Slashdot Mirror
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."
I won't be greedy - I'd do it for $1000.
Heck, I'd do it for the $200 I need for a new motherboard and RAM for my new Athlon XP 2200+ !
Cruising the internet on my TI-99/4A @ a whopping 300 baud!
Definitely! I'm sure there are a lot of racist Universities out there with little or no ethics.
Yes, I am an agent of Satan, but my duties are largely ceremonial.
I'm glad MIT did the right thing and walked away from this study. 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. That quite possibly could be the case.
There's no reason to believe that some college student from Hong Kong is a terrorist. Sure there are some terrorists out there, but I doubt they're sweating their midterms at some university. To deny foreigners the ability to work on some stuff isn't just slightly racist, it's outrageously stupid since there are some unbelievably bright people who come to the US from other places for school.
In the financial services industry, most people have to be bonded - that is the FBI gets your fingerprints and they do some sort of rudimentary background check on you. Would that placate the "homeland security" wolves? At any rate, it would be more information on foreign students than they have on most Americans.
Sometimes I think that homeland security is the process of a bunch of people staring at a collander and trying to decide which hole to patch first. Sure it's possible to keep the total morons from pullling off something big (or burning you in the same way they did before) but how many people out there really think that with anything less than a fascist state, it's possible to secure the country against someone whose well funded, clever, and out to get the US?
-- Truth goes out the door when rumor comes innuendo. -- Groucho Marx
Federal funding controls the research, evidentally.
I don't think it's unreasonable that foreign students be restricted from participating. After all, it's my tax dollars paying for this, and I would expect my government to provide for their own citizens before some foreigners who presumably will take their knowledge back to their home countries.
Like it or not, their are things in this country we restrict non-U.S. citizens from doing, and that is a good thing. They can't work for many government agencies or contractors. They are our guests, and they shouldn't expect that we give them the keys and the kitchen sink.
This summary is just trolling by the submitter and michael to stir some shit up.
SIG:Slashdot: indymedia for nerds.
Didn't matter, it wasn't even in the budget ...
I was a grad student at Texas Tech until a few months ago and one of my prof.s had funding from US DOD to study dispersion of chem./bio. warfare agents. The project was multi-year and for 90% of the project, no foreign national was allowed to work on it. That was finally overturned, however, mainly because there weren't enough Americans to work on it.
The project was new just before Sept. 11th and I'm not sure I can blame them for their restrictions at the time. I think they finally figured out that, at least in this case, it didn't matter who worked on the project. It wasn't going to propogate information about how to make delivery agents more effective, just how they interact with urban, rural, etc. environments.
That and Lubbock isn't a hotbed for terrorists if you know what I mean. Cow-tippers, yes. Foreign spies, no.
"I mean, the government wants to just "check" research so that no one can use it as a weapon... as an upstanding American who loves his country AND science, I see nothing wrong with that. After all... America owns science that it creates... just look at all the patents."
"Ya pinkos."
(Quickly scurries into patented asbestos-lined flamewar bunker, and braces for incoming fire)
I for one congratulate MIT!!! It was a bold move to stand up to something as blatantly wrong as what the government was trying to do. Security must not be gained at the sacrifice of our morals. What does that say about us as a society, our nation who claims to lead all others in progressive thought. We welcomed these people to our land when no other country would take them. France gave us a statue embodying the princple. Now we want to send them away because we think all people of a race would also wish us harm. Extremists come from all races, and someday a white female American will do something terribly destructive which will result in the loss of thousands of lives. What will happen then? The government steps in and calms us down and tells us that we can't trust each other and will therefore take away every personal freedom we have in the name of making us secure? I'll spend a cold day in hell before I allow that to happen to me. So yeah, GO MIT!!!!
-Never believe in the end of something great, send it to sub-committee for further study!!! - ME
Yes, I've definitely got to get me one of them Real Genius grants.
MIT is something like eight per cent foreign.
Tim
Omnia vestra castrorum habetur nobis.
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?
We have to be more careful about who is using the information being worked on by scientists. Though it is critical that the study/data be released so that others can improve on that work, it is also critical that information not fall into the wrong hands. Imagine China/Pakistan/North Korea having satellite technology 20 yrs ago. It would have been a very different world. I think restrictions are necessary now-a-days.
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
They didn't want to restrict anybody from working on anything - they just wanted to run backround checks on non-citizens working on the projects. Is that really such a big deal??
The problem is this: the gov't is not proposing to pay for someone else's education, they're proposing to pay for a study of something they're interested in, and then also trying to dictate who can work on that study. Since the study is unclassified, and therefore public science anyway, MIT apparently feels that this is improper and pretty pointless.
The bottom line is that if you take someone's money - the government's, a corporation's, a foundation's, etc - you are implicitly or explicitly agreeing to the strings attached. Seldom is there a "free lunch". If there is money being offered, there is usually a reason why. I'm not entitled to have free money come raining down on me. Why should a wealthy institution like MIT? They know the game.
If I offer the FSF a $20,000 grant to develop a "Foo" software package for me, provided they design it how I want, the FSF is certainly free to turn that money down and do their own thing (or do without a Foo package). But that doesn't make me an evil man for asking the FSF to write a program that meets my needs if I give them a donation to do so. Similarly for the government.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-530647,0 0.html
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?
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
You know why America still holds its place as a technological leader? Not becoz of just american researchers but a significant foreign nationals working in America, who wouldn't have that same oppurtunity in other countries. AFAIK, America's support for intelligence and research skills over nationality has let it remain supreme.
I think we should close our borders to people who only want to go to school here, and then leave the country when they finish their education!Wrong again, most of the students who come here don't make plans to leave. They settle here. In my past 3.5 yrs in college I have seen 90% of foreign nationals do something or other to stay even overstay their visa time.
Foriegn students are a big security risk! Their loyalties are always in question.
Agreed, but solution is not to close borders. And again you cannot let people walk freely in and out just for the sake of technology or research. Its neither a one line solution nor can be found in a week. May be this is the risk we have to take for the sake of free economy otherwise we have to turn like those chinese closing down thousands of internet kiosks and putting restrictions on our citizens! Not good!
This is a research grant, not tuition. Foreign students generally pay far more than residents due to ineligibility for federal/state grants.
Except that big grants enable the host institutions to offer fellowships and/or stipends to students - at MIT, many of them foreign - which enable them to study there.
2003: You must use Americans for this important work.
1941:You must use blonde haired, blue eyed Germans for this important work.
Trolling is a art,
It's not a matter of racism, it is the idea that government assisted programs (like state universities) should benefit the citizens of that government FIRST.
Murphy was an optimist.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
The grant isn't paying for the admission (tuition) but the facilities and curriculum. Both are needed to educate someone; as such this grant would fund the education of non-citizens. I don't have a problem with denying government help to non-citizens.
You have it backwards: the brain drain doesn't work like that -- smart people from poor countries study for advanced degrees in thhe US, then stay there to make 100 times the income they could back home, or have research opportunities impossible there.
Those that do have their education paid for may often be obligated to return home to benefit their countries -- as a form of foreign aid (teach a man to fish, etc). But many find ways to dodge that to stay in the land of milk and honey.
President Bush signed a law last summer prohibiting students from countries considered sponsors of terrorism from working with germs and toxins most likely to be used for bioterrorism.
I'm a computational biologist, but not an expert on biological weapons, by any means. Let me say at the outset: the government has no business regulating scientific inquiry. I'm sure other people will argue this point eloquently and what they may say about AI research applies to biology as well.
It's a good idea to keep something in mind - the history of the entire field of computer science is heavily intertwined with the rise of the modern intelligence apparatus here in the US. Likewise, nuclear technology. The same is NOT true of my field (biology.)
However, while you can use your m4d sk1llz to annoy uncle Sam, they're not really dangerous. The danger is in NCB (non-conventional) weapons:
1) Nuclear weapons technology is already restricted up the wazoo.
2) Chemcial weapons technology requires a great deal of industrial infrastructure. The cat is out of the bag. All sorts of foreigners know chemistry. The oil industry is incredibly secretive anyway. Government intrusion into chemical engineering is unlikely.
