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

WH proposes rules giving political appointees final approval on research grants

scientificamerican.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 676 posts

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

#311

Post by shaftoe »

filoeleven wrote: post #288
Spooky23 wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re thinking tactically. I actually thing the democrats will try to put the Trumpist stuff back in the box. They may not be able to. The rule of law requires trust and that’s gone, and will only be rebuilt by time. The reactionary Supreme Court has changed the character of the executive. That court will live for many years. The executive branch exists to represent the will of the chief executive. We’ve normalized…

[flagged]

A) this court has a number of originalists, more likely to reject grabs for power than more progressive judges. There's worse things than a court that tries to adhere to the constitution when the executive branch and Congress both routinely do not.

B) do you really want to get to a place where the arbiters get politically reset and degraded every time the pendulum swings? This is the equivalent of a courtroom where a defendant or plaintiff can threaten to fire the judge or add their cousin as a co-judge.

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

#312

Post by [deleted] »

btown wrote: post #293
ninjagoo wrote: post #234

Maybe we need to strengthen civic/philanthropic infrastructure around Science and Technology to reduce reliance on government funding cycles. Science and Educational purposes are valid 501(c)(3) purposes. A donation to a 501(c)(3) that funds open-source scientific software, public STEM education, basic research, science grants, or public-interest tech research can be deductible. Up to 60% of Adjusted Gross Income can…

Arguably, these vehicles do exist... in the form of 501(c)(3) university endowments. They endow professorships and graduate fellowships, pay for facility buildouts and infrastructure, and provide a strong pipeline of financial aid to allow talented undergraduates to pursue research rather than needing to repay debt immediately after graduation. And unused funds are invested in public and private markets, ensuring min…

[deleted]

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

#313

Post by soraminazuki »

ck2 wrote: post #169

if the Dems don't also take back the Senate, this country is done it will take longer than this decade, maybe even next, to restore the brain loss and faith in secure jobs for research basically this country will just become a highway of non-stop warehouses, alternating ICE prisons vs "AI" datacenters science, medicine, all research and development just gone to other countries

[dead]

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

#314

Post by basilgohar »

mcphage wrote: post #292
mavelikara wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A law which will be used from the opposite side just as well, as soon as the power switches hands again. This is the real test. If these changes are so bad, will someone campaign bare on overturning these? Will the “other side” change it? If they don’t, you know that they also agreed with it - this handwringing now is just for show.

> If they don’t, you know that they also agreed with it - this handwringing now is just for show. No, the left should use the things right broke to abuse the right—just like the right is breaking everything to abuse the left. Otherwise the right will never learn why breaking things is a bad idea, and they’ll just keep on breaking everything like they have been for my entire life and before.

This will only result in the abuse of the populous by the powerful, not right or left. Right and left are illusions that are at best distractions from the powerful class asserting their interests to the detriment of the lower classes. That's all there is. Always was, always will be. Both left and right have eroded this whilst claiming to do the opposite.

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

#315

Post by steve_adams_86 »

dgacmu wrote: post #290
somenameforme wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

One of the explicit goals of the NSF is to train the next generation of scientists. Part of that is making sure that you're creating a rich pipeline of people who are going to do innovative things. Broadening participation is much more about things like getting more (usually younger) people from all walks of life interested in joining your field. Which is basically an unmitigated good -- first, the obvious advantage…

I would say this is exactly where you want that kind of policy. At the bottom, where you’re cultivating what will end up at the top. You want the diversity of ideas for exactly the reasons you stated.

People get upset as though this policy is dictating that a minority from the corner of the earth with no meaningful experience is going to be mandated into the role of heart surgeon or airplane pilot as well. That’s not how this works. However, those roles themselves stand to benefit from the diversified cultivation at the bottom of the stack, eventually.

Even very intelligent people seem to think inclusive policies mean that incompetent people will be promoted in private industry or government, but frankly, I never witnessed that to any abnormal degree until the people decrying it the most ended up in power. A game show host as president. A Fox News anchor as secretary of war. I can only keep a straight face because I’m so jaded by it.

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

#316

Post by gmueckl »

intended wrote: post #261
amazingamazing wrote: post #201

[flagged]

I think Mike Masnick said it best here: > " Why Techdirt Is Now A Democracy Blog (Whether We Like It Or Not)" > ...but a few asked questions regarding what Techdirt is focused on these days, and how much we were leaning into covering “politics.” > When the very institutions that made American innovation possible are being systematically dismantled, it’s not a “political” story anymore. It’s a story about whether the…

Places like HN don't necessarily become political of their own choice. Policy is forced on them, so they can no longer avoid it.

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

#318

Post by ninjagoo »

btown wrote: post #293
ninjagoo wrote: post #234

Maybe we need to strengthen civic/philanthropic infrastructure around Science and Technology to reduce reliance on government funding cycles. Science and Educational purposes are valid 501(c)(3) purposes. A donation to a 501(c)(3) that funds open-source scientific software, public STEM education, basic research, science grants, or public-interest tech research can be deductible. Up to 60% of Adjusted Gross Income can…

Arguably, these vehicles do exist... in the form of 501(c)(3) university endowments. They endow professorships and graduate fellowships, pay for facility buildouts and infrastructure, and provide a strong pipeline of financial aid to allow talented undergraduates to pursue research rather than needing to repay debt immediately after graduation. And unused funds are invested in public and private markets, ensuring min…

[flagged]

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

#319

Post by ChrisLTD »

x3ro wrote: post #217
ChrisLTD wrote: post #186

It’s sad to watch my country commit suicide. Not only will my compatriots be poorer for it, but the rest of the world will be too.

[flagged]

U.S. government funding generates a lot of scientific and medical breakthroughs outside of what people on this forum would call “tech”.
Post reply on HN