5 ms·
>Our initial, more restrictive approach was motivated solely by our desire to protect our volunteers and our members from legal risk In other words: They overr
by kken 7y ago
>Our initial, more restrictive approach was motivated solely by our desire to protect our volunteers and our members from legal risk
In other words: They overreacted, possibly biased by those in charge.
- pishpash 7y ago"Our initial, more restrictive approach was motivated solely by pulling something out of our goatse ass." More seriously, I'd like to understand what legal liability they thought they were exposed to, and how they made that decision so fast, and who.
- neilv 7y agoI was guessing that IEEE lawyers and/or gov't officials temporarily advised IEEE to do what they did, and, later, gov't officials notified IEEE it was OK. That this affected the IEEE in this way is a matter of concern, for an international academic/professional organization. I'd say most of us want to do good work, in good faith, for all of humanity, and are happy to collaborate around the world. Even when there are tensions and conflicts among nations, politicians, and businesses, the rest of us can keep doing our collaborative work. Also, our mutual engagement around the world promotes diplomacy and our better selves.
- blu42 7y agoUnfortunately trade wars are as real as any other kind of war, where 'no holds barred' is the norm. I'm still amazed how many people fell for the 'concerns of espionage' pretext. I guess most wars in history have started will equally dumb pretexts.