异步编程+FP的程序的可读性太差# Programming - 葵花宝典
x*l
1 楼
Perm 被拒, FMA广告不管用， 我还特意从FMA要了一份复印件。
现在得从新打广告了， 有人知道怎样打广告才行吗？
Chronicle of Higher Education 就够了吗，还是也要再当地报纸打， 多谢
现在得从新打广告了， 有人知道怎样打广告才行吗？
Chronicle of Higher Education 就够了吗，还是也要再当地报纸打， 多谢
b*y
2 楼
在现在这样一个商业社会，可以说，任何供求关系的存在，都是要建立在一定的商业利
益基础之上。
公司雇佣员工，需要员工给公司创造价值。如果创造的价值要比公司付出少的话，最终
的结果可能是被解雇，否则这就不符合基本的商业规则。经常有看到不少猎头贴出的工
资非常吸引人，年薪动辄上百万，殊不知担当这样的工作需要承受多大的压力，创造出
多少业绩。
以个人的例子来看：每小时的工资为40美元，每小时对客户收费180美元，所以公司雇
佣的动力是雇员能够提供有效的咨询服务，同时公司能够在维持基本的开销之外产生足
够的利润。试想一下，如果在同样的背景下，雇员要求涨工资到100美元每小时，而公
司对客户收取的费用不变，这样的情况下在扣除掉公司正常的开销之外没有能产生足够
吸引人的利润，那显然这个雇主与雇员之间的供求关系不成立，结果可能就是雇员不会
被雇佣，或者雇主无法提供这样的薪水。所以从这个角度来讲，要跟公司谈薪水，最好
心里有个底，自己产生的利润能有多少，能给公司带来多大的价值。
北美有不少倒爷，可谓身材万贯。这个商业模式成功的原因就是在于有供求关系的存在
，低价进货高价出售，同时又有巨大的学生市场帮忙做“小护士”，进一步为这个商业
模式增砖添瓦。海外代购，也是因为有着这些品牌产品的差价，形成一个巨大的利益链
。而国人对于欧美大牌的向往，更促成了这个供求关系的存在。通过一个合理的形式满
足这个供求关系就是这些海外代购能够生存并且收益不菲的原因。
个人职业的发展，也需要有商业模式的思考。如果选择的职业本身就是建立在一个并不
是十分可行的商业模式的基础之上，那就要非常谨慎，否则职业发展可能进入死胡同，
难以取得提升。类似的，行业的选择也很重要。对于不少做研发的工程师来说，选择一
个有发展潜力、科研投入比重大的行业，远比选择一个行业利润薄、竞争压力大、研发
投入比重少的传统行业，有更好的职业发展空间。
如何发现潜在的市场需求，寻找满足这种需求的解决方案，有强大的执行力将方案有效
地推广应用，是一个成功商业模式的基石。
益基础之上。
公司雇佣员工，需要员工给公司创造价值。如果创造的价值要比公司付出少的话，最终
的结果可能是被解雇，否则这就不符合基本的商业规则。经常有看到不少猎头贴出的工
资非常吸引人，年薪动辄上百万，殊不知担当这样的工作需要承受多大的压力，创造出
多少业绩。
以个人的例子来看：每小时的工资为40美元，每小时对客户收费180美元，所以公司雇
佣的动力是雇员能够提供有效的咨询服务，同时公司能够在维持基本的开销之外产生足
够的利润。试想一下，如果在同样的背景下，雇员要求涨工资到100美元每小时，而公
司对客户收取的费用不变，这样的情况下在扣除掉公司正常的开销之外没有能产生足够
吸引人的利润，那显然这个雇主与雇员之间的供求关系不成立，结果可能就是雇员不会
被雇佣，或者雇主无法提供这样的薪水。所以从这个角度来讲，要跟公司谈薪水，最好
心里有个底，自己产生的利润能有多少，能给公司带来多大的价值。
北美有不少倒爷，可谓身材万贯。这个商业模式成功的原因就是在于有供求关系的存在
，低价进货高价出售，同时又有巨大的学生市场帮忙做“小护士”，进一步为这个商业
模式增砖添瓦。海外代购，也是因为有着这些品牌产品的差价，形成一个巨大的利益链
。而国人对于欧美大牌的向往，更促成了这个供求关系的存在。通过一个合理的形式满
足这个供求关系就是这些海外代购能够生存并且收益不菲的原因。
个人职业的发展，也需要有商业模式的思考。如果选择的职业本身就是建立在一个并不
是十分可行的商业模式的基础之上，那就要非常谨慎，否则职业发展可能进入死胡同，
难以取得提升。类似的，行业的选择也很重要。对于不少做研发的工程师来说，选择一
个有发展潜力、科研投入比重大的行业，远比选择一个行业利润薄、竞争压力大、研发
投入比重少的传统行业，有更好的职业发展空间。
如何发现潜在的市场需求，寻找满足这种需求的解决方案，有强大的执行力将方案有效
地推广应用，是一个成功商业模式的基石。
k*n
3 楼
我第一次签H1b，有没有那位有经验的告诉一下，如果是2entries，我可多安排些活动
，再回去一次，
即使只有三个月。
多谢。
，再回去一次，
即使只有三个月。
多谢。
d*8
4 楼
http://www.usimmlaw.com/current_information.htm
India, China and the "Otherwise Unused" Employment Visas Numbers
Is the Visa Office Discriminating Against China?
(short answer is "no")
(This posting was prepared April 4, 2011, before publication of the May Visa Bulletin)
The State Department is about to start allocating more than 12,000 extra visa numbers to EB2 applicants. Most will go to applicants from India. The EB2 India date in the May Visa Bulletin will advance for the first time since September, 2010. EB2 India and China may continue to advance for the rest of the fiscal year - unlikely to pass December, 2006.
The back story
There are about 140,000 employment based visa numbers available for fiscal year 2011. Each independent country of the world is limited to no more than 7% of that total. There are five employment related preference classifications - with each allocated a certain percentage of the total. The second preference ("EB2") is allocated 28.6% of the total.
Visas are issued in Priority Date order
Visas numbers are made available in priority date order within preference classification without regard to country of changeability of the applicant. There is an exception for those countries which are expected to reach their 7% limitation within a fiscal year. Applicants from those countries are allocated visa numbers within preference categories.
So why is EB2 for India and China backlogged, while the rest of the world is Current?
India and China are both expected to reach their 7% limitation in fiscal 2011 based on the "reasonable estimates" of visa usage for the year the Visa Office is permitted to make by law. (INA 203(g)). In fact, India had already reached its 2011 EB2 allocation by April, 2011, and China is well on track to utilize its entire allocation in July. This means that India and China are limited to no more than 28.6 percent of their entire country limitation in EB2. Thus - even though the rest of the world is "current" the China and India EB2 cutoff dates are currently set to 2006 manage the approximately 2800 visas typically available under the EB2 annual limit for each country subject to the 7% limitation.
When it rains visa numbers ...
The law provides that if the total 140,000 employment based visa numbers are not used, then the extra visa numbers are to be utilized without regard to the 7 percent per country limitation.
The law also provides that unused visa numbers from EB4 and EB5 will add to the EB1 total - and unused EB1 visa numbers become available for EB2. Of course, visa numbers aren't "unused" until the fiscal year ends on September 30th - but the law provides that the Visa Office can allocate visa numbers during the year based on reasonable expectations of usage.
Because of a drop in overall employment demand, particularly in EB1, the Visa Office is currently estimating at least 12,000 extra visa numbers will be available for EB2 this year. And those 12,000 numbers can now be considered for potential allocation without regard to the EB2 per country limitation which otherwise affects India and China.
Where do the additional 12,000 EB2 numbers go?
By law, the extra 12,000 EB2 numbers are made available to the entire world in priority date order. INA 203(e). And they are allocated without regard to country of chargeability.
The "Current" EB2 availability for countries other than India or China indicates that the demand from those countries is met from the base 28.6% allocation - without need for extra numbers. This leaves all 12,000 extra visa numbers to be utilized by India and China.
By law, the 12,000 "otherwise unused" numbers which will be available for EB2 in 2011 are allocated in priority date order. The law provides that they are allocated without regard to the per country limits once the State Department determines that country has reached its EB2 limit.
There are at least 17,400 applicants who have filed, or who are ready to file EB2 adjustment of status applications and whose priority dates are in calendar year 2006. For the most part, these are applicants who filed adjustment of status applications in July or August 2007 when the visa bulletin reported EB2 as "current" for every country and whose adjustment of status applications could not be completed because of retrogression in the EB2 category for India and China. In addition, there are an unknown number of applicants with 2006 priority dates who have "upgraded" from EB3 to EB2 by filing new PERM applications and preference petitions. And there are an unknown number of applicants with approved EB2 petitions who do not have pending adjustment of status applications.
