Why There's No Nobel Prize In Computing

Well, by Flyerman · 2011-06-06 04:22 · Score: 5, Funny

At least I have a reason for never winning a Nobel Prize, unlike all those writers.

here's how it would go down by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 04:23 · Score: 5, Insightful

They'd just end up giving it to somebody like Zuckerberg rather than somebody like Knuth.

Re:here's how it would go down by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 04:33 · Score: 4, Funny

They'd just end up giving it to somebody like Zuckerberg rather than somebody like Knuth.
Why would a dead german polar bear receive a prize in computing?
Thanks to Zuckerberg we can now exchange cute lolcats with our thousands of friends! We had no way to do this before Facebook existed.
He deserves this prize more than anyone else (and especially a bear, you fool).
Re:here's how it would go down by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 04:34 · Score: 2, Insightful

Exactly what I came here to say. If it means that some self aggrandizing marketing troll stands a chance of being the nobel prize winner for computing, I'd as soon not have a computing category.
Re:here's how it would go down by camperdave · 2011-06-06 04:53 · Score: 2

Why would a dead german polar bear receive a prize in computing?
Knut is the bear. Knuth is the genius who literally wrote the book on computer programming.

--
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
Re:here's how it would go down by SnarfQuest · 2011-06-06 04:56 · Score: 3, Insightful

No, it would go to someone like Al Gore or Obama. That would make as much sense as the awards they've already given them. Maybe they will give it to an actual programmer, if they can prove that they really hate America.

--
Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
Re:here's how it would go down by Kjella · 2011-06-06 04:57 · Score: 2

Why, did Bill Gates win a Nobel prize in economics that I didn't hear about? Zuckerberg would be the same, high on the money low on the science.

--
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Re:here's how it would go down by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 05:18 · Score: 1

WHOOOSH
Re:here's how it would go down by Hognoxious · 2011-06-06 05:25 · Score: 5, Funny

And cunt is someone who explains the joke, i.e. you.

--
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Re:here's how it would go down by memyselfandeye · 2011-06-06 06:31 · Score: 1

Um, the Nobel Prizes for sciences and literature has nothing to do with the Peace Prize. The Peace Prize, your "hate America crowd", consists of Norwegian politicians and related types who are interested in promoting agendas. The other prizes are awarded by the various Swedish academies related to that prize. Sweden is not Norway... look it up on Google if you don't believe me. The Swedish academies are definitely more objective than politicians, and probably less politically motivated by the prize nominees than the peace prize. I'm no fan of medieval academic society here in the 21st century -I truly hate graduation ceremonies and 'group think' of modern universities - but as a person who directly works with a Nobel Laurette who definitely fulfill the European stereotype of a "cowboy American," I'm here to tell you hating America is not a prerequisite, desirability, or issue, for nominees one way or the other.
In other words. The "Nobel Peace Prize" is currently a great way for politicians to promote their adjectives. The "Nobel Prize" is a great way to recognize people who have contributed to our society through invention and discovery... even if Americans receive them from time to time.
Re:here's how it would go down by lanceran · 2011-06-06 08:07 · Score: 1

http://www.documentingreality.com/forum/attachments/f3/257981d1300841480-kunt-dies-i-mean-knut-shit-kunt.....i-mean-knut-014.jpg Are you sure its not Kunt?
Re:here's how it would go down by Dabido · 2011-06-07 03:36 · Score: 1

Because Knut(h) the polar bear ate a lot of penguins and was deemed more linux than Ubuntu. :-)

--
Sure enough, the cow costume was hanging up next to the superhero outfit and sailors uniform. (S,Spud)

If there was enough interest.. by Superken7 · 2011-06-06 04:24 · Score: 1

I bet Apple, Google, IBM, Microsoft, Oracle and all the big guys drowning in cash could create the Nobel Prize in Computing.

Why they would (or would not) want to do it, might be a valid question.

Re:If there was enough interest.. by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 04:51 · Score: 1

Thank you for that incredible insight. Since neither TFS nor TFA posited such a groundbreaking thought, none of us mere mortals would have ever considered such an idea without your brilliant comment.
Re:If there was enough interest.. by moronoxyd · 2011-06-06 05:36 · Score: 1

Actually, companies can do more than one thing at a time, as opposed to, say, some posters here on ./ who have problems breathing and typing at the same time, as can be easily seen by the contents of their posts, that can only be explained by acute lack of oxygen.
Re:If there was enough interest.. by TheRaven64 · 2011-06-06 05:41 · Score: 3, Interesting

Google and Intel do fund part of the $250,000 award that Turing Award winners receive.

--
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Re:If there was enough interest.. by BreezeC · 2011-06-06 15:56 · Score: 1

They support to ACM Turing like Google and Intel.
The ACM winner many from IBM.

there's at least a dozen prizes already by gl4ss · 2011-06-06 04:25 · Score: 3, Interesting

there's at least a dozen prizes already for computing related things(productive and games), and for the important things the inventors are already covered by current nobel prizes.

and there's no nobel prize for the best designed car either, so there..

--
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.

Re:there's at least a dozen prizes already by phantomfive · 2011-06-06 04:53 · Score: 2

Our award is called the IPO award, and it's great. Turns out it's harder to get than I thought it would be when I first started in this field, though.

--
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Re:there's at least a dozen prizes already by Darinbob · 2011-06-06 07:23 · Score: 2

But we don't have a Nobel Prize in mathematics either. Much of Computer Science would fall under that category.

Math by Hatta · 2011-06-06 04:25 · Score: 1

Advances in computing should fall under Math, but there's no prize for that either.

--
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!

Re:Math by betterunixthanunix · 2011-06-06 04:33 · Score: 1, Informative

Except the Fields medal. And the Turing Award...

--
Palm trees and 8
Re:Math by Hatta · 2011-06-06 04:40 · Score: 1

Neither of which are Nobel Prizes.

--
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Re:Math by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 04:41 · Score: 1

While it's true that the Fields medal is the closest equivalent to a Nobel prize in mathematics, it's only awarded to mathematicians under fourty. So it wouldn't have been possible to even award it to, say, Wiles for his proof of FLT. (But surely that would have been deserving of a Nobel prize in mathematics, right?) More so, this also means it can't be awarded to people like Shelah, highly prolific mathematicians whose impact in their field could not possibly be overestimated.
The Fields medal is also only awarded every four years.
As for the Turing award, that's for computing, not mathematics. New insights in category theory or harmonic analysis on Lie groups or whatever else your specialty happens to be won't get you a Turing award, period, no matter how important and far-reaching your results are.
Re:Math by TheRaven64 · 2011-06-06 04:44 · Score: 1

Exactly what I was going to say. The Turing Award is frequently described as 'the Nobel Prize for computing', and comes with a $250,000 prize, as well as the prestige. It's been going since 1966, so it's hardly new. Looking down the list of winners, I can't see any that I don't think were worthy of the award.

