tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post6923110354801760130..comments2024-03-27T19:58:17.387-05:00Comments on Computational Complexity: Boycotting ArizonaLance Fortnowhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06752030912874378610noreply@blogger.comBlogger44125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-79108672062063042322010-05-22T16:21:13.100-05:002010-05-22T16:21:13.100-05:00To the anonymous commenter who wrote:
That so man...To the anonymous commenter who wrote:<br /><br /><i>That so many commenters feel the need to remain anonymous when expressing (especially conservative) opinions about political issues reflects badly on tolerance in academia. ... David's comments for instance ... tells the rest of us to shut up until we get tenure.</i><br /><br />I don't know how you make the leap from the actual situation (me writing non-anonymously, several more-conservative posters writing anonymously) to the bizarre conclusion that I'm intolerant of others' political views, but let me be clear.<br /><br />I very much do not wish the people I disagree with to shut up. That would be the antithesis of academic freedom and free speech, principles I hold dear. I would like some of them to change their minds, but that's a completely different thing.<br /><br />I haven't ever let my feelings on someone's political views influence how I think of them as a researcher, and I have no intention of ever doing so in the future. I have colleagues and co-authors with whom I have strong political disagreements; that doesn't stop me from working with them.<br /><br />But it also doesn't stop me from expressing my own opinions, under my own name, when I think it appropriate. Your comment comes across as trying to censure me for doing so and I find that almost as offensive as your incorrect assumptions about my tolerance.D. Eppsteinhttp://11011110.livejournal.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-37152254474655467592010-05-21T02:58:22.917-05:002010-05-21T02:58:22.917-05:00Greg: Though I was wrong about the time period (Ca...Greg: Though I was wrong about the time period (Canada passed 10% of the US population in the 1960's rather than the 1980's) the basic conclusion is that the rate of immigration is even marginally higher than in the US yet it still does not promote the same level of backlash.Paul Beamenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-63845561401730669562010-05-20T21:27:01.244-05:002010-05-20T21:27:01.244-05:00can we boycott Australia now that they have broad ...can we boycott Australia now that they have broad rights to search my laptop if I travel there?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-26639664917232769712010-05-19T16:57:56.362-05:002010-05-19T16:57:56.362-05:00I look forward to 2011 when the REAL ID Act goes i...I look forward to 2011 when the REAL ID Act goes into effect. The uninformed ramblings in the comments section of this academic blog should make for good laughter for days if not weeks.Frednoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-67691786740751685002010-05-19T13:57:39.245-05:002010-05-19T13:57:39.245-05:00“All Men are created equal”! The founders had it r...“All Men are created equal”! The founders had it right, when attempting to form a perfect union and they also knew that they were not there yet but knew we one day would get there. Lincoln moved us forward as did JFK and LBJ. This Nation was founded by men of many nations and backgrounds. It was founded on the principle that all men are created equal, and that the rights of every man are diminished when the rights of one man are threatened.<br /><br />It is my contention that this AZ law is not constitutional and will fail when challenged (unless, of course, they keep adding more amendments), pretty funny for this so called perfect law.<br /><br />As for the undocumented workers, as Ronald Reagan said “It’s the Economy, Stupid”. When the economy is good we say let’s all celebrate “Cinco de Mayo, my brothers” but when we are in a down “it’s all your fault, you damn immigrant”. This too will pass. The real problem is the narcosis/drug and people smuggler that’s what the focus should be on.<br /><br />Don’t you find it funny that no one ever voted for Governor Brewer, it’s all about politics, do not be fooled. Busy Brewer has passed S.B. 1070, no permit conceal weapons law, the famous Birthers law banning Ethic studies law, and if history is a lesson their House Bill 2779 from two years ago (which failed when challenged) and the one that was the funniest the boycott of Martin Luther King Day, not wanting another holiday. I believe there is an undercurrent to their enactment of new laws, they real love following a distinct pattern.Benitonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-5557329425016840962010-05-19T13:30:05.070-05:002010-05-19T13:30:05.070-05:00Paul: I totally agree with you that Canada is wis...Paul: I totally agree with you that Canada is wiser in a number of ways than the United States. Not in every respect, but certainly the US could learn a few things from Canada, and immigration is one example.<br /><br />However, your statistics about the countries' populations is a bit off. Yes, Canada has a distinctly higher immigration rate than the US, but it also has a lower birth rate, and I also don't know about the emigration rates. The population ratio using Wikipedia numbers is very close to constant:<br /><br />2010: 11.03%<br />2000: 10.91%<br />1990: 11.06%<br />1980: 10.82%<br /><br />Maybe the biggest difference is not the sheer immigration rate, but simply that immigrants to Canada are treated better. Illegal immigrant status in the United States has become an entrenched class system. A much smaller fraction of Canadian immigrants are "illegal", and they are treated more as equals.