5 ms·

The most effective action tech companies can take is what they did against SOPA: post large protest banners on popular websites. Though I don't think this is th

by guelo 10y ago

The most effective action tech companies can take is what they did against SOPA: post large protest banners on popular websites. Though I don't think this is the right time to take that step. There are many outrages ahead, many will be directly related to tech, like killing net neutrality, forcing tech companies to compile Muslim registries, banning tech worker and student visas, and who knows what else. I think tech companies should reserve their fire for the many battles to come. Many different parts of society will be involved in these fights, it's not only up to tech communities to fight every battle.

tptacek 10y ago
Don't post banners about the US refusing reentry to Green Card holders who are the spouses of American citizens, or who fought alongside our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan, because that might dilute our protests against net neutrality? After a period of 6-12 months outside the country, US Green Card holders lose their Green Cards.
- pvg 10y ago
  After a period of 6-12 months outside the country, US Green Card holders lose their Green Cards. In a time of grave concern for many green card holders, it's probably better to avoid this sort of inaccurate info. It's freakout time but let's stick to freaking out about true things.
  - tptacek 10y ago
    Could you please true up the information?
    - jacquesm 10y ago
      I'll true it up for you, it is actually worse than you describe. If you are absent > 6 months you could end up with your green card status listed as 'abandoned', but even if you come back every 6 months that is no guarantee at all that it will not be listed abandoned. The golden rule seems to be to be more than 6 months per year in the USA, preferably substantially more than 6 months to avoid ambiguity.
      - tptacek 10y ago
        Further, it appears that after a year your green card is by statute no longer valid for reentry into the country. You don't lose the green card, but your reentry has to be special-cased by CBP or a consulate.
      - vsl 10y ago
        Green card is for people who want to immigrate into US; US isn't interested in granting citizenship to people living elsewhere (never was), the stated goal is to diversify US population. Given that, such a requirement makes sense - and is very common in immigration procedures around the world.
        slededit 10y ago
        The rules to naturalize are separate and more stringent than the rules to maintain the green card. Talking about granting citizenship is a separate issue.
    - pvg 10y ago
      I'm no immigration lawyer - just a greencard holder who's been through a couple of adventures in the process. There's a decent summary here: http://lawandborder.com/risk-abandoning-green-card-abroad-6-months/ http://lawandborder.com/risk-abandoning-green-card-abroad-6-... Key things: 6 months absence can be a factor in challenging your status as a Lawful Permanent Resident. 12 months absence means your green card (the actual document) is no longer valid for re-entry but it doesn't automatically make you a non-LPR. Customs and Border Patrol can deny you entry, as we've just seen, on the basis executive action, legally questionable or not. But they can't take away your LPR status - only an order from an immigration court judge can do that. A lot of this is cold comfort to any LPR caught up in this and unable to re-enter right now - but there is a process and the status itself is not so trivial to take away. The call to help organizations who provide legal aid to such people (and refugees and other visa holders) seems like the right thing to me, it's probably the most immediate need.
      - tptacek 10y ago
        You're right, even as I wrote the original comment I knew in the back of my head that "lose their green card" wasn't the right way to put it; I just wrote carelessly. Thanks!
        deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
idlewords 10y ago
The most effective action tech companies can take is to pour rivers of money into immigrant advocacy and legal aid organizations, and to make sure their CEOs speak out loudly, right now. Banners don't matter. Net neutrality mattered in October, doesn't really matter now. Get your head straight.
- downandout 10y ago
  I am not sure that legal aid/advocacy will help those affected here. The President has wide latitude to make immigration decisions. Love it or hate it, the new policy is what it is and the courts are likely not in a legal position to be able to overturn or make an end-run around it, regardless of how compelling the argument in a given case is. Encouraging new and timely legislation is much more likely to be effective if you are opposed to this executive order.
  - idlewords 10y ago
    It helps in three really important ways: 1) You don't have the right to counsel in immigration hearings. There are several organizations that provide free legal aid. 2) Immigrant communities are scared and need to know their rights, and have a trusted source of information. There are unfortunately a ton of scammers who prey on scared people. 3) These organizations are a helpful intermediary between vulnerable people and government agencies, police, etc.
- DanBC 10y ago
  I suck at slogans, but... "You like this service? Our founder came to the US in 19XX" "You enjoy this website? Here's a list of 2nd generation immigrants on our executive board" ...might get people to realise how much of the US economy is driven by 1st & 2nd generation immigrants.
  - foodFor1234 10y ago
    That won't help change attutiudes. It will reinforce existing attitudes. "See! Immigration is good. These immigrants and their kids are building services!" "See! Immigrants are hiring other immigrants and their children to provide lower cost labor and networking out-of-country and locking us out of the market." If you want to change, you need a slogan like "American made, American owned, American labor." along with the (now disappearing) attitude that American is not an ethnicity, it is a lifestyle.
abecedarius 10y ago
I'm also unsure about protest banners, but on the general theme of holding your fire, "this is exactly how big companies lose against startups. They wait around to see what the startup will do, and by the time they have figured out that it’s important it is too late to catch up. This is why Andy Grove’s motto at Intel was “Only the paranoid survive.” So working with startups has taught me: don’t wait until it is too late. Protest early and often. We wouldn’t even be here if people hadn’t grossly underestimated Trump to begin with." (From Albert Wengler earlier this week, http://continuations.com/post/156262260395/what-i-learned-from-startup-investing-about-the http://continuations.com/post/156262260395/what-i-learned-fr...)
Haegin 10y ago
Tech companies can also leave the states. Taking the amount of tax revenue they pay abroad will make a much stronger point than adding some banners, and that's before you factor in the deskilling of somewhere like the bay area if the tech companies leave. Of course, too many of the mostly white male tech company founders and investors are hoping to benefit from things like reduced corporate taxes to care about discrimination that doesn't affect them.
- willstrafach 10y ago
  This is not true. The US taxes worldwide income regardless of country.
  - seanmcdirmid 10y ago
    True. But country of residence gets first dibs, and you get a credit for taxes paid abroad.
  - Haegin 10y ago
    Oh yeah, I forgot about that crazy rule. That doesn't apply to corporate taxes though right?