--
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Re:Math by theshowmecanuck · 2011-06-06 04:48 · Score: 3, Insightful

The Fields Medal is not granted to anyone who has passed their 40th birthday. So a lot of great mathematicians who have done great work after this age, or whose work was not recognized until after they were 40 will not be / were not awarded. This is ridiculous. If you are going to recognize great work, age should not play a part. It is not right. It also means that the Fields Medal is not comparable to the Nobel Prize which does not discriminate based on age.

--
-- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
Re:Math by david.emery · 2011-06-06 04:53 · Score: 1

Of course Mr Nobel is fully entitled to his opinion and codification in the rules for his prize. But if the Nobel Committee would consider -any changes-, this is the change they should make.
Re:Math by Spy+Handler · 2011-06-06 04:55 · Score: 1

really? What kind of insanity is this? Why??

If anything, you'd think that old fogeys who create awards like this would've mandated the winner be AT LEAST 40 years old.
Re:Math by Lumpy · 2011-06-06 05:06 · Score: 1

I prefer the IG Nobel Prizes..

--
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Re:Math by oursland · 2011-06-06 05:18 · Score: 1

Neither of which are Nobel prizes, which is the topic of discussion.
Re:Math by Hognoxious · 2011-06-06 05:21 · Score: 1

> it's only awarded to mathematicians under fourty.

for the benefit of any French speakers, he means <<quarount>>.

--
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Re:Math by Jeremy+Erwin · 2011-06-06 05:23 · Score: 2

G.H. Hardy wrote:

I had better say something here about this question of age, since it is particularly important for mathematicians. No mathematician should ever allow himself to forget that mathematics, more than any other art or science, is a young man's game. To take a simple illustration at a comparatively humble level, the average age of election to the Royal Society is lowest in mathematics. We can naturally find much more striking illustrations. We may consider, for example, the career of a man who was certainly one of the world's three greatest mathematicians. Newton gave up mathe- matics at fifty, and had lost his enthusiasm long before; he had recognized no doubt by the time he was forty that his greatest creative days were over. His greatest idea of all, fluxions and the law of gravitation, came to him about 1666 , when he was twenty- four—'in those days I was in the prime of my age for invention, and minded mathematics and philosophy more than at any time sine'. He made big discoveries until he was nearly forty (the 'elliptic orbit' at thirty-seven), but after that he did little but polish and perfect.
Galois died at twenty-one, Abel at twenty-seven, Ramanujan at thirty-three, Riemann at forty. There have been men who have done great work a good deal later; Gauss's great memoir on differential geometry was published when he was fifty (though he had had the fundamental ideas ten years before). I do not know an instance of a major mathematical advance initiated by a man past fifty. If a man of mature age loses interest in and abandons mathematics, the loss is not likely to be very serious either for mathematics or for himself.
One of the ostensible purposes of such prizes is to subsidize further research. If the recipient of a Fields Medal is past his or her prime, the monies will be wasted, Hardy's observation may no longer hold, but old traditions die hard.
Re:Math by theshowmecanuck · 2011-06-06 05:50 · Score: 1

Which is why John Nash won a Nobel Prize for economics... i.e. no math Nobel, and no Field's Medal for an old man. It is why I say that Intelligence and Stupidity are NOT mutually exclusive (talking about how the Fields Medal is awarded, not John Nash). Stupidity to me is more closely related to wisdom, or how you do or do not apply your intelligence. It is why we all can do stupid things. Trust me. I know. :D

--
-- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
Re:Math by Jeremy+Erwin · 2011-06-06 06:21 · Score: 1

There's also the Abel Prize
It's annual, like the Nobel Prize.
The prize amount is similar to that of the Nobels.
Like the Nobel Peace Prize, it's presented by the King of Norway.
There's no age limit.
Re:Math by interkin3tic · 2011-06-06 07:03 · Score: 1

Biology should also be a category. Awards for biologists are often shoehorned into physiology, medicine, or chemistry, but as with computing, that can't encompass the whole field. I think that Stephen Jay Gould and Niles Eldredge should have been given a Nobel for punctuated equilibrium, but evolutionary theory doesn't fit into any of those categories. Ecology and population genetics too seem like areas of biology that aren't covered.

Also seems like quite an oversight to give an award for literature but not other arts. Videogames specifically. You can't convince me that Samuel Beckett deserved a Nobel, but Shigeru Miyamoto, creator of Mario Bros doesn't. I've read waiting for Godot. Pretentious crap I say! I'd rather play Super Mario Sunshine than read Beckett.
Re:Math by Warlord88 · 2011-06-06 07:05 · Score: 1

I had heard of this as well and apparently it's just a myth and not true: http://www.snopes.com/science/nobel.asp
Re:Math by interkin3tic · 2011-06-06 07:12 · Score: 1

"I do not know an instance of a major mathematical advance initiated by a man past fifty."
Fair enough, but I don't think "we can't think of any advances made by anyone under 40" is good justification for keeping an age limit. That will only hold up until someone over 40 comes along with a major advance, at which point I suspect the reasoning will become cyclical: it can't be a major advance because he's over 40.

Or she. I'm assuming the Fields medal doesn't discriminate against gender?
Re:Math by Darinbob · 2011-06-06 07:28 · Score: 1

I was given a book on the IG Nobel prizes. I was greatly surprised and amused when I found my former employer listed as a winner! One out of a group of those winning "for the use of imaginary numbers in accounting".
Re:Math by qmaqdk · 2011-06-06 07:33 · Score: 1

And the Abel Prize which is pretty much equivalent to a Nobel Prize in all but name.

--
My UID is prime. Hah!
Re:Math by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 10:42 · Score: 1

Unfortunatly for Hardy, Erdos showed us all that he was wrong.
The age limit for the Fields Medal is a shame. It should have been removed long ago.
What happens to Wiles is a vibrant exemple of its stupidy.
Re:Math by arielCo · 2011-06-06 15:04 · Score: 1

One of the ostensible purposes of such prizes is to subsidize further research. If the recipient of a Fields Medal is past his or her prime, the monies will be wasted, Hardy's observation may no longer hold, but old traditions die hard.
Quoth WIkipedia:

It comes with a monetary award, which since 2006 is C$15,000.
Nice but it doesn't quite free the recipient from pecuniary worries.

The monetary award is much lower than the roughly US$1.5 million given with each Nobel prize. Other major awards in mathematics, such as the Abel Prize [six million kroner, which is approx. (2010) €740,000 or US$992,000] and the Chern Medal [$250,000], have a large monetary prize like a Nobel.
(figures in brackets from corresponding articles)

--
This post contains no rudeness or derision of any kind. All arguments are friendly. Terms and exclusions may apply.
Re:Math by Jeremy+Erwin · 2011-06-07 07:21 · Score: 1

Yes, that does seem paltry. And it does put a dent in my theory. It turns out that the age limit is merely traditional.

