images But Ms.excel has no such 
Ramba
01-29 10:06 PM
Interesting to watch this video.How CNN and Lou is propagating false information and not airing how H1B system works.They think viewers are idiot.It may be true that USCIS might have approved more than mandated numbers.It does not matter.Even they can approve 1 million H1B petition.But everyone has forget one thing.One must verify how many actual new H1B visas are issued by the consulates (DOS) based on approved petitions and how many adjusted to H1B status from other non-immigration status in US.There are so many H1B visas denied by the consulates.CNN do not air that.
Furthermore, there are so many cases in which more than 1 employer might have applied H1B visa for same person.It is legal.Finally the guy come to US thro one employer.Other approved petions are wasted in this case.They can not do labor subsitution in H1B like in GC.
CNN is smartly hiding the actual facts.
Furthermore, there are so many cases in which more than 1 employer might have applied H1B visa for same person.It is legal.Finally the guy come to US thro one employer.Other approved petions are wasted in this case.They can not do labor subsitution in H1B like in GC.
CNN is smartly hiding the actual facts.
wallpaper right of Factor and type 2
smisachu
12-28 08:48 PM
India is nobody's fool.Will you take back inside your house, the trash you have trown out?India wins the war, destroys all terrorist camps, kills all the wanted terrorists on Indian files.Then India withdraws from pakistan leaving back pakistan in the hands of its current civilian heads.All India wants is to kill the terrorists, either Pakistan does it or We do it for you.India will be doing Pakistan a favor.So either you do it or we do it.Bottom like the terrorists need to be Killed.
And as far as comparing us to President Bush, India has never lost a war yet because India never went to war with any one with out them provoking it.India always fights Justified wars and justice always wins.
So Mr.Trained Reservist,
Let's say the war is won in 15-20 days based on your expert knowledge, what is next?India occupies Pakistan?and acquires 160 million muslim population along with Talibans?You think that will end terrorism and riots in India?
Oh BTW, there is another trained reservist in the history who claimed Iraq war would be won in two weeks.Do you know who he is?Hint: he became the worst president in the history of the US.
And as far as comparing us to President Bush, India has never lost a war yet because India never went to war with any one with out them provoking it.India always fights Justified wars and justice always wins.
So Mr.Trained Reservist,
Let's say the war is won in 15-20 days based on your expert knowledge, what is next?India occupies Pakistan?and acquires 160 million muslim population along with Talibans?You think that will end terrorism and riots in India?
Oh BTW, there is another trained reservist in the history who claimed Iraq war would be won in two weeks.Do you know who he is?Hint: he became the worst president in the history of the US.
pani_6
07-13 01:27 PM
I commend the initiative.But I see a few issues with it:
You are complaining to DOS about USCIS and DOL.That will not work.Every agency has a specific role
[I am going to include USICS Address and Fax's numbers also]
You are complaining to the official who sets visa dates.He has no authority to give relief just because some applicant/s are asking for it.He has to follow the rule every month and his responsibility is only to set the dates based on the statistics received from USCIS.This official has a very specific and limited role.
The reasons are not compelling enough.You cannot just say you are waiting long enough and thus your date should become current.Rules cannot be changed just for that reason.
[with due respect ...How did the rules suddenly change to favour eb-2]..I am not against it..just want to know?
If economy was down in 2001- 2003 and you were asked to file in EB3 and people in Perm could file in EB2 is your strongest reason, it may not work in your favor.Because by law you can file again and convert to EB2 and port your date.DOL and USCIS does not stop you from doing that.
If you are qualified for EB2 but your attorney and employer filed in EB3, then it is not a fault of USCIS/DOL/DOS.You must talk to the company and the lawyer for it.If the company or the lawyer has broken any rule or employer has exploited you, then the letter should be complain to the appropriate authority about them.
