20 ms·
Harvard scientist is arrested, accused of lying about ties to China
- tehjoker 7y agoLast time, I said this was corporate fears of losing money dressed up as xenophobia and got pushback. Now the spooks are just stating it outright. Chinese and American scientists have more in common with each other than we do with the elites that run the government and corporations to the detriment of the population. We should loudly denounce the government interfering with free scientific exchange and funding. Science isn't a competition; it's meant to benefit all of us regardless of nationality. Edit: Last time they were messing with a researcher that was working on cancer treatments. They were worried he'd "steal" cancer treatments and give them to Chinese people! The nerve!
- mattmcknight 7y ago"We should loudly denounce the government interfering with free scientific exchange and funding" $18M his funding was from the government (NIH and DoD). With those grants he agreed to disclose foreign funding sources. He failed to do so.
- vibrio 7y agoAgreed, this is made clear in the process of NIH, DoD funding. Initially I thought prosecutors and media wasre overreacting, but the scale of both the foreign funding sources and NIH DoD funding is not something that anyone could overlook unintentionally. Its a shame for such and accomplished scientist.
- tehjoker 7y agoWithout hearing his side, I am skeptical. It might be he didn't disclose because he knew that he'd be penalized for taking money from his home country. I don't know, but my skepticism when it comes to "national security" and nations they want us to think of as the enemy requires an extremely high bar. edit: sorry got the scientist's nationality wrong.
- pedrosorio 7y ago> It might be he didn't disclose because he knew that he'd be penalized for taking money from his home country. ? “Charles M. Lieber (born 1959) is an American chemist and pioneer in the field of nanoscience and nanotechnology.”
- arcticfox 7y agoEven if you got his nationality correct, it'd be an absolutely absurd defense to not disclose because he knew he'd be penalized.
- shakna 7y ago> It might be he didn't disclose because he knew that he'd be penalized That is called fraud. That's not an excuse, and is in fact a reason for him to continue to be in trouble.
- Brave-Steak 7y agoCould you imagine? "I decided not to disclose my tax evasion because I knew I'd be punished. I'm innocent!"
- ng12 7y agoWait, are you trying to cast the guy who got paid millions of dollars to assist a foreign government as "one of the little guys"?
- farazbabar 7y agoI wish things were as simple as this, however scientists' desire to share and collaborate stands directly at odds with state actors desire to access the technology differentiators. Would be nice to live in a world where these technologies weren't deployed against other humans (on all sides) but that is not the reality we live in.
- frozenport 7y agoThe fuck is this relevant, the dude was given substantial in pocket money for facilitating unilateral technology transfer that he did not disclose.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- baseballdork 7y agoI don't get this sentiment at all. China is notorious for stealing IP, they're a major military player (threat), and this professor lied about his ties to China and still worked on DoD funded projects. The government reaction seems pretty reasonable.
- tehjoker 7y agoMany many projects are DoD funded and have little to nothing to do with immediate military applications. China is a threat to US hegemony in its own backyard, but to state that China is a threat to actual US citizens is kind of absurd. We're over there, they're not over here!
- arcticfox 7y agoThey're not over here - yet. Never in the history of the world has there been a surveillance state like they're building, there's no telling how effective it might end up being.
- blackrock 7y agoWhat exactly is the Chinese “threat” here? Are they going to send a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier loaded with soldiers to invade the shores of Seattle and Los Angeles? And then claim the mainland United States as their own property?
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- therealdrag0 7y agoCountries are continually jockeying for power. There's cyber wars, trade wars, cultural wars.
- gdy 7y agoNot the countries. The "elites".
- inimino 7y agoAccepting hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars and then lying to your university, the DoD, and NIH about it has nothing to do with "free scientific exchange".
