Exporting Knowledge Via Students 397
brainhum writes "SF Weekly reports that proposed Department of Commerce regulations will require foreign students at US universities to apply for export licenses to use dual purpose technologies in the classroom. From the article: 'Inherent in the new rules is a discriminatory contradiction: Students from India, which has cordial relations with the U.S., will need licenses to study, but students from Saudi Arabia -- home country for most of the participants in the 9/11 attacks on New York and Washington, and much of the financing and ideology behind Islamist terrorism -- will not.' The proposed regulations point out that current export license requirements are based on the person's most recent citizenship, which they believe, could allow a person born in Iran to avoid licensing if they held Canadian citizenship. More information is available in the SF Weekly story "Student of Concern"."
Wrong idea! (Score:5, Insightful)
To sober up a bit, this is a silly restriction. Nearly all the information you can obtain in higher education can be now found on the Internet. Why bother even trying to restrict it? Besides, competition keeps the world healty. Without it, what desire is there to continue developing new and better technologies? Not to mention the matter of helping our fellow man. India has improved a lot, but my understanding is that there are still plenty of poverty-ridden areas. Many African countries are another good example of this. Why stop them from developing their country? If you want to be effective, close the legal holes in our own country that effectively allow for the import/out-sourcing of slave labor. (e.g. We should open our borders and allow people to legally immigrate in order to work, and then start prosecuting the abuses of the H1-B system.)
There's probably not too much that can be done about out-sourcing (other than ensuring working conditions are required to be to american code), but that doesn't matter quite as much. In a short period of time, the out-sourcing bubble is likely to collapse as companies find that they aren't saving money. Alternatively, foreign wages will rise to a sufficient degree to make such out-sourcing impractical.
Sorry about the American-centered post, but the original story is all about us and our laws. Europeans and other world residents may feel free to chime in with their anecdotes and feelings on the issue.
Re:Wrong idea! (Score:2, Insightful)
Err... Yeah, competition in the realms of nuclear testing and missiles will give it that healthy, glowing complexion free of humans it's wanted for years.
Re:Wrong idea! (Score:5, Insightful)
Or it could lead to better nuclear technology, including nuclear engines [wikipedia.org] and space travel [wikipedia.org].
Truth be told, the cold war was the last vestige of a long age of war. Remember, WWI was primarily about nobility attempting to maintain power in a modern world, while WWII was about Eugenics and superiority through control of genetics. (Since proven to be absolute garbage.)
The cold war was the same issue: Governments trying to hold onto personal power over others. They got away with it because the system was touted as a modern form of government that was for the people and by the people. And like all such governments, it collapsed in the face of the true ideals of individual freedom. Anyone remember the television show "Dallas"? Who would have thought [wikipedia.org] that it could lead to the fall of communism in Romania?
Re:Wrong idea! (Score:5, Insightful)
Back on topic, this is a fucking retarded move. Another in a series of steps toward the end of America's golden age. Fellow Americans, our government is failing us in every conceivable way. Very few of our problems have their roots in the evils of furriners. Isolation serves only to cut us out of the equation. It's a bad play any way you slice it, and to see the ridiculous way it's being weilded WRT Indians vs. Saudis... ugh.
Re:Wrong idea! (Score:2)
The Cold War the last vestige of a long a
Re:Wrong idea! (Score:2)
Because during the cold war the Military recieved adequate funding for what it was required to do and had sufficient personel. After the fall of the Soviet Union congress cut back on the number of personell in the military. (Number of personell in the military is regulated by congress directly, the military has no direct power in the matter). Here is a PDF showing a graph of active duty personnel fro [osd.mil]
Re:Wrong idea! (Score:2)
Another wrong idea [Re:Wrong idea!] (Score:5, Interesting)
Blanket statements such as these always invite the inevitable discussions. ("No your wrong!" "You suck!" "No YOU suck!"). World War II had many causes. Unlike some other wars which can be traced back to a single cause, WWII's causes included:
European theater
- Hilter's desire to return Germany to first class world power status after being humilated by the Treaty of Versailles.
