This Year's Nobel Prize in Physics Mixes 2 Research Fields — And Politics - Are there too many old white men receiving Nobel prizes?

Gym Leader Elesa

Archenemy of the THOT Patrol
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
Running the risk of insulting any pagan larpers on these forums, pagans live in a world insulated from reality by spirits, furies and emotions. Things don't happen because of causality, but because of some god/spirit's capriciousness. Monotheism was a step away from that world view into a world of laws and order.
So sometimes, when someone displays that level of magical thinking, I label them a pagan, as they're only a few steps away from sacrificing virgins to make it rain or appease the sun god.
See modern climate movement for further references.
When they discriminate against white people and/or to help women or colored people, they sacrifice them on the altars of their gods, even if metaphorically so. Same when some idiot makes a gaff and insults "the feelings of black people". Every one of them? you hurt the symbol object they put up for it. Heretic.
TLDR - religious hysteria not rooted in law / causality is pretty pagan tbqh
Thank you for your reply!

I'm not a pagan larper, but from a scholar's perspective, that's not quite an accurate assessment of classical and medieval pagan religions (assuming you refer to European regions, as most people do with that statement.) Many of those, especially in the Mediterranean, were actually remarkably sophisticated and orderly, and advocated a pretty rational worldview. Its also worth noting that one shouldn't equate polytheism with animism, mythology with religion (the Greek Epics and Greek Religion had almost nothing in common, its a relationship more akin to the movie Constantine with real Catholicism than representative of actual beliefs, for instance) and I would note that the "evolution into the orderly monotheism" myth is really more of a propaganda thing by early Christian bishops. Christianity was, in many ways, far more mystical and superstitions than Hellenism, sometimes to a preposterous degree, before the Church adopted Hellenic models of thought. It's also a myth that Hellenism was fading into a monotheistic practice or dying as the philosophers of the late classical codified new kinds of thought (we once believed Christianity and Judaism fought a very weak opponent, this is now known not to be the case. Olympian polytheism inspired a lot of loyalty in the educated classes, if you weren't Plato or Hypatia.) The important thing really in that discussion is the level of organization, doctrine, etc. The more ancient, established, and scholarly a religion is, the less "pagan" it will be in your sense. This has nothing to do with, well, actual "paganism" in the sense of polytheism or whatever.

That all said, the way you use the word would irritate a lot of the neo-pagans on tumblr and that cracks me the fuck up. Keep doing it. While there are a lot of reconstructionists and moderates I respect, I'm tired of this "uwu pastel pagan enlightenment look out how science we are compared to those Christians bullshit."

I agree that Ada Lovelace didn't really contribute much. I think she's been hyped up a lot largely due to the fact that she was a woman scientist in the 19th century.
I do think it's bullshit that Grace Hopper, the first modern computer programmer and the inventor of compilers and a fucking admiral never gets tge respect she deserves. I guess the popular consciousness/textbook publishers only have room for one female computer scientist and they've decided to more or less invent one instead of recognizing a real one.
Yeah, you might have to admit to some children that women were rarely scientists until the late 19th century and it was still uncommon until the second half of the 20th, but it's better to teach them the truth.
This is a good post and you promised not to make those anymore, but I'm forgiving you for the shoutout to Grace Hopper. Women can make outstanding contributions in scientific fields, but, to repeat the rest of the thread, they actually have to make them. And withholding the truth from a child about the past is always grossly immoral. I can forgive being wrong, but it's hard to overlook deliberate deceit for the sake of a nebulous "greater good."
 

Shoggoth

kiwifarms.net
Thank you for your reply!

I'm not a pagan larper, but from a scholar's perspective, that's not quite an accurate assessment of classical and medieval pagan religions (assuming you refer to European regions, as most people do with that statement.) Many of those, especially in the Mediterranean, were actually remarkably sophisticated and orderly, and advocated a pretty rational worldview. Its also worth noting that one shouldn't equate polytheism with animism, mythology with religion (the Greek Epics and Greek Religion had almost nothing in common, its a relationship more akin to the movie Constantine with real Catholicism than representative of actual beliefs, for instance) and I would note that the "evolution into the orderly monotheism" myth is really more of a propaganda thing by early Christian bishops. Christianity was, in many ways, far more mystical and superstitions than Hellenism, sometimes to a preposterous degree, before the Church adopted Hellenic models of thought. It's also a myth that Hellenism was fading into a monotheistic practice or dying as the philosophers of the late classical codified new kinds of thought (we once believed Christianity and Judaism fought a very weak opponent, this is now known not to be the case. Olympian polytheism inspired a lot of loyalty in the educated classes, if you weren't Plato or Hypatia.) The important thing really in that discussion is the level of organization, doctrine, etc. The more ancient, established, and scholarly a religion is, the less "pagan" it will be in your sense. This has nothing to do with, well, actual "paganism" in the sense of polytheism or whatever.

That all said, the way you use the word would irritate a lot of the neo-pagans on tumblr and that cracks me the fuck up. Keep doing it. While there are a lot of reconstructionists and moderates I respect, I'm tired of this "uwu pastel pagan enlightenment look out how science we are compared to those Christians bullshit."



This is a good post and you promised not to make those anymore, but I'm forgiving you for the shoutout to Grace Hopper. Women can make outstanding contributions in scientific fields, but, to repeat the rest of the thread, they actually have to make them. And withholding the truth from a child about the past is always grossly immoral. I can forgive being wrong, but it's hard to overlook deliberate deceit for the sake of a nebulous "greater good."
I appreciate you not taking it personally and understanding I use it as a slur. It's like calling someone a nigger. They can even be white. It has become a bit disconnected from the original meaning.
Or we can return to the original meaning of paganus which brings as full circle to "magically thinking primitive"
 

Splendid

Castigat ridendo mores
True & Honest Fan
kiwifarms.net
Thank you for your reply!

I'm not a pagan larper, but from a scholar's perspective, that's not quite an accurate assessment of classical and medieval pagan religions (assuming you refer to European regions, as most people do with that statement.) Many of those, especially in the Mediterranean, were actually remarkably sophisticated and orderly, and advocated a pretty rational worldview. Its also worth noting that one shouldn't equate polytheism with animism, mythology with religion (the Greek Epics and Greek Religion had almost nothing in common, its a relationship more akin to the movie Constantine with real Catholicism than representative of actual beliefs, for instance) and I would note that the "evolution into the orderly monotheism" myth is really more of a propaganda thing by early Christian bishops. Christianity was, in many ways, far more mystical and superstitions than Hellenism, sometimes to a preposterous degree, before the Church adopted Hellenic models of thought. It's also a myth that Hellenism was fading into a monotheistic practice or dying as the philosophers of the late classical codified new kinds of thought (we once believed Christianity and Judaism fought a very weak opponent, this is now known not to be the case. Olympian polytheism inspired a lot of loyalty in the educated classes, if you weren't Plato or Hypatia.) The important thing really in that discussion is the level of organization, doctrine, etc. The more ancient, established, and scholarly a religion is, the less "pagan" it will be in your sense. This has nothing to do with, well, actual "paganism" in the sense of polytheism or whatever.

That all said, the way you use the word would irritate a lot of the neo-pagans on tumblr and that cracks me the fuck up. Keep doing it. While there are a lot of reconstructionists and moderates I respect, I'm tired of this "uwu pastel pagan enlightenment look out how science we are compared to those Christians bullshit."



This is a good post and you promised not to make those anymore, but I'm forgiving you for the shoutout to Grace Hopper. Women can make outstanding contributions in scientific fields, but, to repeat the rest of the thread, they actually have to make them. And withholding the truth from a child about the past is always grossly immoral. I can forgive being wrong, but it's hard to overlook deliberate deceit for the sake of a nebulous "greater good."
Fuck, you're right.
Death to jannies long live Elesa.
 

Irrelevant

kiwifarms.net
I agree that Ada Lovelace didn't really contribute much. I think she's been hyped up a lot largely due to the fact that she was a woman scientist in the 19th century.
I do think it's bullshit that Grace Hopper, the first modern computer programmer and the inventor of compilers and a fucking admiral never gets tge respect she deserves. I guess the popular consciousness/textbook publishers only have room for one female computer scientist and they've decided to more or less invent one instead of recognizing a real one.
Yeah, you might have to admit to some children that women were rarely scientists until the late 19th century and it was still uncommon until the second half of the 20th, but it's better to teach them the truth.
Actually feminists have finally discovered Grace Hopper. Their current line is that Grace Hopper invented programming in 1959 but Ada Lovelace was still the first programmer in 1833. Yeah they have no idea what they're talking about so it makes no sense.
 

Tasty Tatty

kiwifarms.net
Wasn’t there a big deal about a woman scientist taking the first picture of a black hole recently when it was a team effort?

Maybe if more women went into science and achieved something, they’d be better represented.
The women who want to make science are already making science. The ones who cry for more representatiion are alwasy women from the humanities. LOL. And even if only one wins, it's gonna be a perfect representation of the % of women that are currently in science.
 

