Ah it's the Nobel Prize week! If anyone curious about this week's schedule:
Tuesday: physics. Wednesday: chemistry. Thursday: literature. Friday: peace. Monday: economics.
Ah it's the Nobel Prize week! If anyone curious about this week's schedule:
Tuesday: physics. Wednesday: chemistry. Thursday: literature. Friday: peace. Monday: economics.
It still kind of baffles me that there’s no Nobel prize for mathematics.
I know there are plenty of other math awards out there, so it’s not really “worse” or anything, I have always just thought it was a weird omission.
Blame Alfred Nobel, he set up the original categories. According to Wikipedia his goals were prizes "which annually recognize those who 'conferred the greatest benefit to humankind'". Perhaps he didn't consider math as directly benefiting mankind.
I know, I just find it odd that apparently literature directly benefits mankind but not math.
They can always do what economics did and create a new prize and name it in honor of Alfred Nobel
obligatory comment about how economics one isn't a Nobel prize.
Next Monday also isn’t in this week so it all works out.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Memorial_Prize_in_Econom...
> Although the Prize in Economic Sciences was not one of the original five Nobel Prizes established by Alfred Nobel's will, it is considered a member of the Nobel Prize system, and is administered and referred to along with the Nobel Prizes by the Nobel Foundation. Winners of the Prize in Economic Sciences are chosen in a similar manner to and announced alongside the Nobel Prize recipients, and receive the Prize in Economic Sciences at the Nobel Prize Award Ceremony.
I think it's more the Nobel Peace Prize that stands out.
The peace prize stands out for being different.
The economics one stands out for not being endowed by Nobel but instead Sveriges Riksbank well after his death (thus it's the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences).
But it's administered by the Nobel Foundation, etc.
The Peace Prize stands out because sometimes it is given to someone who wages war such as Henry Kissinger or Barack Obama.
Giving the prize to Obama, whose main achievement at the time was not to be Bush, was a disgrace and did huge damage to the image of the committee. And he did nothing after that that would have deserved a prize.
Bush's PEPFAR was so good that if they gave him the prize it'd be more deserved than many other people who have it.
[flagged]
The best take I saw was giving it to USAID
No. Francesca Albanese and Greta Thunberg.
Is it seven or eight wars he ended this term? I imagine if he could just remember at least two then he’d be a favorite for the prize.
Has he actually ended any wars? I know he says he ended wars but he is incapable of saying anything without endlessly embellishing his achievements (or just making shit up entirely). It’s hard to know what achievements have been made by this administration, if any.
If he (or his team) actually ended the Gaza conflicts, then that’s cool, and credit where credit’s due, though I currently have no reason to think that Israel will honor any terms that they agree to.
He's starting wars in Portland, Los Angeles, and Chicago. Trump told the military last week, "This is going to be a major part for some of the people in this room. That's a war too. It's a war from within."
Was there ever a clear exception stating that you're ineligible for a Nobel in regards to stopping a war that you yourself started?
The Peace Prize has had quite a few weird choices, like Kissinger when that simply meant the USA would stop participating in the Vietnamese civil war (and to be generous putting a stop to USA bombing campaigns that Kissinger advocated in Vietnam and surrounding countries) or Barack Obama for giving a few speeches after less than a year in office. So it's not out of the question but it's hard to see the logic behind Trump getting one now.
Here are the current favorites accross the betting sites, I mean Trump has a decent chance
https://files.catbox.moe/xc1ik1.png
(NATO is a funny one too lol)
Betting sites set their odds to maximise their revenue, not reality ;)
Polymarkets currently has him at 3%
https://polymarket.com/event/nobel-peace-prize-winner-2025?t...
On the one hand, betting markets are fantastic predictors. I do really admire the "skin in the game" aspect tracking future outcomes better than polling or "expert" opinion.
But that comes at a steep cost. It's a huge negative externality. Placing bets on future outcomes like this isn't the same as placing bets on future outcomes by starting companies, investing in companies, doing fundamental research, or even putting your money in the public markets.
It's like sports betting. We're making the marketplace rich and separating gambling addicts from their livelihoods. Without enriching society.
We should tax this to pay for education or have some kind of societal upside. It's all bad, otherwise.
We may get some surprises but I don't think so:
- Trump doesn't project a peaceful image, that's not his style, unlike Obama. No matter the result of his actions, he is at a disadvantage.
- The September peace proposal for the Gaza war that could make a good argument is likely to be too recent to influence the decision.
- Trump wants to annex Greenland, I don't think the Norwegian Nobel Committee appreciates.
files.catbox.moe has a security policy called HTTP Strict Transport Security (HSTS), which means that Firefox can only connect to it securely. You can’t add an exception to visit this site.
Why is Firefix blocking it? Is HSTS somehow bad?
Oh there's something with their certificate
holy fuck people will bet on pretty much anything I guess huh?
I bet you they won't.
I will take that bet. It's very easy for me to win.
Yes it is sad that the whole Nobel prize coverage will be just a background to a week talking about Trump, whether he wins or not :(
He won't win. How could the committee look at him, while he is actively celebrating killing people off the coast of Venezuela (whether they are smuggling drugs or not) and give him the Peace Prize.
Obama authorized 54 strikes in Pakistan in his first year, resulting in estimated 100 civilians dead. He received Nobel peace prize that year.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drone_strikes_in_Pakistan
I guess it depends on whether or not the committee members plan on visiting the US anytime soon.
Trump isn't good enough at blackmail. Netanyahu, on the other hand...
I don't think anyone seriously believes he will win. Despite making up all kind of wars and conflicts he claims to have solved, there hasn't been any real peace coming from him, yet. Maybe Gaza turns out to something real, but it's not done yet, and I kinda doubt they decide on these prices on a short whim. And if development in the USA continues like at the moment, I doubt he will be considered next year. It will be just one conflict cancelling out one peace.
but what if he turns into the ultimate humanitarian after he wins one? Has the nobel committee considered that?/s
Yeah its weird how he explicitly states he wants a peace prize and then turns around and does very hellish things, rips up Aid programs, impose one sided tariffs without caring about your allies, belittle a president desperately trying to fight for his countries sovereignty, mafia style negotiations for said country minerals without a security guarantee in order to send weapons, trash nato allies repeatedly, taunt allies that you wont honor security guarantees if they dont do x , remove historical names for no good reason from various government objects , alienate out entire class of people with your rhetoric while using a platform thats supposed to be bipartisan, deport & arrest people while bypassing judges as much as you can
> rips up Aid programs
This is a misleading miscapitalisation. USAID isn't about aid. It's about "international development" - i.e. soft power in ideologically contested nations.
>but what if he turns into the ultimate humanitarian after he wins one? Has the nobel committee considered that?/s
Ugh giving me flashbacks to the “the office will change him” arguments. Can’t believe people actually said that out loud.
If he somehow got the peace prize as he balloons a department sneaking around in plain clothes with their faces covered rounding people up at work and terrifying/ripping families apart then the prize is truly a joke. Luckily there’s no way he’s getting it.
[flagged]
Oh well, the comments will also be filled with complaints about Kissinger, Obama, Teresa, Arafat... and how the prize therefore somehow is worthless. 2020 thread has 30 comments mentioning Trump, 20 comments mentioning Obama.. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24728142
Instead of celebrating the winners, some people just want to complain.
Both are valid topics.
Sure, but is it worth discussing again and again and again? To me it's like beating a dead horse. Every year, the same discussion here. Drowns the more interesting discussion about the actual winners.
I get your point.
It is possible, however, that it's different people each year having roughly the same conversation.
But this is true of many topics.
Talking about Trump is also like beating a dead horse to some people. Doesn't really matter. People are allowed to talk about stuff.
Dead horses don’t generally beat themselves, after all; hobby horses doubly so.
> Instead of celebrating the winners
Well.. assuming the winner isn't a war criminal we can celebrate at least :P