- Hilter's policy of "living space" which demanded the forced exodus of people of slavic origin in order to make space of his "Master Race." And my forced exodus I also mean the systematic genocide of entire races. (The eugenics you speak of).
- Domination of the European continent, politically. Hilter's Germany probably would not have occupied France and other Western European countries if Germany had won the war. Instead they would have set up satellite states similar to the Soviet Union's Warsaw Pact.
- Mussolini's desire to elevate Italy to first class world power status.
- His own imperial desires to conquor the Balkens, Greece, and North Africa in order to make modern Italy a second "Roman Empire."
- Britian and France's inability to recognize Facsim as a threat they had to match early on, instead appeasing Hilter and letting him "annex" the Sudatenland, Austria, and Chezkoslovakia. (okay not really a cause but not everything is Hilter's fault)
Pacific TheatreOf course I havn't touched on all the causes and I am sure I got some of my details wrong. In addition I am sure I made a blanket statement somewhere that will invite discussion.
Oh well. :\
Re:Another wrong idea [Re:Wrong idea!] (Score:3, Interesting)
Specifically, their 'exchange' agreements with Germany from which the germans got a loophole for the military limitations Versailles imposed on them, while the russians got the tech.
Oh, and it's "fascism", btw.
Clarification of your thesis [Re:Another wrong (Score:5, Informative)
Thesis: World War II (WWII) was fought by the UK, France, USSR, China, and USA (Allies) against Germany, Italy, and Japan (Axis)[1] in order to prove to their citizens, or to whoever, that they were against Anti-Semitism and Eugenics, especially because the governments and leaders of said Allies engaged in Anti-Semitism and Eugenics and they did not want their own bigotry to come to light. By fighting against a greater injustice than their own they could redeem themselves in the eyes of others.
[1]I am purposely leaving out many other combatants due to space limitations.
I am going to write the first part of this post assuming that I have your thesis correct (which I probably don't) and will address what I think about said thesis.
Eugenics and Anti-Semitism are not the same thing. They are related in that they both rely on what we enlightened people would now consider bigotry. Certainly at the time they were probably not considered evil or inhumane. Fortunately by out standards they are. I won't disagree with you that Americans, Britons, and Russians where just as Anti-Semitic as Germans or any other nationality. I also won't disagree with you how Eugenics was used in the US. There are numerous shameful examples that even make headlines today as when the Governor of Virginia apologized for his state's Eugenics programs.
I don't believe that humanitarian reasons had much to do with the reasons why WWII occured. The idea that human rights somehow trump all other international issues began after WWII with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which was adopted by the United Nations (UN) in 1948. Of course it was drafted and the ideals developed during the Second World War, but the reasons that caused WWII were a result of state of international affairs in the 1930s.
Finally I'd like to disagree with you about your final point:
Of course the worst thing of all is that the US didn't work up much of a sweat about things even AFTER Poland was invaded. London was being firebombed and we were still discussing "if we get pulled into this war, whose side would we be on?"
The United States of before WWII was a different country than the one that emerged afterwards. In fact US foreign policy was always been defined as a mix of two poles, idealism (Woodrow Wilson) and realism (Theodore Roosevelt). Before WWII idealism coupled with isolationism reigned. The idea that the US should be the "city on the hill," acting as a beacon for all to copy our own shining example of democracy, dominated US foreign policy and the minds of ordinary citizens. By working to make a better democratic republic at home the US could be an example to countries abroad.
