> The article is extremely light on details but fact he doesn't have a Green Card/Lawful Permanent Resident yet would indicate that at some point of his time in United States, he was illegally present, probably for a while.
That is absolutely false. I know many people who have lived legally in the USA for many many years with valid visas and have intentionally never pursued a green card. Two people come to mind including one who has over 20 years the US on valid visas -- she intentionally never pursued the green card despite both (a) being married to an American and (b) being legally able to get the green card.
Some of them are now pursuing green cards only because of federal government's immigration enforcement not only going after illegal immigrants or criminals but clearly and intentionally pursing immigrants in general -- even those who are legal and without any criminal history.
From my understanding on this issue, spouses of US citizens are handed a green card after paperwork is shuffled, there is no pursuing it.
When discussing this with friends, multiple spouses have pulled out green cards and only newly weds had anything else but green card. She showed her passport with some form attached to it.
>From my understanding on this issue, spouses of US citizens are handed a green card after paperwork is shuffled, there is no pursuing it.
This is incorrect. You do need to pursue it. Just because your friends did pursue it once they were able to, doesn't mean it is automatic. One needs to decide if they want to get their green card or not once they are married to a US citizen.
I emphasize that I'm not defending the Trump regime, but do you know this friend well enough to be confident that she would tell you if her visa situation didn't check out? It would be extremely hard to stay in the US for 20 uninterrupted years on valid visas without permanent residency. O-1s are theoretically indefinite but require yearly renewal, and all of the other common visas I know of have maximum durations below 10 years.
Yes, I am 100% certain of what I said. These individuals have had valid visas in the US and been here for 10-20 years and intentionally have never become green card holders.
One was on a student visa for undergrad and then a student visa for masters for 6 years total (4 for undergrad and 2 for masters), then on a G4 diplomatic visa while working at the World Bank for 5 years, then back to a student visa for 5 years pursuing a PhD, then back to a G4 Diplomatic visa for 6 years while working at the World Bank. This person married an American about 10 years ago and still never pursued a green card out of choice.
Another was on a G4 diplomatic visa while working at the IDB for 3 years, then a student visa for 5 years while pursuing a PhD, then a visa while working at the Federal Reserve for a number of years (not sure of which, but either H1B or J1), and then on a G4 diplomatic visa while working at the IMF.
Of course, these are not your typical situations for the average immigrant. Admittedly, I live in a bit of a bubble surrounded by economists in Washington DC from the World Bank, IMF, IDB, etc who are mostly on G4 diplomatic visas.
My point is it is still possible and one shouldn't presume.
How does it actually work? Can you add an "about" page that goes into the algo? Or can you add more info on the readme on github? I'd love to learn more.
Impressive!
We're a university lab and published recommendation algorithms. Never knew that doomscrolling could be this addictive this fast, thnx!
Please consider taking an hour and push this to a Github with quick readme. Scientists and developers would get it. We have been building a torrent-based alternative to Youtube for a few years. Not many knowledge out there around operational frontpage algorithm.
The first identified tools were 3.3 million years ago, which is before the homo genus emerges. Thus, those were either by Australopithecus afarensis or by a yet unidentified hominid species -- they were still very likely our ancestors (but technically TBD).
Then around 2-2.5 million years ago you get the first homo species in the genus homo such as Homo habilis and they created the Oldowan tool culture.
Both Australopithecus afarensis and Homo habilis are our ancestors -- however they are also the ancestors of other homo lines that diverged from us that we are not descendents of (which are now extinct).
People often forget how widespread and varied the Homo genus was before all our cousin species went extinct (likely in part due to us).[1] Homo erectus colonized the entire old world very effectively 1.5 million years ago!
Last I knew, the 3.3 mya evidence from the site Lomekwi 3 in Kenya was debatable, though a serious possibility, and the 2.58 mya evidence from the Olduvai Gorge in Tanzania was considered the sure thing.
Also, more than primates use tools: Many corvids (crows, ravens, etc.) do, as do other animals. Look up New Caledonian Crows in particular.
But don't take all this from HN commenters debating each other; find some authoritative sources. A recent review article in a scientific journal would be a great start. Google Scholar lets you search for review articles.
