Clinton Tech Plan Reads Like Silicon Valley Wish List (usatoday.com) 355
theodp writes from a report via USA Today: "If there was any lingering doubt as to tech's favored presidential candidate," writes USA Today's Jon Swartz, "Hillary Clinton put an end to that Tuesday with a tech plan that reads like a Silicon Valley wish list. It calls for connecting every U.S. household to high-speed internet by 2020, reducing regulatory barriers and supporting Net neutrality rules, [which ban internet providers from blocking or slowing content.] It proposes investments in computer science and engineering education ("engage the private sector and nonprofits to train up to 50,000 computer science teachers in the next decade"), expansion of 5G mobile data, making inexpensive Wi-Fi available at more airports and train stations, and attaching a green card to the diplomas of foreign-born students earning STEM degrees." dcblogs shares with us a report from Computerworld that specifically discusses Clinton's support of green cards for foreign students who earn STEM degrees: As president, Hillary Clinton will support automatic green cards, or permanent residency, for foreign students who earn advanced STEM degrees. Clinton, the presumptive Democratic presidential candidate, wants the U.S. to "staple" green cards on the diplomas of STEM (science, technology, engineering, math) masters and PhD graduates "from accredited institutions." Clinton outlined her plan in a broader tech policy agenda released today. Clinton's "staple" idea isn't new. It's what Mitt Romney, the GOP presidential candidate in 2012, supported. It has had bipartisan support in Congress. But the staple idea is controversial. Critics will say this provision will be hard to control, will foster age discrimination, and put pressure on IT wages.
Potentially more abuse prone than the H1B visa (Score:5, Insightful)
Easy solution (Score:5, Insightful)
Potentially more abuse prone than the H1B visa. Diploma mills are already a reality in many parts of the world, adding a green card as an incentive and the potential for abuse is immense.
So you limit it to select accredited universities. Problem solved. If someone can graduate from MIT with an engineering degree and wants to stay in the USA, we're idiots to not help them do that. It only becomes a problem if we don't pay any attention to how it's done.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So you limit it to select accredited universities. Problem solved.
Accreditation has already been heavily compromised in order to suck up student loan money.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It only becomes a problem if we don't pay any attention to how it's done.
This idea is a non-starter. We already discourage students from pursuing STEM degrees by allowing companies like Facebook and Microsoft to import cheap labor in the form of H1-B visas--are we now to add a further disincentive by saying that anybody who can slither under the wire to get accepted to a U.S. university (and graduate) is now your permanent competition inside the United States? That's so self-destructive it's ridiculous. Policies like this are why the idiots in Britain voted to shoot their countr
Keep the economic benefits here (Score:2, Insightful)
We already discourage students from pursuing STEM degrees by allowing companies like Facebook and Microsoft to import cheap labor in the form of H1-B visas
You do realize that there is a LOT more to STEM fields than working for large IT firms right? I have an engineering degree and I work in manufacturing. (and manufacturing in the US is alive and well in spite of claims to the contrary) Most scientists, engineers and mathematicians don't work in Silicon Valley or Seattle. H1B visas are simply Not A Thing among engineers in my industry. They just aren't. I'm not saying they aren't a problem (they are) but they aren't as wide spread or severe a problem as
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
to import cheap labor in the form of H1-B visas--are we now to add a further disincentive by saying that anybody who can slither under the wire to get accepted to a U.S. university (and graduate) is now your permanent competition inside the United States?
Seems like we see this same idiocy on every /. story related to immigration. Here's the thing: an immigrant has the same cost of living I do, the overseas guy doesn't. Every single developer who immigrates get paid more as a result. The average pay for the work increases with every immigrant.
Your competition has never been "workers in the US" in software development, but "workers in the world".
Re:Easy solution (Score:4, Insightful)
The average pay for the work increases with every immigrant.
Um, no. There's something called a saturation point, beyond which adding in more programmers drives down wages. This is nothing more than employers trying to rig the supply and demand equation and save a buck. Any crowing about "shortages" of skilled STEM talent are mostly B.S.--the problem is they won't raise wages to attract someone to the job, and would prefer the government allow them to import cheap H1-B labor, or saturate the market by granting permanent residency to anyone who goes gets a STEM degree here. Both practices dilute wages, because both practices allow employers to defy the laws of supply and demand--they want to monkey with the available supply of these workers to keep wages down.
