Security Versus Science 286
dogfrt writes "According to this Wired News article, post-9/11 homeland security has had a decidedly negative effect on US scientific research. In specific, researchers are self-censoring what they publish, talented foreign students are being denied visas (approximately 20%, according to one source in the article), and researchers are avoiding work with dangerous pathogens, choosing more innocuous micro-organisms."
Sad. (Score:5, Insightful)
Differnet times for a different world (Score:3, Insightful)
Security through Obscurity (Score:5, Insightful)
Ouch (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Differnet times for a different world (Score:5, Insightful)
You reap what you sow.. (Score:2, Insightful)
Has America Given away its edge on tech? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Security through Obscurity (Score:2, Insightful)
Why? (Score:5, Insightful)
Overall they're doing the right thing, but I can't help but feel they're doing it for the wrong reason.
Article Overstates effects of Visa restrictions (Score:5, Insightful)
2) There is a real question of if the open borders policy has really helped US science in a meaningful way from the 20's-50's the US had a fairly strict immigration policy and quite a bit of science happened in the US. Right now the US has a serious problem of underutilizatin of native US technical/scientific talent.
Re:Sad. (Score:1, Insightful)
That makes sense. After all, if there's one thing you can say about Al Qaeda and other terrorists, it's that they are very trustworthy. That is, at least when they're saying that they want to kill you.
Re:Sad. (Score:1, Insightful)
There is nothing artificial about consequent security. It's tested approach that we know will lead to results. Maybe we don't het to be the most innovative country annymore, but that's arisk we are willing to take in order to ensure that we are safe from terrorists.
Do you seriously trust Ascroft less than Osama Bin Laden?
Do you seriously trust that madman more that a God loving patriot willing to to sacrifise some false sense of securuity in order to maintain our freedom and power to strike back against our enemies?
Whatever your opinion on Ascroft and Rumsfeld is; the fact is that they are person's you can trust simply because they are consistent in their policy over time, not jsut in a short glimpse of second.
The qualities we need for homeland security are the same that they can deploy in our research and development sector.
If these "scientists" that we don't allow to enter our country choose to work for Osama how can DHS be blamed for that? It's a free world and we still can't controll their behavior as much as we would like, but blaiming DHS becasue of others people misery is a bit naive and "conspiracyish".
The founding fathers newer intended that our intel should be perfect or our state leaders shoul be a genious, all they wanted was someone that tried to protect the constitution. And there is no doubt that DHS is a broad and gentle approach in securing or continued freedom from oppression.
Re:Ouch (Score:2, Insightful)
The next step will be a 'brain-drain', probably to Europe or somewhere like Korea.
The US attitude to intellectual property and more and more, civil rights will drive bright people away.
If Linux and open source grow, I think that Germany will have the new Silicon Valley.
Law of unintended consequences (Score:5, Insightful)
Ben Franklin Said it Best (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Sad. (Score:5, Insightful)
Let me take these one at a time.
Re:The real enemy (Score:2, Insightful)
The real enemy is not the Department of Homeland Security but the terrorists who have forced us to take these drastic measures.
Because we all know about how hi-tech science such as box-cutters were used in the 9/11 attacks. Not to mention that only foreigners are terrorists.
Re:Differnet times for a different world (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The real enemy (Score:3, Insightful)
However, if we (the western world, but especially the States) allow a few uber-fundementalist Islamists whithout even mainstream support by their religion to dictate what can and will be researched, they get that much closer to their goal. Tough call, risk stagnation or distaster?
Re:The real enemy (Score:4, Insightful)
The best analogy would probably be if American universities suddenly declared that transcripts for new graduates were going to be classified and you couldn't talk about them to the general public. Good luck going to your potential employers upon graduation and telling them, "Yeah, sure, I took some classes, but I can't tell you which ones or how well I did in them either. (But hire me anyways, please!)"
Re:Article Overstates effects of Visa restrictions (Score:1, Insightful)
I'm just back from a stint at a US government lab - which is why I'm posting anonymously. The PhD students and post docs from a range of countries have had massive problems getting into the US - six month delays are now common. Even coming from the EU has started to be a massive problem, delays, stupid interviews etc. When you only have a few years of funding a delay this long starts to seem stupid - why go to the US when the EU or Japan are easier for entry? get your work done, get the PhD and then worry about the US on your resume.
The main difference between now and the past is that large scale science isn't done by one country alone - most international projects at US government labs are (typically 50%) funded by other countries - now if you don't allow their people easy access in and out of the country you risk having them say for this hassle we can build in the EU or Japan or at least stop giving the US any money or support which kills the project.
