Not acknowledging gender only makes sense when there has been no discrimination against that gender in the past. Women in STEM and especially in India have accomplished their successes in spite of heavy odds against them. Women in India (traditionally) have been expected to stay at home and take care of the family, not send rockets to Mars.
As such acknowledging their accomplishments while acknowledging their gender is not a bad thing.
> But there is context, and the context is the immigration ban put in place by the president.
Yes, your point only makes sense if the context of the immigration topic was limited to a travel ban in the countries that the Trump administration is currently focused on. But there is an even larger context of this administration's statements regarding immigration. If you are looking to apply larger contexts then keep in mind Steve Bannon and Jeff Sessions' statements regarding immigration:
-- Steve Bannon:
"When two-thirds or three-quarters of the CEOs in Silicon Valley are from South Asia or from Asia, I think... A country is more than an economy. We’re a civic society." (He dislikes Asian executives in SV).
-- Steve Bannon:
"Don’t we have a problem with legal immigration? Twenty percent of this country is immigrants. Is that not the beating heart of this problem?" (He dislikes legal immigration from any country, not just muslim majority countries).
-- Jeff Sessions:
"The H-1B program is a “tremendous threat” to American professionals." (He wishes to curb visa programs for highly educated and professional immigrants).
At the end of the day, an immigrant is an immigrant. If Steve Bannon or yourself are accepting Canadian and South African immigrants' contributions, but wish to isolate those contributions from those of Sudanese, Muslim or Asian immigrants then there is a deeper bias problem that must be talked about. The current travel ban might be of 6 muslim majority countries, but you cannot ignore the very real statements by the Trump administration about their intention to stop legal immigration from as many sources as possible.
When you keep that context in mind, it makes less sense to add nuance to the situation and start isolating contributions of immigrants based on the countries they are from.
>Is Garrett Camp an immigrant? Sure sounds like it. But is that really in the spirit of "founded by immigrants"?
Yes, Garrett Camp is an immigrant. He just happens to be white and from Canada and is thus perceived less as "those other people" and more "American" because he blends in. If he came from Sudan would you consider him to be "more of an immigrant"? Your own comment implies this bias even if you didn't mean for it to sound that way.
If you know where to find these H1B "sweatshops" on US soil, please take those charts and company names to the Department of Labor and report the wage crime or occupational hazards you are implying with your hyperbole. Otherwise, your statements are deeply exaggerated. Here's a link to get you started: https://www.dol.gov/whd/howtofilecomplaint.htm
Google, Microsoft, Netflix & Facebook benefit directly from H1B visas and are most certainly not "sweatshops". Even when you consider companies that pay less than the top tech companies, no one would consider them sweatshops. So hyperbole aside, and keeping in mind that H1B also brings academic talent to universities, the hate towards the H1B program seems more rooted in a hate of immigration than a worry of the program not realizing its "original intent".
If you don't want 85,000 of the best talent in the world per year to power US companies' and academia's growth, that's fine. Go ahead and limit the visa program and risk that talent going elsewhere.
The Trump administration has stated it might cap H1B visas further. This move will directly impact academia and the Tech industry and the influx of top talent. By combining the issue of illegal immigration with legal high value H1B visas, the Trump administration and its supporters are not helping their own argument. There is a nuance there which the parent comment was correctly mentioning. You want the best of another country to come to the US as they have been or risk the slow spiral of insignificance that Germany faced.
This author woke up on the wrong side of the bed before writing this article. If Nintendo can achieve $4M in mobile sales in 1 day as it did with Super Mario Run -- does it really matter if the company is conservative or revolutionary?
See: Hollywood in recent years and its constant need to do sequels because they guarantee a successful and profitable venture.
Attributing Wordpress as the core CMS for a domain based on simply checking for a wordpress installation on the domain seems like a flawed approach. Lots of domains have blogs hosted on Wordpress but might not be using Wordpress as a CMS to manage the entire online presence.
Domination by large corporations in commodity products isn't necessarily a bad thing. It leaves the brightest & most ambitious entrepreneurs to solve more complex issues. In 2015, should an ambitious 25 year old create a new pizza shop or try to create a new tech or bio-medical research company? The examples I provided are up for debate, but the fact that our basic needs (food, clothes, home improvement) are taken care of by the Walmart & Home-Depots of the world might not be such a bad thing. Just aim higher on society's hierarchy of needs.
Don't get dejected. A person can probably write a similar post about every great company that will get started in the next 10 years. Prove cynics like that wrong.
Good luck. If manually emailing editors is taking too long, you can try doing a press release for a few $XXX through prnewswire, businesswire or prleap as well. Might not have the same success as personalized emails, but it's an option if you're busy.