- dfee 7y agoAs an alternative to the only other comment here, dressing this up as xenophobia: > The arrangement between Lieber and the Chinese institution spanned "significant" periods of time between at least 2012 and 2017, according to the affidavit. It says the deal called for Lieber to be paid up to $50,000 a month, in addition to $150,000 per year "for living and personal expenses." > "Lieber was also awarded more than $1.5 million by WUT and the Chinese government to establish a research lab and conduct research at WUT," the document states. > For a large part of the time frame in question, Lieber was also the principal investigator on at least six U.S. Defense Department research grants, with a cumulative value of more than $8 million, according to the affidavit. It also says he was the principal investigator on more than $10 million in grants funded by the National Institutes of Health.
- wpskidd 7y agoSo he was a board member of Burisma Holdings too?
- m0zg 7y agoI remember just a few weeks ago there was a story on HN of a Russian scientist working on a government project "sharing" some research on hypersonic weapons with a NATO affiliated university somewhere in Europe. In the thread there I said a US scientist would get his ass thrown in jail in the US under the circumstances, which was downvoted. It will be interesting to study the difference between that case and this one. So far the tone I'm seeing here is markedly different, and most people seem to be justifying the position of the DOJ.
- unishark 7y agoBased on your description it sounds pretty different. In this case the professor is charged with lying to get funding.
- jashephe 7y agoThe conspiracy theorist in me can't help but wonder if "leaking" forged documents of this nature could be an effective way for China or another foreign government to sabotage the leaders of the American research enterprise. Of course, my inner cynic is leaning pretty heavily towards Occam's razor for this one.
- arcticfox 7y agoThat would be pretty straightforward to dismiss with full transparency by the alleged perpetrator. There's definitely going to be corroborating evidence.
- jashephe 7y agoOh, absolutely. I guess I was wondering if accusations alone would serve to substantially inconvenience or embitter individual scientists, or decrease public trust in academic research and academicians in general. Not trying to suggest that this case specifically is some foreign plot.
- taneq 7y agoNot if that full transparency uncovered further forged documents which corroborated the accusations. If we're assuming a full on intelligence operation here then that wouldn't be significantly harder to pull off. After a couple more pieces of evidence the story would support itself and any inconsistencies would be blamed on the target's own attempts to cover up.
- duxup 7y ago>These grants require the disclosure of significant foreign financial conflicts of interest, including financial support from foreign governments or foreign entities Meanwhile: >paid up to $50,000 a month, in addition to $150,000 per year Seems pretty straightforward. He must be a smart guy, I wonder how he thought he would get away with it? Even if he could hide the money run of the mill espionage could find it. He was supposed to do research at Wuhan University and even file for parents for and sort of promote that school. Hard to imagine nobody would notice that. I wonder if he kept taking the money after he told investigators that he wasn't a part of the program? He had to suspect they were on to him?
- droithomme 7y agoHe's a smart guy. Maybe not wise or ethical though. While no one figures it out, China wins. When some one figures it out, US loses a top researcher. Win-win for China. Why wouldn't they play this game? It's a guaranteed win.
- tgtweak 7y agoAdditionally, it's systematic, from the article and in the same week: Yanqing Ye, 29, who is currently in China, is charged with one count each of "visa fraud, making false statements, acting as an agent of a foreign government and conspiracy." She had been working at Boston University and is accused of lying about her position as a lieutenant in the Chinese military. Zaosong Zheng, 30, was arrested last month at Boston's Logan International Airport and is charged with allegedly attempting to smuggle vials of biological materials and other research materials stolen from U.S labs. Zheng, who was a a Harvard-sponsored cancer researcher, has been indicted on that charge along with a count of making false statements.
- m0zg 7y agoProfessor != researcher. It's more like a research manager. Not a huge loss to the field.
- cat199 7y ago
- rasengan0 7y agoSome context: Original charge: https://www.justice.gov/usao-ma/pr/harvard-university-professor-and-two-chinese-nationals-charged-three-separate-china https://www.justice.gov/usao-ma/pr/harvard-university-profes... This one is safe at home: https://www.masslive.com/boston/2020/01/chinese-peoples-liberation-army-lieutenant-yanqing-ye-assessed-us-military-websites-researched-professors-while-studying-at-boston-university-federal-authorities-say.html https://www.masslive.com/boston/2020/01/chinese-peoples-libe...