[This statement is not entirely true...Lawyers have DOL/USICS contacts] and acts in a way that the application will get approved ...most times looking at the trend and talking to DOL contacts and adjudicators...]
Please also note that labor is filed based on the degree and experience requirement of the job.By law if the requirement is only undergraduate degree for the job, the employer cannot file in EB2 just because the applicant has a masters degree or more experience than needed.So you cannot really put this arguement here because it will be against the rules.
So I personally do not think this idea will work.
[could you suggest a solution..you know that legislation cannot work this year so what needs to be done??]
While this mess is depressing for EB3 folks, we need to have a more compelling argument, determined membership and effective plan to get things changed.
The root cause of the problem is limited greencard quota for EB3.And the solution is to get recapture, get rid of country limits, STEM exemption.Any single relief itself will be huge for all of us.With 179 phone calls and $16656 collected in last 3 months, I do not see that happening.It will need a far more bigger and determined effort.Such amount can be spent on full scale lobbying in just one month.179 phone calls are nothing if we have to make a compelling case for ourselves.
[Eb-3-I is also participating in calling and contributing..]
[For people suggesting that the letter is weak..could you give an idea as the what written in letter would work..]
You are complaining to DOS about USCIS and DOL.That will not work.Every agency has a specific role
[I am going to include USICS Address and Fax's numbers also]
You are complaining to the official who sets visa dates.He has no authority to give relief just because some applicant/s are asking for it.He has to follow the rule every month and his responsibility is only to set the dates based on the statistics received from USCIS.This official has a very specific and limited role.
The reasons are not compelling enough.You cannot just say you are waiting long enough and thus your date should become current.Rules cannot be changed just for that reason.
[with due respect ...How did the rules suddenly change to favour eb-2]..I am not against it..just want to know?
If economy was down in 2001- 2003 and you were asked to file in EB3 and people in Perm could file in EB2 is your strongest reason, it may not work in your favor.Because by law you can file again and convert to EB2 and port your date.DOL and USCIS does not stop you from doing that.
If you are qualified for EB2 but your attorney and employer filed in EB3, then it is not a fault of USCIS/DOL/DOS.You must talk to the company and the lawyer for it.If the company or the lawyer has broken any rule or employer has exploited you, then the letter should be complain to the appropriate authority about them.
[This statement is not entirely true...Lawyers have DOL/USICS contacts] and acts in a way that the application will get approved ...most times looking at the trend and talking to DOL contacts and adjudicators...]
Please also note that labor is filed based on the degree and experience requirement of the job.By law if the requirement is only undergraduate degree for the job, the employer cannot file in EB2 just because the applicant has a masters degree or more experience than needed.So you cannot really put this arguement here because it will be against the rules.
So I personally do not think this idea will work.
[could you suggest a solution..you know that legislation cannot work this year so what needs to be done??]
While this mess is depressing for EB3 folks, we need to have a more compelling argument, determined membership and effective plan to get things changed.
The root cause of the problem is limited greencard quota for EB3.And the solution is to get recapture, get rid of country limits, STEM exemption.Any single relief itself will be huge for all of us.With 179 phone calls and $16656 collected in last 3 months, I do not see that happening.It will need a far more bigger and determined effort.Such amount can be spent on full scale lobbying in just one month.179 phone calls are nothing if we have to make a compelling case for ourselves.
[Eb-3-I is also participating in calling and contributing..]
[For people suggesting that the letter is weak..could you give an idea as the what written in letter would work..]
2011 Excel VBA Stuff
abracadabra102
08-06 05:00 PM
Stroustrup C++ 'interview'
On the 1st of January, 1998, Bjarne Stroustrup gave an interview to the IEEE's Computer magazine.Naturally, the editors thought he would be giving a retrospective view of seven years of object-oriented design, using the language he created.By the end of the interview, the interviewer got more than he had bargained for and, subsequently, the editor decided to suppress its contents, 'for the good of the industry' but, as with many of these things, there was a leak.Here is a complete transcript of what was was said, unedited, and unrehearsed, so it isn't as neat as planned interviews.You will find it interesting...