<br /><br />That brings the discussion back to what is really going on Arizona. However much Arizona insists that its goal is to end "trespass" by illegal immigrants, it's not true. Illegal immigrants are 5-10% of Arizona's population, mass deportation will never be any more than a convenient threat, and "trespass" is mainly a pretext for second-class status. SB1070 in particular will do more to degrade illegal immigrants than to deport them.Greg Kuperberghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16655664043505766628noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-78034750290316819172010-05-19T09:54:10.882-05:002010-05-19T09:54:10.882-05:00The real point of the outrage over Arizona's n...The real point of the outrage over Arizona's new law is not whether the particular sanctions or impacts are worse than other laws. The key is that it is a <i>new</i> injustice that is not fully entrenched. Isolating and stigmatizing Arizona (for stigmatizing undocumented/illegal immigrants and others who might seem to be immigrants) is likely to keep other jurisdictions from repeating what Arizona has done (or enacting laws with similar intent) and, based on past experience, will actually be effective in getting rid of the injustice. <br /><br />It is hard to see what anyone in Arizona can actually think is a positive impact of the law, except as the legislative equivalent of a protest march, with no intent on enforcement. As police forces both in Arizona and elsewhere know, making police enforce immigration rules is counterproductive to public safety as it makes people, who would otherwise be helpful with respect to policing crime, fearful of police. I would be very surprised if the law still exists a year or two from now.<br /><br />I am both an American by birth and an immigrant, having been born and grown up in Canada. I am often taken aback by the negative reaction to "foreigners" in this "land of immigrants" compared to the reactions in Canada. (It is not so much of a surprise that European countries which are much more culturally monolithic than the US have stronger reactions against immigrants.) <br /><br />Canada's rules over the last 40 years or so have been much more benign for immigrants than those in the US. This is despite the fact that Canada offers much greater social services to everyone so the "burden" of immigrants on the system is greater. Multiculturalism rather than the melting pot has been the paradigm. <br /><br />It is not as though the percentage of new immigrants in the US has been larger than that in Canada. For many years the US population was 10 times Canada's. Two decades ago the US had a population of 250 million versus 25 million for Canada. Now the US population is a little over 300 million whereas Canada's is over 35 million. <br /><br />The differences are reflected even in the terms used in the two countries: In the US, immigrants are "resident aliens" versus "landed immigrants" in Canada. Resident aliens are technically required to notify the US government of every address change and carry their precious green cards at all times. There is nothing similar for landed immigrants - until recently the only proof was just a slip of paper one kept in one's passport. The creation of landed immigrant cards was only a post-9/11 change at the behest of the US.<br /><br />This doesn't mean that Canada doesn't do bad things - all I have to say is "tar sands" - but it does seem that xenophobia is much less of an issue there than in the US.Paul Beamenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-24874946035924074022010-05-19T07:35:33.542-05:002010-05-19T07:35:33.542-05:00That so many commenters feel the need to remain an...<i>That so many commenters feel the need to remain anonymous when expressing (especially conservative) opinions about political issues reflects badly on tolerance in academia.</i><br /><br />Or perhaps it speaks to the spinelessness, and lack of scientific ability, of the anonymous commenters. I was attacked by a slew of anonymous commenters over a period of days, after I guestblogged here about how well ITCS ran the first ICS conference. Those anonymous commenters seemed incapable of reading past the first couple (easy, nonscientific) paragraphs of what I wrote.<br /><br />I took it harder than I should have, probably, and didn't read, or comment, on CS blogs for some months. Also, I heard from someone, later on, that other people, much more established than I am, declined to do followup posts on ICS, in part because of the toxic atmosphere the anonymous "how dare you go to China, much less praise them" comments I had unwittingly provoked. If that's true, I'd say anonymous argumentative comments are a net negative for the field overall.<br /><br />And, seriously, I have to wonder if you are willing to <i>do</i> anything besides be opinionated, if you won't stand behind your words. I didn't apply for a student travel grant to STOC because I didn't agree with the Hyatt labor policies. Now, maybe I wouldn't have gotten a grant even if I had applied, who knows. But I made a (small) career decision because of a political principle. How do you expect to have any constructive influence on the world at all, if you won't stand up for what you believe in?Aaron Sterlingnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-80069137918876007162010-05-19T06:53:30.547-05:002010-05-19T06:53:30.547-05:00School Board politics is among the roughest kind ....School Board politics is among the roughest kind ... I know from personal experience because my wife has served on the Seattle School Board ... twice I served as my wife's campaign manager/fund raiser ... once winning the election (yay!) ... once losing the election (ouch!).