.. though there is no formal age limit for recipients, the medals have traditionally been presented to mathematicians not older than forty years of age, as an encouragement for future achievement.
source/a
Re:Math by interkin3tic · 2011-06-07 09:14 · Score: 1

I wasn't talking about the scientific nobel prizes. I was talking about the literature one specifically. This is more akin to "Backdoor girls 3 should win the adult movie award for sexiest scene given that debbie does dallas won and is far less sexy."

I also wasn't seriously suggesting "which one I like better" should be the standard for what deserves a nobel prize. The standards for the lit prize, set in Nobel's will, now that I look them up, are "the most outstanding work in an ideal direction... writings which, by virtue of their form and style, possess literary value."

Outstanding, form and style possessing artistic value. Not exactly concrete, measurable qualities. I'd take the position that Mario wins that one. Far bigger impact on our culture. Certainly outstanding from the field, undoubtedly the most played game from the NES era is a mario game, either 1 or 3 by critics and everyone else as well. Pioneering platformers in both 2D and then again in 3D, that certainly counts as a form with value. Stylistically, they are outstanding.

Culturally, I suspect they have a greater impact than the whole modernist movement did. Deeper meanings, there is an environmentalist streak to some of the games, especially sunshine. With Beckett, you have to dig so deep for meaning that I suspect most of the academics who claim they're there are just looking for meaning in tea leaves. His play "breath" was a pile of garbage and a baby crying, over in 30 seconds. There's no real value there, just english majors wanking each other off.
Re:Math by theshowmecanuck · 2011-06-07 14:09 · Score: 1

What is productive age. Even if it is infrequent that someone say older than 80 comes up with a world shattering idea, is this a reason not to encourage everyone who is willing to make the effort? Your work should speak for itself with no consideration for age. I am assuming your source is a good one since it looks like you took some effort to dig it up... So it is a good thing that people didn't listen to Nobel's wishes too closely. The age part is ridiculous and discriminatory. Great discoveries are ageless. And now that people are living ever longer, in ever greater health, this applies even more.

--
-- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
Re:Math by Jeremy+Erwin · 2011-06-09 00:41 · Score: 1

That's absurd. Even if we were to assume that productive mathematical careers are proportional to adult lifespan, the statistic you're trying to use is mean life expectancy at birth. It's dragged down by infant mortality.

Get one for mathematics first by Deus.1.01 · 2011-06-06 04:25 · Score: 1

That covers about half that.

--
My -1 Troll is actually a +1 funny. And my -1 flame is actually a +1 insightfull.

Turing Award by LUH+3418 · 2011-06-06 04:26 · Score: 1

Some people have a limited definition of what constitutes "science" or "progress".

At least we have the Turing Award.

Mathematics is another by jd · 2011-06-06 04:26 · Score: 2

But they have the Fields Medal. Indeed, other disciplines have found ways round this problem. It is not the lack of a Nobel that is the issue, but the lack of a belief within the field that could bring about a comparable prestigious award.

--
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)

Re:Mathematics is another by LWATCDR · 2011-06-06 05:17 · Score: 1

Exactly there are lot of professions left out. There is no Nobel prize for Astronomy, geology, or any of the engineering fields. They have their own like the Collins trophy for Aerospace. Computer science is no more deserving than those fields.

--
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
Re:Mathematics is another by NonUniqueNickname · 2011-06-06 08:20 · Score: 1

The story of why there's no Nobel prize in Mathematics is much more interesting, involves a woman.
Re:Mathematics is another by afabbro · 2011-06-06 09:59 · Score: 1

Indeed, other disciplines have found ways round this problem.
It's not a problem.
Actually, considering some of the people who've won the Peace Prize, winning a Nobel is tantamount to an insult.

--
Advice: on VPS providers
Re:Mathematics is another by gmhowell · 2011-06-06 11:09 · Score: 1

You misspeled slut.

--
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon

I nominate India Based Tech Support by SJHillman · 2011-06-06 04:27 · Score: 2

This way, the Nobel Prize for Technology can have as much meaning as the Nobel Peace Prize and the Time Person of the Year

Re:I nominate India Based Tech Support by M.+Baranczak · 2011-06-06 05:03 · Score: 1

I would say that the Time Person of the Year is worth more than the Peace Prize, just because they're more honest: they give it to people who've had a great impact on the world, not necessarily a positive impact.
Re:I nominate India Based Tech Support by 1u3hr · 2011-06-06 05:41 · Score: 1

I would say that the Time Person of the Year is worth more than the Peace Prize, just because they're more honest: they give it to people who've had a great impact on the world, not necessarily a positive impact.

Except in 2001 when they omitted giving it to bin Laden, who certainly did change the world. They earlier gave it to Hitler, so it wasn't just for "nice guys". But they were gutless and gave it to Giuliani. So, not so honest.
Re:I nominate India Based Tech Support by nomadic · 2011-06-06 07:13 · Score: 1

That's why I won it in 2009.
Re:I nominate India Based Tech Support by Ltap · 2011-06-06 09:05 · Score: 1

Hitler in fact almost won "Person of the Century" (which was instead given to Einstein). The reason being that he "failed in his goals", which is completely avoiding the fact of how much (albeit negative) influence he had. It was more to protect Time from pressure from people (after all, giving someone an award is generally seen as a sign of positive support except, arguably, in cases in the Darwin Awards) who wouldn't understand why they have given it to Hitler. If I recall correctly, Hitler was Person of the Year in the 1930s, when his rise to power from virtually nothing was seen as remarkable.

--
Yet Another Tech Blog
(but so much more, including game and movie reviews)
http://yanteb.peasantoid.org
Re:I nominate India Based Tech Support by 1u3hr · 2011-06-06 12:27 · Score: 1

It's always (well, in the last few decades) seen as a celebration of the person's achievements.They should just say that their criterion is now "The person who most changed the world for the better" since that's what they have effectively been doing for most of the time. Which would be fine, but they're dishonest in saying it's simply "most important" because it's clearly not true.

wouldn't be officially called a Nobel Prize by tukang · 2011-06-06 04:29 · Score: 1

I have an idea, let's call it the Turing Award! ... seriously, though. There isn't a Nobel prize for Math, either, so it's no shock that there isn't one for computing.

My nominations.. by jedimark · 2011-06-06 04:31 · Score: 1

Hmmm.. if there was such a thing, I'd like to see nominated, on terms of impact and contribution to society:

Linus, RMS, Bjorne S, Donald K, and that windows intern guy who wrote solitaire.

Re:My nominations.. by catmistake · 2011-06-06 05:07 · Score: 1

I'd nominate John Carmack.

