银魂

Proposed US rule barring China science collaboration sparks outcry from US scientists_我的网站

一 |     

    China US Photo:VCGAmerican scientists have voiced opposition to a proposed rule which seeks to ban federal funding for US science collaboration with China, saying that it would instead hurt US interest, the Washington Post reported on Tuesday. Chinese experts also warned that the slew of US restrictions on China-US scientific cooperation is unlikely to deal a fatal blow to China's scientific development, but could instead backfire on the US.
The proposed Office of Management and Budget (OMB) rule, set to take effect in December, would mark one of the biggest overhauls of US science funding in decades, giving political appointees greater authority over grant awards previously guided by scientific peer review and requiring that they "advance the President's policy priorities," according to the Washington Post. 
It would also effectively expand the 2011 Wolf Amendment, which bars scientists from using NASA funding for bilateral collaborations with China, to all federal agencies and scientists receiving federal funds, marking the largest break in US-China scientific engagement in decades, the US media outlet reported.
So far, the proposed rule has garnered nearly half a million public comments, many from scientists and leading US science bodies. A Washington Post analysis of 50,000 of those comments found that around 88 percent were negative.
The rule, initially set to take effect in October, was pushed back to December after a bipartisan stopgap funding bill temporarily halted its adoption. Unlike the Wolf Amendment, the rule does not require congressional approval to take effect.
"I do think there are still members of Congress who think we have a monopoly on knowledge. They think we're still in the Cold War Soviet era ... where we were ahead in most areas of science and technology. That is not the case with China. We are no longer the leader in many areas of science," said Tobin Smith, senior vice president for government relations and public policy at the Association for American Universities, which advocates on behalf of leading US research universities, per the Washington Post.
Scientists warn that the rule risks subjecting long-term scientific research to four-year political cycles. "We will not succeed if with every new administration we are ping-ponging back and forth about priorities," the American Association for the Advancement of Science said in a blistering comment, urging the administration to withdraw the rule. "Fast-tracking such profound changes ... hands an easy victory to nations like China," it said, the Washington Post reported.
This reflects a fundamental divide between the US government and the scientific community over how science should develop, Wang Yiwei, a professor at Renmin University of China's School of International Studies, told the Global Times. He noted that politicians tend to believe that suppressing China as a competitor would allow the US to preserve its market dominance and technological edge. 
Scientists, however, tend to follow a different logic, as scientific progress depends on openness, exchanges and collaboration. If science and technology are driven solely by competition and private capital, with the ultimate goal of maintaining technological monopolies, this could create greater risks and ultimately undermine US interests as well, Wang said. 
The proposed rule change is the latest salvo in a broader battle in Washington over how to respond to China's rise as a scientific superpower. In July, the US National Science Foundation (NSF) also moved to ban collaborations between scientist it funds and many Chinese research institutions and their employees, according to Science magazine. 
Liu Shaoshan, director of the Center for Embodied AI at the Shenzhen Institute of Artificial Intelligence and Robotics for Society and a former US-based researcher, told the Global Times in a previous interview that the NSF's new proposed rules created a "talent wall," arguing that restrictions based on nationality, institutional affiliation, and research partnerships could reduce the global talent pool available to the US, weaken its ability to attract leading scientists, and slow scientific innovation. 
Liu also said scientific advancement relies not only on discovery but also on the exchange, validation, and dissemination of knowledge.
Wang also said China has built significant strengths through its vast pool of scientists and engineers, complete industrial chains and massive application scenarios, while increasingly moving from application-oriented innovation toward original research. Against this backdrop, US technological blockades and restrictions on cooperation are unlikely to halt China's progress, but could instead isolate American scientists from China's latest research and collaboration opportunities. Such an approach could also prevent the two countries from leveraging their respective strengths and ultimately undermine US competitiveness, Wang said.
。    1月13日，安徽网友章女士（化名）告诉上游新闻（报料邮箱：[email protected]）记者，他们一行25人本打算去泰国清迈旅游，于1月7日通过安徽某旅行社向上海春秋旅行社南宁分公司支付了5万元的大部分机票费用，出发时间为2月27日。付款后第二天，出于安全方面考虑，这25名游客决定取消行程并提出退款申请，但被拒绝，理由是付款前已明确告知“临时团队票不退不改签”。对此，章女士认为，“不退款是他们航空公司自己内部规定，我认为属于霸王条款。”旅行社工作人员则表示，临时团队票有其特殊性，本来就明确告知了“不退不改签”。