Interviewer: Well, it's been a few years since you changed the world of software design, how does it feel, looking back?
Stroustrup: Actually, I was thinking about those days, just before you arrived.Do you remember?Everyone was writing 'C' and, the trouble was, they were pretty damn good at it.Universities got pretty good at teaching it, too.They were turning out competent - I stress the word 'competent' - graduates at a phenomenal rate.That's what caused the problem.
Interviewer: Problem?
Stroustrup: Yes, problem.Remember when everyone wrote Cobol?
Interviewer: Of course, I did too
Stroustrup: Well, in the beginning, these guys were like demi-gods.Their salaries were high, and they were treated like royalty.
Interviewer: Those were the days, eh?
Stroustrup: Right.So what happened?IBM got sick of it, and invested millions in training programmers, till they were a dime a dozen.
Interviewer: That's why I got out.Salaries dropped within a year, to the point where being a journalist actually paid better.
Stroustrup: Exactly.Well, the same happened with 'C' programmers.
Interviewer: I see, but what's the point?
Stroustrup: Well, one day, when I was sitting in my office, I thought of this little scheme, which would redress the balance a little.I thought 'I wonder what would happen, if there were a language so complicated, so difficult to learn, that nobody would ever be able to swamp the market with programmers?Actually, I got some of the ideas from X10, you know, X windows.That was such a bitch of a graphics system, that it only just ran on those Sun 3/60 things.They had all the ingredients for what I wanted.A really ridiculously complex syntax, obscure functions, and pseudo-OO structure.Even now, nobody writes raw X-windows code.Motif is the only way to go if you want to retain your sanity.
Interviewer: You're kidding...?
Stroustrup: Not a bit of it.In fact, there was another problem.Unix was written in 'C', which meant that any 'C' programmer could very easily become a systems programmer.Remember what a mainframe systems programmer used to earn?
Interviewer: You bet I do, that's what I used to do.
Stroustrup: OK, so this new language had to divorce itself from Unix, by hiding all the system calls that bound the two together so nicely.This would enable guys who only knew about DOS to earn a decent living too.
Interviewer: I don't believe you said that...
Stroustrup: Well, it's been long enough, now, and I believe most people have figured out for themselves that C++ is a waste of time but, I must say, it's taken them a lot longer than I thought it would.
Interviewer: So how exactly did you do it?
Stroustrup: It was only supposed to be a joke, I never thought people would take the book seriously.Anyone with half a brain can see that object-oriented programming is counter-intuitive, illogical and inefficient.
Interviewer: What?
Stroustrup: And as for 're-useable code' - when did you ever hear of a company re-using its code?
Interviewer: Well, never, actually, but...
Stroustrup: There you are then.Mind you, a few tried, in the early days.There was this Oregon company - Mentor Graphics, I think they were called - really caught a cold trying to rewrite everything in C++ in about '90 or '91.I felt sorry for them really, but I thought people would learn from their mistakes.
Interviewer: Obviously, they didn't?
Stroustrup: Not in the slightest.Trouble is, most companies hush-up all their major blunders, and explaining a $30 million loss to the shareholders would have been difficult.Give them their due, though, they made it work in the end.
Interviewer: They did?Well, there you are then, it proves O-O works.
Stroustrup: Well, almost.The executable was so huge, it took five minutes to load, on an HP workstation, with 128MB of RAM.Then it ran like treacle.Actually, I thought this would be a major stumbling-block, and I'd get found out within a week, but nobody cared.Sun and HP were only too glad to sell enormously powerful boxes, with huge resources just to run trivial programs.You know, when we had our first C++ compiler, at AT&T, I compiled 'Hello World', and couldn't believe the size of the executable.2.1MB
Interviewer: What?Well, compilers have come a long way, since then.
