this post was submitted on 22 Apr 2025
762 points (99.0% liked)
World News
46022 readers
3932 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
They're already off the cliff, they just haven't looked down yet.
should be diving off…
Hopefully she gets deported to a good country. We're evil now. Like Google turned evil.
She would be deported to Russia. So no, she will not be deported to a good country.
If she's being moved against her will, then it's safe to assume she's being moved someplace worse.
you could just read the article instead of safely assuming… but yes:
fighting possible deportation to Russia, where she said she fears persecution and jail time over her protests against the war in Ukraine.
russia will put her in a gulag or maybe just kill her.
The main reason she is detained is probably that she is a russian who opposes the Ukraine war.
Do you have a source handy? With ICE backed by this administration, I wouldn't imagine Russians with bad takes on Ukraine would be targets.
Edit: I misread the original comment and now understand why a Russian opposing the Russian invasion of Ukraine would be a target.
I'd imagine Russians opposing the Ukraine war would especially be targets, maybe you misread the comment and the "bad take"? Trump would be eager to get rid of pro-Ukraine speakers for Putin.
(A source would be nice too)
You are correct that I misread the original comment.
I hope her lawyer is skilled and the court responsive to arguments - and she gets her freedom back.
If I was her, one of my first actions would be starting to teach a colleague to replace me, while asking colleagues abroad about open jobs in research (followed by questions about legislation, immigration and civil rights).
Basically, I would not stay in a country whose officials wronged me for no reason, and might do that again.
Why on earth would she have any interest in helping the company retain knowledge when the country that company is in has treated her so poorly? Move on and it's their loss.
I hear there is no shortage of countries willing to take American scientists. I don't think she'll have a problem finding a better (safer) place.
Operation: Return Paperclip
I hope she's not sent to a death camp before a court have a chance to say anything, because that's also a thing that can happen.
Last thing I'd do is give anyone a way to do my work without me present
I love the headline. That's how you report on these issues: still clickbaity but focusing on the perps and the effects of their actions.
I don't really like it, makes it sound as if her rights are only important because she is useful.
While I agree with your concern, I think it does help highlight how bad these policies are because it is impacting more than just "useless " or something like that. I agree that rights should still matter regardless, but focusing on the impacts helps signal to broader audiences.
It's important because the rhetoric of "we only want useful people" isn't true. It's not just about her, it's also about false rhetoric.
I see where you're coming from and agree from that perspective, on the other hand, I feel like it highlights and billboards the stupidity of this regime extremely well.
Like: "Hey we could have a cure for cancer any minute now but no, these dumbnuts are too busy scaring and/or extrajudicially kidnapping people who would better humanity."
Isn't this the main complaint about China and the communists from the West in terms of actions, not the half baked oversimplified idealist nonsense; anti academic injustices due to populist stupidity in politics that lead to mass murder and loss of human progress?
Yes, and I personally feel that until January 2025 it was still a valid claim for an american to make. Not anymore.
the reason she was detained was that she was analyzing images that'd cure cancer. you underestimated big pharma
Somewhere in here is a perfect counter balance to right wing speak.
"A scientist who was about to publish a cancer curd has been arrest by border agents with Trump's authority. Trump received billions big pharm funding."
The trick with the right is it doesn't need to be entity true. It just need to tick ther correct set of emotions.
Okay RFK.
Why would the greedy fuccbois at the top of these pharmacy companies want to cure cancer? Aside from the clout theyll make billions more off inflated treatments that may or may not work
Realistically speaking, she's most likely somehow sponsored by big pharma (Well considering that it's imaging, it's more the interesection between big tech and big pharma, not sure where to put health division of GE or Siemens) , and cancer treatment/dianostic bring them a lot of money so they like cancer research.
Looking at a couple publications from the lab funding appears to be from a couple different foundations but nothing commercial. Pharma barely puts anything into basic R+D unless they're a startup. Established pharma R+D is largely clinical trials and/or process development. If her work is patented by the university then pharma may pay the university to use her work. University would then give a smaller kickback to the lab/scientists.
NCI (national cancer institute-part of NIH) was the largest cancer research funder in the US, about 7B worth and even then less than 10% of proposed projects were being funded. The ACS (American cancer society) funds about 100M.
Thank you for this. I'm not sure how it became common knowledge to assume pharma companies pay for r&d but I've seen 10 different people on this app say those exact words and it's really starting to peeve me off.
Each cancer is almost a disease in itself, due to its own individual nature, for an effective treatment the ideal would be to use personalized medicine, which will always give a lot of money to big pharmaceutical companies, there is no need for them to delay or harm research into cancer treatment.