Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Why There's No Nobel Prize In Computing

CmdrTaco posted more than 3 years ago | from the they-hate-us dept.

Science 229

alphadogg writes "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. That's because there is no Nobel Prize for these fields, and it's unlikely there will be one any time soon. According to the Nobel Foundation: 'The Nobel Prizes, as designated in the Will of Alfred Nobel, are in physics, chemistry, physiology or medicine, literature and peace. Only once has a prize been added — a Memorial Prize — The Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel, donated by Sweden's central bank to celebrate its tercentenary in 1968. The Nobel Foundation's Board of Directors later decided to keep the original five prizes intact and not to permit new additions.' So, if IBM, Google, Apple or some other deep-pocketed tech company wanted to make a big donation along the lines of what Sweden's central bank did in 1968, maybe it could sway the Nobel Foundation to add a prize. But it most likely wouldn't be officially called a Nobel Prize."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Well, (5, Funny)

Flyerman (1728812) | more than 3 years ago | (#36351544)

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

Ain't one of those either (1)

frovingslosh (582462) | more than 3 years ago | (#36352074)

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

Re:Ain't one of those either (2)

elfprince13 (1521333) | more than 3 years ago | (#36352188)

"Literature"

here's how it would go down (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36351562)

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

Re:here's how it would go down (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36351742)

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 (2)

camperdave (969942) | more than 3 years ago | (#36352054)

Why would a dead german polar bear receive a prize in computing?

Knut [wikipedia.org] is the bear. Knuth [wikipedia.org] is the genius who literally wrote the book [wikipedia.org] on computer programming.

Re:here's how it would go down (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36352414)

And camperdave wrote the book on Woooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooosh

Re:here's how it would go down (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36352436)

WHOOOSH

Re:here's how it would go down (5, Funny)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 3 years ago | (#36352558)

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

Re:here's how it would go down (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36352056)

Knuth not KNUT

Re:here's how it would go down (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36351772)

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 (3, Insightful)

SnarfQuest (469614) | more than 3 years ago | (#36352092)

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.

Re:here's how it would go down (1)

Deus.1.01 (946808) | more than 3 years ago | (#36352682)

USA got 362 Nobel prize laureats....did they all hate USA?

Re:here's how it would go down (2)

Kjella (173770) | more than 3 years ago | (#36352116)

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.

If there was enough interest.. (1)

Superken7 (893292) | more than 3 years ago | (#36351586)

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.. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36352030)

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.. (0, Flamebait)

SnarfQuest (469614) | more than 3 years ago | (#36352388)

I doubt that they would. Right now they are trying to figure out what the government plans on doing to them, with their "I hate companies" policies. Obama is constantly talking about his plans to devistate corporations, who are just evil money stealing basterds, and his talks of greatly increasing government regulations on all businesses. They're busy trying to deal whith the crap he's throwing on their plate, and expecting to be screwed over big time. Don't expect them to create an annual award when they are wondering if the government is going to do a takeover on them. The government would see an award of $1,000,000 as enough money to create or save six $20,000 jobs for one year.

Re:If there was enough interest.. (1)

moronoxyd (1000371) | more than 3 years ago | (#36352732)

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.

there's at least a dozen prizes already (3, Interesting)

gl4ss (559668) | more than 3 years ago | (#36351600)

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..

The ACM Turing award is the equivalent CS 'Nobel' (5, Informative)

jmcbain (1233044) | more than 3 years ago | (#36351940)

At the author of the article mentions, the ACM Alan M. Turing Award [acm.org] 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.

Re:The ACM Turing award is the equivalent CS 'Nobe (2)

pjt33 (739471) | more than 3 years ago | (#36352366)

What is TCP/IP if not telecom?

Re:The ACM Turing award is the equivalent CS 'Nobe (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36352698)

If you have to ask, I don't see a Turing award in your future...

Re:there's at least a dozen prizes already (2)

phantomfive (622387) | more than 3 years ago | (#36352048)

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.

Math (1)

Hatta (162192) | more than 3 years ago | (#36351602)

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

Re:Math (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36351670)

It is because Alfred Nobel hated Math.

Re:Math (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36351788)

He hated mathematicians.

The story (legend?) is that his wife cheated on him with a mathematician so no prize for this field.

Re:Math (1)

david.emery (127135) | more than 3 years ago | (#36352050)

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 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36351682)

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

Um, Fields Medal [wikipedia.org] ?

Re:Math (1, Informative)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 3 years ago | (#36351756)

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

Re:Math (1)

Hatta (162192) | more than 3 years ago | (#36351870)

Neither of which are Nobel Prizes.

Re:Math (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 3 years ago | (#36352246)

I prefer the IG Nobel Prizes..

Re:Math (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36351880)

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 (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 3 years ago | (#36352490)

> it's only awarded to mathematicians under fourty.