<br /><br />One good heuristic for getting the most out of your School Board, as a member the public, is to press for facts. How many non-citizen children are in the school system? How many of them are illegal? How many are in foster-care programs? <br /><br />And most importantly, <i>what concrete actions are being taken to help those kids become productive citizens?</i><br /><br />That's because informed public debate and concrete actions are (in our family's experience) both of them more effective than boycotts.<br /><br />They are also much harder to achieve.John Sidleshttp://www.mrfm.orgnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-71793787588888901132010-05-19T02:21:06.519-05:002010-05-19T02:21:06.519-05:00D Epstein says: "I'm sick of people telli...D Epstein says: "I'm sick of people telling me "until all the other bigger chunks of pure evil in the world are eliminated, don't pay attention to this little chunk of pure evil sitting right here". It's evil, it's in our own back yards, we should clean it up."<br /><br />The problem with this is that it is clearly pure hypocrisy. There are 100 worse evils just on your backyard that you do not choose to address. You are taking an ugly and annoying politic move of AZ and raising it to the level of an "evil", which it certainly isn't, in order to justify a stupid and arrogant call for boycott which is really shallow trendiness. <br /><br />Likely that about half of the US readers of this blog do not agree with your assessment (including the amazing statement that AZ police is more racist than that of other states -- like LAPD maybe?). Despite being humans and not just academics they would rather see political issues debated elsewhere, not on a complexity blog. For the European readers of this blog, the whole debate is on extremely minor details relative to the debates over immigration that they have at home (without involving suggestions of computational complexity boycotts.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-87458429174849617632010-05-19T01:13:15.184-05:002010-05-19T01:13:15.184-05:00Anon 33, not carrying a green card isn't made ...Anon 33, not carrying a green card isn't made a criminal act by the law. Nor is being a visitor without your passport. When reading 13-1509 of hb 2162 it does look like it does, until you get to:<br />F. This section does not apply to a person who maintains authorization<br />from the federal government to remain in the United States.<br /><br />So the penalty only applies to people here illegally. If you were stopped and asked to verify that you were in the country legally the easiest thing would be to show your green card or visa, but if you didn't have it on your person there still wouldn't be any charges. In your hotel example that could mean a trip to the hotel in the police car, but the bill contains no penalties of any sort for people in the country legally who are found without their documentation.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-30822800283894652502010-05-18T22:37:45.730-05:002010-05-18T22:37:45.730-05:00If had a green card, I would avoid conferences in ...If had a green card, I would avoid conferences in Arizona. The danger of committing a crime simply because I forget the green card in my hotel room would not be worth it.<br /><br />Anonymous at 6:39pm: This is more than just about "convenience"; It is just not reasonable to make not carrying a green card a criminal act, and it does not only hurt the "illegal immigrants", as you say.<br /><br />When I travel to the U.S., I only need a visa waiver, and if I understand this correctly, I should be safe. So I may (or may not) still attend conferences in Arizona...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-44353580509300369352010-05-18T21:06:53.693-05:002010-05-18T21:06:53.693-05:00That so many commenters feel the need to remain an...That so many commenters feel the need to remain anonymous when expressing (especially conservative) opinions about political issues reflects badly on tolerance in academia. Anonymous commentators are probably worried, and properly so, about their, or our?, career prospects if it is discovered they do not toe the party line. This is hardly surprising despite the interest in diverse viewpoints academia supposedly cherishes.<br /><br />David's comments for instance do not put anyone at ease in this regard. Some things are surely evil, but when this word is bandied around it either loses its meaning or tells the rest of us to shut up until we get tenure.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-27981128218241476392010-05-18T20:43:35.467-05:002010-05-18T20:43:35.467-05:00Benito, I'm not clear what your argument is. ...Benito, I'm not clear what your argument is. Is your argument that the law is bad because it makes it harder for illegal immigrants to live in Arizona, or are you trying to say something else?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-56708131947820338002010-05-18T20:37:26.744-05:002010-05-18T20:37:26.744-05:00I hope that every American, regardless of where he...I hope that every American, regardless of where he lives, will stop and examine his conscience about this and other related incidents. This Nation was founded by men of many nations and backgrounds. It was founded on the principle that all men are created equal, and that the rights of every man are diminished when the rights of one man are threatened. All of us ought to have the right to be treated as he would wish to be treated, as one would wish his children to be treated, but this is not the case.