← Back to context

Comment by djeastm

11 hours ago

Yours is an "ends justify the means" argument, but are you comfortable with the way these cuts were done? Would you approve so robustly of your own research being cut with a keyword search for government-unapproved terms?

> Yours is an "ends justify the means" argument, but are you comfortable with the way these cuts were done?

Generally no. But I also think that certain classes of keyword filtering were probably a good idea. Filtering for any grants with "structural determinants of health" and reviewing them intensively with the goal of defunding 99%, for example, is probably a good idea.

> Would you approve so robustly of your own research being cut with a keyword search for government-unapproved terms?

I mean, there's zero chance my research would have fallen afoul of any such terms, but let me put it this way: my field was completely up-ended by DeepMind. They not only won a Nobel for that work in record time, but used an approach so severely out of fashion that it couldn't really get any attention.

I guess I'm saying: I don't think it would have been so bad to cut most of it, if it meant that we got more actual diversity in the field.

  • > I mean, there's zero chance my research would have fallen afoul of any such terms, but let me put it this way: my field was completely up-ended by DeepMind. They not only won a Nobel for that work in record time, but used an approach so severely out of fashion that it couldn't really get any attention.

    Someone else mentioned that a project got cut because they used the term "engendered".

    The keywords search cuts were not exactly skillfully enacted.

    • > Someone else mentioned that a project got cut because they used the term "engendered".

      Well, assuming that this is not an apocryphal story, and that there's no other relevant missing details (e.g. "research into silly topic X also used the word engendered"), etc., then that's dumb. I'm not going to argue about hearsay.

      I will say this: before you believe such claims, you should verify them. They're often misremembered or completely made up. In particular, I'm not sure how anyone would know what keyword search was used to target their grant for review.