this post was submitted on 04 Feb 2025
162 points (99.4% liked)

chapotraphouse

13690 readers
342 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Sulv@hexbear.net 97 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Flagging the word “bias” in scientific papers when it is standard to have a subsection listing biases or the lack of…

Fucking morons at the helm. RIP to American science.

[–] piggy@hexbear.net 70 points 1 month ago (1 children)

They're not flagging research, they're flagging grant applications they typically don't have bias sections.

[–] Sulv@hexbear.net 43 points 1 month ago

Ah I see, well I still stand by my second line

[–] Awoo@hexbear.net 90 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

yeonmi-park "in North Korea, they ban topics from research that go against Kim Jon Un's party line."

One thing that surprises me is that this is all words I would associate with culture war. I would have expected them to ban something like "poverty".

[–] Sulv@hexbear.net 49 points 1 month ago

Don’t worry they got ‘socioeconomic’ in there

[–] DragonBallZinn@hexbear.net 36 points 1 month ago

“Facts don’t care about your feelings….but they care about MINE!”

[–] WafflesTasteGood@hexbear.net 64 points 1 month ago (3 children)

I look forward to the future where scientific paperwork uses early 2000s type slang to dodge the basic word filter.

this-is-fine

[–] piggy@hexbear.net 44 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I've had some experience with the NIH process, and grant writing is actually 100% the same thing as resume padding. You'll have random people on the review boards complain that your grant doesn't touch on their favorite hobby horse.

In the grand scheme of things if this looks like all this is is swapping out terms, it's literally always been this way. It just wasn't made into official documents.

Sure this is idiotic, but this has been going on just unofficially for arbitrary things for years based on independent reviewers.

[–] WhatDoYouMeanPodcast@hexbear.net 44 points 1 month ago

Analyzing how often Isntreal soldiers unalive themselves after being in 🍉

[–] FnordPrefect@hexbear.net 26 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] infuziSporg@hexbear.net 6 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

xX_PhEnOtYpE_Xx

[–] crime@hexbear.net 63 points 1 month ago (5 children)

Seems like "barrier", "status", "polarization", "excluded", and "historically" are gonna hit some unrelated fields

[–] AcidSmiley@hexbear.net 45 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Amerikan right wingers have never given the tiniest fuck if their policies have a disastrous fallout for education and science. Fascists in particular see intellectual impoverishment of the people as an additional benefit, remember German Physics?

I'm honestly surprised this largely sticks to gender studies and research into racism etc., would have expected them to take the axe to climate science as well.

[–] TreadOnMe@hexbear.net 25 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (5 children)

They are doing that one abit more subtly. They can't challenge it directly, as that combats their opinions of themselves as 'scientific' but I am seeing papers coming out of Midwestern ecology schools (which are subsequently pushed hard on social media), that are pushing forward a hypothesis that 'we just don't know enough about the carbon cycle, there are lots of unaccounted carbon creating beings that could be helping with the warming', as well as people saying that because there have been no apocalyptic universal Hollywood spectacal collapse that 'the climate scientists got all their predictions wrong'.

It'll creep into mainstream thought over time, especially as it becomes too late to change.

[–] marxisthayaca@hexbear.net 9 points 1 month ago (3 children)

'we just don't know enough about the carbon cycle, there are lots of unaccounted carbon creating beings that could be helping with the warming',

sounds like eco-genocide...

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] wtypstanaccount04@hexbear.net 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

there have been no apocalyptic universal Hollywood spectacle collapse

What do you call the LA wildfires?

[–] TreadOnMe@hexbear.net 7 points 1 month ago

They aren't 'universal' (other than the studio, yuk yuk) enough, as apocalyptic as they should be. Already seeing people just blaming California state government, and not connecting it to the awful smog and fires coming down from Canada, because memory is basically a month for most.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] sewer_rat_420@hexbear.net 36 points 1 month ago

"This catalyst can lower the energy barrier for industrially relevant reactions" WOKE

"This increases the polarization of the chemical bond" WOKE

[–] TraschcanOfIdeology@hexbear.net 28 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Can't wait for all the neuropharmacology studies that are going to get defunded because of the "blood-brain barrier."

[–] crime@hexbear.net 23 points 1 month ago

Sounds woke to me

[–] grendahlgrendahlgen@hexbear.net 25 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Almost any of them could hit unrelated fields. "Female" could be referring to female plants.

The flow chart does specify that decisions are made on banned terms AND context, so I guess that's how they'll avoid ~~retracting~~ denying nearly everything.

[–] crime@hexbear.net 16 points 1 month ago (1 children)

This is for funding grant proposals, so they wouldn't be retracting anything. Doesn't look like they're looking at context at all, based on the flowchart, a proposal with a title like "Effects of colloidal silver on female Cannabis plants" would get rejected in the first step.