That's a difficult distinction to make - at which point does tool selection differ from modification for use as a tool - any animal that strips the leaves off a twig in order to use it as a tool has manufactured the tool.
The people of the Olduvan industry from 2.58 mya tools (the earliest accepted by consensus [0]) manufactured their tools - that's exactly what archaeologists are talking about.
Chimps and New Caledonian Crows (and maybe some other animals) also manufacture their tools, at least sometimes, BTW. IIRC the crows strip sticks and bend them into hooks to grab at objects.
Why would someone imply otherwise if they don't know? What are people trying to prove in this discussion?
[0] There's strong evidence of 3.3 mya; see other comments.
I think the whole interest in tool making is we're looking for clues to intelligence and tools are just one of the few things they left behind. It's much less satisfying to discover an animal's tool making is an instinctual behavior like burrowing animals making their own holes to sleep in, than that they worked it out using more generalized thinking.
Not sure what you are asking. My point was that animals using objects as tools is a different thing than the Oldowan stone tool manufacturing “industry”. I wasn’t saying that tool manufacture is exclusive to primates. However, pointing out mere tool use by non-primates is sort of beside the point of the TFA topic, IMO.
> My point was that animals using objects as tools is a different thing than the Oldowan stone tool manufacturing “industry”.
Agreed, though the dividing line is tricky.
(Your prior comment didn't say 95% of that; for example, it doesn't mention animals. Because the parent comments were focused on human ancestors, that's what I thought you were addressing.)
I believe the evidence is animal bones that show marks from butchery, as well as actual sharpened stone flakes and other things found primarily in what is now Kenya: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lomekwi
The headshots of the customer testimonials are all stock images and not the people they say are giving the testimonials. Makes me very skeptical that the testimonials are real or any of the stats on the page are real.
Why are you representing that these people were your clients, when, by all indications, they are not. It would be a tremendous coincidence if all of your clients also happen to be models for stock photos in their spare time of also being employed in unrelated jobs in tech.
You have been caught trying to pass fake images as real on your site, and now you are trying to get off on a technicality (These aren't AI!).
This isn't a good look for a project that needs authenticity and trust at the core. Why would I put one of the most consequential professional interactions in a my career (finding the next job) into the hands of people that deride fair criticism (see what you said when someone asked for your "about" page) and that are willing to actively deceive when called out.
And thus it can only be used to pass legislation that impacts the federal budget according to the reconciliation rules. I don't see how the house putting in a provision that doesn't impact the budget but strips judges of a power could fly with the reconciliation rules. But I'm not a lawyer or legislative rules expert
The Republicans already ignored the parliamentarian ruling they couldn't use reconciliation to prevent California from setting a combustion engine sunset date.
I took a class by Martha Nussbaum when I was 18 years old. It was a graduate ancient philosophy class on Sophocles' Philoctetes. I had idolized Nussbaum as one of the great minds of our time and leap at the opportunity to learn from her. I remember having to get her permission to take the class as it was for philosophy and classics grad students, but she agreed. It was like drinking from the firehose, but it really ignited my dedication to studying the classics in college, for which I am immensely grateful. She is such a quick mind.
Russia is only incentivized to accelerate their cyber operations against the US. It's clear their manipulation of the narrative to their benefit is working in winning over the right wing of America and sowing discontent in some Americans against Ukraine. Why would they stop when they're succeeding?
But those running corporations are fiduciaries - the have a legal and ethical obligation to their shareholders. If those shareholders want to not maximize profits and have other objectives, then that's totally fine and then the managements obligations are to those aims of the shareholders.
That is absolutely false. I know many people who have lived legally in the USA for many many years with valid visas and have intentionally never pursued a green card. Two people come to mind including one who has over 20 years the US on valid visas -- she intentionally never pursued the green card despite both (a) being married to an American and (b) being legally able to get the green card.
Some of them are now pursuing green cards only because of federal government's immigration enforcement not only going after illegal immigrants or criminals but clearly and intentionally pursing immigrants in general -- even those who are legal and without any criminal history.
reply