iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Jason Rasgon @vectorgen.bsky.social · 4h

If there's anything I've learned its that continuously demanding a Nobel prize like a toddler is the best way to get one

050

Jason Rasgon @vectorgen.bsky.social · 9h

I don't get paid enough to do other people's jobs for them so why am I constantly required to do other people's jobs for them?

151

Jason Rasgon @vectorgen.bsky.social · 07/10/2026

Weren't training grants already restricted to US citizens and permanent residents?

2141

Jason Rasgon @vectorgen.bsky.social · 07/10/2026

I've had my share of those. The journal who I argued about data formatting for 3 months, finally getting it to their satisfaction, only to have the paper desk rejected the next day. I was not polite in my response

020

Jason Rasgon @vectorgen.bsky.social · 07/10/2026

My quickest rejection was 4 hours after submission. Let me resubmit it to a different journal the same day

130

Jason Rasgon @vectorgen.bsky.social · 07/10/2026

This is a good thing, not a bad thing. If a manuscript is going to be rejected, I greatly prefer a rapid rejection compared to a prolonged one

280

Reposted by Jason Rasgon

rax ‘levon honkers’ king @raxkingisdead.bsky.social · 07/10/2026

gregor samsa awoke one morning to discover he had been transformed into a sickass beetle. fuck yeah he said scuttling all over the walls and ceiling like no dumbfuck traveling salesman could ever do. this is the best day of my life he said

373562846

Jason Rasgon @vectorgen.bsky.social · 07/10/2026

This article. Which was eventually published with a boring title because the editor didn't appreciate it either www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1...

static.klipy.com

John Cleese: Monty Python Philistine Pig Ignorance

ALT: John Cleese: Monty Python Philistine Pig Ignorance

020

Jason Rasgon @vectorgen.bsky.social · 07/10/2026

I once had a comment on one of my preprints from some irate dude who took offense to our (somewhat) cheeky article title. I responded with "Lighten up, Francis". bioRxiv refused to post it, but kept the dood's original comment

static.klipy.com

Conan O'Brien: This Is Unacceptable

ALT: Conan O'Brien: This Is Unacceptable

221

Reposted by Jason Rasgon

Nate Brought @usfreepressspain.bsky.social · 06/10/2026

This is plainly and obviously illegal. Every single person in Congress has standing to sue. Why hasn't every single Democrat (and Massie, Paul, and a few other allegedly reformed Republicans) filed/joined such a suit?

063

Reposted by Jason Rasgon

Jeremy Berg @jeremymberg.bsky.social · 06/10/2026

There is no NSF leadership. They were removed and never replaced.

322772

Reposted by Jason Rasgon

Mark Peifer (He, him) @peiferlabunc.bsky.social · 06/10/2026

Earlier this year the scientific community successfully fought back on dramatic changes in Federal funding proposed by the Trump Administration.Now another RFI is proposing substantial changes that would damage peer review. This letter from SDB President Helen McNeill lays out the issue clearly 1/n

Dear SDB Members,

I am writing you now to ask everyone to respond to a proposed change to the way that grant review information at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) is communicated to grant applicants, institutions, and NIH program staff. This is your opportunity to provide feedback on the process that selects our grants for funding.

The proposed change means that individuals, institutes and NIH staff will no longer receive the final overall impact score or percentile score that reflects the scientific opinion of a panel of experts. Currently, three reviewers provide their detailed opinion of a grant, and then the entire panel asks questions, can examine figures, and discuss the strengths and weaknesses of a grant, and then members all independently score. The final overall impact score reflects this discussion and careful consideration of the entire scientific panel.

The proposed change is to now simply divide the scored grants into three categories: Scored applications would be grouped into three broad categories - “Most Competitive (top 25%),” “Competitive (26%-50%),” and “Not Discussed”. The motivation for the change is that decisions would now focus on the comments of reviewers, not the score of the grant to determine which grants to support. However, the current mechanism allows for scores and comments to be considered. Thus, removing the score component from NIH staff makes selection of which grants to fund more burdensome for NIH staff.