3) Biological weapons are extremely difficult to make. HOWEVER, my colleagues and I are doing our best to make molecular biology as easy as possible. There's a shortage of technicians; we train people without discriminating against Pakistanis. Advances in the field make molecular biology easier, quicker, cheaper and increase your yield.
The point is that molecular biology technology, used only once in a successful terrorist context (the Anthrax, mailed by a former Marine who had no trouble getting clearance; you know he's guilty), is POTENTIALLY the most dangerous of all. The only reason I don't need security clearance to do molecular biology is because Uncle Sam failed to get in at the ground floor - molecular biology has always been very much an international effort. Of course, US military labs remain the exception.
So, we (biologists) need to be ready and determined to resist the intrusion of security concerns into our laboratories; the pressure to do so will be fierce.
The good and new comes from no quarter where it is looked for, and is always something different from what is expected.
...was catalyzed by an influx of foreign-national brainpower from abroad during the thirties, forties, and fifties.
Einstein was given a post at Princeton in 1930 but didn't become a citizen until 1935; Enrico Fermi didn't become a citizen until 1944, Werner von Braun didn't become a citizen until 1955...
Meanwhile, Hitler's scientific efforts were hampered by the exclusion of Jews, doubtless for good security reasons.
If the United States had been more cautious in monitoring the politics of scientists and more careful in security concerns, J. Robert Oppenheimer would probably not have been allowed to lead the Los Alamos project. It was certainly his personal leadership as much as Groves' that contributed to the ultimate success of that endeavor. Both Germany and Japan had scientists puttering around on atomic bombs, but only the U.S. had scientific leadership--determined to see the project culminate the production of a weapon.
If the United States starts to discourage participation by foreign students and scientists, we abandon one of the historic sources of our leadership and risk falling behind.
What does this have anything to do with homeland security? I think they're getting a little paranoid if you ask me. This whole homeland security thing is based on fear. Isn't that what the terrorists want? To strike fear into the hearts of "non-belivers", make us panic and do stupid things like approving scientific studies before their released. that's censorship if you ask me. Everyone needs to calm down about all this "Osama's gonna get us" crap.
~Common sense is the most evenly distubuted of all things, everyone thinks they have enough, and wants no more
I think the feeling is more like this: we've had enough immigrants. It's time to take care of our own.
This is why you vote Democrat, and then write your senator with "I'll be keeping my gun, thank you." The change in "government" policy is simply the difference between the Clinton and GWBush administrations' respective foreign policy philosophies.
The Clinton era policy was based on "engagement." I'm not sure where the GWBush people are coming from. The idea of engagement is that international politico-economy is improved, and so is the global politico-economic position of the US, when we get *more* involved with foreign economies. Macroeconomists talk about "growing the pie." Engagement is like growing the global pie so the US piece gets bigger too.
GWBush policy people seem to think "we're doing just fine thank you, and we don't want you doing any better, so we're taking our ball and going home." Oh, and try to get all the arabs against Saddam Hussein (Iraq has no oil, just Mecca) because it's like destabilising islamic international relationships to destabilise OPEC strength, so that Texan and Alaskan oil barons can get invited to the price-of-energy (price-of-everything) control meetings. "If OPEC isn't about arabs, it's just about oil barons, and aren't we all in the same boat? So let's stop giving money to the blow-yourself-up mad-at-the-world poor muslim martyr-wannabes and get back to making ourselves rich and locking-in the status-quo! See: this is how WE maintain the status-quo..."
</rant>
--- Nothing clever here: move along now...
Every time we bought and installed a US made supercomputer, part of the contract insisted that we prevent access by students from a list of countries provided by the DoD.
So you can go on living that fairy tail...I'll just rememeber who to contact when I decide to sell my swamp land in Florida.
... in the Department of Defense: US citizenship is a prerequisite for doing certain types of work. And this is not a post-9/11 (how Katzian) change. Foreign nationals have been restricted in this manner since (IIRC) the Cold War - possibly longer than that.
Besides, if the gov't is sponsoring the research, the gov't is the customer. Doesn't the customer usually have some say over what happens with deliverables, e.g. publication/distribution?
I want to drag this out as long as possible. Bring me my protractor.
.. will not be over "weapons of mass destruction". It will be over oil, and then ideas. This administration WILL continue to erode rights until corporate America holds ALL the cards. We can all see this. It is time to do something about it.
Put the chimp out the door in '04.
When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro- Dr. Hunter S. Thompson
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.
The evaluation of an action as 'practical' . . . depends on what it is that one wishes to practice.
...pay attention to who's saying the government is wrong: Sheila Widnall. From 1993-1997, she was secretary of the Air Force, arguably the most technologically advanced of the four branches of the US military. For those not up on US government, the Secretary of the Air Force is the civilian head of the US Air Force. All the generals answered to her; she answered only to the Secretary of Defense, who answers to POTUS. She would have had authority and responsiblity for all the research funded by the Air Force, so she's seen both sides of this (though I don't know to what extent she micromanaged it).
She makes a VERY good point that what the government should do is to determine what's classified research and what's not. It's reasonable to restrict the participation of foreign nationals in classified research, but the concern with this grant was that it was for unclassified research.
For you cynics, note that this grant wasn't for that much money (only half a million) and was probably chosen to send a message because they didn't much want to do it anyway and it wasn't enough money to worry about.
There is no saying it was racist.
Nationalist, sure, but that isn't the same thing.
If the 'strings' had said "No French" or "No Germans", then this conversation wouldn't be happening.
In this case, the NSA wanted to pre-screen any foreign nationals working on the project.
I'm sorry, but I don't see the racism there. They didn't say that they (the foreign nationals) automatically couldn't work on the project, they just wanted to check out whichever ones did.
Profiling? Maybe. But it happens regularly in government and business. The last two companies I worked for had a much more rigorous screening process for foreign nationals. In their defense, they'd gotten burned at least once.
But then so has the US Government. I don't blame them for being careful.
I like you, Stuart. You're not like everyone else, here, at Slashdot.
foreign students are dangerous? a,ericans are more than capable of being dangerous. timoty mcveigh was good oll american boy.
...
einstein, godel, bohr, von braun,
all foreingers that you should be grateful for that they used their minds for the usa.
Int
Those who have the gold get to make the rules.
If you don't like these restrictions, then get your own funding and do your own project where you get to make the rules. Frankly, I see nothing wrong with prohibiting non-US citizens from doing US research into defense initiatives.
and they couldn't find it for some reason...
If your bitterest enemies are people who hack the heads off civilians, then I would say you're doing something right.
If you're publishing, even if you're just verifying other's results, you're doing science. If you're keeping it to yourself, even if you're breaking new ground, you're doing research.
It's a subtle distinction, but the two don't necessarily go hand in hand. And in the end, ten people doing published science benefits us more than a thousand doing independent - therefore probably redundant - research.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
Denying a citizen to give a spot to a guest student is just not logical. Now, if there are openings after all citizens have slots, then I have no problem filling those with exchange students.
Murphy was an optimist.
the line between patriotism and fascism is a slipery slope. Everyone needs to look at history closely and realize we're rapidly sliding down that slope unless we pull our collective heads out of our butts. A person's religion, color, language or nationality does not equal their allegiance. The best way to protect freedom isn't to kill all your enemies, but to learn from them. Violent expression doesn't happen overnight. People should realize we making the same mistake our ancestors made and learn from it, not do the same exact thing. I'm sure the founding fathers of America would be more proud if society collectively works to improve freedom democracy. Not colonize a country in the name of democracy. That just smacks of the holy crusades.
frankly, yes, it does come down to that, and I wish they would close the borders for a limited time, 6 months to a year maybe. Once the world sees what it's like without the USA to run to, perhaps they'll be a little more appreciative of what we offer to them.
ok, on the one hand you talk about america as the Great Melting Pot, but next you talk about how isolationism is racist - which means you believe in an "American Race"? Make up your mind.