- crimsonalucard 7y agoIs Wuhan just a coincidence? The city is the center point for the corona virus and this crime. Seems strange for two headlines to come out of a random chinese city.
- leesalminen 7y agoTo those wondering if the connection to Wuhan is coincidence, there's a BSL-4 research facility on the outskirts of Wuhan. https://www.nature.com/news/inside-the-chinese-lab-poised-to-study-world-s-most-dangerous-pathogens-1.21487 https://www.nature.com/news/inside-the-chinese-lab-poised-to...
- leesalminen 7y agoWhy the downvotes?
- kube-system 7y agoWuhan is coincidental. It's a very large city, more populous than any city in the US. Lots of things happen there.
- cliqueiq 7y agoSure okay whatever.
- leesalminen 7y agoI never said it wasn't. Also, according to http://english.whiov.cas.cn/News/Events/201502/t20150203_135923.html http://english.whiov.cas.cn/News/Events/201502/t20150203_135... the facility in Wuhan is the only BSL-4 facility in China. So, there's lots of things happening there that _aren't_ happening anywhere else in China.
- kube-system 7y agoThere are people in the thousand talents program in other large Chinese cities, and some of them are under investigation by US authorities too
- neya 7y agoI was just watching this documentary the other day and I am actually not surprised. For anyone interested in this topic, should really have a look at this documentary: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdR-I35Ladk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdR-I35Ladk
- amacbride 7y ago“In an affidavit unsealed Tuesday, FBI Special Agent Robert Plumb said Lieber, who led a Harvard research group focusing on nanoscience, had established a research lab at the Wuhan university — apparently unbeknownst to Harvard.” This is pretty egregious, and it baffles me that he thought it would go undetected (or that his home institution wouldn’t object.)
- Aperocky 7y agoHe's wrong to not report conflict of interest on national defense funding, but how is establishing a lab elsewhere alone egregious? Private research institutes, like corporations, don't own people who work for them.
- droithomme 7y ago> "These grants require the disclosure of significant foreign financial conflicts of interest, including financial support from foreign governments or foreign entities," the U.S. Attorney's Office in Massachusetts said in a statement announcing the charges against Lieber.
- Aperocky 7y agoDid you read my comment? My parent comment did not mention the conflict of interest while I did.
- knzhou 7y agoI completely agree with you: collaboration is no crime in science. Obviously, we will both be downvoted to invisibility, because this site's users are fervent nationalists, not scientists.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- jorblumesea 7y agoSo the facts of the case are... * Famous professor accepted money from China, then lied to authorities * Famous professor also had DoD contracts which prohibit such connections without disclosure * China is known for its IP transfer, strategic threats to both US power and democracy, and use of non-traditional intelligence sources, which is why such regulations about disclosure are required Seems pretty reasonable. I'd imagine any government would want to know who they're working with before cutting them a check. If someone at AWS was moonlighting for Google Cloud, no one would bat an eye if they were fired, taken to court, and sued for everything they were worth.
- gdy 7y agoHow is China a strategic threat to 'democracy'? China isn't supporting 'color revolutions' of its own kind.
- Brave-Steak 7y agoYou must be willfully ignorant if you don't see all of China's work to influence Western countries in ways that are favourable to China, despite their despicable track record in ... I don't know, lots of things regarding human rights and individual freedoms. And yeah, yeah. The US isn't perfect either, but I'm not afraid of the US using their influence to take away or undermine democracy in Germany.
- thiagoharry 7y agoNot in Germany, but in Africa, Latin America end Middle East, US has a history of undermining democracy.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- gdy 7y agoAnd what have actually China done 'to take away or undermine the democracy' in Western countries?
- mbreese 7y agoA similar situation recently led to the firing of the leadership at Moffitt Cancer Center in Florida too. https://www.tampabay.com/news/health/2019/12/18/moffitt-cancer-center-shakeup-ceo-and-others-resign-over-china-ties/ https://www.tampabay.com/news/health/2019/12/18/moffitt-canc...
