2013年3月12日 星期二

Children of illegal immigrants deserve opportunity

My family had just moved from Fort Collins to Colorado Springs. I was in fifth grade. Fort Collins was even whiter then than it is now, so seeing brown faces in my classroom was kind of a new experience. Donna was one of those kids.

She was nice, friendly; she lived a few blocks up the hands free access in a white-and-black tri-level. I used to go to her house and listen to music in her basement. I don’t remember anything about her family, whether she had siblings or what her mother looked like or what her father did for a living. I do, however, remember that at some point, during the course of a routine conversation, she told me her dad didn’t have his green card.

I didn’t know what that meant, so later that day, around the dinner table, I asked my parents about a green card, because Donna’s dad didn’t have one, I said, and what did that mean.

They said it meant Donna’s dad — maybe even Donna, probably even Donna — were in the country illegally.

Donna and I stayed friends for a little while but drifted apart in junior high when boys became more interesting. We barely even knew each other by the time we were seniors in high school. I never saw her again after we graduated.

I thought about her this week, though, when I heard the Colorado House had approved a bill that would allow in-state tuition for students who were brought by their parents into the U.S. illegally. What had Donna’s adulthood been like? Did she go to college? Get a good job? A green card? Citizenship? Did she ever vote?

After I graduated from college, I moved to the San Luis Valley, a beautiful and fascinating part of our state that pulls its economy from the ground with the potato crop. The farms down there, like farms everywhere, depend on migrant crews to get through harvest. The operators said they checked the documentation of everyone who worked on their crews, but often the workers looked over their shoulders when they were approached by a reporter and refused to give their full names.



Illegal immigration is a huge and hugely complex problem for the United States. No one wants to ignore the violation of U.S. laws or encourage people to circumvent those laws on their way across the border. But we can’t continue to deny the fact that so much of our economy is based on immigrant laborers, illegal or otherwise. Undocumented workers are not only in the potato fields near Alamosa and the beet fields in Greeley, but they’re in all facets of the service sector — hotels, restaurants, child care, construction, day labor — and beyond.

By some estimations, there are as many as 12 million illegal immigrants in the United States. If we could even force that many workers out of the country, which, of course, we can’t, our economy would crumble. It’s a convenient fantasy to think that long lines of unemployed Americans would be working if only others had followed the rules.

By some estimations, there are as many as 12 million illegal immigrants in the United States. If we could even force that many workers out of the country, which, of course, we can’t, our economy would crumble. It’s a convenient fantasy to think that long lines of unemployed Americans would be working if only others had followed the rules.

But the truth is it’s time for the United States to quit pretending and address this issue.

My friend Donna was a smart, talented girl who had more to offer the world than just a welcoming smile to a new kid. It would be a tragedy to think her talents were shut down because of decisions her parents made that she had no control over.

The Colorado Legislature should be congratulated for taking that first nascent step and recognizing that there are so many other kids like Donna who could just use a hand up from their home state.

One of the most pernicious simplifications in mainstream politics is the "credit card" analogy. You know the one: the British economy is like a maxed-out credit card, and we have a responsibility to pay it off.

It's pernicious because the British economy is nothing like a credit card, maxed-out or not. Britain has control of the very currency in which it owes debt; it can print money to pay bills. On top of that, its effect on the economy which is its revenue source is so large that if it scrimps and saves in order to pay down its debt, there's a very real chance its income will drop by even more.

But Peterson says it's a positive development that service providers are getting creative using techniques such as SMS and smartphones, devices users want to carry and that help two-factor scale.

"It's nice to see that some of these hurdles are being cleared," he said. But today there is a lot of "silver bullet frenzy" around the topic.

Jeff Stollman, principal at Secure Identity Computing, says the details around two-factor authentication are not always clearly explained and that leads to poor decisions.

"Deployment is often pushed by regulators, but how it should be done is not defined," he said.

In-band factors, such as answering security questions, are notably weak, given they are prone to man-in-the-middle attacks. And answers to the personal questions they ask often can easily be discovered online or in social media accounts.

"Two factor needs to be out-of-band, either a token or a mobile phone," says Stollman. On a scale of 1 to 10, if authentication is a one, out-of-band two-factor can increase security to a three or a four, he says.

With these methods, users are sent a code to enter to complete log-in or they acquire a token, a bit of data to prove who they are, that is presented to complete authentication.

