After nearly two years of waiting for paperwork to be reviewed by CIS and Department of State and for an appointment at the consulate, my partner received the entry visa and passport in the mail only three days ago. I am truly sorry for anyone who is about to start this process because it will take even longer on top of what is already an inhumanely lengthy amount of time to bring someone into the U.S.
I’m just 2 months behind you, my wife and I were celebrating that we’d be able to live in USA very soon just hours before the embassy announced indefinite suspension of interviews.
To make matters worse; they prioritize family visas under student visas sometimes so this delay could easily be many more months for us. And could require us having to fetch fresh documents from a corrupt government as some for the marriage visa have expiration dates.
Britain has been extended some visas, recognizing that it's sometimes unreasonable (person from a country with more cases) or impractical (lack of flights) for people to leave when they expected to.
The current extensions are only to 31 March, but maybe they will increase again after that.
For someone already in USA on H1B, I expect there won't be much impact other than added delay, as the processing of H1B within USA is done over mail and not involve interviews.
Consular services for citizens (like passport renewals) will take priority over visas. A lot of countries like the Philippines are already loosening/waiving visa rules for foreigners stuck in the country though.
Visa services are for non-citizens and that's being suspended. Services for citizens are still offered. So if you need to renew your US passport, you can still do it. Also as an added bonus, if you renew your passport through an overseas US embassy, you get it expedited without the extra charge. Meaning you can get your new passport in 2 or 3 weeks rather than months.
Same. Passport expiring soon. I’m living in the UK and can’t go home to the US right now (well I could, but it would require a 2 week quarantine). It’s mildly disconcerting, I hope this doesn’t really go on for 18 months.
I live in San Francisco on an E3 visa (Australian), but got caught out by the Schengen/UK bans and am currently in the UK where I am fortunately also a citizen. I can't go home to SF right now, and my visa expires in June. It remains to be seen whether I'll be able to renew it before then, or if travel restrictions will be lifted.
Residents on non-immigrant visas are getting a raw deal. The world has got bigger problems but this really sucks.
> well I could, but it would require a 2 week quarantine
That's actually quite reasonable as most folks are effectively shelter-in-place. Not a big deal, but would you really want to fly in these conditions? Expired but valid US passport = you can still re-enter the USA.
I definitely wouldn’t want to fly now, no (I’m also sheltering in place). For me it’s more of an existential panic that if there were some emergency it would not be feasible for me to return home quickly.
If you can, try to talk with your internship coordinator about your concerns and see if they have any contingency plans. I don't know which company your internship was with, but I recall interns having some flexibility in their placement at AWS. The company might be able to place you in Canada (AWS, for example, has a large presence in Vancouver).
Most FAANG have Canadian offices. If you don't get your visa on time but people go back to work in the office, you can ask them to help you find another team in Canada.
We need to just accept 2-4 million sick and elderly Americans dying. That outcome cannot be any worse than complete economic and social destruction that we seem to be pursuing in the name of virus suppression.
Full suppression will require total shutdown for ~18 months.
Mitigation, specifically requiring the sick and elderly to self-isolate and quarantinging COIVD-19 cases and their families, will result in 2-4 million dead (depending on its effectiveness), with the situation over in 3 months.
Your post is grim, but I suspect that some countries will make the same calculation as time goes by. Here in Poland, we saw one of the first lockdowns for a European country, but the lockdown stopped at closing the border, schools, large restaurants and malls. Other shops remain open (I just went hat shopping today, for instance), people are traveling between the city and their country homes, and the feeling seems to be now that if you want to avoid infection, it is your own responsibility to stay home instead of expecting the economy to shut down.
No ... this is a glimpse of the kind of changes the world needs to make anyways to stave off destructive climate change. The world needs to learn to be together virtually ... that means remote work for knowledge workers, better local communities that let residents walk to get everything they need (groceries, restaurants, bars, etc), less flying to far flung parts of the world (at great carbon cost).