The sig is a sig, if you don't get the concept, shut the fuck up.
What makes you think that more funding will improve the situation? The reason the percentage of foreign grad students pursuing PhDs is so high is because (this is the case in the uk and I assume also the us) the income from a PhD is so low. When faced with the choice of doing a PhD and earning $12k per year for 3-4 years or taking that job offer with company xyz for $30k per year rising to $60k after 4 years, it's easy to see why uk born graduates take the job.
More funding will simply increase the amount of new PhDs available, not increase the salaries of the people doing the PhDs.
Also, many of the PhD graduates I have known have the opinion that one's employability after completing the PhD is the same (and sometimes less) than before the PhD, unless the objective is to stay in academia.
If the gov't wants security checks, and in some cases that's reasonable (remember all the military work MIT has done, most famously during WWII), that should get them on EVERYONE. Stop this xenophobic insult now.
Aside from the philosophical problem with accused foreign citizens mindlessly, need we remind the NSA of all the wonderful homegrown dangers we have managed to grow in the U.S., from Timothy McVeigh (& Nichols) to the Unabomber to the Columbine shooters to John Walker Lindh to this DC sniper bastard Muhammed, and that's just the last ten years. And and those are just the killers; don't forget double agents Aldrich Ames (CIA) and Robert Philip Hanssen (FBI). Even if you are sympathetic to some of these, consider the rest.
My argument is that if you're going to be paranoid, do be equal opportunity about it out of respect for logic and fair play. Look in your own backyard.
I mean, it's only a matter of time before our version of Hitler's 'SS' show up here...with 'HS' (Homeland Security) on their lapels. Think it can't happen? I'll bet that the citizens of Germany in the 1930's thought that too. We have unchecked paranoia in this country..and that's very dangerous, especially when the Government is using it to control its citizens.
If I was going to try to go to a government funded school in Korea, I'd certainly expect to only be admitted after all the Korean citizens who wanted to go were enrolled. Why should it be any different for Koreans coming here?
Murphy was an optimist.
Personally, I think your views are shortsighted and, sorry to be so frank, wrong.
It's true that 9-11 was a terrible thing to happen. It's also true that the US has done more damage to itself in the name of "Protecting the Homeland" than any terrorist could ever do. We have restricted the very freedoms that make this country great. We have violated the rights of people because they MIGHT be someone who knows someone who's dangerous. We have detained citizens without trial or charges and forbiden them to speak with anyone, even an attorney, even a government appointed attorney. We strip search grandmothers, and detain people that have funny last names. We listen to the quisling, reporting people that don't leave tips in greasy spoons.
"Those that would trade liberity for security deserve [and will get] neither." - B. Franklin.
As for your assertion that no one thought flight school students could be terrorists, you have your facts wrong. Remember the conflab at the FBI? That's what that's about. Someone DID think there might be terrorists being trained at flight schools.
To protect ourselves from terrorist requires a scalpel, not the howtizer that's being used. The true cancer of a free society are those that would render freedom impossible. The true terrorists are they that wage war on the rights of the people. The real terror is the loosing of the dogs of a police state.
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
How likely do you think it is that China will become a mecca for foreign grad students in the way that the USA is? Maybe 20 years from now if there are massive changes, but it is not likely to happen in the near future.
Out of curiosity, where are you from? Are you a foriegn student studying in the US?
Lasers Controlled Games!
See? Either way, the world benefits. I'm in total agreement with you. I'm sick of our gov't and their corporate masters trying to conquer the world.
I too have worked at a state university in the midwest. During our "diversity training" the HR people seemed to think it was a good thing that the grad schools was 35% asian and the undergrad schools were only about 10%. Since the state funding the scholl has an asian population of MAYBE 1%, I could not agree with their assessment that 35% was ideal. Shouldn't it reflect the breakdown of the population of the state, ideally?
I have worked in a US university and can state with assurance that since US schools (mine in particular) accept students with a horrific lack of preparation, I cannot believe that qualified US undergraduates are being turned away from State Schools when they apply.
I know many people (myself included) who were denied access because there were not enough open slots. I may have been "unprepared", but I made the Dean's List for my academics so I was not behind the curve. I had to go to a satellite campus my first year, however, because there were not enough open slots at the main campus.
What prevents qualified students from going to college is usually funding, and for that foreign students are generally ineligible (they must pay their own way, hence bringing needed money to the school)
Funding is a big issue here, but student loans do a decent job to get people through school, and the school still gets their money.
The job of a top research university, however, is *not* to crank out BA or BS students, but rather to train graduate students and produce solid research by supporting the professors (in part by supplying them with good graduate students).
Yes, US tax dollars go to State schools to support them so US students can obtain an education. But they also go to support the development of knowledge, which indirectly benefits the US citizens paying the taxes. These two goals do not need to compete given the tremendous range of educational institutions in the US.
The job of a state institution is to benefit the members of the state. A state university is there to ensure that the members of that state are competitive in the job market. Research is a great side benefit, but all the breakthroughs in the world are useless if the population is unemployed, don't you think?
Murphy was an optimist.
The original comment is what "foreigners" believe is a stereotypical American response. What are called here in Britain "Little Englanders".
If I was to to take the same attitude then I would be shouting about having my daughter's boyfried repatriated. After all, what is someone from Arkansaw doing at Cambridge University, we should be saving the places for British students. He could be an undercover terrorist.
It is noticeable that all your presidents who have travelled abroad believe in a policy of engagement. They seem to realise the world actually exists outside of your borders. The ones who haven't travelled seem to be almost xenophobic in their attitude to other nations.
And once the USA sees what it's like without oil imports and cheap 3rd world labour, maybe it'll be a little more appreciative of what the world offers to it.
I wouldn't take a cent from that administration. Bush's presidency has become an Orwellian nightmare which DOES parallel Hitler's rise... (compare the sloganeering of Bush with the exact same from adolph) "404" K ----- just like a non-existent website? the money will never show? ROFLMAO! good for MIT, they have the balls to stand up to that rascist-texas-moron....
I call computer-illiteracy job security
I'm not sure either, but the juxtaposition just struck me as funny. Maybe it's because you seem to be advocating "america first" isolationism in your post, and open (=open to everyone) standards in your sig.
Looking at your web address (I cannot reach the site from here)
Do try again, it's hilarious. Well I thought it was funny.
(It's hosted in the US, BTW (at least according to ARIN). Funny how there are actually no .kp sites, and the DPRK "PR dept" operates through .jp and US-hosted .com sites, i.e. countries is threatens to nuke on a regular basis, isn't it?)
If I was going to try to go to a government funded school in Korea, I'd certainly expect to only be admitted after all the Korean citizens who wanted to go were enrolled.
This is OT, but you remember about the Japanese people who were abducted by north korea? One of them, it turns out, got married (in NK) to an american defector. Strange, or what?
When the Soviet Union tried to keep its research secret, the research moved overseas. Restrictions on foreign nationals, visa restrictions, and secrecy are the best way for the US to ensure that research moves to Europe, Japan, and China. With secrecy, researchers won't generate the publications that advertise that a country and a lab is first rate. With visa restrictions, educated foreigners will increasingly look for jobs overseas, where they are more welcome than ever, or just stay at home and try to make things work there. Hiring restrictions on foreign nationals for "secret" projects further reduce available jobs and further drive them away.
Yes, foreign students could potentially represent a risk to national security, but get real! As posted above, (and from listening to the hundreds of foreign grad students I went to grad school with) most students that come from abroad, especiall those involved in any type of decent research (and that can get into MIT!!!) are going to stay here! They stand to lose more by going back to wher ethey came from. In the U.S., they know that they will get paid better wages and that they can provide a more stable future for their families.
... why would they want to stop foreign students from working on a grant? From the mounths of several profs I have had in the past, I quote: foreign "students work harder than American most American students. They are not distracted by friends, family, and other extra curricular activities. They are taught to please those in authority, and are willing to work for the priviledge to sta in this (the U.S.) country. They will work harder because they have much more to lose!"
