dpatru

Your article says that Duke University is shutting down research because the government is cutting overhead allocation from 61% to 15%.

The posted article was about research to cure blindness with stem cells. The top comment implied that such research was being defunded.

I asked for an example that was not about defunding research on transgender mice. The only examples provided were for research that was confused with transgender research.

So it seems that Doge is not cutting research for curing blindness and the like but only for transgender and some related-sounding other studies that were lumped in together, which will probably be sorted out in time.

A decade ago I read this same advice in "The Curmudgeon's Guide to Practicing Law": spend at least a little time trying to solve the problem before you look to how other's have solved it. One benefit is that occasionally you may stumble on a better method. But the more common benefits is that it helps develop your problem-solving skills and it primes you to understand and appreciate existing solutions.

The side that uses government power to censor its opponents should automatically be suspect.

This is like complaining of unequal vehicles at an airport: A relatively few can fly very fast and hold hundreds of passengers, but most are earthbound-bound and can carry only a few passengers. Of course Silicon Valley has inequality: it’s home to some of the most impactful people on earth. Hobbling these people will do nothing to help the poor, just like crippling airliners will not improve the cars in airports parking lots.

No doubt the BBC has its flaws, but you take allies where you can find them. If you care about the truth, it’s important to call out government censorship. The foreign press is more likely to reveal unpleasant truths.

To the extent that writing is like playing an instrument, one should try writing simply before trying to be stylish or entertaining. And for many purposes, simple writing is enough.