Comment by bbarnett
4 years ago
I know this is going to be contentious, but a quick Google shows that
* both originated in China (both attended early university there)
* one appears to be on a student VISA (undergraduate BA in China, now working on PhD at UoM)
China doesn't allow its brightest and best to leave, without cause.
When I see research like this, it also makes me think of how "foolish" China sometimes views the West, and the rest of the world. Both for political reasons, eg to keep the masses under control, and due to a legitimate belief we all have in "we are right".
Frankly, whilst I have no personal animosity against someone working on behalf of what they see as right, for example, forwarding what they believe to be in the best interests of their country, and fellow citizens? I must still struggle against goals which are contrary to the same for my country, and my citizens.
Why all of the above?
Well, such things have been know for decades. And while things are heating up:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/china-canada-universities-r...
"including the claim that some of the core technology behind China's surveillance network was developed in Canadian universities."
When one thinks of the concept? That a foreign power, uses your own research funding, research networks, resources, capabilities, to research weaponry and tools to destroy you?
Maybe China should scoff at The West.
And this sort of research is like pen testing, without direct political ramifications for China itself.
Yes, 100%, these two could have just been working within their own personal sphere.
They also could be working on research for China. Like how easily one can affect the kernel source code, in plain sight. And even, once caught, how to regain confidence of those "tricked".
dang: This post does not deserve to be flagged. Downvote? Sure! Flagged? I've seen far more contentious things stated, when referring to the NSA. And all I'm doing here is providing context, and pointing to the possible motivations of those involved.
Others kept stating "Why would the do this?!" and "Why would they be so stupid?".
Further, at the end I additionally validate that I am postulating, that 100% it certainly may not be the case. Only that I am speculating on a possible motivation.
Are we now not allowed to speculate on motive? If so, I wonder, how many other posts should be flagged.
For I see LOADS of people saying "They did this for reason $x".
Lastly, anyone believing that China is not a major security concern to the West, must be living under a rock. There are literally hundreds of thousands of news articles, reports, of the Chinese government doing just this.
Yet to mention it as a potential cause of someone's actions is.. to receive a flag?
This is unjustified xenophobia. And besides, if they were really trying to get bugs into the Linux kernel to further some nefarious goal, why would they publish a paper on it?
Simplest explanation is that they just wanted the publication, not to blame it on CCP or the researchers' nationality.
As I said, the research is the goal. Acknowledging China's past behaviour, and applying it to potential present actions, is not xenophobia.
> China doesn't allow its brightest and best to leave, without cause.
LOL, this is completely unfounded bollocks.
Of course, because one doesn't need permission to leave China? Or even a high enough social credit?
As of 2 years ago (pre-COVID), no. You needed a passport, and that's it. I doubt things have changed materially since then.
Some people require permission to leave (e.g. certain party members/SOE managers/etc), and I'm sure a lot of others are on government watchlists and will be stopped at the airport.
But it's patently absurd to take that and infer that every single overseas Chinese student was only allowed to leave if they spy/sabotage the West.
This is utter bullshit. I didn't need a permission or high enough social credit to leave China.
5 replies →
Talking about flagged posts: why are they so hard to read? If I don't want to read a flagged post, I simply won't read it. Why are you forcing me to not read it by coloring it that way?
>This post does not deserve to be flagged.
You start with "I know this is going to be contentious", you know this is flamebait.
Why would you assume it is flamebait? The person knows they have an opinion that is at the edge of the conversation, which might invoke disagreement, and disclaims it up front?