But there was a current of realism in American foriegn relations and that was not directed toward Europe but toward the East to China. Trade relations with China was the reason for the friction between the US and Japan in the 1920s and 30s. The US may not have "cared" about Germany annexing Central Europe, but when Japan invaded Manchuria in 1933 the US cared.[2] The embargo against oil which the US imposed against Japan after its invasion of China in 1937 was one of the primary reasons Japan wanted to extend its empire to the Dutch East Indies (Indonesia today), a major source of petroleum. Japan could only do so if the US Navy in the Pacific was neutered. This directly lead to the surprise attack of the US Naval Base at Pearl Harbor. The Japenese were aiming for one decisive blow in order to knock out the US. And with Britian fighting against Germany the British colonies were vulnerable. Japan stood to gain everything with one roll of the dice.
[[2]The real "start" of WWII as far as I am concerned. Of course real fighting didn't begin until 1937 when Japan invaded the rest of China and it didn't become worldwide until 1939 with the invasion of Poland. Europeans/
Re:Wrong idea! (Score:2)
The Soviet Command Economy wasn't terribly interested in a spending war with the US nor is there a great deal of evidance to suggest that increased military spending was responsible for the Soviet Collapse.
There is a huge amount of evidance to suggest that the reforms of Gorbiachev were largely responsible for the Soviet Collapse.
Contrary to popular belife, the construction and development of nuclear weapons technology isn't t
Re:Wrong idea! (Score:3, Insightful)
HELLO! This is Slashdot.
The Soviet Command Economy wasn't terribly interested in a spending war with the US nor is there a great deal of evidance to suggest that increased military spending was responsible for the Soviet Collapse.
Excuse me? Remember the nuclear arms race? When one side had enough nukes to destroy the world five times over, the other side had to get enough nukes to destroy the world ten times over.
Re:Wrong idea! (Score:2)
Halfway is too serious (I apologize in advance if I'm missing
Re:Wrong idea! (Score:2, Informative)
Here [informatio...house.info] is the real reason why we were attacked. It is because we were making military advancements on Muslim soil. Both "hating freedom" and "hating our society" were excuses that Bush came up with.
Re:Wrong idea! (Score:5, Insightful)
Why did the attacks happen?
- Was it because US troops are on Muslim soil? The US has more foreign bases than any other nation, sometimes on seriously unfreindly territory (e.g., Cuba), almost all of which have provoked no suicide attacks.
- Was it because of cultural dominance? Then why aren't Canadians and Europeans bombing the hell out of the United States? They bear the worst of it.
- Was it because of the poverty of the Arab world? But most of the attackers were middle-class and well educated. This is also true of many Palestinian bombers. Furthermore, many Arab countries are well off.
- Was it for reasons that takes more than five seconds to describe? Most likely.
Re:Wrong idea! (Score:5, Funny)
Was it because of cultural dominance? Then why aren't Canadians and Europeans bombing the hell out of the United States? They bear the worst of it.
We've launched Bryan Adams, Nelly Furtado and Celine Dion at you. Damn you Americans for being impervious to our mind-control rays.Re:Wrong idea! (Score:2)
Re:Wrong idea! (Score:2)
Not so impervious now eh....
Re:Wrong idea! (Score:2)
Re:Wrong idea! (Score:5, Insightful)
cuba does not regard guantanamo as holy place. Muslims regard saudi arabia as holy place.
- Was it because of cultural dominance? Then why aren't Canadians and Europeans bombing the hell out of the United States? They bear the worst of it.
If you would know, canada,europe and US are all part of Western Civilization. There are differences, but not as great as a difference between US and middle east
- Was it because of the poverty of the Arab world? But most of the attackers were middle-class and well educated. This is also true of many Palestinian bombers. Furthermore, many Arab countries are well off.
Right, and the attackers understood that it is thier duty to standup for the weak, since they are well educated in the land of illitrate (ofcourse the form (suicide bombing) is wrong imho.) Many middle east countries are indeed well off. But only thier dictators (with US support). The general polulation lives in poverty (except UAE).
- Was it for reasons that takes more than five seconds to describe? Most likely.
