Slashdot Mirror
Scientists Boycott NASA Conference Because of Ban On Chinese Participants
New submitter Eunuchswear writes "Congress has passed laws forbidding NASA from allowing Chinese nationals on its premises, so NASA was forced to reject applications from Chinese scientists to attend the upcoming meeting on the Kepler space telescope next month. This ban extends even to Chinese scientists and students working in the USA, angering many American scientists. Geoff Marcy, known for his work on exoplanets, is reported to be boycotting the conference. 'In good conscience, I cannot attend a meeting that discriminates in this way. The meeting is about planets located trillions of miles away, with no national security implications.' he said in an email to the conference organisers."
Once the Chinese start colonizing other planets in advance of Americans, they will simply ban Americans from visiting those planets in exchange. ;-)
Ezekiel 23:20
You know that the President can veto laws he doesn't like, right? So it's sort of implicit that he's all for this.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
This is the responsibility of Frank Wolf, R-VA, of the Virginia 10th District. If you should live in the 10th District (in N. Virginia), contact him and let him know what you think about this.
I have met him several times, but have no idea what he really thinks he is accomplishing here.
... so I guess this will teach them a lesson about spying on other countries.
Of course, the irony of "the pot calling the kettle black" doesn't go unnoticed.
I'll file this under, "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. -- Mahatma Gandhi"
Depends on how much of Congress passed it, if it was somehow bipartisan enough to get a veto-proof majority (which has a snowball's chance in hell of happening on any bill with this Congress) then Obama can't do shit. I can't find the law in question in TFA though so I can't figure out how many votes it got. Chances are he did in fact agree with the law and sign it, but just noting there is a way for Congress to pass a law that the President is against.
After years of not using a signature, I am going to make one to say the following: Fuck Beta
Or if the law is stuck as an amendment to a must-pass bill like an appropriations bill, or to something overwhelmingly popular, or something the presidents party has already committed to passing. The completly unrelated rider is a long-established tradition in American politics.
Found it, the law was H.R. 933: Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013. It passed with more than 2/3 of both houses.
After years of not using a signature, I am going to make one to say the following: Fuck Beta
So. Let me get this straight. A Pfc has access to diplomatic cables and other documents with TS classifications; but a Chinese scientist can't attend a conference where the results are likely to be published in papers with no classification at all.
OK, I haven't read TFA (this is Slashdot) but the summary certainly makes it sound like total incompetence. I wish I could say I was surprised.
I bet I can explain this though. It probably has something to do with what happened at Los Alamos, where a Chinese scientist walked off with some sensitive information. The way to fix that problem was to make sure the sensitive information there was properly classified and restricted to people with the proper clearance. Instead it sounds like they decided to classify... a lot of science. Once again, incompetent.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
So we punish scientists for the actions and policies enacted by politicians and businessmen? The scientists and students are not the ones responsible, in fact it's a generally accepted trend that they tend to be more liberal and open minded than the aggressive pricks in charge (in any country). You can flip that argument right around on us too.
I read TFA and all I got was this lousy cookie
@moblaster,
You obviously don't know how research works. If you did, you wouldn't be using the phrase "allow their citizens to study and work here". American universities aren't "allowing" the Chinese, Indian, Eastern European and other nationalities' students to study here, they are profiting from those students working for them for a pittance here. Trust me, if American citizens were clogging up the system of doctoral programs in STEM then no university would be going through the strenuous process of getting foreign students to do the drudgework for their research standing glory. I'm a foreigner (not Chinese but that doesn't frikking matter) with a doctorate in engineering who is working here in the US. I'm sick and tired of short-sighted and downright Tea Party-esque nutsacks like you. We had a bunch of those crazies protesting outside our company a couple of years ago chanting the you-took-our-jobs mantra. I'd have liked to have gone down to ask how many of those ignoramuses had a doctorate in electrical engineering like myself, but I was afraid one of them might pull a legally owned and carried handgun and frikking kill me with it.
Our company on average pays about $40K to get a foreigner like me into the country. This doesn't include the cost of sending teams of engineers overseas to conduct interviews. Do you nitwits really think they would ever do that if they could find Americans who were capable of doing the same thing? I hire for our company now, and I know for a fact that we prefer Americans, as we damn well should, since this is America. However, we sometimes go for months without finding the right candidates because H1B season is over.