Shoggoth

kiwifarms.net
Actually feminists have finally discovered Grace Hopper. Their current line is that Grace Hopper invented programming in 1959 but Ada Lovelace was still the first programmer in 1833. Yeah they have no idea what they're talking about so it makes no sense.
Grace Hopper invented programming in 59, but Turing built the first computation machines in the 40s. So what did scientists and mathematicians do for 10 years, just look at it?
Between 1945 and 1947, Turing lived in Hampton, London,[105] while he worked on the design of the ACE (Automatic Computing Engine) at the National Physical Laboratory (NPL). He presented a paper on 19 February 1946, which was the first detailed design of a stored-program computer.[106] Von Neumann's incomplete First Draft of a Report on the EDVAC had predated Turing's paper, but it was much less detailed and, according to John R. Womersley, Superintendent of the NPL Mathematics Division, it "contains a number of ideas which are Dr. Turing's own".[107] Although ACE was a feasible design, the secrecy surrounding the wartime work at Bletchley Park led to delays in starting the project and he became disillusioned. In late 1947 he returned to Cambridge for a sabbatical year during which he produced a seminal work on Intelligent Machinery that was not published in his lifetime.[108] While he was at Cambridge, the Pilot ACE was being built in his absence. It executed its first program on 10 May 1950, and a number of later computers around the world owe much to it, including the English Electric DEUCE and the American Bendix G-15. The full version of Turing's ACE was not built until after his death.[109]
 

Irrelevant

kiwifarms.net
Grace Hopper invented programming in 59, but Turing built the first computation machines in the 40s. So what did scientists and mathematicians do for 10 years, just look at it?
They did the same as what Babbage did with his machine before Lovelace taught him how to program it.

Hopper was actually influential though. Feminists always have to ruin things with over the top claims.
 
  • Feels
Reactions: Unog

MarvinTheParanoidAndroid

This will all end in tears, I just know it.
kiwifarms.net
The Nobel prize hasn't been worth a damn since Obama won it for being black and a U.S. president. It really doesn't matter how much they bastardize it now since they've shown there are no standards going forward from his election.
Because she was not. The observation -- that stars in the outer part of the Galaxy is moving slowly, as if something were dragging them -- and number crunching that pointed out the existence of Dark Matter was done in the early 20th century, by Fritz Zwicky, a WHITE MAN.
Ah yes, Fritz Zwicky, the man who discovered the super nova and punched you in the face if you ever argued with him.
The problem with Nobel Prizes is a lot of research in the past could have been done by one or two dedicated people. This has been a major problem since the 1950s once all the easy shit was discovered. Now it takes teams to do amazing things because there are no more easy pickings.

Typically they solve this by giving it to the PI or the first author of any paper, but this still doesn't solve the issue.
Couldn't they just give the prize to each team member? Not like they have to share just the one but they each get one for contributing to the same discovery.
Actually feminists have finally discovered Grace Hopper. Their current line is that Grace Hopper invented programming in 1959 but Ada Lovelace was still the first programmer in 1833. Yeah they have no idea what they're talking about so it makes no sense.
The argument that Ada Lovelace can't be the first programmer because the work she tailored for a hypothetical machine was never built is like saying Archimedes can't be credited for inventing Calculus because his work was pasted over with bible text. The only way I'd agree with dismissing Ada is if the actual Analytical Engine were built and her notes were applied to the machine and it didn't work, & then we'd have to answer the question as to why it didn't work as well.

But yes, it is true that Ada and Babbage were not responsible for the modern concept of computers nor were their work an inspiration for the development. The real fascinating thing with Ada and Babbage is they make a curious 'what if' of what the present would've been like if they had actualized their hypothetical work the way we think of with the missing documents from the Library of Alexandria, or if electricity had been explored when it was first discovered instead of being treated as a curiosity.

Now I have a good question I want to ask, since women are not excelling in STEM as a whole and not really inventing shit to the expectations being held, and if women are generally disinterested in STEM altogether, who and why does anyone bother pushing women into those fields? Is it male feminists? Do female feminists actually care about entering STEM themselves? If they don't care then why do they care about other women getting into STEM?
 
Last edited:

DrunkJoe

kiwifarms.net
Women just need to learn that men are better at everything and with the current trend of troons that includes being women too. Shouldnt require a nobel peace prize to realize that
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Pissmaster General

X Prime

kiwifarms.net
Now I have a good question I want to ask, since women are not excelling in STEM as a whole and not really inventing shit to the expectations being held, and if women are generally disinterested in STEM altogether, who and why does anyone bother pushing women into those fields? Is it male feminists? Do female feminists actually care about entering STEM themselves? If they don't care then why do they care about other women getting into STEM?
It's because STEM is more prestigious than traditional woman's work, and a central underlying conceit of the current social age is that biology does not matter or that groups are biologically the same as other groups.

For that conceit to hold up, people have to be in fields at rates roughly the same as their proportion of population in society.

