7 ms·

And the real partisan question is ”should the US fund studying the black holes”, not the actual science question

by nikanj 4mo ago

helterskelter 4mo ago
At this point I wouldn't be surprised if they thought it was a DEI thing.
- iAMkenough 4mo ago
  If the 20-something’s at DOGE proved anything last year, the keyword “black” associated with grant funding probably put the research on a list of DEI cuts.
  - apical_dendrite 4mo ago
    This is getting downvoted, but it's actually true. DOGE repeatedly used naive keyword searches to kill funding for projects that often had nothing to do with DEI. > Among them was a $349,000 grant to replace an aging HVAC system at the High Point Museum in North Carolina. “Improving HVAC systems enhances preservation conditions for collections, aligning with the goal of providing greater access to diverse audiences,” the ChatGPT DEI rationale stated. > Another federal employee, whose primary job function is managing relations with private equity-held businesses, was placed on administrative leave "pursuant to the President's executive order on DEIA," per a dismissal memo reviewed by BI. https://www.businessinsider.com/doge-wrongly-flagged-jobs-programs-dei-equity-2025-3 https://www.businessinsider.com/doge-wrongly-flagged-jobs-pr...
  - ryandrake 4mo ago
    I don't know why you're getting downvoted. This is exactly the kind of expertise and competence we have in the Administration right now. It is totally believable that they would do a substring search for "black" and "trans" and defund black hole research and transistor science.
    - tombert 4mo ago
      It is a little impressive how actively bad they are at this. I haven't had that much respect for Elon since he called the cave diver a pedophile, but something I didn't realize until the 2025 administration started is how lazy everyone involved with it is. As far as I can tell, no one in that administration has, at any point in their life, ever examined any of their own opinions or actions, or looked up the "why" of any of the programs that they declared as "wasteful". That or they're just idiots. Tough to say.
    - m-ee 4mo ago
      They have said in depositions that they just did substring searches or fed lists to chat gpt, it’s not even a question.
twothreeone 4mo ago
Which really tells you more about the state of mind of people asking that question. What kind of person isn't curious about the puzzle of their own existence, or the nature of the physical reality they live in (and yes, by "being curious" I mean "being willing to put a tax dollar amount to them")?
- wins32767 4mo ago
  That's foolish. There is certainly an amount of money on funding research that is unreasonable! Determining where that line should rest is an inherently political question. Determining who should get funding for that is also a political question. The latter question was able to be papered over for many years because the scientific community generally contained roughly equal members of both parties. Since that isn't true any longer now "science" is getting treated like interest group just like all the other groups within the country. It's definitely going to hurt the country in the long run, but acting like this wasn't going to happen eventually when the university system purged itself of moderates and conservatives is foolish and obscures the part of the problem that came from the universities themselves.
  - khalic 4mo ago
    lol, are you implying science is dying because, you believe, less and less scientists are “conservative”. Do you have any notion of how ridiculous that sounds?
    - wins32767 4mo ago
      I'm not implying I'm stating that if you depending on the tax base of the entire country to pay your bills you need to ensure that you cultivate the support of both parties.
      - khalic 4mo ago
        This is a fictitious scenario invented to make the conservatives the victims… when they are the ones in power, killing the science. No amount of mental gymnastics trumps that fact
GolfPopper 4mo ago
The real "partisan" question is, "What can the GOP leadership and their owners loot without immediate negative consequences for themselves?"

And the real partisan question is ”should the US fund studying the black holes”, not the actual science question

by nikanj 4mo ago

And the real partisan question is ”should the US fund studying the black holes”, not the actual science question

helterskelter 4mo ago

At this point I wouldn't be surprised if they thought it was a DEI thing.

iAMkenough 4mo ago
If the 20-something’s at DOGE proved anything last year, the keyword “black” associated with grant funding probably put the research on a list of DEI cuts.
- apical_dendrite 4mo ago
  This is getting downvoted, but it's actually true. DOGE repeatedly used naive keyword searches to kill funding for projects that often had nothing to do with DEI. > Among them was a $349,000 grant to replace an aging HVAC system at the High Point Museum in North Carolina. “Improving HVAC systems enhances preservation conditions for collections, aligning with the goal of providing greater access to diverse audiences,” the ChatGPT DEI rationale stated. > Another federal employee, whose primary job function is managing relations with private equity-held businesses, was placed on administrative leave "pursuant to the President's executive order on DEIA," per a dismissal memo reviewed by BI. https://www.businessinsider.com/doge-wrongly-flagged-jobs-programs-dei-equity-2025-3 https://www.businessinsider.com/doge-wrongly-flagged-jobs-pr...
- ryandrake 4mo ago
  I don't know why you're getting downvoted. This is exactly the kind of expertise and competence we have in the Administration right now. It is totally believable that they would do a substring search for "black" and "trans" and defund black hole research and transistor science.
  - tombert 4mo ago
    It is a little impressive how actively bad they are at this. I haven't had that much respect for Elon since he called the cave diver a pedophile, but something I didn't realize until the 2025 administration started is how lazy everyone involved with it is. As far as I can tell, no one in that administration has, at any point in their life, ever examined any of their own opinions or actions, or looked up the "why" of any of the programs that they declared as "wasteful". That or they're just idiots. Tough to say.
  - m-ee 4mo ago
    They have said in depositions that they just did substring searches or fed lists to chat gpt, it’s not even a question.

twothreeone 4mo ago

Which really tells you more about the state of mind of people asking that question. What kind of person isn't curious about the puzzle of their own existence, or the nature of the physical reality they live in (and yes, by "being curious" I mean "being willing to put a tax dollar amount to them")?

wins32767 4mo ago
That's foolish. There is certainly an amount of money on funding research that is unreasonable! Determining where that line should rest is an inherently political question. Determining who should get funding for that is also a political question. The latter question was able to be papered over for many years because the scientific community generally contained roughly equal members of both parties. Since that isn't true any longer now "science" is getting treated like interest group just like all the other groups within the country. It's definitely going to hurt the country in the long run, but acting like this wasn't going to happen eventually when the university system purged itself of moderates and conservatives is foolish and obscures the part of the problem that came from the universities themselves.
- khalic 4mo ago
  lol, are you implying science is dying because, you believe, less and less scientists are “conservative”. Do you have any notion of how ridiculous that sounds?
  - wins32767 4mo ago
    I'm not implying I'm stating that if you depending on the tax base of the entire country to pay your bills you need to ensure that you cultivate the support of both parties.
    - khalic 4mo ago
      This is a fictitious scenario invented to make the conservatives the victims… when they are the ones in power, killing the science. No amount of mental gymnastics trumps that fact

GolfPopper 4mo ago

The real "partisan" question is, "What can the GOP leadership and their owners loot without immediate negative consequences for themselves?"