7 ms·
Congress Bans Some Scientific Collaboration with China, Citing Espionage Risk
- hammock 15y ago"They are trying to get our technology secrets" is not a valid reason for this policy, since you haven't shown conclusively that it's a bad thing to give them our technology.
- Groxx 15y agoYou're attempting to apply logic to a government. This can only end in tears.
- trotsky 15y agoIt seems likely you'd feel differently if it was your IP getting taken.
- burgerbrain 15y agoIf it were his IP getting taken, would he really need the government to tell him not to do that?
- gburt 15y agoTitle is misleading. The clause prevents some sources of federally funded science from collaborating with China. "The clause prohibits the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) from coordinating any joint scientific activity with China." That said, this seems pretty crazy to me.
- mark_l_watson 15y agoI agree: from reading the title I thought that companies and individuals were banned also.
- burgerbrain 15y agoWe ban NASA from collaborating with China, meanwhile NASA collaboration in the past with the Soviet Union and Russia has proved very beneficial (scientifically and politically).
- est 15y agoWhile Russia has tons of innovations on aerospace, what about China?
- burgerbrain 15y agoPeople in the US used to (and still do) commonly say similar things about the russians.
- arethuza 15y agoWhat, that the Russians haven't innovated in aerospace?
- burgerbrain 15y agoYes. Obviously that is false, but you still hear people say it.
- arethuza 15y agoThat's amazing - not only because of the obvious history (Sputnik, Gagarin etc.) but also because of the fantastic ongoing success of their launch vehicles - Arianespace will be starting to launch medium loads from Guiana later this year using Soyuz launchers (in addition to the Ariane 5 heavy launcher and the Vega lightweight launcher): http://www.arianespace.com/launch-services-soyuz/soyuz-introduction.asp http://www.arianespace.com/launch-services-soyuz/soyuz-intro...
- orijing 15y agoIt launched people into orbit, hasn't it? It's been much more successful than India, for instance. But you're right that compared to Russia its accomplishments are fewer. Perhaps it's just a matter of time.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- cabalamat 15y agoAs written the policy can be read as very far reaching, banning for example NASA from sending anyone to a scientific conference at which a Chinese national or employee of a Chinese company is also attending. it would also ban them from buying anything from a Chinese company other than ordering off-the-shelf parts.
- mturmon 15y agoThat's not what the wording of the linked article indicates. Do you know more information on this that supports your interpretation? Because your interpretation would prevent anyone from NASA attending, for example, the American Geophysical Union conferences, which is ridiculous.
- vorg 15y ago> the Obama Administration has taken the position that the ban does not apply to any U.S. scientific interactions with China conducted as part of foreign policy. This interpretation will likely allow the President to continue current activities until the spending bill expires in October. Not if the American Geophysical Union conferences were declared to be part of a foreign policy initiative by the White House.
- known 15y agoDoes it make any difference for China sitting on a pile of $3 trillion reserves?
- bradfordw 15y agoHeh, so are we going to kick out their students which we've enrolled in some of our top research universities?
- nkassis 15y agoThat would be counter productive, what we are trying to do in infiltrate their intellectual elite and put people with our liberal views in place. MOuahahahahahaa. This protectionist stuff is stupid. I collaborate with people in China on some of my work and one of them started the project I'm developing right now I'm just expanding the project and making it more generic. Lucky for me, the Canadian Gov is the one funding this project.
- john4 15y agoIf you're trying to claim that giving Chinese youth student visas to study at elite western universities will create a more liberal, pro-western intelligentsia in China, you are flatly wrong. The Chinese who come here (to the US) are part of the growing Chinese middle- and upperclass and tend to be the most nationalistic of all. Talk to them next time you get a chance; ask them what they think of democracy and freedom, and they'll likely spout PRC government propaganda about how the "Chinese people need to be controlled." We make them into scientists and engineers without succeeding, and perhaps without even really attempting, to make them democrats. We are potentially creating big problems for ourselves and our western and east Asian allies down the road by equipping China with the skilled professionals it needs to produce the weapons of war to threaten the free world. As for protectionism, if it really bothers you, perhaps you should complain about China's "luxury tax" (import duty) and government-mandated technology transfers for access to their production and consumer markets. China is easily the most protectionist member of the G20.
- cabalamat 15y agoIf, as proponents of Western civilisation argue (and which I personally believe, FWIW), Western ideals of freedom are universal and every society will eventually want them, then by definition some Chinese studying in the West ill pick up some Western ideals. If the West is wrong about our ideals being universal, then our society is no better than others anyway and it doesn't matter (in the long run for the overall good of humanity) if the Chinese conquer us.
- amireza 15y agoIs it really possible to hack all these heavy files on super secret(isolated) computers from abroad?
- iamapipebomb 15y ago"....On these computers was information about all of the casework I have done on behalf of political dissidents and human rights activists around the world." Does science collaboration/espionage endanger people's lives?
- JakeSc 15y agoThe quote you cited was not an example of scientific collaboration or espionage. In this case, yes, the espionage probably endangered someone's life, given China's human rights track record. I see your point, though, and agree that science collaboration is not harmful. However, I think that the article was mainly focusing on Chinese military advancement, as most of the attacks cited in the article were on our military infrastructure. Again, I would say that a more advanced military will endanger people's lives.
- dvdhsu 15y agoIf we don't share, won't they just break in to get it?
