41–50 of 201 posts
[flagged]
In what way? This is a list of words to identify applications that the Trump admin wants to deny grants to. Isn't that restricting research quite broadly based on very ideological grounds? This isn't about US research priorities, it is just political interference.
Why did this just plummet to page three? Very weird. [Edit] A few seconds later, I cannot find it no matter how many times I click "more".
List of words includes: female, females, and women. Does not include words like: male, males,and men. Party of free speech that wants to protect women according to their supporters.
Can I see a source for “forbidden” or “banned”? I see the author claiming these words get “flagged”, but also no source other than his post. Surely HN users wouldn’t be so quick to just believe a random mastadon post because it aligns with their own , right?
Why did this just plummet to page three? Very weird. [Edit] A few seconds later, I cannot find it no matter how many times I click "more".
[flagged]
In what way? This is a list of words to identify applications that the Trump admin wants to deny grants to. Isn't that restricting research quite broadly based on very ideological grounds? This isn't about US research priorities, it is just political interference.
Why did this just plummet to page three? Very weird. [Edit] A few seconds later, I cannot find it no matter how many times I click "more".
In particle physics we usually use these terms which will be at any proposal. This is an interesting textbook definition of false positives when you have list that is using too common words. - Minimum "Biased" data - "Discrimination" or "Discriminatory" variables - Phase space "excluded" - "Inclusion" of data/variable/anything - "inequality" -> wow bell's inequality and all this theory work about inequalities will be…
[flagged]