In spite of DuBridge’s willingness to jump on board the ABM train in Nixon’s White House, it didn’t take long for his us

Sometimes, straddling that line meant declining to say much of anything. When the National Academy of Sciences report came out opposing the giant space mirrors, Donald Hornig offered this reassuring bromide: “The government is not interested in the mirror [concept] at the present time.” Well okay then. What did Hornig really think about — once again — giant space mirrors? Did he agree with the science community, but wouldn’t speak out strongly for fear of his “unsubtle” boss?

“You’ve gotta work with this team,” Lane said. “You have to calibrate people and establish some degree of rapport and trust, and trust really with a capital ‘T’ — if you do something that makes them no longer trust you, you’re done. There are a thousand ways to marginalize your effectiveness in the White House.”

DuBridge apparently attempted to walk that fine line between cheerleading and scientific rigor, just like his predecessors did and most successors would — in one case, on an issue that has in some ways held the science advisor hostage as long as it has existed.

Nixon’s assault on science did not begin overnight. In early December 1968, the President-Elect appointed CalTech president Lee DuBridge to be his science advisor, to reasonable acclaim in the scientific community. Nixon said his appointment would help spawn “a major scientific research effort, particularly in the field of peaceful research.”

The incoming president had long sought acceptance from the country’s intellectual elite, and tapping Kistiakowsky’s West Coast “high priest of science” counterpart probably seemed a good first step. As the Times put it, “Mr. Nixon is thought to be particularly eager to demonstrate that a Republican President need not be alienated from scholars and scientists.”

John Holdren told me essentially the same thing: “We in the science advising business know that inputs from science are never the only inputs to the president,” he said. “What you want in science advice is for the decision-making by the president and the other senior folks around him to be informed by the relevant science, but not necessarily dictated exclusively by that. What you don’t want is them making decisions without even knowing what the relevant science has to say.”

http://news7.totssants.com/izt/videos-norge-v-danmark-v-no-no-1jcg-7.php

http://news7.totssants.com/izt/Video-norge-v-danmark-v-no-no-1prx-24.php

http://news7.totssants.com/izt/videos-Norway-Denmark-v-en-gb-1hwy-.php

http://news7.totssants.com/izt/video-Norway-Denmark-v-en-gb-1tzd-18.php

http://news7.totssants.com/izt/videos-Norway-Denmark-v-en-gb-1fmh30122020-4.php

http://news7.totssants.com/izt/videos-norge-v-danmark-v-da-da-1jji-14.php

http://news7.totssants.com/izt/videos-norge-v-danmark-v-da-da-1wkl-2.php

http://news7.totssants.com/izt/videos-norge-v-danmark-v-da-da-1enm-16.php

http://go.negronicocktailbar.com/jze/Video-norge-v-danmark-v-da-da-1buw-21.php

http://news7.totssants.com/izt/v-ideos-norge-v-danmark-v-da-da-1ilt-13.php

http://news7.totssants.com/izt/Video-KS-Lechia-Tomaszow-AZS-Czestochowa-v-en-gb-1oqe-.php

http://go.negronicocktailbar.com/jze/videos-norge-v-danmark-v-da-da-1nlt-16.php

http://go.negronicocktailbar.com/jze/Video-KS-Lechia-Tomaszow-AZS-Czestochowa-v-en-gb-1jmw30122020-.php

http://news7.totssants.com/izt/v-ideos-KS-Lechia-Tomaszow-AZS-Czestochowa-v-en-gb-1vgx-18.php

http://news7.totssants.com/izt/v-ideos-KS-Lechia-Tomaszow-AZS-Czestochowa-v-en-gb-1imj-21.php

http://news7.totssants.com/izt/Video-lechia-tomaszow-v-azs-czestochowa-v-pl-pl-1tds-8.php

http://news7.totssants.com/izt/video-lechia-tomaszow-v-azs-czestochowa-v-pl-pl-1ngw-20.php

http://news7.totssants.com/izt/video-lechia-tomaszow-v-azs-czestochowa-v-pl-pl-1cty-8.php

http://news7.totssants.com/izt/video-lechia-tomaszow-v-azs-czestochowa-v-pl-pl-1nuy-21.php

http://news7.totssants.com/izt/videos-dusseldorfer-v-iserlohn-roosters-v-de-de-1ozd-11.php

techniques: You can add more NLP solutions to your chatbot solution like NER (Named Entity Recognition) in order to add more features to your chatbot. With having a NER model along with your chatbot, you can easily find out any entity that appeared in user chat messages and use it for further conversations. And also you can add a Sentiment Analysis model to identify different sentiment tones behind user messages and it will exactly give some additional colors to your chatbot.

This demonstration did not go as planned. DuBridge’s tenure started innocently enough, with pushes for increases in federal funding for science (a miss; funding continued to drop precipitously), support to reduce the amount of secret military-funded science done at universities (a hit; by May 1969 only four percent of university-held government contracts were secret, down from eight percent two years before), among other priorities.

Sure, the details of those plans might have been different, but this was no fluke. Generally speaking, the scientific community has shot down as unfeasible, too expensive, or otherwise unwise virtually every large-scale missile defense idea of the last seventy years. But time and again, the scientist at the president’s right hand has found himself defending — or, at times, aggressively supporting — these plans in spite of their dubious technical feasibility. It is perhaps the best example of the disconnect that the advisors have all been forced to confront — science for science’s sake, or science for the president’s sake.

On December 17, 1968, before Nixon took office, DuBridge answered a question about anti-ballistic missile systems by claiming he didn’t have enough information to formulate an opinion — admirable fence-sitting, to be sure. Only a few months later, a single, two-paragraph item in the Times cut DuBridge in half and placed a piece on either side of that fence:

The fundamental question that every presidential science advisor has had to face is, simply, who he (all the advisors so far have been men, with two exceptions who served only briefly in an “acting” capacity) really works for. Are you an advocate for strong science? Or a cheerleader for the country’s chief executive?

Lane stressed that the science advisor needs to be an expert at coalition building if he wants to get anything done. “It isn’t really so helpful for the science advisor to walk into the president and convince the president — or at least nudge the president over on a view,” he said. There are too many other inputs involved in high-level government decision-making, and scientific reality is — sadly — only one of them.

The specific day-to-day job of the president’s science advisor has obviously shifted over the years, in particular as more and more federal policy has taken on at least some aspect of science or engineering. Chaotic presidency of Donald J. Trump notwithstanding, generally speaking the advisor or some OSTP staff will have to be at the table when drawing up any number of regulations, policy proposals, white papers, and more; and the advisor, meanwhile, if he believes the president should face a certain direction on those policies, or react to some situation involving science in a certain way, has his work cut out for him.

“I would describe it as fighting fires,” said Neal Lane, who served as President Clinton’s advisor for his last few years in office. “Every day, or every few days, some crisis emerges because of the complexity of government.” Lane and I spoke on the phone soon after the 2016 election, when the science community began to brace itself for the president who called the firmly established, beyond-a-shadow-of-doubt link between asbestos and cancer a “con” — just to pick a random bit of science denial among many. Lane somehow maintained a reasonably optimistic tone in spite of the specter of ignorance looming above us.

Economic advisors, domestic policy advisors, national security advisors, the chief of staff — having these people on your side can help bring that relevant science to the president’s attention. But if you can’t align with those and others at the White House? Science doesn’t just take a back seat to other concerns; it gets relegated to the trunk or thrown out of the car entirely.