Apparently, among the latest Elon (Or fElon) decisions, a few nuclear scientists with lots of experience were among the people laid off at NNSA.
FElon realized the gaffe. Does anyone know they got hired back?
Tri-Valley Cares needs to be on this if they aren't already. We need to make sure that NNSA and LLNL does not make good on promises to pursue such stupid ideas as doing Plutonium experiments on NIF. The stupidity arises from the fact that a huge population is placed at risk in the short and long term. Why do this kind of experiment in a heavily populated area? Only a moron would push that kind of imbecile area. Do it somewhere else in the god forsaken hills of Los Alamos. Why should the communities in the Bay Area be subjected to such increased risk just because the lab's NIF has failed twice and is trying the Hail Mary pass of doing an SNM experiment just to justify their existence? Those Laser EoS techniques and the people analyzing the raw data are all just BAD anyways. You know what comes next after they do the experiment. They'll figure out that they need larger samples. More risk for the local population. Stop this imbecilic pursuit. They wan...
Comments
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/trump-nuclear-security-firings-doge_n_67b2858de4b0ad102039a970
It was NNSA staffers. Presumably probationary people. I do not think a single scientists was fired.
Where do you get this stuff?
There is a whole lot of bad information going around that is being spun by both sides. Just a little checking and you can see it is bs.
Doge claims that 25% of NSF grants are DEI. They gave a list of grants they claim are DEI grants, I went looked the list and could not find any DEI grants out of the 15 I chose chose randomly. They are clearly using a very bad algorithm, for key words. I would guess less than 5% of the NSF grants are funding DEI activities. If they get this wrong I can assume they are getting a bunch of stuff wrong as well.
NSF is the same thing. It has 1700 people now. I think it had 300 people 20 years ago and did a munch better job. Now NSF grants are nightmare to deal with, and they have way too many onsite panels. Every conference now have NSF people showing up, who are simply not getting anything out of attending these events. It used to pretty much peer reviewed at the bottom line but now they have so many people that they are now pressing their thumb on the scale.
Any who served on these panels know what is going on. The DEI thing is real especially with grant outcome because peer review is become a smaller part of the process now.
This theme repeats throughout many Federal organizations and seems like it got much worse in the last 10-15 years which growth was a metric of success.
Covid just added the extra "work from home model" which reduced the effeteness even more.
Rules for Thee but not for Me?