--
The Admin and the Engineer
Re:My nominations.. by Ukab+the+Great · 2011-06-06 07:54 · Score: 1

I agree that Don Knotts has had an immeasurable impact on society; without his valuable work we'd never be able to make fun of rural law enforcement.

A Nobel Prize for professionals? by Missing.Matter · 2011-06-06 04:32 · Score: 1

Isn't the Nobel prize for scientists? I guess aside from the Nobel Peace and Literature Prizes. I guess I just can't imagine anything in the IT field being Nobel Prize worthy. Should my electrician or my lawyer also be miffed he's not getting a Nobel Prize?

Re:A Nobel Prize for professionals? by Nemyst · 2011-06-06 04:50 · Score: 1

You're equating IT with computer science.
Hypothetically, wouldn't things such as artificial intelligence be worth of a Nobel?
Re:A Nobel Prize for professionals? by Missing.Matter · 2011-06-06 04:56 · Score: 1

No I'm not. The article notes that professionals in telecom and IT are left out from getting a Nobel Prize. I don't think of professionals in IT as scientists. A researcher at a company that does IT and telecom maybe (Bell Labs comes to mind), but "IT professional" makes me think of Larry the sysadmin lamenting that he'll never get a Nobel Prize.
Re:A Nobel Prize for professionals? by npsimons · 2011-06-06 07:58 · Score: 1

The article notes that professionals in telecom and IT are left out from getting a Nobel Prize. I don't think of professionals in IT as scientists. A researcher at a company that does IT and telecom maybe (Bell Labs comes to mind), but "IT professional" makes me think of Larry the sysadmin lamenting that he'll never get a Nobel Prize.
Yeah, that perplexed me as well. IT professionals? Sysadmins? All due respect to them, but I don't think they are worthy of a Nobel prize unless they actually did something that will have lasting positive impact beyond their lifetime. Now Turing, Dijkstra or Hoare (you know, actual computer SCIENTISTS) on the other hand . . .

--
Nathan's blog
Re:A Nobel Prize for professionals? by tnk1 · 2011-06-06 09:49 · Score: 1

As great as some of the discoveries that are made by Nobel Prize winners are, it irritates me that people have the attitude that engineers and other folks aren't instrumental in that positive impact. No Nobel Prize winner would have any impact on anything unless their ideas were implemented by someone else, many Nobel Prize winning scientists don't have the skillset to apply anything at all.
Sure, I get that theoretical disciplines should have a top flight award in their field that has great prestige. What I reject is that you have to be an actual computer scientist, or some such to have that same level of effect. For every theoretical discovery that we have turned into something, there are other great applications that people have come across by sheer dumb engineering or experimentation. Take, you know, fire for instance. No one knew how it worked for just about all of human history, but they were able to devise the principles of how to replicate it without anything resembling theoretical science. I would say that the first person or people to devise a means of being able to replicate and generate fire at will have had more impact on human history, and will continue to have more impact on human history than any Nobel prize winner has ever had.
Most Nobel Prize winners rely as much on their underlings and partners as any engineer does and there are certainly cases where Nobel winners have won prizes for discoveries that would more accurately have been shared with one or more people who were not included. In many ways, the idea of the single world-changing genius like Newton or Einstein is more of an exception than the rule even among Nobel winners.
I do think that a sys admin should have an award category they can belong to that also has an award with the level of recognition of similar prestige to a Nobel Prize. Perhaps that should be more of a team award, but perhaps so should the Nobel Prize too.
Re:A Nobel Prize for professionals? by afabbro · 2011-06-06 10:09 · Score: 1

You're equating IT with computer science.
Hypothetically, wouldn't things such as artificial intelligence be worth of a Nobel?
Some days the machines will award it to us, for Most Improved Human.

--
Advice: on VPS providers

Get the in the queue behind biologists... by jo_ham · 2011-06-06 04:33 · Score: 1

There's no prize for biology either, much to the annoyance of chemists who find that often the chemistry prize is given to then instead. So much so that the most recent award for Palladium catalysed coupling reactions raised eyebrows because it was actually *chemistry* being awarded the chemistry prize!

Of course, it all stems from the historically limited subject categories.

Re:Get the in the queue behind biologists... by jo_ham · 2011-06-06 05:00 · Score: 1

Of course, just like I consider chemical engineering to cross both of those disciplines.
But if you look back over the history of the prize, it has been given for things that really don't cross into chemistry *at all*.
Re:Get the in the queue behind biologists... by catmistake · 2011-06-06 05:12 · Score: 1

Based on reductionism, A prize in biology (and physiology or medicine) is redundant, as we already have a prize for chemistry. The chemistry prize... is also redundant, as there already exists a prize in physics...

--
The Admin and the Engineer

Since encryption is munitions... by WebManWalking · 2011-06-06 04:35 · Score: 1

... maybe the Nobel Prize for Chemistry?

It's only as far fetched as the government classifying contact lenses as a drug. Certainly no more far fetched than declaring by law that some drugs have no medical uses.

But seriously, if there were Nobel Prizes for computing, a lot of luminaries before us would form a life-long backlog of folks who should be honored first. The best you can hope for is to get honored posthumously.

Re:Since encryption is munitions... by ceoyoyo · 2011-06-06 06:57 · Score: 1

Nobel prizes are not given posthumously.

I thought this was pretty well known by happylight · 2011-06-06 04:35 · Score: 1

Nobel's wife cheated on him with a mathematician.

And we all know computing is just glorified math.

Re:I thought this was pretty well known by catmistake · 2011-06-06 05:14 · Score: 1

Well, it was a rather bodacious and shapely mathematician that broke his tender little heart. This is why he invented dynamite in the first place.

--
The Admin and the Engineer
Re:I thought this was pretty well known by sxeraverx · 2011-06-06 15:43 · Score: 1

Math is just glorified physics.

There have been prizes awarded for computing by UnknowingFool · 2011-06-06 04:40 · Score: 1

While not a separate category, there have been prizes awarded that have significantly advanced computing. Off the top of my head:

Jack Kilby, invention of the IC (2000)
Albert Fert and Peter Grunberg, discovering Giant Magnetoresistence (2007) (GMR is important for HDs)
William Boyle and George Smith, invention of the CCD (2009)
Charles Kao, work on fiber optics (2009)

I'm sure there are others I've missed.

--
Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.

The ACM Turing award is the equivalent CS 'Nobel' by jmcbain · 2011-06-06 04:45 · Score: 5, Informative

At the author of the article mentions, the ACM Alan M. Turing Award is the definitive award given out in the computer science community and is considered on par with the Nobel Prize. All the winners of the Turing Award have won the award based on work that has stood the test of time, typically on merit that was introduced 20+ years prior and still stands today as a fundamental and invaluable core contribution to the field. You will find contributions on computational theory, TCP/IP, programming language theory, HCI, cryptography, software engineer, and others.