... and they worked MANY more hours than I did! I couldn't keep up because of family obligations and obligations to my business that I was running while in school. Most American students have something else other than school going on in their life during their graduate career ... it is just a simple fact of life.
...
Now past the security issue
That statement couldn't be spoken any better! I was an American grad student at one point, and although I worked pretty hard, I will admit that most of the foriegn students worked much harder than I did
So again, why wouldn't the gov't want to take advantage of people that are willing to give them more bang for their buck?
I don't like what I have just stated, because I do believe that many Americans are being passed over for terrific opportunites because of what I just said, but it is the (sad) truth. The PhD.'s of this nation see that, so what can't the people running the gov't???
Just my $0.02 cents
(BTW: I didn't do any grad work in Language Arts, so please don't flame me for bad grammar or my mack of good keyboard skills)
HallmarkOrnaments.Com
No need to be sorry, you're entitled to your opinion as am I.
The flight training situation points out that even though someone DID THINK there could be terrorists taking flight training, the report was buried before it could see the light of day. Why was that?
I disagree with you that we've done more damage then good in the name of "Protecting the Homeland." The fact of the matter is we haven't been attacked (on US soil) since 9-11-01, Afganistan is a FAR better place (and no long a free harbor to terrorists plotting to kill us) and we are actively pursuing a foreign policy that will result an a more secure and yes, free America and rest of the world.
I don't find myself more restricted nor do I find my freedom reduced at all.
I realize that's an unpopular opinion here. Too bad - it doesn't make it any less true.
As for people being detained; we're at war and these people are war criminals suspected of plotting to or actually killing us. Again the govt is doing a good job in rooting out these people and putting the proverbial thumbscrews to them.
What people need to get used to is the idea that there are people in the rest of the world that completely and utterly opposed to our existence.
It's us or them and if you think you can negotiate with them, you're wrong - dead wrong.
You know you're a geek if you've ever replied to a tagline.
There is no saying it was racist.
Nationalist, sure, but that isn't the same thing.
While I would agree that it probably is just dumbfucks in the government not racism, those two sentences just don't make sense together after the 20th century.. Like, well, NAZI -- "Nationalist..." Milosovitch... Just about every murder in the last century was for nationalist reasons, millions upon millions of people... and there was a tinge of racism in both the cases I mentioned. As there was with Stalin, Jonson&Nixon, Truman, and most other nationalist war criminals.
We're not. Our high schools are failing, the primary education system in this country is in shambles. Like it or not, universities are the places where we have to catch up with the world. We really can't do that if our students can't get into them, can we?
I'm 100% opposed to affirmative action in universities because it doesn't take applicants based solely on merits, but I am more against a government program that doesn't put it's own citizens first.
I think the return on tax dollars has a greater impact if it enhances the lives of the taxpayers. Which is more valuable to the citizen: a degree from the university, or a job serving fries in the drive thru to an exchange student with a degree ?
We need to benefit the citizens first.
Murphy was an optimist.
The blasted firewall here blocks it, I'll give it a peek when I get home.
I honestly don't remember it at all.
Murphy was an optimist.
--I'm more concerned over home grown terrorist like robert mcnamara, henry kissinger,both the clintons, george the elder, king george the present, rumsfield, cheney, the hierarchies in the democratic national committe and the republican national committee, the membership of the council on foreign relations, the members of the tri-lateral commission, and various criminal gangs and cartels inside the various combined workgroups of the military/industrial complex who profit from war and drug smuggling in the private sector, especially banking, and the spook, law and justice "communities".
..list to reflect more serious potential threats and dangers, to go down to slightly less serious,to less serious and so on. History has shown just over and over again that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. And the history of the 20th century shows that citizens of various countries around this ole whirrled have a much higher odds-on probability of being exploited/murdered/enslaved by their own governments and "connected ones" then by "outsiders". For every person killed by a "foreign invader" in the 20th century, there's 5 to 10 killed by their own nation's power structure once they became absolute tyrants.
Hegelian dialectic is alive and working daily to bring a fascist reality to the US. It don't matter what label or name these gents go by, a dictatorship "system" that lies chronically, steals everything that ain't nailed down, and uses their positions for personal and secret profit are way more of a danger than anything else.
Now this viewpoint doesn't negate the possibility and probability of various other foreigners being up to "no good". I take that as a gimme as well. It's reality, there ARE foreign bad guys here and also domestic low level independent nutjobs. We got a population of around 270 million or so, law of averages comes into play. I just think it's better to have th..
IMO, having watched politics and "current events/news/history" as a major interest since the late 50's/early 60's, I'd say that the US has well more than it's "fair share" of power mad dictators or dictator wannabe's,from the very highest levels to local levels, very public to very private, governmental and business, and it's official pronouncements have been full of lies and misdirections.
Just since I've been a teenager I've watched *someones* get away with whacking a president-JFK, to starting a decades long war-for-profit based on a total lie -nam war with the gulf of tonkin fairy tale, to shafting it's own vets -agent orange was a "myth" and "all in their heads", and gulf war syndrome was "in their heads", to experimenting on their own people by aerial and ground spreading of chemical, bioliogical and radiological agents-something they denied for years and finally admitted. And so forth and on and on, way too many examples to list. Heck just the federal reserve perpetual debt note scam is big enough to prove how much people get lied to and brainweashed into believing the lies.
The gestalt is-the old cliche is true, for a basic rule of thumb, when a politician's lips are moving..well, take it with several large handfuls of salt. Right now, IMO again, we are being lead down the dictatorship path with lies much more deep and sinister than minor accounting lies at enron, and those were large enough. That's chump change to what's really going on now with this "war on terrorism".
Anyone's MMV obviously, just fool me once, shame on you, fool me 4873 times, shame on me. Learn from history or repeat it, binary choice.
The enemies of freedom, themselves being quite naive, are always quick to accuse others of naivete.
The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
the only reason we import oil is because our politicians make a lot of money that way. If US politics wasn't directly intertwined with the oil industry, you can bet we wouldn't be importing any.
a lack of cheap 3rd world labour would give americans a) jobs b) quality goods. People are so used to shittiness that (b) would be a major eye-opener.
Like I said, this would be temporary, maybe a year at most.
I think you're wrong on this one.
The vast majority of foreign students go home. Many are bonded by their governments or companies, have families back home, can't get an visa, or maybe just don't want to stay. Students know if they overstay their visa then they can't get a job anyway.
I'd say the 90% figure is about right, but it's for students who leave not stay. I'd argue only 1 or 2 out of every 10 foreign students stay on for any period of time. And usually it's only the best ( >3.8 GPA holders, quite often ) that get sponsored to stay.
This is just my observation from working/studying at a university with a very high foreign student population for the last 6.5 years.
Based on upvotes, Ageism is the only "-ism" Slashdotters care about and think isn't SJW
Try selling electric-powered SUVs to the electorate.
Not that I don't agree with your point - the US's achilles heel is its dependency on oil imports.
a lack of cheap 3rd world labour would give americans a) jobs b) quality goods. People are so used to shittiness that (b) would be a major eye-opener.
I don't even think I own ANYthing made in USA, so I can't comment. ;-)
Basically, MITs reason is much more prosaic than some sort of "intellectual freedom" (*snort*). If MIT was restricted from using foreign students on a research project, that project would very likely die for lack of interest. Let's face it: US students are for the most part smarter than wasting 4-7 years in a PhD program, given the financial risk involved. Thus we have the observation that the graduate student bodies at many (most?) large research schools are foreign.
From the universities point of view, this is just good business sense: large pool of willing labor that works cheap. Also, don't be fooled by high tuition for foreign. That's just a numbers game to charge what is essentially more overhead for these same grants.
MIT sees this as a dangerous precedent. If they accepted these restrictions, it would be more difficult to refuse them later, and could really dent the supply of indentured labor available to fuel university researh programs.
The whole thing make sense in the context of an "education industry".
I own quite a few things made in the USA. On the whole quality is much higher than made overseas - save Japan and western euro nations.
