grendahlgrendahlgen comments on "Women = icky = no money" NSF

[–] grendahlgrendahlgen@hexbear.net 25 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (7 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.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 7 child comments

[–] crime@hexbear.net 16 points 2 years ago (6 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.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 6 child comments

[–] grendahlgrendahlgen@hexbear.net 7 points 2 years ago (5 children)

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

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 5 child comments

[–] Sphere@hexbear.net 12 points 2 years ago* (2 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.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments