National Science Foundation (NSF)
2009
Confused by the fact that science sees religion as its chief threat. Might we worry instead about threats posed by NSF/NIH/NAS?
I find @EricRWeinstein addressed by @NSF speaking in the first person singular. Think Eric: what did Moses do in this situation?
Oh @NSF do not confuse me more. Did thou not fund me to go to MIT? Did thou not command me to gain the PhD for our nation's good?
Give me a sign @NSF: what are we going to do about the epidemic level of hogwash that threatens our nation in finance/markets?
For @dabacon: "NSF/NAS study ways of glutting markets to depress wages for universities and other employers ignoring the scientific impact."
BTW @dabacon, any fear of writing such a blog post is meant to be covered by your academic freedom. Your fear, is exactly my point.
QED.
"scarce talent *lured* into the PhD-level NS&E career paths will not be available for other uses." -Internal NSF labor study [Emphasis mine]
"This pessimistic scenario of rising PhD scarcities and *rapidly rising salaries*.."-NSF study fearing high scientist wages. [Emphasis mine]
By far the biggest threats to innovation, discovery and scientific revolution come from our dominant science organizations.
New Topic: "What's your vision of true academic freedom?" [Asks @Philip_Girvan.]
An old joke about the diference between the Soviet and US constitutions. Both give freedom to dissent. The US gives freedom the day after.
Academic freedom is about making secure heroes out of Margot O'toole, Doug Prasher & Nassim Taleb instead of pushing them to the periphery.
Academic freedom is freedom to invite a senior colleague to self-copulate for inserting himself before your name on YOUR paper..and survive.
Academic freedom comes from the academic *obligation* to schedule lectures if you have even the possibility of strong disruptive results.
Academic freedom entails a right for a non-expert theorist of high ability to cross boundaries and live on merit without seeking permission.
Academic freedom is the insulation from threat or want to continue in good standing for *any* and *all* contributions & reasoned dissent.
What few people admit is that opposing "String Theory", "The Great Moderation", "Scientist Shortages" etc...leads to excommunication.
This was best put by @BretWeinstein: "Selection is to be feared only when just individuals are prevented from returning costs."
So @ahaspel asks what institutional reforms are needed (which was where I was headed when a birthday party occured in physical reality).
First of all, I am focused primarily on science. If universities can't provide Academic freedom, science needs to move homes.
Next: Basic research in science is a public good (inexhaustible and inexcludible). Therefore we need higher levels of public funding.
To maintain academic freedom we need to move resources from what is falsely called 'scientific training' to the compensation of researchers.
To get strong individuals, our target for researchers should be something like MA by 21-22 PhD by 25-26, permanent job by 26-28 (approx.).
Graduate training is actually much shorter than assumed. Typically one is a graduate 'student' in year 1,2 of a PhD and working thereafter.
Raising PhDs should be Eusocial. Giving students to PI's in a 1 on 1 relationship is like parking choir boys with priests. Better in theory.
We must also fund entirely different sorts of people. Without Huxleys, Grossmans, & Hardys you don't get Darwins, Einsteins, & Ramanujans.
A central point: scientists are supposed to be K-selected but universities are hell bent for leather to r-select PhDs.
Yet that's insane.
Research & Teaching in Universities are as perfectly linked as Skiing & Shooting in the Biathalon: tenuously for all but Professors / Finns.
Last point for now: Freedom for academics is precisely freedom from academics. A real marketplace of ideas beats the pants off peer review.
Something occurs to me. If you've never had reason to test your own academic freedom, you may have absolutely no idea what animated me.
On May 23, 2003 an extraordinary talk at NAS called âExactly Backwards: Scientific Manpower Theoryâ was given.There is no record of this.
The talk was so extraordinary that it was repeated again at NAS 11 days later on June 3, 2003. Again there is no meaningful record of this.
The talk presented evidence to the National Academy of Sciences that NAS & @NSF partnered to manipulate markets over scientist salaries.
Now ask yourself why would @NSF be trying to weaken American scientists? Why would NAS help? How would NSF dependent scientists self-defend?
Gauge theoretic economics interest has come recently from @mathpunk @dabacon @diffeomacx @riemanmzeta @tylercowen @ahaspel etc... Loving it.
I should say that Gauge theoretic economics is also all about academic freedom, quashed as it was by the rennegade Boskin Commission idiocy.
An email from Twitter overnight said: "National Science Fdn (@NSF) is now following your tweets on Twitter." Yet, now @NSF is gone. But why?
As we can obviously see each other @NSF, I propose public dialogue on whether NSF should be strengthening scientists (ergo raising wages).
If you would like to see a dialogue with @NSF on academic freedom, compensation, shortage canards, etc... retweet and star.
An excellent test of our President is whether the Obama era @NSF can undo catastrophic damage to US scientists begun by the Reagan era NSF.
@NSF's human operator clarifies @NSF's follow/unfollow: RT @pffli @EricRWeinstein Because human operators make mistakes.
But @NSF / @pffli, why not engage with reasoned critique? You have a fine economist on staff named M. Boylan. Ask about: http://bit.ly/NSFSG
Of course following me isn't a mistake at all @pffli. You paid for my education to do research. My research is at NBER http://bit.ly/NSFSG
In order for us to help keep @NSF funded, healthy, & attractive, we need you to engage. And, of course, we've followed each other for years.
Thanks @pffli/Paul. You shouldn't have trouble getting @NSF clearance to follow me. Ask around @NSF/NAS/Harvard/NBER/ASCB. I'll check out.
I tweet as an Individual scientist. There are no work (Gov't/Corp) entanglements in this stream for @NSF to worry about.
2010
I'm delighted to learn of teaming between Google & NSA followed by Microsoft & @NSF making a joint announcement today. #Bob&Carol/Ted&Alice
I'm trying to figure out why the US is now crazy for 'Singapore Math'. Does anyone believe that the US sucks at math? Well, anyone smart?
The US needs to invent 'US mathematics' where we learn from our own awesomeness instead of malingering to get @NSF funded.
Glashow, Weinberg, Glauber, Politzer, Cooper, Hulse & Schwartz went to one US public school over 25 years (1941-1966). Can we claim to suck?
Hoffmann, Cohen, Stein, Lederberg, Axel, Fogel, Lax went to 1 rival US public school across town in the same period. But in '70, WE changed.
The problem with US math & science education is that we became dependent after 1970 on a permanent state of lying about just how bad we are.
I await being lectured on data supposedly showing that we'll be speaking Korean if we don't follow tech CEOs.
I love bulgogi: bring it.
Lockhart's 'Mathematician's lament' makes a strong argument for what to do in the face of math hysteria: http://bit.ly/11lyg.
Oh man. @DARPA_news claims there is a US geek shortage. Uh...Do they know it has authors? Circa 1986? By @NSF? Jointly with NAS via GUIRR?
Recommendation to @DARPA_news: request all internal docs written by @NSF economist Myles Boylan. Some are undated with no attribution.
Finally after standing up for Pornographer rights, Ed Teller, NSA, and pointing out that @NSF/ NAS lie about shortages, I have 0 followers.
.@NSF funded cartoon Cyberchase is quite radical. Counter-stereotypes girls & minorities as better at math with white boys more confident!
2011
I'm fascinated by scientists cheerleading for @NSF without understanding it's dual roles in both promoting & destroying innovation.
2016
1/ The invisible world is first detected in the visible world's failure to close. [For @naval @johndurant @pmarca et al. A tweet storm try.]
2/ In physics we have conservation laws. We found the light/invisible neutrino because decay in heavy/visible particles violated these rules
3/ Likewise in biology we proved the germ thy of pathogens vs theories like spontaneous generation/miasma by visible effects at macro scale.
4/ I used 'failure to close' to deduce from 1st principles that the NSF must have done a secret study in '85-6 on how to *lower* sci. wages.
5/ This was b/c the incompetent 'shortfall studies' that got NSF in trouble would have lead to different visa laws than those that passed.
6/ I was shocked when a highly competent "smoking gun" study hidden in '86 showed up exactly where my thy predicted: https://t.co/VZvmupRFon
7/ This is the secret history of H1-B. The @NSF secretly studied how to interfere w/ US labor market 2 avoid paying scientists market wages.
8/ Rules:
I) Look for a macro system failing to close.
II) *Don't* posit a detailed explanation.