Yes, but you covered the main reasons already. When you see that the only very few people are getting rich in the land of oil and you still don't have money to eat 3 times, I think you would question why.
Re:you aren't too clear on the concept (Score:3, Informative)
There was no call of expansion to other territories. Sure the chosen people were called to wipe everyone out in the promised land, but once the land was taken, that was it. This is unlike the practice of many other nations and peoples of around that time.
So whilst Israel was deadly to the Canaanites (that said
Re:Wrong idea! (Score:2)
Re:Wrong idea! (Score:2)
Re:Wrong idea! (Score:2)
You're mistaken. They don't hate freedom, and they don't hate McDonalds. They hate the U.S. specifically, and to a slightly lesser extent the rest of the "Western" countries that support or at least do not stop them.
Why? Well, they hate the U.S. because of what they perceive to be U.S.
Re:Wrong idea! (Score:2)
I certainly do agree with most of what you said. But I have heard that many traditionalist Muslims are very upset that their culture is being destroyed by "corrupt" (open to debate) western influences.
As far as "hating freedom". It is sad that the discourse is dumbed down to that level. And, as I noted in a previous post,
Re:Wrong idea! (Score:5, Insightful)
Most students would simply go to another country without these restrictions, such as United Kingdom, Germany or other countries with good educational opportunities.
This is the US shooting itself in the foot - the international intelligentsia who come to the US contribute significantly to the American society. By restricting what they have access to, you're restricting their contributions.
Consequently, they'll simply go elsewhere, where there are similar opportunities without such draconic laws. The result? The US will lose out on a lot of very smart people who until now saw the US as a good destination for education and research.
And you must also keep in mind that a lot of these folks do stay back in the US after higher education and become permanent residents or citizens - discouraging them from studying and you've lost a lot of talent preemptively.
Yay! More international Students for Us. (Score:2)
Re:Wrong idea! (Score:2)
Both Merriam Websters [m-w.com] and Dictionary.com [reference.com] disagree with you.
Draconic is the same as draconian.
Re:Wrong idea! (Score:4, Insightful)
Not that I'm condoning it, but the article does mention that it would be needed for dual-use technologies, which means things that could be used to advance another country's military technology. There are alerady licensing issues when exporting the technologies themselves (Want to launch a satelite from Brazil? Expect a lot of paperwork). THis is the realization that students could easily learn this in the US and then simply take their textbook, notebook, or even just memory back home to advance military science of their home country.
That said, I find the inherent racism of brainhum appaling. What makes an Iranian or Saudi inherently more dangerous than a Mexican, Indian, Russian, German, etc? And an Iranian-born Canadian citizen? jeez!
Re:Wrong idea! (Score:5, Insightful)
"When the Third Reich was emerging, they said that only Germans of pure Aryan descent could attend German universities. Significant numbers of German scholars departed," she says. "That was detrimental for Germany, but was glorious for the U.S.
"We got Einstein."
Ah, well.
Re:Wrong idea! (Score:2, Insightful)
I have a friend who, before the invasion of Afghanistan, argued that we shouldn't leave there until we insured that every household had a TV and DVD player.
He was serious. He considered that a sign of American democracy. I don't think he considered the irony inherent in our obtaining those particular items from China, an actual neighbor of Afghanistan.
". .
Indeed. I lived through the J
Re:Wrong idea! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Wrong idea! (Score:2)
Re:Wrong idea! (Score:2)
He may also have already read the article linked to form elsewhere, of course.
Re:Wrong idea! (Score:3, Informative)
Of course, you want tunable dye lasers for LIS, and I'd imagine
Ummm? (Score:5, Interesting)
(Note, I haven't read TFA, so I really don't have an informed opinion of what's going on, it was just a thought that struck me.)
Re:Ummm? (Score:2)
-russ
Re:Ummm? (Score:2)
Re:Ummm? (Score:3, Insightful)
That's like, $0.34 US, right?