For example - I'm a bassist, and I own 4 bass guitars. One made in the USA, one made in Germany, one made in China, and one made in Mexico. In order of quality, I'd put them like so (best to least)
USA
Germany
China
Mexico
The USA bass is a bit simpler than the German one, but the German one has a part that shouldn't have broken that was broken by its previous owner, so I have to put it second.
you belong to Caesar. It's a concept simple enough that it was expressed by a simple bookshelf builder who grew up out in the sticks two thousand years ago.
Once upon a time the great private universities were the bastions of independant thinking, but a funny thing happened on the way to the Forum. They started takeing Caesar's money. A little aid here, a little aid there, and then the big money, government contracts.
This has created on odd state of affairs where a private institution has a public face presenting public knowledge, and at the same time a public face creating very, very, VERY private knowledge.
Or worse, presenting as public knowledge that which it is payed to present as public by Ceasar. Do you really need it spelled out that some of that "knowledge" lacks a bit around the edges in the "truth" department?
When a government contracts for science the government OWNS that science. I mean this quite literally.
If you wish to do science, or engage in ANY free thought for that matter, the solution is obvious and simple. Don't take Caesar's coin.
The poet laureate, by accepting the the coin and protection of the Lord is compelled by his very state to write only that which is pleasing and/or flattering to the Lord. If you don't think this happens in science you are naive. The poet who rejects the Lords money may say anything he wishes, although his life may otherwise be somewhat harsher.
Which way to go is a choice. Choose wisely, if not well.
KFG
just ask the women in afganastan about how their situation has changed. go do a google news search on it. //yes my grammer / spelling is horrible but i've been up for about 40 hours now
Oh, in that case you might know whether this snippet is true (I was going to use it at you, but I wasn't sure ;-) ) - that Fender had to move their production of cheapo guitars from Japan to Malaysia because the Japanese ones were better than the (more expensive) USA-made ones. Is that true?
(Of course, Japan is hardly a 3rd-world country, so this is a bit beside the point, but it's an interesting piece of trivia.)
That's what I keep telling the IRS.
Devon
The short version is that with WW2 the US swapped places with the UK. The US provoked Japan into attacking it, as 80% of Americans didn't want to enter the war, because it saw that Japan was quickly building its own empire. Industrialization had been going strong in the US for a century, and the capitalists needed markets in which to sell products. The US came out of the war with a built-up industrial base, and an excuse to build military bases throughout the globe. Europe was decimated, leaving America the world's only superpower.
Since that time, we've worked to expand our economic sphere, as empires are wont to do, throughout Asia and South America. Through the CIA, the US has sponsored and/or outright led several military coups: Chile, Indonesia, Guatemala, Panama, and many more. The latest -- failed! -- attempt was Venezuela this past April.
Why would the US do this? Do Americans hate other people? Of course not. That assumes that Americans make choices which affect the US's foreign policy. I certainly wasn't asked about whether or not I wanted to overthrow the overwhelmingly democratically-elected president of Venezuela. But Venezuela controls a lot of oil, and capital needs oil (resources). So capital made that choice for me. Can you think of another country that controls a lot of oil? Hint: it starts with "I" and ends in "raq."
The fairy tale that terrorists hate all of our freedoms is so amazingly idiotic, I'm shocked that anyone buys into it. Yes, that's a sad statement on our citizens. Do you really think bin Laden is sitting in a cave somewhere thinking, "Stupid Americans! Why can't I have my MTV?! I'm so jealous." No, he's pissed because the US has military bases in what he believes to be the holy land of all Muslim people (over a billion world-wide). Whether or not we stop supporting Israel (his other beef), I think we at the very least should pull out of Saudi Arabia just to appease one sixth of the world's population. That's just common sense if not common courtesy.
It's easy to get cynical or give up when you look upon the world stage and see what the US does to other countries and peoples (1.5 million dead in Iraq due to economic sanctions). I just hope that by talking with others we can wake up enough people to take back control of the country. How? I wish I knew, but I'm convinced it's not going to happen through the ballot box.
You can go read any number of political essays and books yourself, but I think you'd be hard pressed to argue that our touted two-party system is not really a one-party system: the capital party. No, I'm not socialist or communist, though those systems haven't really been tried in the real world. I've been reading more about anarchy* and know that, once we stop hating each other for silly reasons, it's the way to go. The only question is can we get there?
Me? I'm actually hopeful.
* If you think Anarchy means mob rule or no order, you don't understand anarchy. Neither did I. Start skimming the FAQ, but the basic tenant is that you are a sovereign individual and should not be giving up your power to anyone.
P.S. For a good history of the US, I highly recommend A People's History of the United States: 1492 to Preset by Howard Zinn. I'm only up to the Civil War (and the other Civil War), but it's very good so far.
Freedom to fear. Freedom from thought. Freedom to kill.
I guess the War on Terror really is about freedom!
OK, here's the deal, as I understand it.
Fender Musical Instruments has two Brands: Fender and Squier. Squier instruments are made in Indonesia now. They were formerly made in Korea and Mexico. They have never been anything above bargain-basement instruments.
Fender brand instruments are made in Mexico, Japan, and the USA. For a time in the mid-80s, the Japanese Fenders WERE of superior quality to the american ones, but their QC has changed now. Fender only has a handful of guitars that are made in Japan now, mostly artist signature series instruments. The ones that are made there are equivalent in build quality to USA fenders but lack a bit in the finer touches. For example, USA fenders, starting in 2000, have rolled fingerboard edges, better quality hardware, and are just a lot more polished than the past 15 years worth of instruments.
Fender lost a lot of market share in the 80s to Ibanez, ESP, Jackson, and other shred-guitar manufacturers because everyone wanted a locking tremolo and a ruler-thin neck and all that garbage. They had a great Ibanez clone (which is ironic since Ibanez made its name with clones of Fenders, Gibsons, Rickenbackers, etc.) called the Heartfield Talon but it came out too late; Nirvana came out about a year later.
So in short, Japanese Fenders were better when they first started making guitars in Japan, but then the USA crew got its act together and overtook them now. As of today, the USA guitars are superior.
Technology loves to be free, but when it can be turned around and used to harm you, you need to think about to whom it is being given freely.
Just a shame that the government didn't think something similar in 1979/80 when it trained and armed a mercenary army in Afghanistan to fight the Soviet Union once it had lured them into its 'Afghan Trap'...
There is only one state school in my state that was credible in my chosen field, the one where my aptitudes are.
If your State U was full up, I would hazard that the reason was because there were more students *from the state* who wanted to go than there were places... which is not a good thing, but is not the fault of foreign enrollment.
My state U is the one I ended up working for, where the enrollment breakdown was completely off WRT the state population. That tells me there may have been more students from the state who wanted to go, but those slots were filled by exchange students first. :-)
Yes, but foreign students are not eligible for those loans. My point was not that US nationals did not pay (they do!) but that they were not "footing the bill" for foreign nationals.
Yup. And my point was it's no longer money concerns keeping citizens out of college, it's a lack of open slots in the programs. And the exchange students paid apprx $10k a year more than the state students. That difference is equaled out when you consider the tax contribution of the extended family and community of the state student for many many years. I was the first generation to go, but you can bet that my parents, grandparents, and community helped fund the school with taxes for years.
Ah, and here we do differ. I believe that the role of education is not merely to provide job training, but to develop human understanding too. Graduate school, in particular, is usually ill suited for job-preparation. Yet I do believe it is an important thing that tax dollars should support.
I'd say that is _a_ role, not _the_ role of our wonderful U's. But you need to make sure that people have the basics they need to survive first: food, shelter, etc.. These are provided by the job training aspect, and without those none of the higher functions matter. I guarantee that someone freezing to death would burn books of great literature for heat, for example.
But here we enter into personal opinions, and heaven forbid I should try to proseltize my own views...
I thought that's what Slashdot is for? :-) Truly, voice your views and opinions. This is a friendly (and interesting!) debate, after all. Yes?
Murphy was an optimist.
"I'll take the money"..." There is no saying it was racist."...what a couple of ignorant, blind, apathetic as*holes.