Stroustrup: They have?Try it on the latest version of g++ - you won't get much change out of half a megabyte.Also, there are several quite recent examples for you, from all over the world.British Telecom had a major disaster on their hands but, luckily, managed to scrap the wh*le thing and start again.They were luckier than Australian Telecom.Now I hear that Siemens is building a dinosaur, and getting more and more worried as the size of the hardware gets bigger, to accommodate the executables.Isn't multiple inheritance a joy?
Interviewer: Yes, but C++ is basically a sound language.
Stroustrup: You really believe that, don't you?Have you ever sat down and worked on a C++ project?Here's what happens: First, I've put in enough pitfalls to make sure that only the most trivial projects will work first time.Take operator overloading.At the end of the project, almost every module has it, usually, because guys feel they really should do it, as it was in their training course.The same operator then means something totally different in every module.Try pulling that lot together, when you have a hundred or so modules.And as for data hiding.God, I sometimes can't help laughing when I hear about the problems companies have making their modules talk to each other.I think the word 'synergistic' was specially invented to twist the knife in a project manager's ribs.
Interviewer: I have to say, I'm beginning to be quite appalled at all this.You say you did it to raise programmers' salaries?That's obscene.
Stroustrup: Not really.Everyone has a choice.I didn't expect the thing to get so much out of hand.Anyway, I basically succeeded.C++ is dying off now, but programmers still get high salaries - especially those poor devils who have to maintain all this crap.You do realise, it's impossible to maintain a large C++ software module if you didn't actually write it?
On the 1st of January, 1998, Bjarne Stroustrup gave an interview to the IEEE's Computer magazine.Naturally, the editors thought he would be giving a retrospective view of seven years of object-oriented design, using the language he created.By the end of the interview, the interviewer got more than he had bargained for and, subsequently, the editor decided to suppress its contents, 'for the good of the industry' but, as with many of these things, there was a leak.Here is a complete transcript of what was was said, unedited, and unrehearsed, so it isn't as neat as planned interviews.You will find it interesting...
Interviewer: Well, it's been a few years since you changed the world of software design, how does it feel, looking back?
Stroustrup: Actually, I was thinking about those days, just before you arrived.Do you remember?Everyone was writing 'C' and, the trouble was, they were pretty damn good at it.Universities got pretty good at teaching it, too.They were turning out competent - I stress the word 'competent' - graduates at a phenomenal rate.That's what caused the problem.
Interviewer: Problem?
Stroustrup: Yes, problem.Remember when everyone wrote Cobol?
Interviewer: Of course, I did too
Stroustrup: Well, in the beginning, these guys were like demi-gods.Their salaries were high, and they were treated like royalty.
Interviewer: Those were the days, eh?
Stroustrup: Right.So what happened?IBM got sick of it, and invested millions in training programmers, till they were a dime a dozen.
Interviewer: That's why I got out.Salaries dropped within a year, to the point where being a journalist actually paid better.
Stroustrup: Exactly.Well, the same happened with 'C' programmers.
Interviewer: I see, but what's the point?
Stroustrup: Well, one day, when I was sitting in my office, I thought of this little scheme, which would redress the balance a little.I thought 'I wonder what would happen, if there were a language so complicated, so difficult to learn, that nobody would ever be able to swamp the market with programmers?Actually, I got some of the ideas from X10, you know, X windows.That was such a bitch of a graphics system, that it only just ran on those Sun 3/60 things.They had all the ingredients for what I wanted.A really ridiculously complex syntax, obscure functions, and pseudo-OO structure.Even now, nobody writes raw X-windows code.Motif is the only way to go if you want to retain your sanity.
Interviewer: You're kidding...?
Stroustrup: Not a bit of it.In fact, there was another problem.Unix was written in 'C', which meant that any 'C' programmer could very easily become a systems programmer.Remember what a mainframe systems programmer used to earn?
Interviewer: You bet I do, that's what I used to do.