There are tens of thousands of additional applicants who have priority dates subsequent to 2006.
The 12,000 "otherwise unused" will be fully utilized by those with 2006 priority dates. Of the 17,400 presently "known" applicants, 13,200 are from India, and 4,200 are from China. We would therefore expect that about 75% of the applicants who would benefit would be from India. However, there are substantial numbers of Indian applicants whose priority dates are presently not current, but earlier than any China EB2 applicant whose priority date is available.
As of March, 2011, the EB2 priority date from China is July 8, 2006 and India is two months behind at May 8, 2006. The EB2 priority date for India will advance until either the 12,000 visa numbers are used, or until it becomes equal to the China EB2 date. The China and India EB2 dates will then advance together. In April (and for the next few months), India EB2 will be earlier than China EB2. We would therefore expect India to benefit from more than 75% of the extra 12,000 EB2 numbers because we believe more than 75% of those with the oldest EB2 priority dates are from India.
So is the Visa Office discriminating against China?
If more than 75% of the "otherwise unused" visa numbers were allocated to India instead of split between India and China, would it mean the Visa Office discriminating against China? Is it favoring India? The answer is that the Visa office is not discriminating against or favoring any country in allocating the "otherwise unused" numbers. It is following the law.
The law requires the "otherwise unused" visa numbers to be allocated in priority date order. There are more applicants from India than China with older priority dates. The applicants with the older priority dates will get the visa numbers first. That is the law. Those are the applicants who have waited the longest. Most of those are from India.
There are claims that this somehow violates the anti-discrimination provisions of the INA which provides that no person shall be discriminated against in their preference or priority classifications because of their country of birth (except for the per country limits which don't apply as to the "otherwise unused" numbers).
It clearly does not. The allocation of extra numbers is being done by the visa office without regard to a person's nationality or country of birth. The allocation is being made by "place in line" - priority date - as required by law. The people who have waited the longest go first. That is the law. To "split the baby" and give half the extra numbers to persons from one country and half to persons from another would violate the law.
Sharing the otherwise unused visa numbers equally between India and China would mean that someone from India with an older priority date would wait longer than an applicant from China - and that would violate the anti-discrimination provisions of the INA. Applicants from both those countries are discriminated against with regard to the 7% limitation, which takes into account country of origin. That is the law. But the law does not provide for extending that discrimination to the otherwise unused visa numbers which fall through to EB2.
Allocating the otherwise unused visa numbers by priority date and not by country is a requirement of the law - and it is not discriminatory.
India, China and the "Otherwise Unused" Employment Visas Numbers
Is the Visa Office Discriminating Against China?
(short answer is "no")
(This posting was prepared April 4, 2011, before publication of the May Visa Bulletin)
The State Department is about to start allocating more than 12,000 extra visa numbers to EB2 applicants. Most will go to applicants from India. The EB2 India date in the May Visa Bulletin will advance for the first time since September, 2010. EB2 India and China may continue to advance for the rest of the fiscal year - unlikely to pass December, 2006.
The back story
There are about 140,000 employment based visa numbers available for fiscal year 2011. Each independent country of the world is limited to no more than 7% of that total. There are five employment related preference classifications - with each allocated a certain percentage of the total. The second preference ("EB2") is allocated 28.6% of the total.
Visas are issued in Priority Date order
Visas numbers are made available in priority date order within preference classification without regard to country of changeability of the applicant. There is an exception for those countries which are expected to reach their 7% limitation within a fiscal year. Applicants from those countries are allocated visa numbers within preference categories.
So why is EB2 for India and China backlogged, while the rest of the world is Current?
India and China are both expected to reach their 7% limitation in fiscal 2011 based on the "reasonable estimates" of visa usage for the year the Visa Office is permitted to make by law. (INA 203(g)). In fact, India had already reached its 2011 EB2 allocation by April, 2011, and China is well on track to utilize its entire allocation in July. This means that India and China are limited to no more than 28.6 percent of their entire country limitation in EB2. Thus - even though the rest of the world is "current" the China and India EB2 cutoff dates are currently set to 2006 manage the approximately 2800 visas typically available under the EB2 annual limit for each country subject to the 7% limitation.
When it rains visa numbers ...
The law provides that if the total 140,000 employment based visa numbers are not used, then the extra visa numbers are to be utilized without regard to the 7 percent per country limitation.
The law also provides that unused visa numbers from EB4 and EB5 will add to the EB1 total - and unused EB1 visa numbers become available for EB2. Of course, visa numbers aren't "unused" until the fiscal year ends on September 30th - but the law provides that the Visa Office can allocate visa numbers during the year based on reasonable expectations of usage.
Because of a drop in overall employment demand, particularly in EB1, the Visa Office is currently estimating at least 12,000 extra visa numbers will be available for EB2 this year. And those 12,000 numbers can now be considered for potential allocation without regard to the EB2 per country limitation which otherwise affects India and China.
Where do the additional 12,000 EB2 numbers go?
By law, the extra 12,000 EB2 numbers are made available to the entire world in priority date order. INA 203(e). And they are allocated without regard to country of chargeability.
The "Current" EB2 availability for countries other than India or China indicates that the demand from those countries is met from the base 28.6% allocation - without need for extra numbers. This leaves all 12,000 extra visa numbers to be utilized by India and China.
By law, the 12,000 "otherwise unused" numbers which will be available for EB2 in 2011 are allocated in priority date order. The law provides that they are allocated without regard to the per country limits once the State Department determines that country has reached its EB2 limit.
There are at least 17,400 applicants who have filed, or who are ready to file EB2 adjustment of status applications and whose priority dates are in calendar year 2006. For the most part, these are applicants who filed adjustment of status applications in July or August 2007 when the visa bulletin reported EB2 as "current" for every country and whose adjustment of status applications could not be completed because of retrogression in the EB2 category for India and China. In addition, there are an unknown number of applicants with 2006 priority dates who have "upgraded" from EB3 to EB2 by filing new PERM applications and preference petitions. And there are an unknown number of applicants with approved EB2 petitions who do not have pending adjustment of status applications.
There are tens of thousands of additional applicants who have priority dates subsequent to 2006.
The 12,000 "otherwise unused" will be fully utilized by those with 2006 priority dates. Of the 17,400 presently "known" applicants, 13,200 are from India, and 4,200 are from China. We would therefore expect that about 75% of the applicants who would benefit would be from India. However, there are substantial numbers of Indian applicants whose priority dates are presently not current, but earlier than any China EB2 applicant whose priority date is available.
As of March, 2011, the EB2 priority date from China is July 8, 2006 and India is two months behind at May 8, 2006. The EB2 priority date for India will advance until either the 12,000 visa numbers are used, or until it becomes equal to the China EB2 date. The China and India EB2 dates will then advance together. In April (and for the next few months), India EB2 will be earlier than China EB2. We would therefore expect India to benefit from more than 75% of the extra 12,000 EB2 numbers because we believe more than 75% of those with the oldest EB2 priority dates are from India.
So is the Visa Office discriminating against China?
If more than 75% of the "otherwise unused" visa numbers were allocated to India instead of split between India and China, would it mean the Visa Office discriminating against China? Is it favoring India? The answer is that the Visa office is not discriminating against or favoring any country in allocating the "otherwise unused" numbers. It is following the law.
The law requires the "otherwise unused" visa numbers to be allocated in priority date order. There are more applicants from India than China with older priority dates. The applicants with the older priority dates will get the visa numbers first. That is the law. Those are the applicants who have waited the longest. Most of those are from India.
There are claims that this somehow violates the anti-discrimination provisions of the INA which provides that no person shall be discriminated against in their preference or priority classifications because of their country of birth (except for the per country limits which don't apply as to the "otherwise unused" numbers).
It clearly does not. The allocation of extra numbers is being done by the visa office without regard to a person's nationality or country of birth. The allocation is being made by "place in line" - priority date - as required by law. The people who have waited the longest go first. That is the law. To "split the baby" and give half the extra numbers to persons from one country and half to persons from another would violate the law.
Sharing the otherwise unused visa numbers equally between India and China would mean that someone from India with an older priority date would wait longer than an applicant from China - and that would violate the anti-discrimination provisions of the INA. Applicants from both those countries are discriminated against with regard to the 7% limitation, which takes into account country of origin. That is the law. But the law does not provide for extending that discrimination to the otherwise unused visa numbers which fall through to EB2.
