all 42 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 64 points 4 months ago (4 children)

Lieber acknowledged being “young and stupid” in getting involved with China’s Thousand Talents Program, the state-backed initiative to recruit overseas experts, his lawyer told the court in 2021. When he was arrested in 2020, Lieber told FBI agents he “wanted to win a Nobel Prize” and be recognized for his work, according to prosecutors.

The FBI declined to comment and the Justice Department didn’t respond to questions.

The Lieber case illustrates a broader failure of U.S. policy, some analysts say.

“If you think of him as a vector for tech acquisition that runs contrary to U.S. interests, we identified that, punished him, and that did nothing to stop the big-picture trend,” said Emily de La Bruyère, co-founder of China-focused consultancy Horizon Advisory and a senior fellow at the Washington-based Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a nonprofit research institute considered hawkish on foreign policy. Gerstell, the former U.S. official, described Lieber as “Exhibit A” in how U.S. legal tools are inadequate.

“This is a guy who was convicted of precisely the thing that we want him to be convicted of in this context, and yet the minute he's released from house arrest, he’s off in China,” he said.

Lmao good for him. I pray for the opportunity to help China with my talents.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 29 points 4 months ago (2 children)
  • [–] 29 points 4 months ago

    The difference in this case that makes it sweeter in my opinion is that it seems Lieber left of his own volition. Xuesen looks to be exchanged for a POW before making the Dongfeng missile. Lieber was being pushed through a legal meat grinder for paperwork and tax bullshit and generally treated poorly. So he just left for someone who appreciated labor. Two different flavors of schadenfreude, one cruel and stupid country

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 58 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    ​That concern is amplified because of Beijing’s military-civil fusion strategy, whereby civilian scientific resources and research are shared with the military.

    Unlike the US where there is a hard wall between civilian science and the military right, right, right, right?! hasan-stfu

    “China has weaponized against us our own openness and our own efforts for innovation,” said Glenn Gerstell, a nonresident senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and former general counsel of the U.S. National Security Agency from 2015 to 2020. “They’ve flipped that and turned it around against us, and they’re ​taking advantage of it.”

    LMAO as if the US hasn't spent a century stealing anything it could from anyone it could rip off. Boo hoo we need more secrecy and less scrutiny of our mad science efforts. Otherwise those Asiatic hordes could never come up with this on their own. Only the divine anglo-brain-pan could possibly bring about innovation.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 28 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    That magnanimous openness, where all the research is done by mininally compensated international students under constant threat of deportation.

    Shocking that they'd go home to work in a lavishly funded lab where that's not the case.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 11 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

    The USA just can't help but look a gift horse in the mouth. International grad students are viewed with such suspicion... and yet, are one of the fundamental innovators powering the engine of the US economy. Lieber's grad students are a perfect example: a lot of people think he was training an ominous horde of Asians who are presumably doing nefarious things such as advancing medical science at USA universities.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 25 points 4 months ago (32 children)

    embedding electronics into the human brain

    pass

  • source
  • hideshow 32 child comments
  • [–] [S] 62 points 4 months ago (31 children)

    If you were a paraplegic then you might feel differently I suspect.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 31 child comments
  • [–] 51 points 4 months ago (5 children)
  • [–] 44 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    I had the same initial reaction you did, but I think it's just because of people like Musk trying to do sicko shit with it that I just immediately had that association despite the fact that there are countless legitimate medical applications.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 4 months ago* (3 children)

    yep yep you're reading my mind

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Yeah but not through psychic powers, you have an unsecured ssh version runnnng on your StemConnect

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (11 children)

    Paraplegics would be like 50th in line for this kind of neuroprosthesis. Most paraplegics would probably forego experimental neurosurgery in order to get a slightly better mobility aid. (Which at this point is the best this can do. Which isn't nothing. But the number of people who hate their wheel chair that much isnt as high as you may think)

    You may be thinking of tetra/quadriplegics.

    EDIT:I should not speculate on the future of health technologies.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] [S] 17 points 4 months ago (10 children)

    I mean they're already using this tech to help paraplegics in China today https://www.nature.com/articles/s41587-026-03101-8

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (9 children)

    That's not what the article says. The article does not mention paraplegics. It mentions paralysis. The two are related but distinct terms.

