Umm you do realize that if H1-Bs are paid more than American workers it would be cheaper to employ Americans, right?
Indeed. The H1b program is supposed to bring in highly skilled talent in specific areas which can't be found in America. If it is cheaper to higher an American with that talent, that indicates that there IS an American with that talent and therefore there is no need to hire an H1B for that position.
That salary might be low in some places and high in others. It might be low in one industry or high in another.
This.
H1-B jobs are supposed to be paid at the prevailing wage for the position and the industry it's in. We can be cynical about how some employers scoff at this and misuse H1-Bs, but the solution is to enforce the existing law, not break it with an unworkable across-the-board salary threshold.
Prevailing wage is not paid because the workers are a) abused into working far more than 40 hours a week so they can replace greater than 1 citizen and b) given entry level titles and wages and expected to perform the senior level job of the citizen they replaced.
Even if prevailing wage WAS paid, this is not high enough. Could they not find anyone at prevailing wage? Then they did not offer enough. People who have positions are not going to jump ship for the exact same salary. You probably need to add 15 to 20% to that just to entice people over. That doesn't mean you need an H1b, that just means you need to offer more money.
I invested in getting power and water and phone to your house, so please shut up.
So did I, should that make me happy to invest money in paying some CEO to skim whatever he can off of the billion dollar investment before pissing the rest of it out into the Nevada desert?
Based on the what we know of this company and their product so far I would be willing to invest up to $0 in it. However, if I know my government, I have already invested thousands in it.
Would it really surprise you if Donald Trump said two opposite things?
To be honest, yes. Because he says what is on his mind, and he doesn't often change his mind.
But this is not Trump saying two opposite things. It was somebody saying Trump said one thing but Trump actually said the opposite.
When I first read the subject, I thought they intended to use it against people who badmouthed terrorists, and not against the terrorists themselves. But that is because I have not really seen any particular concern about what the terrorists say about us, and a great deal of concern about our hate speech against terrorists.
The fact is, that you can't really claim your religious freedom is being infringed when you haven't even entered the country
Donald Trump was asked for clarification on an important point: He says US citizens who are Muslims and traveling abroad should also be barred from entering the country.
Oddly enough, it appears that he said the exact opposite of that. "I have Muslim friends, Greta, and they're wonderful people. But there's a tremendous section and cross-section of Muslims living in our country who have tremendous animosity," he told Fox News anchor Greta Van Susteren. "It does not apply to people living in the country, except we have to be vigilant."
What wealthy nations? All western governments are deep in debt..
One man is on the street and has nothing.
Another man lives in a house with a mortgage with negative equity and drives a car in which he is upside down on the loan.
Which one is poorer?
I'm not making a point, I think it is a legitimate question and the answer is not an easy one. But it certainly is relatable to nations and debt.
If the island will be uninhabitable in 100 years, when the global water level, if trends continue, will be 1 foot higher, then that pretty much means it is uninhabitable now. Get out now while you still can.
We should publicly shame the cable companies for charging over $250 for the $99 plan. We should shame them for upcharging us for "commercial free" content, and then adding commercials. We should shame them for increasing the cost of cable TV from $20 including Pay Channels in the 1980s to over $250 including pay channels to day, outpacing inflation almost as fast as healthcare and education.
It takes them 5 MB to store a 40,000 word dictionary? They must be literally storing a dictionary including the definitions, too. Average length of a word is 5.1 characters. Assuming 2 byte characters because they will probably want to use some multinational words just to use extra space, that gives an average of 10.2 bytes per word, or about 398.5k with no compression. Probably about 56k after compression.
More math issues, each specific location takes 3 words, which will be an average of 30.6 bytes. Another pesky problem of using words is they are not all the same length, so you can't specify a fixed record size, which you would undoubtedly want to do. If they used Lat and Long, those can be stored in a signed float for a total of 16 bytes, period. Need to add altitude, you can do another signed float for another 8 bytes, or you could cheap out an probably used a signed small int. The word approach doesn't even deal with altitude, so there would have to be another field to store an apartment number or floor number or use the GPS altitude.
Java is the 4th highest, with about 2% of the flaws found being Java. I'm really shocked that Java shows up higher on the list than Javascript. If ever there was a language where people copy and paste somebodiy's working code and try to mangle it to work for their own purposes with no understanding of the actual language or security thereof, it is Javascript.
