11 ms·
Ten years ago they beat MIT. Today, it's complicated (2014)
- Cyph0n 11y agoI watched the documentary around a year ago and was really inspired by the team. It's sad to hear what happened to them to be honest. Such brilliant minds put to waste.
- jacobush 11y agoPossibly they were all better off though, after their win, than they would otherwise be. It's both heartbreaking and inspiring what became of them. Heartbreaking: that not even one became an engineer or had greater (Hollywood ending style) success. Inspiring: that they struggle hard and have some success against formidable odds. Also sad that the Phoenix school to this day has to scrounge for equipment and funds. Lots of players dropped the ball here, the Arizona state, companies, enterprises, MIT. MIT could have gotten immense goodwill by partnering up somehow with the Phoenix school. An off-site campus or something, anything really.
- throwaway_exer 11y agoOne graduated from ASU with an engineering degree and works as a supervisor.
- moeamaya 11y agoAs a poor Mexican from Arizona who went to MIT, this story hits close to home. But after much reflection, I believe the sad reality has a enduring positive legacy which has only begun. While perhaps not following the paradigm of success we on HN often consider, the team's victory in the competition and subsequent publicity became a widely distributed step-function for an entire generation of down trodden Latinos. Although anecdotal, I've witnessed a large swath of family and friends become engineers, go to med school or start their own business. This viable reality was made possible by the previous generation taking chances and working incredibly hard. I admit that I've been envious in the past of my immigrant friends with parents who are from India, China and Korea, where studiousness and achievement are default conditions for upbringing. But I'm excited to see an inflection point in the Mexican culture and it starts with stories like these!
- kelukelugames 11y agoIt's harder for unskilled labor to emigrate across the Pacific. I knew plenty of underachievers in Beijing. Most of the hispanic people I met through school or work were recent immigrants from upperclass families. However, one of my Columbian classmates at MIT grad school was the son of a janitor. He founded a startup after graduation. If we calculated a ratio for achievement vs our parents' occupations then he has one of the highest scores. Here is the link to his company. http://www.skulpt.me http://www.skulpt.me
- forgotpwtomain 11y agoJust a heads-up - this page auto-plays a video.
- uniclaude 11y agoThis is from 2014, maybe it should be marked as such. Incredibly touching story nonetheless.
- techman9 11y agoI was on a First Robotics Competition team in high school and interacted with Falcon Robotics, (Team 842), a few times. They're well regarded as one of the best and most gracious teams in the competition.
- 77pt77 11y ago> since his legal status prevented him from being an employee, but allowed him to create his own company. Come again?
- winter_blue 11y agoThe key here is that he is hiring himself, so as he is the employer (of himself), and the liability for hiring an undocumented worker falls on himself. Anyone can create a Delaware C corporation, even people from other countries who have never been to the US. You do need to be a citizen however to create an LLC or an S corporation.
- 77pt77 11y agoAny sources you recommend so that I can find about the differences between those? Thanks.
- winter_blue 11y agoMost companies you hear about are C corporations. S corporations are nearly identical to C corporations, except that they do not pay any corporate taxes. There are a bunch of qualifications for being an S corp (that ensures only small companies can be S corps): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S_corporation#Qualification_for_S_corporation_status https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S_corporation#Qualification_fo... An LLC (Limited Liability Company) is similar to an S corp in that it does not pay incomes taxes, but it is structured differently and is not a corporation. For a startup, I've heard it's more expensive to set up an LLC than an S corp.
- akjj 11y agoThis is mostly true, but you're confusing because there are two different levels: corporations are registered and regulated at the state level, of which LLC is one category. The IRS then categorizes registered corporations as either S-corps or C-corps for the purpose of federal taxes. There's not a one-to-one mapping between the two levels, especially since there's 50 different states, but usually LLCs implies S corp.
- winter_blue 11y agoThe entirety of blame for all of this pain, loss, and suffering falls squarely on the Republicans who oppose immigration reform, and keep calling for the merciless deportation of everyone including children who overstayed their visas or came over the border.
- sokoloff 11y agoI think there are two issues there. One, the immigration rules. Two, the enforcement of those rules. On the second, I have little sympathy for the category of people who intentionally break a law and then cry foul when that is discovered and addressed.
- delazeur 11y agoExcept that all four of these people were brought into the country as young children. Were you in control of your life when you were five?
- sokoloff 11y agoI was not. My kids are 4 and 6; they absolutely depend on me to make good choices on their behalf. I know that they will benefit from or suffer the consequences of many of my choices.
- kaitai 11y agoYep. Isn't it great that these kids could compete in robotics competitions and work to support their families in relative safety instead of being stuck in a corrupt and dangerous country in which a drug war has torn apart civil society? Looks like their parents made a pretty rational choice!
- sokoloff 11y agoAgreed. Their parents took significant risk and made a choice that, albeit illegal, worked out very well for their kids for a little over a decade. Well done and I hope that I'd have done the same for my family in analogous circumstances. That doesn't mean that, once discovered, the kids are entitled to residency or citizenship.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- lhopki01 11y agoThis demonstrates a tragedy that happens all too often. How many talented people out there have their talents wasted because of barriers like this. How many people can't fulfil their potential because they're born into a poor family or on the wrong side of an arbitrary border?
- huherto 11y agoSometimes a border is not a border, it is scar. An ethnic group was already living in that area and one day they find themselves at one side of the fence.
