comment: >
  
  Buy them out with your own grants then. The modern academic model is clear in the absence of funding: publish or perish. If you can't get money you can't publish. If someone else provides it then researchers will take it.
context: "Margaret McCuaig-Johnston, former executive vice-president of NSERC and now senior fellow at the Institute for Science, Society and Policy at the University of Ottawa, noted that the new security guidelines only cover federal grants and not individual academic research with China’s military. China offers a lot of money to Canadian researchers and universities to work with them, she said.
  “The People’s Liberation Army is not our friend and we should not be partnering with them,” she said. “Any collaboration with the National University of Defence Technology is clearly going to a military purpose and Canadian researchers should be using their own personal ethical lens to decide not to move forward with that research.”
  ...
  Dennis Molinaro, a national-security analyst and professor at Ontario Tech University, said “there is a lot of passing the buck” taking place on the subject of university research with China.
  The universities say they need clarity from government on risks posed by their joint research. But CSIS, for instance, which gathers intelligence on foreign threats, is prevented from sharing specific details with Canadians – even with law enforcement unless it’s specifically for prosecution and regarding a criminal offence.
  “Each are relying on the other to do the right thing, meaning the university wants to know what specific threat exists so it doesn’t curb academic freedom, and the intelligence sector wants the university to act on the basis of, in essence, ethics, that partnering with this kind of institution in the PRC is unethical,” Mr. Molinaro said.
  He said the federal and provincial governments need clearer guidelines for academic partnerships and legislative reform to the CSIS Act that enables the spy service to talk more openly about threats that exist." >
  
  Universities are thirsty for big dollar research initiatives because it helps them boost their international rankings. On top of that, Deans have an inordinate amount of say in the direction their departments go, and with budget models that often incentivize departments to enroll more students and churn out more papers, the money speaks louder than the strategic plan the administrators laid out with no teeth. Administrators get to make the line go up, and Deans get the big ticket items for their departments.
  Until there’s a specific government policy prohibiting research activity with certain actors, this behavior will continue. >
  
  At the risk of being branded a commie, this is what happens when countries progressively privatise higher education. The institutions stray more away from what's best for students and just chase the $$. My father was a university professor before he retired and he lamented that this even applied to research which were increasingly becoming less theoretical and more designed to achieve short term practical application, which is short sighted because it's the more theoretical research that churns out the bigger leaps in scientific understanding in the long term. >
  
  DARPA money is no joke. You can go from using a 30 year old instrument that only takes zip drives and floppy disks for data transfers to brand new everything. I don't agree with taking money from military sources, but I get why people do it. There would be fewer people willing to work with any military if research as a whole wasn't so underfunded. >
  
  There's a lot of money you can get that doesn't even have to be spent on actual military or classified stuff, too. The US military funds a ton of basic, public research. Personally I think if you're able to get the military to give you money for that sort of stuff, more power to you. >
  
  Can't compete with those defence dollars. >
  
  
  China offers a lot of money to Canadian researchers and universities to work with them, she said.
  
  Came here to say this. It's pretty grim when everything is for sale in your country. Political influence, your land and housing, corporations and their IP and your natural resources. >
  
  It's just the end state of capitalism. Thats all. >
  
  Its really not though, but go off.