Note, however, that the Turing Award does not cover IT or telecom.

ACM Turing award.... by Sir_Sri · 2011-06-06 04:46 · Score: 3, Insightful

Just as there is the fields medal in mathematics (and the new, perhaps more appropriate Abel prize), there is the ACM A.M. Turing award for computing.

The problem with making more nobel prizes is where do you draw the line? Why isn't there one for astronomy and astrophysics, separate from the one for physics (these guys really do complain about being lumped together alot), or organic, and inorganic chemistry. How about splitting the nobel prize in medicine into a 'procedures' and a 'biochemistry' category.

Why not a Nobel prize in business, as separate from a Nobel prize in economics? Or different sub branches of economics.

Hell, there are, at just the school I am at, (exactly) 50 different PhD programmes offered. Why doesn't each of those get a nobel prize? Women's studies and feminist research, history, music etc. There are people who do great work in all of those 50 programmes, well, ok, maybe not journalism or women's studies, but the other 48 anyway,

Nobel prizes are an odd tool. They are largely awarded, in the sciences at least, well after the work is done, and in many cases awarded clearly in a sequence (so that they can award both the discoverer of something really cool *and* all the people who made that discovery possible). Computing doesn't quite seem to be ready for that yet. All of the big work, especially on the hardware side, is done by corporations, with huge arrays of people involved, and as much as there are a lot of people who develop a lot of really neat and powerful novel algorithms they get Turing awards already... It would seem kinda silly to be rewarding Intel, or IBM or the like for their fundamental computer research. They do a lot of it, and they deserve industry recognition, (which they get), but I'm not sure it makes much sense to be handing them a nobel prize.

Re:ACM Turing award.... by DerekLyons · 2011-06-06 05:02 · Score: 1

Computing doesn't quite seem to be ready for that yet. All of the big work, especially on the hardware side, is done by corporations, with huge arrays of people involved
Other than substituting "university" for "corporation" - that's different from the Nobel Prize(s) or any other major prize... how? When the Nobel Prize was started, Really Big Discoveries in the sciences were pretty much the discovery of a single person (with maybe a lab assistant or two) - but that's no longer true and hasn't been for a long time.
Re:ACM Turing award.... by Sir_Sri · 2011-06-09 07:02 · Score: 1

I don't know about the universities you're at, but around here every prof is his or her own research group. They may have some grad students, there may be a handful of faculty supposedly working on any given problem, but in practice it's usually a very small group of people who actually do the work, usually one or 2. That does happen in industry too of course.
There are big collaborations, the neutrino observatories for example. But the particle accelerators and neutrino observatories themselves aren't really the research, there's some there, but the core research is finding the results of using the accelerators. This is, in my view, different from the computer hardware industry, where the research is to produce the item, and the data taken with, or from it, is up to the end user. The thousands of engineers and scientists involved in designing and building the latest CPU's are really doing great work, at producing a product. The science nobels are for discovery and description, any discovery or description deserving a nobel probably falls under physics already (memristor for example). Discovering a new algorithm falls into the ACM Turing category.

Should be the Captain-Obvious-Dept. by WegianWarrior · 2011-06-06 04:48 · Score: 5, Insightful

The Nobel prizes were created by the Will of Alfred Nobel, who died quite a long time before modern computers were even a remote possibility. Obviously there was no Nobel prize for computers - nor economics, since economics were not considered a science back then (note that the so called Nobel Prize in economics isn't a Nobel Prize - it's a prize in memory of Alfred Nobel). Maybe there is a need for an internationally recognized prize for outstanding achievements in the field of computer science... but it won't be and can never be a "Nobel Prize".

Complaining about the fact that Nobel didn't make a provision in his will to institute a prize for a field of science that didn't exists in his time makes even less sense than the creationist argument that evolution isn't a science since Darwin wasn't awarded a Nobel Prize (hint: Darwin died before Nobel).

--
Everything in the world is controlled by a small, evil group to which, unfortunately, no one you know belongs.

Re:Should be the Captain-Obvious-Dept. by Frequency+Domain · 2011-06-06 05:15 · Score: 1

My roommate's cousin's girlfriend's acupuncturist told me that Nobel's wife had a three-way with a mathematician and Lady Ada Lovelace (whose nickname was Linda). Nobel found the videotapes and swore there would never be a Nobel Prize category for math, computer science, or three-ways.
I'm looking forward to confirming this on Wikipedia tomorrow after I'm done reading about Paul Revere.
Re:Should be the Captain-Obvious-Dept. by LWATCDR · 2011-06-06 05:23 · Score: 1

Is Evolution a science? It thought it was theory with a massive amount of supporting evidence in the science of biology.

--
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
Re:Should be the Captain-Obvious-Dept. by geoffrobinson · 2011-06-06 06:00 · Score: 1

Yes, staunch Young Earth Creationists make that argument all the time. Or not. Or whatever. Let's just make fun of creationists.

--
Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
Re:Should be the Captain-Obvious-Dept. by interkin3tic · 2011-06-06 07:46 · Score: 1

Complaining about the fact that Nobel didn't make a provision in his will to institute a prize for a field of science that didn't exists in his time makes even less sense than the creationist argument that evolution isn't a science since Darwin wasn't awarded a Nobel Prize (hint: Darwin died before Nobel).
But it is probably complaint-worthy that evolution didn't get a category.
Re:Should be the Captain-Obvious-Dept. by interkin3tic · 2011-06-06 07:52 · Score: 1

Yes lets! I was just at the dinosaurs in Cabazon, California. Leave it to creationists to buy dinosaur statues in an attempt to spread their ridiculous beliefs that dinosaurs themselves disprove. Kind of like vegans buying a giant statue of a steak to promote not eating steak.
Re:Should be the Captain-Obvious-Dept. by MysteriousPreacher · 2011-06-06 07:56 · Score: 1

I haven't encountered that arguement regarding Darwin, but Creationists do generally spout nonsense on a par with it. They pretty much set themselves up as a punchline for many jokes.

--
-- Using the preview button since 2005
Re:Should be the Captain-Obvious-Dept. by dward90 · 2011-06-06 08:30 · Score: 1

Funniest post I've read in weeks. Thank you.

--
My other sig is clever.

Re:Oh for pity's sake. by Missing.Matter · 2011-06-06 04:49 · Score: 1

There is no mathematics prize. Closest you get to math is physics.

Mathematics should get one first by gatkinso · 2011-06-06 04:53 · Score: 2

As pointed out many times before.

--
I am very small, utmostly microscopic.

Re:Mathematics should get one first by treeves · 2011-06-07 05:19 · Score: 1

I agree with you basically, but you could leave out the "bring mankind forward" bit since I think mathematics does that, albeit in a different way from the applied sciences. Although the applied sciences constantly rely on mathematics, there is an abstract/concrete distinction that separates the two.