Allocating the otherwise unused visa numbers by priority date and not by country is a requirement of the law - and it is not discriminatory.
l*h
5 楼
每天都要做的事，肯定是很重要的事。而每天都在做的事。必然是最重要的事。
有些事，不分人，都得每天做，先不提每分每秒都在做的，比如呼吸，是身体
运作的标志，比如思想，是精神活着的表现。就说吃喝拉撒睡，（辟谷的，成仙的，熬
夜看球的，回来倒时差的除外），也是极重要的。
再延申出去，每天吃什么，睡多久，也是关系健康的，我吃的盐比你吃的米还多
，这是足够老的人才敢说的话，而你过的桥比别人走得路多就未必， 也可能就是导游
或者大学里写的论文有关桥。
还有些每天要做的事，重要性因人因时因地而异。
如上班挣钱，必须养家供娃交保险的时候，每天都得去。 到了一笔挥就最短的
辞职信，说世界很大，我想去看看的时候，情况就变了。当然，浪迹完，赋闲后，也许
又重回职场了，那就证明，也许真没什么比工作的状态更充实，而你由此认清了自己，
这才是更重要的事。再以后，对每天上的班也就不能或不敢或不好意思心猿意马，当成
苦差了。
又比如夫妻间的亲热。少年新婚多半是每天都有的。中年以后就日渐稀罕。有次
参观一位极其景仰的国学大师的故居，不小心注意到他家卧室居然是分床。不由一丝遗
憾，他与夫人鹣鲽情深，人所共知，却并非是每日同枕共眠。没有什么比与爱人相拥着
入睡更安心的事。当然这仅是我的狭隘念头。也许是性情，也许是精力，也许就是各人
所看重的东西不同。这些内寝之中的事情，也只有各自心知。
我也试着用这个判断的方法，看自己的另外一些日常。
第一件每天都做的事，就是早起。细想这真是很重要的。
平日里不早起，孩子们就上不成学；虽说学校离家不太远，可是我不敢冒险不
送，各种原因，主要是我担心。周末不起，孩子就去不了课外活动，打不了球，做不了
小老师。不是推妈已经是愧对孩子，又怎么能把孩子唯一的一些机会给了周公。
现在是假期，不用送孩子了，可还是要早起，夏天的太阳太毒，不趁着早晨的
一丝宝贵的清凉，去Trail上走走，这一天恐怕就全耗在了椅子上。再说，不起，肠胃
不依，早早就鼓噪着要工作。爱好科学的大女儿小学时就跟我说过，饿了不吃饭，胃会
把胃自己吃掉，这是怎样绝望的自谏！
所以早起这件事，一年到头，几乎每天都做，除了个别周末多眯了几个钟头，
醒来就发现前所未有的茫然，饿过了劲，不知吃的是branch 还是lunner；除草，侍花
，洗衣，理发 必须删除两项，堆到明日，明日复明日，明日何其多。
第二件每天都做的事，是跟小女儿的甜言蜜语。她性情跟我最像。平日上学前
，都被要求写一张纸片，鼓励的话，亲近的画，必须用心，不能敷衍应付。其他跟她一
起做的事，比如睡前读书，比如路上讲故事，几乎每天，但总会有些例外。现在她跟爸
爸回国，每天都要视频，嬉笑哼哈，或只是大眼瞪小眼，有一搭没一搭看着，并没有很
多新鲜事情要说。就是要“你在我在”。
第三件每天都做的事，是画画。没有功底，没有同伴，纯粹自娱自乐。是看着
调色板上的五颜六色，就满心欢喜，拿起笔，就坐上时间机器，不知有汉，无论魏晋，
不知所之所至的事。
这么说来，每天都在做的事，就是深入人生肌理，决定你是你的事。
有些事，不分人，都得每天做，先不提每分每秒都在做的，比如呼吸，是身体
运作的标志，比如思想，是精神活着的表现。就说吃喝拉撒睡，（辟谷的，成仙的，熬
夜看球的，回来倒时差的除外），也是极重要的。
再延申出去，每天吃什么，睡多久，也是关系健康的，我吃的盐比你吃的米还多
，这是足够老的人才敢说的话，而你过的桥比别人走得路多就未必， 也可能就是导游
或者大学里写的论文有关桥。
还有些每天要做的事，重要性因人因时因地而异。
如上班挣钱，必须养家供娃交保险的时候，每天都得去。 到了一笔挥就最短的
辞职信，说世界很大，我想去看看的时候，情况就变了。当然，浪迹完，赋闲后，也许
又重回职场了，那就证明，也许真没什么比工作的状态更充实，而你由此认清了自己，
这才是更重要的事。再以后，对每天上的班也就不能或不敢或不好意思心猿意马，当成
苦差了。
又比如夫妻间的亲热。少年新婚多半是每天都有的。中年以后就日渐稀罕。有次
参观一位极其景仰的国学大师的故居，不小心注意到他家卧室居然是分床。不由一丝遗
憾，他与夫人鹣鲽情深，人所共知，却并非是每日同枕共眠。没有什么比与爱人相拥着
入睡更安心的事。当然这仅是我的狭隘念头。也许是性情，也许是精力，也许就是各人
所看重的东西不同。这些内寝之中的事情，也只有各自心知。
我也试着用这个判断的方法，看自己的另外一些日常。
第一件每天都做的事，就是早起。细想这真是很重要的。
平日里不早起，孩子们就上不成学；虽说学校离家不太远，可是我不敢冒险不
送，各种原因，主要是我担心。周末不起，孩子就去不了课外活动，打不了球，做不了
小老师。不是推妈已经是愧对孩子，又怎么能把孩子唯一的一些机会给了周公。
现在是假期，不用送孩子了，可还是要早起，夏天的太阳太毒，不趁着早晨的
一丝宝贵的清凉，去Trail上走走，这一天恐怕就全耗在了椅子上。再说，不起，肠胃
不依，早早就鼓噪着要工作。爱好科学的大女儿小学时就跟我说过，饿了不吃饭，胃会
把胃自己吃掉，这是怎样绝望的自谏！
所以早起这件事，一年到头，几乎每天都做，除了个别周末多眯了几个钟头，
醒来就发现前所未有的茫然，饿过了劲，不知吃的是branch 还是lunner；除草，侍花
，洗衣，理发 必须删除两项，堆到明日，明日复明日，明日何其多。
第二件每天都做的事，是跟小女儿的甜言蜜语。她性情跟我最像。平日上学前
，都被要求写一张纸片，鼓励的话，亲近的画，必须用心，不能敷衍应付。其他跟她一
起做的事，比如睡前读书，比如路上讲故事，几乎每天，但总会有些例外。现在她跟爸
爸回国，每天都要视频，嬉笑哼哈，或只是大眼瞪小眼，有一搭没一搭看着，并没有很
多新鲜事情要说。就是要“你在我在”。
第三件每天都做的事，是画画。没有功底，没有同伴，纯粹自娱自乐。是看着
调色板上的五颜六色，就满心欢喜，拿起笔，就坐上时间机器，不知有汉，无论魏晋，
不知所之所至的事。
这么说来，每天都在做的事，就是深入人生肌理，决定你是你的事。
l*G
6 楼
ubuntu has been so much buggy in the last 4 years. I used ubuntu from 5.10
until 12.04,
now fully moving to centos, much better.
1. installing software on centos is also easy:
1)sudo yum whatprovides packagename
2)sudo yum install packagefound
or
1) download the .rpm file from internet for cents 6
2)sudo rpm -i filename.rpm
2. you may have to startup network each time you login
sudo ifup eth0
or
sudo ifup wlan0
Then you can google how to make it automatically start network driver,
basically edit file
/etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-eth0
and change ONBOOT value from "no" to "yes"
3. You may have to enable EPEL repository to get packages such as gparted
http://www.rackspace.com/knowledge_center/article/installing-rhel-epel-repo-on-centos-5x-or-6x
bye bye apt-get
until 12.04,
now fully moving to centos, much better.