We can still greatly expand our reach beyond what many people do today through technology, without having bankers and executives commuting by plane every week.
No but I am in the tens of millions of Americans who will lose their job and go bankrupt if things continue this way. I could sell my possessions and move back with my elderly parents (ironically exposing them even more to the virus). Suicide is another option if the situation does not improve.
At least during a regular economic downturn, you can go to a bar, drink out your sorrows, join a construction crew. Now, during Coronavirus panic, which of these options even remain? It is completely unprecedented to have everything shut.
Those who will perish already have existing health conditions, and would have died at some point anyway:
So if this virus kills people in the same demographic as you instead and you are one of the people dying, you're ok if the government just let you die?
The country has been in lockdown for, what, one week? And already you're talking about letting people die so you can keep your job, or committing suicide?
Show a little fortitude, we will get through this.
This logic doesn't make sense, you will also die eventually anyway, that doesn't mean killing you now is ok. In an earlier comment you said what you propose will be like taking all the deaths in the next few years and fitting them into next 3 months. What makes you think those people living a few years fewer is less important than young people enjoying a good economy?
I am not surprised that you are being downvoted. Most of HN does not understand that a majority of the US lives paycheck to paycheck. In their world, all work can be done remotely and this pandemic will increase the transition to remote work.
I live in a city where the local economy is tourism based. I am estimating that as of this Friday, the unemployment rate in my city is closer to 70% if not more. The minimal amount of unemployment insurance is not even enough to put food on the table, let alone pay rent.
It is not my fault that people drive around newer than 10y/o cars, and buy Starbucks every morning, and eat out every day at the 30 minute lunch they get from their callcenter job.
Learn to save for times like this.
Our corporations need to learn the same lesson. Let them fail.
> Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email us and we'll look at the data.
I think responding to that idea with "that idea sounds Russian" does further degrade discussion, as it goes from someone considering cost of life to raising conspiracies that Russia/Asia are trying to leverage this situation to raise the death toll in Western society, which can degrade further into falling deeper down the hole into conspiracies about the virus being intentionally created
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_of_life is a thing, so long as society makes a decision which doesn't absolutely minimize death rates. Why don't we ban cars as a pandemic?
There's a clear argument to defend saving 2-3 million Americans (even more world wide) that doesn't involve accusing Russia
That’s not the only problem. Say you aren’t high risk, great! But do you really want to live in a world without a functioning health care system. Because that is what you are promoting. When hospitals get overwhelmed, even minor issues can become catastrophic.
In a car crash? Need some surgical repair? Too bad, we’re not open for business because we’re trying to keep critically ill patients alive and need the gowns and equipment for healthcare workers.
That would only be the case for 3 months, after which those who were most vulnerable to the virus would have perished.
2.8m Americans die annually, basically we are just seeing 1-2 years of deaths brought forward into a 3 month window. It will be harrowing to triage those patients but it can be managed.
I would prefer that situation to living through a great depression. Healthcare is irrelevant without a job or any income whatsoever, with huge sections of the economy closed and extensive restrictions on what individuals can and can't do.
I have parents in their late 60s who are looking at their entire retirement portfolio evaporating.
I have a terminally ill sister and aunt who are faced with spending their final weeks/months in lockdown, with people unable to visit them or attend their funerals. They are struggling to access regular supplies due to hoarding.
What about the millions of elderly people who will die this year of natural causes and whose final moments on Earth will now be of loneliness, boredom, and despair?
Depending on the duration, of course, the lockdowns seem to have the potential to be much crueler and sadder than an earlier death.
Yes, let's put money before people to prove how great our system is!
What if the only sick thing in the first place was our economy ? At least all BS start-ups with no useful products/service living on investors money will start to drop like flies, and if you ask me I'm feeling much better about that than having to burry my parents or grandparents.
