
IEEE forced to ban Huawei employees from peer-reviewing papers - xucheng
https://twitter.com/qian_junhui/status/1133595554905124869
======
astatine
Standards bodies, industry associations and the like are multi-country
organizations. No single country should be able to prevent others from
participating in such organizations. IEEE today and a few days ago the SD card
and WiFi alliance banning Huawei seem to ignore the views of the members from
the multitude of other countries who are also members of those orgs. Egregious
violations of some written or unwritten code of conduct needs to be handled by
multi-lateral institutions. For lack of a better organization, some wing of
the UN perhaps?

~~~
rememberdeath
Just wanted to add that IEEE is much more than a standards body. Lot's of
conferences are held by IEEE.

~~~
astatine
Oh yes. I am an IEEE member of reasonably long standing and this just
complicates things for everyone, particularly for IEEE chapters in other
countries where Huawei may have a presence and are active participants
locally.

~~~
xucheng
It gets more complicated when considering Huawei is also a major sponsor to a
variety of research conferences, open source projects, etc.

I wonder what is ACM's stand on this?

------
lpcvoid
This is just ridiculous. This goes way beyond what they originally intended
with stopping suspected IP Theft or backdoors by Huawei. This is a black day
for academic progress and research in general.

~~~
itoutsider
Google Scholar or Wikipedia websites has been banned in China for a decade, Do
you think this is ridiculous?

~~~
lpcvoid
No, that's not great either. That's the Chinese gov wanting to block knowledge
from outside about political events, probably. This is something worse though
in my opinion, since it actively halts innovation standardization which
shouldn't have anything to do with politics.

~~~
leereeves
With all due respect to academics, banning political opposition is far worse.
Freedom is more important than new IEEE standards.

------
majia
We need to kill Huawei first, with some collateral damages to others, so that
Huawei cannot do bad things to us in the future, even though there is no
evidence or court ruling that Huawei is hacking anyone at this moment.

Last time it was Iraq's WMD/washing powder.

~~~
Sylvan0000
Then you happy with surveillance by US gov everyday with Apple, Google, Amazon
right? We feel happy when accuse others but never think about ourselves and
the ‘ethical’ gov.

~~~
hema64b
he's being sarcastic

------
Barrin92
If the US intends to rile up the the Chinese population for decades to come,
well I guess they're on a good path. Unbelievable.

~~~
_iyig
The Chinese government needs no help in portraying this, or any other
propionate U.S. response to Chinese trade policy, as an “insult to the Chinese
people” and an outrage. Seriously, they’ve done it with much smaller stuff.
It’s basically Fox News all the time in mainland Chinese news media, with
government scriptwriters.

That said, I wouldn’t be surprised if Huawei got removed from the. blacklist
as part of the ongoing U.S.-China trade negotiations, a la ZTE. Trump has
already publicly mentioned this possibility. I hope this comes to pass, as
reviewing IEEE papers seems like a fairly harmless activity.

------
orangeX
IEEE is just for US, not for humanity. It should be shame of that VISION—"IEEE
is the world’s largest technical professional organization dedicated to
advancing technology for the benefit of humanity."

~~~
DDWD
I can not agree with you more!

------
Canada
That's a step too far. What's next, a ban on even talking to Huawei employees?
I mean, if you want to be absolutely safe from serious legal troubles right...

------
hema64b
Shame. And if you google "ieee Huawei", you can still find several news like
"celebrating the release of new standard co-operated by Huawei and IEEE" on
the first page. Now their version should be changed to "IEEE is the world’s
largest technical professional organization(under the guide of U.S. gov)
dedicated to advancing technology for the benefit of the U.S." In the past,
even physical war accelerates the development of tech(most for weapons tho
some could be utilized to daily life), and now politics are forcing tech to go
reverse. Wonderful.

------
RcouF1uZ4gsC
It seems that Huawei is the US hostage in the China-US trade negotiations. I
wonder who the US company will be that China will decides to screw over in
retaliation?

~~~
teh_infallible
Apple, most likely. They seem like the easiest target.

~~~
est
Actually it's Boeing.

~~~
orwin
By targeting Boeing, they really are targeting FAA power over other national
or transnational agencies. Can this cause repercussion on other US agency
power? I know that FDA ruling is mostly ignored in western countries, and this
do not impact any other US-based agencies, so maybe it won't have any other
consequences.

If this only impact Boeing the US should be glad. And Boeing deserve a slap
anyway. Their decision killed more than 300 people and the people responsible
won't really be impacted (as the marginal utility of the money decrease the
more you already have).

------
Joakal
I don't understand, how does a BIS list prevent communication ie IEEE reviews?

------
DDWD
I am lucky that I have not joined the IEEE as a member. In the future, I will
refuse to be a journal article reviewer. I will not do free work for such an
organization anymore.