The loss of detailed scores will also make it more difficult for researchers to assess how competitive an application was and determine whether to revise and resubmit it. An application ranked top 2% and one ranked 24th% would receive the same label, even if the scientific panel viewed them quite differently. Meanwhile, applications ranked 25th%and 26th% would be placed in different categories because of a tiny difference that NIH itself says should not be treated as meaningful. The proposal would erase potentially important differences while creating arbitrary new dividing lines.

This is a dramatic loss of transparency in the scientific review process. Under the new plan, principal investigator(s), applicant institutions, NIH program staff, ICO leadership, and the relevant NIH Advisory Council will no longer have access to the final overall score.

NIH is explicitly asking for input on this particular question.

This is a Request for Information (RFI), not simply an announcement of a policy that has already been finalized. NIH says comments will be used to inform the final recommendation, including implementation and communication.

Please comment here: https://rfi.grants.nih.gov/?s=6a2b1c22c3fcfda46e0badd2

Deadline for response receipt is October 13, 2026, 11:59 PM ET.

26262

Jason Rasgon @vectorgen.bsky.social · 06/10/2026

In the US, i've never had better than just OK. In Asia, I've had some phenomenal airport meals.

010

Jason Rasgon @vectorgen.bsky.social · 05/10/2026

I'm amazed trump didn't pardon him

020

Reposted by Jason Rasgon

Nobel Prize @nobelprize.org · 05/10/2026

BREAKING NEWS The 2026 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine has been awarded to Karl Deisseroth, Peter Hegemann and Georg Nagel “for their discoveries concerning light-gated ion channels and optogenetics.”

231064514

Reposted by Jason Rasgon

Nobel Prize @nobelprize.org · 05/10/2026

Congratulations to our first Nobel Prize laureate of 2026 🎉 Early this morning Karl Deisseroth found out he was awarded this year's Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine. He seems very happy with the news!

Karl Deisseroth on the phone looking happy

141178138

Jason Rasgon @vectorgen.bsky.social · 05/10/2026

Still time to win the Literature Prize this year

to.win

110

Jason Rasgon @vectorgen.bsky.social · 05/10/2026

I was wondering when Deisseroth was going to win

2152

Reposted by Jason Rasgon

Jason Moore @moorejh.bsky.social · 04/10/2026

control panel of the day #HCI #want

4374

Jason Rasgon @vectorgen.bsky.social · 03/10/2026

As it is, as it was, as it always has been. Rule 17 people... "17. Do not have loyalty to your institution; they don’t have any for you. Never fool yourself; a tenure-track job is a mutually beneficial business arrangement. Do what is best for you" bsky.app/profile/vect...

1278

Jason Rasgon @vectorgen.bsky.social · 03/10/2026

I mean, they attract venture capital. I think that's the entire point of these institutes

240

Jason Rasgon @vectorgen.bsky.social · 02/10/2026

Finishing up a manuscript revision where the response to reviewers is longer than the fucking manuscript

static.klipy.com

Elmo in Flames: Take Me Lucifer

ALT: Elmo in Flames: Take Me Lucifer

5493

Jason Rasgon @vectorgen.bsky.social · 02/10/2026

All they have to do is visit an old graveyard

041

Reposted by Jason Rasgon

Jeremy Berg @jeremymberg.bsky.social · 01/10/2026

From a discussion of updating a department website...

A photo with baby Yoda and adult Yoda with the caption "Could it be time for a new photo?"

934670

Reposted by Jason Rasgon

Don Moynihan @donmoyn.bsky.social · 01/10/2026

America today is a country where regulators won't allow private companies to air interviews of the opposition on TV, but declare that taxpayer funded propaganda is fine.

462219777

Jason Rasgon @vectorgen.bsky.social · 01/10/2026

All the better to bury you with

010