7 ms·

> Why should somebody researching e.g. fusion for the Department of Energy also need to create a Promoting Inclusive and Equitable Research (PIER) plan, to even

> Why should somebody researching e.g. fusion for the Department of Energy also need to create a Promoting Inclusive and Equitable Research (PIER) plan, to even apply? To try to ensure that the people working on the project are selected fairly and on merit, rather than unfairly and on personal prejudice.

nickburns 2y ago
Is that not what Equal Protection under the 14A (applied to the USG through the Due Process clause of the 5A) is for?
- tangent128 2y ago
  Without enforcement mechanisms (a PIER plan in this context), the 14th Amendment is just blots of ink on paper.
  - nickburns 2y ago
    The US Constitution protects the people from excessive acts of government, not the other way around. It says nothing about "enforcement mechanisms" which, should any actually be enacted by the legislature or ordered by the executive, are subject to constitutional challenge by the people before the judiciary (unless rendered moot by a superseding legislative act or executive order). Our constitutional republic is not merely "just blots of ink on paper" but rather alive and well.
  - ahmeneeroe-v2 2y ago
    A PIER plan is not Equal Protection. For the last few years, a PIER plan is explicitly about Un-equal Protection in the service of achieving "equitable" outcomes.
    - larkost 2y ago
      How do you explain the un-equitable outcomes that we have been getting? The whole point of DEI is that there are (largely unconscious) biases that have been producing these un-equitable outcomes, and we need some conscious effort to get rid of them. If truly being race-blind (or any other way of dividing people that is not strictly merit) is really your goal, and you are aware of unconscious bias, then what are people really objecting to?
      - ahmeneeroe-v2 2y ago
        Can you offer any other possible explanations than "unconscious bias" that would lead to different outcomes? "Unconscious bias" is sociological dark matter. It is a kludge used to prop up otherwise ineffective social theories.
        ANewFormation 2y ago
        Exactly. This [1] headline from the NYT pretty much sums up the issue: "To Make Orchestras More Diverse, End Blind Auditions." Different groups of peoples have different strengths and different weaknesses. This isn't some sort of a problem that needs fixing. And if one does want to 'fix' it you need to start way earlier than at the e.g. hiring point. Want to beat that kid who's been playing violin for hours a day since he was 6? Ok, then your target demographic is 6 year olds, not professional orchestras. [1] - https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/16/arts/music/blind-auditions-orchestras-race.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/16/arts/music/blind-audition...
        larkost 2y ago
        I can't read the article, so I don't really know what they are arguing for there. The headline sounds a bit click-baity, so I don't want to guess what the content is. But looking from a sex standpoint blind auditions are responsible for a sweeping change in the ratio of men and women in professional orchestras (though men still outnumber women %60 to %40, but that is from a near %100 a while ago). This is absolutely a case to look at to demonstrate what unconscious biases are, and a wonderfully effective way of fighting it in one specific place.
ANewFormation 2y ago
You can read about PIER plan requirements here. [1] Archive since the page is already dead. Things are moving ridiculously fast for government to the point I suspect there was alot of desire to get rid of all this stuff before, but people were unable to do so. Anyhow it had nothing to do with the merit of the project or the team which were obviously already being evaluated. It was nothing but an unrelated ideological conformity test added as a requirement. [1] - https://web.archive.org/web/20230104150813/https://science.osti.gov/grants/Applicant-and-Awardee-Resources/PIER-Plans https://web.archive.org/web/20230104150813/https://science.o...
- themgt 2y ago
  Great resource. imo Trump is jerking the wheel too hard in the other direction but some of this stuff was legitimately crazy. FAQ: Q: I am only requesting support for one graduate student; do I still need to submit a PIER Plan? A: Yes, all applications for funding to the Office of Science, with the exception of supplemental proposals, conference proposals, and proposals to the SBIR/STTR Programs (at this time), require a PIER Plan. All applicants are encouraged to consider what contributions they can make to creating more equitable and inclusive research environments. It is expected that the complexity and detail of a PIER Plan for a smaller research project and fewer project personnel would be less than that for a larger research project. [and no we won't provide you an example, it needs to be from your heart] When you're requiring the greengrocer to submit a personalized statement justifying how each single apple he sells contributes to the project of worldwide socialism you might be risking provoking a reactionary counterrevolution. Americans need to just chill with trying to enforce micromanaged ideological conformity on a continent-sized country of 350 million people. And avoid winding up in a place "eroded by the ideological rituals that the entire power structure depend on, 'that are ever less credible, exactly because they are untested by public discussion and controversy'".
  - foobarbecue 2y ago
    I applied for and won a small NASA ROSES citizen science seed funding grant ($80K). The call focused on outreach and equity in a way that encouraged me come up with a plan to get underprivileged high school students involved. This improved my results and made a difference in their lives.
pipes 2y ago
Considering a candidates suitability for a role based on their race, gender, or sexual orientation is the opposite merit based selection.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- intended 2y ago
  Huh? Really? Aren't people by default biased towards their ingroups and things familiar to them? Don't we make movies of the times someone actually got noticed and was able to enrich our society through their merit? Perhaps I am wrong.
  - ANewFormation 2y ago
    The whole concept of 'got noticed' runs entirely contrary to the notion of merit, to an absurd degree in tech. One does not hope to get noticed - they strive to excel on their own or by bringing others in to help them. Your merit is not what you might achieve, but what you do achieve.
    - intended 2y ago
      Really? We're rational here, which is pretty much meant to be the hallmark of techies. > The whole concept of 'got noticed' runs entirely contrary to the notion of merit, to an absurd degree in tech. >Your merit is not what you might achieve, but what you do achieve. Taking it seriously, I can see several situations where these rules do not hold true. However, that may be me reading in factors you exclude for the purposes of your point. So let me turn it to you - can you consider circumstances where these statements wouldn't hold true? Or are they absolute in your eyes? If they are absolute, I would definitely want to understand your defintions, since I can conceive of many obvious cases where these points are violated. But since they are obvious, I am assuming you haven't overlooked them in the way you envision things.
  - pipes 2y ago
    You haven't addressed what I said. You've identified a problem (let's just assume you are correct about the problem for arguments sake). I've pointed out the problem with current "solution": making decisions about individuals based on their race, sexual orientation or gender seems far from good, but you haven't addressed that.