Re:Easy solution (Score:5, Insightful)
I doubt that's the case with H1B immigrants who are locked into a specific sponsoring employer under pain of being kicked out of the country. It certainly is the case, though, with actual green card immigrants who, if they they are underpaid or otherwise unfairly treated, can jump ship for a new employer. So that would be my solution:
Eliminate H1B, and any other employer-restricted visas entirely. But for provably skilled and educated workers in the STEM fields, have a fast track program to get them permanent residency in short order. That way they can't be trapped by an abusive employer. And they'll be here, contributing to our economy, in the long-term rather than making a bit of money and taking it, and their skills, back overseas.
Re: (Score:3)
You seem to suggest that there aren't smart people here or that Americans can't be trained or that there's a shortage of skilled workers (hint: there isn't a shortage).
Troll.
Re: (Score:3)
The key word here is "accredited institutions." If that's done right, it is less abusive and potentially less of a problem for workers than an H1B since they can shop around for better jobs.
Re:Potentially more abuse prone than the H1B visa (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: Potentially more abuse prone than the H1B visa (Score:2)
Re:Potentially more abuse prone than the H1B visa (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Promises like this are easy for Hillary (Score:5, Insightful)
She is amazingly quick to tailor promises based on who she is talking to. The tech community should be aware of this.
Some big examples would be gay marriage, TPA, patriot act, Iraq War, etc.
Yes, I know all politicians lie. I am just annoyed that people believe things that Hillary say means something.
On a tech site, we are cheering someone's tech platform whose tech level is so low that her defenders say we should not expect Hillary to be able to manage two separate email accounts.
Re: (Score:2)
Those she will probably deliver, as long cyberdyne is one of the companies that get benefited.
Re: (Score:2)
. . . I expect not so much Cyberdyne, but Yoyodyne. . .
After all, gotta court that Red Lectron vote. . . (grin)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Government control on encryption = "put a giant backdoor in everything"
Re: (Score:3)
I feel the same about Trump, I've got a ton of friends trying to convince me to vote for him.
My response: I will not be bullied into voting for a East Coast, Elitist, big government, big business Liberal. And that goes for Hillary Too.
Re: Promises like this are easy for Hillary (Score:4, Funny)
I'm tempted to write-in Rick Astley.
After all, he's never gonna give us up, never gonna let us down. . . .
Re:Promises like this are easy for Hillary (Score:5, Informative)
What's the deal with gay marriage? Do you think she doesn't really support it, or does really support it but says she doesn't?
She didn't support it, until it turned out that a lot of voters supported it, so in 2013 she changed her position and supported it. It speaks to principles. Hers are "say what's popular." I'm sure if people heard what she said to Goldman Sachs audiences (that netted her hundreds of thousands of "speaking fees"), most people would not support it, so we won't get to hear those comments.
Clinton opposed same-sex marriage as a candidate for the Senate, while in office as a senator, and while running for president in 2008. She expressed her support for civil unions starting in 2000 and for the rights’ of states to set their own laws in favor of same-sex marriage in 2006. As polls showed that a majority of Americans supported same-sex marriage, Clinton’s views changed, too. She announced her support for same-sex marriage in March 2013.
Re:Promises like this are easy for Hillary (Score:5, Insightful)
It was relatively recent that a majority of Americans supported gay marriage.
I don't mind politicians who change their tone over time.. we all change our viewpoints throughout our lives. As I've grown older I have become more liberal (by American standards). I also do not care what a politicians personal belief is, I want to know how they would influence the law related to those issues. I would personally only approve of an abortion if there were life-threatening complications to the pregnancy... but I think everyone should make their own choice.
Re: (Score:3)
Trump is more honest, believe it or not.
Which shows how scary this election is.