1. installing software on centos is also easy:
1)sudo yum whatprovides packagename
2)sudo yum install packagefound
or
1) download the .rpm file from internet for cents 6
2)sudo rpm -i filename.rpm
2. you may have to startup network each time you login
sudo ifup eth0
or
sudo ifup wlan0
Then you can google how to make it automatically start network driver,
basically edit file
/etc/sysconfig/network-scripts/ifcfg-eth0
and change ONBOOT value from "no" to "yes"
3. You may have to enable EPEL repository to get packages such as gparted
http://www.rackspace.com/knowledge_center/article/installing-rhel-epel-repo-on-centos-5x-or-6x
bye bye apt-get
Y*G
7 楼
正常写法:
void foo() {
doA();
doB();
doC();
}
异步+FP写法:
fooAsync(OnCompleteCallback onComplete) {
doAAsync(new OnCompleteCallback() {
public void onComplete() {
doBAsync(new onCompleteCallback() {
public void onComplete() {
doCAsync(onComplete);
}
}
}
}
}
void foo() {
doA();
doB();
doC();
}
异步+FP写法:
fooAsync(OnCompleteCallback onComplete) {
doAAsync(new OnCompleteCallback() {
public void onComplete() {
doBAsync(new onCompleteCallback() {
public void onComplete() {
doCAsync(onComplete);
}
}
}
}
}
f*e
8 楼
what? try EB1
i*n
9 楼
r
一般是三月两次
【在 k**n 的大作中提到】
: 我第一次签H1b，有没有那位有经验的告诉一下，如果是2entries，我可多安排些活动
: ，再回去一次，
: 即使只有三个月。
: 多谢。
一般是三月两次
【在 k**n 的大作中提到】
: 我第一次签H1b，有没有那位有经验的告诉一下，如果是2entries，我可多安排些活动
: ，再回去一次，
: 即使只有三个月。
: 多谢。
d*8
10 楼
Please pay attention below section:
Because most of the 17,400 applicants were Indians (13,200) and the older
priority dates are from India, India will most likely get around 75 percent
of those numbers.
As emphasized by Jay Solomon, author of “EB-2 Story: India, China and the
“Otherwise Unused Employment Visa Numbers – Is the Visa Office
Discriminating Against China” published on AILA Infonet (Doc. No. 11040634)
and also available at http://www.usimmlaw.com/EB2Story.htm April 2011, there is no discrimination against China in US policy, since it is US law that visa numbers be accorded based on a person’s priority date or place in line, not on a person’s nationality or country of birth. Although it has a practical disproportionate effect on Indian applications, the law neither favors or penalizes any particular country.
Because most of the 17,400 applicants were Indians (13,200) and the older
priority dates are from India, India will most likely get around 75 percent
of those numbers.
As emphasized by Jay Solomon, author of “EB-2 Story: India, China and the
“Otherwise Unused Employment Visa Numbers – Is the Visa Office
Discriminating Against China” published on AILA Infonet (Doc. No. 11040634)
and also available at http://www.usimmlaw.com/EB2Story.htm April 2011, there is no discrimination against China in US policy, since it is US law that visa numbers be accorded based on a person’s priority date or place in line, not on a person’s nationality or country of birth. Although it has a practical disproportionate effect on Indian applications, the law neither favors or penalizes any particular country.
j*a
11 楼
i upgrade my debian to 7.0 today. happy with apt-get.
【在 l*******G 的大作中提到】
: ubuntu has been so much buggy in the last 4 years. I used ubuntu from 5.10
: until 12.04,
: now fully moving to centos, much better.
: 1. installing software on centos is also easy:
: 1)sudo yum whatprovides packagename
: 2)sudo yum install packagefound
: or
: 1) download the .rpm file from internet for cents 6
: 2)sudo rpm -i filename.rpm
: 2. you may have to startup network each time you login
【在 l*******G 的大作中提到】
: ubuntu has been so much buggy in the last 4 years. I used ubuntu from 5.10
: until 12.04,
: now fully moving to centos, much better.
: 1. installing software on centos is also easy:
: 1)sudo yum whatprovides packagename
: 2)sudo yum install packagefound
: or
: 1) download the .rpm file from internet for cents 6
: 2)sudo rpm -i filename.rpm
: 2. you may have to startup network each time you login
c*o
12 楼
你一看就没用过。。。
用 future monad, gorountine 啥的，一个callback都不用写，还可以互相随意组合。
al usdQuote = future { connection.getCurrentValue(USD) }
val chfQuote = future { connection.getCurrentValue(CHF) }
val purchase = for {
usd chf if isProfitable(usd, chf)
} yield connection.buy(amount, chf)
purchase onSuccess {
case _ => println("Purchased " + amount + " CHF")
}
最后一个 onSuccess往往都被framework带劳了
用 future monad, gorountine 啥的，一个callback都不用写，还可以互相随意组合。
al usdQuote = future { connection.getCurrentValue(USD) }
val chfQuote = future { connection.getCurrentValue(CHF) }
val purchase = for {
usd chf if isProfitable(usd, chf)
} yield connection.buy(amount, chf)
purchase onSuccess {
case _ => println("Purchased " + amount + " CHF")
}
最后一个 onSuccess往往都被framework带劳了
x*l
13 楼
商科，鲜有EB1
【在 f*******e 的大作中提到】
: what? try EB1
【在 f*******e 的大作中提到】
: what? try EB1
d*8
14 楼
Because most of the 17,400 applicants were Indians (13,200) and the older
priority dates are from India, India will most likely get around 75 percent
of those numbers.
there is no discrimination against China in US policy
priority dates are from India, India will most likely get around 75 percent
of those numbers.
there is no discrimination against China in US policy
d*g
15 楼
一个火坑跳到另一个火坑
【在 l*******G 的大作中提到】
: ubuntu has been so much buggy in the last 4 years. I used ubuntu from 5.10
: until 12.04,
: now fully moving to centos, much better.
: 1. installing software on centos is also easy:
: 1)sudo yum whatprovides packagename
: 2)sudo yum install packagefound
: or
: 1) download the .rpm file from internet for cents 6
: 2)sudo rpm -i filename.rpm
: 2. you may have to startup network each time you login
【在 l*******G 的大作中提到】
: ubuntu has been so much buggy in the last 4 years. I used ubuntu from 5.10
: until 12.04,
: now fully moving to centos, much better.
: 1. installing software on centos is also easy:
: 1)sudo yum whatprovides packagename
: 2)sudo yum install packagefound
: or
: 1) download the .rpm file from internet for cents 6
: 2)sudo rpm -i filename.rpm
: 2. you may have to startup network each time you login
Y*G
16 楼
如果你在future后面写一个anonymous函数，不是可读性一样很差
j*y
17 楼
Chronicle of Higher Education is enough, at least for my case.
【在 x*l 的大作中提到】
: Perm 被拒, FMA广告不管用， 我还特意从FMA要了一份复印件。
: 现在得从新打广告了， 有人知道怎样打广告才行吗？
: Chronicle of Higher Education 就够了吗，还是也要再当地报纸打， 多谢
【在 x*l 的大作中提到】
: Perm 被拒, FMA广告不管用， 我还特意从FMA要了一份复印件。
: 现在得从新打广告了， 有人知道怎样打广告才行吗？
: Chronicle of Higher Education 就够了吗，还是也要再当地报纸打， 多谢
d*8
18 楼
大家快支持NIU，过了这个村，估计就没有这个店了。
k*5
19 楼
哪个不是火坑？
【在 d********g 的大作中提到】
: 一个火坑跳到另一个火坑
【在 d********g 的大作中提到】
: 一个火坑跳到另一个火坑
c*o
20 楼
你觉得差，就不要anonymous，完全可以定义可重用函数，然后用val来得值计算
FP没啥特别的，为啥总觉得势不两立
【在 Y**G 的大作中提到】
: 如果你在future后面写一个anonymous函数，不是可读性一样很差
FP没啥特别的，为啥总觉得势不两立
【在 Y**G 的大作中提到】
: 如果你在future后面写一个anonymous函数，不是可读性一样很差
x*l
21 楼
special handling? as the requirements for ads are different.
【在 j*****y 的大作中提到】
: Chronicle of Higher Education is enough, at least for my case.
【在 j*****y 的大作中提到】
: Chronicle of Higher Education is enough, at least for my case.
j*e
22 楼
原帖http://www.usimmlaw.com/EB2Story.htm是指空口说胡话。“Allocating the otherwise unused visa numbers by priority date and not by country is a requirement of the law - and it is not discriminatory.
”哪一条法律这样讲？请他指出来？
有必要调查一下这个律师的背景。是否阿三在背后资助？或者跟DOS有一腿？
JAY I. SOLOMON
Suite 1350, 900 Circle 75 Parkway
Atlanta, Georgia 30339-3095
Telephone: 770/955-1055
Fax: 770/955-9303
Email: j******[email protected]
大家发email找他理论去。
”哪一条法律这样讲？请他指出来？
有必要调查一下这个律师的背景。是否阿三在背后资助？或者跟DOS有一腿？
JAY I. SOLOMON
Suite 1350, 900 Circle 75 Parkway
Atlanta, Georgia 30339-3095
Telephone: 770/955-1055
Fax: 770/955-9303
Email: j******[email protected]
大家发email找他理论去。
L*n
23 楼
Windows!