- burke 15y agoSo we cut NASA's budget to basically nothing, then ban them from collaborating with China? These are sad times.
- kurumo 15y agoCold War 2.0 China edition.
- newmediaclay 15y agoGreat article in the NYT the other day about how these protectionist policies are going to prevent China from investing their massive cash reserves in US ventures: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/04/business/global/04yuan.html http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/04/business/global/04yuan.htm....
- arturadib 15y agoIt is unclear to me how this ban will incentivize China to stop spying on the US. If anything, it might lead to more espionage to make up for the information flow lost to the ban. Also, the statement from congressman Wolf "we have nothing to gain from dealing with them" seems to contradict the very purpose of a collaboration - I'm yet to see a scientific collaboration that goes only one way. As with most embargoes, both sides will probably lose. A more reasonable response might be to engage with US companies and technology hubs to improve their defenses.
- akadien 15y agoYou don't understand espionage. You don't incentivize a country to not spy; you make it hard as hell for them to steal your secrets. And, who cares about incentivizing China? We should continue to find ways to make it harder for China to rip off our technology. This is a brilliant move against an outwardly adversarial country and I hope it continues.
- ugh 15y agoI somehow fail to see the difference between incentivizing a country not to spy and making it “hard as hell” to spy. Isn’t that the same? I’m also, like the grandparent, a bit unsure how this is an appropriate measure. Are scientific collaborations used for espionage? If they are not or seldom used for espionage, how does a ban on collaboration result in less espionage? Which benefits of collaboration does the US relinquish?
- Helianthus 15y ago>Isn’t that the same? No. You can't incentivize a country not to spy because that implies some control, some carrot. Making it "hard as hell" is treating the contest with the adversarial framework it deserves, taking for granted that the opponent will or could attack. >Which benefits of collaboration does the US relinquish? The honest answer is, none, some, or all of them; and it doesn't matter. Being a political action it is just as much a political statement. China openly gets away with espionage (and openly gets away with putting enough spin on its public statements to make a new neutron star.) Congress is openly saying it doesn't like that. Not to mention that your string of questions is dependent on the if statements resolving 'correctly.' Honestly I'd be very surprised if scientific collaborations weren't used for espionage.
- VladRussian 15y agosomebody got a chance to finally implement their dark deep dreams - wolves, scientific collaboration...
- pnathan 15y agoIf you follow the hacking over the last few years in relation to China, a clear pattern emerges: China wants United States IP. It's about time someone started taking that threat seriously in the US.
- eru 15y agoGood luck with that. The British didn't manage to keep the Germans from getting their technology in the 19th century.
- xnerdr 15y agoI say it's at least 2 years too late. China has taken the Military and Industrial tech it needed to get up to speed and is now innovating without us.
- danssig 15y agoI don't understand why this is bad. Don't you want China to innovate on their own?
- xnerdr 15y agoI don't because I am not chinese and will not share in the wealth of such enterprising behaviour. You can never become a chinese citizen unless you are born there. Never.
- danssig 15y ago>I don't because I am not chinese and will not share in the wealth of such enterprising behaviour. So you want them to remain poor and primitive just because you can't cash in on their success? That's... not very nice.
- xnerdr 15y agoLife is cruel. You have one piece of toilet paper. Will you use it for yourself or give to a stranger?
- fleitz 15y agoI could understand if we're not supposed to be giving our launch coordinates to China, but something like an interial navigation system has plenty of uses. This seems silly overbearing and not likely to effect much change as how China commits espionage is through spies in places like Sandia, not collaborating on science projects. The only difference between our spies and theirs is that ours haven't gotten caught so far.
- michaelhalligan 15y agoNow that we've spent a trillion dollars killing one man in Afghanistan, it's time to shift our focus on creating a cold war with China to make sure the coffers of the military-industrial complex stay full.
- mturmon 15y agoIf you read the backstory on this, about the attempted hacking of the computers in Congress, it starts to sound similar to the reasons Google stopped censoring google.cn.
- danssig 15y agoIt's 2011 and we're still just cave men afraid of our shadows. What rational reason would China have for trying to invade the US? Doing something like that would just piss off the rest of the world and wouldn't solve any problems they have anyway.
- briandear 15y agoIt isn't about invasion its about the IP theft and industrial/scientific espionage. The China threat is extremely real, especially in high tech areas. The Chinese version of "collaboration" is "you innovate, we report to Beijing." The Chinese intelligence services are the most active in the world -- they make the KGB look like girl scouts. There's a reason for it. Spend some time doing business in China and you'll understand.
- danssig 15y agoWhat are you afraid they're going to do? Suddenly they're as advanced as the US and then.... ? If they still can't innovate without us as some claim then nothing will change, their people will just be better off and they'll have gotten there a lot cheaper. Personally I'd like to see the rest of the world catch up as soon as possible. I don't subscribe to the idea that for us to be happy people somewhere halfway around the world need to be miserable.
- atakan_gurkan 15y agoI submitted a piece from Physics Today to HN [1] a few days ago. The article describes how the scientific interaction between the US and China helped the Chinese nuclear program. For the record, I do not think the benefits from such a wide ban is worth the price. IMHO banning Chinese visitors from NASA facilities is a terrible idea. Why make it so wide? I cannot help but think this decision is driven by some desire for "punishment", which is not logical at all. 1: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2518011 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2518011