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

Re:Math (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 3 years ago | (#36351914)

Exactly what I was going to say. The Turing Award [wikimedia.org] 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.

Re:Math (3, Insightful)

theshowmecanuck (703852) | more than 3 years ago | (#36351968)

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.

Re:Math (1)

Spy Handler (822350) | more than 3 years ago | (#36352076)

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 (2)

Jeremy Erwin (2054) | more than 3 years ago | (#36352514)

G.H. Hardy wrote: [ualberta.ca]

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 (1)

oursland (1898514) | more than 3 years ago | (#36352432)

Neither of which are Nobel prizes, which is the topic of discussion.

Re:Math (0)

ahabswhale (1189519) | more than 3 years ago | (#36352008)

Actually, no it should not. You can create award winning software that has very little to do with mathematics.

Knuth says otherwise (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36352754)

Knuth says otherwise, so should I listen to some guy on /., or Donald Knuth?

Economics &Physics (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36352198)

Economics for software. Physics for hardware.

Get one for mathematics first (2)

Deus.1.01 (946808) | more than 3 years ago | (#36351608)

That covers about half that.

Turing Award (1)

LUH 3418 (1429407) | more than 3 years ago | (#36351626)

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

At least we have the Turing Award [wikipedia.org] .

Cmputer Science is like poetry only worthless. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36352134)

Computer Science isn't a science.

I really don't feel like writing a dissertation on /. right now ... anyway, CS isn't based on any natural laws. It's more of a social "science" or even a language like mathematics - maths can't really explain many natural things; it just approximates them.

Computer "science" is a human invention not a natural occurrence. CS is no more a science than poetry.

Re:Cmputer Science is like poetry only worthless. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36352788)

Spoken like a person who has no idea what Computer Science actually is or really entails. Bravo!

Physics IS computation. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36351632)

It from bit.

Mathematics is another (2)

jd (1658) | more than 3 years ago | (#36351642)

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.

Re:Mathematics is another (1)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 3 years ago | (#36352418)

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.

I nominate India Based Tech Support (2)

SJHillman (1966756) | more than 3 years ago | (#36351646)

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 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36351884)

Don't dis the Time Person of the Year. I think it is a great award.

Disclosure: I'm the 2006 recipient [time.com]

Re:I nominate India Based Tech Support (1)

M. Baranczak (726671) | more than 3 years ago | (#36352216)

I would say that the Time Person of the Year [delawareonline.com] 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 (1)

1u3hr (530656) | more than 3 years ago | (#36352802)

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.

who cares (0)

Eponymous Hero (2090636) | more than 3 years ago | (#36351668)

nobody in computer science deserves one. who would get it, zuckerberg? i'd kill myself on stage during his acceptance speech.

wouldn't be officially called a Nobel Prize (1)

tukang (1209392) | more than 3 years ago | (#36351674)

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.

IEEE (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36351704)

IEEE has quite a few awards for electronics and computer science achievements.

My nominations.. (1)

jedimark (794802) | more than 3 years ago | (#36351716)

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.. (1)

catmistake (814204) | more than 3 years ago | (#36352280)

I'd nominate John Carmack.

A Nobel Prize for professionals? (1)

Missing.Matter (1845576) | more than 3 years ago | (#36351726)

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? (1)

Nemyst (1383049) | more than 3 years ago | (#36351996)

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? (1)

Missing.Matter (1845576) | more than 3 years ago | (#36352104)

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.

CS is a science (1)

billlava (1270394) | more than 3 years ago | (#36352150)

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 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36352398)

Much of other scientific disciplines (chemistry, biology, physics, etc...) is based primarily on observation.

Everything you own was created by the discplines of chemistry, biology, and physics. Every neat toy and gadget, your car, the materials that make up your house, your food, etc. (But that's just an observation.)

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.

Yeah, and nearly every one of the breakthroughs in your example were made in the fields physics and chemistry (biology is a stretch, but I bet I could make the case for that too).
 
You don't know much, do you?

Cut out the middle man (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36351728)

How much for creating a prize in "Rad"

And can I win it that year too, because giving all that money to a bunch of old swedes is pretty rad.

Get the in the queue behind biologists... (1)

jo_ham (604554) | more than 3 years ago | (#36351758)

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... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36351924)

I guess you don't consider biochemistry part of chemistry then eh?

Kind of a limited way of looking at things.

Re:Get the in the queue behind biologists... (1)

jo_ham (604554) | more than 3 years ago | (#36352148)

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... (1)

catmistake (814204) | more than 3 years ago | (#36352334)

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...