It's not just the elderly who will die if the system is overwhelmed. Nearly 40% of those that are sick enough to require hospital care are between the ages of 20 and 64[1]. If everyone is getting it at the same time and there's not enough health care to go around, those 20-64 year olds will be dying too. I'm guessing you yourself may fall into that age cohort.
A quick google suggests that 84% of the population is under 65, so this isn’t especially surprising. Every other data source I’ve seen has used age 60 as the benchmark which is probably skewing how we think of these numbers in the US context.
% of ICU patients in ages 20-44 is just 2-4%.
% of ICU patients under 60 is going to be, eyeballing it, maybe 25-30% with most of concentrated in people in their 50s.
If you’re young and would be hospitalized (not ICU), I think it’s pretty unlikely you would die from this even if just left at home.
This is a serious concern. It is not apocalyptic. If you’re young and healthy, you are still vastly likely to come out of this just fine even if infected regardless of hospitals.
No offense taken. I kind of worry about this mindset generally. It isn't real unless I know someone who is in hospital. It gets real quickly when you get sick.
I didn't mean to be so "anecdotal" here. I do know people who are fine, I've read stories of people who are fine, the data shows most people will be fine - except that elderly age group & folks with seemingly compromised immune systems. There are exceptions of course. And it is very real, but I think people need to be cognisant of data when citing mortality rates & incidents.
There is no indication that 5% of the population will die.
The Imperial College report finds that in a complete do-nothing scenario, 4 million Americans will die, which is only 1.2% of the population.
With some mitigation (isolation of the elderly, isolation of suspect cases and their families) that number is reduced to 2 million, only 0.6% of the total population. This is the approach we need to be pursuing, and it means reopening all schools and businesses right now, and directing and supporting the elderly to self-isolate. Massively ramping up our healthcare infrastructure and preparing for massive triage is also a good idea.
The alternative of complete suppression requires total shutdown for an estimated period of 18 months, until a vaccine is available. However, its worth nothing that vaccines for influenza (for reference) are only partially (50-70%) effective, and need to be renewed annually. So its likely that even in this total shutdown scenario, we are still looking at 1 million deaths - with immense and unprecedented economic and social impacts.
Keep in mind, that 2.8 million Americans die annually from all causes - 0.8%. Coronavirus might mean for example that a critically ill patient dies from cancer a week earlier than otherwise.
This is a whimsical idea that things will remain in stasis until something happens. Explain it to the newly unemployed with expiring healthcare and diminishing prospects.
I don’t see how their employment prospects or healthcare scenario would improve with them falling severely sick and now having preexisting conditions to boot.
This is exactly where governments need to step in to prevent stuff like this.
It's been explained thousands of time already, most people will get it eventually, the game is to spread it over time. If you spread it over months hospitals will be able to better take care of patients (not only coronavirus, every other patients too).
> Do people really believe the virus won't be there afterwards?
That's why we're not in charge of it, many smart people are taking what they believe is the best decisions for their country/the world, they probably have more data and knowledge than you, and no, they're probably not as dumb as you're trying to paint them.
If we can massively ramp up testing infrastructure, we can manage and treat the “unpause” a lot better. The more time we can buy now with drastic measures, the better prepared will be to deal with subsequent peaks, spreads, and resource constraints.
It's a brace ourselves to prevent a cascading effect from overtaking our healthcare system. After the initial wave breaks over us, we'll still be dealing it - we hopefully just won't be overwhelmed.
The recipe in China was social distancing, masks and hand sanitizing. Somehow in China politicians understood the concept that germs coming out of your mouth and nose can be most effectively stopped right there - they even advocated makeshift masks while ramping up production of surgical and n95 masks.
I am currently in France and the only measure is social distancing. Police dont wear masks, no hand sanitizer at supermarket entrance. It is simply not available although it is mostly just 70% alcohol. I have masks and I wear them when I go out but people (strangers) even tell me on the street that they are useless. I think Louis Pasteur is agitatedly turning in his grave.