nickburns 2y ago

Is that not what Equal Protection under the 14A (applied to the USG through the Due Process clause of the 5A) is for?

tangent128 2y ago
Without enforcement mechanisms (a PIER plan in this context), the 14th Amendment is just blots of ink on paper.
- nickburns 2y ago
  The US Constitution protects the people from excessive acts of government, not the other way around. It says nothing about "enforcement mechanisms" which, should any actually be enacted by the legislature or ordered by the executive, are subject to constitutional challenge by the people before the judiciary (unless rendered moot by a superseding legislative act or executive order). Our constitutional republic is not merely "just blots of ink on paper" but rather alive and well.
- ahmeneeroe-v2 2y ago
  A PIER plan is not Equal Protection. For the last few years, a PIER plan is explicitly about Un-equal Protection in the service of achieving "equitable" outcomes.
  - larkost 2y ago
    How do you explain the un-equitable outcomes that we have been getting? The whole point of DEI is that there are (largely unconscious) biases that have been producing these un-equitable outcomes, and we need some conscious effort to get rid of them. If truly being race-blind (or any other way of dividing people that is not strictly merit) is really your goal, and you are aware of unconscious bias, then what are people really objecting to?
    - ahmeneeroe-v2 2y ago
      Can you offer any other possible explanations than "unconscious bias" that would lead to different outcomes? "Unconscious bias" is sociological dark matter. It is a kludge used to prop up otherwise ineffective social theories.
      - ANewFormation 2y ago
        Exactly. This [1] headline from the NYT pretty much sums up the issue: "To Make Orchestras More Diverse, End Blind Auditions." Different groups of peoples have different strengths and different weaknesses. This isn't some sort of a problem that needs fixing. And if one does want to 'fix' it you need to start way earlier than at the e.g. hiring point. Want to beat that kid who's been playing violin for hours a day since he was 6? Ok, then your target demographic is 6 year olds, not professional orchestras. [1] - https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/16/arts/music/blind-auditions-orchestras-race.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/16/arts/music/blind-audition...
        larkost 2y ago
        I can't read the article, so I don't really know what they are arguing for there. The headline sounds a bit click-baity, so I don't want to guess what the content is. But looking from a sex standpoint blind auditions are responsible for a sweeping change in the ratio of men and women in professional orchestras (though men still outnumber women %60 to %40, but that is from a near %100 a while ago). This is absolutely a case to look at to demonstrate what unconscious biases are, and a wonderfully effective way of fighting it in one specific place.