Only kidding. In seriousness, it's probably because taxation helps cover (i.e., make direct) some of the external costs of gasoline use rather than, to put it bluntly, subsidizing the destruction of the environment.
There *are* real costs associated with dumping pollutants into the air, but the simple economy doesn't account for them -- one of the reasons we're basically all going to hell in a hi
Re:Ummm? (Score:2)
,br> I guess a lot, then.
Re:Ummm? (Score:2)
Oil - production:
3.11 million bbl/day (2004 est.)
Oil - consumption:
2.2 million bbl/day (2003 est.)
Oil - exports:
1.37 million bbl/day (2004)
Oil - imports:
987,000 bbl/day (2004)
Re:Ummm? (Score:2)
If the question really is, "How much comparative political & economic pull does India have vs. Saudi Arabia?", the answer would seem to be similar. However, India is not ruled by a monolithic elite family that would be easily offended by such a gesture.
The point is really moot. Foreign relations with neither country would be harmed materially by such a rule in the long term.
Foreign and domestic economic policy dictates (arguabl
And always remember... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:And always remember... (Score:2)
Re:And always remember... (Score:2)
However, at least, in the US, it is not possible (at all) for (wetware) thinking or memory to violate copyright law, as it is, at least theoretically, in the UK--where I am.
Re:And always remember... (Score:2)
Sad, too - unfortunately. Better give back everything to Uncle Sam when you leave, including the remnants of your soul.
Another reason for IP (Score:2)
My Take (Score:3, Interesting)
My opinion is that it's a free country, but does that make it a free world? Should people be able to move all the business out of one country to simply make a buck? Maybe that's not ethical if you're gaining the knowledge from the country in question. But maybe there is a better twist to it...
I'm Canadian and I have tried outsourcing to the US before with my LAMP [wikipedia.org] knowledge (PHP). The pay simply sucks. I can get more money doing local work for charities than working for someone abroad. The pay is that bad. So if Joe American wants to pay that to India to get better positioning for their company's budget -- I'm all for it. Why? Because now I can compete directly against the Indian firm on QUALITY -- something they can't compete on because they just don't have the time with all this new business coming in, IMHO.
I take more time to be sure the job is well done, and that reinforces the expression that you get what you pay for.
Re:My Take (Score:2, Insightful)
These same people sit around all befuddled as to why
Ethics and Countries (Score:3, Interesting)
As an analogy suppose you were visiting a poor diabetic for dinner. On your way in you scan the room tryi
Not terribly odd. (Score:2)
Ahh. Cognitive Dissonance, well, maybe in 10 or 15 years we will get over this and do stuff that is kind of intelligent. (Although it could be that India has nukes and the Saudis have Isreal right next door to them,
Decline (Score:5, Insightful)
Doubt anyone celebrated. (Score:2)
For example, the US military has rules against on foreigners working on certain parts of military programs.
Canada is not considered "foreign" in some cases, which makes us exempt from some of these restrictions, however the factories must comply with the (arguably racist) US policy.
The way around this is that "Ethnic Origin" is a functional job requirement for these projects.
Re:Decline (Score:2)
Re:Decline (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Decline (Score:2)
OSAMA HAS WON! (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:OSAMA HAS WON! (Score:2, Insightful)
These are still dangerous times. There's an enemy out there that would like to hurt us and change our way of life and shake our will and shake our confidence. Friday, July 30, 2004. Springfield, MO.
It seems Osama has changed our way of lives, or has Mr. Bush and his closest friends?
--
Random Signature #2
Generated by SlashdotRndSig [snop.com] via GreaseMonkey [mozdev.org]
Hardest workers (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Hardest workers (Score:2)
Re:Hardest workers (Score:2)
Read what the other guy said first. It applies to many cases.