- MCRed 11y agoAll to protect mafiosos who pretend to be organizing "unions" for the "workers" benefit (which is illogical if you think about it due to the Principle-Agent problem, and makes no sense economically- the bosses will cut deals best for the bosses, not for the union membership.) Keeping talented people down is just a side effect.
- winter_blue 11y agoYou are actually right, historically speaking. After the United States victory in the Mexican-American War, there was a movement to annex all of Mexico.[1] The decision to not do so was based on racial concerns. Senator John C. Calhoun of South Carolina who opposed the annexation of Mexico, made this speech to Congress: We have never dreamt of incorporating into our Union any but the Caucasian race—the free white race. To incorporate Mexico, would be the very first instance of the kind, of incorporating an Indian race; for more than half of the Mexicans are Indians, and the other is composed chiefly of mixed tribes. I protest against such a union as that! Ours, sir, is the Government of a white race.... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_of_Mexico_Movement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_of_Mexico_Movement
- gedy 11y agoYou are very right, especially places like colonial Africa. However in the context of California, Arizona, etc much of the immigration is from Guatemala, Central America, etc, not the true native tribes like the Chumash, Luiseño, et al who are still here. Just pointing this out because "division" gets bandied about a lot inaccurately.
- Yhippa 11y agoI don't know the specifics of the current reasoning or history that Arizona has with immigration but at a base level I'm pretty infuriated that these kids actually have the desire to do hard things that society needs and got thwarted. I know there are rules but how many potential new engineers (is there still a big shortage?) are we letting slip through the cracks?
- OJFord 11y agoDoes "illegal" in this (immigration) context have a more subtle meaning in the USA? When the article says he lost his place when voters pulled scholarship money from "people in the country illegally", I read that and think, well I'm not surprised - surely if the university is aware that somebody is in the country illegally then they have a duty to report it to the authorities, and certainly not offer them studentship - nevermind a scholarship?!
- skybrian 11y agoThe question is whether children should be blamed for what their parents did. Many people would say no.
- OJFord 11y agoOh I see. Still sounds mad to me though, I mean what's the alternative appending something like > or, you are under 18, and not to blame for your illegal residency to citizenship requirements?
- pkaye 11y agoThat is already there in the laws. Overstays under 18 years of age are not penalized when you subsequently try to legalize. Otherwise there is a 3-10 years ban which takes some legal effort to overcome. Furthermore to legalize one must qualify through job or family and this can be a tough barrier for many.
- skybrian 11y ago
- MCRed 11y agoYet another tragedy of regulation. Yes, I know unions want to keep competition for their services low, in the theory that they can extract higher wages. But the reality is, the people who want to come to america to work for companies are almost always going to have something that the existing people in america don't- either a willingness to do jobs that american's don't like or think are beneath them or skills that americans don't have in enough quantity. Limiting immigration is limiting economic growth. The time when the country grew the fastest and most dramatically was also a time when shiploads of people were just showing up. Every time you see someone saying "we need regulation for capitalism to work" these are their victims. Democrats and Republicans both have a history of denying people human rights, and the right to employ whomever I want-- without regard to where they were born-- in my business is a right that they are denying. It also denies the employee the right to work for whomever would like to hire them. Government doesn't know best. This is why socialism has never worked. So, if you're lamenting the way these people have been treated, look to your own voting history.
- rtl49 11y agoOften stories of this sort are used to advocate a more permissive immigration policy, particularly toward those from Mexico and South America who have entered the US illegally seeking economic opportunity. Rational arguments seldom make their way into this discussion, if it can be called that. On the one side we have the empathetic liberals, who in many cases ultimately wish to see the complete abolition of national borders and global inequality. Joining them are corporations, which want abundant labor in order to reduce the costs of employment. On the other, we have low-skilled citizens, who don't wish to see their quality of life reduced by admitting large numbers of people willing to work for very little. Along with them are those concerned about the political and cultural consequences of admitting a massive, homogeneous, and very different group of people into their homeland. There are probably some racists among the group, though probably far fewer than the other side often claim. Whichever side you find yourself on, I think the following must be admitted: 1) The ordinary citizen currently in the United States will likely experience a decline in quality of life as a result of a permissive immigration policy. 2) Massive economic migration to rich countries from poor ones is not a solution to the problem of global economic inequality or poverty. 3) Historical instances of immigration, colonialism, and invasion do not justify or necessitate permissive immigration policies in the present day.
- jsprogrammer 11y ago>1) The ordinary citizen currently in the United States will likely experience a decline in quality of life as a result of a permissive immigration policy. On what basis must this be "admitted"? You provide no rationale for it in the preceding paragraphs and then dump this line as if it should be obvious.
- rtl49 11y agoOrdinary people in the US benefit economically because of their citizenship. Many of these people possess few skills and would live in abject poverty doing the same work in other countries. Admitting large numbers of low-skilled workers increases the supply of laborers, with the result that competition for employment increases, and wages decline. Even with a minimum wage, the number of employment opportunities is reduced. Thus, ordinary citizens stand to experience a decline in their quality of life.
- SmellyGeekBoy 11y agoThis is a terrible clickbait title (currently "Ten years ago they beat MIT. Today, it's complicated")
- elg0nz 11y agoI cannot recommend more Spare Parts by Joshua Davis (the book the movie is based on). It does a great job explaining the situation these kids live in. (How can a kid go to college when their parents are sick and working 4 jobs to make ends meet?) The real heroes here are not just the kids, but the teachers that with a non existent budget created a safe space for these kids to thinker and to use their natural talents