I think there are a lot of inhumane things happening around the world right now to label this inconvenient, at best. We need better leadership through higher voter participation and an informed electorate to stop these inhumane and inconvenient policies.
I think it is helpful to remind folk that these policies are not universally hated. Indeed a majority of voters voted specifically for them, and they were explicitly laid out.
This is democracy in action. The majority (of those who care enough at all) get to rule over the minority (and the apathetic). Obviously not all actions will be universally loved, but no govt action can ever be universally loved.
Well, for one you're not supposed to use a majority vote to abolish democracy, or mess with unalienable rights. You can think of it as "democracy with precommitment".
Its also helpful to remind folk about why someone would hold this position.
The largest reason US got to where it was at least in the world economy stage was because of the visa program. It was the country everyone wanted to move to, because you can apply your skills, make money, start a business, with very little restriction comparatively, buy a house, and live your dream life.
The more people wanna work, the more opportunities there are for work. Any time money changes hands, like in salary for work, this grows the economy, which further creates new jobs.
If someone is for this type of restricted immigration, then you should have a clear cut position on why you think things being more expensive, less available, and overall lower economic activity (which affects things like one being able to get a mortgate or other loan, and so on) is generally better for the country.
Because if they don't have those reasons, or have ones that are not rooted in reality than the position comes from xenophobia and racism in 99% of the cases.
Countries are not merely economic zones..! While I don't even agree with you (skilled immigrants are very different from unskilled), even if I did, anti immigration sentiment is largely about culture. I would prefer to live in my own culture than to be slightly richer in someone else's culture.
It be valid point if you cound point to a set of traditions and beliefs that defines what American culture is, but modern American culture is literally an average over contributions from different cultures due to all the historic immigration.
You are a fish unaware of the water. America doesn't have a culture? If I move from America to India or Japan or Brazil I will not experience a cultural difference? This is an asinine statement. Orange is an average over red and yellow, and it's certainly not green. I refuse to be abashed of liking my culture more than some other ones.
He's not saying the US doesn't have a culture. He's saying the US is large and diverse and has multiple cultures. Thus trying to define "American culture" is difficult.
The point is valid, but perhaps not relevant. Broadly, yes, Americans are easy to spot abroad. Attitude, behavior etc are all part of culture.
Yes, an American from NY and one from Alabama will have massive differences, but culture (anywhere) doesn't mean that people are all the same.
Deep down, if you substitute "culture" for "race" in most (not all) conversations you get a much closer understanding of the real problem. For example the first lady is an immigrant, but clearly the right kind.
Im sorry, but if you think that someone being effectively racist in a nice way is somehow better than being up front and calling them out for their belief, you are beyond lost. People like you deserve Trump. Youll ride your high horse of morality of being nice to everyone straight to your grave.
Please spare us the sermonizing and personal vitriol, thanks. I posted the same reply to the other commenter. My role here is to uphold the guidelines, not to adjudicate on the relative merits of arguments in a fundamentally toxic debate. This place only continues to exist because we have guidelines and uphold them daily, and because enough other people bother to be respectful in the way they participate here. If you’re not able to make your points without personal attacks, this is not the place for you.
I’m as concerned about economic collapse as anyone. We’re not so delusional as to think we can fix the hardest problems in the world by writing assholish comments to each other on what is a nerd message board. This is a site for people who build things, and for people who are are interested in discussing new approaches to difficult problems. It’s not for clobbering each other over the head with ideas that people have been clobbering each other over the head with for decades. Stop trashing the guidelines and our efforts to uphold them; they are the entire reason this continues to be a place where people come to discuss difficult topics after nearly two decades. Please go somewhere else if this is the best you have to offer. This is a place for people who have high standards of themselves.
In the US, anti-immigrant sentiment is often the highest in regions with relatively few immigrants, far away from the border. The less that immigrants are part of peoples daily lives, the more people seem to fear for their "culture".
Presuming to have any real agency over the evolution of human culture also seems misguided. Culture is like a river, in that "no man ever steps into the same one twice". It's constantly changing in unpredictable ways, from generation to generation or even within generations, with or without immigration. That goes for the cultures of immigrants also.
The more people stand to lose, the more they fear losing it? shocking. (I don't even think that's true. Southern border states are a lot more concerned with illegal crossings than anywhere else. People who have to live near ethnic ghettos have a bigger problem with them than the coastal elites pushing for it. Etc)
Pretending that importing millions of foreigners will not affect the culture whatsoever is just a dumb or disingenuous argument, sorry. We already see a microcosm of it with Indian tech workers, having constant scandals about only hiring other Indians of their caste, and with the southern border states having dual spanish language signs everywhere. UK has issues with Islamic tension today already.
It is so fundamentally obvious that mass immigration from non-western cultures will produce non-westernized cultural changes, that otherwise wouldn't happen, that I have to just assume you are intentionally pretending not to understand that.