This is McCarthyism all over again, folks. The Bush adminstration needs to be taken out of office NOW. Land of the free??? Land of the federated, pre-fascist states. The government told MIT that the only way that MIT could get a $404k research grant was to let the NSA do a complete background investigation on all "non-Americans and foreign nationals" only, in the name of "Homeland Security". MIT said to piss off and forfeited the grant.
YEAH MIT!!!
Could you imagine how f*cked we would have been in WWII if the Department of Homeland Security wouldn't let Einstein work on research in our country because he was German (and a supporter of Communism)?
"Homeland Security" = xenophobia and racism. Period.
Mistakes of our past are meant to be lessons in which we learn from to not make again, they are not meant to be repeated. One of my favorite quotes in the world..."They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety -- Benjamin Franklin." That is exactly that the Bush administration is.
There is always a tendenancy to support nationalist measures. Totally understandable! BUT and this is a big BUT. Is it a good idea?
Look at Einstein. He was a German, who rennounced his citzenship, then became Swiss and finally American. However, he only became American once he lived in the US on a permament basis.
So according to this logic Einstein should have been excluded. Really would that have been a smart move?
Now before one raises the argument, but that was Einstein. Lets remember this is about scientific research where an Einstein may be found. And also lets remember the people who actually are loyal and the least to worry about are the scientists. They generally do not tend to be activists or dictators....
"You can't make a race horse of a pig"
"No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
Nonsense.
The math of the encryption systems that we (used to) limit export of was always open. You could always *talk* about the encryption. The only issue was with exporting binaries.
To show just how insane that policy was, I offer this: I went into a bookstore in London in 1995, and found a huge book that was nothing more than the source code to PGP, with a preface on the best OCR scanners to scan the book & get it to compile. The book was perfectly legal, since talking or writing about encryption was legal...it was just a pre-compiled binary that was illegal.
Trying to limit (like this) who works on something that's going to be published as research anyway is just stupid.
Germany just sold one of the world's first production magnetic train to China. The train ran for the first time Jan 1, 2003 at 450 KPH. As a scientist and engineer I sure want to see what they did....
What we forget is that scientists != activists.
"You can't make a race horse of a pig"
"No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
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.
Government funded projects can impose all the restrictions (within the confines of the law) that it wants, while private endeavors should enjoy respective freedom from such regulations. However, I do not believe that the risk of "terrorism" goes up significantly between citizen and non-citizen; lest we forget Timothy McVeigh, the snipers, and other Americans? Obviously illegal aliens and other such persons that do not belong in this country should be prohibited from access to "sensitive" information, but the background checks on visitors should be done before they enter the country, not at every turn of the corner when they want to participate in something as simple as research.
If I remember correctly the following facts are true:
1.The morons who highjacked planes on the 11th of september last year and flew them into various buildings highjacked those planes with fucking boxcutters. I'm not sure which high-tech university in the states is researching boxcutter warefare, but I doubt it would be classified as rocket science.
2.All the embassy bombings and suicide bombings over the last few years have been done with explosives that were readily available on the black market. This too isn't rocket science.
3.The Anthrax attacks in the US last year were carried out, in all probabability as mentioned by your own FBI, by an American. Possibly it was a pissed off or overly patriotic lunatic like a certain Dr.Stephan Hatfield, but what is fascinating is that nothing has ever come of this. No one has been prosecuted and there have never been any verified suspects. Christ, don't you people worry about stuff like this. Covering up after an internal biowarfare attack, in all likelyhood by an American, and you piss yourselves about foreigners.
I think you Americans, as a nation, are being screwed over by your own government, an you are walking down that road that leads to Fascist Empire Buidling, with all the horrors that it contains.
This is not to say that other governments don't do the same thing, but the US is the one that always had the claim to being a free society (even if those with certain experiences in the McCarthy years would claim otherwise)
Comment removed based on user account deletion
So you're saying you're apathetic about apathy?
:)
Millions of us do vote, and almost exactly half of those who voted did not choose this President, nor were they apathetic about their choice.
Voting is technically irrational, that is, the benefits do not outweigh the trouble of doing it. But as the last election demonstrated, sometimes it's a good thing to be irrational. (OK, Florida sort of showed that your vote does AND doesn't count, but do show up.
BTW, an easy way to get involved is to simply donate some money to one of the many orgainzations that worry about watching gov't 24/7, or merely doing good things where gov't does not. They won't think you're apathetic.
And even arguing here is political involvement...
For me, not voting is saying, "Since giving my power to someone else to rule over me is at its very base unethical, I choose not to participate in choosing my ruler." If there was an option on the ballot for "Dissolve the government entirely," I'd choose that.
Picture this. You're walking along when you come across a guy holding a gun. He's got two prisoners chained to a wall and says you get to pick which one he kills. You tell him to kill neither prisoner, but he insists that he must kill one or the other. So, which do you choose? Choosing one makes you partially complicit. Not choosing has no effect, but at least you aren't involved.
It may seem like splitting hairs or apathy, but I see it differently. Going down to the polls and marking off "none of the above" will have zero effect. If 50 million people did it at the next election, whomever got the one actual vote would be elected. I take political action by speaking with people and educating them about their choices. It may not overturn the system tomorrow, but it will do it sooner than the other option.
Freedom to fear. Freedom from thought. Freedom to kill.
I guess the War on Terror really is about freedom!
Apples and oranges. Being an American has little if anything to do with genetics. Weren't born in the US? Take the oath. Poof, you're a citizen. You can do everything that a "natural-born" citizen can do except for the lone exception of running for US president. Hell, you can even be Secretary of State (ask Madeleine Albright).
And the "born in the US" requirement means just that. No requirement that your family must have lived in the US for X number of generations (like so many other countries). Heck, it doesn't matter if your parents are illegal aliens. If you are born in the US, you're a citizen.
Should the federal government be doing these kinds of background checks on foreign nationals? No. Does doing this mean the US government is looking for the genetic purity that the Nazis were looking for? Not by a long shot.
Uh, Mecca is in Saudi Arabia, not Iraq. And Iraq is sitting on a shitload of oil. What do you think US was doing cozying up to Iraq 20 years ago? To get Iraqi oil of course. Only Saudi Arabia has more oil than Iraq, and that's just what we know, which, seeing as we haven't been there exploring in a while, is probably greatly understated.
"Hot lesbian witches! It's fucking genius!"
After reading through the posts so far, it seems like the discussion is more or less centered around nationalism, which is often confused/intermixed with racism. I suppose I'll throw in my $0.02 in that bin.
I am a foreign student in the US from Malaysia, and I can only give you my personal perspective, but I think many foreigners from third world countries can find some agreement in my experiences.
The golden goose is the US academic research. Here is the 10000ft view: People come to US to do research for three main reasons, very good economic standard of living, amazing varieties/opportunities in research, and in a lesser sense, some personal freedom. This is a great deal for the US. How? Well, the foreign countries pay (not just money wise!) for the education up to about 20 years old, then US reap the reward. Not only does US get to pick the best that those countries have to offer, she also gets them at the most productive age of 20-30. There can be no better deal than what the US is getting. Anyone who thinks that US is disadvantaged by admitting so many foreign students is mistaken.
This is one of the main reasons USA can maintain her supremacy.
Recently, things are changing for the worse for US. It will probably hurt US if this dumb nationalism continues for a long time. How are things changing? It is changing in the sense that it is getting harder for foreigners and students to come in. Things have been getting progressively worse over the years, usually after an attack on US like the Kenya US embassy bombing. However, it got a _lot_ worse after 9/11, _and_ after the INS had been creamed in the press for issuing a VISA to one of the dead 9/11 hijackers.
What happened is that INS went into paranoia/PR overdrive. Before that, the attitude is just arrogance "you gonna stay illegally and steal a piece of our hard earned economic pie!!" Now, it is arrogance with paranoia "you freedom-hating terrorists gonna kill us freedom loving people!!!!!!"
I must clarify that this arrogance I only detect at the US embassy in my country and at the LAX immigration line. I will give more specific examples.