Classic ASP has more than 80% of the bugs. Why just ignore it? It ought to be a dead language, but it isn't. I happen to know that there is active programming happening in Classic ASP even now, despite the bugs.
A finger is instead pointed squarely at PHP, which, with 25% of the applications represented on the internet, only represents less than 8% of the flaws. Not that I have any particular bias towards PHP, I don't even use it, but the finger needs to be pointed at where the trouble spots are, and Classic ASP tops the heap.
Yesterday, I did a good deed. I taught a guy how to use ADO Commands and Command Parameters instead of inline SQL. He was running the inline SQL through some filters to try to catch certain SQL commands in an attempt to defeat SQL injection. So maybe the flaws/MB in Classic ASP will go down by some tiny iota.
You will always save money when there are hundreds of companies offering a product over when there is only one product available.
If you're 20 and healthy then yeah, getting a personal policy all by your lonesome will be cheaper than joining a risk pool of employees of all ages and health levels.
If you're 60 then getting a personal policy all by your lonesome will never be cheaper than joining a risk pool padded out by the 20 somethings buying the company plan. Unless you're talking about buying high-deductible ER-only coverage, in which case your tricycle doesn't even rank with the Ferrari's everyone else is getting and you should feel bad for claiming it's a better deal because it's cheaper.
High Deductible aka Major Medical is the only kind of insurance that actually IS insurance.
Newegg has HDD for just over 3 cents per GB right now. So they are predicting that in two years, the price of SSD will go down by 40% while the price of HDD will go up by a factor of 3?
At the moment, we are really seeing about a 10X price disparity, and it has been about the same for several years now.
Same as any other field. Too much dependence on technology without understanding the basics. Like learning to use a calculator before you learn how to add. If the technology fails, the technology dependent are lost. It's hard to find a good auto mechanic, programmer, or pilot these days who can actually take over when the technology fails. They only know how to keep their hands off the machinery while the technology does its thing.
Of course, piston-engine propeller planes still use LEADED fuel.
Options exist, but pilots don't seem to care.
Pilots don't care? Right. They could pay $30k for a new engine that would run diesel instead of Avgas on their model. Or in many cases that there are simply no alternatives to upgrade to because nothing has passed certification yet.
Tech is 90% male, for entirely social reasons, doesn't that indicate some kind of problem? Just covering your ears and going "la la la it's perfect" isn't really a solution.
Not entirely social reasons. Most women just don't want to do it. Why force them in order to satisfy some arbitrary quota? An efficient society is one where you let people do the jobs they want to do.
That term is reserved for those who have accountability for what they create and in most of the civilized world have gone through a certification process.
What she is, is a software developer. Part of that process is design and testing, but that alone does not make her an engineer.
Fuck all these people who think otherwise and dilute the word because they want to have a way to place themselves from their peers, because they can't do it with their work.
Maybe she is a Software Engineer. There is such a job title, and you don't even have to go to Engineering school to get it. Your company gives it to you. Get over it. Engineer is not a term reserved only for certified people. Professional Engineer is. Use that instead if you want to feel good about yourself and feel the need to lord it over others who may have many more certifications from many other governing bodies that just don't happen to be the one you worship before.
You think you can negotiate better rates than a company with 100's of people?
You don't even have to negotiate. You just take the advertised rate and save money. You will always save money when there are hundreds of companies offering a product over when there is only one product available. This was true even before ACA, but everyone was told that it wasn't true and they should stick with a company plan. I wonder why that was? Kickbacks? Executive Perks?
My guess would rather be that they neither heard about the ice age scare nor the global warming craze, but they simply saw that water is coming, that floods are getting more numerous and that it's safer to pack up and GTFO.
Some people don't need no statistics to know when to flee some place. Wet feet are more convincing than any amount of statistics.
At 6 feet above seal level, how can you even tell floods are more numerous? High tide is over 5 feet. At least once a month, you are going to get flood even if there is no significant weather.
They started fleeing the encroaching waters back in the 1970s when the sea level was still dropping.