It looks like we'll have to wait until China can supply us with enough masks. Until then pressing "unpause" will start the epidemic all over again - if the confinement is going to halt it.
> Do people really believe the virus won't be there afterwards?
Of course people believe the virus will be there afterwards, it will almost certainly never go away. Look at how much effort the world put into eradicating Smallpox.
That effort will not be repeated given the current conservative politics in the US, Britain, and Russia. Modern conservatism is financially backed by the kind of capitalists that have enormous amounts of cash to spend on preventing regulation of their industries (like oil, health insurance, for-profit universities, churches).
That has led to a massive anti-science, anti-social safety net, anti-vaxx backlash. It will be impossible to get the entire world to coöperate and get eradicate it as we did with Smallpox.
But.
By buying time and saving lives now, we give ourselves a chance to develop vaccines. In functioning developed countries, we will build herd immunity through vaccination.
Meanwhile, countries like the USA will have regular COVID-19 outbreaks in pockets where somebody decides not to vaccinate their children, just as we do with Measles and other entirely preventable diseases.
Sorry to be so gloom-and-doom, but connect the dots between "YOLO, I'm young, I'm healthy, I'm off to Spring Break in Florida and Hawaii during a pandemic, sucks to be anybody who gets it from me," and, "Vaccines? We don't need any of that elitist Liberal malarky."
---
p.s. You got a lot of downvotes. Nobody can explain exactly why any comment gets downvoted, but my suggestion is that your questions are good, but leading off with a statement that you are struggling to see how this will help may be perceived as jumping to a conclusion without paying attention to any of the knowledge about this that is readily available, and then expressing absolute confidence in your evaluation of what will happen.
I cannot read your mind, but others may perceive it as being a bit Dunning-Kruger, like you have jumped to a conclusion without doing even cursory research, and assuming that you know enough that you don't need to listen to any of the many experts who are saying the opposite of what you are saying.
Again, I don't purport to tell you what you're thinking, just sharing a (quite possibly wrong) conjecture for why your otherwise good question gets a negative response.
Ironically, the problem is not that we have done too much damage in the short term but that we haven't done enough. What we need to do is stop people from going outside unless absolutely necessary. It's pretty much that simple, but no one likes what that looks like: martial law, forced quarantine, forced house arrest like they have in China. The government should deal with the short term pain by stepping in and back stoping every business by guaranteeing payroll for a few months. It will be insanely expensive and be political suicide, but it would work (as seen in China). What won't work is the weak, iterative preventive methods we are employing now which don't stop the virus from spreading (as people won't comply) and lead to prolonged economic pain.
> As of March 18, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services has suspended routine in-person services until at least April 1 to help slow the spread of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). USCIS staff will continue to perform duties that do not involve contact with the public. However, USCIS will provide emergency services for limited situations. To schedule an emergency appointment contact the USCIS Contact Center.
This is probably a really huge blow to the Pleasant Green Youtube channel. Ben was trying to get a visa for a Cameroonian woman needing surgery in Miami, and now this. Hopefully they can get beyond it.
109 comments
[ 0.22 ms ] story [ 200 ms ] threadHonestly I was pretty pissed that I needed to spend so much time waiting and scheduling around a trip to the office for that.
To make matters worse; they prioritize family visas under student visas sometimes so this delay could easily be many more months for us. And could require us having to fetch fresh documents from a corrupt government as some for the marriage visa have expiration dates.
The current extensions are only to 31 March, but maybe they will increase again after that.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/coronavirus-immigration-guidance...
Residents on non-immigrant visas are getting a raw deal. The world has got bigger problems but this really sucks.
That's actually quite reasonable as most folks are effectively shelter-in-place. Not a big deal, but would you really want to fly in these conditions? Expired but valid US passport = you can still re-enter the USA.
I have no idea what to do now.
