Gabriel54

I was only a lowly TA so I saw these issues from afar, but I would add that, on a more optimistic note, I don't think I've ever met an instructor who wouldn't do whatever he or she had to do to support someone with special needs. As you suggested, metrics do not tell the whole story and certainly metrics for the sake of metrics are not helpful and may in fact be dangerous.

That said there is certainly a lot more work that needs to be done in this area. Hopefully these regulations over time bring out practical positive change. Time will tell.

I'm reading the comments here and confused by one thing... Do people here not purchase fresh fruit and vegetables on a regular basis (i.e. multiple times a week)? I am not an expert on Costco but it seems insane to visit a store the size of Costco every couple of days just to buy some tomatoes and parsley.

Well, to be fair, it has made every course hosted on Canvas equally accessible to everyone. ;)

Canvas has an easy way of checking if a pdf or other course material is accessible, so many universities are forcing faculty to put all their materials on Canvas. That way if a pdf or powerpoint is not compliant it is immediately flagged. The goal is to reach a "100% accessible" metric.

Note that little of this really helps the students that it is supposed to help, because as you wisely point out, raw HTML is almost by definition extremely accessible. I work in a field that uses Latex and the source code of Latex should also be considered more accessible than the compiled pdf. But for university administrators the only important thing is that the accessibility metric that appears (or used to appear, before today!) on Canvas shows 100% accessible.

Accessibility regulations, implemented with feedback from faculty and with the support of university resources, are certainly a good thing. But that is not what is happening in my experience.

Definitely not a criticism of your (hard) work here. Thank you!

I'm surprised how few comments there are on this thread. This is probably affecting millions of students at the most stressful time of the year.

Incidentally I've always hated Canvas and probably every other LMS provider, but what is particularly amusing about this current outage is that it is occurring at exactly the time when universities are demanding that all professors put all of their materials on Canvas, without exception, due to ADA compliance regulations. It is explicitly forbidden for professors to, e.g., refer to pdfs posted on a personal website.

Other commentators here seem not to understand that many faculty also do not enjoy being forced to use Canvas.

Where are you in the process currently? Once the I-130 is approved my understanding is that you can delay at the NVC stage indefinitely. You just have to contact them at least once every 12 months, or log in every year to submit one or another document (basically they should see some activity on your case).

I never said what I think about the law. I think we can agree that it does not address many of the fundamental issues that people experiencing homelessness face. The alternative, however, is not more sympathy but rather specific solutions like a sane health care system (which might include mandatory drug or alcohol rehabilitation) and social service support. Everyone has the right to live in dignity which includes a safe place to live.

The chance of people being sympathetic and wanting to help those who suffer is much higher if the homeless people aren't removed from their view.

I disagree with this completely. I think seeing homeless people in the street every day makes people think the government is incompetent and unable to deal with a serious issue. This leads to people adopting more extreme measures like exactly the one we are discussing right now.

I'm not sure what sympathy has to do with anything we are discussing? People experiencing homelessness do not need sympathy, they need homes and community and support. It is a luxury to be sympathetic because the most sympathetic people are not the people dealing with issues associated with homelessness.

In my opinion the way the US deals with homelessness is a disaster because we have a disorganized, disconnected and dysfunctional social net. E.g., how is someone with bipolar disorder or schizophrenia able to treat their condition if they cannot get their medicine because they don't have health insurance? How can they get a home without a job or family support? The list of such issues goes on and on.

Telling people that they just need to have more sympathy and to accept seeing homeless people on the street is a losing strategy and not a solution. In my opinion the solutions include universal healthcare, robust social support systems and drug/alcohol treatment programs. These programs benefit everyone. At the same time it is not crazy to say, "I do not want to see drug addicted people on my doorstep every day."

Perhaps you also agree that these are part of an ideal solution but framing it as sympathy for the homeless is a losing strategy. Everyone would benefit from a social welfare system set up in a sane way, but somehow every discussion in the US turns into an "us-versus-them" mentality. It is like a reality distortion field and a victory of the media-propaganda complex.

Edit: to summarize, homelessness presents two problems, one for the individual experiencing it, and one for society. Solutions need to target both problems. But to deny the reality of one or the other is a critical error.

Your heart doesn't have to bleed for such a person but I think most people would agree it is tiresome to see homeless people in the street. It is also a public health issue. Doing heroin in the middle of the sidewalk and throwing the needle on the ground is obviously extremely un-hygienic and dangerous to everyone.

Or to be more generous, they are tired of seeing drug addicted people sleeping in the street.

I certainly do not agree with that. My point is that this article itself conflates homelessness and addiction, which I think is a serious error.

There is homelessness, and then there is drug and/or alcohol addiction.

Those who are convicted of sleeping outdoors could be given the option to avoid jail time by instead entering into a mandatory treatment program for at least 12 months.

What happens if someone is homeless and not addicted to drugs or alcohol? Why assume everyone who is homeless is also an addict? It seems entirely reasonable that someone homeless AND addicted to drugs/alcohol should be required to enter into a treatment program.