Yes, getting a new client takes a lot of time, and you don't always know exactly when one will end, so it is hard to schedule another one to start until you are definitely done with the old one. In may case, I have several clients and I don't spend 100% of my time with any one of them, but your situation is very different because you are "supplemental staffing" which means they need you the bulk of the time.
In my last experience with independent consulting, back when the economy collapsed due to 9/11, it was hard to find any job, contracting or otherwise. Even if you tried to go back into full time employment, recruiters and companies treated former consultants like red-headed stepchildren. How DARE you go out and try to earn what you are worth! As punishment, you can't have a job with us. The job postings would even say stuff like "corporates only", "must have corporate culture", that sort of thing. That's probably illegal now, but back then if you did consulting and then tried to come back into a full time employee role, you were blacklisted.
How do you compete with India? Can't they get a team of 6 devs for the price of you?
Indian development is not that much cheaper than paying somebody local. Most of the difference is hype and buy-in from corporations that aren't including all of the costs and only looking at the upfront small difference in outlay. The actual consultants are definitely much cheaper, but the consulting house that is paying them charges about 125% of the price of a regular full time employee's salary. It may seem stupid to replace an employee with someone who charges more, but employing people has extra costs, some, but not all of which are removed by hiring a consultant.
Does your field (which sounds like app development) allow you to charge a premium rate so you can drive down the number of hours worked? Solo shops and microshops in other professional services (like PR/marketing) essentially plan on only 50% billable time, with the remainder going to biz-dev and a little admin.
But for that to work at a decent salary equivalence, your hourly rate (or equivalent if you do fixed-fee work) needs to be $100 an hour or more. Is that reasonable in your field?
I bill $100 an hour and I find that to be extremely cheap for the work that I do. I recognize that when I was working at a company with all the meetings and interruptions, that the amount of work that I got done in a day now takes me about an hour to do on my own. So i am turning around $1500 or more of work in an hour, but only billing $100 for it.
A local medium sized business does daily rate for it's consultants. An entry level consultant bills out at $1,500 a day. That is almost $200 an hour right there. Big companies like S&P were billing out at $400 an hour 20 years ago. So no, I don't think $100 an hour is unreasonable at all. It is downright cheap.
Slashdot Mirror
Umm you do realize that if H1-Bs are paid more than American workers it would be cheaper to employ Americans, right?
Indeed. The H1b program is supposed to bring in highly skilled talent in specific areas which can't be found in America. If it is cheaper to higher an American with that talent, that indicates that there IS an American with that talent and therefore there is no need to hire an H1B for that position.
That salary might be low in some places and high in others. It might be low in one industry or high in another.
This.
H1-B jobs are supposed to be paid at the prevailing wage for the position and the industry it's in. We can be cynical about how some employers scoff at this and misuse H1-Bs, but the solution is to enforce the existing law, not break it with an unworkable across-the-board salary threshold.
Prevailing wage is not paid because the workers are a) abused into working far more than 40 hours a week so they can replace greater than 1 citizen and b) given entry level titles and wages and expected to perform the senior level job of the citizen they replaced.
Even if prevailing wage WAS paid, this is not high enough. Could they not find anyone at prevailing wage? Then they did not offer enough. People who have positions are not going to jump ship for the exact same salary. You probably need to add 15 to 20% to that just to entice people over. That doesn't mean you need an H1b, that just means you need to offer more money.
I invested in getting power and water and phone to your house, so please shut up.
So did I, should that make me happy to invest money in paying some CEO to skim whatever he can off of the billion dollar investment before pissing the rest of it out into the Nevada desert?
Based on the what we know of this company and their product so far I would be willing to invest up to $0 in it. However, if I know my government, I have already invested thousands in it.
Would it really surprise you if Donald Trump said two opposite things?
To be honest, yes. Because he says what is on his mind, and he doesn't often change his mind.
But this is not Trump saying two opposite things. It was somebody saying Trump said one thing but Trump actually said the opposite.
When I first read the subject, I thought they intended to use it against people who badmouthed terrorists, and not against the terrorists themselves. But that is because I have not really seen any particular concern about what the terrorists say about us, and a great deal of concern about our hate speech against terrorists.
Donald Trump was asked for clarification on an important point: He says US citizens who are Muslims and traveling abroad should also be barred from entering the country.
