Yes, it definitely is censorship, because scientists employed by the government may not report findings, existing government information is being erased, and the public cannot access it. So studies about racial concerns are cancelled, programs measuring the rate of climate change are being cancelled and the data and even the data collecting instrumentation is destroyed. This list of banned words is just one aspect of the censorship ... taken as a whole, this is an unconstitutional censorship of data that has public health and public safety implications. Does it qualify as Hacker News? Well, does Hacker News even exist when we no longer have access to critical data? Is that not topical? And does this kind of post suddenly become relevant when the government starts censoring the website directly? And how would we know when that starts to happen? Are you going to magically send us all letters in the mail? Or will you just silently acquiesce?

the mention of which can now result in research grants or other agreements with the federal government getting nixed.

That sounds like censorship to me.

Also, it's just clearly not true, even for the government? For example, here is the CDC mentioning Opioids, which are ostensibly "banned:" https://www.cdc.gov/overdose-prevention/about/understanding-... . Similarly, "female:" https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/images/databriefs/451-500/db491-fig...

Many of the rest are clearly editorial or phrasing preferences (e.g., "Latinx" in place of "Latino/a"), which are reasonable to have; I'm sure any mainstream publication like the NYT also has its own preferred language and style guidelines.

There is not simply one government in the US.

It seems the federal executive admin is censoring government websites of all levels and branches of government.

Even still, this list is passed around at my university where researchers are censoring their proposals to not include these words. That's called a chilling effect, and it's against the ideals of free speech.

Surely you are not so stupid to misunderstand and ignore the chilling effects of this?

Agreed, but I and obviously you are not and we do not have to pretend to be by becoming enraged at their idiotic behavior if it has no material impact.

Secondly, I do not agree that they think issues will "disappear"; I believe that they simply think this gives them license to impose their will on the groups that identify with said banned terms.

It has reached beyond government institutions. From the linked article:

"These policies’ tentacles already extend beyond government websites... Reports say scientists are self-censoring in hopes of improving their chances of getting government grants."

In regards to government institutions, limiting speech in this way will cause people to die.

For example, banning the phrase "air pollution" will curtail efforts to address air pollution, e.g. scientists not submitting research proposals addressing air pollution, causing people to die as a result[1].

[1] https://www.cdc.gov/climate-health/php/effects/air-pollution...

Their CEO was in the Obama admin, and they didn't really press Biden/Obama to the same extent with high profile advocacy on whistleblowers, Assange, Espionage Act, etc.

This is a left wing think tank.

Edit: article flagged presumably for bias.

female is also on that list...

I think our priorities are so effed right now smh