by guelo 10y ago

tptacek 10y ago

Don't post banners about the US refusing reentry to Green Card holders who are the spouses of American citizens, or who fought alongside our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan, because that might dilute our protests against net neutrality? After a period of 6-12 months outside the country, US Green Card holders lose their Green Cards.

pvg 10y ago
After a period of 6-12 months outside the country, US Green Card holders lose their Green Cards. In a time of grave concern for many green card holders, it's probably better to avoid this sort of inaccurate info. It's freakout time but let's stick to freaking out about true things.
- tptacek 10y ago
  Could you please true up the information?
  - jacquesm 10y ago
    I'll true it up for you, it is actually worse than you describe. If you are absent > 6 months you could end up with your green card status listed as 'abandoned', but even if you come back every 6 months that is no guarantee at all that it will not be listed abandoned. The golden rule seems to be to be more than 6 months per year in the USA, preferably substantially more than 6 months to avoid ambiguity.
    - tptacek 10y ago
      Further, it appears that after a year your green card is by statute no longer valid for reentry into the country. You don't lose the green card, but your reentry has to be special-cased by CBP or a consulate.
    - vsl 10y ago
      Green card is for people who want to immigrate into US; US isn't interested in granting citizenship to people living elsewhere (never was), the stated goal is to diversify US population. Given that, such a requirement makes sense - and is very common in immigration procedures around the world.
      - slededit 10y ago
        The rules to naturalize are separate and more stringent than the rules to maintain the green card. Talking about granting citizenship is a separate issue.
  - pvg 10y ago
    I'm no immigration lawyer - just a greencard holder who's been through a couple of adventures in the process. There's a decent summary here: http://lawandborder.com/risk-abandoning-green-card-abroad-6-months/ http://lawandborder.com/risk-abandoning-green-card-abroad-6-... Key things: 6 months absence can be a factor in challenging your status as a Lawful Permanent Resident. 12 months absence means your green card (the actual document) is no longer valid for re-entry but it doesn't automatically make you a non-LPR. Customs and Border Patrol can deny you entry, as we've just seen, on the basis executive action, legally questionable or not. But they can't take away your LPR status - only an order from an immigration court judge can do that. A lot of this is cold comfort to any LPR caught up in this and unable to re-enter right now - but there is a process and the status itself is not so trivial to take away. The call to help organizations who provide legal aid to such people (and refugees and other visa holders) seems like the right thing to me, it's probably the most immediate need.
    - tptacek 10y ago
      You're right, even as I wrote the original comment I knew in the back of my head that "lose their green card" wasn't the right way to put it; I just wrote carelessly. Thanks!
      - deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]