I know some managers at Microsoft are considering remote interns but it will be far from the same experience.
why do you think so? except for free food and the city life of whichever city you were supposed to be in, what's the difference?
Edit: I am specifically referring to the Imperial College report which outlines this scenario. Here is the original report: https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/s...
And here is a summary: https://twitter.com/jeremycyoung/status/1239975682643357696
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/media/imperial-college/medicine/s...
Full suppression will require total shutdown for ~18 months.
Mitigation, specifically requiring the sick and elderly to self-isolate and quarantinging COIVD-19 cases and their families, will result in 2-4 million dead (depending on its effectiveness), with the situation over in 3 months.
We can still greatly expand our reach beyond what many people do today through technology, without having bankers and executives commuting by plane every week.
At least during a regular economic downturn, you can go to a bar, drink out your sorrows, join a construction crew. Now, during Coronavirus panic, which of these options even remain? It is completely unprecedented to have everything shut.
Those who will perish already have existing health conditions, and would have died at some point anyway:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-18/99-of-tho...
Show a little fortitude, we will get through this.
Learn to save for times like this.
Our corporations need to learn the same lesson. Let them fail.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_of_life is a thing, so long as society makes a decision which doesn't absolutely minimize death rates. Why don't we ban cars as a pandemic?
There's a clear argument to defend saving 2-3 million Americans (even more world wide) that doesn't involve accusing Russia
In a car crash? Need some surgical repair? Too bad, we’re not open for business because we’re trying to keep critically ill patients alive and need the gowns and equipment for healthcare workers.
2.8m Americans die annually, basically we are just seeing 1-2 years of deaths brought forward into a 3 month window. It will be harrowing to triage those patients but it can be managed.
I would prefer that situation to living through a great depression. Healthcare is irrelevant without a job or any income whatsoever, with huge sections of the economy closed and extensive restrictions on what individuals can and can't do.
I have parents in their late 60s who are looking at their entire retirement portfolio evaporating.
I have a terminally ill sister and aunt who are faced with spending their final weeks/months in lockdown, with people unable to visit them or attend their funerals. They are struggling to access regular supplies due to hoarding.
Go have the courage of your convictions and go talk to some elderly people and explain that to them, see what they think about that.
I know what I think about that.
It could even be yours.
Will you be ok with that?
I am sorely tempted to answer this honestly.
Depending on the duration, of course, the lockdowns seem to have the potential to be much crueler and sadder than an earlier death.
What if the only sick thing in the first place was our economy ? At least all BS start-ups with no useful products/service living on investors money will start to drop like flies, and if you ask me I'm feeling much better about that than having to burry my parents or grandparents.
[1]https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/18/health/coronavirus-young-...
% of ICU patients in ages 20-44 is just 2-4%.
% of ICU patients under 60 is going to be, eyeballing it, maybe 25-30% with most of concentrated in people in their 50s.
If you’re young and would be hospitalized (not ICU), I think it’s pretty unlikely you would die from this even if just left at home.
This is a serious concern. It is not apocalyptic. If you’re young and healthy, you are still vastly likely to come out of this just fine even if infected regardless of hospitals.
What happens when we "press unpause"? Do people really believe the virus won't be there afterwards?
Life would come to a halt regardless.
No offense.
No offense.
You may be on hacker news, but you definitely aren't smart.
The Imperial College report finds that in a complete do-nothing scenario, 4 million Americans will die, which is only 1.2% of the population.
With some mitigation (isolation of the elderly, isolation of suspect cases and their families) that number is reduced to 2 million, only 0.6% of the total population. This is the approach we need to be pursuing, and it means reopening all schools and businesses right now, and directing and supporting the elderly to self-isolate. Massively ramping up our healthcare infrastructure and preparing for massive triage is also a good idea.
The alternative of complete suppression requires total shutdown for an estimated period of 18 months, until a vaccine is available. However, its worth nothing that vaccines for influenza (for reference) are only partially (50-70%) effective, and need to be renewed annually. So its likely that even in this total shutdown scenario, we are still looking at 1 million deaths - with immense and unprecedented economic and social impacts.