Re:Promises like this are easy for Hillary (Score:4, Informative)
I think it's because she took so long to support it, well after many other prominent Democrats were publicly in favor. Also, she had an almost 20 year public record of being against gay marriage when she was First Lady and Senator Clinton. And, she has shown an amazing record of telling specific audiences what they want to hear in order to further her own goals:
1996: President clinton signs DOMA. I'm sure she didn't have anything to say about that at the time.
1999: When running for Senate, she tells a gay audience that she was against her husband's "Don't ask / Don't tell" policy [nytimes.com]. Another line the same article clarifies her views on gay marriage and DOMA:
Mrs. Clinton's spokesman, Howard Wolfson, said that the first lady, like her husband, supported legislation passed by Congress in 1996 that effectively banned gay marriages.
2000: Speaking in White Plains, NY:
Marriage has got historic, religious and moral content that goes back to the beginning of time, and I think a marriage is as a marriage has always been, between a man and a woman.
Also 2000: She supports rights equality with gay civil unions:
"I have supported the kind of rights and responsibilities that are being extended to gay couples in Vermont,"
2004: Senate floor speech where she was against a Federal amendment banning same-sex marriage. She still opposed gay marriage in the 2004 speech, but was against enshrining it into the Constitution.
2006: Tells group of gay politicians that and she wouldn't block it if New York passed a law allowing it. Never mind that she couldn't under the 10th Amendment. [nytimes.com]
2007 - 2008 Presidential Primary: Asked about her opposition on gay marriage by a gay-oriented television network, she gives this:
"Well, I prefer to think of it as being very positive about civil unions. You know, it’s a personal position. How we get to full equality is the debate we’re having, and I am absolutely in favor of civil unions with full equality of benefits, rights, and privileges."
2013: Full throated support of gay marriage now that DOMA is about to be shot to sunshine by the Supreme Court
2014: During her book tour, she interviews on NPR's "Fresh Air" [npr.org] where Terry Gross asks her about her past positions on gay marriage, and Hillary gets a little pissy about it, throwing out the "playing with my words" accusation. About 1/3 of the way through the transcript is where the exchange takes place.
Only now that the majority of the electorate supports gay marriage does she support it. Flip flop on an issue that is religious / moral with a nice sprinkling of civil rights when the polls say to? That's how you define leadership!
(For the record, I'm fine with gay marriage, so don't get up in my business as being some homophobic whatever.)
Re: (Score:2)
You mean, in between his depositions and grand jury testimony?
Re: (Score:2)
Green card holders are not tied to the job like H1B's are.
Re: (Score:2)
Potentially more abuse prone than the H1B visa. Diploma mills are already a reality in many parts of the world, adding a green card as an incentive and the potential for abuse is immense.
Diploma mills aren't accredited... If they are they are typically more than mere mills :)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but as a Silicon Valley CEO, how else are you going to put [downward] pressure on STEM wages? Supply and demand- increase supply, keep demand the same, prices go down.
Re: (Score:2)
Critics will say this provision will be hard to control, will foster age discrimination, and put pressure on IT wages.
That's part of Silicon Valley's wish list though, is it not?
Re: (Score:2)
We have a "Technical College" that pumps out A+, MCSAs, and AAS on an assembly line, most of them learn nothing and don't make it in the real world.
Re: (Score:2)
This was a decade-plus ago, but we had a guy in for an interview with pretty much every basic certification there was: MCSE, CNE, CCNA, A+.
When I asked him a Unix question, you could SEE the Blue Screen of Death in his eyes.
Because, obviously, if there wasn't a cert on it, it couldn't be important. . .
And any situation other than cookbook Microsoft, Novell, or Cisco questions got equally blank looks. . .
Entirely too many of these shake-and-bake 1-week special cert classes have destroyed the worth of certifi
Re: (Score:2)
We have had a few that crammed for certs passed them and then didn't even remember the things they were supposed to know.
It's not surprising, I passed history but if you asked what year a war happened it better be the war of 1812 or I'll have to look it up.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why? Is it the wig [ning.com] or the hat [prweb.com]?
Re: Potentially more abuse prone than the H1B vis (Score:4, Informative)
That late 90s economy couldn't have existed as it did separate from it's aftermath.