Stroustrup: OK, so this new language had to divorce itself from Unix, by hiding all the system calls that bound the two together so nicely.This would enable guys who only knew about DOS to earn a decent living too.
Interviewer: I don't believe you said that...
Stroustrup: Well, it's been long enough, now, and I believe most people have figured out for themselves that C++ is a waste of time but, I must say, it's taken them a lot longer than I thought it would.
Interviewer: So how exactly did you do it?
Stroustrup: It was only supposed to be a joke, I never thought people would take the book seriously.Anyone with half a brain can see that object-oriented programming is counter-intuitive, illogical and inefficient.
Interviewer: What?
Stroustrup: And as for 're-useable code' - when did you ever hear of a company re-using its code?
Interviewer: Well, never, actually, but...
Stroustrup: There you are then.Mind you, a few tried, in the early days.There was this Oregon company - Mentor Graphics, I think they were called - really caught a cold trying to rewrite everything in C++ in about '90 or '91.I felt sorry for them really, but I thought people would learn from their mistakes.
Interviewer: Obviously, they didn't?
Stroustrup: Not in the slightest.Trouble is, most companies hush-up all their major blunders, and explaining a $30 million loss to the shareholders would have been difficult.Give them their due, though, they made it work in the end.
Interviewer: They did?Well, there you are then, it proves O-O works.
Stroustrup: Well, almost.The executable was so huge, it took five minutes to load, on an HP workstation, with 128MB of RAM.Then it ran like treacle.Actually, I thought this would be a major stumbling-block, and I'd get found out within a week, but nobody cared.Sun and HP were only too glad to sell enormously powerful boxes, with huge resources just to run trivial programs.You know, when we had our first C++ compiler, at AT&T, I compiled 'Hello World', and couldn't believe the size of the executable.2.1MB
Interviewer: What?Well, compilers have come a long way, since then.
Stroustrup: They have?Try it on the latest version of g++ - you won't get much change out of half a megabyte.Also, there are several quite recent examples for you, from all over the world.British Telecom had a major disaster on their hands but, luckily, managed to scrap the wh*le thing and start again.They were luckier than Australian Telecom.Now I hear that Siemens is building a dinosaur, and getting more and more worried as the size of the hardware gets bigger, to accommodate the executables.Isn't multiple inheritance a joy?
Interviewer: Yes, but C++ is basically a sound language.
Stroustrup: You really believe that, don't you?Have you ever sat down and worked on a C++ project?Here's what happens: First, I've put in enough pitfalls to make sure that only the most trivial projects will work first time.Take operator overloading.At the end of the project, almost every module has it, usually, because guys feel they really should do it, as it was in their training course.The same operator then means something totally different in every module.Try pulling that lot together, when you have a hundred or so modules.And as for data hiding.God, I sometimes can't help laughing when I hear about the problems companies have making their modules talk to each other.I think the word 'synergistic' was specially invented to twist the knife in a project manager's ribs.
Interviewer: I have to say, I'm beginning to be quite appalled at all this.You say you did it to raise programmers' salaries?That's obscene.
Stroustrup: Not really.Everyone has a choice.I didn't expect the thing to get so much out of hand.Anyway, I basically succeeded.C++ is dying off now, but programmers still get high salaries - especially those poor devils who have to maintain all this crap.You do realise, it's impossible to maintain a large C++ software module if you didn't actually write it?
more...
U.S.Department of Labor
Wage and Hour Division
Release Number: 05-1573-SEA (05-145)
Date:
Dec.2, 2005
Contact:
Michael Shimizu
Phone:
1-866-4-USWAGE
Ajay International of Bothell Ordered to Pay $65,830 in Back Wages to Three Employees
SEATTLE -- Ajay International Inc., Bothell, Wash., has been ordered to pay $65,830 in back wages to three employees, the U.S.Department of Labor announced today.The departmentп
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.