    Here's your hint dude. If it mentions a glove that can move your hand , it is not going to do anything for someone who is paraplegic.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] [S] 2 points 4 months ago (8 children)
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (7 children)

    Zero mention of paraplegia or paraplegics. That one does mention tetraplegics/quadroplegics as a possible group to receive this kind of neuroprosthetic. As i said prior, i believe you may be conflating "paraplegia" and "tetraplegia"/"quadriplegia" and "paralysis" into one thing.

    Edit: Let's define our terms so we don't end up starting an argument unnecessarily

    Paralysis: an inhibition of motor function. I.e. something that is supposed to be able to move, isn't. (Palsies are also considered a form of paralysis, but let's keep it simple for now) This covers everything from sleep paralysis to tetraplegia/quadriplegia, really everything apart from mechanical obstructions (generally) counts.

    Paraplegia: Disturbance of the motor and sensory function of the legs and lower body. Likely due to some congenital affectation of the spinal canal or spinal injury. Some paraplegics can walk, some can't even move a single muscle, some have absolutely no feeling south of the navel, some have most of their sensory functions intact, and some have a spastic disorder. It's a wide spectrum. But if it affects your hands it is not paraplegia.

    Tetra/quadriplegia: there's some technical reason tetra ia more correct tham quadri but I forget it. You banged your cervical spine (Neck) and now your motor functions below that are impaired, sensory functions may also be inhibited. Just as with paraplegia its a wide spectrum but importantly it covers arms AND legs (Hence quadri [four] plegia).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] [S] 2 points 4 months ago (6 children)

    I don't really follow how this distinction relates to the original point I was making to be honest. Please explain why it matter which specific disability the chip helps alleviate?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago* (5 children)

    It matters both insofar as the specific experience people have of disability matters and that you insisted that you were talking about a specific thing in spite of correction.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] [S] 2 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    I once again ask how me not realizing the specific distinction is relevant to the original point I was making. Are you suggesting that suffering of people with specific conditions is less important than others?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (3 children)

    Let me go back to the first post I made here

    Paraplegics would be like 50th in line for this kind of neuroprosthesis. Most paraplegics would probably forego experimental neurosurgery in order to get a slightly better mobility aid. (Which at this point is the best this can do. Which isn't nothing. But the number of people who hate their wheel chair that much isnt as high as you may think)

    Which of course lays out why the difference is relevant.

    And let me add: That is some dishonest bullshit in response to being proven wrong dude. That is genuinely sad and hostile and you need to log off.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] [S] 3 points 4 months ago* (2 children)

    To sum up, you made up an assertion without any basis. Then when shown that this tech is actually being used to help disabled people, you started doubling down on hair splitting not being able to acknowledge being wrong. Maybe take your own advice there.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 4 months ago (11 children)

    Okay you've now helped every paraplegic on earth.

    However every human being in a capitalist system from now until the sun engulfs the planet is a slave unable to ever break free due to brainwashing, surveillance, and control chips implanted in all humans within these societies to prevent revolt. This is forced with economic coercion and later done at birth as an "equality" measure since you can no longer work, get benefits, etc without one.

    You've made a small number better but doomed humanity to be a slave race. Good job. Not a worthwhile trade off.

    Such a thing should exist under communism but under capitalism it will be used to design unbreakable chains to subjugate humanity to the end of time and that and the suffering it will bring is unacceptable.

    This is why I view even Chinese efforts as terrifying. Their research will not stay in China, it will be taken by the west and used in horrendous ways. Man is not responsible enough yet to have this kind of technology.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] [S] 18 points 4 months ago (6 children)

    It's pretty clear that capitalists have been maintaining social control in the west without any need for chips just fine. We don't need some sci-fi tech, we're already living in a society where people are atomized and unable to organize in a meaningful way.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (5 children)

    They want total control without having to maintain states.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] [S] 4 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    It's pretty clear that you need something akin to state structure to maintain that level of control in practice.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (3 children)

    Not if you have technology akin to magic.

    Not saying this will happen but there are definitely billionaires fantasying about it and them trying and failing can still have outcomes.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] [S] 4 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    Sure, people can fantasize about all kinds of stuff, but what matters at the end of the day is what's materially possible.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 4 months ago