--
...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.

Ain't one of those either by frovingslosh · 2011-06-06 04:54 · Score: 1

There is no Nobel for writing. You are likely thinking of the more easily obtained Pulitzer .

--
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.

Re:Ain't one of those either by elfprince13 · 2011-06-06 05:02 · Score: 2

"Literature"
Re:Ain't one of those either by Eunuchswear · 2011-06-06 06:54 · Score: 1

aargh. reply to undo fumble fingered mod

--
Watch this Heartland Institute video
Re:Ain't one of those either by zill · 2011-06-06 09:52 · Score: 1

Yes, that would be why the joke is funny.

CS is a science by billlava · 2011-06-06 05:00 · Score: 1

and a much more practical one at that. Much of other scientific disciplines (chemistry, biology, physics, etc...) is based primarily on observation. What can we observe and record about things that already exist. Computer science involves taking those observations about natural phenomena (electrons, etc...) and doing innovative things with them.

Figuring out how to manipulate electricity in such a way that a 12-year old boy in a village in India can search the entire corpus of Shakespeare from his phone in milliseconds is pretty damn impressive if you ask me. A lot of Nobel-worthy breakthroughs occurred to get us to where we are now.

Then again, the Nobel foundation was set up by Alfred Nobel long before anyone thought of such a thing. If they want to keep their traditions and not add any new prizes, that's their right. It's just unfortunate that to the general public, the Nobel prize is the prize to get if you've done anything useful in science.

Re:CS is a science by AdamHaun · 2011-06-06 08:23 · Score: 1

Computer science involves taking those observations about natural phenomena (electrons, etc...) and doing innovative things with them.
What you're talking about is engineering. CS is a science in name only, being made up of computational theory (a field of mathematics) and software engineering (its application). Computer engineering is the application of electromagnetism and solid-state physics. Nobel physics prizes have been awarded for work on transistors, semiconductors, CCDs, etc.
Then again, the Nobel foundation was set up by Alfred Nobel long before anyone thought of such a thing.
I'm sure Nobel was familiar with applied science, given that his claim to fame was the invention and marketing of dynamite. The industrial revolution had been going on for quite a while, too.

--
Visit the
Re:CS is a science by AdamHaun · 2011-06-08 03:30 · Score: 1

At the risk of proving your point, adaptively tweaking software (or hardware) operations based on measured performance is a common engineering technique and is not normally considered an empirical science in itself. That being said, if you want to argue for some edge cases, I'm not going to stand in your way. That's not what the OP was talking about, though.

--
Visit the

Create the award NOW and give it to Steve Jobs... by pandrijeczko · 2011-06-06 05:00 · Score: 1

...posthumously.

--
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.

feminist research?! by G3ckoG33k · 2011-06-06 05:00 · Score: 1

"feminist research"

LOL!

Either you are an idiot or a cuckold.

Feminism is not a science. Feminism is a political view, not science.

Why not apply for "democrat research" or "republican research", or "nazi research".

Re:feminist research?! by ColdWetDog · 2011-06-06 05:20 · Score: 1

Go back and read his entire post. Then read it again. I guess it's not subtlety day for you.

--
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
Re:feminist research?! by LWATCDR · 2011-06-06 05:22 · Score: 1

Well look at the peace prize. How did a newly elected president that hadn't even served long in federal government get it?
Simple it was a "We didn't like Bush" award.
And in the end troops still in Iraq, troops still in Afghanistan, and a new air war in Libya.

--
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
Re:feminist research?! by timeOday · 2011-06-06 05:58 · Score: 1

I think he was awarded it principally on the basis of winning the election, thereby breaking the racial barrier that precluded any black American from serving as President of the United States for its first 200+ years. That in itself was historic. Was it worthy of the Nobel? Questionable. It's easier to justify in the case of, say, Nelson Mandela, who served years in prison before winning office in South Africa, and where the transition away from apartheid was more abrupt and so easier to appreciate.
Re:feminist research?! by MysteriousPreacher · 2011-06-06 06:23 · Score: 1

On the Nobel site they have the following to say:

The Nobel Peace Prize 2009 was awarded to Barack H. Obama "for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples"
http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/2009/
Yeah, it's difficult to come away without feeling that he won it for not being Bush. It'd be a different story if they'd awarded it on completion of a successful term in office. He has some pretty notable achievements prior to becoming president, but the above quoted rationale is so hopelessly vague that it does appear to be a bodge.

--
-- Using the preview button since 2005
Re:feminist research?! by LWATCDR · 2011-06-06 06:39 · Score: 1

Then shouldn't the prize had been awarded to the American voter and the President Obama besides you are creating a confortable fiction for yourself.
The Nobel committee said it was for
"The Nobel Peace Prize 2009 was awarded to Barack H. Obama "for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples""
Nothing to do about racial barriers.
It was 100% political and 100% because he wasn't Bush. It was nothing but pure silliness oh and Gitmo is still open.

--
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
Re:feminist research?! by nomadic · 2011-06-06 07:01 · Score: 1

The Nobel Peace Prize lost its lustre when Henry Kissinger won it; don't blame Obama.
Re:feminist research?! by Anonymous Coward · 2011-06-06 08:38 · Score: 1

For the vast majority of humanity's existence, 50% of the population has been treated as second-class. I find it depressing that someone with the wealth and education required to post on slashdot thinks feminist research is a political view, uses the word 'cuckold' seriously and compares feminist research to Nazi research.
Your tone, use of 'LOL', idiotic views and moronic alias all indicate that you are the sort of unthinking scum that I come on here to escape.
Re:feminist research?! by LWATCDR · 2011-06-06 09:43 · Score: 1

Don't you think than Yasser Arafat's win was right up there?
And why not President Obama for not turning it down?

--
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
Re:feminist research?! by Sir_Sri · 2011-06-09 06:45 · Score: 1

I said there are 50 different PhD programmes here. One of them is "Women's Studies and Feminist Research", I then made a quip about people doing good work in 48 of those programmes, but specifically not journalism or women's studies. Nothing more than that. And honestly, overall, that had nothing to do with what I was getting at.
Re:feminist research?! by Sir_Sri · 2011-06-09 07:17 · Score: 1

I was focused more on the sciences. The peace prize is a whole other problem.
My gut feeling on the peace prize, is that, in general, anyone who actually deserves it probably isn't alive or free to receive it, at it's mostly just poking a stick in the eye of whomever is opposed to who you awarded it too. And public criticism is usually not the patch to success of oppressive regimes where the peace prizes actually deserve to go.
In many ways I suppose it exemplifies the problem the UN faces. It's much harder to quantify the value of preventing a war, than winning or losing it. In Nobel's time the notion of making peace etc. was somewhat different than it is today, and I don't really know how a prize really makes sense anymore.

lost some luster by frovingslosh · 2011-06-06 05:02 · Score: 1

Can't let this story pass without observing that the Nobel Peace Prize has become a bi of a bad joke lately. Particularly with that guy who claims to have invented the Internet winning one for making a scientifically inaccurate movie, and the one to our current President was given that they admitted wasn't for anything he had done but rather for what they hoped he would do (which sounds to me a lot like trying to bribe a public official)

--
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.

