Read on Twitter
Will be interesting to learn more about the role of MIT, which has done questionable China work. For example, CSAIL kept its partnership w/ iFlytek after it was listed for human rights abuses - and ended it only after I sent in qs for this story https://www.wired.com/story/iflytek-china-ai-giant-voice-chatting-surveillance/
Some grad students at MIT's CSAIL objected to taking money from a company that had been singled out by @hrw for abuses. They were told, basically, that they had to find other funding or suck it up https://www.wired.com/story/iflytek-china-ai-giant-voice-chatting-surveillance/
Remember that MIT also took $850,000 from Jeffrey Epstein and refused to cut its ties to Saudi Arabia after Khashoggi was killed. https://www.chronicle.com/article/mit-offers-harsh-words-for-saudi-arabia-but-stops-short-of-cutting-financial-ties/
I can't speak to the SUSTech partnership at issue in Gang Chen's case, but I've seen other institutions build up China revenue and then, after the feds came knocking, effectively throw their researchers under the bus. It's good that MIT is paying his legal fees.