There is a big difference between professors being "free" to publish and express their views on a subject, and teaching that same subject in such a way that their views are presented as the only acceptable views on that subject.

It's an observation, not a value judgement. Try finding a fresh loaf of bread in the average American suburb.

I have never been asked such a thing, in the US or elsewhere. It would be on the customer to inform the staff of any allergies.

You should also remove any students from classrooms whom routinely distract from others' learning.

A good idea but not practically possible in any district, unfortunately.

The stuff Jordan says about there being some value in the classics is good. Some of his stuff about meaning is good. Little to none of it is original.

I don't think he ever claimed that these ideas were original?

He’s also a raving misogynist. I have two daughters. He can fuck right off with that shit.

I feel like this is quite an extraordinary accusation. The tone of your comment reminds me of his interview with Kathy Newman. Everything he said that had even the smallest nuance was twisted into something else. What specifically did he say that makes you thing he is a misogynist?

I wonder, have you personally been in a university environment recently? Within the past ten or fifteen years? I ask because, as someone who attended a supposedly "good" university in the USA, before going I had an interest in the humanities but was quickly discouraged by the number of individuals who seemed to be possessed by propaganda. I mentioned in another comment, for example, that I saw another student have as their desktop background a photo of Mao and the cultural revolution. So this is the backdrop against which Jordan Peterson is saying, you know, there actually are Western intellectuals worth reading and listening to and thinking about. And yes, on a personal level, I did get to read some of those writers you mentioned. It did not surprise me that they turn out to be much deeper than Jordon Peterson himself, but I don't think he ever claimed to be a revolutionary thinker? I consider him more of an evangelist than anything else. How many intellectuals can we say have truly had an impact with their ideas? The number is small. I think the reason Jordan Peterson suddenly became a phenomenon is because he was at least brave enough to call out ridiculousness when he saw it (at least at the very beginning of his celebrity, I cannot speak for his recent comments because I stopped paying attention once he started going into politics).

At a pre-protest meeting of a cause I wanted to support, I noticed that the organizer had on their desktop background a kind of propagandistic poster of Mao leading the cultural revolution. Keep in mind, this is in the USA. I'm no expert in world history by any means, but the level of ignorance is astounding.

From the EB-1 page on USCIS [0], under "Extraordinary Ability" category:

You must be able to demonstrate extraordinary ability in the sciences, arts, education, business, or athletics through sustained national or international acclaim.

You must meet at least 3 of the 10 criteria* below, or provide evidence of a one-time achievement (i.e., Pulitzer, Oscar, Olympic Medal) as well as evidence showing that you will be continuing to work in the area of your expertise. No offer of employment or labor certification is required.

There is also a category for professors and researchers. In this category one must have an offer of employment. No labor certification is required.

[0] https://www.uscis.gov/working-in-the-united-states/permanent...

On the link above, there is a link to "Table VI (Part II) Preference Visas Issued Fiscal Year 2024". It is broken down by the consulate/embassy issuing the visa. The grand totals have about 5000, 10000, 16000 EB-1/2/3 visas issued globally, respectively. What am I misunderstanding?

I am looking here [0] and I see that almost 20,000 O visas were issued at foreign posts in 2024, and it looks like several thousand E visas in the first priority category were issued. I agree with you that for most people, currently, the way it works is that they get an H1-B and then wait for their turn to apply for EB-1 (if they are from a country subject to quotas), but it is incorrect to say that consulates do not issues O or EB-1 visas. Why this is the case I have no idea, perhaps it is easier for companies to file for H1-B?

[0] https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/legal/visa-law0/v...

As many others have pointed out there remain EB-1 visas and O category visas. In particular the O visas (for "extraordinary ability") are not subject to any nationality quotas. If these companies are serious about hiring the "smartest people", why would they not fall into these categories? Just for fun, here is an example of a teenager who recently got an O-1 visa as a software engineer [0]. Surely the folks applying to OpenAI, Nvidia, etc. would have similar qualifications?

[0] https://x.com/Mokshit06/status/1955377782902624410

Where are you getting this information from? EB-1/2/3 are clearly visas issued to people [0]. It is true that many people may adjust status to EB-1/2/3 while already in the US in another status, but they are certainly visas still available to people. As I understand, due to the quota system it can be very difficult for folks born in certain countries to receive them (due to quotas) and they end up waiting for many years.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EB-1_visa

I've been very happy with Paq [1] which is essentially a lightweight wrapper around git pull.

[1] https://github.com/savq/paq-nvim

You said it very well. Personally I would even go so far as to say it is a manufactured crisis perpetuated by both parties for the benefit of the rich in this country.

I would rather have anarchy than rule of law enforced by bandits.

This indicates to me that you have no idea how desperate people become in a failed state, in the absence of law and order.

I think it is a stretch to conclude that because someone voted for Trump, they support all of his immigration policies. Some of the policies perhaps, but I think it is a matter of degree. Many viewed Biden (rightly or wrongly) as not enforcing the law at all.