Oh for pity's sake. (0)

Ga_101 (755815) | more than 3 years ago | (#36351782)

If there was a computing discovery of true importance, it would most likely be granted the mathematics prize. In the same way that biology tends to get lumped in with chemistry every other year.
But for the most part, computing discoveries are just not 'Nobel' important.

Re:Oh for pity's sake. (1)

Missing.Matter (1845576) | more than 3 years ago | (#36351992)

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

Noble? (1)

noshellswill (598066) | more than 3 years ago | (#36351784)

There being nothing noble about computing ... just peonish hack N' slash with a certain aroma of **economy** abounding ... why should there be a Nobel prize? Surely by any gentlemans standards ... any more than a boot-black or liveryman there is nothing worth aspiring to.

Since encryption is munitions... (1)

WebManWalking (1225366) | more than 3 years ago | (#36351790)

... 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.

I thought this was pretty well known (1)

happylight (600739) | more than 3 years ago | (#36351792)

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 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36351860)

Alfred Nobel wasn't married.
He just didn't consider math to be important.

Re:I thought this was pretty well known (1)

catmistake (814204) | more than 3 years ago | (#36352364)

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.

Re:I thought this was pretty well known (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36351938)

It's not glorified math. It's just applied math.

Affair (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36351808)

I was going to say that maybe a Computer Scientist had an affair with Alfred Nobel's wife - but then I realized this couldn't possibly be true unless she really liked basement dwellers.

Do these mean anything anymore? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36351836)

I have to admit I don't follow these as closely as I did while in school, but part of my apathy is they seem to be more of a political tool than a true accomplishment award.

what fundamental advances in computer science (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36351846)

have been made since 1960, let's say? I suppose you could count packet-switched communications, graphical user interface, relational database, distributed transactions, RSA encryption. I don't know if you'd get 50 prizeworthy inventions.

There have been prizes awarded for computing (1)

UnknowingFool (672806) | more than 3 years ago | (#36351866)

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.

ACM Turing award.... (3, Insightful)

Sir_Sri (199544) | more than 3 years ago | (#36351942)

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.

feminist research?! (1)

G3ckoG33k (647276) | more than 3 years ago | (#36352156)

"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?! (1)

ColdWetDog (752185) | more than 3 years ago | (#36352464)

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

Re:feminist research?! (1)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 3 years ago | (#36352494)

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.

Re:ACM Turing award.... (1)

DerekLyons (302214) | more than 3 years ago | (#36352196)

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.

Should be the Captain-Obvious-Dept. (5, Insightful)

WegianWarrior (649800) | more than 3 years ago | (#36351970)

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).

Re:Should be the Captain-Obvious-Dept. (1)

Frequency Domain (601421) | more than 3 years ago | (#36352372)

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. (1)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 3 years ago | (#36352516)

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

Mathematics should get one first (2)

gatkinso (15975) | more than 3 years ago | (#36352060)

As pointed out many times before.

Re:Mathematics should get one first (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36352336)

Nobels are an award for applied sciences that bring mankind forward. The field of maths in general seems to distance themselves from the impurities of applies science.

Create the award NOW and give it to Steve Jobs... (1)

pandrijeczko (588093) | more than 3 years ago | (#36352154)

...posthumously.

lost some luster (1)

frovingslosh (582462) | more than 3 years ago | (#36352194)

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)

Re:lost some luster (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36352402)

Wow, Palin is posting on slashdot now!

Hey are you wiling to do an Ask Slashdot? and why did the illustrious Sarah Palin choose a strange slashdot handle like "frovingslosh"? Does it mean something in Alaskan?

I'm a big fan of your reality series on Fox News, what is the next place you will be going on the next episode?

Re:lost some luster (1)

VortexCortex (1117377) | more than 3 years ago | (#36352474)

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.

Way cool! (1)

Vinegar Joe (998110) | more than 3 years ago | (#36352262)

Al Gore can add another Nobel Prize to his collection!

Noble Prize for Windows XP (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36352518)

Maybe that's how we could force Microsoft to keep extend XP's EOL?

Why allow XP to die at such a horrid time in our market system, jobs and monetary system, and especially consider it's finally got most of the bugs out of it, forcing people to buy new hardware while removing from service productive working software.

The audio mixer system in win 7 is crap "It don't even have CONTROL - S" The audio API is overly complex
The Start Menu in win 7 is crap
It's not fun to work in win 7 on anything to create media.
The protected folders suck and add confusion, where in XP you can just go straight to the files without digging around.

Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36352540)

It would simply be unfair: Knuth would win it 10 times straight.

if anyone in the Computer IT world gets a Nobel (1)

FudRucker (866063) | more than 3 years ago | (#36352570)

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.

"Nobel Prize" in economics (1)

johnbr (559529) | more than 3 years ago | (#36352588)

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. (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 3 years ago | (#36352690)

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.

vanity (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36352740)

that's what this is about.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?