28 comments

  • tlb 35 minutes ago

    15 years ago you could argue that venture capital wasn't funding enough advanced tech, so ideas were failing to cross the gap from pure research to commercial development. But lately there's capital available for quantum computers, fusion, synthetic bio, space exploration, asteroid mining, and lots more. The government is going to suck at funding the right things. They should leave tech transfer to private investors, and focus on funding pure science.

    • SoftTalker 2 minutes ago

      > quantum computers, fusion, synthetic bio, space exploration, asteroid mining

      Poster children for tech with no realistic commercial prospects. Projects in these fields have been pipe dreams for decades. Where are any commercial products in the areas of fusion reactors? Quantum computers? Asteroid mining operations?

      If private investors want to fund this stuff, fine. As long as they don't come seeking bailouts later.

    • downrightmike 30 minutes ago

      Tax payers fund the research, they should get a cut of whatever company uses that research.

      • counters 3 minutes ago

        That would be a crappy trade; today, the public benefits multiple times over as commercialization of technology drives the innovation economy. Who cares about sharing a measly fraction of direct profits when we all get long-term growth of our investment and retirement portfolios at upwards of 10% annually?

      • epistasis 29 minutes ago

        Disagree heartily, the research should be for basic science that's not directly patentable. It should develop the base upon which everything else is built, that's the part of the science that can't get funded through private money. Leave the private money to the parts that can be monetized.

        Of course, that's all generalities, sometimes directly monetizable stuff does come out of basic research. But the NFS should focus on basic research, because nobody else will in the US, and if we want to have it here at all, have the practitioners, have the knowledge, and then also reap the economic rewards because we have those people here, we need to fund the basic science that politicians love to mock and criticize.

      • tlb 25 minutes ago

        They do as soon as that company makes a profit, or anyone sells shares in that company.

        • mothballed 15 minutes ago

          In theory, sure. In practice what the taxpayers get in exchange for their taxes is they are buying a better likelihood to not have the IRS drag them to jail or all their shit carried away / seized by feds, and the 'deal' ends there (unless you count whatever power you think you get from voting, LMAO). The taxes and public collection of profits are materially in possession of congress and/or the executive. The public is basically getting dick from that (most of FICA tax goes back to the public though maybe though not as ROI just redistribution so the poors don't riot), the politicians then use their money to bomb girls' schools in Iran or prosecute Amish for having an uninspected slaughterhouse or whatever else gets their jollies going.

          The sooner the public learns that the public coffers aren't theirs, and will never be theirs, the better.

  • ianm218 29 minutes ago

    > By levying such a large tax on its other programs, the agency appears to be defying a congressional directive in the final FY 2026 appropriations bill that “No [NSF] directorate shall receive more than a 5 percent reduction relative to the fiscal year 2024 enacted level.” That language was meant to address fears by the research community and some legislators that NSF, if its overall budget remained flat, might decide to grow TIP at the expense of its other directorates—a concern that now appears prescient.

    What I find so hard to wrangle is that the Trump admin does almost everything in an illegal hamfisted way, whatever their doing gets stricken down by courts, and then a year later we’re just spending time and resources undoing the obviously illegal things they do.

    This change even seems like a positive one I wish they should just pass a bill like a normal government.

  • TimorousBestie 2 hours ago

    More or less a handout to the tech industry. This is just the STTR program with even less oversight and a questionable funding source.

    Curious what the plan is when the academic pipeline for training researchers collapses entirely. AI all the things?

    • contemporary343 an hour ago

      I think it's also a way to reduce funding to universities (which are politically disfavored), since other things like arbitrary reductions to indirect costs didn't work. It also defies both congressional will in the appropriations bill (which is directorate-specific) and of course the whole charter and mandate of NSF, from Vannevar Bush's original case for it.

      • TimorousBestie an hour ago

        Yeah, this is all well-attested.

        It’s so weird. Presumably the conservatives still want the US to be a superpower, which presumably includes high-tech capabilities like global power projection, missile defense, and persistent space operations. At the same time they seemingly want a Cultural Revolution-like decimation of intellectuals.

        I don’t see how they believe they can attain both objectives at once.

        • solid_fuel an hour ago

          > Presumably the conservatives still want the US to be a superpower,

          I used to think that too, but it seems evident the current crop of conservatives is only interested in hurting people they don’t like and funneling money into the pockets of oligarchs. It’s pretty evident now that none of this is being done out of patriotism or a genuine desire to improve America.

        • exe34 40 minutes ago

          > Presumably the conservatives still want the US to be a superpower

          Why would you presume that? Isn't enough that they get rich and powerful as compared to others around them?

    • wahnfrieden an hour ago

      It’s a political revenge move, there’s no strategy toward a better outcome such as AI (however questionable that would be) as that’s not the point of it

  • pphysch 29 minutes ago

    The next generation of life-improving technologies will likely come out of AI/robotics trained on high-quality data that hasn't been collected yet. Medical, ecological, resource and waste management, agriculture, home automation, etc.

    Scientists are literal pros at identifying and collecting (if not organizing) high-quality data.

    This really should be a period of supercharging basic science in recognition of that, not looting it.

  • wirtSalthouse 22 minutes ago

    “According to a June 18 memo…” That’s cool, bruh. Can we see the memo?

  • secretsatan an hour ago

    It’s to repay the bribes

  • ck2 18 minutes ago

    again, it's all Russell Vought

    most people know who Stephen Miller is but the real monster is Russell Vought

    Heritage Foundation's #1 enforcer, the destruction of science and academia is their top 10

    if Vance, their prized successor, somehow gets the reins in 2029 country is absolutely cooked

    * https://www.propublica.org/article/russ-vought-trump-shadow-...

    * https://www.propublica.org/article/video-donald-trump-russ-v...

  • wirtSalthouse 23 minutes ago

    “According to a June 18 memo…” Cool bruh. Can we see it?

  • BenFranklin100 an hour ago

    Rest assured, this will likely come with no small amount of grift.

    The Trump administration has already installed political appointees in America’s federal R&D organizations including the NIH and NSF. They have final say on funding decisions. These appointees override grant peer review and regular agency channels. It’s all part of Russel Vought/Project 2025’s unitary executive theory.

    These NSF initiatives could well be the next logical step to channel millions of research funds to politically connected companies and organizations. Something similar happened with the recent Reflecting Pool fiasco where the federal contracts were give to Trump donors.

    There’s no reason not to believe this will also happen to America’s federal R&D. Grift aside, there’s no reason either not to believe the funds will be given to Trump administration pet projects of dubious scientific value.

    • Hikikomori an hour ago

      >It’s all part of Russel Vought/Project 2025’s unitary executive theory

      And its heavily inspired by the nazi Carl schmitt that created the legal foundation for Hitlers rule.

    • tennfown an hour ago

      > Rest assured, this will likely come with no small amount of grift.

      I naturally expect this money to go to tech companies who have time and time again proven their ability to innovate and thrive in the bleeding edge: basically Oracle.

      • srean 43 minutes ago

        I hope everyone gets it that it is sarcasm, painful as it is.

      • jagged-chisel 44 minutes ago

        Oracle innovate? This must be sarcasm.

  • josefritzishere an hour ago

    That's not suspicious or anything...

  • charcircuit an hour ago

    Making an effort so that the tax payers are getting a return on their investment instead of letting it go up in smoke is a good thing.

    • khalic 41 minutes ago

      Fundamental Science is responsible for most of the money being generated today, Einstein…

    • defterGoose 36 minutes ago

      What a hilariously fact- and understanding-free piece of ragebait.