Oddly enough, it appears that he said the exact opposite of that. "I have Muslim friends, Greta, and they're wonderful people. But there's a tremendous section and cross-section of Muslims living in our country who have tremendous animosity," he told Fox News anchor Greta Van Susteren. "It does not apply to people living in the country, except we have to be vigilant."
What wealthy nations? All western governments are deep in debt..
One man is on the street and has nothing.
Another man lives in a house with a mortgage with negative equity and drives a car in which he is upside down on the loan.
Which one is poorer?
I'm not making a point, I think it is a legitimate question and the answer is not an easy one. But it certainly is relatable to nations and debt.
> I'm too lazy to read it, but does it even MENTION nuclear power?
Yeah, right. That's because you're not paid for that, you're only paid for shilling nuclear here.
If shilling nuclear on slashdot is a paid job, I want to know where I can sign up.
If the island will be uninhabitable in 100 years, when the global water level, if trends continue, will be 1 foot higher, then that pretty much means it is uninhabitable now. Get out now while you still can.
We should publicly shame the cable companies for charging over $250 for the $99 plan. We should shame them for upcharging us for "commercial free" content, and then adding commercials. We should shame them for increasing the cost of cable TV from $20 including Pay Channels in the 1980s to over $250 including pay channels to day, outpacing inflation almost as fast as healthcare and education.
It takes them 5 MB to store a 40,000 word dictionary? They must be literally storing a dictionary including the definitions, too. Average length of a word is 5.1 characters. Assuming 2 byte characters because they will probably want to use some multinational words just to use extra space, that gives an average of 10.2 bytes per word, or about 398.5k with no compression. Probably about 56k after compression.
More math issues, each specific location takes 3 words, which will be an average of 30.6 bytes. Another pesky problem of using words is they are not all the same length, so you can't specify a fixed record size, which you would undoubtedly want to do. If they used Lat and Long, those can be stored in a signed float for a total of 16 bytes, period. Need to add altitude, you can do another signed float for another 8 bytes, or you could cheap out an probably used a signed small int. The word approach doesn't even deal with altitude, so there would have to be another field to store an apartment number or floor number or use the GPS altitude.
Just wondering.
Java is the 4th highest, with about 2% of the flaws found being Java. I'm really shocked that Java shows up higher on the list than Javascript. If ever there was a language where people copy and paste somebodiy's working code and try to mangle it to work for their own purposes with no understanding of the actual language or security thereof, it is Javascript.
Classic ASP has more than 80% of the bugs. Why just ignore it? It ought to be a dead language, but it isn't. I happen to know that there is active programming happening in Classic ASP even now, despite the bugs.
A finger is instead pointed squarely at PHP, which, with 25% of the applications represented on the internet, only represents less than 8% of the flaws. Not that I have any particular bias towards PHP, I don't even use it, but the finger needs to be pointed at where the trouble spots are, and Classic ASP tops the heap.
Yesterday, I did a good deed. I taught a guy how to use ADO Commands and Command Parameters instead of inline SQL. He was running the inline SQL through some filters to try to catch certain SQL commands in an attempt to defeat SQL injection. So maybe the flaws/MB in Classic ASP will go down by some tiny iota.
If you're 20 and healthy then yeah, getting a personal policy all by your lonesome will be cheaper than joining a risk pool of employees of all ages and health levels.
If you're 60 then getting a personal policy all by your lonesome will never be cheaper than joining a risk pool padded out by the 20 somethings buying the company plan. Unless you're talking about buying high-deductible ER-only coverage, in which case your tricycle doesn't even rank with the Ferrari's everyone else is getting and you should feel bad for claiming it's a better deal because it's cheaper.
High Deductible aka Major Medical is the only kind of insurance that actually IS insurance.
Newegg has HDD for just over 3 cents per GB right now. So they are predicting that in two years, the price of SSD will go down by 40% while the price of HDD will go up by a factor of 3?
At the moment, we are really seeing about a 10X price disparity, and it has been about the same for several years now.
Same as any other field. Too much dependence on technology without understanding the basics. Like learning to use a calculator before you learn how to add. If the technology fails, the technology dependent are lost. It's hard to find a good auto mechanic, programmer, or pilot these days who can actually take over when the technology fails. They only know how to keep their hands off the machinery while the technology does its thing.
Of course, piston-engine propeller planes still use LEADED fuel.