India has 3-4 times as many people as the IS (~1 billion vs ~300 million). They send their best over here to get an education. It is no surprise that it seems like they have a lot of smart people, they do, but proportionally no more than the US. It is just that you see them because they don't fit in with Americans in anything else.
Education is not about hard work, it is about understanding. Many hours in memorization may help you ace
Uh huh. (Score:5, Interesting)
I think what's far scarier is that the country that Timothy McVeigh and Ted Kaczynski come from doesn't have this restriction. They're able to go to US universities without licenses.
Hidden Agenda? (Score:5, Insightful)
First of all, like someone mentioned, anything you can learn in the US in a classroom is already published somewhere. The same textbook you buy for your class is probably on Amazon.com for anyone in any country to purchase. Teaching an Indian student about Nuclear Engineering is really not a security concern. If that student was intent on learning nuclear technology to create WMDs, there are other countries they could go to anyway to learn.
Placing restrictions on education is the last thing we should be doing. With the general population dumbing down, we should be accepting anyone willing to learn. Highly educated people are becoming few and far between. I don't care if the next guy that designs the power plant that keeps my house lit up is Indian or American, as long as someone learns how to do it.
I don't want to get politcal, but this seems like a situation entirely fabricated by the government for some kind of hidden agenda.
Re:Hidden Agenda? (Score:2)
Wow. It's almost as if they expect that Saudi Arabia will cease to be any sort of threat to the US in the near future! I wonder why they would think that...
Re:Hidden Agenda? (Score:2)
Number of nuclear programs in Saudi Arabia: 0
I think that about sums it up. It's a stupid policy, but India did test nukes knowing they were going to incur sanctions.
Saudi Arabia... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Saudi Arabia... (Score:2, Insightful)
I'll give you a hint [oil.com]
Re:Saudi Arabia... (Score:5, Informative)
The Saudi Arabian government panders to the terrorist capitol of the world because the US government is headed by their friends.
Re:Saudi Arabia... (Score:2)
What does this have to do with anything? (Score:4, Insightful)
but students from Saudi Arabia -- home country for most of the participants in the 9/11 attacks on New York and Washington, and much of the financing and ideology behind Islamist terrorism -- will not.
Aside from making me wish I could mod the article -1, Flamebait, what does this matter? The only possible purpose to this statement is to inflame the debate.
NEWS FLASH: The USofA is home to the majority of terrorists that have attacked abortion clinics and is the source of the financing and ideology of right wing militants. We should immediately move to ensure that all Americans that attend universities apply for licenses to use the knowledge the acquire.
Ridiculous, right? Feel better now?
Re:What does this have to do with anything? (Score:2)
Aside from making me wish I could mod the article -1, Flamebait, what does this matter? The only possible purpose to this statement is to inflame the debate.
I don't think its flamebait. If the legislation does go ahead with this type of differentiation, then the question does indeed arise - whats specia
Re:What does this have to do with anything? (Score:3, Insightful)
The USA is definitely overpop
Re:What does this have to do with anything? (Score:5, Insightful)
If the idea indeed is to deny knowledge to potential enemies, it makes sense to see who these "enemies" are. And looking at the fact that the majority of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudi; Bin Laden is a Saudi; many of the others in the Al Qaeda hierarchy are Saudi; it would make sense to include Saudis in this set of restricted students. Now, to not put restrictions on Saudis and then turn around and place such restrictions on Indians (to name a group) who have had no involvement whatsoever in terrorism against the US and EU, defies logic, doesn't it??
Re:What does this have to do with anything? (Score:4, Insightful)
The only possible purpose to this statement is to inflame the debate.
Why? Saudi Arabians have repeatedly attacked the US, and Saudi Arabia is highly undemocratic and has no religious freedom. India is a free country and Indians have never posed a threat to the US. Shouldn't that be taken into account when discussing further restrictions on who can be taught dangerous information?
Re:What does this have to do with anything? (Score:2)
I can't wait to start hearing the stories of US interrogators flushing Bibles down the toilet. . .