On point 2 about the underutilization of US talent - if it was there it would be used. Its not. This isn't H1(B) territory (OK some of it is but for people who fit into a group of about 6 in their field in the world). Most of its PhD's and Post-Docs who are there for experience with the bosses just flying in for a few weeks at a time on business waivers.
Re:Law of unintended consequences (Score:3, Insightful)
Every facet of life is about balance... we can't focus on science at all costs nor can we focus on security at all costs. The article doesn't say what the percentage of rejected foreign physics (and note that the article stated it was 20% of physics students, not 20% overall) students were prior to 9/11 nor what countries those 20% are from (does the US want to let in Iranians, North Koreans, etc into graduate physics programs)
Instead of looking outside the US for science majors, perhaps the states should improve their school system (throwing more money at it hasn't fixed it). Here in NY, they decided that the math regents and physics regents tests were too hard so they're going to pass a bunch of kids who failed it (despite my being able to get 100% on the math in about 15 minutes using only high school math (no calc or anything fancy) that I haven't studied in 10 years). Go back to teaching students how to think and learn rather than how to feel good about themselves.
Security by obscurity (Score:5, Insightful)
Do you seriously think that any of this research really would make a difference to a terrorist or not?
How much high tech did it take to fly two planes into two buildings? The planes, that's it. And it's not like they even built the planes themselves.
Security by obscurity is not the way to go. Anybody who has any experience in real life with security (be it physical security, or more abstract as in network security) knows that security by obscurity is nothing more than a pillow to sleep on for those who are trying to protect themselves.
And when that "security" measure is hindering science.. I don't think I have to spell it out for you.
Re:not necessarily blaming the scientists (Score:2, Insightful)
-uso.
Re:Security through Obscurity (Score:5, Insightful)
Hehe..
Or try telling a country of Britney worshippers..
Or what about a country of Dr.Phil fans..
We're all fucked. People are stupid. Politicians most of all.
Re:Differnet times for a different world (Score:5, Insightful)
Congratulations, you've just shown a fundamental misunderstanding of how scientific progress happens.
Presenting it only to the US military will result in errors not getting caught by peer review. It'll mean each individual research team has to re-invent the wheel in their research, instead of building on other teams' experience and results.
Not only that, but many researchers have to show that they get papers published - having no papers published = dead career.
My stance (Score:3, Insightful)
From what I can tell the US isn't always able to get the information it needs from international sources. The head of Interpol was on "News Hour" a few months ago and he agreed that the system doesn't work because the right information is not available at the moment it is needed. Interpol can't always get the information it needs from the FBI and vice versa because of a lack of protocols for just-in-time transferring of information.
No one ever accused the Bush administration of hav (Score:1, Insightful)
So how does it feel to be beaten like a drum by someone you think is intellectually inferior?
What a hallucinatory rant (Score:1, Insightful)
You of all people know this?!?! One must ask, "How?"
Ashcroft tried to remove the meaning of your life.
WTF does this mean? It's pure ad hominem bullshit.
Science should not be constrained by security.
Utterly ridiculous. So we should disseminate all data? No matter what it could be used for? One wonders your position on gun control - to be consistent you'd have to support complete unfettered access to firearms. Somehow I doubt that.
Re:The real enemy (Score:2, Insightful)
But it seems like these days, U.S. citizens who speak out against their government's actions are automatically "traitors", and "liberal" is now synonymous with the worst insult possible. It doesn't matter if these people deeply love their country, they are still committing "treason". Goosestepping patriotism seems to be the only Allowable Thoughtpattern.
How did this happen? It's like the 1950s, Part II.
Re:What is so sad??? (Score:2, Insightful)
Terrorism and its effects (Score:5, Insightful)
Huh? (Score:3, Insightful)
Osama Bin Laden comes from a family that has incredible amount of wealth. All of the 9/11 hijackers were in the Middle class. If the Islamic radicals were driven by economic status they would attack their own corrupt governments rather than attacking us. Your acting as if the Middle East wasn't the richest source of oil in the world.
Brian Ellenberger
Re:What a hallucinatory rant (Score:5, Insightful)
Science creates tools, means to ends, not ends in themselves. Tools have no morality in and of themselves, and so therefore their research should not be judged based upon what they could be used for. Final, production level products of that research, can and should be scrutinized for what they could be used for.