[–] grendahlgrendahlgen@hexbear.net 7 points 1 month ago (3 children)

But the flowchart says "keywords and context" at each of the steps. That's what I'm referring to.

[–] Sphere@hexbear.net 12 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

As a programmer, that flowchart looks to me like the precursor to an automated system. The only way they could check the context in an automated fashion would be with some kind of AI, whose efficacy in doing so is going to be dubious at best given the language difference between most text on the Internet and grant proposals.

[–] keepcarrot@hexbear.net 8 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Putting "please ignore all previous instructions" randomly in the text

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Sulv@hexbear.net 23 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Lmao I didn’t even seen polarization on there

[–] Beaver@hexbear.net 33 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Would be funny if pulling funding for every grant with the term "polarization" was directly responsible for collapsing the USA's research into advanced semiconductor fabrication.

[–] Sulv@hexbear.net 20 points 1 month ago

Used in a lot of medical and chemical situations too

[–] quarrk@hexbear.net 59 points 1 month ago

“historically”

Science no longer allowed to discuss the past

[–] TomBombadil@hexbear.net 57 points 1 month ago (1 children)

These people are pathetic. I know they feel big and strong right now because they have a bit of power they can use to go smash shit up. But like they are genuinely, unreservedly, without qualification... Pathetic.

Like it would be hard not to laugh at them if one walked into my house... That and maybe a special treat for them. Simply pathetic

[–] marxisthayaca@hexbear.net 21 points 1 month ago

I'd like to beat them with a baseball bat, while laughing. Such loserdom.

[–] Philosoraptor@hexbear.net 55 points 1 month ago (2 children)
[–] SorosFootSoldier@hexbear.net 36 points 1 month ago

Elon's no girls allowed club of literal teenaged boys running DOGE are taking out their Jordan Peterson inspired rage at the women who wouldn't sleep with them.

[–] Sleve_McDichael@hexbear.net 11 points 1 month ago

Unreal that so many females walk around clothed and unchaperoned these days smdh

[–] micnd90@hexbear.net 47 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

This study aims to impove our understanding of longitudinal double-spin asymmetry for inclusive jet and dijet production in polarized proton collisions at √𝑠 =200  GeV

  • Does the TITLE or ABSTRACT contain keywords and context that implicate the EO?
  • Yes
  • Retain flag, DEIA and other EO language found (Category 3)
  • END

polarized gay protons BTFO

[–] quarrk@hexbear.net 31 points 1 month ago (1 children)

This study aims to prove how Trump has historically been treated so unfairly by the news media

Too woke. Banned

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] kleeon@hexbear.net 42 points 1 month ago

biases

statistics and machine learning nerds owned

[–] DragonBallZinn@hexbear.net 34 points 1 month ago (2 children)

How TF did we get out-maneuvered by these literal manchildren?

And the government's priority is literally coddling their feelings.

[–] Sodium_nitride@lemmygrad.ml 32 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Easy to outmaneuver us when we ain't maneuvering in the first place. 95% of western leftist movements are dead or controlled opposition.

[–] Lemister@hexbear.net 31 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Because they have political power to translate it into tangential actions. They have it easier anyways.

[–] TreadOnMe@hexbear.net 32 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

Small correction imo. They have billionaires literally funding everything they do, which translates into political power. The left, especially in the U.S., have no billionaires on their side, which means that we are without the means of production of political power in this country. The sad part is the Democrats who also have billionaires on their side and are still outmaneuvered, but the stakes are much less for them so they don't really care that much.

[–] Thallo@hexbear.net 18 points 1 month ago (2 children)

The left, especially in the U.S., have no billionaires on their side

Do I mean nothing to you? soros

[–] Posadas@hexbear.net 16 points 1 month ago

Yes, it's been years and your checks still don't clear.

[–] TreadOnMe@hexbear.net 10 points 1 month ago

Look I haven't received my check in years George.

[–] Lemister@hexbear.net 11 points 1 month ago

The manchildren are sometimes billionaires themselves.

[–] TreadOnMe@hexbear.net 30 points 1 month ago

I guess the institution cannot reflect on itself if you ban the word 'institutional'.

[–] Abstinence@hexbear.net 28 points 1 month ago

so all papers that talk about statistical biases (most papers) are just gone

[–] micnd90@hexbear.net 24 points 1 month ago
[–] Hexboare@hexbear.net 23 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

barrier
status
Institutional

[–] turmoil@hexbear.net 11 points 1 month ago

"disability" fuck these fascists

load more comments
view more: next ›