Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Words flagged in search of current NSF awards

mastodon.social

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 201 posts

Re: Words flagged in search of current NSF awards

#151

Post by immibis »

lelanthran wrote: post #89
drawkward wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In point of fact, I have been asking whether they are parroting lies or gullible. This type of "review" is simple McCarthyism. DeSantis, in Florida, has shown us how this goes. The Trump admin is doing this on a pretext of removing politics from science, when it is demonstrably injecting politics into science.

Yeah, but we saw this coming years ago when hordes were cheering actual banning of words. I wasn't the only one on various forums who pointed out to all those cheerleaders in the "main replaces master or you're a nazi" camp that normalizing banning of words can only hurt in the long run. I do not support banning of speech in any but the most extreme cases, but this still uses "review" at least. The previous "master v…

I have never been called a Nazi for having a Git branch called "master". This happening is something right-wingers invented in their minds for reasons yet unknown.

Re: Words flagged in search of current NSF awards

#152

Post by [deleted] »

foxglacier wrote: post #128
badRNG wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Reading comprehension is shocking, not just in you but most people here. The post just said "can cause a grant to be pulled". That's entirely consistent with this list being a screening filter and somebody will look at what the grant/application is actually for. Both the post and the comment you are replying to used the term "flagged". Best I can tell, they aren't claiming what you seem to think they are claiming.

That's true. I was really generally replying to other comments but put it on this one because it was quite specific. You're quite right, an internal flag isn't a ban.

[deleted]

Re: Words flagged in search of current NSF awards

#154

Post by freejazz »

Dig1t wrote: post #146
freejazz wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"banned"? Like there's some singular entity in charge of all of IT that gets to ban things?

Yes, we have mandatory linter rules which won’t let us check in code that contains the word “whitelist” or “blacklist” or “master” because they are somehow racist. I work at the biggest tech company, which employs hundreds of thousands of people and these rules are applied across all codebases. This stuff is widespread across big companies and the government.

That's just your organization, I meant "all of IT" when I said "all of IT".

There are posters here acting as if there is a singular entity in charge of IT, that forces this rule on everyone.

I don't see what consequence it is that your particular organization prefers to do things its own way. It's a completely different proposition from pretending like the word is banned outright for everyone, by someone.

Re: Words flagged in search of current NSF awards

#155

Post by _DeadFred_ »

Dig1t wrote: post #139
Yizahi wrote: post #71

I remember how "master" and "slave" were banned a few years back in information technology context and people cheered that ban. And surprise surprise, the same mechanism of arbitrary bans can be turned 180 degrees. And it appears that if the only criteria is a superficial offense at the established word unrelated to the imaginary offense, then many different people can use that same mechanism to ban or attack whateve…

Absolutely correct. We’re still not allowed to use “whitelist” and “blacklist” because it’s somehow racism. We have linters which bar us from checking in code with these words and a bot which scolds us publicly in chats. Now the same people who applauded that policing of speech suddenly are offended when their explicit political speech is being removed. It’s just simply hypocrisy.

Way to 'what about' speech policing. Yay to normalizing less freedoms because 'someone else did something too'.

Re: Words flagged in search of current NSF awards

#156

Post by Yizahi »

philipov wrote: post #109
Yizahi wrote: post #71

I remember how "master" and "slave" were banned a few years back in information technology context and people cheered that ban. And surprise surprise, the same mechanism of arbitrary bans can be turned 180 degrees. And it appears that if the only criteria is a superficial offense at the established word unrelated to the imaginary offense, then many different people can use that same mechanism to ban or attack whateve…

There was never a ban like this on the master-slave terminology. A lot of places started moving away from those terms, but plenty of others just kept the old naming. There was no top-down directive from the federal government like there is here - I don't think it's fair to compare them as if they are equivalent situations. This is heavy-handed in a way that makes peer pressure look completely benign in comparison.

The same issue as with some other terms in 21st century. For example monopoly by the 19th century definition would be almost impossible today, because "look, that company has a whopping 0.1% of the market, hence we with 99.9% are not a monopoly". So yeah, it wasn't banned everywhere, but that reached momentum wide enough for me to consider it essentially a ban.

And as a I said below, even if call it not a ban but idk "popular advisory", the point is that it set a precedent. And now right wingers would really ban words they don't like.

Also they may argue that they did not ban their words either. Can you apply for grant elsewhere? Yes you can, technically. "So what the problem"(c) they will ask.

Re: Words flagged in search of current NSF awards

#157

Post by rurp »

Dig1t wrote: post #146
freejazz wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"banned"? Like there's some singular entity in charge of all of IT that gets to ban things?

Yes, we have mandatory linter rules which won’t let us check in code that contains the word “whitelist” or “blacklist” or “master” because they are somehow racist. I work at the biggest tech company, which employs hundreds of thousands of people and these rules are applied across all codebases. This stuff is widespread across big companies and the government.

There's a pretty big difference between a private company pandering to progressives by banning a few words versus the federal government suddenly declaring that many different words and concepts are banned. These NSF flags are just one case out of many, similar changes are being rushed out across every federal department. I agree that the word bans at your company are stupid, but the govt changes are a whole other level of bad.

Re: Words flagged in search of current NSF awards

#158

Post by karaterobot »

foxglacier wrote: post #114
elashri wrote: post #14

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]

You're not wrong about the words not being banned, but that's not what the person you're responding to claimed.

I'll also note that being flagged for further scrutiny can effectively end a project that requires disbursement of funds in a timely manner. Ask me how I know, and I'll tell you that I was looking for work last week, because the projects I work on would not have been able to pay me next month if the executive order had not been rescinded. This isn't my speculation, it's what we were told by leadership. These projects are not at all DEI-related, but a shotgun approach to halting disbursal until we're convinced otherwise would have caused a lot of projects to go tits up in the interim. Grant-funded science projects generally do not have huge cash reserves to pay employees until the money spigot turns on again. So, applying a filter blacklist can be very destructive, just by creating temporary false positives.

Re: Words flagged in search of current NSF awards

#159

Post by philipov »

Yizahi wrote: post #156
philipov wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was never a ban like this on the master-slave terminology. A lot of places started moving away from those terms, but plenty of others just kept the old naming. There was no top-down directive from the federal government like there is here - I don't think it's fair to compare them as if they are equivalent situations. This is heavy-handed in a way that makes peer pressure look completely benign in comparison.

The same issue as with some other terms in 21st century. For example monopoly by the 19th century definition would be almost impossible today, because "look, that company has a whopping 0.1% of the market, hence we with 99.9% are not a monopoly". So yeah, it wasn't banned everywhere, but that reached momentum wide enough for me to consider it essentially a ban. And as a I said below, even if call it not a ban but idk…

It's different because it's the federal government. You can't compare it to a bunch of companies deciding to do the same thing because of popular opinion. While both processes have their own mechanism for driving conformity, one is essentially democratic, while the other is strongly autocratic.

Re: Words flagged in search of current NSF awards

#160

Post by mikeyouse »

larsiusprime wrote: post #115
techbananas wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m curious what will happen to FIRE over the next few years. Presumably a lot of their funding over the past few years has come from right leaning sources and presumably they’re going to have to change their tack with the new folks in power.

FIRE has been around for decades and has dutifully resisted acquiring a partisan valence

Unfortunately a number of the legal minds behind these terrible laws are former FIRE alum, it was a real bummer when I saw multiple resumes with stints at FIRE.
Post reply on HN