This, too, is pure ad hominem bullshit. The parent would not have to support complete unfettered access to firearms to be consistent. It's one thing to allow researchers unfettered access to materials for their research, but rather different to allow the end product of that research to be available to anyone.
Re:Sad. (Score:2, Insightful)
It's not a question of trust... It's a question of who is the most dangerous for me.
I'm not American but as an athiest I'm pretty sure Bin Laden would be very happy to kill me. But the fact is he's powerless. Sure he could give some money to a terrorist to bomb something but demagogy apart, this is insignificant. He doesn't have nuclear weapons, chemical weapons are less effective than a bomb and the problem with planes could be solved simply by a stupid door. There is still problems with, for example, trains but again it could be solved with simple solutions. I agree it won't be cheap but even if it cost 50 billions it means less than $200 per person.
On the other hand there's Ashcroft. He don't want to kill me but for "security reasons" he wants to control me. And the problem is, even if I live in Canada, he can. He has the power to make sure I never cause trouble to people in power and never voice my opinion (sure I can say wathever I want but only as long as I don't disturb anything which in the end is exactly the same).
God loving patriot
Bin Laden is also a God loving patriot. He was rich and could have lived in a beautiful house in California if he wanted to. But he choose to fight for God and his country. So I'm sure you understand that I really don't trust "God loving patriots".
If these "scientists" that we don't allow to enter our country choose to work for Osama
No these scientists won't work for Bin Laden but they will simply work for their country and help their country instead of helping the US. Of course, as I'm not american, I see nothing wrong with this...
Re:Sad. (Score:5, Insightful)
It's much easier to keep sensitive information away from the good guys than it is to keep it away from the bad guys. Since any metric will be measuring what information is kept away as opposed to who it is kept away from, the "increased security" will work to the relative advantage of the bad guys.
Re:9/11 killed sisas (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:The real enemy (Score:5, Insightful)
2. Nobody said the people I'm speaking of who oppose the U.S. government in certain policy issues are against the interests of the United States. Criticising your own government does NOT make you a traitor, sorry. That's a right you have.
3. I am not a U.S. citizen, merely someone who believes in the concepts on which it was founded. Happily, I won't have people screaming "Traitor!" in my face if I dare question what my government is doing.
Dumbass Biologist keeps plague samples for 20 yrs (Score:1, Insightful)
I've seen the storage shelves of a university's labs and they are truly scary, with half-inch long sublimated cyanic crystals formed around the caps of jars that have been unopened for tens of years - very pretty and very lethal - so long that it would require a hazardous waste disposal team to even pick up said jars. Christ, after hearing about Dr. Plague above, who know what other kind of shit biologists/chemist keep in their closet, waiting for the unsuspecting janitor to stumble upon it!
As for foreign grad students, this has been studied heavily. The real reason the U.S. has so many foreign grad students is not because they're excellent, but because it was considered good foreign policy to fund these persons. And nowadays such U.S. funds are more likely to be used to put an Argentinian through cosmetics school than a Bangladeshi through the Stanford physics program. IMO there should be no U.S. government funding of foreign students whatsoever.
There are plenty of qualified people in the U.S. to fill these openings and more.
Re:And how exactly do POWs held without a trial (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Sad. (Score:3, Insightful)
This doesn't seem terribly well thought out to me.
First, you don't apparantly know what motivates them (there are several excellent books on this; try Alan Dershowitz's book Why Terrorism Works [amazon.com], for example, as your tone indicates you are fairly left-of-center, as is Dershowitz). What you're talking about (hatred between nations of differing states of economic development) is what international relations theorists call World System Theory.
Don't impose your cultural biases on the situation. The terrorists are, as another poster pointed out, from wealthy backgrounds. Their nation is a major economic power. Instead, we have a cultural / religious conflict. A history of european imperialism, the recent collapse of the Ottoman empire, and a history of hatemongering by the totalitarian regimes there have created the terrorism problem.
Certainly, US policies play a part in this. But do you suggest abandoning our key ally (Israel, the only democracy in the region)? That's a major irritant to the Arab world. So is western culture. That's frankly an even bigger provokation. The only way to stop that would be major cultural changes in the US. Removing the rights of women, for example. Or executing gays and lesbians. Any takers? Not me. A third source of the conflict is religion. Saudi Arabia and other countries have espoused fundamentalist strains of their religion. So instead of the history of tolerance we saw at the Islamic world's height, we see massive intolerance, and violence against every country on the Muslim world's borders.
