The audio on this is about the worst I’ve ever heard on YouTube. I fast forwarded and at least he stops playing that loud music over his quiet voice, but damn.
He gets off topic a lot (bullies, amphetamine salts??) and spends the entire time talking to the commenters not the video recording.
Surely, there’s a better video out there than this.
Exactly, it's creaper to fire foriegn workers as they will work for much less. It's a racket. I hope the Trump adminstration cracks down on this. Employers need to prove there's no available and qualified applicant beofore the H-1B is approved. They also need to prove they are paying the same to a domestic applicant as they would a foreign candidate.
Thanks! It's really hard to find any info online and even for the Slovenian version we just have a copy of a copy of the original installation CD and no photos of the original localized materials exist online.
Yeah it's really odd how much OS/2 software has been lost considering the last IBM release of OS/2 Warp was only December 2001. Thanks for your work. Personally, I am currently debating buying a ThinkPad T23 or T30 and dual booting OS/2 Warp 4.51 and Arca OS 5.1
It is still _extremely_ fussy about installation and across 4 test machines I never got ArcaOS to dual-boot with anything except a single basic IBM PC DOS 7.1 setup.
Anything more than a single bootable primary partition in BIOS config is highly unlikely to work, in my experience. In UEFI mode it's even fussier and of course actual IBM OS/2 won't run then.
Forget dual booting, except maybe with DOS.
Trying to dual boot two OS/2 instances sounds like a recipe for hair loss or a cardiovascular incident. I don't think I'd try to do that if you paid me. Paid me a lot.
Except the Haitians really are eating dogs and cats. I have seen the video and photographic evidence. They see it as free food. You think cats and dogs wander Haiti in massive numbers? No, they eat them. They’re starving.
Their “Trump is a dictator, literally Hitler, who will take away womens right to vote” didn’t work the first time in 2015/2016 and it didn’t work this time either. The U.S.A knows what a Trump presidency is like and they voted to have it again: it was that good.
Democrats got their chance the last 4 years and instead of making the lives of U.S. Citizens better, they made it much worse, and shoved social justice issues down their throats that they didn’t want.
I think your view is also largely hyperbole. It is a nice vote winning narrative to suggest that democrats did nothing but shove social justice issues down people's throats, but like you, I'm not American and I suspect that is just as much hyperbole as "Trump is literally Hitler".
You're part of the division of hate that you seem like you're raging against, using messaging like that.
Employers should have to prove they were not able to find a U.S. citizen who can do the job before they're allowed to hire someone that needs a work permit. Employers purposefully seek out non-U.S. citizens as they know they're happy to work for a lot less, especially if gets them into the U.S. This whole system encourages economic migrants, puts U.S. citizens out of work. As far as In am concerned you're actively working against your fellow Americans helping foreigners abuse and exploit our immigration laws.
There actually IS exactly such a requirement to advertise positions in the US and accept applicants. The issue is that it is gamed or done only perfunctorily. What you are looking for is enforcement, which costs money, and goes against the desires of the companies lobbying for such legislation.
It would also help enormously if the immigration was not tied to a specific company, i.e., the worker could jump to a new company at will without having to convince Company-B to do the whole sponsorship process. As it is, (iirc) if they lose their job, they have only 90?180 days to find a new sponsor or go home. This would make it much less exploitative, and also lower incentives for companies to sponsor H1Bs instead of seeking US workers. Write your congress-reps & Senators.
(Source: tech co founder in some companies that did H1Bs, so not sponsoring but managing the workers brought under the process; also competed under a coach that my school took exceptional efforts to get here from Austria because of his world-class qualifications, they still had to really fine-tune the requirements)
> Employers purposefully seek out non-U.S. citizens as they know they're happy to work for a lot less, especially if gets them into the U.S.
This is commonly stated but is not true. US companies are required to pay the "Prevailing Wage" [0] to H-1Bs, so they cannot use foreigners to undercut US citizens.
However, foreigners whose presence in the US is dependent on their employment are certainly more likely to be abused by employers
The prevailing wages are comically low though for most jobs that I've seen (like half of the real reasonable salary for the job we're offering). And employers have the option of 2 data sources so that they can selectively pick the lower of the 2 depending on the jobs they typically apply for.
> US companies are required to pay the "Prevailing Wage" [0] to H-1Bs, so they cannot use foreigners to undercut US citizens.
This is laughable. I do not know how the government calculates those wages, but as someone who got to US on H-1B visa this year I'm making more than 2x the "prevailing wage" listed on my LCA application.
Just to clarify: my job is a Software Architect, in one of East Coast states, and the prevailing wage listed in my application was $84k. So it is not that my salary is especially good, it's this government-mandated one that is a joke.
I'm lucky, because I came here to work for the same company I used to work in my home country so I got offered good terms (somehow H-1B was easier to get than L-1). If some company offered me a job for the "prevailing wage" I would laugh in their face, but I'm sure for some people that would seem like a lucrative offer.
I just checked my own LCA. My listed (and actual) salary on the LCA is 1.07x the listed prevailing wage, but it doesn't include stock or bonus which are part of my total comp. Including those, my total comp is 2.06x the listed prevailing wage.
I know from talking to my American colleagues that my total comp is around the same level as theirs, so at least at my company they don't undercut US citizens.
Your listed PW does seem quite low, and I don't know how they actually measure it. I certainly agree that companies will do whatever they can to lower wages for all worker, and not including stock or bonus in the prevailing wage is ripe for abuse. Perhaps some reform for this law is in order.
That's another thing: my compensation is basically all salary, no stock options of any kind. I think the trick might be that my immigration lawyer listed the PW for "entry level" Software Architect job (is there even such thing?), while I have around 20 years of experience.
Could it be that the prevailing wage is a national average, ie not adjusted for a high col city? I feel like tech salaries especially must swing a lot between flyover states and big coastal cities.
Well, maybe. I mean, my city is really not that high col city: median house price is $450k and the rent outside city center is just $1300 for one bedroom. But salaries in IT are pretty good here, my salary is actually the average for my position that I found on Glassdoor (I used that as a reference point when negotiating relocation with my employer).
> Employers should have to prove they were not able to find a U.S. citizen who can do the job before they're allowed to hire someone that needs a work permit.
Why?
It's their money and their business.
What business do you or I have in forcing upon them what they can do? any more than they would have any business forcing themselves upon us?
AFAICT, the parent answered that with "This whole system...puts U.S. citizens out of work." (Whether that's actually true or not, I'm not entirely certain, but the argument could definitely be made, and, in all likelihood, convincingly.)
> What business do you or I have in forcing upon them what they can do? any more than they would have any business forcing themselves upon us?
Presumably, it's people's business because the US is basically a nation governed by the people who see it as their responsibility to help ensure their basic values (peace, prosperity, life, freedom, justice, pursuit of happiness, etc.). So, when there's regulation that affects the people, it actually is their business.
> "This whole system...puts U.S. citizens out of work." (Whether that's actually true or not, I'm not entirely certain, but the argument could definitely be made, and, in all likelihood, convincingly.)
If bringing people from outside the USA into the USA puts people out of work, doesn't having children also put people out of work?
I'm not a US citizen, but you might find that most US citizens would prefer their government to prioritize the interests of US citizens over foreign nationals. Just as I would expect my home country's government to prioritize the interests of its citizens over foreigners.
Depends what “can do the job” means, right? Elite tech companies try to hire the highest ability people they can. The US is not a large share of the world’s population, so even if it is massively overrepresented in top performers, the vast majority of top performers are still foreign born. Your position is that US companies should hire less impressive people because they are American. Maybe you can build a functioning search engine that way, so a 100% American-born engineering team can technically do the job, but does it end up being Google? Does it end up being competitive relative to what the immigrants who worked on it would have done in their own countries or a friendlier country?
This is some weird 'Gangs of New York' wanna be BS. I'm sorry but we have been welcoming people throughout the entirety of our existence, it is part of the American project, and it is a part of our strength, not our weakness nor downfall.
My family were the ones told 'no Irish need apply' and now you want me to tell someone else's family off and that they aren't wanted? My family fled eastern europe for their lives but you want me to tell someone else my fear of a threat to my income is more valuable than them? Nah bro, I'm good. Don't claim to be a defender of me/America/Americans. Your type didn't want my family here either back in the day but the USA thrived even with our/my existence. Being American isn't in your blood, it's in who you chose to be. Alway had been/always will be. And Americans don't choose fear over welcoming.
I'd give every new American a huge welcome hug if I could because they are us and are family. They are your parents/grandparents/great grandparents/etc. Sad that you have forgotten that or chosen to forget because you are scared too 'share'.
Everyone reading this, I'm glad you want to come be part of this great experiment. I hope you chose to stay, it's a pretty cool place with pretty cool people.
>we have been welcoming people throughout the entirety of our existence
>And Americans don't choose fear over welcoming.
>it's a pretty cool place with pretty cool people.
How do you explain the election of Trump, and the quite possible re-election of him? It seems that only about half of Americans fit your description these days.
People like Peter exist in part to help large organizations (including YC) exploit the current system. Peter seems focused on startups - but it's within the same vein.
The parent's sentiment is valid. There's no reason the US needs to import startups - there's plenty here in the US that don't get funding/support/attention they already deserve.
Instead of helping immigrate potential founders - I'd rather see YC do outreach in these other countries to empower/support founders within their home nation.
But, that might slightly diminish YC's chances of funding the next Facebook or something... so here we are.
It also means the next Facebook would benefit a foreign country's economy rather than America's. One reason the US economy is the best in the world is that we import entrepreneurs and their businesses.
reply