二 | 章女士表示，她和朋友们一共25人，打算今年2月前往泰国清迈游玩。他们购买了春秋航空2月27日出发的机票（3月4日返程），每人2300元，于1月7日通过微信转账的方式，将5万元的大部分机票费用转给了安徽某旅行社工作人员王先生，后者将钱转给了上海春秋旅行社南宁分公司。王先生发给他们的航班信息显示，出发航班为9C 8511，2月27日下午，从浦东机场出发飞往清迈；回程航班为9C 8512，3月4日从清迈飞往浦东。

三 | 泰国清迈是中国游客的热门旅行目的地。网络图付款后第二天（1月8日），出于安全方面考虑，章女士和朋友们商讨后决定取消行程，章女士联系上旅行社工作人员，希望能退还机票的费用，但被拒绝。

四 | “我们认为航空公司应该要有特殊应对方案，并且不退款是他们航空公司自己内部规定，我认为属于霸王条款。

五 | ”章女士表示，虽然全额付款了，但航空公司并未统计身份证号码等个人信息。

六 | 不过她发来的截图显示，一名旅行社工作人员陈先生曾通过微信给她发去消息，称“临时团队票不退不改签”。

七 | 旅行社工作人员给章女士发去的图片显示“临时团队票不退不改签”。受访者供图13日，上游新闻记者查询春秋航空官网发现，在第八章“客票变更”和第九章“退票”的相关规定中，对于团体旅客的客票变更和退票要求，注明了“请联系原出票渠道办理。”但章女士表示，目前安徽某旅行社和春秋旅行社均不愿意全额退款，表示只能退还每人200多元的费用。随后，记者联系上帮章女士等人订票的安徽某旅行社工作人员王先生。

八 | 王先生表示：“当时再三和她（章女士）确认了出行的时间，因为我们对接的航司是春秋，他们要求款到才能留位，所以必须要付款。付完款在申请票的时候，就给她讲过了，临时团队票在未出票之前可以换人，但不退不改签，这也是航司的规定。有关东南亚旅游的事情，目前各大航司都没有出台相应政策，如果出了相应政策可以免费退，我们也是会退的。”王先生表示：“具体退款情况也和航司规定有关，春秋的费用要便宜一点，但是规定就不一样。比如机票付款的时候需要全款，其他航司可能是20%、50%，但这一点我们在对接时也明确告知过。

九 | 现在春秋航空告诉我们，可以免费退2个人的费用，其余的每人只能退200多元。

十 | 他们这种情况不属于不可抗力，只是他们比较担心而已。我们也说得非常明白，旅行团会有专业领队陪同，也会寻找当地旅行社接待，也有导游，是比较安全的。”章女士付款截图显示，收款方为上海春秋旅行社南宁分公司。随后，记者联系上南宁分公司的工作人员。相关工作人员介绍：“不是说不可以退票，可以退，每人能退260元，但他们不接受。他们不去泰国，不是火山、地震、战争这样的不可抗力，而是他们个人原因。临时团队票不退不改的规定，是一直都有的，而且订票之前也是给他们讲过的。”记者联系上春秋航空。

十一 | 一名工作人员表示，票务的处理主要还是看合同规定。目前看来章女士等人是通过春秋旅行社订的机票，而旅行社和航空公司是两个法人，春秋旅游已经获悉此事，已请南宁分公司开展调查工作。重庆市律协刑民交叉专业委员会委员、重庆志和智律师事务所高级合伙人张公典表示：“是否退款要看双方的协议。如果他们没有签合同，但双方之前均认可这个票不退不改，实际上也达成了一个合同关系。章女士需要遵守这个合同的约定。

十二 | 如果章女士提出的理由不属于不可抗力，她要求全额退款的主张可能无法得到支持。”知名刑事辩护律师、河南泽槿律师事务所主任付建表示，消费者应先与航空公司协商，合理表达诉求，要求部分退款或者进行改签。也可要求消协介入进行调解。消费者在购票时应当仔细阅读合同条款，明确自己的权利与义务。上游新闻记者 金鑫。

十三 |

Current article:http://eigy3i1.xuanliaruamibinmilangca.shop/5k1oi/20260826/4009726.html

Published on:09:08:11