[flagged]
NSF faces shake-up as officials abolish its 37 divisions
251–260 of 877 posts
Re: NSF faces shake-up as officials abolish its 37 divisions
#252Why not take up those projects which align with the goals of the government? After all, science is also also about adaptation and survival.
Re: NSF faces shake-up as officials abolish its 37 divisions
#253The NSF budget is ~$10billion. That's about half of NASA's, 1.2% of the DoD's, 0.5% of the discretionary budget ($1.7 trillion). Why is this the focus of the admin? Science is one of the few things the US is doing well.
There are very few places an administration can cut costs without touching entitlements. Until voters stop punishing politicians for raising the retirement age or trimming wasteful healthcare spending, they will cut the discretionary budget.
Re: NSF faces shake-up as officials abolish its 37 divisions
#254Earlier quoted context omitted.
They're pushing a 55% budget cut. There is absolutely no universe in which you can justify that with rhetoric around "DEI" science. This is going to cut very, very deep into basic STEM / biomedical research. They're cancelling mRNA research, they're flagging research that uses words like "trauma" or studies how medications impact men and women differently. There's no sensible agenda behind all of this, it's just back…
[flagged]
Re: NSF faces shake-up as officials abolish its 37 divisions
#255Last week, staff were briefed on a new process for vetting grant proposals that are found to be out of step with a presidential directive on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI),... In the new structure, even if a revised proposal gets the green light from a division director, a new body whose membership has not been determined will take a fresh look to ensure it conforms to the agency’s new standard for making awa…
Re: NSF faces shake-up as officials abolish its 37 divisions
#256Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
So if it crashes, then it's Tesla's fault and they pay? Or do you pay?
Except in self summon, and if it side swipes the car on the way out, it's obviously still my fault. That's just never happened to me.
Where in my sentence did i say I wasn't fully in control of the situation? I just say i very, very rarely even have to disengage in situations.
On the very rare occassion that i do disengage, it's not really that the car is going to put me in a life threatening situation, it kinda just stops... and tweeks out a bit. Mainly at some super wierd triangle intersection in some of the small towns along the california coast.
Honestly i've come to "feel" the car after using it. I'll disengage if i even have a shadow of a doubt it's not going to work, and in situations where i've seen it "fail" before. It might have accomplished it, but instead i just drive through the wierd intersection and reengage.
This has already turned into a rant, but one last point; Have you driven in the other cars in Austin? They do the same thing. When it tweaks, or thinks it might tweak, they patch over to a human who takes control of the car.
Re: NSF faces shake-up as officials abolish its 37 divisions
#257Earlier quoted context omitted.
> While I disagree with this perception that Trump is a "Russian asset", whatever this means If you don't understand what it means, how can you know you disagree with it?
It's an undefined term that changes with whatever conspiracy they want to push. That's why I disagree with it. I don't like Trump, but he's the result of bad decisions made in America, not by some foreign power.
Just some quick examples:
* Recommending American de-nuclearization while stating that Russia is no longer a threat to America.
* Dismantling cybersecurity programs that are intended to identify and counter Russian hacking efforts.
* Peace negotiations with Ukraine and Russia that require no concessions made by Russia.
All of these actions are being taken despite polling poorly with Americans. You could say that none of these definitively proves that there is Russian leverage over Trump and you would be technically correct. The flip side of that coin is that you also can't explain why these actions are in America's best interest.
Re: NSF faces shake-up as officials abolish its 37 divisions
#258Earlier quoted context omitted.
Who cares? It contributes to the deficit, which is what matters for fiscal policy.
Social security is entirely self funded, has a large surplus in the form of the SS Trust Fund (that’s being spent down) and has contributed $0 to the deficit or debt. You should really learn the basic facts about something like that if you’re going to support cuts to the program.
The question is about real actual resource distribution. SS is drawing more resources from young people than it is giving back. That's an actual problem, no matter how many tabs you add to your excel spreadsheet.
Re: NSF faces shake-up as officials abolish its 37 divisions
#259Re: NSF faces shake-up as officials abolish its 37 divisions
#260Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are very few places an administration can cut costs without touching entitlements. Until voters stop punishing politicians for raising the retirement age or trimming wasteful healthcare spending, they will cut the discretionary budget.
Society isn't going back to old people eating dogfood, a child labor workforce, and people being denied basic healthcare. Adjust to reality and make it work, or the masses will make it work but it won't benefit anyone how we get there.