Is there any evidence that this is connected to other political issues?

I mean, the open-access movement is widely hailed as an important progressive step in improving the academic world, regardless of nationality. Hopefully it's just a matter of time before the US's own agencies join in similar demands, assuming that there isn't already such a plan.

Agreed. Many countries already require publicly funded research be made available for open access. A list of US government agencies that require such access after an embargo period is presented here: https://scholcomm.columbia.edu/open-access/public-access-man...

The NIH's decision to require open access a year after publication was actually a huge step forward, and that must have been a decade ago now. Pretty much everyone who isn't a publisher would prefer it be immediate, but there's a limit to what the funding agencies can do without congressional approval (or interference).

> Is there any evidence that this is connected to other political issues?

No, there isn't in this specific instance.

However, reading news for the past year did give me a overall feeling that ties between China and EU are getting closer while ties between China and US, as well as EU and US are getting more strained.

It’s interesting because, on the surface, it appears that China is exerting more control over its population while the EU seems to be giving back control to its population. But reading between the lines, the EU is actually moving toward more political control over its member countries, just like China but in a more progressively palatable format.

Why wouldn't China support it for other countries? THey'd benefit from the knowledge but would not pay for it. Meanwhile, I can imagine that they'd follow a more restrictive policy that would limit the viewing of Chinese research publications to Chines scientists. Edit: The latter statement is speculative, relative, and probably topic-dependent.

The idea behind this is that they don't just voice support for this from other countries, but adopt it themselves as well, i.e. researchers funded by these funders would be required to submit their work to fully Open Access journals as well.

> EU aligning with China

Hmm...isn't this the other way around, China aligning with "European funders"? (EU is coordinating, individual organisations within countries are actually doing).

Yeah in this case it is like what you described. Updated.

> on issues like this in the context of US-China war of words.

well, it does reduce the chinese cost of acquiring foreign IP, and so the decision seems pretty internally consistent

The animes got those themes from the real world. Pretty cool to see how the learning pattern can go full circle!

I wonder if EU is also going to align with China w.r.t. the Social Credit Score. Want to to business with us? Just make sure every European uses WeChat so we can read everything they say online.

No need, we'll get pretty close by ourselves. Want to contact customer support? Sure, but only through Twitter - and obviously, we'll prioritise those with most followers, as they'll be most able to damage our brand.

China is always in favor of making it easier to steal IP. I hope I live long enough to see them complaining that other nations don't respect their inventions.

I can imagine an anime plot where China/EU go back on their plan. But if they truly end up instituting this plan I'm not seeing any plausible plot line.

Are there really anime stories where a Barbara Streisand character roars at telepathic sourcerers who just stay silent and motionless for the rest of the episode?

Pretty similar to 1984 where Orwell split the world up into Eurasia, East Asia and Oceania

Oceania, Eurasia and Eastasia. 1984 had it right

In the novel of course this was the public view exposed to a society subject to total information control. "We have always been at war with eastasia".

Like the current surface web isn't completely and utterly controlled.

You don't need "big firewalls" and government-sponsored censorship to control information. There are softer ways [0] to press for a narrative that's advantageous to you and ways that are way less visible [1].

Note the claim how supposedly none of the "interventions" happen in the English language, just like the NSA supposedly never spied on US citizens. That statement was rooted in the Smith-Mund Act, which has since then been reformed [2] and it's been an extremely noticeable shift in the English language online discourses.

Just like language itself is a filter, anybody who only speaks English is dependent on trusting what English sources translate and tell them. While other-language sources often paint a very different, usually way less polarized, picture.

[0] https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2018-09-29/the-cleaners-...

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/mar/17/us-spy-op...

[2] https://foreignpolicy.com/2013/07/14/u-s-repeals-propaganda-...

I didn't know 1984 had it first, interesting. Maybe it is finally the time for me to read it.

Definitely recommend it. It's one of my favorite books, and it's not an exaggeration to say it had a radical effect on my politics.

I avoided it somehow in high school, as I did most books, and ended up reading it in my early 20s. Now over the past 10 to 15 years I've seen it starting to come true in scary ways, albeit not exactly as was predicted (which is to be expected of course).

It's also just a good book! It builds to a tremendous climax, and the ending is just as good and unexpected as any good story today. Highly recommended.

If you like audiobooks, the one narrated by Frank Muller is great. Audible has it for $10 but it's of course hobbled with their DRM. There is a copy of the Frank Muller reading floating around on torrents, but a better solution is to just buy DRM free. There is a DRM free version narrated by Simon Prebble that I haven't listened to, but it has great reviews (all audiobooks from Downpour are DRM free btw): https://www.downpour.com/1984?sp=12482

P.S. If you care about your freedom, when possible buy DRM free from places like Downpour. Paired with an app like Listen Audiobooks, I find the UX to be even better than Audible (it's a great app: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.acmeandroi...)

I would love to but: "Not Available For Sale in Sweden"

Nevermind, The local library had it as an e-audiobook for direct download. Sadly in swedish. Will be fun, was probably 35 years ago I read it :)

Grab Brave New World while you're at it. They should sell them glued to each other, combined they perfectly describe our current tech and media situation.

I agree with this, both are great books to read and interesting perspectives. I am sure most people have seen this but those who haven't you should check out (https://io9.gizmodo.com/5890861/read-aldous-huxleys-review-o...). Orwell sent a copy of 1984 to Huxley and the response to the book is an interesting read.

The phrase I use is: "It's a brave new world, until you resist, then it's 1984."

Pretty much this. Huxley for the young and horny, Orwell for the old and opinionated.

Add in Animal Farm for the trifecta.

I agree, two completely different types of suppression, each quite scary.

Agreed about the contents, but an important difference ist that 1984 is incredibly well written and gripping while Brave New World is a dull read - IMO.

Yesterday is the best time to have read 1984.

If you ever plan on entering politics don't read it. Today's politicians seem to think it's a manual, not a warning.

Very interesting perspective.

Actually I've read The Prince and I got carried away by the ideas in the book. Maybe I shouldn't read 1984 after all? Anyway, I'm just interested in politics, but not planning to enter politics.

What makes you think it's a warning and not a manual ?

Why not both? I think for most of the working class, it's a dystopian novel with a warning. For most of our politicians and the ruling class (and oddly, many of the big tech companies), it's a utopian novel filled with great ideas.

Orwell certainly meant it as a cautionary tale.

I agree, but better late than never.