Yeah, we got to hear the President play the sax on TV and benefit from the "bubble expanding" half of the boom/bust cycle (and also collect on the dividend of the end of all that Cold War spending, but I digress) but the hype fest couldn't go on indefinitely. VA Linux and the dot.bomb hype outfits needed to eventually produce something that could realize a profit (*ahem*)
Re: Potentially more abuse prone than the H1B vis (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: Potentially more abuse prone than the H1B visa (Score:5, Interesting)
You do know that the balanced budget was because of the first Republican controlled Congress in 40 years, right? Clinton was along for the ride after the 1994 midterm when it came to budgeting - he could Veto and look like a complete ass, or negotiate and sign the appropriations bills Congress sent him, which is what he did. Wisely.
That's the difference between the Clinton years and the last 6 years - the parties worked together and this country boomed. During the Obama presidency, both parties have had the "our way or GTFO" attitude and we've gone nowhere.
Divided government can work, and in fact has worked to create the two most robust economies we've seen in the modern period - the Reagan 80s and the Clinton 90s. But the parties have to work together.
Re: (Score:3)
So what you are saying is the Obama should have gone along with the proposed budgets and debt ceiling legislation put forward by the House because appropriations is their role not his.
I completely agree, he has governed in bad faith.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, that late 90s economy was horrible and balancing the budget was even worse.
Yeah, those Clintons really are disastrous compared to the GOP budgets of 00, and the GOP economy of 2007, combined with all of the quick military excursions and getting OBL that W/GOP did.
I can see why you GOP types are always AC anymore. Spineless like your leaders.
For the 90's, that's because of the Republican Congress. Clinton was against it and even shut the government instead of signing the budget bill the first time around.
Also, while they are less publicized, Obama has been getting us into a lot of "quick military excursions." I have a lot f friends dropping out of the Guard just for that that reason alone.
Re:Clinton has nothing to do with the economy. (Score:4, Interesting)
Presidents have very little control over our economy.
Indeed, I don't know why people keep perpetuating the lie that presidents have such huge economic influence. It's probably because the candidates campaign on these empty promises, "Vote for me, I'll make all your economic dreams come true!" Truly the most power they have is veto, and they are heavily pressured to not delay a budget which has made it through both houses of Congress.
Congress has much more influence over the economy. Go look up which party was in control of Congress during each recession. I've already done it for the 13 recessions since the Great Depression: Democrats controlled both houses 11 times, Republicans 2 times.
Surprised? Shouldn't be. (Score:4, Insightful)
Hillary and the various silicon valley billionaires are tight. They get her elected and she will try to implement their agenda. And make no mistake, their agenda involves more money for them, less privacy for you and more control over you.
Re: Surprised? Shouldn't be. (Score:2)
This is right. All these additional lines of connectivity won't necessarily enlighten and free the people they are imposed upon. These are levers and pulleys of greater social control.
A free e-mail server in every basement ! (Score:5, Funny)
A free e-mail server in every basement!
Now there's a platform I can support.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Green Cards (Score:4, Interesting)
The green card idea is interesting, and I would enthusiastically support such a plan if it also included a dramatic reduction in the H1-B program.
The moon on a stick might as well be in the plan (Score:2)
... for all the basis in reality the plan will have once she gets elected in.
Wouldn't it be nice if politicians were legally oblidged to give realistic manifestos and if they failed to deliver on at least a given percentage of them then there would be a fine or reduction in tenure time or some other punative measure?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
To be fair, the State of New York voted for her to be a Senator twice. Once as a carpet bagger in 2000, and again in 2006.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That's dumb as hell. All we have to do is stop reelecting them. Is that so difficult?
Re: (Score:2)
With the choices we're given, apparently it is.
Re: (Score:2)
We make the choices. We don't have to take what is "given".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What, is somebody putting a gun to your head, telling you who to vote for? Sounds to me like you're just to lazy to make the effort and just want to blame everybody else for your own bad choices.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
As it turns out, yes, that is difficult. When it comes to the Congress, everyone seems to think it is all the other Congressmen and Senators that are the problem - my representative / senator is awesome! It's the other 434 representatives / 98 senators that need to be shown the door!