Re:lost some luster by VortexCortex · 2011-06-06 05:20 · Score: 1

Yes. Nobel prizes have slowly become more and more about politics instead of achievements or advancements. My GED is a more prestigious award: At least it is proof that someone actually did something.
Note: I dropped out of high school to start a software company (to help support my struggling family), which I was able to do at the age of 17 without any formal instruction only due to the amazing advancements in computing technology; Let me know when a high school drop-out that dabbles in physics, chemistry, physiology, medicine, or peace, is able to support a family of 5 by doing so -- Then I'll reconsider giving a damn about the Politico-Nobel Prize.
Re:lost some luster by Peter+Bortas · 2011-06-06 06:11 · Score: 1

The Nobel Peace Prize was always a political one. How could it not be? Since we are talking current politics the latest recipients will always cause more butt-hurt than people can remember the previous ones generating.
The prizes handed out in Sweden have the recipients chosen by scholars in the same field. There will be politics, but at least most people agree that the recipient has done something worthy of prize even if they wish their favorite had won.
The Peace Price is the only one Norway are charged with handing out, and the commission charged with selecting the receiver is set up by the politicians in charge on national level. And I can't see that there is an obviously better method. Presumably politicians are the ones dealing in the peace-trade.
Re:lost some luster by interkin3tic · 2011-06-06 07:55 · Score: 1

Particularly with that guy who claims to have invented the Internet winning one for making a scientifically inaccurate movie
Does the fact that Al Gore never said he invented the internet make you question whether you're wrong about everything else?

Way cool! by Vinegar+Joe · 2011-06-06 05:06 · Score: 1

Al Gore can add another Nobel Prize to his collection!

--
"The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes

Re:The ACM Turing award is the equivalent CS 'Nobe by pjt33 · 2011-06-06 05:14 · Score: 2

What is TCP/IP if not telecom?

if anyone in the Computer IT world gets a Nobel by FudRucker · 2011-06-06 05:26 · Score: 1

it should be people like Linus Torvalds & Richard Stallman for their efforts in the GNU/FOSS/Linux because they are benevolently giving away for free what the other business are doing for a profit motive.

--
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing

"Nobel Prize" in economics by johnbr · 2011-06-06 05:26 · Score: 1

While the economics prize is _technically_ not a Nobel Prize, everyone calls Paul Krugman the 'Nobel Prize Winner' (Google Nobel Paul Krugman) - including, I might add, the New York Times.

If someone were to endow the money to define a Computer Science prize, and the Nobel Committee were the ones to award it, I would wager $1000 that it would fairly quickly ( 10 years) be attributed just like the others.

Yeah, like what e v e r. by Hognoxious · 2011-06-06 05:32 · Score: 1

When Nobel Prizes are dished out each fall, the most accomplished professionals in computing, telecom and IT have usually been left out in the cold.

We don't care. The money, the admiration of our fellow men from athletes to MBAs, and (last but not least) the human wave of hot babes throwing themselves at us is reward enough.

--
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."

Re:Affair by Nadaka · 2011-06-06 05:50 · Score: 1

Maybe she hooked up with Ada Lovelace? Its not like there are that many era appropriate computer scientists to choose from.

I don't understand. by tenco · 2011-06-06 05:56 · Score: 1

There's lots of information and communications technology in physics nobel prizes alone:

Japan Prize by ebh · 2011-06-06 06:24 · Score: 1

The Japan Prize started in 1985 with the government support and the Prize is awarded to honor the achievements of people throughout the world, who have contributed to the progress of science and technology and the advancement of world peace and prosperity. The Prize is in principle given for work done in any field of science and technology, but each year two particular fields are designated based on trends within these areas and other considerations. As a rule, the Prize is given to individuals, with one person being selected in each field. In certain cases, however, small groups of researchers will also be considered. Laureates receive a "Japan Prize" certificates of merit, a prize medals, and a cash award of 50 million yen for each field.

This year's categories were "Bioscience and Medical Science" and "Information and Communications". The prize in the latter category went to Ken Thompson and Dennis Ritchie for some operating system thingie.

Vint Cerf and Robert Kahn won in 2008 for inventing the Internet. Tim Berners-Lee won in 2002 for inventing the World Wide Web. W. Wesley Peterson won in 1999 for inventing the CRC. Marvin Minsky won in 1990 for pioneering AI. John R. Pierce won one of the inaugural awards for being a co-inventor of pulse-code modulation (he also coined the word "transistor").

Re:The ACM Turing award is the equivalent CS 'Nobe by gManZboy · 2011-06-06 06:25 · Score: 1

Hear, hear! Why did this post even make it up to /.? Isn't this obvious?

--
Ed Grossman, InformationWeek

Where's the one for cooking? by blair1q · 2011-06-06 06:27 · Score: 1

There's also no Nobel Prize for cooking.

And why should there be?

CS is a branch of mathematics. by Kaz+Kylheku · 2011-06-06 06:38 · Score: 1

Giving the Nobel prize to one branch but not others would be retarded.

For instance, the discovery of public key encryption.

Number theory or computer science?

Doh ...

Re:CS is a branch of mathematics. by ildon · 2011-06-06 07:15 · Score: 1

My thought exactly. If anything there should be a Nobel Prize for Mathematics, which important discoveries in computer science would be eligible for.

Re:The ACM Turing award is the equivalent CS 'Nobe by luis_a_espinal · 2011-06-06 06:43 · Score: 1

What is TCP/IP if not telecom?

Maybe because telecom >> TCP/IP?

Re:Economics still isn't a science... by 140Mandak262Jamuna · 2011-06-06 07:02 · Score: 1

The bankers craved for the respect people wearing lab coats and thick glasses were getting. The bankers wanted in too. But they had no stomach for grueling work, nor for dispassionately declaring who was right and who was wrong without politics and prejudice. When you have that much money and want something badly, you can simply buy it. They pooled enough money and awarded a Nobel prize for the science of economics. Instant credibility. We are scientists too woot!

--
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact

Nobel Prize for AI by halo_2_rocks · 2011-06-06 07:06 · Score: 1

If you want a Nobel Prize in Computing, invent AI. I believe that current Turing machine theory is insufficient for AI so you'll have to not only expand on the theory, but develop the new machine to demonstrate a "thinking" machine. If you do that, you'll deserve a Nobel Prize.

uhhh by nomadic · 2011-06-06 07:07 · Score: 1

Important advances in computing are recognized by the Nobel Prize in physics. This is a non-story.

