Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Please remember that science is under attack in the United States - new proposals would gut the nih even beyond the horror that is ongoing. As a scientist I am horrified and I truly hope that we don’t abandon the usas historically strong investment in the future.
 help



Kindly share more details

1. Trump has been trying to cut Science budgers by larger percentages for a while now. Congress has not let them.

2. NIH funding notice of awards has slowed to a crawl since Trump did not get his wish to cut Science funding.

3. Putting scientific funding under political control, instructing them to ignore the reviews conducted by peer scientists.

4. Have practically made international collaborations on grants impossible. An expert in Canada or Europe that would be great? Pretty much, too bad.

5. Pushing policies that make grants cancelable at any moment without need to have a justified reason, including potentially for exercising free speech, disagreeing with Administration doctrine, etc, or because you're ugly. This and the funding uncertainty makes planning difficult...just like business, stability/predictability matters.

6. Pushing policies that prevent funds to help cover costs of dissemination, including conference costs.


100% support (10s of millions of Americans do) many of these cuts when scientists are hired because they know someone, or are part of some “group” rather than being the best choice. Also not interested in funding anything not research related, including various “offices” that have nothing to do with supporting research. Lots of things to like about these cuts.

> 100% support (10s of millions of Americans do) many of these cuts

I doubt "10s of millions of Americans" can describe the core functions of the NIH

> when scientists are hired because they know someone, or are part of some “group” rather than being the best choice.

How do you think new appointees and hires in the NIH/HHS are selected? Political loyalty seems to be a better predictor than scientific impact or output.

> Also not interested in funding anything not research related, including various “offices” that have nothing to do with supporting research. Lots of things to like about these cuts.

The cuts and changes are dramatically impacting research support. Grant money is not being disbursed at the same rate since the new review changes began. You can more plainly characterize the changes as harmful to research in general than focused on removing whatever specific things you don't like.


You know so little about this, ad it is terribly frustrating to me. Scientists have been made out to be villains, when, on the whole, these are some the hardest working, most motivated people you will ever encounter.

They have absolutely no idea what they are destroying or why. An entire generation of scientists will be lost. It is breathtaking to watch what will surely be someday labeled as one of the greatest acts of intentional, national self-destruction ever.

I'm pretty sure only a small fraction of grants gave this issue, and the cuts have meanwhile being very wide, without any sort of intelligent approach (I know ppl doing stuff like material science at nasa that now have nothing to do because they cut costs of various inputs, while the very expensive lab equipment is sitting there now unused)

Can you cite any stats or studies that show that this is happening in any substantial amounts? This seems to be one of those "it just makes common sense" when the underlying data is ignored or assumed.

>100% support (10s of millions of Americans do) many of these cuts when scientists are hired because they know someone, or are part of some “group” rather than being the best choice.

Prove it. Prove this happens at a large scale. This is just nonsense talking points.


It’s called the 2024 election. People have had enough leftist politics in their science.

It's called the 2024 election. People have listened to so much propaganda aimed at destroying the anyone with credibility that can challenge whichever "truth" the propagandist chooses to push.

There is no leftist scurge I'm science.


Sigh.

I'm sure the average person was completely fed up with the federal grant process for medical issues and it was a driving force in their voting decision. Excellent proof.


Could you explain how much the US spends on its science budget compared to peers? It would help us really understand how much he's cutting it and harming our science base if we knew the numbers. For example if we're spending 50% less than EU or Canada.

I've been wondering why they attack science outside of they think it is woke and liberal.

It makes no sense to cut off the hand that saves you even as a rich billionaire who wants to control people in a fascist society.


It pleases their voters. All the MAGAs I know think scientists are scammers, funded by Bill Gates, brewing up "fake" viruses to reduce the population and insert nanobots to track their movements.

They don’t believe in competence because they’ve never experienced it. They think everything is narrative and spectacle.

They are all about science and research. What they don’t want is for scientific discoveries to be publicly available, because then it is harder to leverage them for absurd profit margins.

Everyone likes to think that their opponents are evil, highly intelligent, silently scheming types like the legendary Cardinal Richelieu.

In reality, mediocre thinkers with inflated egos and little understanding of long-term consequences are pulling the strings almost everywhere.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: