Scientific Research Encountering More Restrictions

vab writes "MSNBC is running an article that details how the MIT AI Lab, the birth place of the free software movement, walked away from a $404K study because the government wanted to restrict participation by foreign students. The article talks about further restrictions the US Government is trying to impose in the name of homeland security and how other research institutions are reacting."

Comments

Re:Foreign students

[Anne_Nonymous]

>> It is although somewhat difficult to tell whether they did this out of a principled stand or if they did it simply because they have so many foreign students that they wouldn't be able to pull it off unless they used them.

According to a nice inverview on NPR this morning, it was the principal of the thing.

http://www.npr.org/programs/morning/index.html

(I don't think there's a direct link yet this morning)

Re:I can see why they'd walk away from it...

[TheOnlyCoolTim]

MIT is something like eight per cent foreign.

Tim

Really?

[Izang]

MSNBC says: "But the National Security Agency refused to budge from a requirement that any foreigners working on a planned project at MIT's Artificial Intelligence Laboratory be screened by the government in advance, forcing the school to turn down the money in September, Powell said." You say: "MSNBC is running an article that details how the MIT AI Lab, the birth place of the free software movement, walked away from a $404K study because the government wanted to restrict participation by foreign students." Sounds like they are just checking for ties to terrorists. Where does it say that foreign students are restricted from participating?

Re:Really?

[byron150]

He actually quoted the tagline for the article, when reading the article later you find out that they simply wanted to screen them. I don't like it much better then total restriction but if you want to blame someone, blame MSNBC for attempting to get your attention by misleading you initially.

Re:Really?

[Rogerborg]

restrict: To keep or confine within limits.

Limit, not absolutely prohibit.

NSA screening would deny access to some people based on the probability of them being or becoming hostile. What criteria would the NSA use to determine whether to label each student "potential terrorist"? Would that be open to scrutiny or appeal?

Seems pretty limiting to me, at least in principle, and that's the position under discussion.

In a related story

[Alien54]

Theodore Postel is also winning some points on his concerns about technology snafus under the guise of national security. Check out this story:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-530647,0 0.html

• The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) is considering an investigation into accusations that fundamental flaws in the proposed "Son of Star Wars" system have been covered up.

  After months of demanding an inquiry into the affair, Ed Crawley, the chairman of MIT's aeronautics and astronautics department, has reversed previous refusals and recommended an investigation.

  The issue in question goes to the heart of missile defence technology, an article of faith among many Republicans and a key plank in Mr Bush's 2000 presidential manifesto.

  Dr Postol and fellow critics say the ability of an interceptor missile to distinguish between an incoming warhead and the decoys likely to accompany it is deeply suspect. Any such doubts would cripple the credibility of the system.

Again, all as a matter of national security, and which did not make a splash stateside. The story at the link is much more detailed.

So what is the government going to do about this outbreak of integrity in the halls of learning?

Re:This is A Good Thing

[Interfacer]

The students pay for their education by working long hours on the projects. the money doesn^t pay the students but the hardware.

MIT is very concerned

[The Pim]

I was at an informal dinner of 40 or so MIT professors a couple weeks ago. (My landlord caters the event, and I help him out sometimes because I'm interested in the restaurant business.) The theme of discussion was the difficulty foreign students are now having getting visas to come to MIT.

In the company of only their peers and an eavesdropping busboy, the group was candid and unguarded. Almost everyone had a story of a student who had been hindered by the stricter immegration rules. One expressed doubt that MIT could "be MIT" under these circumstances. Jerry Sussman--co-author of "the only good book on computer programming" (quote from a Slashdot favorite I won't name) and all-around brilliant and creative guy--said he's "been depressed for the last year". Man, that made me want to cry.

This convinced me that the problem is real, that it is hampering the advancement of learning--and that it could even lead to the unseating of the US as the center of the learned world.

Reverse Brain Drain

[dprice]

The January Wired magazine has an article about stem cell research and cloning in China. The combination of the US government restricting foreign students from participating in certain research and also restricting certain kinds of biological research has caused a brain drain of Chinese researchers from the US to China.

During the 1980's and 1990's, many Chinese researchers would study in the US, and many would stay in the US after graduating. Now some of those researchers that have been living and working in the US have been moving back to China. New students are staying in China to study since they are developing their own labs backed by the Chinese government.

As the US keeps adding restrictions, they (Congress, etc.) actually encourage foreign countries to develop their own research capabilities that the US cannot control, except by threats like in the case of Korea and Iraq. It will make those countries less dependent and more isolated from the US which will give the US less bargaining power in future diplomatic relations.