<br /><br />I know the proponents of this law say that the majority approves of this law, but the majority is not always right. Would women or non-whites have the vote if we listen to the majority of the day, would the non-whites have equal rights (and equal access to churches, housing, restaurants, hotels, retail stores, schools, colleges and yes water fountains) if we listen to the majority of the day? We all know the answer, a resounding, NO!<br /><br />Today we are committed to a worldwide struggle to promote and protect the rights of all who wish to be free. In a time of domestic crisis men of good will and generosity should be able to unite regardless of party or politics and do what is right, not what is just popular with the majority. Some men comprehend discrimination by never have experiencing it in their lives, but the majority will only understand after it happens to them.Benitonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-75583642856060831212010-05-18T20:35:55.975-05:002010-05-18T20:35:55.975-05:00I hope that every American, regardless of where he...I hope that every American, regardless of where he lives, will stop and examine his conscience about this and other related incidents. This Nation was founded by men of many nations and backgrounds. It was founded on the principle that all men are created equal, and that the rights of every man are diminished when the rights of one man are threatened. All of us ought to have the right to be treated as he would wish to be treated, as one would wish his children to be treated, but this is not the case.<br /><br />I know the proponents of this law say that the majority approves of this law, but the majority is not always right. Would women or non-whites have the vote if we listen to the majority of the day, would the non-whites have equal rights (and equal access to churches, housing, restaurants, hotels, retail stores, schools, colleges and yes water fountains) if we listen to the majority of the day? We all know the answer, a resounding, NO!<br /><br />Today we are committed to a worldwide struggle to promote and protect the rights of all who wish to be free. In a time of domestic crisis men of good will and generosity should be able to unite regardless of party or politics and do what is right, not what is just popular with the majority. Some men comprehend discrimination by never have experiencing it in their lives, but the majority will only understand after it happens to them.Benitonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-51701951215892865832010-05-18T18:39:17.277-05:002010-05-18T18:39:17.277-05:00Most of the opposition to the AZ law on this blog ...Most of the opposition to the AZ law on this blog appear to based on some distorted fantasy about what the law is. (see for example GASARCH's comments)<br /><br />Stopping someone without probable cause for some other infraction - explicitly forbidden in the text.<br />Using race as a basis for probable cause - explicitly forbidden in the text.<br /><br />The only comment in opposition that I saw that is responsive to the actual law, not the campus sloganeering version is that it is inconvenient to carry your green card. That's the law in the whole US and has been since before most of us were born.<br /><br />The only real difficulty it causes is for illegal immigrants. I'll grant that it does make it harder for them to live illegally in Arizona. If that is the evil you see then make that argument. But if your problem with it is that it is going to create problems for people here legally, there really isn't much support for that proposition.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-23050643878456079852010-05-18T18:20:15.071-05:002010-05-18T18:20:15.071-05:00I disapprove of the Arizona law, and I think its r...I disapprove of the Arizona law, and I think its racial profiling ramifications may make it immoral and not just wrong. But I don't think it rises to the level that it deserves a boycott because of that.<br /><br />However as a practical matter, many scientists are immigrants, and not all of them remember to carry their documentation with them at all time. (I don't carry my green card with me- I heard it's an incredible hassle if it gets lost - and I don't want to take that chance, and so I only carry a (by now rather tattered) photocopy.) So, the higher likelihood for a participant getting arrested or just feeling uncomfortable can count for a reason to prefer a venue not in Arizona. I may feel a bit uncomfortable and unwelcomed there, and perhaps other non-citizens will feel the same.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-81281062658318563872010-05-18T18:14:01.148-05:002010-05-18T18:14:01.148-05:00It is also NOT up to those who think we should NOT...It is also NOT up to those who think we should NOT boycott AZ as well to decide for the community.<br /><br />(D. Eppstein is expressing his views as you are doing. You are not the representative of the community to decide that we should not boycott AZ. Maybe it is more important for you to be ab academic than being a human and hide your head in the sand, it is not for some of us.)Antoher grad studentnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-62712567473925750882010-05-18T17:42:47.206-05:002010-05-18T17:42:47.206-05:00Totally agree with Anon #23 and #20.
