4 ms·

The answer is that nothing of this seems to be a crime, and scientists are not in the business of filling reports, but doing research. If you get money from the

The answer is that nothing of this seems to be a crime, and scientists are not in the business of filling reports, but doing research. If you get money from the USA, there is no law saying that you cannot get money from China. The science is the same and the money is the same. What the US is trying to do is to stop innovation and criminalize the collaboration with Chinese institutions.

ipsocannibal 6y ago
You are obfuscating the point. This issue is not about researchers receiving funds from China. Its about failing to disclose that this funding has been received. The US is trying to ensure transparency in how the research that is being funded in part by the American tax payer is ultimately paid for. Should US citizens not know this? Does transparency in research funding not matter?
- dang 6y ago
  Please edit personal swipes out of your comments here. If another comment is wrong, it's enough to provide correcting information. Your comment would be fine without the first sentence. (It might be even better with the last sentence, which is redundant and starts to feel like a cross-examination, but that one is not a big deal.) https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - ipsocannibal 6y ago
    So are you a hacker news moderator? Your comment history seems filled with comments on other peoples comments. If so can your account be labelled as such? Does hacker news support this type of labelling?
    - godelski 6y ago
      Dang and Scott Bell are the two moderators here. I don't know Scott's username but Dang is pretty well known. It confused me at first too but he's been pretty active lately so I think they just don't tag is because it is such a small community and pretty much everyone knows who Dang is.
    - dang 6y ago
      Yes, as godelski explained. We don't mark moderator usernames as different on this site. Partly that's because the site creator (pg) never did so, and partly because we don't want to create divisions between ourselves and the rest of the community. We're community members too, indeed were that long before we ever became moderators. It would feel weird to go around with special hats on. At the same time, I know it leads to confusion sometimes, and I'm sorry about that.
  - ipsocannibal 6y ago
    Thanks for the call out. Snark can distract from the conversation.
bobcostas55 6y ago
>scientists are not in the business of filling reports The primary task of a PI these days is to write grant applications.
neltnerb 6y ago
The crime is signing the form saying that what you reported is true when you accepted federal money. That's what makes it a possible felony. If they disclosed the funding source it is possible they wouldn't have access to as many grants. But they can just... not take money that they aren't eligible for. I'm finding it hard to drum up much sympathy for signing documents that state things you should have known weren't true. There are valid excuses that make it more a paperwork oversight than industrial espionage for sure. But this article didn't give enough detail to know what percentage were oversights versus knowing deception. Don't lie on paperwork you send to the feds.
joyj2nd 6y ago
"scientists are not in the business of filling reports, but doing research." You obviously have never worked in science. "If you get money from the USA, there is no law saying that you cannot get money from China." The USA does not give money to you. The NIH does. Darpa too and many others. This government institutions have their own rules and regulations. "The science is the same and the money is the same. What the US is trying to do is to stop innovation and criminalize the collaboration with Chinese institutions." The US is trying to control the hemorrhaging outflow of US taxpayer funded research.
- mD5pPxMcS6fVWKE 6y ago
  How is it hemorrhaging, if it's scientific research that usually gets published in public journals? Or are we talking about top-secret atomic research?
  - ethanbond 6y ago
    There’s a whole lot of science that happens in the area between “published in a public (free/open access?) journal” and “top-secret atomic research.” The vast majority of research fits between those camps, in fact.
    - mD5pPxMcS6fVWKE 6y ago
      I see, that's probably more of an issue in medical sciences than in fundamental physics where I'm coming from. My experience with "top-secret" research is that it's usually a c r a p.
      - godelski 6y ago
        If we're talking about fundamental physics I'll mention fusion research. If you go to the DOE Chinese citizens are highly restricted around locations like NIF. You don't need any kind of clearance to work at NIF, but people have different restrictions. Same is true for CERN. China doesn't have full access to everything that happens at CERN, which is a fairly open lab. Most research isn't classified, but that doesn't mean most research is open.

ipsocannibal 6y ago

You are obfuscating the point. This issue is not about researchers receiving funds from China. Its about failing to disclose that this funding has been received. The US is trying to ensure transparency in how the research that is being funded in part by the American tax payer is ultimately paid for. Should US citizens not know this? Does transparency in research funding not matter?

dang 6y ago
Please edit personal swipes out of your comments here. If another comment is wrong, it's enough to provide correcting information. Your comment would be fine without the first sentence. (It might be even better with the last sentence, which is redundant and starts to feel like a cross-examination, but that one is not a big deal.) https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- ipsocannibal 6y ago
  So are you a hacker news moderator? Your comment history seems filled with comments on other peoples comments. If so can your account be labelled as such? Does hacker news support this type of labelling?
  - godelski 6y ago
    Dang and Scott Bell are the two moderators here. I don't know Scott's username but Dang is pretty well known. It confused me at first too but he's been pretty active lately so I think they just don't tag is because it is such a small community and pretty much everyone knows who Dang is.
  - dang 6y ago
    Yes, as godelski explained. We don't mark moderator usernames as different on this site. Partly that's because the site creator (pg) never did so, and partly because we don't want to create divisions between ourselves and the rest of the community. We're community members too, indeed were that long before we ever became moderators. It would feel weird to go around with special hats on. At the same time, I know it leads to confusion sometimes, and I'm sorry about that.
- ipsocannibal 6y ago
  Thanks for the call out. Snark can distract from the conversation.

bobcostas55 6y ago

>scientists are not in the business of filling reports The primary task of a PI these days is to write grant applications.

neltnerb 6y ago

The crime is signing the form saying that what you reported is true when you accepted federal money. That's what makes it a possible felony. If they disclosed the funding source it is possible they wouldn't have access to as many grants. But they can just... not take money that they aren't eligible for. I'm finding it hard to drum up much sympathy for signing documents that state things you should have known weren't true. There are valid excuses that make it more a paperwork oversight than industrial espionage for sure. But this article didn't give enough detail to know what percentage were oversights versus knowing deception. Don't lie on paperwork you send to the feds.

joyj2nd 6y ago

"scientists are not in the business of filling reports, but doing research." You obviously have never worked in science. "If you get money from the USA, there is no law saying that you cannot get money from China." The USA does not give money to you. The NIH does. Darpa too and many others. This government institutions have their own rules and regulations. "The science is the same and the money is the same. What the US is trying to do is to stop innovation and criminalize the collaboration with Chinese institutions." The US is trying to control the hemorrhaging outflow of US taxpayer funded research.

mD5pPxMcS6fVWKE 6y ago
How is it hemorrhaging, if it's scientific research that usually gets published in public journals? Or are we talking about top-secret atomic research?
- ethanbond 6y ago
  There’s a whole lot of science that happens in the area between “published in a public (free/open access?) journal” and “top-secret atomic research.” The vast majority of research fits between those camps, in fact.
  - mD5pPxMcS6fVWKE 6y ago
    I see, that's probably more of an issue in medical sciences than in fundamental physics where I'm coming from. My experience with "top-secret" research is that it's usually a c r a p.
    - godelski 6y ago
      If we're talking about fundamental physics I'll mention fusion research. If you go to the DOE Chinese citizens are highly restricted around locations like NIF. You don't need any kind of clearance to work at NIF, but people have different restrictions. Same is true for CERN. China doesn't have full access to everything that happens at CERN, which is a fairly open lab. Most research isn't classified, but that doesn't mean most research is open.