This is not true. You do not need to be a US resident to register a company, and anyone own shares in a company. There are a variety of visa options, and ways to navigate the process that will work.
I didn't say you needed to be a US resident to register a company.
I said that most pre-GC work-permits (e.g. H1B) don't allow you to own a US-based business. If you're here on a work-permit, they (the govt.) expect you to be an employee of your sponsor, they don't want you to start a business.
To your point,
one can be an investor in a US company without having a US visa/residence/work-permit. Although, to open a business without living in the US, only a handful of states allow this (e.g., Delaware, Wyoming, Nevada).
However, once again, if you are in the US on a work-permit, you need to follow the rules of the work-permit. The rules applicable to non-citizens who are not living in the US on a work-permit may be different.
>I said that most pre-GC work-permits (e.g. H1B) don't allow you to own a US-based business
You can absolutely own a US-based business on a H1B, like you can buy shares in companies, it's just a 100% share. You just cannot work for your company without having an approved H1B from that business or having some other generalized work permit like an EAD.
Most tech startups will be Delaware. And a lot comes down to the definition of "own" which is ambiguous especially as a C-Corp. One may not be CEO, but can be a H1B Co-founder with a non-trivial (for some amount of non-trivial) number of shares. The O-1 far as I can tell allows for startups, and there may be other visa types which I am unaware of.
Really, I am just saying that the statement "you need a GC to own a business" is far too broad a claim to be true.
Its not so complicated. Not everyone wants a green card. It triggers international taxation, exit taxes if you give it up, etc. If you can maintain a work permit for 20 years, why not? Until life circumstances change sufficiently that it makes sense to have a green card, the balance of pros and cons may not lean towards it.
I don't support this kind of detention, but the case reads like he overstayed his original conditions of entry.
According to the court order, he entered the US on the Visa Waiver Program in 2009. He may have a work permit now because anyone can file for an Employment Authorization Document (EAD) through an I-765 while they are applying for a green card through marriage, but there's no indication that he had work permits before that. I've encountered Irish people throughout the US in similar situations.
Whether he did really have valid work permits, or not, I have no idea. You seem knowledgeable. But I am just generally mildly frustrated by people online jumping to conclusions assuming malice or criminal intent, while knowing nothing about the US immigration process. It is not surprising that people don't know how US immigration works. Why would one need to unless it is something you have to work with? There are so many misunderstands about H1B, GC, etc.
I do agree that really that the core issue is not with this one particular case, but broadly a pattern of how people are treated, and a failure of due process. People make mistakes. Governments are made up of people who also make mistakes. Process is how you catch mistakes and minimize its occurrence. A failure of due process reduces trust that even fully legal aboveboard immigrants will be treated reasonably and fairly. And that is reducing my confidence that I will be staying in this country long term.
> You seem knowledgeable. But I am just generally mildly frustrated by people online jumping to conclusions assuming malice or criminal intent, while knowing nothing about the US immigration process
The other side of the coin is that outlets like the Guardian have been intentionally omitting details and writing misleading headlines and stories in order to exaggerate things in a partisan manner. If the person's immigration status from 2010 to mid 2025 was legal, they would've posted that. They have been literally quoting his lawyer in the article. There's been several dozens of such intentionally misleading articles.
This article is about a man whose human rights are being violated. When you argue about whether or not he should have been arrested based of parsing the facts and the law, you are putting yourself on the same side as Stephen Miller. There is no ethical basis to afflict this treatment on anyone, so everything in your post after the first comma shouldn't be there.
> If you can maintain a work permit for 20 years, why not?
But did he? The OP is mum on the matter about what kind of work permit he had for the 19 years before applying for a green card last year. If he did have some kind of work permit, it sounds like a really strange situation. The article says was running his own business, was he sponsoring himself on a temporary worker visa or something?
Given the gaps in the article, I think it's fairly likely he didn't have work permit until recently, and was working here illegally for most of that 20 years.
There is no obligation to provide the public with his life story. Even if provided, few really understand the US immigration process to really comprehend what it means. And finally, does it matter? Even if deportation is fully legally and ethically justified, do the ends justify the means?
> There is no obligation to provide the public with his life story.
There is an obligation that a reputable newspaper will publish all relevant facts. The initial version of this article was misleading and appeared to omit relevant context to create a sympathetic story.
However, the article has since been updated:
> Culleton entered the US in 2009 on a visa waiver programme and overstayed the 90 day-limit but, after marrying a US citizen and applying for lawful permanent residence, he obtained a statutory exemption that allowed him to work, [his lawyer] told the Guardian. “He had a work-approved authorisation that is tied to a green card application,” she said.
> ...
> Culleton said that when he was arrested he was carrying a Massachusetts driving licence and a valid work permit issued as part of an application for a green card that he initiated in April 2025. He has a final interview remaining.
So it sounds like he was living and working illegally in the US from 2009 until April 2025. It's not clear to me if "statutory exemption" should legally shield him from deportation. Some cursory LLM searches say it doesn't, but I don't think that's definitive.
> And finally, does it matter? Even if deportation is fully legally and ethically justified, do the ends justify the means?
