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

NSF faces shake-up as officials abolish its 37 divisions

science.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

501–510 of 877 posts

Re: NSF faces shake-up as officials abolish its 37 divisions

#501

Post by nickpsecurity »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #341
hackyhacky wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> DEI in practice is illegal No, it isn't, and this assumption is based on a poor understanding of what DEI is. The right paints DEI as a directive to hire less-qualified people based on their race. In reality, DEI just ensures that everyone gets a fair chance regardless of their race.

You speak of equal opportunity . What happens in practice is enforced equal outcomes which entails compromising on principles and standards to get the desired result. i.e. "Group X is under-performing at math" so therefore the problem is with inherent bias in math and we won't expect engineers and scientists to have competency in this domain to get the makeup of people we have decided upon from the start.

I'll add the people that promoted it often said that amongst themselves while more publicly just talking about "diversity." They usually believed in imtersectionality, redistribution of wealth/power, etc. Their fix is systematic discrimination against specific groups to redistribute power to achieve the outcomes. And, if other groups become dominant, they still favor them over white people.

We've seen that these ideologies are conflict-oriented, racist, and less effective. They were forced on us by policy and law by people who in no way represented most of Americans' thinking. Now, a different group favoring no racism, equal opportunity, and generosity to all groups based on need is reversing the prior group's work. Everyone who had been discriminated against will appreciate ending that discrimination.

Re: NSF faces shake-up as officials abolish its 37 divisions

#502

Post by jimmar »

Macha wrote: post #125
jimmar wrote: post #78

In 2023, the NSF said it gave 9,400 research awards at an average of $239,700 each [1]. That's $2.25 billion. That year, the NSF has a budget of $10.5 billion [2]. Can somebody with more insight into the NSF explain where the NSF money goes? My PhD was largely funded through government grants, though not the NSF. To put it mildly, our government contacts were not the most competent people and were frequently roadbloc…

Voters want to know that the money is being "spent effectively". This basically means that the amount of bureaucracy and overhead can only go up. Accepting less alignment with government goals and streamlining process would probably bring overhead down. That is not the goal of the new admin, they'll probably end up achieving a worse ratio of overhead as they monitor everything to make sure it doesn't contradict their…

I don't think transparency requires additional bureaucracy. I would also be a fan of removing requirements that the NSF align its mission with whichever political party is in power.

Re: NSF faces shake-up as officials abolish its 37 divisions

#503

Post by nickpsecurity »

While I support cuts and reforms, I'm a bit saddened and worried by cuts at NSF. Most of the best work I've shared here was funded by NSF. The private sector largely wasn't doing it. If they did, the deliverables weren't free but sometimes were when NSF funded. I'd hate to see those types of grants go.

That said, there is an ideological difference driving this on at least two points (if ignoring DEI etc).

One, taxes are taken from individuals to be spent on the government's priorities. Good, evil, or just wasteful... you have no say. If private donations, then you can fund the people and efforts you value most with your money. Conservatives say your money should be yours as much as possible which requires cutting NSF, etc.

Second, private individuals and businesses decide most of what happens in the markets. The problems in the markets are really their responsibility. If it needs NSF funding, the private parties are probably already failing to make that decision or see it as a bad one. Private, market theory says it's better to let markets run themselves with government interventions mostly blocking harmful behaviors. Ex: If nobody funds or buys secure systems, let them have the consequences of the insecure systems they want so much. Don't fund projects that nobody is buying or selling.

Those are two, large drivers in conservative policy that will exist regardless of other, political beliefs. Those arguing against it are saying the people running the government are more trustworthy with our money. Yet, they're crying out against what the current government is doing. Do they really trust them and want all those resources controlled by the latest administration? Or retain control of their own money to back, as liberals, what they belief in?

Re: NSF faces shake-up as officials abolish its 37 divisions

#504

Post by dredmorbius »

baxtr wrote: post #366
kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hard to declare that the earth is only 6000 years old with all those science hippies in the way. Gotta set priorities.

What do you mean when you say "only"?!

The Ussher Chronology, held fast to by many Christian religious fundamentalists / extremists through Young Earth Creationism:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ussher_chronology>

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Young_Earth_creationism>

Re: NSF faces shake-up as officials abolish its 37 divisions

#505

Post by cdmckay »

tinktank wrote: post #369
UncleOxidant wrote: post #179

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.