Of course, mobile devices are a blessing and a curse. They diminish out-of-band methods given that users may be logging into services via their phone, therefore, negating the second factor

"The smartphone has the ability to simultaneously weaken two-factor because you are going to be using Facebook, Google, Twitter from that device and is that really another factor if you are pushing your credential back through it," says Peterson. "Just because that happens on another channel is that really as secure as something like a smart card."

Social networks change the ways we change the world

It turns out this conundrum of being compassionate, philanthropic and ready to get involved — but less-than-wealthy — is a common one. But some individuals haven’t let this be a barrier to their charitable impulses. When a yogi in southern California desperately wanted to help after the devastating 2010 earthquake in Haiti, she decided to donate her skills to help raise money, offering yoga lessons to benefit victims.

Her ingenuity was the inspiration for Causora.com, a one-year-old startup created with the idea that whatever your qualifications or skills are, you can turn them into charity. “[My friend] raised money by doing what she loved to do, and got new customers for her own business,” says Causora founder Kai Buehler about the aforementioned yogi, who wishes to remain anonymous. “We started looking around at the marketplace for it, and couldn’t find anything.”

Buehler only launched Causora during the 2012 holiday season, but she already has recruited celebrities to help raise hands free access for the new platform. In addition to all the yoga, massage, search engine optimization help services and technical support offered on behalf of various causes on the site, Marc Anthony is offering tickets and backstage passes to his benefit concert for Maestro Cares, a non-profit Anthony founded to create safer and healthier environments for Latin American children.

Causora joins an ever-growing space in new media focused on activism, community involvement and philanthropy facilitated by Web sites and social networks. Before platforms like Causora, its unrelated cousins including Fundly, Causes.com, Crowdrise, StartSomeGood and Razoo (among many others) cropped up to address a similar question: what is the best way, or an alternative way, for people to give back, when donating money is the status quo?

Crowdrise, out of Detroit, offers incentive-based giving with a gameification twist: whomever raises the most for their particular cause receives a prize (whatever that might be). It’s their own way of opening up the world of philanthropy for more people. “It’s not just about top donor,” says co-founder Robert Wolfe. “It’s about who tries the hardest. You don’t have to have a million Twitter followers or millions of dollars.”



Unlike a lot of startups, Crowdrise wasn’t trying to fill a gap in the market. Its mission when it emerged two-and-a-half years ago was to make the philanthropic space more fun. This is one key to getting people more involved more often, Wolfe believes.

“If you get an email from one person raising money for cancer research, and another [similar] email from a someone saying they will dye their hair blue when they reach their goal,” he says, “you’re definitely donating to the one who said they’d dye their hair blue.”

Social networks focused on philanthropy or activism also offer a way for people to demonstrate that they live a charitable life. For example, each Crowdrise member gets a profile where he or she can catalog and comment on their various activities.

“It’s an interesting combination,” Mahan says. “On the one hand it’s a basic fact of human nature that people want to be involved and make a difference, but the reason for the explosion now is that technology is rapidly growing and it’s easier and easier to put out an app, a Web site, a platform. Everyone is a publisher and everyone has a voice.”

Fundamentally changing the way people participate in the world around them will take more than just changing the tools they use to take action. Making a difference from the bottom-up is a daunting task, Mahan admits. For now, though, he views the rise of people taking to the Internet to get involved as a great start.

“New tech allows people to get involved who otherwise probably would not, that’s the hopeful side of this,” he says. “In a world dominated by top-down communication and in an ever-growing and complicated world, we feel small and powerless. Newer technology has given a glimmer of hope: I can participate, I can learn more, things are more transparent, and it’s better than getting home to a mailbox full of donation solicitations.”

Are you tired of feeding meters and getting parking tickets? Starting Wednesday and for the next three months, you can pay the parking meter just by using your cell phone.

Deputy Director of Planning & Community Development, Wendy Thomas, says, “time and time again, and perfectly understandably, people complain about getting parking tickets and most people get parking tickets are for meter time violations”. Now Great Falls is jumping aboard the technology train and trying a new way to pay for meter parking. Thomas explains, “you can pull into a parking space, pull up an app on your smart phone and actually pay for your parking”.

This is a three month trial kicking off Wednesday. All the meters will have stickers with scanable barcodes and an assigned zone and space number. Your cell can even remind you when your time is up in hopes to cut down on parking tickets. Thomas explains, “when you pay you will have a countdown on your phone and you will actually be messaged when you have 15 minutes left on your meter”.

The city has looked at other ways to make downtown parking user friendly, such as swiping a credit card for meter parking, which proved way too expensive. Thomas says, “it was an incredible investment in infrastructure that meant new meter heads and new machines that would be paid by block”.