Going to the US embassy in my country to get a VISA pretty much means that you will have to swallow your pride completely (and pass it out through the rear orifice), lower yourself to the social level of a diseased pariah dog on the street, and prepare to beg for a VISA. The experience is completely humiliating. Does it make one angry? Hell, yes. This is not good. My sister is still peeved that she was denied a VISA to come to visit me (this was before 9/11). For those knee-jerks who are about to say "why come to US then? we don't need you": your wisdom and understanding is beyond reproach, so just can it.
As for the LAX immigration check point experience that I had, this asshole was asking me for a certain piece of document that I did not need to have, I said I didn't have it and I didn't know at that time that I did not need to have it (my H1-B employer had it), and he kept asking me where it was! WTF? He let me through anyway (because I did not need to have that document, and he damn well knew it), but needless to say it was not a fun experience for me. WTF? WTF? Why generate this ill will? (This was before 9/11 also.)
Not all people associated with INS is anal like that! Not at all! Remember that anthrax incident? Well, I happened to send in my passport for VISA renewal at that time, and lady luck hated me because my passport arrived at the huge government mail sorting center the day anthrax was discovered in one of the 10^6 letters. My passport, along with a lot of other letters, went nto a black hole and "should be considered lost." During this time, the INS peeple that contacted me were very, very courteous. Although they couldn't do much--I think they have no control over the documents anymore, probably something like FBI is doing the "disinfecting." But the INS people were surprisingly pleasant given the circumstances.
Anyway, about the current state of affairs with INS... The numbers of rules that are being released from that tower is amazing. Every month there is a new rule. The problem is that the rules are pretty much useless. It is trying to treat the symptoms of terrorism, like shooting at anything that seem to move, in complete darkness. In fact, I would guess that it is excabating the situation by brewing ill-will. Last year, 150 returning students were denied VISAs, from my country alone. It used to be that getting a VISA, besides the humiliation, was just a three day wait (before that, it was a half-day wait). Now, it will take over a month. Few would want to return home for month long breaks because you might not return in time for the next semester, if at all. Is this helping anything in any sense? Besides, the airlines is losing your business. :-)
After all that, guess what happened to me? I requested for a transfer of status from H1-B to F1 because I was going back to school to finish what I started 10 years ago, and the transfer was stalled with a request for more information. Even though I had given all the info that was normally requested, INS requested for more info. To show the level of intelligence that was behind my case, one of the questions I had to answer was "how do you plan to go to school 3000 miles away in state B when you are in state A (where I was working under H1-B then)." Dunno, I suppose I had to quit my job if I didn't want to commute and/or work illegally after the termination of my H1-B? 8^) Anyway, after screwing a few things up for me and giving me some heart warming reassurances that my future is up in the air, my request for transfer was just approved. One semester late. And they totally left out my surname (last name to you Americans) in the approving document. LOL. So they are "screening" with that level of competence? Good luck catching anything real, and try not to shotgun too many innocents in the process. :-)
Completing the circle... It is getting harder for a foreigner to come here as student. Remember the golden goose? I suppose that means it is being harassed more and more. So what is happening now is probably not good for the USA. Will it affect US competitiveness in the future? Maybe, maybe not. Maybe if this gets much worse, or continues much longer (I think we are talking about decades time frame for any measurable effects), US will suffer. Maybe not. But I think it doesn't solve or help in the problem of terrorism. I think the problem lies else where and is much more complicated. So in conclusion I think this is just a lot of pain for hardly any gain, fueled by an INS with eggs in her face, and sustained by various factors (general paranoia, ignorance, and un-wisdom).
As a side note:
For those people who keep harping about the "Golden Rule: He who holds the gold makes the rule." This statement is only used to explain reality, don't mistake it as a moral justification (unless that's the level of your morality). Why? Just because a person has the upper hand and can make the rules, doesn't mean he will make a good rule. Also, you might have to go deeper to ask how did he get the upper hand in the first place? Is he making good rules? Are people squirming under him? Is he thinking for everyones best interest? Or is he just maintaining the status quo at the expense of general improvement? Don't be unwise.
Cheers,
e.
When people say things like this there is always some idiot jumping up and down shouting 'anti-american'. The idea never seems to enter these people's empty heads that being globocop might be a bad thing for America.
Rudyard Kippling wrote 'The White Man's Burden' about the US invasion of the Philapeans. Despite Kippling's reputation as an imperialist poet it is actually anti-imperialist 'go bind your son's in exile'.
The failure in the Whitehouse made similar statements during his election campaign, he said America must be humble, meaning that it should not be throwing its weight arround. He was against 'nation building' and against international engagement. The problem being that they are only against negotiations and engagement when they fail to get what they want. As soon as that happens the first resort is unilateral demands.
To address the point of the thread, this administration does not want scientific research. It is completely interested in any information that does not support their pre-determined agenda. They have suppressed all the information on the Federal agency web sites that call administration policy into question and they are busy stacking research panels to make sure none come out with the 'wrong views'.
I have a simple rule for evaluating people, look at how often they listen and who they listen to. We know that this administration listened only to its campaign contributors, in particular big oil when it wrote its energy policy. The Siera club was called in for one meeting that lasted less than two hours, half of which was taken up by introductions.
The problem with this administration playing globocop is that they treat every single issue in terms of the narrowest electoral advantage. It is driven by the Cubanistas in Miami, the Zionists in Broklyn and the Messianistic Christian Right in the Bible belt.
I doubt that Castro would still be in power but for the US embargo giving an excuse for his failed economic policies. So do most in Congress but they don't want to loose the vote in Florida.
The problem with US policy on Israel is that the US keeps trying to play the neutral intermediary while providing the military and economic support that allows Israel to continue to occupy the Palestinian territories and continue to attempt colonisation with settlements.
The administrations declaration that from now on it intends to act unilateraly can only have one effect. Every country is going to have to build nuclear weapons since they have been empirically demonstrated to be the one thing that the neo-imperialist right respect.
This is why we should all be very affraid of the attempts to build SDI. The risk is that sometime in the future another weak president trying to look tough may be tempted to call someone's nuclear bluff in the mistaken beleif the system works.
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
I admit to not reading the entire thread, but it seems to me that the basic point is being entirely missed: What is the federal government doing offering to spend 400 million dollars on a research project at a university. This is really my tax dollars at work? I'm appalled (though to be honest not surprised). This is why we have debt, taxes, and this is how the constitution gets trampled every day. Article I, Section 8 provides a list of the powers of the congress, and the 10th Amendment closes the door on anything else. The racism, nationalism, terrorism, blah blah blah issue would be not terribly relevant if the federal government stuck to its own business.
The goal is cheap oil for America. The tool is religious competition. You see, the US couldn't care less who controls Jeruselam or Greater Israel or the entire Middle East, as long as it has access to cheap oil and the profits it generates. In order to control the access, it has to keep the locals from gaining control of it themselves. The easiest way to do that is to keep them fighting against each other.
The US and UK chose Palestine as the new home for fleeing Jews (after closing their own borders during the war) for one reason: they knew it would start a conflict in the entire region. The added bonus is that it's basically a military outpost for the US. This was classic divide and conquer.
If the Middle East nations were to set aside their differences over religion and power and work together, they could easily become leading economic powers. Of course, they'd have the US working against them at every turn to maintain control. Not towing the political line? Look for a coup attempt in a few months.
Freedom to fear. Freedom from thought. Freedom to kill.
I guess the War on Terror really is about freedom!
putting the proverbial thumbscrews to them
You mean torture them.. I'm embarassed that my government can't even treat criminals like they are human. And people like you probably think a terrorist, because of the terror he commits, is no longer human. It doesn't matter whether you think a terrorist is human or not, the facts are that detaining and torturing a criminal suspected of terrorism to get a confession is an act of terrorism in itself.
Are you human?
Let me make this more simple for you. I oppose your very existence and I live right next door.
Ah, yeah, I forgot that. And I even read the book (Rise and Fall of the Third Reich) including the trials.
But I'm sure you'll be able to compare GWB to Hitler regardless.