Restrict Entry Instead (Score:2)
Problem solved.
What if they write the software? (Score:2)
India is working on the bomb, but come on. if they really wanted to "leak" something they'd just pirate it. If software is available to collage students it can't be that important.
Re:What if they write the software? (Score:2)
Collage Students (Score:2, Funny)
What kind of software do collage students use? Something that involves a lot of cut n paste?
Isn't all the information in... Text books? (Score:3, Insightful)
exporting knowledge (Score:4, Insightful)
Because we all know foreigners are too dumb to use an OCR scanner...
That's the problem! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:That's the problem! (Score:2)
In other words, not a "real" Canadian.
More red tape please... (Score:2)
It will be the same (Score:2, Insightful)
I fail to see how restricting anything in the universities will help avoid terrorism, when the terrorists (Osama, etc) that planned 9/11 were trained by US military. Oh! Wait! maybe they _did_ take a degre
China Crisis (Score:2)
That will be nothing compared to what China will do. With a vast internal market they can export to the rest of the world at rock bottom prices.
If they can't educate their better students in US colleges the Chinese will just bite the bullet and set up their own _English_ language colleges and buy in top quality staff with the promise of research grants. Then they will attract all the Asian students currently wanting to go to
Auto Industry (Score:2)
I thought that the foreign automakers (notably Korean and Japanese) are setting up more North American design and production.
As for China, all the automakers are working on expanding in there.
In time global pricing will equalize, if China frees its currency, this will happen faster.
Helloooooooo... sidestepping security? (Score:2)
And what prevents an Islamist terrorist from studing in India - DOH!?!?!? Specially when his teacher was just graduated from the US.
The obvious logical step is requiring foreign students to belong in a country who agrees NOT to trade with banned countries.
And then, requiring foreign students to belong in a
Back in the day.... (Score:2)
Now, if they do the same thing, we keep a close eye on them, because their place or birth makes them inherently untrustworthy.
Nice.
Re:Back in the day.... (Score:3, Informative)
This is really happening:
Shaul Mofaz, Israel's Defense Minister, visited the US in 2002, shortly after 9/11. The border officials in JFK airport in NYC didn't let him in, becuase he was born in Iran in 1948. It took high-level diplomatic intervention to allow him to continue instead of being turned back to Israel. Apparently being a former Chief of Staff [wikipedia.org] of the IDF (Israeli Army) doesn't mean you might not be an Iranian terrorist.
In March 2003, the Israeli singer Rita had to cancel a tour of the US.
They don't need the license to learn it. (Score:2)
So technically, they should be able to learn something, they just should not be able to leave the country unless they get the export license.
Re:They don't need the license to learn it. (Score:3, Insightful)
The reason educated people were not allowed to leave the Soviet Union was that the government did not want to "export" their knowledge. Only if the Soviet government really trusted that an educated person would come back would he be allowed to temporarily leave.
Today this "export restriction" only applies to some foreigners. But how long will this restriction last? After all, US citicens could also leave their country with potentially dangerous information in their minds, and thus "export" this pot
Whats the point? (Score:2, Insightful)
Information flows more freely than ever in todays world, and these restrictions just add up to more bureaucratic nonsense while doing little to boost American security.
An international student's perspective (Score:2, Insightful)
As an Indian grad student studying in the US, I have absolutely no problem with an extra pair of eyes checking to see if what I'm doing is legit. I suspect that many international students don't either. What I fear though is th
Re:An international student's perspective (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm assuming that your statement is about personal liberty, and if so, I* agree wholeheartedly with you. Also, there' the fact that all this 'dual' purpose technology is not impossible to develop elsewhere - those who want it will create it, while the brilliant minds that want to learn and contribute here will be scared away. I hate the thought of having to prove that I'm not a potential terrorist.