Plus, when someone has been sent to Congress from a district / state two or three times in a row, it's hard to find anyone with a pulse to run against them, so you get weak shit candidates that can't hold a coherent message th
Re: (Score:3)
How can you propose a system to hold politicians accountable for failure to deliver on platform goals unless they have complete dictatorial control over implementation? "Well, then, they shouldn't promise anything .. " I hear you say. Well, sure, under such a system, politicians would be foolish to propose improving or changing anything. Would that make you happier? Life is a lot more complicated than you wish it was. In general, if *you* know that proposed plans are just plans, and *I* know proposed plans
Re: (Score:2)
Make it absolutely clear in the manifesto what is a promise - ie we WILL do it (short of a nuclear war or similar disaster) - and what we a hope to do if finances/time/law permits.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I think that's perfectly legit though - they brought up the things they said they would in the "Contract" in the first 100 (or so) days of that Congress. If the votes weren't there, the votes weren't there - anyone promising to pass legislation in a campaign is lying to you.
There are so many things that can derail a piece of legislation that it's amazing anything ever passes. People that hold a grudge hang poison pill amendments on it. The opposition party will try to amend it to nullify key points of it
No surprise (Score:5, Funny)
Considering that Silicon Valley almost certainly came up with it to begin with. She always stay on script. Sigh
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Do not trust political candidates... (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:3)
H1B is the problem (Score:3)
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
That's partly on Clinton
Um know that is mostly on Clinton, its the executives jobs to make sure that the laws are implemented and enforced. Clinton should have been saying "show me the fiber" or show our federal prosecutors and a court how you are otherwise complying with the law.
He did not do that.
tl;dr: Clinton hates Americans, loves foreigners. (Score:2)
Since she's for more guest worker fraud, she's against her own country.
Then again, she's one of the globalists.
Re: (Score:2)
It's a permanent resident status, meaning there's nothing "Guest" about it. If you think that immigration is bad, then that's a bad thing, but if your concern is about temporary status workers being taken advantage of, to the detriment of normal workers (as well as themselves), then, giving permanent (no strings) status instead is a vast improvement.
Well... (Score:2)
This actually doesn't look so bad to me, it's surprisingly sane, actually. The US is pretty reliant on only a few major industries for exporting, mainly entertainment and food. They're farther ahead then any other country when it comes to the size of their tech industry, so I think we should be focusing on ensuring that the country doesn't needlessly fall behind, especially with people becoming seriously concerned about the state of our privacy laws. Investing and growing it is a smart move, and I don't op
Or, in other words (Score:4, Informative)
Clinton doesn't actually have a "tech plan". She was given one by her wealthy Silicon Valley donors. This is a woman who doesn't know how to use a fax machine, the idea that she even remotely understands net neutrality is a joke.
Re: (Score:2)
This is a woman who doesn't know how to use a fax machine, the idea that she even remotely understands net neutrality is a joke.
When did using a FAX machine ever become a job requirement?
I had a FAX machine between 2005 and 2010 when I got into IT contract work. HR would fax the contract, I would sign it and get my I-9 notarized, and faxed the documents back. These days I can print out from computer, sign the documents, scan into computer, and send documents back via email. Heck, I sometimes use a digital signature for some of this stuff.
BTW, Donald Trump reportedly doesn't use a computer and has two rotatory telephones on his desk.
Re: (Score:2)
two rotatory telephones
So he's locked up the hipster vote.
Hipsters love crusty old things.
Yeah. Let's talk DELIVERY. (Score:2)
Seriously.
Every politician on the hunt for a job has a slick, sexy "action plan" designed to grab a given constituency by the short and curlies and make them want to vote for that person.
The problem is, after the election is over and the candidate is firmly ensconced within their comfy office, said action plan and the promises contained within are forgotten faster than the name of a partner at a drunken one night stand...
Some regulation is more equal than others (Score:2)
Net neutrality — whether you like it or not — can only be achieved by a regulatory barrier. The government is telling owners of cables, routers and switches, what they can and can not do with their own equipment and data passing through it.