idlewords 10y ago

The most effective action tech companies can take is to pour rivers of money into immigrant advocacy and legal aid organizations, and to make sure their CEOs speak out loudly, right now. Banners don't matter. Net neutrality mattered in October, doesn't really matter now. Get your head straight.

downandout 10y ago
I am not sure that legal aid/advocacy will help those affected here. The President has wide latitude to make immigration decisions. Love it or hate it, the new policy is what it is and the courts are likely not in a legal position to be able to overturn or make an end-run around it, regardless of how compelling the argument in a given case is. Encouraging new and timely legislation is much more likely to be effective if you are opposed to this executive order.
- idlewords 10y ago
  It helps in three really important ways: 1) You don't have the right to counsel in immigration hearings. There are several organizations that provide free legal aid. 2) Immigrant communities are scared and need to know their rights, and have a trusted source of information. There are unfortunately a ton of scammers who prey on scared people. 3) These organizations are a helpful intermediary between vulnerable people and government agencies, police, etc.
DanBC 10y ago
I suck at slogans, but... "You like this service? Our founder came to the US in 19XX" "You enjoy this website? Here's a list of 2nd generation immigrants on our executive board" ...might get people to realise how much of the US economy is driven by 1st & 2nd generation immigrants.
- foodFor1234 10y ago
  That won't help change attutiudes. It will reinforce existing attitudes. "See! Immigration is good. These immigrants and their kids are building services!" "See! Immigrants are hiring other immigrants and their children to provide lower cost labor and networking out-of-country and locking us out of the market." If you want to change, you need a slogan like "American made, American owned, American labor." along with the (now disappearing) attitude that American is not an ethnicity, it is a lifestyle.

abecedarius 10y ago

I'm also unsure about protest banners, but on the general theme of holding your fire, "this is exactly how big companies lose against startups. They wait around to see what the startup will do, and by the time they have figured out that it’s important it is too late to catch up. This is why Andy Grove’s motto at Intel was “Only the paranoid survive.” So working with startups has taught me: don’t wait until it is too late. Protest early and often. We wouldn’t even be here if people hadn’t grossly underestimated Trump to begin with." (From Albert Wengler earlier this week, http://continuations.com/post/156262260395/what-i-learned-from-startup-investing-about-the http://continuations.com/post/156262260395/what-i-learned-fr...)

Haegin 10y ago

Tech companies can also leave the states. Taking the amount of tax revenue they pay abroad will make a much stronger point than adding some banners, and that's before you factor in the deskilling of somewhere like the bay area if the tech companies leave. Of course, too many of the mostly white male tech company founders and investors are hoping to benefit from things like reduced corporate taxes to care about discrimination that doesn't affect them.

willstrafach 10y ago
This is not true. The US taxes worldwide income regardless of country.
- seanmcdirmid 10y ago
  True. But country of residence gets first dibs, and you get a credit for taxes paid abroad.
- Haegin 10y ago
  Oh yeah, I forgot about that crazy rule. That doesn't apply to corporate taxes though right?