Keep in mind, that 2.8 million Americans die annually from all causes - 0.8%. Coronavirus might mean for example that a critically ill patient dies from cancer a week earlier than otherwise.
> those that have recovered have problems breathing (can't walk up stairs)
Source?
We will live with the virus for decades.
We are pausing the economy to buy us time until a treatment or vaccine is available.
> slowing down the spread of the virus
This is a whimsical idea that things will remain in stasis until something happens. Explain it to the newly unemployed with expiring healthcare and diminishing prospects.
That's why people have to vote for things in their interests before problems arise. You shouldn't lose your healthcare when you lose your job.
This is exactly where governments need to step in to prevent stuff like this.
> Do people really believe the virus won't be there afterwards?
That's why we're not in charge of it, many smart people are taking what they believe is the best decisions for their country/the world, they probably have more data and knowledge than you, and no, they're probably not as dumb as you're trying to paint them.
> they probably have more data and knowledge than you
Also please appreciate the fact that you don't know me - or my context for having opinions about this.
It's a brace ourselves to prevent a cascading effect from overtaking our healthcare system. After the initial wave breaks over us, we'll still be dealing it - we hopefully just won't be overwhelmed.
I am currently in France and the only measure is social distancing. Police dont wear masks, no hand sanitizer at supermarket entrance. It is simply not available although it is mostly just 70% alcohol. I have masks and I wear them when I go out but people (strangers) even tell me on the street that they are useless. I think Louis Pasteur is agitatedly turning in his grave.
It looks like we'll have to wait until China can supply us with enough masks. Until then pressing "unpause" will start the epidemic all over again - if the confinement is going to halt it.
Of course people believe the virus will be there afterwards, it will almost certainly never go away. Look at how much effort the world put into eradicating Smallpox.
That effort will not be repeated given the current conservative politics in the US, Britain, and Russia. Modern conservatism is financially backed by the kind of capitalists that have enormous amounts of cash to spend on preventing regulation of their industries (like oil, health insurance, for-profit universities, churches).
That has led to a massive anti-science, anti-social safety net, anti-vaxx backlash. It will be impossible to get the entire world to coöperate and get eradicate it as we did with Smallpox.
But.
By buying time and saving lives now, we give ourselves a chance to develop vaccines. In functioning developed countries, we will build herd immunity through vaccination.
Meanwhile, countries like the USA will have regular COVID-19 outbreaks in pockets where somebody decides not to vaccinate their children, just as we do with Measles and other entirely preventable diseases.
Sorry to be so gloom-and-doom, but connect the dots between "YOLO, I'm young, I'm healthy, I'm off to Spring Break in Florida and Hawaii during a pandemic, sucks to be anybody who gets it from me," and, "Vaccines? We don't need any of that elitist Liberal malarky."
---
p.s. You got a lot of downvotes. Nobody can explain exactly why any comment gets downvoted, but my suggestion is that your questions are good, but leading off with a statement that you are struggling to see how this will help may be perceived as jumping to a conclusion without paying attention to any of the knowledge about this that is readily available, and then expressing absolute confidence in your evaluation of what will happen.
I cannot read your mind, but others may perceive it as being a bit Dunning-Kruger, like you have jumped to a conclusion without doing even cursory research, and assuming that you know enough that you don't need to listen to any of the many experts who are saying the opposite of what you are saying.
Again, I don't purport to tell you what you're thinking, just sharing a (quite possibly wrong) conjecture for why your otherwise good question gets a negative response.
From https://uscis.gov
> As of March 18, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services has suspended routine in-person services until at least April 1 to help slow the spread of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). USCIS staff will continue to perform duties that do not involve contact with the public. However, USCIS will provide emergency services for limited situations. To schedule an emergency appointment contact the USCIS Contact Center.