Slashdot Mirror
Tech Leaders Create Most Lucrative Science Prize In History
redletterdave writes "Mark Zuckerberg, Sergey Brin and Yuri Milner have teamed up to create The Breakthrough Prize in Life Sciences Foundation, which now offers the most lucrative annual prize in the history of science: A $33 million pot to be split among 11 people, with individual rewards worth $3 million apiece. Comparatively, the monetary value of the Nobel prize is just $1.1 million. 'Our society needs more heroes who are scientists, researchers and engineers,' Zuckerberg said. 'We need to celebrate and reward the people who cure diseases, expand our understanding of humanity and work to improve people's lives.'"
It's a bid for immortality. Young rich guys sponsoring biotech research? They want to live forever.
First thought when I read the names Zuckerberg and Brin was; There must be a clause in there which states that to claim the prices means handing over any and all patents.
I do agree with the sentiment that a "hero" is somebody who saves lives rather than somebody who is really good at sports, making money or generally getting themselves in front of a camera. People seem to admire the wrong people nowadays.
Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
If we want to have actual heroes doing the research that will lead to such prizes, why not give reasonable career path to scientists? Right now, heroes are first selected by "who is willing to stay in academia despite the working condition", which is not a very interesting criterion in my opinion.
Obama made a few rousing speeches after his election, which at the time was enough of a promise for this Prize to be awarded. He also got it for "not being Bush". If the Nobel committee knew then what they know now, I doubt they'd consider Obama for a Prize. That's the problem with giving accolades like these, even the political ones, on the strength of hope and promises rather than actual effort and results. Oh well, the latest Peace Prize was given to the "EU"... at a time when some of us Europeans feel that EU measures are actually a destabilizing factor.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
So just because he once had those cards made, probably as a joke, when he started the company, should he now be forever ignored? Come on...
Scientists will take this prize as seriously as the selection process is going to be. If they award this to deserving scientists, then the scientific community will, over time, take them seriously. Silly business cards of one of the founders notwithstanding.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
We live in a world where we have beaten most diseases and already live longer than we should
Oh yeah... beaten most disease? Give me a fucking break. We certainly nailed some big viruses, but those aren't diseases.
Let me know when you figure out how to cure something as simple as Migraine headaches. How about depression, we have 'treatments' but certainly no cures, and those treatments are a crapshoot. Maybe this drug works... oh no, well lets try this one... Yeah it works, but your heartrate doubled...
The simple fact of the matter is that the current state of 'medicine' is that your options for actually beating a disease are:
1. Take a vaccine for the cause before you actually get the disease (if a vaccine exists)
2. Take antibiotics if it is bacterial in nature. Hope that the infection hasn't caused irreversable damage
3. Take a knife and cut it out.
4. Sew it back up.
Everything else is basically palliative care. We are just now beginning to se the barest glimpse of genetic treatments, and you are considering most diseases beaten and that people live too long?
I know misanthropy is hip on slashdot, but that doesn't make you right.
Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
And besides, isn't it better that we let the righteous distribute their earnings as they see fit, and not let those socialist tax collectors get in the way?
One of the stranger complaints I've read about the philanthropy of Bill Gates was that it unfairly allows Bill Gates to decide which causes are worthy, instead of the people of the United States. This is rather perverse if you consider what he's spending the money on - how many Americans do you think die from malaria each year? Any guesses how many Americans would vote to continue funding research into malaria versus, say, obesity or Alzheimer's or other 1st-world afflictions? Basically, people are upset that his charity is directed at impoverished equatorial nations instead of the American middle class.
I'm no fan of how Bill Gates made his money - I still wince every time I have to use Microsoft products, with the lone exception of their optical mice - nor am I a particular fan of Facebook. But I think in this case I'll trust their judgement over that of the people who elected Bush twice.