~~~
anfilt
I am not even sure they wanted to do this It might be action out caution to
avoid legal repercussions. I think it's extreme, but I am not IEEE's lawyers.
So let's not jump to conclusions about motivations.

------
haibo
IEEE is registered in USA, so it has to follow the USA's law and rules, so I
think it's not an issue of IEEE but an issue of BIS, please try to figure out
that.

~~~
ssnistfajen
Companies domiciled in the PRC also has to follow PRC's laws and regulations
(whether they are compatible with our values is another question). Using the
same ridiculous logic we've seen throughout this whole saga, we can also
conclude that IEEE is "literally the US government".

~~~
haibo
Whatever literal game, law is law, and my suggestion is to try to figure out
why HW is in the BIS list.

------
rustacean
ieee should transfer its registration to Switzerland.

~~~
hlsblog
It's good idea.

------
contingencies
(Originally posted on dupe; re-posting here)

With the ambient positive mood regarding the significant rise of sci-hub, open
publishing commitments from academics and institutions and the correspondingly
significant pressure on rent-seeking publishers, perhaps we will see parallel
pressure extend to politically partisan or subjugated organizations until an
open science free of such politicking emerges?

One solution would be anonymous scientific publication and review. Imagine
that: let science stand on _science_ , instead of appeals to authority. The
bonus with such an approach is that it simultaneously solves for various
"isms".

------
reinmind
The best practice that proves academic reasearch can not be independent from
governor.LOL

------
lnyng
Source from IEEE. Read the attachments about the policy details.

[http://www.ieee802.org/secmail/msg23427.html](http://www.ieee802.org/secmail/msg23427.html)

------
Arbalest
I can't help but wonder, are educational institutions immune to this? Keep in
mind that these are all corporations involved here.

~~~
rememberdeath
I am sure there are academics who are employed by Huawei. Implementing 5G
requires academics.

[https://www.huawei.com/en/press-events/news/2018/7/Huawei-
Dr...](https://www.huawei.com/en/press-events/news/2018/7/Huawei-Dr-Erdal-
Arikan-Polar-Codes)

------
randomblbl
It’s so sad that academic world is polluted by the politics. Who benefits from
this!

------
skankhunt_42
It's such a shame and you can't even find any news report in English.

------
ezVoodoo
Politics over academics. Such a dark day of human academic history!

------
hank99
Really shame

------
anonymousDan
Wow. That is crazy.

------
peter-m80
That's insane

------
hongbo_zhang
This is ugly

------
joe___
that is a shame

------
wangii
IronCurtain V2.0?

~~~
xucheng
Or McCarthyism 2.0.

~~~
_iyig
Funny thing - McCarthy was right, in a sense: KGB informants were all
throughout U.S. government and industry [0]. Unfortunately, he accused and
abused lots of innocent people, so this fact is often overlooked.

[0]
[https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/685lp2/was_j...](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/685lp2/was_joseph_mccarthy_right/)

~~~
dougspencer
Ridiculous and a laughable accusation. The page you referred to has nothing
substantial. Both Rosenberg and Hiss are proved to be innocent quickly but
lots of people became silent because of McCarthy. If you want to go back to
the dark ages, go yourself. Do not put your insensible sense to all the
knowledgable people here.

~~~
_iyig
Are you challenging the fact that the U.S.S.R. had extensive espionage
networks in the U.S. during the 1950s, including the Rosenbergs who were in
fact guilty of spying for the Soviet Union?

McCarthysim per se was horrible, but the fact remains that the Red Scare was
grounded in historical truth.

[https://www.amazon.com/Venona-Decoding-Espionage-America-
Com...](https://www.amazon.com/Venona-Decoding-Espionage-America-Communism-
ebook/dp/B001PTHYCM/ref=nodl_)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_and_Ethel_Rosenberg](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_and_Ethel_Rosenberg)

~~~
echaozh
If you hunt witches, there will always be witches to burn. If you try hard
enough, any American can be a USSR spy.

~~~
_iyig
What am I not stating clearly?

Witch hunts are bad, but yes, there was a large spy network. Perhaps it could
have even been uprooted with measured counter-intelligence, instead of
McCarthyism.

------
yuankui
history will remember this day