Finally, you're whining about China cyberspying on the US? Seriously? Is your high horse made of an alloy of Forgetnewseum and Ironyblindium? In this day and age of NSA scandals is when you decide to take umbrage at "billions of Chinese cyberattacks per day"? You're outraged at China's cyberattacks a few weeks after it became known that the US government spied on diplomatic exchanges and on diplomats themselves?!
Get a life, and some capability of rational thought.
Forbidding NASA from allowing Chinese nationals on the premises clearly has a disparate impact against people of Chinese ethnicity; therefore, this is discrimination based on race.
Under the latest interpretations of the Civil rights act; any disparate impact is discrimination.
The courts should be having a field day with this....
Instead of having it at NASA, can't they just have it at the local Holiday Inn?
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
From TFA:
The recent Congressional action refers to a broader law passed in July which prohibits Nasa funds from being used to participate or collaborate with China in any way. The law has raised fears among some Nasa-funded scientists that they will have to sever ties with their Chinese collaborators, and no longer take on Chinese students. weve embraced this schitzophrenic notion that theyre both an ally as well as an enemy. our Frienemy manufacture entire lifestyles for americans, from phones to computers and even the next great bridge to replace the golden gate
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_span_replacement_of_the_San_Francisco%E2%80%93Oakland_Bay_Bridge
To insist your second largest trading partner is so prone to espionage as to warrant eviction from, historically, a great font of collaborative international scientific research of the modern era, misses the point entirely. to insist somehow they might glean some kernel of knowledge from NASA that they would not otherwise discover as a nation that manufactures supercomputers, high speed maglev transportation, and the worlds largest power plant ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Gorges_Dam ) is laughable.
this legislation was concocted by the republican party. Any woman or man of science should remember this as "the party that cant." In the past we hosted 7 astronauts aboard the russian space station MIR. Yet somehow today, the country that hasnt moved missiles into cuba, hasnt started proxy wars, and hasnt ginned up anti-american rhetoric is now so dangerous as to be inadmissable in the eyes of a party that as far as i can tell, stopped researching China after the cold war.
Good people go to bed earlier.
Wolf thinks he's accomplishing pandering to the conservative majority of his district, and he's absolutely right. Remember, politicians and bureacrats most often make decisions that serve their own interests, not the interests of those they ostensibly represent or the public at large. There's a whole school of economic thought called "public choice" that studies this phenomenon.
Space game using normal deck of cards: http://BattleCards.org
It's more to do with the fact that China is running massive corporate, scientific, industrial and military espionage operations against the West, particularly the US (but Europe is also badly affected). I wouldn't let the Chinese within 10 miles of the place.
It's more to do with the fact that NSA is running massive corporate, scientific, industrial and military espionage operations against everyone, particularly Everyone (but EVERYONE is also badly affected). I wouldn't let the Americans within 10 km (SI rules!) of anywhere.
FTFY!
I still don't understand how that behavior is legal. Sneaking extra laws inside things into irrelevant laws should not be possible. This package deal all-or-nothing bunk needs to be rid of.
You have never been to Hong Kong it seems. Totally different place than mainland China, not only because of Cantonese, but also extremely fast internet with no internet filtering, cool movies and very cheap prices. I know a lot of people in Shanghai that travel over there just for shopping. Hell you actually need a different visa to get over there so I don't know why you think the Chinese government changed Hong Kong somehow.
No, it is the scientists, businessmen, and students doing the spying. That is how China does it. They have an espionage system that they compare to "a thousand grains of sand".
They are quite successful at it too. They have stolen everything from the most advanced US nuclear warhead design to advanced Russian anti-aircraft missile designs. They are not to be trifled with.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
American universities ... are profiting from those students working for them for a pittance here.
True - what industry doesn't like cheap labor? That doesn't mean other Americans necessarily benefit from it.
Trust me, if American citizens were clogging up the system of doctoral programs in STEM then no university would be going through the strenuous process of getting foreign students to do the drudgework for their research standing glory.
Perhaps Americans aren't clogging the system because it doesn't pay for them to. For decades plenty of Americans got STEM Ph.D.'s. The problem was that, due to the high demand for them, they got paid decently. Fortunately the National Science Foundation (a trade association for academia paid for by the US government) recognized this problem in the 1980's, and discussed how a vast increase in student visas could lower the price of employing Ph.D.'s. Unsurprisingly, it worked!
