4 ms·

I fear this is the warning shot across the bow of those tech executives who supported this president. First, they come for your conferences. Then, your H1B visa

I fear this is the warning shot across the bow of those tech executives who supported this president. First, they come for your conferences. Then, your H1B visa-holding employees. Then...? Innovation thrives on freedom. Freedom of expression, freedom of movement, freedom of markets. And tech, in its best form, is about freedom, rather than market-capture and rent-seeking. Needless to say, none of these recent developments are good.

lkrubner 10y ago
Innovation thrives on the rule of law, independent courts and neutral arbiters of contracts, habeas corpus and due process, the right to a lawyer, and the right to uncoerced testimony. Consider Jethro Tull, the farmer. In 1700 he was 26 and he was taking over the family farm. He hired some local hands to seed the fields that spring. As had happened for thousands of years, the workers took bags of seed and cast handfuls on the ground. Jethro Tull became angry, because there were patches of ground that had too much seed, and other patches of ground that had too little seed. He went over to the workers and asked them to be more careful. But they proceeded as before. Tull became more angry, and went to speak with them again. But they still ignored him, and kept doing their work in the traditional manner, as they had since they were children, and as had their parents before them, and their parents before that. Tull was in a rage, but saw he could not change how the workers did their work. Instead, he decided to build a machine that would plant seeds at regular intervals. This was the beginning of the Agricultural Revolution. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jethro_Tull_(agriculturist) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jethro_Tull_(agriculturist) But now ask, why did this happen in 1700, and not in 1680 or 1660 or 1500, for that matter? Was Tull simply smarter than any farmer that had ever lived before that time? Or was their a new legal system on his side? In the time of Tull's father, England was still burning witches. The last great spasm of irrational fear and witch burning swept over Britain in the mid 1600s. But then Britain passed the Bill Of Rights, in 1688. Now everyone had the right to a fair trial, and a right to a lawyer, and no one could be tortured into confessing to a crime, such as witchcraft. And Tull belonged to the first generation of entrepreneurs in history knowing that they could depend on the rule of law -- the government could not take arbitrary action against him, but was constrained by its own processes. Therefore Tull could shatter tradition, and do completely new things, without the threat of being burned as a witch. I could cite an endless number of examples. Galileo made brilliant discoveries in an illiberal nation, and was put under house arrest, Newtown made discoveries in a nation of laws, and he became a national hero. Simply knowing that laws will be enforced fairly defeats a lot of the kinds of evil scheming that spring up under authoritarian regimes. "Freedom" is an empty word. When talking about the kinds of environments that cultivate innovation, it's best to try to be specific about that environment. History teach us the raw ingredients: the rule of law, fair and independent courts, habeas corpus and due process, the right to a lawyer, the right to uncoerced testimony.
- onion2k 10y ago
  That would be a compelling line of reasoning if Jethro Tull had actually invented the seed drill, but he didn't. He perfected the design but the device had been around Europe for 150 years before Tull's version, and in China for 2000 years before that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seed_drill https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seed_drill
  - lkrubner 10y ago
    The same argument applies even more strongly. If a technology is known, but fails to come into widespread use until there is a legal system that protects people from persecution, then the new legal system clearly played a large role in emancipating that technology from obscurity. Do I need to list every example? I was assuming they were well known. Consider what France lost by driving out the Huguenots. Consider what England gained by offering protection to the Jews. Consider this famous summary by Voltaire: "Although the Episcopalian and the Presbyterian are the two main sects in Great Britain, all others are welcome there and live pretty comfortably together, though most of their preachers detest one another almost as cordially as a Jansenist damns a Jesuit. Go into the Exchange in London, that place more venerable than many a court, and you will see representatives of all the nations assembled there for the profit of mankind. There the Jew, the Mahometan, and the Christian deal with one another as if they were of the same religion and reserve the name of infidel for those who go bankrupt. There the Presbyterian trusts the Anabaptist, and the Church of England man accepts the promise of the Quaker. On leaving these peaceable and free assemblies, some go to the synagogue, others in search of a drink; this man is on the way to be baptized in a great tub in the name of the Father, by the Son, to the Holy Ghost; that man is having the foreskin of his son cut off, and a Hebraic formula mumbled over the child that he himself can make nothing of; these others are going to their church to await the inspiration of God with their hats on; and all are satisfied." That such a great market could come into existence was thanks to the legal system set up in Britain during its revolutionary period, which ended with the passage of the Bill Of Rights that gave most British citizens the basic rights we nowadays assume. Also consider what Britain lost, 90 years later, when Parliament suddenly asserted that the Bill Of Rights was not a universal set of human rights, but a specific set of liberties given to people living in the British Isles, but not applying to the Colonies of North America. The people living in the Colonies of North America were so outraged by this that they rebelled against British rule and broke ties with the British government.
briandear 10y ago
How many H1s are from Somalia or the Sudan? I agree with your basic points, but on a practical level, how much does this actually affect things for H1 companies? We are talking 7 countries very few of which produce many H1 employees.

