[flagged]
NSF faces shake-up as officials abolish its 37 divisions
321–330 of 877 posts
Re: NSF faces shake-up as officials abolish its 37 divisions
#322Earlier quoted context omitted.
How is it possible that you still see the chance that the actions are being done in "good faith"? In my opinion you'd have to construct a lot of "visual barriers" in order to not see the "full picture" of what kind of people the current regime is made of, and what their motivations would be... You'd have to be looking away, because looking at it would mean admitting you've been wrong.
[flagged]
Re: NSF faces shake-up as officials abolish its 37 divisions
#323I worked at two National Laboratories, Argonne and Idaho, on NSF funded internship grants. The second one turned into a full time job, again on an NSF grant. The first one was on supercomputing, writing proof of concept code for a new supercomputing operating system (ZeptoOS). The second was on the automated stitching of imagery from UAVs for military applications (at a time when this was not commoditized at all, we…
Re: NSF faces shake-up as officials abolish its 37 divisions
#324I have been in and out of the academic world my entire career. I have worked as a programmer/engineer for two universities and a national lab, and worked at a startup founded by some professors. There is huge uncertainty with the people whom I have worked with, nobody seems to be sure what is going to happen, but it feels like it wont be good. Hiring freezes, international graduate students receiving emails to self d…
The irony is that in their supposed effort to "Make America Great Again" they're going to end up accelerating China's rise. We may have decided that basic research is no longer something we want to do, but China's going to continue to forge ahead and leave us in the dust. All thanks to people who have no understanding of how anything works, but only want to tear things down that they don't understand.
Re: NSF faces shake-up as officials abolish its 37 divisions
#325Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not any different than it has been.
> That's not any different than it has been. Good point. Exactly like when the Biden administration decided to cancel all grants to Harvard University because they didn't allow a government takeover of the university. Oh, wait, that didn't happen.
Re: NSF faces shake-up as officials abolish its 37 divisions
#326Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
I think the problem here is that there isn't just one way in which Donald Trump is unduly influenced by Russia in ways that are difficult to explain. I can understand being skeptical, but there's several independent actions Trump has taken that are all inexplicably sympathetic to Russian interests. Just some quick examples: * Recommending American de-nuclearization while stating that Russia is no longer a threat to A…
Re: NSF faces shake-up as officials abolish its 37 divisions
#327Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Unfortunately a majority of American voters saw what happened in the first Trump term and decided that they wanted more of it, with even fewer controls and restrictions. I'm not sure this accurately conveys the situation. American voters have been dissatisfied with the lesser of two evils choice foisted upon them every 4 years for decades. We're 75 years into endless wars. Massive numbers of union high paying jobs…
That's what a lot of it was. In 2016, the establishment was offering us a choice between another Bush and another Clinton, with Cruz being set up as the Buchanan, the conservative who would be allowed to win a state or two before gracefully stepping aside for the real nominee. So voters said screw this, we'll take a shot on the guy who might be crazy, rather than just another one of the same gang. Surprisingly to man…
Incorrect. Stop lying.
Re: NSF faces shake-up as officials abolish its 37 divisions
#328Earlier 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…
could the 55% budget cut be a bureaucracy reduction, not a dei issue?
[1]I think it's probably fair to assume that whoever concluded the word "bias" indicated a likelihood the paper was "woke" struggled with high school statistics and has never read an academic paper of any sort...
Re: NSF faces shake-up as officials abolish its 37 divisions
#329Earlier 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]
I'd be interested in discovering what the breakdown is, DEI vs non-DEI, but I wouldn't be surprised if this move was to censor climate change research, since this administration doesn't consider climate change to be real.
Re: NSF faces shake-up as officials abolish its 37 divisions
#330Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am American. Most of the people I know are also American. I'm trying to tell you why lots of my fellow Americans voted this way. aaronbaugher's comment in this thread is also insightful.
I understand why many Americans voted that way, I’m just saying that they are responsible for the inevitable consequences. Regardless of motivation, electoral choices have consequences that voters collectively own. Again, it’s not like we haven’t seen this before in other countries that have voted in populists. It’s always the same cycle: Widespread dissatisfaction promotes populists who correctly identify legitimate…
I watch all sorts of news. Ultra-liberal Democracy Now!, CNN, ABC, NBC, podcasts on the left and right, right-leaning Fox, etc.
I can say that the right is cheering perceived win after win. From their perspective, tariffs are bringing manufacturing jobs back, what they see as corruption is being rooted out, government is being made leaner, more efficient, and more local. Law is being enforced.
The left seems to be focused on publicizing what they see as losses, assuming that the right will inevitably see the self-evident error of their ways. I don't think this is likely to happen.