Thus, since women make up roughly half of the population, if they are truly equal they must be half the STEM field. If they're not, some other factor is at fault, presumably oppression keeping them out of prestigious work. It's the same logic behind arguments that African-Americans are underrepresented in prestigious fields, supposedly because of white oppression.

In short, to ensure the world is truly equal, 13% of Americans in every field have to be black, and 50% of that 13% must be women. And so on for every other field.
 

Irrelevant

kiwifarms.net
The argument that Ada Lovelace can't be the first programmer because the work she tailored for a hypothetical machine was never built
That's not the argument against her. The argument is that Babbage wrote programs for his own machines before he even met her.

There is added controversy over how much of her programs were hers vs rewritten versions of Babbage's notes. The pro-Lovelace side say she saw an Italian paper and translated it and added her own algorithms. The truth is she translated the paper because Babbage's friend paid her to do so and Babbage helped her do it.

Babbage was an autist who could never hold on to patrons and so his friends and Lovelace were his high society PR to secure funding.

Lovelace was definitely the first person to see the potential of a general-purpose computer and daydreamed about the possibilities but it's not clear what she actually did. On the other hand Hopper was one of the first to advocate for a general-purpose programming language and actually helped make it happen.

But even with Hopper the COBOL story isn't really that true. COBOL copied her syntax from a previous language but she didn't actually design COBOL itself which was basically done by commission at the behest of the DoD. However 3/7 of the credited designers are (relatively) unknown women so again there's the problem of feminists bigging up one woman as a superhero and ignoring the full story.

There were a lot of women in the early days of computing since 99% of "programmers" were just data entry and that was considered a woman's job the same as the old rooms full of human computers. With such a big pool of talent some of them naturally rose to the top by the 60's and were what we'd consider modern programmers. Ironically it was probably Hopper beginning the abstraction and simplifying of programming that lost all those women their jobs and now there are less female programmers because for whatever reason they won't jump into the pool by themselves.
 
Last edited:

Sperghetti

#waxmymeatballs
kiwifarms.net
Now I have a good question I want to ask, since women are not excelling in STEM as a whole and not really inventing shit to the expectations being held, and if women are generally disinterested in STEM altogether, who and why does anyone bother pushing women into those fields? Is it male feminists? Do female feminists actually care about entering STEM themselves? If they don't care then why do they care about other women getting into STEM?
I've always assumed the push was from a certain variety of (probably mostly female) feminists who don't want to go into these fields themselves, but want other women to go into them so they live vicariously through them as examples of "girl power". The same type who were super vocal about supporting Hilary Clinton even though they probably didn't care about 99% of what went on in US politics before 2016, or get really invested in video game gender politics despite not actually being that into video games.
 

Stoneheart

kiwifarms.net
Grace Hopper invented programming in 59, but Turing built the first computation machines in the 40s. So what did scientists and mathematicians do for 10 years, just look at it?
Thats not True... Konrad Zuse build the first "modern" computer in 41. Leibniz invented computers as an idea and build a pretty impressive machine in 1694

Turing was a brilliant man, but not the first.
 

Irrelevant

kiwifarms.net
I see, so does that mean he's the first programmer or is there someone before that?
If you consider the Analytical Engine a computer then he's probably the first. When I was a kid people didn't really count it as a computer but that changed to allow the Lovelace myth to be pushed.

Babbage also made mechanical calculators but because they were single purpose they could only do what they were manufactured to do so you wouldn't say they were programmable unless you want to count their manufacturing as the programming. If you do go down that road you can go all the way back to the Antikythera mechanism from ~87BC.

The first "real" computers and programmers are the WWII crypto stuff.
 
Last edited:
Tags
None

About Us

The Kiwi Farms is about eccentric individuals and communities on the Internet. We call them lolcows because they can be milked for amusement or laughs. Our community is bizarrely diverse and spectators are encouraged to join the discussion.

We do not place intrusive ads, host malware, sell data, or run crypto miners with your browser. If you experience these things, you have a virus. If your malware system says otherwise, it is faulty.

Supporting the Forum

How to Help

The Kiwi Farms is constantly attacked by insane people and very expensive to run. It would not be here without community support.

BTC: 1DgS5RfHw7xA82Yxa5BtgZL65ngwSk6bmm
ETH: 0xc1071c60Ae27C8CC3c834E11289205f8F9C78CA5
BAT: 0xc1071c60Ae27C8CC3c834E11289205f8F9C78CA5
LTC: LSZsFCLUreXAZ9oyc9JRUiRwbhkLCsFi4q
XMR: 438fUMciiahbYemDyww6afT1atgqK3tSTX25SEmYknpmenTR6wvXDMeco1ThX2E8gBQgm9eKd1KAtEQvKzNMFrmjJJpiino