481–490 of 877 posts
It's not just the NSF, it's the entire functional federal government.
If you're wondering when it's time to literally shut down the country with a national strike? That time has already passed and that state persists until the children and put on time out.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Every DEI program I've been involved in has had target quotas which put pressure on hiring managers to reach those quotas, but still "hire on merit". And then they hire a viz minority engineer who thinks translating a js file to python means renaming the file extension.
You are either lying about hard-number racial/gender quotas or you were working for companies that were flagrantly breaking the law. Did you whistle blow? You see, it doesn't add up, because usually when a company breaks the law so blatantly, it does so in crafty, shady ways intended to make more money, not in an attempt to create diversity that does nothing for the bottom line while also threatening the very existen…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They're going through every federal agency making cuts, not singling out this one in particular. That's BS. They are already bragging about raising defense spending.
> They are already bragging about raising defense spending. Sure, but that's the exception. The cuts to the NSF are the norm.
Not to mention that the Department of Defense has never passed a financial audit in the last seven years and money frequently disappears into contractors who are known to delay projects on purpose to make more money.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I could never get beyond "honorable mention" for the NSF GRFP. I found the diversity part of it most difficult to write. Like honestly my research had nothing to do with diversity and I'm not an underrepresented minority myself. But that was a major part of how the application was scored, so you had to come up with some bullshit and hope for the best. And that was like 15 years ago, I hear things have only gotten mor…
They could have ended the diversity statements, but kept all the research. They decided to end all the research too.
Which is kind of crazy... I'm here on the Internet ranting about DEI, and the MAGA movement is still toxic enough to completely alienate me. MAGA is probably worse than DEI.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
You forget that Trump's enemies are all married to this narrative of Trump as Russian asset. So I'm very clear that he will try to destroy as many as these people as possible during his second term. This includes all the people pushing support for Ukraine, which is seen as a Biden project. It has nothing to do with helping Russia and more with his personal preservation in power.
I'm not saying that you're wrong, but that is an awful lot of accidental benefit for Russia and precious few others. Far too much for my tastes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
"If it's not ideologically aligned it won't get funded." As I show elsewhere in this thread, the previous administration forced applicants to include irrelevant DEI language in grant applications.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I could never get beyond "honorable mention" for the NSF GRFP. I found the diversity part of it most difficult to write. Like honestly my research had nothing to do with diversity and I'm not an underrepresented minority myself. But that was a major part of how the application was scored, so you had to come up with some bullshit and hope for the best. And that was like 15 years ago, I hear things have only gotten mor…
I would counter your anecdata with the 5 friends I have, all of whom are whiter than printer paper and 3 of whom are deeply conservative, who received GRFP. Your failure to get GRFP had nothing to do with the diversity statement.
What tells you more is that the diversity statement exists and they say it's used as part of scoring. Therefore, unless the amount of score it counts for is infinitesimally small, some people win/lose based on the content of their diversity statement.
Was that me? Who knows. But unless the whole thing was just busy work for no reason, it was probably a bunch of people.
How many? Who knows. I'm sure you'd agree that it would be interesting if somebody published that data! Maybe the new NSF will be more transparent than the old one.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I could never get beyond "honorable mention" for the NSF GRFP. I found the diversity part of it most difficult to write. Like honestly my research had nothing to do with diversity and I'm not an underrepresented minority myself. But that was a major part of how the application was scored, so you had to come up with some bullshit and hope for the best. And that was like 15 years ago, I hear things have only gotten mor…
Grfp has always been prestigious. However many more professors themselves are funded from nsf grants they use to then pay for their grad students.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Having looked at the list, I feel you’re gonna be fine > NSF Grant Terminations 2025 > https://airtable.com/appGKlSVeXniQZkFC/shrFxbl1YTqb3AyOO
The fastest way for the US to lose its competitive edge and status as global leader is to reduce funding for scientific research and academic institutions. They are the Crown Jewels and the primary attraction for talent from around the world. The damage for the next four years is done. The question is, even if there's a major shift back to sanity with the next prez elections, it'll take years to build up trust and th…
> China will try but their credibility is low, which is the US's only saving grace This is your incorrect perception. The credibility of China around the world (outside the US) as a technology leader is already higher than the US. The current government is only cementing this perception.