Virtually none of this is our (America's) fault. Not every evil that happens in the world is our fault. So while I'm sure that the blame-America contingent feels sophisticated and cosmopolitan, they're frankly in the wrong here. If that's not you, then good for you (there are plenty of people who believe this, so my point isn't wasted). Your 'tainted flag' reference lead me to believe you are.
OK, so now Ashcroft. I'm not sure what you mean by "removing the meaning of your life". (Though banning Monty Python would be tragic.) Apart from highly partisan smearing, I've yet to hear a real criticism against him. He's hard working, organized and smart. The objections against him typically boil down to "he's evil because he's evil" (a tauntology), "he's destroying america / secretly a nazi / wants to remove our rights / etc" (hyperbole, again unsupported), and the PATRIOT Act.
If you're a moderate who's only just tuned in, only that last argument against Ashcroft has any factual basis. So then, all we have to do is decide if the PATRIOT Act is good or bad.
Bottom line (my opinion): there are some excellent provisions to it, and some very bad provisions. Nearly all of the new powers it gives to law enforcement actually require a warrant from a judge. Much simply establishes a procedure for already legally acceptable investigation avenues.
However, there are several provisions that are very worrisome. For one thing, some special powers delegated to anti-terrorism activities are being stretched by the DoJ to include non-terrorism activities, like drug enforcement. Gag orders on groups subpoened for membership records would be another. A final one would be 'trolling' type provisions that allow law enforcement to broadly grep for information without a particular investigation in mind.
So there's much to be fixed. Does this really make the A
Cultural understanding perhaps? (Score:2, Insightful)
How about cultural understanding? The USA doesn't exactly have the best reputation here in Europe. You might not care - but we are quite a few people who would have live in a World where people understanding each others cultural backgrounds - so we can all be at least friendly on some level.
I went to Virginia as a high school exchange student - spent a year there and learned a lot about americans the US in general that I would never have learned as a tourist. When you live among people you learn quite a lot more about them than when you just stay at they hotels and see their monuments. This knowledge I took back to my home country (Denmark) and have since then told a lot about my experience - and I believe that I to some degree have given quite a few danes a more varied impression of the US. Likewise I have told countless of americans about Denmark - and they have experienced how we really aren't that different from them.
And just like I went to the USA some american student (although all too few and even fewer in these times) take the trip to a froeign country - both promoting the US and taking back an understanding of a different culture.
Closing down your country is not the answer. Not economically and not culturally. Americans have a tendency to believe they can pretty much handle everything themselves. Although that is true to a degree it is, and has always been, far from true in all cases. You need to trade with the rest of the World - and to do that you need foreigners who know your country and your culture - and most importantly you need a lot of foreigners who have a positive attitude towards you. Otherwise we're all pretty much screwed (or at least worse off financially).
The Terrorists Won (Score:4, Insightful)
If you don't believe me, look around at the changes since then.
People don't trust anyone, governments are taking away rights and privacy wholesale.. Censorship.. Jailings for expressing yourself, mass carnage, daily bombardments of news, peoples work/life habits changed.. etc, etc, etc.
The basic fabric of a free society has been ripped to shreds.. They are just loving it.
THIS is their real goal.. destroy free society so everyone is reduced to their level of poverty and opression...
Re: Differnet times for a different world (Score:5, Insightful)
> Sept. 11 changed everyone's PERCEPTION of the threat of terrorism, including Bush, as you pointed out. This was a change for the better as it's more in line with reality. As you point out, terrorism existed before 9/11. We didn't take it seriously enough before 9/11, however.
Arguably we've gone from underperceiving terrorism to overperceiving it.
Yeah, 9/11 was bad, but how many people have died in car wrecks since then, and how much do your hear about that on the news?
Or from a less parochial perspective, how many people in the world have died of AIDS or died in the various slaughters that have been running in Africa?
Re:Sad. (Score:4, Insightful)
Retards (Score:1, Insightful)
Meanwhile, I can't do basic scientific research because no fucking airline in the country will allow me to ship cases of samples (hundreds of little glass vials in padded racks) by air. Guess what, you can't get water samples from the un-electrified hinterlands by boat before the organisms in them DIE.
You retards with your flags held high, and your total incomprehension of what those flags once symbolized, make me so pissed I understand where Osama's coming from.
Flaming Jebus, people, don't you realize the shrub is just a puppet of the pollution industry? Their whole goal is to make oxygen and water COST MONEY, how many times do you have to hear them quote "The Tragedy of the Commons" before you figure it out?
If only you morons could give up your freedoms without endangering mine... I will take my chances with the freakin' terrorists, just put things back the way they were before you all wet your craven pants!