【在 k****5 的大作中提到】
: 哪个不是火坑？
【在 k****5 的大作中提到】
: 哪个不是火坑？
Y*G
24 楼
我的意思是可读性差，写起来却很爽。
【在 c******o 的大作中提到】
: 你觉得差，就不要anonymous，完全可以定义可重用函数，然后用val来得值计算
: FP没啥特别的，为啥总觉得势不两立
【在 c******o 的大作中提到】
: 你觉得差，就不要anonymous，完全可以定义可重用函数，然后用val来得值计算
: FP没啥特别的，为啥总觉得势不两立
j*e
25 楼
文中吐露实情了："In fact, India had already reached its 2011 EB2 allocation
by April, 2011, and China is well on track to utilize its entire allocation
in July." 他哪里来的数据？有内线？
by April, 2011, and China is well on track to utilize its entire allocation
in July." 他哪里来的数据？有内线？
d*g
26 楼
一万零一遍：Arch
【在 k****5 的大作中提到】
: 哪个不是火坑？
【在 k****5 的大作中提到】
: 哪个不是火坑？
c*o
27 楼
这个和FP没关系，和个人习惯有关。
【在 Y**G 的大作中提到】
: 我的意思是可读性差，写起来却很爽。
【在 Y**G 的大作中提到】
: 我的意思是可读性差，写起来却很爽。
zg
28 楼
He said following:
By law, the extra 12,000 EB2 numbers are made available to the entire world
in priority date order. INA 203(e). And they are allocated without regard
to country of chargeability.
As I remember, someone pointed out the law says "without regard to country
limit" instead of "without regard to contry of chargeability". The former
only means a county can get more than 7%; the later means the SO should be
shared by oversubscribed counties. SO by pd is not required by law, it is
chosen by Mr. O.
Can someone more familiar with the issue email or call this lawyer and let
him know the truth, assuming he is not working for or representing Indian
interest?
【在 j*e 的大作中提到】
: 原帖http://www.usimmlaw.com/EB2Story.htm是指空口说胡话。“Allocating the otherwise unused visa numbers by priority date and not by country is a requirement of the law - and it is not discriminatory.
: ”哪一条法律这样讲？请他指出来？
: 有必要调查一下这个律师的背景。是否阿三在背后资助？或者跟DOS有一腿？
: JAY I. SOLOMON
: Suite 1350, 900 Circle 75 Parkway
: Atlanta, Georgia 30339-3095
: Telephone: 770/955-1055
: Fax: 770/955-9303
: Email: j******[email protected]
: 大家发email找他理论去。
By law, the extra 12,000 EB2 numbers are made available to the entire world
in priority date order. INA 203(e). And they are allocated without regard
to country of chargeability.
As I remember, someone pointed out the law says "without regard to country
limit" instead of "without regard to contry of chargeability". The former
only means a county can get more than 7%; the later means the SO should be
shared by oversubscribed counties. SO by pd is not required by law, it is
chosen by Mr. O.
Can someone more familiar with the issue email or call this lawyer and let
him know the truth, assuming he is not working for or representing Indian
interest?
【在 j*e 的大作中提到】
: 原帖http://www.usimmlaw.com/EB2Story.htm是指空口说胡话。“Allocating the otherwise unused visa numbers by priority date and not by country is a requirement of the law - and it is not discriminatory.
: ”哪一条法律这样讲？请他指出来？
: 有必要调查一下这个律师的背景。是否阿三在背后资助？或者跟DOS有一腿？
: JAY I. SOLOMON
: Suite 1350, 900 Circle 75 Parkway
: Atlanta, Georgia 30339-3095
: Telephone: 770/955-1055
: Fax: 770/955-9303
: Email: j******[email protected]
: 大家发email找他理论去。
a9
29 楼
arch三天两头改关键包很头疼啊，而且把老的全扔掉。
【在 d********g 的大作中提到】
: 一万零一遍：Arch
【在 d********g 的大作中提到】
: 一万零一遍：Arch
Y*G
30 楼
还是用Java舒服
假定
SimpleFunctionTask -- 异步执行一个函数
SequentialTask -- 将两个task串行执行
CompositeTask -- 同时启动多个task
new SequentialTask(
new CompositeTask(
WAIT_ALL,
new SimpleFunctionTask(new Runnable() {
void run() {
useQuote = connection.getCurrentValue(USD);
}
},
new SimpleFunctionTask(new Runnable() {
void run() {
useQuote = connection.getCurrentValue(USD);
}
}
},
new SimpleFunctionTask(new Runnable() {
void run() {
if isProfitable(usd, chf) {
...
}
}
},
new SimpleFunctionTask(new Runable() {
void run() {
System.out.println("Purchased " + amount + " CHF";
}
});
)
【在 c******o 的大作中提到】
: 你一看就没用过。。。
: 用 future monad, gorountine 啥的，一个callback都不用写，还可以互相随意组合。
: al usdQuote = future { connection.getCurrentValue(USD) }
: val chfQuote = future { connection.getCurrentValue(CHF) }
: val purchase = for {
: usd : chf : if isProfitable(usd, chf)
: } yield connection.buy(amount, chf)
: purchase onSuccess {
假定
SimpleFunctionTask -- 异步执行一个函数
SequentialTask -- 将两个task串行执行
CompositeTask -- 同时启动多个task
new SequentialTask(
new CompositeTask(
WAIT_ALL,
new SimpleFunctionTask(new Runnable() {
void run() {
useQuote = connection.getCurrentValue(USD);
}
},
new SimpleFunctionTask(new Runnable() {
void run() {
useQuote = connection.getCurrentValue(USD);
}
}
},
new SimpleFunctionTask(new Runnable() {
void run() {
if isProfitable(usd, chf) {
...
}
}
},
new SimpleFunctionTask(new Runable() {
void run() {
System.out.println("Purchased " + amount + " CHF";
}
});
)
【在 c******o 的大作中提到】
: 你一看就没用过。。。
: 用 future monad, gorountine 啥的，一个callback都不用写，还可以互相随意组合。
: al usdQuote = future { connection.getCurrentValue(USD) }
: val chfQuote = future { connection.getCurrentValue(CHF) }
: val purchase = for {
: usd : chf : if isProfitable(usd, chf)
: } yield connection.buy(amount, chf)
: purchase onSuccess {
j*e
31 楼
他自己在文章第二段中说 PD order是有exception的，“There is an exception for
those countries which are expected to reach their 7% limitation within a
fiscal year. Applicants from those countries are allocated visa numbers
within preference categories. ”
他引用的203(e)原文在此http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/SLB/HTML/SLB/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-29/0-0-0-1083/0-0-0-1159.html
“ Order of Consideration. -
(1) Immigrant visas made available under subsection (a) or (b) shall be
issued to eligible immigrants in the order in which a petition in behalf of
each such immigrant is filed with the Attorney General (or in the case of
special immigrants under section 101(a)(27)(D) , with the Secretary of State
) as provided in section 204(a) . ”
其中 in the order 后面的一长串可以不用看，后面一串就是说按PD顺序，前面的主语
部分"Immigrant visas made available under subsection (a) or (b)"
那么这个"subsection (a) or (b)"又是什么呢？
大家看http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/SLB/HTML/SLB/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-29/0-0-0-1083.html，INA 203 (a)就是讲Family Based如何分类，INA 203(b)就是讲Employment Based 如何分类，其中INA 203(b)(1)就是EB-1，INA 203(b)(2)就是EB-2,....,INA 203(b)(5)就是EB-5.
所以他举的这条法律完全就是在讲general的情况，而他自己也说了，中印是例外，现
在剩余名额分配也是在中印间分，当然也是例外情况，怎么能又来引用针对general情
况的法律条文来对付我们呢？
those countries which are expected to reach their 7% limitation within a
fiscal year. Applicants from those countries are allocated visa numbers
within preference categories. ”
他引用的203(e)原文在此http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/SLB/HTML/SLB/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-29/0-0-0-1083/0-0-0-1159.html
“ Order of Consideration. -
(1) Immigrant visas made available under subsection (a) or (b) shall be
issued to eligible immigrants in the order in which a petition in behalf of
each such immigrant is filed with the Attorney General (or in the case of
special immigrants under section 101(a)(27)(D) , with the Secretary of State
) as provided in section 204(a) . ”
其中 in the order 后面的一长串可以不用看，后面一串就是说按PD顺序，前面的主语
部分"Immigrant visas made available under subsection (a) or (b)"
那么这个"subsection (a) or (b)"又是什么呢？
大家看http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/SLB/HTML/SLB/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-29/0-0-0-1083.html，INA 203 (a)就是讲Family Based如何分类，INA 203(b)就是讲Employment Based 如何分类，其中INA 203(b)(1)就是EB-1，INA 203(b)(2)就是EB-2,....,INA 203(b)(5)就是EB-5.
