4 ms·

You're making so many vaporous claims that I doubt if it's even worth engaging.

• dekhn 2y ago
  I've been on HN for a decade and worked (tangentially) with the individual you're responding to- I don't think you should take the effort to respond at all. He's made up his mind that the current approach will improve things, and believes he has "data" to support it, but also seems absolutely naive about the intent and effects of the current administration's approaches.
  • esalman 2y ago
    Agreed. I myself was involved in academia close to a decade as well and participated in studies funded by NIH and NSF during Obama, Trump#1 and Biden era. This person has no clue how rigorous and competitive the grant review process is. If appealing to DEI was so successful in getting your study funded, everyone would do it. But it was never the case at least in my experience.
    • mike_hearn 2y ago
      Great job on making a sub-thread that says nothing. If the process is so rigorous, why is it so easy to find non rigorous outputs? I'm hardly unique in pointing this out: if the best you can do is say everything is fine, despite clear evidence it's not, you can't be surprised at the consequences. If you don't like the current approach that's fine, but where's the alternative? There was a Trump free four years, but nothing was done.