Clearly, some regulation is more equal than others and Hillary Clinton is, once again, talking from multiple sides of her very experienced mouth.
Re: (Score:2)
For instance, Net Neutrality isn't telling them in exacting detail how to manage their network, specifying that they have to use this kind of switch but not that kind, o
Why start believing her now? (Score:3)
Green Cards (Score:4, Insightful)
Clinton... wants the U.S. to "staple" green cards on the diplomas of STEM... masters and PhD graduates
Good. We need to balance out the culture of ignorance that is developing in this country. The people who mock learning and expertise aren't moving the country forward now, and they never will.
Plus, if these people have real green cards, they cannot be abused and underpaid the same way H1Bs are. That should stabilize the labor market a bit, especially if the program ultimately leads to a reduction in H1B issuance.
If American citizens have no interest in education, go ahead and allow *real* immigration. As long as the immigrants integrate culturally, the country will come out stronger like it always has.
Only the Hillary fan club cares (Score:2)
Seriously.
As there isn't any accountability for campaign promises, why would anyone ( who has lived through more than one election ) give any candidates promises any credibility at all ?
I put her promises in the same category as Trump.
( or any candidate for that matter )
Lots of fluffy talk tailored to whatever group they're trying to snuggle up to, never any follow-through and no consequences.
Hillary will say anything to get elected (Score:4, Informative)
I have talked to Hillary supporters who have said without any embarrassment: "Of course, she can't keep those promises and she has to lie. But it's vitally important that she get elected and she has to say things because American voters are stupid and she wouldn't get elected otherwise. Once she has been elected, she will just do what's good for the country."
How about a job (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, looking at Bill and Bush, I can only say that a prez that got a headjob was better than one that needed one badly.
Then again, would I want one that can't even give good enough head to please her hubby?
Re: (Score:2)
Meanwhile, the guy who followed him...
http://web.mit.edu/humancostir... [mit.edu]
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe the paycheck came in and she felt she should show much she can be the corporate whore that's wanted.
Re: (Score:2)
Or this is her way of locking that lead up.
Re: AC's Tech Plan (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Drudge Report was all over the Istanbul bombing [drudgereportarchives.com] almost as soon as it happened. CNN [cnn.com] reported too. As did Fox News [foxnews.com]...
Today — the next day — New York Times [nytimes.com] had their article. And Washington Post [washingtonpost.com].
Are you taking your talking points from these dimwits [dailykos.com], perhaps?
STEM+f issue likely to be superceded by events (Score:2)
I suspect the who's-in-STEM-or-not issue will be a non-issue very shortly, as education planning, execution and employment cycles go. LDNLS [fyngyrz.com] systems will be doing serious design and software generation fairly soon. I think it's entirely possible that people currently in the educational system who are on, or plan to follow, STEM paths will find themselves coming out of school with the employability-equivalent of buggy-whip manufacturing skills.
That's without actual intelligence emerging. With it... same thing
Re: (Score:3)
Our universities put lots of women through STEM majors. But when they graduate they go back to China, where they can build big things.
Re:DOESN'T ADDRESS THE REAL ISSUE (Score:4, Insightful)
Our universities put lots of women through STEM majors. But when they graduate they go back to China, where they can build big things.
Or they don't give us many employment options outside of 'mad scientist,' 'evil overlord,' and 'teacher.' I'm currently teaching but I'm starting to think finding a project whose goal is to cause world peace (by killing everybody) may be more moral.
Re: (Score:2)
Look, I don't like Hilary. I don't think this plan is anything more than an attempt to get votes. But your particular complaint about what would happen if the plan were carried out strikes me as misguided.
Foreign students who are here to get a degree ALREADY get to stay as long as they are working on a degree. The crunch comes when they graduate. They need to have a job lined up to stay in the country, and so companies have a lot of leverage in hiring and then how they treat them afterwards under the H1B pr
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Or, it's because it's offtopic, and offtopic is a -1 mod.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Best way to not be replaced by a young person with a fresher skill set? Don't let yours get stale.
If the skill set is equal, experience wins every time in fair hiring practices.