lkrubner 10y ago

Innovation thrives on the rule of law, independent courts and neutral arbiters of contracts, habeas corpus and due process, the right to a lawyer, and the right to uncoerced testimony. Consider Jethro Tull, the farmer. In 1700 he was 26 and he was taking over the family farm. He hired some local hands to seed the fields that spring. As had happened for thousands of years, the workers took bags of seed and cast handfuls on the ground. Jethro Tull became angry, because there were patches of ground that had too much seed, and other patches of ground that had too little seed. He went over to the workers and asked them to be more careful. But they proceeded as before. Tull became more angry, and went to speak with them again. But they still ignored him, and kept doing their work in the traditional manner, as they had since they were children, and as had their parents before them, and their parents before that. Tull was in a rage, but saw he could not change how the workers did their work. Instead, he decided to build a machine that would plant seeds at regular intervals. This was the beginning of the Agricultural Revolution. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jethro_Tull_(agriculturist) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jethro_Tull_(agriculturist) But now ask, why did this happen in 1700, and not in 1680 or 1660 or 1500, for that matter? Was Tull simply smarter than any farmer that had ever lived before that time? Or was their a new legal system on his side? In the time of Tull's father, England was still burning witches. The last great spasm of irrational fear and witch burning swept over Britain in the mid 1600s. But then Britain passed the Bill Of Rights, in 1688. Now everyone had the right to a fair trial, and a right to a lawyer, and no one could be tortured into confessing to a crime, such as witchcraft. And Tull belonged to the first generation of entrepreneurs in history knowing that they could depend on the rule of law -- the government could not take arbitrary action against him, but was constrained by its own processes. Therefore Tull could shatter tradition, and do completely new things, without the threat of being burned as a witch. I could cite an endless number of examples. Galileo made brilliant discoveries in an illiberal nation, and was put under house arrest, Newtown made discoveries in a nation of laws, and he became a national hero. Simply knowing that laws will be enforced fairly defeats a lot of the kinds of evil scheming that spring up under authoritarian regimes. "Freedom" is an empty word. When talking about the kinds of environments that cultivate innovation, it's best to try to be specific about that environment. History teach us the raw ingredients: the rule of law, fair and independent courts, habeas corpus and due process, the right to a lawyer, the right to uncoerced testimony.

onion2k 10y ago
That would be a compelling line of reasoning if Jethro Tull had actually invented the seed drill, but he didn't. He perfected the design but the device had been around Europe for 150 years before Tull's version, and in China for 2000 years before that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seed_drill https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seed_drill
- lkrubner 10y ago
  The same argument applies even more strongly. If a technology is known, but fails to come into widespread use until there is a legal system that protects people from persecution, then the new legal system clearly played a large role in emancipating that technology from obscurity. Do I need to list every example? I was assuming they were well known. Consider what France lost by driving out the Huguenots. Consider what England gained by offering protection to the Jews. Consider this famous summary by Voltaire: "Although the Episcopalian and the Presbyterian are the two main sects in Great Britain, all others are welcome there and live pretty comfortably together, though most of their preachers detest one another almost as cordially as a Jansenist damns a Jesuit. Go into the Exchange in London, that place more venerable than many a court, and you will see representatives of all the nations assembled there for the profit of mankind. There the Jew, the Mahometan, and the Christian deal with one another as if they were of the same religion and reserve the name of infidel for those who go bankrupt. There the Presbyterian trusts the Anabaptist, and the Church of England man accepts the promise of the Quaker. On leaving these peaceable and free assemblies, some go to the synagogue, others in search of a drink; this man is on the way to be baptized in a great tub in the name of the Father, by the Son, to the Holy Ghost; that man is having the foreskin of his son cut off, and a Hebraic formula mumbled over the child that he himself can make nothing of; these others are going to their church to await the inspiration of God with their hats on; and all are satisfied." That such a great market could come into existence was thanks to the legal system set up in Britain during its revolutionary period, which ended with the passage of the Bill Of Rights that gave most British citizens the basic rights we nowadays assume. Also consider what Britain lost, 90 years later, when Parliament suddenly asserted that the Bill Of Rights was not a universal set of human rights, but a specific set of liberties given to people living in the British Isles, but not applying to the Colonies of North America. The people living in the Colonies of North America were so outraged by this that they rebelled against British rule and broke ties with the British government.

briandear 10y ago

How many H1s are from Somalia or the Sudan? I agree with your basic points, but on a practical level, how much does this actually affect things for H1 companies? We are talking 7 countries very few of which produce many H1 employees.