Watson To Be Knighted

hobbes37 writes "BBC News is reporting that James Watson, one of the scientists who discovered the double helical structure of DNA nearly 50 years ago, is to receive an honorary knighthood."

Comments

Crick?

[Anonymous Coward]

What about crick?

Doesn't he get the knife (er, sord) too?

Re:Crick?

[Ubi_NL]

Crick is dead

A Knight in shining white lab-coat armor!

[Eric S Raymond]

Thank you for your discovery. Thank you for all the mutated monkeys and ghastly abnormal children who will become our slaves. Not if, but when it happens.

BTW, When is Tolkien going to be knighted, now that he is making the Brichtish government some dough?

What about Tim-Berners Lee

[an_mo]

I guess this means Tim-Berners Lee, another imaginative Briton, has to wait another 40 years.

Re:What about Tim-Berners Lee

[Xenophon Fenderson,]

There's a big difference between biology and <sarcasm>library science</>. All Berners-Lee did was develop a popular naming scheme for content (hypertext systems have been around for a long time). Watson, et al, discovered, fundamentally, how life works. The two accomplishments don't really compare.

Re:What about Tim-Berners Lee

[Anonymous Coward]

You have got to be kidding. Just the idea of linking hypertext to the internet deserves him a nobel prize. Plus he worked out the server/client software and made up the markup language.

Proof being that he presented his ideas to hypertext conferences and all he got in return was a "duh?".

Research or commerce

[Sprunkys]

Consider that this man has devoted his whole life to research, to knowledge, to finding answers. And then it takes ages for such a man to be rewarded for his research et al (though I must admit he received his Nobel Price quite early, compare to many other laureates, they are often older than 60 or so). Compare this to a businessman, a manager, a college graduate (with lower grades than his fellow student who goes into research) being paid way too much money to sit at a desk and order people around till the age of 60 when he retires and spends the rest of his life in his mansion... somewhere it doesn't seem right.

I still have several years till I have to make a decision between engaging in research/education or going into business (1st year Physics@Twente.NL) but it seems to me that the "reward" for my efforts I would get in research/education are less than when I would work for a big company, earning a lot of money (for them and for me)... what we overlook though is personal satisfaction. A Nobel Price would mean much more to me than a nice golden pen after twenty years of loyal work to whomever...
I wonder, how does the rest of the community look upon a matter like this?

Re:Research or commerce

[Tityrus]

I feel much more like doing research. I'm a mathematics student, and if you get a non-research job with maths, you usually end up as a programmer or a statistician. Whereas, as you do research you are being payed a decent amount of money to read all the books you can get your hands on, investigate the topics you like, etc. I think that's rewarding in itself. The amount of jobs is limited. You're a physics student, but you won't find an industry job where you have to study eg. the quark-gluon interaction for moderate energies :) BTW, you can reward yourself, seeing that you study physics, just discover some nifty device like a handheld quantum computer and you'll be rich _and_ a good scientist in no time :))

Re:Research or commerce

[Sprunkys]

hmmm, handheld quantum computer... sounds nice, any suggestions?

but i think you make a slight mistake here... you have to be a good scientist before making such a handheld quantum computer... you won't become one afterwards :)

Re:Research or commerce

[Anonymous Coward]

No, you got it wrong. You still couldn't escape the curses of the human society: money and fame. Of course, Nobody can completely escape them -- we are all humans. But they should not become the primary drives in life. Your primary incentive should only be one thing -- passion, i.e., you truly love what you do. Without passion, science is just another business.

But the sad reality is, most people get into science and technology -- or any other field, for that matter - precisely because of money and/or fame. In those cases I see little difference between doing it for the Nobel Prize and doing it for the bucks. Money and fame are no-doubt powerful incentives and can get you pretty far, but without passion, your work will be mediocre at best. That is why Sturgeon's law never fails: 90% of everything is crap.

So when it finally comes for you to make the decision of life, ask yourself only one question: Do I really *love* physics, for better or for worse, for richer or for poorer, in sickness and in health...

Re:Research or commerce

[dabacon]

but it seems to me that the "reward" for my efforts I would get in research/education are less than when I would work for a big company, earning a lot of money

Which is the reason most researchers feel that the research itself is the reward.

dabacon

Re:Research or commerce

[Sprunkys]

True. Research is driven by passion.

Not a real knight

[fm6]

Watson is an American, though he was in the UK when he did the DNA work. That's why he's getting an honorary knighthood. Wouldn't do to accept homage from a foreigner. How can you be sure they'll show up for the next Viking attack?

What about Rosalind Franklin?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why Watson, and not Crick or Franklin? As I understand it, Franklin actually did the work and may have had the main ideas, but Watson and Crick published while obscuring her contribution. (The article also mentions someone named Maurice Wilkins; who was he?)