所以他举的这条法律完全就是在讲general的情况，而他自己也说了，中印是例外，现
在剩余名额分配也是在中印间分，当然也是例外情况，怎么能又来引用针对general情
况的法律条文来对付我们呢？
k*5
32 楼
回头试试
【在 d********g 的大作中提到】
: 一万零一遍：Arch
【在 d********g 的大作中提到】
: 一万零一遍：Arch
c*o
33 楼
你没发现，在future monad这里，你都不用管啥串行，并行，你的dataflow自动就把这
些都解决了。
这个本身就叫data flow currency paradigm
要是有transaction, 再加STM/agent, 要是distributed, 再加 location neutral
Actors.
这些都是现在FP强的地方。
些都解决了。
这个本身就叫data flow currency paradigm
要是有transaction, 再加STM/agent, 要是distributed, 再加 location neutral
Actors.
这些都是现在FP强的地方。
zg
34 楼
I searched some previous posts, you did a very nice job of analyzing INA.
How about you summarize/translate your post, and forward it to NIU guys.
Maybe they can ask the same AILA lawyer who handled our letter to Mr.O to
post your idea on the AILA website as a counter attack.
for
of
State
【在 j*e 的大作中提到】
: 他自己在文章第二段中说 PD order是有exception的，“There is an exception for
: those countries which are expected to reach their 7% limitation within a
: fiscal year. Applicants from those countries are allocated visa numbers
: within preference categories. ”
: 他引用的203(e)原文在此http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/SLB/HTML/SLB/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-29/0-0-0-1083/0-0-0-1159.html
: “ Order of Consideration. -
: (1) Immigrant visas made available under subsection (a) or (b) shall be
: issued to eligible immigrants in the order in which a petition in behalf of
: each such immigrant is filed with the Attorney General (or in the case of
: special immigrants under section 101(a)(27)(D) , with the Secretary of State
How about you summarize/translate your post, and forward it to NIU guys.
Maybe they can ask the same AILA lawyer who handled our letter to Mr.O to
post your idea on the AILA website as a counter attack.
for
of
State
【在 j*e 的大作中提到】
: 他自己在文章第二段中说 PD order是有exception的，“There is an exception for
: those countries which are expected to reach their 7% limitation within a
: fiscal year. Applicants from those countries are allocated visa numbers
: within preference categories. ”
: 他引用的203(e)原文在此http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/SLB/HTML/SLB/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-29/0-0-0-1083/0-0-0-1159.html
: “ Order of Consideration. -
: (1) Immigrant visas made available under subsection (a) or (b) shall be
: issued to eligible immigrants in the order in which a petition in behalf of
: each such immigrant is filed with the Attorney General (or in the case of
: special immigrants under section 101(a)(27)(D) , with the Secretary of State
Y*G
35 楼
不错，俺得看一下这个future monad。谢谢
j*e
36 楼
我曾经pointed out the law says "without regard to country
INA 202 (a)(5) http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/SLB/HTML/SLB/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-29/0-0-0-1016.html
这是目前为止唯一一条阐述剩余名额分配的法律条文。
该律师在他自己的文中When it rains visa numbers ...一段也提到了这条，但是他很
狡猾的是，没有像奥本一样用这条来为PD order做辩解。因为他知道这条只讲到
regardless of Country Limit，没有讲regardless of country. 而去看看2010年4月
VB和2010年8月VB就知道（see http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/bulletin/bulletin_1770.html），奥本每次都引用202 (a) (5)来为他的PD order分spillover辩解。因为奥本知道用203 (e)来辩解更行不通。
world
regard
INA 202 (a)(5) http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/SLB/HTML/SLB/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-29/0-0-0-1016.html
这是目前为止唯一一条阐述剩余名额分配的法律条文。
该律师在他自己的文中When it rains visa numbers ...一段也提到了这条，但是他很
狡猾的是，没有像奥本一样用这条来为PD order做辩解。因为他知道这条只讲到
regardless of Country Limit，没有讲regardless of country. 而去看看2010年4月
VB和2010年8月VB就知道（see http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/bulletin/bulletin_1770.html），奥本每次都引用202 (a) (5)来为他的PD order分spillover辩解。因为奥本知道用203 (e)来辩解更行不通。
world
regard
c*o
37 楼
http://doc.akka.io/docs/akka/snapshot/scala/futures.html
http://doc.akka.io/docs/akka/snapshot/scala/dataflow.html
【在 Y**G 的大作中提到】
: 不错，俺得看一下这个future monad。谢谢
http://doc.akka.io/docs/akka/snapshot/scala/dataflow.html
【在 Y**G 的大作中提到】
: 不错，俺得看一下这个future monad。谢谢
j*e
38 楼
我已经把我的研究结果和对法律的理解都公布在这儿了，大家都是硕士以上水平，应该
都能理解。有不理解或不同意见欢迎提出。
我希望大家根据这些理解，自己写信与这个律师去辩论。不要千篇一律，才能让他感受
到群众的压力。
他这篇发表在AILA website吗？我看到的只是在他自己website。
【在 zg 的大作中提到】
: I searched some previous posts, you did a very nice job of analyzing INA.
: How about you summarize/translate your post, and forward it to NIU guys.
: Maybe they can ask the same AILA lawyer who handled our letter to Mr.O to
: post your idea on the AILA website as a counter attack.
:
: for
: of
: State
都能理解。有不理解或不同意见欢迎提出。
我希望大家根据这些理解，自己写信与这个律师去辩论。不要千篇一律，才能让他感受
到群众的压力。
他这篇发表在AILA website吗？我看到的只是在他自己website。
【在 zg 的大作中提到】
: I searched some previous posts, you did a very nice job of analyzing INA.
: How about you summarize/translate your post, and forward it to NIU guys.
: Maybe they can ask the same AILA lawyer who handled our letter to Mr.O to
: post your idea on the AILA website as a counter attack.
:
: for
: of
: State
zg
39 楼
As you said:
202(a)(5) says "without regard to country limit", not "without regard to
county chargeability".
203(e) says PD order, but it is for normal number, not SO number.
So none of them can be used to conclude "law requires SO by PD".
Can you suggest NIU to post this on AILA website through the lawyer they
have in contact? I think any AILA lawyer can post there. It will remind the
solomon guy that there are other lawyers standing for Chinese and they are
watching what he was saying.
【在 j*e 的大作中提到】
: 我曾经pointed out the law says "without regard to country
: INA 202 (a)(5) http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/SLB/HTML/SLB/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-29/0-0-0-1016.html
: 这是目前为止唯一一条阐述剩余名额分配的法律条文。
: 该律师在他自己的文中When it rains visa numbers ...一段也提到了这条，但是他很
: 狡猾的是，没有像奥本一样用这条来为PD order做辩解。因为他知道这条只讲到
: regardless of Country Limit，没有讲regardless of country. 而去看看2010年4月
: VB和2010年8月VB就知道（see http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/bulletin/bulletin_1770.html），奥本每次都引用202 (a) (5)来为他的PD order分spillover辩解。因为奥本知道用203 (e)来辩解更行不通。
: world
: regard
202(a)(5) says "without regard to country limit", not "without regard to
county chargeability".
203(e) says PD order, but it is for normal number, not SO number.
So none of them can be used to conclude "law requires SO by PD".
Can you suggest NIU to post this on AILA website through the lawyer they
have in contact? I think any AILA lawyer can post there. It will remind the
solomon guy that there are other lawyers standing for Chinese and they are
watching what he was saying.
【在 j*e 的大作中提到】
: 我曾经pointed out the law says "without regard to country
: INA 202 (a)(5) http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/SLB/HTML/SLB/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-29/0-0-0-1016.html
: 这是目前为止唯一一条阐述剩余名额分配的法律条文。
: 该律师在他自己的文中When it rains visa numbers ...一段也提到了这条，但是他很
: 狡猾的是，没有像奥本一样用这条来为PD order做辩解。因为他知道这条只讲到
: regardless of Country Limit，没有讲regardless of country. 而去看看2010年4月
: VB和2010年8月VB就知道（see http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/bulletin/bulletin_1770.html），奥本每次都引用202 (a) (5)来为他的PD order分spillover辩解。因为奥本知道用203 (e)来辩解更行不通。
: world
: regard
d*8
40 楼
谢谢ZG and jwe辛苦工作。好人一定有好报。
zg
41 楼
It was published at AILA website, 4/7/2011.
http://www.aila.org/RecentPosting/RecentPostingList.aspx
Kind of feel he is paving the road for coming May VB which might favor
Indian over Chinese.
