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.'"
or is this some sort of advertising thing? You simply cant's trust people with money and power to be genuine these days.
It's a bid for immortality. Young rich guys sponsoring biotech research? They want to live forever.
I couldn't agree more. Because of the dread Nobel prize, radical left-wingers like Einstein, Fermi, Schrödinger, and Heisenberg have ruined physics.
-- My choice of computing platform is a symbol of my individuality and belief in personal freedom.
noble prize don't mean anything anymore since they awarded to Obama for doing NOTHING!
A moron who once had business cards with "I'm CEO, bitch !" thinks scientists are going to take him serious because of... what ? Money ? Dontlemmelaugh.
The Nobel Prizes for the sciences have always been very well chosen. The biggest criticism have always been about who was left out, but I have never heard of one given to a less than brilliant scientist. If you are thinking of the Nobel Prize for Peace, it is hard to disagree... In the committee's defense, the concept itself is extremely political by nature, so every choice is going to look partisan. But you should not confuse the two.
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...
I think truly great teachers should be included. Now to be fair out of the last 20 years of school I think I could nominate two profs. Good teachers are almost impossible to find. Just like great science leaders or engineers, a great teacher can inspire, the problem is 99.9999% of teachers inspire kids to give up rather then strive ( like my entire experience in elementary and secondary ).
My plan is to emulate my hero Zuck - find a scientist with a great idea, sign up to work for him, copy all his notes, disappear for a while, reappear with his work with my name on it, claim the prize.
If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
These massive awards go to researchers who have made truly novel discoveries. They tend to be older researchers past their prime who have already reaped rewards of their research (fame and likely money).
Funding for general research in life sciences has dipped to an all time low, with success rates less than 10% (it was much higher before the economic crisis a few years ago). The top amazing research by big groups still gets funded, but there is still some excellent work that goes unfunded, particularly by young up and coming talented researchers. These young investigators don't yet have a name for themselves, and unfortunately that impedes their ability to get grants and thus do their research.
The Gates foundation is an excellent example of how this can be done -- In today's economy, I would prefer to see something similar than a massive pot going to a few amazing but well established researchers. Of course this wouldn't have made the news if it wasn't over the top...
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
I, for one, welcome our new competitively philanthropic overlords.
The new found social, political, and economic clout that modern day intellectuals are receiving as an outcome of the digital revolution is welcome and long overdue. The prize-ification of discovery and invention is a reflection of a shift in the priorities of our culture as a whole. The PBS Idea Channel has argued that in the modern area, societies pursuit of greatness has largely focused on athletics. That the money for, attention to, and veneration of athletes is what is largely driving the steady crushing of one record of physical acheivement after another.
Prizes like this, the X Prize, bug bounties, crowdsourced funding of science and technology research... all of this is a reflection of gradually shifting priorities. We are slowly redefining what it means to be a winner or a hero. Even if this sort of activity is a relatively minor contribution to the overall progress of civilization, it is a welcome sign of the times.
(P.S. Not watching the Idea Channel yet? Put away your re-tread oblig. XKCD links and get thee to Youtube.)