Our company on average pays about $40K to get a foreigner like me into the country.
You think $40k is a lot of money? That (hopefully) represents only a fraction of the burdened labor cost for employing someone for a year.
Do you nitwits really think they would ever do that if they could find Americans who were capable of doing the same thing?
What does "capable" mean? If you mean have the mental ability, oddly there was an adequate supply of Americans before the flood of students visas. I doubt you're calling Americans dumb though, so I presume you mean obtained their Ph.D.'s. There was also an adequate supply. Why that's no longer the case was explained above.
sometimes go for months without finding the right candidates
Since you're looking for highly educated and specialized people, something would be wrong if it didn't take months to find them. The typical attitude of someone involved in hiring today is that they should be able to get highly qualified people as quickly and easily as you can hire burger flippers. At one point, before other options opened up, American companies understood that talent was something you had to look hard for, and they both invested in and made an effort to retain such people. Such people didn't get canned because business is down this quarter, and the Great Minds of the stock analysts want to see expenses trimmed by almost as much as the CEO's salary. Thinking beyond the next quarter, companies didn't can such people because they knew it would be difficult to find comparable talent when business turned up the next quarter.
P.S. How is it that attacks such as yours are usually posted AC?
One solution would be to give courts the option of striking down a provision of a law if they find it has no relation to the subject of the bulk of the law. But that would need a constitutional amendment.
It's because of all the money that Hong Kong makes. The "one country, two systems" slogan really means "those guys make a lot of money and we don't want to disturb them too much" which is why Hong Kong and Macau are Special Administrative Regions but Tibet is left in the dark.
Although I don't believe the Chinese government charges Hong Kong any tax, so they're not directly benefiting from it directly. I suspect they're trying to use Hong Kong as a gateway investment vehicle for foreign investment and then try to lure them into mainland China with lower labor costs once they learn all the secrets.
Nowadays, you never see anything stamped with "made in Hong Kong" anymore; it's all financial and technical/logistical services now.
Scientists are also notoriously inept at showing gratitude to the country that gives them their grants.
Countries are notoriously inept at showing gratitude to the scientists that give them their progress.
This is the AC who wrote the post you're referencing. I won't reveal my ID because I wouldn't want to have known for which company I work.
True - what industry doesn't like cheap labor? That doesn't mean other Americans necessarily benefit from it.
Last I heard no university was turning away qualified American citizens in favor of foreigners for STEM doctoral programs. The pittance I was talking about is the same the World over. No one pays extravagant amounts to doctoral students. When I was a PhD student I was also the stereotypical dirt-poor grad student as well. If an Indian/Chinese/whatever PhD student can get by with x amount of dollars a month, why can't an American? Specially when you consider most of them come from families poor enough that they send money back home as well.
Perhaps Americans aren't clogging the system because it doesn't pay for them to. For decades plenty of Americans got STEM Ph.D.'s. The problem was that, due to the high demand for them, they got paid decently. Fortunately the National Science Foundation (a trade association for academia paid for by the US government) recognized this problem in the 1980's, and discussed how a vast increase in student visas could lower the price of employing Ph.D.'s. Unsurprisingly, it worked!
Are you arguing that STEM PhDs don't get paid decently anymore? I call shenanigans (love this Americanism), because either you aren't in the right industry or you don't know what you're talking about. By my third year of employment, I was making comfortable six figures a year here in the US. If you consider a six figure salary not decent then you have expenses the likes of which I can't even imagine.
You think $40k is a lot of money? That (hopefully) represents only a fraction of the burdened labor cost for employing someone for a year.
I do think that $40K is a lot of money, when it is compared to $0K. Corporations are in the business of making money. If they can save $40K while hiring someone, they damn well should, it's their fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders to do that. I'm sure the company you work for considers $500 only a small fraction of the total burdened labor cost for employing you a year, lets see you ask them to pay you that much extra this year and see how that goes, shall we?
What does "capable" mean? If you mean have the mental ability, oddly there was an adequate supply of Americans before the flood of students visas. I doubt you're calling Americans dumb though, so I presume you mean obtained their Ph.D.'s. There was also an adequate supply. Why that's no longer the case was explained above.
By capable I mean exactly what that English word means. And of course there was an adequate supply before the flood of student visas, but the demand was low too. If you think that the World of the 1960s needed as many engineers and scientists as the World of 2013, then oh dear, we have a problem.
