441–450 of 676 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes and no. I think the current Ebola outbreak would not be happening if the US was still committed to global health.
You mean the 17th ebola outbreak in the DRC?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/may/29/friday-briefin...
I still think we should allow for grant hunting. If you can disprove a paper, you get the grant money attached to it. Make it a economic worthy endavour to destroy bad science.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree. This administration is ground zero for mismanagement of funds and outright corruption. Just look at the director of the FBI and former secretary of DHS. Both have used and continue to use tax payer money for personal use. It should make every tax payer livid.
It does make me livid, just as much as the waste of taxpayer money on pointless (and sometimes outright racist) research here makes me livid: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48335722 Believe it or not, it's possible to hate both Kash Patel/Kristi Noem and the unelected bureaucrats burning tax money on awful research.
BTW your “believe it or not” is quite condescending. Do you talk to people in real life like that?
Having incentive to produce useful outcomes seems like it would be something folks would be in support of, but it appears many here think this is the end of the world just because it's Trump doing it. At least there's consistency in that regard. Le sigh.
How is this different than adding DEI requirements, the inability to study schedule 1 drugs, or the restrictions placed under the Dickey-Wicker amendment? Federal grants have always been subject to politics.
It's different because it explicitly prohibits deferring to peer reviewers and explicitly requires that grants must "advance the President's policy priorities". Previous restrictions were guiderails for or additional screens on top of the underlying merit-based review; now the merit-based review is secondary and the primary criterion is whether the President's minions like the proposal.
$2.4 million for "Ujima (Collective Work and Responsibility) Girls in a Robotics Leadership Project"
$1.2 million for "FW-HTF-R: Collaborative Research: Virtual Meeting Support for Enhanced Well-Being and Equity for Game Developers"
$700k for "CAREER: Advancing Equity in Middle School Mathematics by Engaging Students and Families of Color in Participatory Design Research"
Etc., etc., etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
U.S. government funding generates a lot of scientific and medical breakthroughs outside of what people on this forum would call “tech”.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It does make me livid, just as much as the waste of taxpayer money on pointless (and sometimes outright racist) research here makes me livid: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48335722 Believe it or not, it's possible to hate both Kash Patel/Kristi Noem and the unelected bureaucrats burning tax money on awful research.
Sure that’s fine. They funded research that you think is wasteful and you would like to have tools to provide that feedback. The issue with this OMB change is that it is not that. The OMB change is a change that allows the administration to cancel any grant for any reason without answering to citizens about it. BTW your “believe it or not” is quite condescending. Do you talk to people in real life like that?
>BTW your “believe it or not” is quite condescending. Do you talk to people in real life like that?
Yes, especially when they're the sort of people who support taking my tax money to fund idiotic and outright racist "research".
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
Ever notice how there really always just enough Democrats in the senate to tank a progressive bill? The Senate needs to go honestly.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well it could be worse because in the end it's still a democracy, for how long that's yet to be seen. Look at Russia, they jumped off a cliff to protect a regime from democracy, and people are checked out - they take no accountability and still act confused of why Russia is being despised - all while accelerating economic and demographic decline with more than one million casualties in a special 3 day military operat…
Russia is a de-jure democracy, just like the US. In fact I'm not sure what difference there is between them.
That's why they're considered a rogue state at the moment.
So at best you can say the Russian regime claims Russia is a democratic, that's not de jure, because for it to be de jure you'd need institutions to make sure it was in fact de jure.
There's none, just signs with the name on the wall, and people roleplaying.
Imagine being in the eye of the hurricane. Every day your country is slipping into a fucking shit show but you have to delude yourself that everything will be fine because the alternative is becoming "tank man". It is all fascinating to me.
I highly doubt you could do that in the US without being shot.