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- knzhou 7y agoOf course the guy should have disclosed everything to his funding sources, but from a scientist's viewpoint, the shock and outrage is confusing. Prominent scientists travel between institutions all the time, managing multiple groups -- it is common to see, on a senior professor's CV, appointments at 5 different institutes in 3 different countries (say, America, India, and Germany). That's a fundamental part of doing science. I benefit from it, and I pay it back by making all the notes and papers I produce freely available. If the moral principle here is that countries shouldn't try to draw scientific talent from other countries, well, the United States is by far the greatest perpetrator of brain drain in the world. A lot of countries have been sucked dry by it, including China itself in the past! If people are actually this worried about scientific knowledge crossing national borders, it won't stop with Prof. Lieber. They'll continue by banning textbook exports, taking down lecture videos, and raiding the Wikipedia servers. While they're at it, they can put up a Great Firewall of their own. That's the only direction I see this going.
- mturmon 7y agoNote: > criminally charged with making "false, fictitious and fraudulent statements"... > In interviews with Defense Department investigators in 2018 and 2019, Lieber said that while he had heard of the Thousand Talents Plan, he had never been asked to be part of it... The charge is not promiscuous collaboration, it's lying about it when asked. If he indeed lied to DoD investigators following up on a possible conflict of interest, that would be a huge problem, on top of (we could guess) an original failure to disclose.
- knzhou 7y agoAs I said, he should have been clear with his funding sources. But that's not where the outrage in this thread is coming from -- everybody here is pissed off at the very idea of scientific collaboration crossing national borders. There are comparisons being drawn between doing science and waging war. This is saddening.
- mturmon 7y ago
- kermittd 7y agoEric Weinstein on the matter - https://twitter.com/ericrweinstein/status/1222303201073909760?s=21 https://twitter.com/ericrweinstein/status/122230320107390976...
- Proven 7y agoSpot on
- refurb 7y agoUnderpay? Top researchers at places like Harvard do very well from what I understand, especially if they consult on the side or sit on boards. We’re talking several hundred thousand. That’s not enough?
- kube-system 7y ago"several hundred thousand" per year is a less than the $750,000 that China was willing to pay according to the article.
- refurb 7y agoSo the argument is we should pay professors at least as much as the China are willing to bribe them with?
- kube-system 7y agoYou’d have to ask the original author for clarification on what their argument is. My interpretation of the argument is that labor markets are heavily driven by economic incentive. I can’t say I’ve seen much data to the contrary.
- cat199 7y agothe comment says 'underpay ... relative to say Investment Bankers, VCs or mgmt consultants.' the point as I see it is that if scientists are of strategic importance, they should be compensated accordingly to prevent the risk of bribery/defection - the same reason companies justify high pay to these other jobs to 'retain their talent'.
- Proven 7y agoHow unusual!
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- ktln2 7y agoLieber requested that half of his money be deposited into a Chinese bank account and other half be paid to him in cash when he next visit WUT. https://twitter.com/gbrumfiel/status/1222217996959199234?s=20 https://twitter.com/gbrumfiel/status/1222217996959199234?s=2...
- angry_octet 7y agoAmazing evidence that he knew it was illicit. Quite ironic too, considering how many Chinese are trying to get money out of China. If he had started a company on the side (legal) then the Chinese could have bought it (legal) for a fortune. Lesson is, get legal advice!
- cm2187 7y agoBut pretty much every western bank sends all bank details of US nationals to the US, under the threat of heavy penalty.
- angry_octet 7y agoWhat is your point? That he is entitled to engage in tax avoidance?
- cm2187 7y agoThat there is no point to open a bank account outside of China if he is trying to hide the money from the US.
- kaybe 7y agoHave you tried getting money transfered internationally? At my level of understanding I can find many legit reasons for this course of action.
- angry_octet 7y agoHe could have asked them to deposit it into his US bank account, it really isn't that hard to do a wire transfer. It doesn't make sense to pay $30 in fees when you are only sending $500, but for $50k its a blip. For Chinese citizens it isn't easy, but for govt and institutions it is.
