Group 1 - The sudden resignation of NSF Director S. Panchanathan was prompted by a 55% budget cut ordered by the Trump administration, leading to the termination of half of the NSF's 1,700 staff members [1][2] - NSF has been perceived as a "fortress of basic science" in the U.S., but the scientific community is now lamenting its destruction under the current administration [2][3] - The NSF's funding has historically been limited, receiving only about 1.5% of the total U.S. annual R&D expenditure, indicating that the vision outlined by Vannevar Bush in "Science: The Endless Frontier" has never been fully realized [10][24] Group 2 - NSF has faced internal conflicts since its inception, with challenges from applied sciences and political pressures to align more closely with national interests, diverging from its original mission of supporting pure scientific research [11][28] - The establishment of the Engineering Directorate in 1981 marked a significant shift, allowing engineering to gain equal footing with basic sciences within NSF, reflecting a broader trend of NSF's evolving focus [14][20] - Recent legislation, including the CHIPS and Science Act, has further emphasized the importance of applied research and technology, indicating a departure from the original intent of NSF as a purely scientific institution [23][25] Group 3 - The NSF's current operational model has shifted to balance both basic science and applied technology, contradicting the initial vision of being a non-political entity focused solely on fundamental research [24][28] - The emphasis on technology within NSF has increased significantly, with the term "technology" appearing 230 times in recent legislative texts, compared to only 163 mentions of "science" [26][28] - The NSF's alignment with U.S. national interests has deepened, particularly in response to geopolitical challenges, marking a significant departure from its founding principles [29][30]