Live data from Hacker News

WH proposes rules giving political appointees final approval on research grants

scientificamerican.com

171–180 of 676 posts

Re: WH proposes rules giving political appointees final approval on research grants

#171
post #167

If you want to stay a scientist, you have to emigrate. The art of continually licking the right asses to keep funding going is not science.

Hasn’t academia always been that way?

Yes but in ways whose solutions admit some level of creativity or ingenuity

Re: WH proposes rules giving political appointees final approval on research grants

#172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They voted for this. In larger numbers than in 2020 and 2016.

What is this "this" you're referring to? Was this on the ballot? Did Trump announce that he would do this? It seems very easy to just blame this on the voter like this.

I'm Canadian and I can tell you this was always part of Project 2025, which was extremely obviously the plan all along.

So I don't know. Assuming the American voter can read and and access to the internet, it's kind of pathetic to imply they couldn't have known

Re: WH proposes rules giving political appointees final approval on research grants

#173

More of the same at this point. If you are politically connected, or stay in an narrow lane of approved work, you get your grant. But if you stray from the politically approved path, or appear disloyal to our First Citizen and the Party, then your grant will be canceled. The remaining supporters of the incumbent party like to claim that they aren't actually doing anything worse than in the past, and if anything they…

The Chairman will have the final say

Re: WH proposes rules giving political appointees final approval on research grants

#174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A friend in a prestigious European university said that applications were up in basically all fields

Win win for Europe and the USA, both get what they want.

I think most Americans, if polled, would prefer to be the global hub of scientific research, instead of an isolated silo of research that only follows a politically approved agenda.

Re: WH proposes rules giving political appointees final approval on research grants

#175
At a US conference last year, people thronged a session that talked about studying in Korea. This would be an empty room at, pretty much, any point in the past several decades.

The amount of capability that America is burning is impressive. I suspect that people outside of academia are not as alarmed, since its not part of daily life.

However it matters the same way that a drug discovery today is life saving 10 years down the line, after its gone through all the processes to go to market.

Re: WH proposes rules giving political appointees final approval on research grants

#176

If you want to stay a scientist, you have to emigrate. The art of continually licking the right asses to keep funding going is not science.

Emigrate where? And why do you assume that the country you're gonna emigrate to will have the funds necessay to fund the research? US grants are the biggest and most generous in the world. I think the USG spends over $900 Billion every year. Europe spends about 1/10th of that. Other option is China but as a foreigner, you will never get a grant there unless you work for someone else.

Re: WH proposes rules giving political appointees final approval on research grants

#178
post #176

If you want to stay a scientist, you have to emigrate. The art of continually licking the right asses to keep funding going is not science.

Emigrate where? And why do you assume that the country you're gonna emigrate to will have the funds necessay to fund the research? US grants are the biggest and most generous in the world. I think the USG spends over $900 Billion every year. Europe spends about 1/10th of that. Other option is China but as a foreigner, you will never get a grant there unless you work for someone else.

I think his main point was that the art of continually licking the right asses to keep funding going is not science.

Re: WH proposes rules giving political appointees final approval on research grants

#180
post #167

If you want to stay a scientist, you have to emigrate. The art of continually licking the right asses to keep funding going is not science.

Hasn’t academia always been that way?

Generally, academia has always had a measure of bias to it. However the bias was never so blatant and never so against producing an environment where good research could feasibly be created. The vast majority of research is non political increments of existing non political increments where the main conflicts are personal beefs among flawed individual PIs and maybe being asked what fig leaf one offers to ensure that the funding doesn’t just go to a bunch of white wealthy straight men. Once you have funding you can be set for years to focus on your work, assuming you don’t do something dumb like make sexist or racist remarks, and even then your funding is generally secure you just might not get a new round 3 years later(probably will though because controversies die pretty fast).

I know a lot of hay and media exists about how academia is yadda yadda biased and anti intellectual. But of course a lot of that is cherry picked examples of controversial figures or individual missteps among individual institutions. This is a bit like taking a classroom with one rowdy asshole and then declaring the whole school must use physical violence as discipline from now on.

Post reply on HN