Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Only H1Bs Need Apply?

posted by cmn32480 on Saturday August 22 2015, @12:52PM   Printer-friendly
from the how-many-jobs-do-we-need-to-lose dept.

eof writes:

I came across the following ad on Indeed.com for a software position (copied directly from the ad, including errors):

Please read this job description carefully.
We are looking for solid C/C++ Engineer with valid h1b visa who are currently in US and willing to transfer his visa to our company for long term employment.

No 3rd party.

Strong mathematical and analytical skills, in linear algebra, discrete mathematics and statistics. Have a strong knowledge of methods of dynamic programming.
Strong knowledge of parallel computing theory and tools like MPI or OpenMP.
In-depth knowledge of C/C++ language, strong knowledge of standard library and boost library and have a strong knowledge of template meta programming.
Have a solid experience with cross-compilation using gnu tools.
Development experience with Linux Red Hat, embedded Linux, Windows 7 using gnu tools like make, gcc, g++. Have experience with cross platform development and testing using Cmake.
Have a prove experience working with source control system Git, Cvs.
Have a strong knowledge of HPC and cluster's architecture.
Have a strong knowledge of scripting language like bash and python.
Strong object-oriented programming and design skills, like design patterns

Salary: $85,000.00 /year

Required experience:

C/C++ experience ,Windows/Unix development: 8 years
Required education:

Master's

Is it legal to limit a search to only H1B applicants? Do people see this often? Is it reasonable to expect a US applicant would be difficult to find? Or is it just no one would expect a US applicant to work for the mentioned salary in the Metro Boston area?

Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Only H1Bs Need Apply? | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 62 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Sunday August 23 2015, @05:12PM

    by hemocyanin (186) on Sunday August 23 2015, @05:12PM (#226686) Journal

    1: having a home server is beside the point.
    2: I'm not convinced that was legal -- HRC was the only one of those DC scum who used private email, to actually use a private server. All the others used a third party server.

    Mostly though, respond to this:

    Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same

    HRC had custody,
    of an "other thing",
    she willfully (meaning intentionally),
    obliterated (deleted contents of) her server,

    That's a fucking crime dickhead.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  
    Total Score:   2  

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 24 2015, @01:59AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 24 2015, @01:59AM (#226784)

    > willfully and unlawfully

    Her argument is that everything she did, she did lawfully. All the other words in those statutes don't matter, the question is whether she could do them lawfully or not. She's stated that as head of the department of state it was within her authority to determine what records could be lawfully destroyed.

    Whether you agree with her interpretation or not, the question of lawfulness is the key and it isn't addressed in the statutes you've quoted.

    • (Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Monday August 24 2015, @04:14AM

      by hemocyanin (186) on Monday August 24 2015, @04:14AM (#226835) Journal

      So what you are saying is that destruction of documents sent to the SOS is legal.

      How much you want to be that if some unknown started deleting official documents he had access to, he'd get prison time?