【在 j*e 的大作中提到】
: 我已经把我的研究结果和对法律的理解都公布在这儿了，大家都是硕士以上水平，应该
: 都能理解。有不理解或不同意见欢迎提出。
: 我希望大家根据这些理解，自己写信与这个律师去辩论。不要千篇一律，才能让他感受
: 到群众的压力。
: 他这篇发表在AILA website吗？我看到的只是在他自己website。
http://www.aila.org/RecentPosting/RecentPostingList.aspx
Kind of feel he is paving the road for coming May VB which might favor
Indian over Chinese.
【在 j*e 的大作中提到】
: 我已经把我的研究结果和对法律的理解都公布在这儿了，大家都是硕士以上水平，应该
: 都能理解。有不理解或不同意见欢迎提出。
: 我希望大家根据这些理解，自己写信与这个律师去辩论。不要千篇一律，才能让他感受
: 到群众的压力。
: 他这篇发表在AILA website吗？我看到的只是在他自己website。
zg
42 楼
Thank you for bring it to everybody's attention.
Seems we need to fight Indian at several fronts, DOS, USCIS, now AILA.
【在 d******8 的大作中提到】
: 谢谢ZG and jwe辛苦工作。好人一定有好报。
Seems we need to fight Indian at several fronts, DOS, USCIS, now AILA.
【在 d******8 的大作中提到】
: 谢谢ZG and jwe辛苦工作。好人一定有好报。
b*l
43 楼
那就是说有3000个名额是给CHINESE的？那是不是说就这12000的名额就能让中国人排期
到06年底？
麻烦大牛们给回答一下。
visa
of
【在 d******8 的大作中提到】
: http://www.usimmlaw.com/current_information.htm
: India, China and the "Otherwise Unused" Employment Visas Numbers
: Is the Visa Office Discriminating Against China?
: (short answer is "no")
: (This posting was prepared April 4, 2011, before publication of the May Visa Bulletin)
: The State Department is about to start allocating more than 12,000 extra visa numbers to EB2 applicants. Most will go to applicants from India. The EB2 India date in the May Visa Bulletin will advance for the first time since September, 2010. EB2 India and China may continue to advance for the rest of the fiscal year - unlikely to pass December, 2006.
: The back story
: There are about 140,000 employment based visa numbers available for fiscal year 2011. Each independent country of the world is limited to no more than 7% of that total. There are five employment related preference classifications - with each allocated a certain percentage of the total. The second preference ("EB2") is allocated 28.6% of the total.
: Visas are issued in Priority Date order
: Visas numbers are made available in priority date order within preference classification without regard to country of changeability of the applicant. There is an exception for those countries which are expected to reach their 7% limitation within a fiscal year. Applicants from those countries are allocated visa numbers within preference categories.
到06年底？
麻烦大牛们给回答一下。
visa
of
【在 d******8 的大作中提到】
: http://www.usimmlaw.com/current_information.htm
: India, China and the "Otherwise Unused" Employment Visas Numbers
: Is the Visa Office Discriminating Against China?
: (short answer is "no")
: (This posting was prepared April 4, 2011, before publication of the May Visa Bulletin)
: The State Department is about to start allocating more than 12,000 extra visa numbers to EB2 applicants. Most will go to applicants from India. The EB2 India date in the May Visa Bulletin will advance for the first time since September, 2010. EB2 India and China may continue to advance for the rest of the fiscal year - unlikely to pass December, 2006.
: The back story
: There are about 140,000 employment based visa numbers available for fiscal year 2011. Each independent country of the world is limited to no more than 7% of that total. There are five employment related preference classifications - with each allocated a certain percentage of the total. The second preference ("EB2") is allocated 28.6% of the total.
: Visas are issued in Priority Date order
: Visas numbers are made available in priority date order within preference classification without regard to country of changeability of the applicant. There is an exception for those countries which are expected to reach their 7% limitation within a fiscal year. Applicants from those countries are allocated visa numbers within preference categories.
j*e
44 楼
我觉得这篇文章应该只代表该律师个人立场，不代表AILA的立场。
【在 zg 的大作中提到】
: Thank you for bring it to everybody's attention.
: Seems we need to fight Indian at several fronts, DOS, USCIS, now AILA.
【在 zg 的大作中提到】
: Thank you for bring it to everybody's attention.
: Seems we need to fight Indian at several fronts, DOS, USCIS, now AILA.
zg
45 楼
I did not mean fight with AILA. I mean fight at AILA.
That is why I suggest NIU to post our understanding of INA at AILA website
through their lawyer. We should let AILA lawyers know SO by PD which favors
Indian over Chinese is not required by law, but a choice of Mr.O.
【在 j*e 的大作中提到】
: 我觉得这篇文章应该只代表该律师个人立场，不代表AILA的立场。
That is why I suggest NIU to post our understanding of INA at AILA website
through their lawyer. We should let AILA lawyers know SO by PD which favors
Indian over Chinese is not required by law, but a choice of Mr.O.
【在 j*e 的大作中提到】
: 我觉得这篇文章应该只代表该律师个人立场，不代表AILA的立场。
j*e
46 楼
大家想想如何批驳他文章倒数第二段的最后一句。
“Applicants from both those countries are discriminated against with regard
to the 7% limitation, which takes into account country of origin. That is
the law. But the law does not provide for extending that discrimination to
the otherwise unused visa numbers which fall through to EB2.”
“Applicants from both those countries are discriminated against with regard
to the 7% limitation, which takes into account country of origin. That is
the law. But the law does not provide for extending that discrimination to
the otherwise unused visa numbers which fall through to EB2.”
G*t
47 楼
不是法律歧视任何国家的人，
是法律在实践上只适用了PD
原则，而没有考虑国会移民
法的多样化精神。
regard
is
to
【在 j*e 的大作中提到】
: 大家想想如何批驳他文章倒数第二段的最后一句。
: “Applicants from both those countries are discriminated against with regard
: to the 7% limitation, which takes into account country of origin. That is
: the law. But the law does not provide for extending that discrimination to
: the otherwise unused visa numbers which fall through to EB2.”
是法律在实践上只适用了PD
原则，而没有考虑国会移民
法的多样化精神。
regard
is
to
【在 j*e 的大作中提到】
: 大家想想如何批驳他文章倒数第二段的最后一句。
: “Applicants from both those countries are discriminated against with regard
: to the 7% limitation, which takes into account country of origin. That is
: the law. But the law does not provide for extending that discrimination to
: the otherwise unused visa numbers which fall through to EB2.”
e*7
48 楼
这不过是一个收阿三黑钱的家伙信口雌黄在AILA，我们需要一个给中国人办事的弄一篇
别的在AILA，内容从这个网站上弄点就够了，主要是要找一个律师能发文章。作用类似
于老将小将在军版占领舆论阵地一样。
别的在AILA，内容从这个网站上弄点就够了，主要是要找一个律师能发文章。作用类似
于老将小将在军版占领舆论阵地一样。
w*g
49 楼
我想请教，在AILA瞎说，对分配原则有什么影响呢？AILA也不是管分名额的啊。
【在 e*******7 的大作中提到】
: 这不过是一个收阿三黑钱的家伙信口雌黄在AILA，我们需要一个给中国人办事的弄一篇
: 别的在AILA，内容从这个网站上弄点就够了，主要是要找一个律师能发文章。作用类似
: 于老将小将在军版占领舆论阵地一样。
【在 e*******7 的大作中提到】
: 这不过是一个收阿三黑钱的家伙信口雌黄在AILA，我们需要一个给中国人办事的弄一篇
: 别的在AILA，内容从这个网站上弄点就够了，主要是要找一个律师能发文章。作用类似
: 于老将小将在军版占领舆论阵地一样。
zg
50 楼
舆论阵地
Make Mr.O more comfortable sticking to his "SO by PD" method.
【在 w*****g 的大作中提到】
: 我想请教，在AILA瞎说，对分配原则有什么影响呢？AILA也不是管分名额的啊。
Make Mr.O more comfortable sticking to his "SO by PD" method.
【在 w*****g 的大作中提到】
: 我想请教，在AILA瞎说，对分配原则有什么影响呢？AILA也不是管分名额的啊。
zg
51 楼
Imagine Mr.O received mail/email of NIU through an AILA lawyer, then this
lawyer posted the article at AILA website today.