Since you're looking for highly educated and specialized people, something would be wrong if it didn't take months to find them. The typical attitude of someone involved in hiring today is that they should be able to get highly qualified people as quickly and easily as you can hire burger flippers. At one point, before other options opened up, American companies understood that talent was something you had to look hard for, and they both invested in and made an effort to retain such people. Such people didn't get canned because business is down this quarter, and the Great Minds of the stock analysts want to see expenses trimmed by almost as much as the CEO's salary. Thinking beyond the next quarter, companies didn't can such people because they knew it would be difficult to find comparable talent when business turned up the next quarter.
This is pretty much the only thing I can agree with you on. Although no one in my industry expects to find someone as easily
You can't un-insult someone after you've insulted them. Just a friendly word of advice. I'm sure those scientists won't be back. Ever.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
I won't reveal my ID because I wouldn't want to have known for which company I work.
Of course - Slashdot pseudonyms are so revealing.
True - what industry doesn't like cheap labor? That doesn't mean other Americans necessarily benefit from it.
Last I heard no university was turning away qualified American citizens in favor of foreigners for STEM doctoral programs.
Nor did I even suggest they were, so your rebuttal makes no sense.
No one pays extravagant amounts to doctoral students.
Again, I didn't even suggest they did. What are you rebutting?
If an Indian/Chinese/whatever PhD student can get by with x amount of dollars a month, why can't an American?
The question is not whether they can, but whether it's worth it. An average American engineer who chooses to go for his Ph.D. will reach a payback point after he's retired! There is an economic disincentive for Americans. By contrast foreign Ph.D. students have the incentive of getting a US work visa. If they come from a poor country, that may mean a vast increase in standard of living. The situations are hardly comparable, and biased against Americans in that there is not nearly as much economic incentive for them.
I do think that $40K is a lot of money, when it is compared to $0K.
Oh dear, I do hope not all of your financial reasoning is of this caliber. Hint: you should consider total costs of approach A vs. B.
By capable I mean exactly what that English word means.
Surely your rhetoric can be better than that. "Capable" is an adjective. You applied it to the noun "thing". Perhaps some precision is in order.
And of course there was an adequate supply before the flood of student visas, but the demand was low too. If you think that the World of the 1960s needed as many engineers and scientists as the World of 2013, then oh dear, we have a problem.
Oh dear, we have a problem with fanciful notions that the rate of technological advance is much greater now that we have iPods, whereas it was slower when we were doing trivial things like going to the moon. There hasn't been much change in the proportion of engineers in the US workforce in 40 years.
American students have stopped preferring to study the hard sciences
Yes, and the currently fashionable "explanation" is that they aren't willing to invest hard work for a better future. American students are frivolous, while foreign students are diligent and hard working. Yet oddly there is no shortage of Americans willing to invest hard work for a better future in law or medical school. There's an old rule for any investigation - follow the money.
BTW: China stole the plans for the most advanced US nuclear warhead, the W88.
Big deal. The Chinese have had nukes for decades. Like any big country, they can't use them without risking MAD. Also, China's become so urbanized, they now have many thermonuclear targets.
And before the Revolutionary War, the people in what we'd call the US were British. But come on, we all know that the social climate right before becoming a country might as well be considered as such.
Everything will be taken away from you.
But the US has decided this year that poor people with easily and cheaply treated diseases should be allowed to live. After only 230 years, and only about 100 years after the rest of the western world decided that it'd make them monsters not to! How can you not consider that humanitarian!
Everything will be taken away from you.
lol. not giving away everything is now "protectionism."
This is astronomy we're talking about here everyone basically gives everything away in this domain..it is the only way shit gets done.
The ban isn't against Chinese people, just Chinese nationals.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
If the US has given away "shit for free" to a "worthless" country, it's because it served some diplomatic or strategic purpose, not because it is a paragon of generosity. Nothing wrong in furthering one's cause, but to say that it was largesse is specious, at best.
One of the problems of a line item veto is it would allow the president to veto just the funding portion of a bill that is too popular to reject outright. That would effectively kill any ability to enforce the new law.
I'm all for a constitutional amendment that would require all passages of a proposed bill to be relevant to the bill as a whole. So no highway funding bills that outlaw abortion, etc.
-- Will program for bandwidth