It is not up...Totally agree with Anon #23 and #20. <br />It is not up to people like D. Eppstein to decide what is "evil" and what is not. Especially when he seems to decide for us already. If you have reservations regarding the AZ law, please address it in a civilized manner, while explaining with precise terms what exactly is "evil" about it, why it is evil, and based on what kind of ethical system it is evil/immoral. Otherwise, it seems like you assume everyone has, or worse, should have, the same opinions as you do, which is arrogant as anon#20 already said.Grad studentnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-6532263345118972182010-05-18T16:35:19.186-05:002010-05-18T16:35:19.186-05:00We should boycott UCI. Consider the following pur...We should boycott UCI. Consider the following pure evil from the <a href="http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=00001-01000&file=833-851.90" rel="nofollow">california penal code:</a><br /><br />834b. (a) Every law enforcement agency in California shall fully<br />cooperate with the United States Immigration and Naturalization<br />Service regarding any person who is arrested if he or she is<br />suspected of being present in the United States in violation of<br />federal immigration laws.<br /><b> (b) With respect to any such person who is arrested, and suspected<br />of being present in the United States in violation of federal<br />immigration laws, every law enforcement agency shall do the<br />following:<br /> (1) Attempt to verify the legal status of such person as a citizen<br />of the United States, an alien lawfully admitted as a permanent<br />resident, an alien lawfully admitted for a temporary period of time<br />or as an alien who is present in the United States in violation of<br />immigration laws. The verification process may include, but shall not<br />be limited to, questioning the person regarding his or her date and<br />place of birth, and entry into the United States, and demanding<br />documentation to indicate his or her legal status.</b><br /> (2) Notify the person of his or her apparent status as an alien<br />who is present in the United States in violation of federal<br />immigration laws and inform him or her that, apart from any criminal<br />justice proceedings, he or she must either obtain legal status or<br />leave the United States.<br /> (3) Notify the Attorney General of California and the United<br />States Immigration and Naturalization Service of the apparent illegal<br />status and provide any additional information that may be requested<br />by any other public entity.<br /> (c) Any legislative, administrative, or other action by a city,<br />county, or other legally authorized local governmental entity with<br />jurisdictional boundaries, or by a law enforcement agency, to prevent<br />or limit the cooperation required by subdivision (a) is expressly<br />prohibited.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-61869489214201262262010-05-18T16:25:01.622-05:002010-05-18T16:25:01.622-05:00D. Eppstein misunderstood the point: A conference ...D. Eppstein misunderstood the point: A conference boycott should be against places, where many participants feel uncomfortable, being subjected to unfair practices. Cleaning up "evil" is an issue motivated by his political views, not shared by the majority of people. What he thinks is evil might not be felt as such by the families of murdered and kidnapped Arizonans. There is an immigration problem. He might not like the AZ law trying to address it, but this does not make the law "evil".Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-9762712285295292342010-05-18T16:04:29.719-05:002010-05-18T16:04:29.719-05:00I'm sick of people telling me "until all ...I'm sick of people telling me "until all the other bigger chunks of pure evil in the world are eliminated, don't pay attention to this little chunk of pure evil sitting right here". It's evil, it's in our own back yards, we should clean it up.D. Eppsteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11923501729858669855noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-27516405684016126252010-05-18T15:53:40.064-05:002010-05-18T15:53:40.064-05:00> We shouldn't locate conferences in places...> We shouldn't locate conferences in places that will disproportionately make the non-white members of our community uncomfortable--<br />You all heard in TV that the black American sportsmen were insulted in Austria a couple of years ago. My wife was beaten up in Germany, more than once, even by policemen, just because she looked and spoke foreign. An airport attendant misplaced the travel papers of a member of my family in Paris, and the police put her in jail, not the attendant, without even listening to her. There are hundreds and thousands of such well documented incidents against foreigners in Western Europe. Many of my friends and colleagues feel uncomfortable in Germany, Austria and France. There real atrocities happen, not just someone fears that bad things could possibly happen to some. So until these three countries are not boycotted, don't even bring AZ up.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3722233.post-54108654040341364872010-05-18T15:35:27.333-05:002010-05-18T15:35:27.333-05:00Boycotting computer science conferences in AZ, Chi...Boycotting computer science conferences in AZ, China, Israel etc. is arrogant. Lance cannot claim to understand the background and the implications of immigration laws or state actions, and so these boycotts are motivated mainly by hysteria and propaganda. Dependent on the polls 60..70% of the Americans support SB1070, which is much milder than the immigration laws of most European countries. The worst one could say about SB1070 is that it has a potential to be misused. But by whom? The majority of AZ policemen are Hispanic. It is shameful that we even discuss boycotts.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com