What do you mean? Does the ends of having enforced laws justify enforcing the law? There's a lot going on with this administration an immigration that's totally unjustifiable (like deporting people to random countries with poor human rights records that they have no connection to), but deporting someone who appears to have long violated immigration law back to their home in a first-world country is not some moral outrage. Trying to promote this case into an outrage does no one any good. It only undermines the credibility needed to call out real outrages.
the relevant facts would be, whether this guy has a criminal record. the rest is (legal) bullshit.
laws are a (social) technology, enforcing them blindly is just as stupid as any kind of extremism, like "just ban private property" or "just let the market sort it out" and everything in between, and around. ("yes, all men" and so on.)
after all there are laws about detention too. if I were DHS I'd be very afraid not to get picked up by law enforcement for breaking them. oh wait. :(
and yes, there's a political goal. the polity wants to remove some people. the machinery is set to work. still, there are better and worse ways to do this. keeping this guy in this hunger games box is more expensive and less humane than putting him on a plane to Ireland.
> the relevant facts would be, whether this guy has a criminal record. the rest is (legal) bullshit.
That's just your opinion, and a controversial one.
> after all there are laws about detention too. if I were DHS I'd be very afraid not to get picked up by law enforcement for breaking them. oh wait. :(
And honestly, detention conditions/process along with ICE tactics are where the focus should be, which are egregious and unacceptable and there seems like a consensus against them. But it's overreach to try to delegitimize all deportations or those of non-criminals, and that works against addressing the more serious issues. IMHO, polarization and overreach in the other direction gives the ICE abuses more cover than they'd otherwise get.
> and yes, there's a political goal. the polity wants to remove some people. the machinery is set to work. still, there are better and worse ways to do this. keeping this guy in this hunger games box is more expensive and less humane than putting him on a plane to Ireland.
Honestly, I think that could probably happen pretty fast if the guy wanted it. It seems like this guy is fighting his deportation through a PR campaign (e.g. drum up sympathetic coverage and hope that the rules are bent for the white guy).
The actual problem that is being solved here is well defined mathematically and is matrix completion via low rank matrix factorization. And using a sampling approach for it. (I have not read the paper in its entirety, just skimmed the intro a bit). It is called "recommendation system" largely due to some history around some of its common appplications (Netflix challenge). But this is not addressing the subjective recommendation problem, but a very particular instantiation of it.
Besides, "subjectivity" concerns the subject, "objectivity" the object. The former is a matter of how an object is received by the observer, and so all perception is subjective in that sense; it can't be otherwise. But the subject can become an object of another subject. We can infer with varying certainty what someone is more or less likely to enjoy based on our knowledge of what they like.
As long as you accept subjectivity, you must also accept that logical inference isn't really useful... because the observer can add rules at any given time - without any logical constraint - thus preferences aren't deterministic... so a random option is as good as it can be.
The application, method and algorithm needs to be separated. The application is movie recommendation. One of the methods which works pretty well for this is low rank matrix completion. There are several algorithms for this method, one of which is quantum.
This is using statistics to tell a preconceived story. Underlying this a notion that foreign workers are simply “imported” like they are dug out of the ground or something. How do these STEM OPT people find jobs? Guess what. They interview like everyone else does.
1: Every big tech interview I have been in the visa status is not even a question in the interview process. There is just a simple gate that “can you legally work in the US”? The hiring committee is not even thinking about visa (that’s a HR problem)
2: Are there confounders in that foreign workers are less likely to negotiate? Absolutely.
3: are there confounders in that people who come to US for study are likely already a self selected bunch who are striving to succeed? What are the typical grade distributions between foreign STEM students and US STEM students? Is grade a confounding variable? What happens if we control for GPA?
And finally does H1B abuse happen? Absolutely.
There is a lot of nuance that are not captured by surface level statistics. But nuance does not make outrage.
I think that nuance is fairly unwarranted when you observe the American system through the lens the laws ask you to view it through.
The American H1B system isn't about importing foreign workers that do a good job, it's about importing foreign workers that do a job no American could do. The system demands you look for some American do do the job first, and only if you fail to find one can you import one from overseas.
In that view, all the talk about GPA fall flat, because it doesn't matter if the foreign worker is better than an American worker, you are supposed to pick the American worker anyway.
I’ve rarely seen them used for that purpose, but of course that’s my personal observation and I have no data about it. A lot of H1B folks I worked with were solid backend/mobile devs. I enjoyed working with most of them but it’d be a stretch to say they were uniquely qualified. I do notice they feel a lot of pressure to never push back on anything due to how they set up the H1B system. Not always the case but often. I always felt that they were being exploited in that way.
Foreign workers are much more likely to agree to do illegal things, including kickback schemes. Unwind this shit and start over. Indian contracting companies big and small have fucked it all up.
We are here to help lower that :-) . As we can push dedupe to the edge we can save on bandwidth as well. And hopefully make everyone upload and download faster.
Great question! Rsync also uses a rolling hash/content defined chunking approach to deduplicate and reduce communication. So it will behave very similarly.
One more: do you prefer the CDC technique over using the rowgroups as chunks (ie using knowledge of the file structure)? Is it worth it to build a parquet-specific diff?
Can you elaborate? As I understand Delta Lake provides transactions on top of existing data and effectively stores "diffs" because it knows what the transaction did. But when you have regular snapshots, its much harder to figure out the effective diff and that is where deduplication comes in. (Quite like how git actually stores snapshots of every file version, but very aggressively compressed).