> The more people stand to lose, the more they fear losing it? shocking.
No - the less real exposure a person has to immigrants and their communities, the more dehumanizing anti-immigrant rhetoric has a chance to substitute for real experience.
> Southern border states are a lot more concerned with illegal crossings than anywhere else
Southern border states are also generally filled with a lot of people who actually know, from experience, that illegal border crossings and immigration are not the same thing.
> the southern border states having dual spanish language signs everywhere
The humanity! There will always be cultural diffusion along borders, no immigration policy is ever going to change that reality. The lives of people on either side are integrated in real tangible ways despite the lines on maps.
And the reverse is also true, of course. Mexico is filled with English speakers and it's quite easy to get around there without speaking a lick of Spanish. It's a great place to visit.
> Pretending that importing millions of foreigners will not affect the culture whatsoever is just a dumb or disingenuous argument
The argument is more that any predictions about the future of culture or efforts to steer it one way or another are mostly futile, and likely more inspired by ones prejudices and irrational fears.
Whatever it is that you are afraid of losing - you probably won't - or if you do, the immigrants probably weren't the ones who took it from you.
(It's actually way more likely that some piece of technology, maybe built by some people on this very site, will be the thing that kills your culture)
But will remain anonymous and are okay with the collateral damage. My suspicion is that competition makes you feel insecure. I was born and raised in SF, and I see this not only with immigrants but also from people who feel violated by migrants. There is a spectrum. It’s ugly, short sighted and unhelpful. It’s what it takes to make the valley, but people love pulling up ladders. At least, behind an alias, you’re will to acknowledge your shortcomings.
Tell me how bitter you are without telling me how bitter you are, anonymously.
You’ve let your bitterness infect your happiness and think no one can see you regurgitating your lack of self worth all over your shirt.
Can we agree these are actions of a coward, you’re attempting to label as democracy and that it accomplishes nothing because no one reading this has authority?
I would genuinely like to understand how you square this with the current president being known to leverage a lot of low/unskilled temporary workers visas.
If these weren't issued he would need to hire Americans?
This feels like one of those times where it is easy to vote for a policy when the effects are on a vaguer or populational level, but when you actually meet or make friends with someone affected it takes on an entirely new light.
I mean this is how gay marriage flipped, enough people got to know their homosexual friends, neighbors, or even family members and realized that the policy was hateful against someone they cared about and the stated harms were clearly rediculous when put in the context of that real person you know.
Hey, if all it takes to get the government to hurt those immigrants is electing a narcissistic pedophile to the highest office of the land, then so be it.
I'm a Canadian but I don't understand this sentiment towards Americans.
I think that citizens of a country should have a say in their policies without it being called "xenophobia". Could some vote for these policies because of "xenophobia" ? possibly but not all.
From what I've gathered, the primary reason Republicans won the election was because a portion of Americans felt unheard and the party gave them a voice.
I'm not obliged to like it but I feel like pushing people like the parent away is precisely why United States is caught in a quagmire right now.
Obviously, Canadians have a very different view than Americans regarding immigration but nonetheless, the will of people should be respected.
The critisism isnt about the policy on immigration. The critisim is about analogously giving a convicted felon a flamethrower to use on your house to get rid of unwanted bugs and thinking that its the right solution. All while also crying about small government all the time. That kind of thinking is pretty much on par for modern conservatives though.
The truth is llegal immigration in the sense of criminals coming here was never a problem. Most of the "illegal" immigrants were coming here by abusing the generous asylum system. And furthermore, they were coming here for work opportunity, not to leech from the system.
The border bill that Biden had in plan would have fixed that. Trump told Republicans to veto it because it would hurt his chances.
I think about their IPO and what seems and likely still is a promising offering seems a little less so with AI offerings. I also wonder if these businesses, suffering from the same AI uncertainties are a good value?
So you didn’t read the article, made an assumption about its content, question someone who did, then blame Adblock for your confusion, instead of just following the conversation?
No I was confused that they wouldn’t count the browser users when there is no good reason to when they try to eval their user base? MAU commonly includes web users as well.
I blame TechCrunch for creating a website that I can’t read but yea fair criticism I didn’t read the article.
I didn’t question GP i asked if they knew why web users aren’t counted.
Do they explain in the article why they would only count mobile users as MAU?
You would be creating a counterfactual inconsistent with most’s understanding of the role and bringing this person’s motives and credibility into question without supporting evidence?
AIs feel? Maybe language structure in trading documents that ultimately led to fraud. If the latter is the case maybe AIs should not be trained on “negative outcomes.” I do not think AIs have emotions or are pressured by language either written or physical, just tokens.
Of course it is just tokens, but the result is the same.
If, in the amount of data they ingested, there was a clear pattern of responding in an hasty and carefree way to frenetic questions, LLMs will try more hasty and carefree solutions to a frenetic prompt.
You can decide whether you can say that they "feel" the urgency or not, but the outcome is very much the same
reply