ANewFormation 2y ago

You can read about PIER plan requirements here. [1] Archive since the page is already dead. Things are moving ridiculously fast for government to the point I suspect there was alot of desire to get rid of all this stuff before, but people were unable to do so. Anyhow it had nothing to do with the merit of the project or the team which were obviously already being evaluated. It was nothing but an unrelated ideological conformity test added as a requirement. [1] - https://web.archive.org/web/20230104150813/https://science.osti.gov/grants/Applicant-and-Awardee-Resources/PIER-Plans https://web.archive.org/web/20230104150813/https://science.o...

themgt 2y ago
Great resource. imo Trump is jerking the wheel too hard in the other direction but some of this stuff was legitimately crazy. FAQ: Q: I am only requesting support for one graduate student; do I still need to submit a PIER Plan? A: Yes, all applications for funding to the Office of Science, with the exception of supplemental proposals, conference proposals, and proposals to the SBIR/STTR Programs (at this time), require a PIER Plan. All applicants are encouraged to consider what contributions they can make to creating more equitable and inclusive research environments. It is expected that the complexity and detail of a PIER Plan for a smaller research project and fewer project personnel would be less than that for a larger research project. [and no we won't provide you an example, it needs to be from your heart] When you're requiring the greengrocer to submit a personalized statement justifying how each single apple he sells contributes to the project of worldwide socialism you might be risking provoking a reactionary counterrevolution. Americans need to just chill with trying to enforce micromanaged ideological conformity on a continent-sized country of 350 million people. And avoid winding up in a place "eroded by the ideological rituals that the entire power structure depend on, 'that are ever less credible, exactly because they are untested by public discussion and controversy'".
- foobarbecue 2y ago
  I applied for and won a small NASA ROSES citizen science seed funding grant ($80K). The call focused on outreach and equity in a way that encouraged me come up with a plan to get underprivileged high school students involved. This improved my results and made a difference in their lives.

pipes 2y ago

Considering a candidates suitability for a role based on their race, gender, or sexual orientation is the opposite merit based selection.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
intended 2y ago
Huh? Really? Aren't people by default biased towards their ingroups and things familiar to them? Don't we make movies of the times someone actually got noticed and was able to enrich our society through their merit? Perhaps I am wrong.
- ANewFormation 2y ago
  The whole concept of 'got noticed' runs entirely contrary to the notion of merit, to an absurd degree in tech. One does not hope to get noticed - they strive to excel on their own or by bringing others in to help them. Your merit is not what you might achieve, but what you do achieve.
  - intended 2y ago
    Really? We're rational here, which is pretty much meant to be the hallmark of techies. > The whole concept of 'got noticed' runs entirely contrary to the notion of merit, to an absurd degree in tech. >Your merit is not what you might achieve, but what you do achieve. Taking it seriously, I can see several situations where these rules do not hold true. However, that may be me reading in factors you exclude for the purposes of your point. So let me turn it to you - can you consider circumstances where these statements wouldn't hold true? Or are they absolute in your eyes? If they are absolute, I would definitely want to understand your defintions, since I can conceive of many obvious cases where these points are violated. But since they are obvious, I am assuming you haven't overlooked them in the way you envision things.
- pipes 2y ago
  You haven't addressed what I said. You've identified a problem (let's just assume you are correct about the problem for arguments sake). I've pointed out the problem with current "solution": making decisions about individuals based on their race, sexual orientation or gender seems far from good, but you haven't addressed that.