Re:alternate proposal by nomadic · 2011-06-06 07:10 · Score: 2

Why counteract Alfred Nobel's wish?

claptrap by BigBadBus · 2011-06-06 07:18 · Score: 1

'The Nobel Prizes, as designated in the Will of Alfred Nobel, are in physics, chemistry, physiology or medicine, literature and peace

Thats because when Nobel died, there was no such thing as IT or "computing" (at least the way we recognise it today), and telecoms were just starting to show some promise.

--
My web domain.

One exploits the other. by recharged95 · 2011-06-06 07:43 · Score: 1

FYI, "IBM, Google, Apple" (and tech in general) benefit form Physics, Chemistry, Physiology/medicine, literature and peace. Not the other way around.

Re:Economics still isn't a science... by elsurexiste · 2011-06-06 08:33 · Score: 1

You must read Max Weber: he tackled those problems for the Social Sciences already: predictions are a complex issue when humans are involved and situations almost never repeat themselves. And it's not like there's nothing of value in Economics. A few useful insights: If you want to stop hyperinflation, you do a convertibility plan; there's a limit on how much you can tax your people before your revenue decreases; a new seller in the market will make prices go down (assuming there's not an oligopoly going on).

The problems you mention have to do with wrong assumptions, and you are right, but even Ohm's law have those (a superconducting medium is not contemplated :) )

Granted, when everyone is making predictions all the time, someone has to get it right. But your second and third questions are answered by those who invested in those companies. As for the first one...

Did anyone pre-compute the economic collapse of 2008?

Yes, there was, Peter Schiff: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2I0QN-FYkpw . Cool stuff! :D

--
I rarely respond to comments. Also, don't ask for clarifications: a brain and Google are faster, believe me!

Millennium Technology Prize by Jusii · 2011-06-06 08:56 · Score: 1

We have Millennium Technology Prize, awarded every second year. First one went to Tim Berners-Lee.

http://www.millenniumprize.fi/

Re:The ACM Turing award is the equivalent CS 'Nobe by pjt33 · 2011-06-06 09:49 · Score: 1

Of course TCP/IP isn't the whole of telecom, but telecom is clearly a category which contains TCP/IP, and it should be clear from context that the issue at hand is which categories are covered. (And, to back up my point, the citation for Vint Cerf and Bob Kahn says that "Since then, they have continued to provide leadership in the networking research community and in the emerging industries of internetworking and telecommunications.")

I AM NOT GEORGE BUSH! by Thud457 · 2011-06-06 10:04 · Score: 1

Apparently they gave out 6,000,000 -1 Peace prizes in 2009.

--

the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

IEEE Awards by TheSync · 2011-06-06 10:18 · Score: 1

The IEEE has the Medal of Honor that just went to Andrew J. Viterbi, without which your cell phone, WiFi, or digital TV would not be working.

The IEEE John von Neumann Medal is for outstanding achievements in computer-related science and technology. Recipients include Donald Knuth, Carver Mead, Gordon Bell, and John Hopcroft.

Nobel Prize could replace software patent system by NetSettler · 2011-06-06 10:22 · Score: 1

I've long suggested that what we should do with software patents is dispense with most of them and instead turn the quest for software excellence from a race to make inane patents into a competition for an elite prize, such as the Nobel. It would eliminate many bogus patents, plus no one would be confused about what was patented and what wasn't, since almost nothing would be patented. I'd have maybe given Nobels for things like RSA encryption or LZW compression, for example--things that took a work to create, aren't likely to be independently created and really serve people. The "prize" could be getting the patent, which most things would not get—though a maximum 5 year term would be best, any more is too long in the modern world of computers. Getting a patent would mean you didn't need a monetary prize, which would make the award cheap to offer. :)

--

Kent M Pitman
Philosopher, Technologist, Writer

The does not compute prize? by wedontneednobadges · 2011-06-06 10:45 · Score: 1

This policy prevents a Nobel prize in computing for not computing...

I disagree with something you think is obvious by dbIII · 2011-06-06 13:54 · Score: 1

nor economics, since economics were not considered a science back then

The portions that successfully pretend to be a science are a branch of applied mathematics and can be applied to other fields outside of economics. The portions that only make the credulous think they are a science are a branch of numeroloical astrology or similar outright confidence tricks. Other portions are just economics - honest empirical rules of thumb that don't pretend to be some sort of absolute truth.
Engineering isn't a science either but in that case there is no desire to attempt to get credibility for fortune telling by pretending it is a science.

Gordon Bell Prize at Supercomputing by gupg · 2011-06-06 17:32 · Score: 1

The Gordon Bell Prize give at the Supercomputing Conference is effectively the yearly Nobel Prize for computing.

Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gordon_Bell_Prize

ACM website:
http://awards.acm.org/bell/

Re:Nobel Prize could replace software patent syste by JasterBobaMereel · 2011-06-06 20:08 · Score: 1

"... like RSA encryption ...aren't likely to be independently created..."

RSA encryption independently created by Clifford Cocks at GCHQ 5 years before R,S and A rediscovered it (independently)

Not the most apt example....

--
Puteulanus fenestra mortis

Nobel's Wife? by Gible · 2011-06-06 21:21 · Score: 1

LOL Computing generally comes under Mathematics and the way I heard it, Nobel's wife ran off with a mathematician and that's why there's no Nobel prize for Mathematics and they get a Fields Medal instead. ..probably bollocks of course, but hey.

--
~/ One man's opinions is a lifetime of pain. /~

There's no Nobel prize for maths either by SpaghettiPattern · 2011-06-06 21:37 · Score: 1

There's no Nobel prize for maths either. As CS mainly derives from maths, the Fields Medal should perhaps be awarded to CS scientists who produce extraordinary work. As much as I admire a handful of exponents in CS, I don't think they merit a Fields Medal as their research isn't truly ground breaking. Also, CS is mostly applied -not fundamental- science.

--

I hadn't the slightest objection to his spending his time planning massacres for the bourgeoisie... (P.G. Wodehouse)

Re:Physics IS computation. by Lanteran · 2011-06-07 15:38 · Score: 1

Technically everything is physics. Or math, whichever you prefer.

--
"People don't want to learn linux" hasn't been a valid excuse since '03.

Re:Nobel Prize could replace software patent syste by NetSettler · 2011-06-08 17:21 · Score: 1

Perhaps. But even so, if there were only one or two patents issued per year, it'd have been easy to see the duplication. As it is, there's a sea capable of hiding much more duplication.

--

Kent M Pitman
Philosopher, Technologist, Writer

Slashdot Mirror

Why There's No Nobel Prize In Computing

148 of 229 comments (clear)