III) Posit a 'neutrino' place holder & dig.
9/ HW: A) Why don't top OEMs sell laptops w/ lens covers, mic kill switches & hardwired video LEDs offering security to gain mkt advantage?
10/ How do you get 9 figures of wealth doing charity work & public speaking without selling, inventing, founding or investing brilliantly?
11/ C) Why were Bernie's massive rallies often not covered @ NYT & why did a positive Bernie article go neg after massive linking from web?
12/ D) Why do laboratory bred mice used for drug testing have extra long telomeres (allowing radical tissue repair) compared to wild type?
13/ I could go on. I don't know which are nefarious. I'm a different kind of conspiracy guy. I *don't* have answers but know where I'd dig.
14/14. Thank you for your time. Feel free 2 attack. But remember, I've been here before just as w @NSF...before digging up their smoking gun
2017
2018
2019
2020
@erikbryn @Noahpinion @fmanjoo No. I refused to believe it until people told me what they were up to. You may want to read this rather carefully. Iâm not making this up:
https://users.nber.org/~sewp/references/archive/weinsteinhowandwhygovernment.pdf
@erikbryn @Noahpinion @fmanjoo Let me have the NSF tell you in their own words why they want so many of your graduate students to be foreign. From section 5:
We need an emergency talk about this media war on @AndrewYang & @TulsiGabbard that was waged on @RonPaul, @BernieSanders & others before.
This is what I call the âVampire Effectâ; institutions will not reflect certain people just as vampires supposedly donât reflect in a mirror.
This isnât cute as #YangMediaBlackout. This isnât hidden any more. This is a boast by our media. Their point to all of us is: âFuck you and your illusionsâ. And We arenât calling it what it is: a declaration of war by our own media and parties against our own democratic process.
Forget the Russians tampering in US democracy. Thatâs amateur hour. The Russians arenât bragging like this. @MSNBC has been asking: âSo tough guys, whatcha gonna do about the fact that we just keep knocking your milkshake into your dateâs lap?â
Iâve experience it every time I bring up the secret NSF study that lead to the H1B visa. There is an absolute black out. But because I have the study, media canât say it doesnât exist. So they just refuse to reflect it. Same w/ other such issues. Thereâs just *no* MSM reflection.
We need to just be done with this open coup against meaningful elections. This is âMagicians choiceâ ... which is no choice at all. To hell with our news magicians. We need to make their credibility a financial issue. Open to suggestions.
Take a look:
https://vocal.media/theSwamp/a-visual-history-of-the-yang-media-blackout
This is the Distributed Idea Suppression Complex or DISC in action.
A hyper specific allegation that the @NSF and GUIRR inside the @theNASEM in 1986 directed an internal economic analysis to figure out how much they would have to pay STEM workers in the future.
The study is economically competent using both supply & demand, and then found new US graduates would have to be paid 6 figures shortly. They termed this the âpessimistic scenarioâ, and then (and Iâm not making this up) faked an *incompetent* DEMOGRAPHIC study by removing demand!
The *competent* ECONOMIC study was protected and buried by never releasing it and removing the date and author from it. The author is still attached to NSF. To be clear: our @NSF is faking incompetence. The mainstream media is faking disinterest. Why? To not reveal the reasoning.
The reason we have sky high STEM immigration is wage tampering. The @NSF & @theNASEM undermined our own model of scientific independence, academic freedom & irreverent science that was the envy of the word by flooding US markets with pliable STEM labor. And over what? Just wages.
Now who is willing to get the @NSF on the record denial? Only the right leaning @BreitbartNews here! And US Instutional media treats anything that appears there as automatically beneath discussion. This is the logic of the Gated Institutional Narrative:
I donât exist. Breitbart doesnât exist. The secret study doesnât have an author, a date or publication. All restrictionists are automatically racists. Blah blah..
But then why not call a liar @nsf? Why invite me to the National Academy 4 separate times to present this @theNASEM?
Ask yourself why your trusted media wonât put this story to rest. Just deny it @NSF. I triple-dirty-dog dare you. I would love the pleasure of having your spokespeople on The Portal to use your superior access to documents to explain.
Welcome to the DISC. Letâs do this thing.
2021
2022
2023
This article is a stub. You can help us by editing this page and expanding it.