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

What's happening inside the NIH and NSF

science.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

671–680 of 1001 posts

Re: What's happening inside the NIH and NSF

#671

Post by WatchDog »

_yb2s wrote: post #112
fasteddie31003 wrote: post #74

[flagged]

1. I don't think allocating funds to reproduce research would be worth the cost of displacing other new research. The current way of discovering that research is wrong by trying to build on it isn't perfect either, but it is still more efficient than systematically reproducing a lot of research. In my experience, scientific reproducibility has gotten substantially better in recent years- the standard of evidence, and…

The US select subcommittee on the coronavirus pandemic, under Biden, concluded that the virus most likely originated from the Wuhan lab

https://x.com/covidselect/status/1863637371624862163?s=46

Re: What's happening inside the NIH and NSF

#672

Post by concordDance »

scarab92 wrote: post #513
xp84 wrote: post #503

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As far as I can tell, Trump is doing things he openly announced he would do for at least a year. So all of this is either a result of robust public support for his policies, or, (my preferred explanation) an even more robust public repudiation of the only alternative that was put forward by the other party, a candidate famous for dropping out before Iowa in 2020 but somehow was coronated the nominee without any voter…

Purity spiral. The left won't be competitive in elections until they learn what it is, why it results in alienation of people who would otherwise support them, and find a way to escape it.

The Yud series on this is actually pretty good (I believe it also predates the term purity spiral): https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/ZQG9cwKbct2LtmL3p/evaporativ...

Re: What's happening inside the NIH and NSF

#673

Post by rbetts »

ReptileMan wrote: post #526

[flagged]

This isn't about pronouns or land grants, no matter how hard that excuse is used. It is about Trump's administration destroying future decades of science, about dismantling the ability of the people to limit the oligarchs, about due process, about a respect for the separation powers that defines America's system of government, about the ability publish and communicate factual data about health, poverty, climate, and myriad other topics inconvenient to those currently in power.

Trump is president. He deserves every chance to reshape the government - but he MUST do so through constitutional processes. He is welcome to advocate for and organize legislation. He is welcome to advocate for and organize even constitutional amendments.

But his approach has wounded, deeply, a critical element of the rule of law. And once that disappears, we all lose everything.

Re: What's happening inside the NIH and NSF

#674

Post by XajniN »

realusername wrote: post #622
Gareth321 wrote: post #609

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think you can call a democratically elected president doing what he promised to do a coup.

So first he lied about Project 2025 and then, "whatever the president does is democratic" is just an obvious sophism, no democracy works like that. Democraties work with checks and balances, which are being broken right now. On a final note, historically a lot of coup came from elected presidents

When did he change the story about Project 2025?

Re: What's happening inside the NIH and NSF

#675

Post by odyssey7 »

intended wrote: post #669
odyssey7 wrote: post #665

This hurts, but it also presents an opportunity for rebuilding. An outcome could be a greater diversity of voices influencing research, rather than the NSF and NIH continuing to serve as monoliths. The NIH is the dominant force in medical research. Remember how theories for Alzheimer’s having an infectious etiology were sidelined for decades? And, to this day, for autoimmune conditions?

Do people recognize what rebuilding entails?

I think it means the next administration would have to hire new people to offer grants to researchers. This would bring new perspectives into the process. There is never any shortage of researchers to fund.

And that the ranks of researchers, which are often stagnant due to a shortage of jobs for PhD holders, would experience turnover in the interim, creating openings for fresh voices when the funding resumes.

Ideally, imo, the grant process could be distributed across more organizations rather than being as centralized as it has been. The next administration might be free to do so if the existing orgs are no longer thriving at that time.

Re: What's happening inside the NIH and NSF

#676

Post by gws16 »

sjsdaiuasgdia wrote: post #565
nlitened wrote: post #562

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> deciding everything that happens in government as if they were a king Isn’t it what the head of executive branch supposed to mean? Trump does exactly how he promised he would do if you elected him, and you guys elected him overwhelmingly to do exactly that.

>Isn’t it what the head of executive branch supposed to mean? In a nation governed by a constitution and laws, absofuckinglutely not. The chief executive is supposed to operate within the bounds of the constitution and the laws created under it.

NIH and NSF ultimately report to the executive branch and if their reach can be expanded under executive fiat in a democratic administration, I don't see why they can't be limited under a republican one?

Re: What's happening inside the NIH and NSF

#677

Post by odyssey7 »

throwfgtpwd234 wrote: post #469
stainablesteel wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's also highly discriminatory and ideological. Decades of discrimination will lead people to want to come back and tear it down, you reap what you sow.

[flagged]

Surely your request is in jest?

Re: What's happening inside the NIH and NSF

#678

Post by mc32 »

jmward01 wrote: post #490

This is a coup and we are calmly debating budgets. Debating the % of budget and how useful organization x is and if y will still get grant money, and, and, and... All of this is ignoring the big elephant in the room that there is one single person deciding everything that happens in government as if they were a king. The right thing to be debating is how we can stop this from continuing and how we can hold those resp…

Large organizations suffer from rot.

They need periodic retrenchment -in the private sector there are economic pressures to re-organize; in the government the tendency is for greater taxation.

Throwing out the baby along with the bath water is not the answer but neither is the status quo.

Re: What's happening inside the NIH and NSF

#679

Post by intended »

odyssey7 wrote: post #675
intended wrote: post #669

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do people recognize what rebuilding entails?

I think it means the next administration would have to hire new people to offer grants to researchers. This would bring new perspectives into the process. There is never any shortage of researchers to fund. And that the ranks of researchers, which are often stagnant due to a shortage of jobs for PhD holders, would experience turnover in the interim, creating openings for fresh voices when the funding resumes. Ideally…

why.. where will the money come from? And next administration?

This is 14 DAYS since election. March isnt even here yet. There are 4 tax filings before the next election.

Please take a look at things like demonitization, or many "harsh" medicine programs in other countries.

The fallout is going to be decades. The government is going to pivot to bread and circuses. The sides are going to get more entrenched, and then theres going to be riots and violence.

This will pass, and new crap will come in. This is banana republic territory, not America territory.

Re: What's happening inside the NIH and NSF

#680

Post by mc32 »

lisp2240 wrote: post #658
intended wrote: post #634

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a suggestion - at least one of several, which is to understand why we got here. The fact that this is escalating since cable TV, Murdoch, and the internet is not a coincidences. Democracies globally are facing a similar problem, which is an abuse of a core democractic principle: Free speech. Free speech is often valued in and of itself. However, free speech in itself is only a tool that serves a greater purpos…

The problem is, in America, both magnets pull to the right. We have a far right republican party and a center right democratic party. There is no leftwing party to provide balance. There’s not a single democrat who would be considered a leftist outside America.

Outside of Europe, in the rest of the world where 85% of the people live, what are examples of successful or meaningful leftist parties?
Post reply on HN