Options exist, but pilots don't seem to care.
Pilots don't care? Right. They could pay $30k for a new engine that would run diesel instead of Avgas on their model. Or in many cases that there are simply no alternatives to upgrade to because nothing has passed certification yet.
Tech is 90% male, for entirely social reasons, doesn't that indicate some kind of problem? Just covering your ears and going "la la la it's perfect" isn't really a solution.
Not entirely social reasons. Most women just don't want to do it. Why force them in order to satisfy some arbitrary quota? An efficient society is one where you let people do the jobs they want to do.
That term is reserved for those who have accountability for what they create and in most of the civilized world have gone through a certification process.
What she is, is a software developer. Part of that process is design and testing, but that alone does not make her an engineer.
Fuck all these people who think otherwise and dilute the word because they want to have a way to place themselves from their peers, because they can't do it with their work.
Maybe she is a Software Engineer. There is such a job title, and you don't even have to go to Engineering school to get it. Your company gives it to you. Get over it. Engineer is not a term reserved only for certified people. Professional Engineer is. Use that instead if you want to feel good about yourself and feel the need to lord it over others who may have many more certifications from many other governing bodies that just don't happen to be the one you worship before.
You think you can negotiate better rates than a company with 100's of people?
You don't even have to negotiate. You just take the advertised rate and save money. You will always save money when there are hundreds of companies offering a product over when there is only one product available. This was true even before ACA, but everyone was told that it wasn't true and they should stick with a company plan. I wonder why that was? Kickbacks? Executive Perks?
My guess would rather be that they neither heard about the ice age scare nor the global warming craze, but they simply saw that water is coming, that floods are getting more numerous and that it's safer to pack up and GTFO.
Some people don't need no statistics to know when to flee some place. Wet feet are more convincing than any amount of statistics.
At 6 feet above seal level, how can you even tell floods are more numerous? High tide is over 5 feet. At least once a month, you are going to get flood even if there is no significant weather.
They started fleeing the encroaching waters back in the 1970s when the sea level was still dropping.
Yes, getting a new client takes a lot of time, and you don't always know exactly when one will end, so it is hard to schedule another one to start until you are definitely done with the old one. In may case, I have several clients and I don't spend 100% of my time with any one of them, but your situation is very different because you are "supplemental staffing" which means they need you the bulk of the time.
In my last experience with independent consulting, back when the economy collapsed due to 9/11, it was hard to find any job, contracting or otherwise. Even if you tried to go back into full time employment, recruiters and companies treated former consultants like red-headed stepchildren. How DARE you go out and try to earn what you are worth! As punishment, you can't have a job with us. The job postings would even say stuff like "corporates only", "must have corporate culture", that sort of thing. That's probably illegal now, but back then if you did consulting and then tried to come back into a full time employee role, you were blacklisted.
How do you compete with India? Can't they get a team of 6 devs for the price of you?
Indian development is not that much cheaper than paying somebody local. Most of the difference is hype and buy-in from corporations that aren't including all of the costs and only looking at the upfront small difference in outlay. The actual consultants are definitely much cheaper, but the consulting house that is paying them charges about 125% of the price of a regular full time employee's salary. It may seem stupid to replace an employee with someone who charges more, but employing people has extra costs, some, but not all of which are removed by hiring a consultant.
Does your field (which sounds like app development) allow you to charge a premium rate so you can drive down the number of hours worked? Solo shops and microshops in other professional services (like PR/marketing) essentially plan on only 50% billable time, with the remainder going to biz-dev and a little admin. But for that to work at a decent salary equivalence, your hourly rate (or equivalent if you do fixed-fee work) needs to be $100 an hour or more. Is that reasonable in your field?
I bill $100 an hour and I find that to be extremely cheap for the work that I do. I recognize that when I was working at a company with all the meetings and interruptions, that the amount of work that I got done in a day now takes me about an hour to do on my own. So i am turning around $1500 or more of work in an hour, but only billing $100 for it.
A local medium sized business does daily rate for it's consultants. An entry level consultant bills out at $1,500 a day. That is almost $200 an hour right there. Big companies like S&P were billing out at $400 an hour 20 years ago. So no, I don't think $100 an hour is unreasonable at all. It is downright cheap.