- paulsimon99 7y agoResearch shouldn’t be limited by politicians
- cletus 7y agoI consider it only a matter of time where the US will take the view that employing anyone born in mainland China, regardless of whether or not they're a US citizen, to be a security risk not worth taking for anything that requires security clearance or is otherwise sensitive or of national interest.
- joe_the_user 7y agoWell that is an interesting take. You might take a look at the Charles W. Lieber's photo and bio. He appears to be a white American. The wikipedia page doesn't say he wasn't born in China but still. It seems like Lieber took his actions for money. If you are going to look at everyone potentially willing to sell out for money, you'll be doing a lot of looking.
- sdinsn 7y agoI take it you did not read the article.
- WiPo 7y agoIt must be one of his Chinese graduate students who went back to work as a faculty in Wuhan and made him that offer. Not surprised at all and actually this kind of bribery has been practiced at lot among Chinese American faculties. But IMO it’s not a severe national security issue though as most Nanotechnology paper are just BS and being published purely for the sake of fundings from NSF. So it’s really unwise to lie on that matter.
- LatteLazy 7y ago10 years ago I was in academia. We were actively encouraged, even required, to find outside funding. Government would look at a bid for 1m and say "find 500k from someone else and we will match it". It was good practice. Who were the people providing all that finding? The Chinese mostly. Now we're in the middle of "sino-panic" and suddenly every cent (Renminbi?) is suspect. I am happy to admit this guy was dishonest and deserves what he gets. But I worry this is the "thin end of the wedge". National security laws are draconian by design and aiming them at researchers continuing policies that were previously supported is both unfair and counterproductive. To me, the whole China "thing" seems like a political witch hunt to avoid talking about real issues (impeachment, the 2020 elections, automation, the fact we have no idea what to do with all the people we can't find jobs for). The weird claims about Huawei infrastructure falls into the same boat: picking a (cold) war to distract from other issues. Beware where this goes.
- philpem 7y agoIt does seem to harken back to McCarthyism when put in that context, doesn't it?
- lidHanteyk 7y agoIt does. And as somebody who has harshly criticized Chinese domestic and foreign policy in the past on HN, I agree that cracking down on academics and technologists because of the behavior of their government is anti-intellectual and just as harmful here as it is there. We need to simultaneously be vigilant against the dangers of other countries exploiting our confident and open stance, and also always keep our empathy for the people being oppressed by their states. I don't think that it's a balancing act, but a matter of dismantling the neoconservative and bleeding-heart-liberal mindsets, and finding a more holistic treatment of immigration and ethnic management; namely, less treatment. Over and over again, we interfere when our interests are violated, but avoid giving everybody a seat at the table when we re-assign the land; instead, we need to communicate more and interfere less. ...I'm going to have to think about this more, though, because as stated, this is a BDS strategy, and I'm not sure whether I endorse BDS strategies.
- 7y ago
- gumby 7y agoOK it does look like he commuted an actual crime (perjury/false affidavit). But more broadly: how is humanity helped by not spreading around the knowledge of basic science and the interconnection between scientists? This is all relating to work that will be published in journals after all.
- koheripbal 7y agoThis guy was conducting DoD funded research, and then replicating that work secretly in a lab in China. Literally espionage.
- gumby 7y ago> This guy was conducting DoD funded research, and then replicating that work secretly in a lab in China. Literally espionage. I did not see the FBI alleging this publicly. It is not in their affidavit. He did lie on his forms to the DoD and that is legitimately a (non-espionage) crime. DoD funding does not in itself make something a national secret. I did plenty of work funded by DARPA in my youth (during the cold war!) all of which could be publicly talked about and no classification or really any constraints were involved. I did later do cryptographic work but that was controlled by the Department of Commerce and was certainly more constrained than anything I worked on paid for by DoD. I don't know Harvard's policy but at MIT since problems in the 60s, all classified work is supposed to be segregated into separate MIT-affiliated operations like Lincoln Labs, MITRE, Draper etc. It looked like distribution his work was controlled at most by the publishing cartel of Elsevier et al.
- say_it_as_it_is 7y agothe usual guilty until proven innocent..