He is supporting and arguing for Mr.O, trying to avoid any future inquiry
from any AILA lawyer regarding Mr.O's SO rule.
【在 w*****g 的大作中提到】
: 我想请教，在AILA瞎说，对分配原则有什么影响呢？AILA也不是管分名额的啊。
lawyer posted the article at AILA website today.
He is supporting and arguing for Mr.O, trying to avoid any future inquiry
from any AILA lawyer regarding Mr.O's SO rule.
【在 w*****g 的大作中提到】
: 我想请教，在AILA瞎说，对分配原则有什么影响呢？AILA也不是管分名额的啊。
c*r
52 楼
NIU的赶快找一个favor老中的律师发个文章， 道德舆论阵地一定要抢的
d*8
53 楼
原贴不全，现在补全了。
t*y
54 楼
"In fact, India had already reached its 2011 EB2 allocation
by April, 2011, and China is well on track to utilize its entire allocation
in July."
每个国家自己的名额要quarterly分配，所以上半年排期推进慢，中印都指着unused
number，那么凭什么印度4月就把自己的用完了，而中国的要等到7月，两边都是有很多
人排队的，很明显，这样子在开始分unused number时，assign的排期里中国人就尽可
能的少了，至少从5月到7月，中国就一个也拿不到，因为自己的还没用完。
需要O正面回答为什么印度4月就把自己的用完了，而中国的要等到7月。这个就是最最明显的不公平，即使是最后还是中印按PD分leftover，那么至少开始分的时候，两国都得把自己本来的名额用完，这样可以最大限度的减少中国的损失。
NIU不是请了一个AILA的律师写质问信吗？那么中国这方的意见也需要POST到AILA去。这个文章必需反驳。
by April, 2011, and China is well on track to utilize its entire allocation
in July."
每个国家自己的名额要quarterly分配，所以上半年排期推进慢，中印都指着unused
number，那么凭什么印度4月就把自己的用完了，而中国的要等到7月，两边都是有很多
人排队的，很明显，这样子在开始分unused number时，assign的排期里中国人就尽可
能的少了，至少从5月到7月，中国就一个也拿不到，因为自己的还没用完。
需要O正面回答为什么印度4月就把自己的用完了，而中国的要等到7月。这个就是最最明显的不公平，即使是最后还是中印按PD分leftover，那么至少开始分的时候，两国都得把自己本来的名额用完，这样可以最大限度的减少中国的损失。
NIU不是请了一个AILA的律师写质问信吗？那么中国这方的意见也需要POST到AILA去。这个文章必需反驳。
c*r
55 楼
这个是关键！ 每次都被黑， 这次至少发出声音。
allocation
最明显的不公平，即使是最后还是中印按PD分leftover，那么至少开始分的时候，两国
都得把自己本来的名额用完，这样可以最大限度的减少中国的损失。
。这个文章必需反驳。
【在 t********y 的大作中提到】
: "In fact, India had already reached its 2011 EB2 allocation
: by April, 2011, and China is well on track to utilize its entire allocation
: in July."
: 每个国家自己的名额要quarterly分配，所以上半年排期推进慢，中印都指着unused
: number，那么凭什么印度4月就把自己的用完了，而中国的要等到7月，两边都是有很多
: 人排队的，很明显，这样子在开始分unused number时，assign的排期里中国人就尽可
: 能的少了，至少从5月到7月，中国就一个也拿不到，因为自己的还没用完。
: 需要O正面回答为什么印度4月就把自己的用完了，而中国的要等到7月。这个就是最最明显的不公平，即使是最后还是中印按PD分leftover，那么至少开始分的时候，两国都得把自己本来的名额用完，这样可以最大限度的减少中国的损失。
: NIU不是请了一个AILA的律师写质问信吗？那么中国这方的意见也需要POST到AILA去。这个文章必需反驳。
allocation
最明显的不公平，即使是最后还是中印按PD分leftover，那么至少开始分的时候，两国
都得把自己本来的名额用完，这样可以最大限度的减少中国的损失。
。这个文章必需反驳。
【在 t********y 的大作中提到】
: "In fact, India had already reached its 2011 EB2 allocation
: by April, 2011, and China is well on track to utilize its entire allocation
: in July."
: 每个国家自己的名额要quarterly分配，所以上半年排期推进慢，中印都指着unused
: number，那么凭什么印度4月就把自己的用完了，而中国的要等到7月，两边都是有很多
: 人排队的，很明显，这样子在开始分unused number时，assign的排期里中国人就尽可
: 能的少了，至少从5月到7月，中国就一个也拿不到，因为自己的还没用完。
: 需要O正面回答为什么印度4月就把自己的用完了，而中国的要等到7月。这个就是最最明显的不公平，即使是最后还是中印按PD分leftover，那么至少开始分的时候，两国都得把自己本来的名额用完，这样可以最大限度的减少中国的损失。
: NIU不是请了一个AILA的律师写质问信吗？那么中国这方的意见也需要POST到AILA去。这个文章必需反驳。
t*y
56 楼
是啊，一样都是两千八，为什么印度能比中国提前3个月用完？然后5月开始分大饼，只分印度不分中国，这不是赤果果的FAVOR印度是什么。
我们先不说按PD分，就说这个，他们能justify吗？
这个文章其实提供了证据 -- 白纸黑字说了印度比中国早3个月用完2800的limit，当两国都有backlog的时候。
这个问题扔到DOS和USCIS的脸上，看他们敢不敢回答！
【在 c********r 的大作中提到】
: 这个是关键！ 每次都被黑， 这次至少发出声音。
:
: allocation
: 最明显的不公平，即使是最后还是中印按PD分leftover，那么至少开始分的时候，两国
: 都得把自己本来的名额用完，这样可以最大限度的减少中国的损失。
: 。这个文章必需反驳。
我们先不说按PD分，就说这个，他们能justify吗？
这个文章其实提供了证据 -- 白纸黑字说了印度比中国早3个月用完2800的limit，当两国都有backlog的时候。
这个问题扔到DOS和USCIS的脸上，看他们敢不敢回答！
【在 c********r 的大作中提到】
: 这个是关键！ 每次都被黑， 这次至少发出声音。
:
: allocation
: 最明显的不公平，即使是最后还是中印按PD分leftover，那么至少开始分的时候，两国
: 都得把自己本来的名额用完，这样可以最大限度的减少中国的损失。
: 。这个文章必需反驳。
D*0
57 楼
我估计是阿三发现我们在闹评分的事而找律师公开造谣支持O的做法，我们也可以找律
师与他对顶。各位也可以写信质问他信口开河的按PD分的法律在哪里。
师与他对顶。各位也可以写信质问他信口开河的按PD分的法律在哪里。
j*i
58 楼
at least this is brought to more & more attention now.
I support - nao yi nao won't do us anything bad at this point. The more
people are aware of it, we get less chances of being blacked-handed.
Even if legally he is not wrong, we will get some
I support - nao yi nao won't do us anything bad at this point. The more
people are aware of it, we get less chances of being blacked-handed.
Even if legally he is not wrong, we will get some
s*l
59 楼
这个“索罗门 ”是哪的姓？
y*w
60 楼
米犹
【在 s****l 的大作中提到】
: 这个“索罗门 ”是哪的姓？
【在 s****l 的大作中提到】
: 这个“索罗门 ”是哪的姓？
s*l
61 楼
这些毒瘤
【在 y*******w 的大作中提到】
: 米犹
【在 y*******w 的大作中提到】
: 米犹
w*l
62 楼
"Applicants from both those countries are discriminated against with regard
强调Diversity算是歧视吗？
有没有牛人从这点上，为什么diversity over PD, 引申一下？
regard
is
to
强调Diversity算是歧视吗？
有没有牛人从这点上，为什么diversity over PD, 引申一下？
regard
is
to
相关阅读
怎样买slickedit便宜？从网站上爬数据用到自己app合法不？胡扯几句什么叫Deep Learning入门谁能给个python 2 decorator class的例子？如何train small object detection说一个国内保密单位在硬盘上装软件的故事 (转载)比较spring-boot 和 node.js有人用react + redux么GitHub: 开源社区不够多元化 (转载)用scala 算一个东西， out of memory 了，怎么办？哪里找Wiki Leak希拉里Podesta邮件可视化项目seq-to-seq model的参数share吗？cloud vs AI 哪个方向更适合职业发展没有比Visual Studio更好的IDE了吧?Deep Learning什么框架好reactive native deploy errorJava 多线程：还需要好CPU？PostgREST有人生产环境用过没 貌似适合猛糙快CRUDdeep learning做embeded system，业界动态或者公司用python分析big data，用哪个library好？