5 ms·
NSF halts grant awards while staff do second review
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- rideontime 1y agoQuick, what's a synonym for "biodiversity" that won't trip the DOGE grep?
- shagie 1y agoBiological variety.
- softwaredoug 1y agoThey're pretty bad a grep, so I'd just do: biod iversity
- cle 1y agoIncreasing "gene yield" or bioalpha should pass the LLM filters.
- wonderwonder 1y ago[flagged]
- moab 1y agoYes, let’s see how well the research kowtows to the party line. A careful, scrutinizing second review should do no harm, right?
- viraptor 1y agoThis is not a review for quality and the new standards are not about scientific rigor. That's the harm.
- goda90 1y agoYou don't think the scientists, who had their grants approved and were depending on receiving the money to do their work, are harmed by this?
- Tepix 1y agoYou think all research should adhere to what the current administration likes? Does that seem like a good idea to you?
- wonderwonder 1y agoYes. That's exactly what elections are about. People vote on what they want the direction of the country to be and what policies and projects receive funding. Same as it ever was.
- dzdt 1y agoIt IS a harm that SCIENTIFIC STUDY can only be undertaken if it meets new POLITICAL standards. This is research that has already been evaluated by an extremely competitive process for scientific merit. Political slant should be irrelevant.
- wonderwonder 1y agoPolitics is never irrelevant, it bleeds into everything. That is why elections are so important
- julienchastang 1y agoScience organizations operate on shoestring budgets and can little afford disruptions of this sort for grants that have already been approved. Not to mention the fact that the new review criteria may have little to do with scientific merit but on keyword hunting or other opaque processes. As has been mentioned many times in the last few months, government investment in science and technology is critical for the US to remain an economic and military leader, and has garnered broad bipartisan support in the past. Scientific leadership is one of the factors that has made the US a great nation. (Edit: grammar).
- tomp 1y ago> The National Science Foundation (NSF) has put a cork in its grantmaking pipeline after BILLIONAIRE Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) set up shop at the agency this week. Really, "billionaire", that's what you're going with (emphasis mine)?! Isn't it more relevant that he founded and runs 2 biggest startups (as in, high velocity, high growth companies) in the world (Tesla & SpaceX) that run circles around both legacy companies and government agencies? So, yeah, if you want things to radically improve fast, of course you call someone like Elon. It's sad that "unbiased news" basically no longer exists.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- treyd 1y agoTwo companies which are massively dependent on government handouts to function.
- allturtles 1y agoWhat would the unbiased version of this report look like? "...after SUPERMAN Elon Musk's...", "...after NATIONAL HERO Elon Musk's..."? In what way would you like journalists to show their deference to this great man?
- 1y ago
- snapcaster 1y agothis seems like it's all theater right? these aren't the huge drivers of the federal budget, but they're too scared to go after military or entitlement spending so enormous effort is put into these things that aren't even big fractions of the budget
- noitpmeder 1y agoYeah it's just headline seeking. They need to continue to feed the republican base stories such as "We're fixing SCIENCE which the Dirty Liberal's have been RUINING for DECADES! CHINA!"
- techpineapple 1y agoI don't think it's theater, I think it's ideological napalm. Christopher Rufo said "Yes, we are going to crush the academic Left, abolish DEI, and salt the Earth beneath it", and I think this is an example of that mission.
- edc117 1y agoIt's just absolute lunacy. If that's the stated goal (and it sure looks like it), the 'academic left' is at least partially responsible for a large majority of the prosperity of this country over the last few decades. How can you have a successful, rich country when you're antagonizing your allies and roughly half of your citizens? These people will burn down their own house and wealth to make sure others don't feel welcome. How hard is it to just learn to live with people that don't agree with you?
- techpineapple 1y ago“These people will burn down their own house and wealth to make sure others don't feel welcome” Yes
- spwa4 1y agoA small percentage will, yes. The vast majority won't. Plus there's the issue of the stranglehold Trump seems to have over GOP members (ie. they're pushed, even threatened into compliance, especially GOP congress members). An easy way of vilifying any group is to point out how bad their most extreme members are. It also doesn't even matter. The Trump situation will end. At that point MAGA people won't be gone, and it'd be a pretty sad outcome if they were or felt repressed, or we'll simply end up right here again. The point is not to win, the point is to make things better.
- Tepix 1y agoI feel sorry for all these agencies and (aspiring) scientists. I hope they find a safe place elsewhere. I'm left wondering if this administration and its henchmen will manage to do the opposite of what the Apollo program left the US in its wake: A giant leap for the U.S. economy. It sure is creating a lot of long-lasting damage.
- apercu 1y agoYea, but a bunch of people they don’t like for (reasons) aren’t feeling safe so it’s totally worth it! /s
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- gmm1990 1y agoHow is creating a new government department that introduces a bunch of arbitrary rules and reviews not adding to bureaucracy?
- bglazer 1y agoJust for reference, the NSF funds nearly all research thats not biomedical in the US: engineering, physics, material science, etc. Its budget was $9B. The NIH, which accounts for nearly all biomedical research, had a budget of $48B. Lockheed Martin, a single defense contractor, received more than $60B in government contracts in 2024.
- sseagull 1y agoAs if review timelines aren't already way too long. I'm currently waiting 9 months for a small $250k grant (edit: waiting to hear if I've even gotten it. I barely remember what the proposal was about now). I can tell you most scientists are just trying to do their jobs, studying hard stuff. Unfortunately, we do not really have the resources to fight anything. Tough situation, and lots of scientists are pretty frightened. Many junior scientists (myself included) are looking at leaving the country.
- chriskanan 1y agoI think this is the first time I've posted an article that has been flagged, especially given that the source is the journal Science. As a professor working in AI, I'll probably be fine, but if I cannot get funding it will be challenging to stay in academia. Then again, both of my last major NSF proposals (which are in review) had either a required Institutional DEI Commitment Statement (that was for an NSF MRI proposal), and the other was a major AI proposal which required about 1/3 of the proposal to be aimed at broader impacts that were largely aimed at increasing diversity in AI. I do care about increasing the number of women, black, and Hispanic people in AI research, although I also had a section about how we need to increase our domestic production of AI scientists given that 70%+ of the PhDs produced in AI in the USA are non-citizens. Both are still in review. I'm not optimistic, but the work required hundreds of hours to create those proposals....
- yodsanklai 1y ago> if I cannot get funding it will be challenging to stay in academia I assume this is the goal
- dzdt 1y agoIt is a shame also that this topic is deemed too hotly political for HN and hence the flagging. We are lacking in good forums for measured discussion of what is happening in this country right now.
- janice1999 1y agoCalling something "controversial" or "political" is a useful tool for those who support the status quo to suppress conversation and dissent.
- jauntywundrkind 1y agoThe site's moderation system needs to change. There's near infinite power to suppress & deny. That's unhackerly in extreme. There should be some skin in the game for suppressing. If you want to participate in moderating things away, at the very least you should be willing & able to put your name on that act of denying the public.
- Chinjut 1y ago[flagged]
- Tadpole9181 1y agoThese days it's genuinely required to put "/s" - can't even tell what's a joke anymore.
- insane_dreamer 1y agohuh? HN is full of science articles