Losing the Chinese and Indian students will be a big problem for the US in the years to come. Right now, the main reason why Chinese and Indians come to the US to study is that they can get opportunities here that they cannot get in their home country. We all know how China and India are developing - what happens that they can get the same opportunites at home? Who will do the graduate research in American universities? Instead of preparing for that eventuality, I see that you have stuff like 'leave no child behind'. I'm not trying to be condescending here - as a great lover of education, it pains me to see that education is nobody's priority in this country.
(* I'm Indian)
United States of SCO (Score:2)
Which will only give the US legal ammunition whenever they need it against foreign companies, governments and technologies.
Makes me wonder if downloading linux-2.6.10.tar.bz2 from USA will be illegal.
American Physical Society on this topic (Score:4, Informative)
Dear Chairs of PhD-granting Physics Departments,
I am writing to alert you to a possible threat to research in your department
and to urge you and your faculty to write to the Department of Commerce (DOC)
in response to its "Advance notice of proposed rulemaking" published in the
Federal Register on March 28, 2005. The notice calls for comments that must be
received by May 27, 2005. As discussed below, the leadership of the American
Physical Society feels this issue is so important that you should seek to
provide thoughtful and accurate responses by your university administration,
your department and individual faculty who might be affected by the
recommended changes. We believe that your comments can make a difference.
The proposed rulemaking by the DOC is a response to recommendations presented
by the Department's Inspector General. Implementation of these
recommendations would cause two major changes:
1) The operation of export-controlled instrumentation by a foreign national
working in your department would be considered a "deemed export", even if that
person were engaged in fundamental research. As a consequence, a license
would be required for each affected foreign national (student, staff or
faculty member) and for each export controlled instrument. Typical export
controlled instruments are high-speed oscilloscopes, high-resolution
lithography systems, high-end computers and GPS systems. The situation is
complicated by the fact that the list of instruments is different for each
country.
2) U.S. organizations would be required to apply for a deemed export license
for students, employees or visitors who are foreign nationals (but not U. S.
naturalized citizens or permanent residents) and have access to controlled
technology if they were born in a country where the technology transfer in
question would require an export license, regardless of their most recent
citizenship or permanent residency. For example, transfer of technology to a
Chinese scientist who has established permanent residency or citizenship in
Canada would be treated, for export licensing purposes under the proposed
guidelines, as a deemed export to a Chinese foreign national. (The list of
export-controlled instruments for Chinese nationals is particularly
extensive.)
The Department of Commerce officials who have the responsibility for
developing new policies and practices in response to the Inspector General's
recommendations are anxious to determine what the impact of implementing those
recommendations would be. They must seek a balance between increases in
national security that might result from the implementation of the new rules
and the decrease in national security that would result from negative impacts
to US research and development.
In initial discussions by the APS Panel on Public Affairs (POPA) it was
thought likely that consequences would be:
a) research would slow down significantly due to the need to obtain licenses
for each foreign national and, particularly, Chinese student, staff member,
postdoc, or faculty member using export controlled instrumentation. We
believe that a separate license would have to be obtained for each
instrument. In this regard, it should be noted that the relevant DOC office
has the staff to handle about 800-1000 license requests per year. Present
times to process a license request are typically 2-3 months.
b) instruments would have to be secured to ensure that those who do not have
the required license could not use them.
c) the number of Chinese and other foreign national students would decrease
markedly as their "second-class" status on campus became apparent, thus
ultimately weakening the nation's science and technology workforce.
d) the administrative costs of research would rise markedly.
e) national security would ultimately be weakened as a consequence of a
Re:To be fair (Score:2)
Re:America is no longer a free world (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:America is no longer a free world (Score:2)
Please! You cannot blame all Americans, or even a majority of Americans, for the fascist regime that has taken over the USA government.
The 2000 national election was stolen by an illegal Florida state law that prohibited a state-wide ballot recount, and a US Supreme Court largely appointed by Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush.
The 2004 national election was finagled by a co