4 ms·

Yeah, I mean, I really doubt Edx has a particular vendetta against Iranians. It's a huge legal problem if it turns out that one or another Justice Department d

• serf 6y ago
  >in exchange for... no real gain. well, except for accomplishing the first bullet on their mission statement.[0] 'Increase access to high-quality education for everyone, everywhere' [0]: https://open.edx.org/about-open-edx/ https://open.edx.org/about-open-edx/
  • x0x0 6y ago
    That's awfully facile. Some exec has to sign off on this. Even if the attorney says X is probably okay, that exec is risking spending the next year talking to attorneys -- or worse -- if a xenophobic congressperson or racist treasury employee gets mad at his or her employer. Or even here [1] from 2014 > Tena Herlihy, edX’s general counsel, said the company has since last May worked with the U.S. State Department and the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control, and has so far applied for and received company-specific licenses for its MOOCs to enroll students in Cuba and Iran (a third license, for Sudan, is still in the works). Is that the best use of extremely limited exec time, fully taking the mission into account? [1] https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/01/28/state-dept-blocks-access-moocs-countries-economic-sanctions https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/01/28/state-dept-bl...
• Fazel94 6y ago
  Payments on the exempted course are okay to process(according to the document) The real gain is people gaining access to quality education that really need it.