[flagged]

I’m not sure I follow… how is that Russian? Wouldn’t it be British?

Re: NSF faces shake-up as officials abolish its 37 divisions

#506

Post by hackyhacky »

nickpsecurity wrote: post #501
kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You speak of equal opportunity . What happens in practice is enforced equal outcomes which entails compromising on principles and standards to get the desired result. i.e. "Group X is under-performing at math" so therefore the problem is with inherent bias in math and we won't expect engineers and scientists to have competency in this domain to get the makeup of people we have decided upon from the start.

I'll add the people that promoted it often said that amongst themselves while more publicly just talking about "diversity." They usually believed in imtersectionality, redistribution of wealth/power, etc. Their fix is systematic discrimination against specific groups to redistribute power to achieve the outcomes. And, if other groups become dominant, they still favor them over white people. We've seen that these ideo…

> I'll add the people that promoted it often said that amongst themselves while more publicly just talking about "diversity." They usually believed in imtersectionality, redistribution of wealth/power, etc. Their fix is systematic discrimination against specific groups to redistribute power to achieve the outcomes. And, if other groups become dominant, they still favor them over white people.

You say this without any evidence at all. As I describe in my comment above, DEI hiring practices do not promote discrimination against anyone.

The right opposes DEI because they genuinely can't understand that someone would want a fair, diverse workplace, so, as you aptly demonstrate, they insert all kinds of imaginary (and obviously false) conspiracy theories in an attempt to show that DEI is actually a disguised attempt to win power for certain favored classes. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

> We've seen that these ideologies are conflict-oriented, racist, and less effective.

You say "we've seen" as if it were established fact, but it isn't. You might as well as "I heard once" or "I saw on Facebook that", insofar as you're attempting to provide a factual basis for your opinions.

> Now, a different group favoring no racism, equal opportunity, and generosity to all groups based on need is reversing the prior group's work. Everyone who had been discriminated against will appreciate ending that discrimination.

No, the current administration is favoring a return to racism by shutting down hiring practices that would have allowed for a diverse hiring pool. Moreover, the administration is transparently also cracking down on viewpoints it doesn't like, by punishing, for example, law firms and universities that are known to to oppose the administration's cause du jour.

Re: NSF faces shake-up as officials abolish its 37 divisions

#507

Post by standardUser »

monero-xmr wrote: post #499
standardUser wrote: post #444

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

The gaslighting here post-Trump is insane. I’m not going to pretend that “no white or Asian males” wasn’t standard policy during the DEI hysteria. Pretending DEI was “just all about merit!” is so absurdly revisionist. Pleaseeee

I'm a white male and I got plenty of jobs. Perhaps you just lack qualifications or soft skills.

Re: NSF faces shake-up as officials abolish its 37 divisions

#508

Post by lesuorac »

rcpt wrote: post #491
lossolo wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't know how to describe what's happening here, but it's really, really stupid. It's just a cynical game to get the highest tax cuts for their buddies and sponsors. https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2025/05/08/congress/jo...

There are no tax cuts because of this. The money saved is a rounding error in the federal budget. This is an ideological purge.

Only if you constrain yourself with reality.

Musk was floating a DOGE dividend with all the money being saved. It'll of course be funded the same was covid checks were but that doesn't mean you have to be honest about how its funded.

Re: NSF faces shake-up as officials abolish its 37 divisions

#509

Post by insane_dreamer »

cmontella wrote: post #133
ddahlen wrote: post #38

I 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…

Yes, the entire DARPA "challenge" series has been about jumpstarting the US robotics industry. People who were involved in those went on to found driverless car companies, which then went on to create a market for driverless cars, and now America is a leader in the industry. And it needed to happened because the state of American robotics was sad in 2004; the very first challenge was a disaster when all the cars ran…

SpaceX was also partly funded by DARPA in its early years, without which, together with other DOD funding, it would likely not have survived.

Re: NSF faces shake-up as officials abolish its 37 divisions

#510

Post by UncleOxidant »

Dakizhu wrote: post #467
kjkjadksj wrote: post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is only ironic if you believe they were speaking in good faith to begin with

No this is what most of their supporters genuinely believe. They think people working in a factory generate more real economic value than people working in offices.

Yep. There are strong Cultural Revolution vibes coming from that direction.
Post reply on HN