this post was submitted on 31 Jul 2026
48 points (90.0% liked)

Technology

86757 readers
3110 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The US research enterprise too heavily centers on elite research institutions, and fails individual researchers with bold ideas, suggests the White House Office of Science and Technology in a new report. The office recommends sweeping changes to where federal funding is spent and how it should be awarded.

Released on July 21, the Science: A New Golden Age report seeks to update Vannevar Bush’s landmark 1945 report Science: The Endless Frontier for the modern era. In the report, OSTP Director Michael Kratsios argues that today’s scientific landscape — shaped by AI, global competition, and private-sector investment — requires a fundamental redesign of how the federal government funds research.

Also on July 21, Kratsios and White House Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought jointly published a memorandum on the Trump administration’s R&D budget priorities for fiscal year 2028. The memo instructs science agencies to incorporate the administration’s priorities into their forthcoming budget requests, as well as develop implementation plans within 90 days for a series of “R&D priority practices.” Those include:

Developing new research funding mechanisms; Identifying and supporting top tech talent through, for example, early career and STEM-learning opportunities; Boosting the “science of science-funding” to evaluate which programs have the greatest impact; And collaborating with industry to drive greater private investment in R&D.

The memo directs agencies to rebalance their portfolios toward foundational research, and prioritize physical science over life science. Many of the administration’s priorities, including AI and nuclear fission, are dependent on computer science, physical science, and engineering, but the report notes that the latter two fields’ share of the federal research portfolio has declined over time, even as their strategic importance has grown.

top 21 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] fubarx@lemmy.world 1 points 10 minutes ago
[–] arotrios@lemmy.world 13 points 9 hours ago

Translation:

They're gutting any sort of science that provides benefits to people (life sciences, environmental, social) and putting the money into technology that is designed to control and hurt people (computer science = AI, while physical science and engineering = military application).

At least that's my take. Feels like they intentionally left the memorandum as vague as possible.

[–] CovertOperative@piefed.zip 7 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

The US research enterprise too heavily centers on ~~people who know what the scientific method is~~ elite research institutions, and fails ~~idiots who do shit based on vibes~~ individual researchers with bold ideas, suggests the White House Office of Science and Technology in a new report.

[–] jpreston2005@lemmy.world 4 points 10 hours ago

This coming from the administration that thought transgenic mice were transgender 🙄 🙄 🙄

[–] fullsquare@awful.systems 43 points 18 hours ago (3 children)

"individual researchers with bold ideas" will mysteriously turn out to be republican techbros

I mean, like everything, the ultimate goal is privatize, control/eliminate competition and profit via exploitation.

Nobody chooses academia over industry for the money. They do it so they're not forced to compromise their values under the thumb of some micromanaging nepo baby demanding results they want to believe no matter what the data actually says. Investors not inventors.

If you get rid of publicly funded research, you leave a lot of talented scientists with no choice. It's either industry, leave the country, or leave science entirely and start a new career.

And keep in mind, this is in addition to what OMB already proposed to do to all federal funding. Maybe they plan to hand Republicans a get out of jail free card by actually stopping the Vought/OMB proposed changes to federal grants just before the deadline in October, then achieve the original goal anyway after the midterms.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 3 points 12 hours ago

Bold ideas, no need for scientific value

[–] pdxfed@lemmy.world 4 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 8 hours ago)

Horse tranqs, get 'em while they're hot

[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 26 points 17 hours ago

"Individual researchers"? Like those with fringe ideas that prevent them from joining those elite research institutes? Or like those who "prove" links between vaccination and autism, or "prove" that horse dewormer ist a genuine cure-it-all?

[–] bagsy@lemmy.world 4 points 12 hours ago

Can't have any science that might harm profits. /s

So the new drug and cancer vaccine clinical trials at the not for profit major cancer centers will be cancelled, and instead YouTube influencers claiming ivermectin cures all cancer will get their funding.
Oh wait - physical science, so more money to oil and gas executives and tech bros?

[–] RedGreenBlue@lemmy.zip 10 points 16 hours ago

More money to corruption!

[–] el_twitto@lemmy.zip 5 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Fuck the fucking idiots in the fucking Whitehouse. They are doing everything they can to wreck the future of this country. I swear they are all Russian assets.

[–] bagsy@lemmy.world 3 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

Epstien worked for israel, and Maxwell's father was a spy. The whole thing was a gigantic honeypot meant to ensnare stupid politicians into toeing the line.

Its absoluety incredible than a couple decades and a few 10s of millions of dollars for party supplies was all it took to completely own the most powerful country on the planet.

It was so successful, you really have to wonder how many more of these rings exist. There is no way epstien was the only one, we only know about him because he got caught.

[–] Gumus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 hour ago

Maxwell's father also created the for-profit science publishing paywall model.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 2 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (1 children)

Not that it’s stopped them before but is this even legal? When congress allocated money toward cancer research, you can’t legally redirect it to proving renewable energy is bad for the environment or all vaccines cause autism

[–] buddascrayon@lemmy.world 3 points 9 hours ago

The only ones that can call them out on that is congress. And right now Congress is being run by a bunch of boot licking Republicans and spineless Democrats.

[–] AcidiclyBasicGlitch@sh.itjust.works 12 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

The memo directs agencies to rebalance their portfolios toward foundational research, and prioritize physical science over life science.

I mean yeah, why not. Listening to Peter Thiel's hand puppet has certainly made America great so far.

Who needs funding for life science research when we got parasites and diarrhea outbreaks? Every American a walking incubator at this point.

[–] fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works 3 points 13 hours ago

Im glad they figured out the US was starting to develop a lead in life science and are going out of there way to hobble us. /s

[–] HubertManne@piefed.social 1 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

I mean:

"Released on July 21, the Science: A New Golden Age report seeks to update Vannevar Bush’s landmark 1945 report Science: The Endless Frontier for the modern era. In the report, OSTP Director Michael Kratsios argues that today’s scientific landscape — shaped by AI, global competition, and private-sector investment — requires a fundamental redesign of how the federal government funds research."

sooooo. in 1945 a report talking about ai and global competition was written. was this written by ai (the government thing or its press release)

[–] nyan@lemmy.cafe 3 points 15 hours ago

I'd guess that the 1945 report was sound, although I haven't read it. Vannevar Bush was a bright guy who came within a hair of predicting the modern Web at around the same time. He almost certainly didn't mention AI in his report, since even expert systems and such were science fiction back then.

The press release and the modern report? Both total garbage, I'm sure, regardless of whether they were written by an LLM or an overworked intern.