Nope, wouldn't do that, both governments usurped rights from the people, but AH had no intention of holding any further elections. I seriously doubt Bush would ever entertain such a thought. Parallels are tenuous at best.
It's amazing what you can construct when you don't bother to include the truth.
And what truth would that be? Seems you, and the moderators all lept to the wrong conclusion.
Goebels was the information officer, in charge of propaganda, glorifying a horrible man, party and government, while spinning about how necessary it was and how good it would be. I'm sure he'd enjoy depicting all this spying, routing all internet through government filters and rounding suspects up in the name of national security. I just hope another president quickly dismantles it all. Once these mechanisms are in place, even the most benevolent leader may be tempted to see how they work.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
but there is a lot less difference between racism and xenophobia.
sic transit gloria mundi
I am not getting into the rest of the argument, but why do I find these statements so very, very hard to stomach?
The picture of this warm and cuddly NSA "simpley checking things out" just somehow doesn't materialize.
sic transit gloria mundi
You're views are either naive or simply wrong.
"The fact of the matter is we haven't been attacked (on US soil) since 9-11-01"
Have you been living under a rock? We've been terrorized by Anthrax Mailers, Snipers, Mail Bombers, and a great many more attacks than are shown on the national news. We are and have been under CONTSTANT attack from terrorist activities. Perhaps you need to realize that foriegn != terrorist and US citizen != Good guy.
As far as Afghanistan being a FAR better place.. Afghanistan is still a god forsaken impoverished shit hole, still churns out terrorists. The only difference is the new government is US Friendly, because we instituted it.
"I don't find myself more restricted nor do I find my freedom reduced at all."
Then you should be glad that your name isn't muhommad. Do you not know of the oriental concentration camps the U.S. had going on during WWII? We rounded people up, regardless if they were even really japanese, US Citizen or not, and imprisnoed them without reason. The US has no problems taking away minority rights, because people like you don't care enough to stand up for them.
"It's us or them and if you think you can negotiate with them, you're wrong - dead wrong."
Why don't you do us all a favor and tell us exactly who "Them" is referring to? You seem to know exactly who the terrorists are and aren't so maybe you should be heading up the HSD instead of Poindexter. The truth is we have no idea who "They" are, so we violate basic human rights of innocents in a McCarthyesque witchhunt for an invisible enemy.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. It's just that yours is stupid.
...the first thing Hitler did was prohibit private firearms ownership in the name of 'public safety'. i'm not terribly fond of the direction the political leadership of this country is heading, but at least this particular face of the coin (the Repubs) are rabidly protective of my Right To Keep And Bear Arms - so if there actually are 'HS' soliders around, and they start to get offensively Nazi-istic, we can always start plinking at them...my .270's zeroed at 100m, it was a good whitetail season...
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. - Aldous Huxley
Cool sig.
I would just like to see the Govt only approving funding for research that can produce even-remotely-helpful results. Figuring out the latest temperature of a Bose-Einstein Condensate (or any damn thing that only exists or works at 0-50 degrees K) is not gonna help anyone for the forseeable future. And I can @#$%^&*$ forsee a fairly long way into the future. More bang for our buck, please. Thank you very much.
Um, dude? You do know that Soviet archives do show that McCarthy was correct in his assertions about Communists trying to control content in Hollywood? (You do also know that Richard Nixon proved Alger Hiss to be a Communist working for the Soviet Union? Soviet archives showed him to be correct also.)
That was not my point.
Just thought I would point these things out to your biggoted white liberal ass. Oh, sorry, did I make a wrong assumption there?
Yes, you did.
Perhaps you are just one of the decadant Americans which must be converted to Islam or killed. Whoops, that would just be another biggoted statement on my part.
Yes, it was.
You can also be pretty damn sure the FBI did investigate Einstein before bringing him into any research. Just as they did for all the people on the Manhatten Project.
That was not my point.
You do know that to get a security clearance, you need to get a background check, right?
Yes, I used to have one.
Or are you just professionally ignorant?
I am professional, yes, ignorant, no. I am simply not blinded by our current nationalism and so-called patriotism because of 09/11/2001. What needs to happen is to judge each person's actions individually, not just because they are from outside the US. The solution lies in fixing the cause of terrorism, nothing else. I could full well support the fall of Israel myself, and I am a full (born in the US) citizen and an educated, self-thinking man (read: educated atheist). What makes me any less dangerous than someone who is here on an education grant studying at MIT and follows Islam? Nothing. I can kill you just as much as them. Therefore the logic being followed by our government is wrong. You solve problems by solving the source of the problem. Why do people hate the US? And then solve that problem. That problem does not have a race, a face, or a nationality. People both inside and outside the US hate the US. Why? That is what is important. Not racial, national, or religious discrimination in a futile attempt to solve a much larger problem.
Thanks man.
I was a raving lunatic. I needed a little water splashed on me. I've got some bitrot in my database, and that makes for some pretty stupid ranting.
Good reply. "I don't care what they say. You're one of the good ones..."
Still: you have to wonder exactly why the f*ck it is in our National Interest to wage war on Iraq.
--- Nothing clever here: move along now...
That last argument is stupid. All of human history is made up of migration. Truely, no group of people can be said to be native to any one area. The only place humans say they are native to is Earth, but even that is subject to debate depending on which cult you are a member. When I say American, I am saying someone born in the United States who supports their country (not those who like a certain California born person take up arms against the USA). You cannot become President of the United States of America unless you were born in the US, US citizen's should be given preference to any foriegner because in some way even private schools are dependant on the US Government.
At the next eco-hypocrisy-meeting, count the private jets used to get to the meeting. Should be interesting to see that
Can anyone please describe what the group was intending to research? I've read through the article, but it's not very specific at all, apart from that it's an AI laboratory.
Were they planning to work on research that could be applied to something like missile guidance, for example?
No, there is no such thing as the Easter Bunny, but anarchy does indeed exist. And no, Somalia has nothing like anarchy right now -- chaos perhaps, but not anarchy. The feudal system is not anarchy either, for that entails giving up your power to a ruler. Like I said, if you don't know what anarchy means, go read up on it.
No state. No laws. Yet this does not mean there are not cultural codes of conduct. There's no law against picking your nose, but most people are polite enough to avoid doing it in public. Why aren't there nose-picking epidemics across the country without a law?
You'd be busy being dead, as people would be well prepared to protect themselves from people like you. Are you saying that the threat of prison is the only thing keeping you from killing people right now? If so, your parents failed and should not have attempted raising children.
Again, no. You have the right to free will. I have the right to life. If you try to kill me, I will not summon a state power to prosecute you after I am dead. Instead, I will use self defense to protect myself, my family, and my community.
Maybe on your planet, but on Earth democracy means "rule by the people as a whole" while mob rule means "rule by mobs." You should note that there exist no state democracies in the world. The US is a constitutional republic. The capitaled class have always ensured that only an elite few hold the power to legislate and execute.
Take for example the Hollings bill. Do you believe that that bill in any way represents the "will of the people"? Did your mom one day call her representative and say, "We really need some way to protect movies from the internet"? No, instead a few people with a lot of capital wrote up some legislation for Hollings to push through Congress to protect their narrow interests.
Freedom to fear. Freedom from thought. Freedom to kill.
I guess the War on Terror really is about freedom!
In case you've never been an out-of-state college student, it costs a *lot* more than being an in-state student. State universities make a profit on this. At the time, California students didn't pay tuition at all, just a couple hundred dollars in "fees", while out-of-state tuition was close to Ivy League prices, and in New York State, out-of-state tuition at the state colleges was about twice in-state tuition, though probably about 2/3 the price of Ivy League schools. In my case, the cost wasn't a problem, because it was the late 70s high-tech boom and my employer was paying for my degree, under a program where they kicked in extra money beyond the tuition so the school would let them send people after the normal admission dates and short-cut the admissions paperwork for qualified students. (Sadly, those days are gone... They were The Phone Company, and without their scholarship program they could have easily hired about 90% of the electrical engineering masters' degree students in those years, as could several other high-tech companies.)
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks