6 ms·

I don't think you need to be so antagonistic against the funders. Not to mention that there are different awards for different things. I think it would be perfe

I don't think you need to be so antagonistic against the funders. Not to mention that there are different awards for different things. I think it would be perfectly fine (and that all the members involved would agree) if the researchers were given the Nobel prize in Biology and the funders the Peace prize.

rdl 15y ago
That would be a great compromise -- an HIV vaccine would probably do more for world peace than at least half of the winners of that prize to date. Another option would be to name the actual vaccine after the funder.
- msbarnett 15y ago
  > That would be a great compromise -- an HIV vaccine would probably do more for world peace than at least half of the winners of that prize to date. What makes you say that? Improve the human condition and eliminate much suffering, absolutely, but do much for world peace? Has there ever been a war fought over HIV? > Another option would be to name the actual vaccine after the funder. Or, we could name it after the thing it vaccinates against.
  - rdl 15y ago
    HIV contributes to violence, civil wars, unstable governments, etc. in Africa. It's actually gotten a lot better in the past 10 years, but in the 1980s/1990s, there was a time when countries looked like they might collapse in the sub-Sahara due to high numbers of HIV/AIDS victims, orphans, etc. It was disproportionately affecting 15-35yo workers, and the fatalism caused by "will probably die from AIDS anyway" led to a lot more individual and organized violence. Dealing with HIV, a general explosion in commodities prices, end of the Cold War, and hands-off Chinese infrastructure investment (tied to commodities, but without trying to influence the government, and thus acceptable) has gone a long way to help Africa. Urbanization, IT/Communications (and access to regional/global markets), and foreign direct investment helps a lot too.
    - msbarnett 15y ago
      Thanks for the response, that was very informative.
  - deleted 15y ago
    [deleted]
- x3c 15y ago
  I would argue that a cheap, environmentally clean and viable energy source would do more for world peace than all the Nobel peace prize winners combined. Dependency on oil must be the single largest threat, except maybe nuclear arms, to international stability. And I make that statement without accepting/rejecting the hypothesis that a lot of wars in the past were motivated by Oil supplies.

rdl 15y ago

That would be a great compromise -- an HIV vaccine would probably do more for world peace than at least half of the winners of that prize to date. Another option would be to name the actual vaccine after the funder.

msbarnett 15y ago
> That would be a great compromise -- an HIV vaccine would probably do more for world peace than at least half of the winners of that prize to date. What makes you say that? Improve the human condition and eliminate much suffering, absolutely, but do much for world peace? Has there ever been a war fought over HIV? > Another option would be to name the actual vaccine after the funder. Or, we could name it after the thing it vaccinates against.
- rdl 15y ago
  HIV contributes to violence, civil wars, unstable governments, etc. in Africa. It's actually gotten a lot better in the past 10 years, but in the 1980s/1990s, there was a time when countries looked like they might collapse in the sub-Sahara due to high numbers of HIV/AIDS victims, orphans, etc. It was disproportionately affecting 15-35yo workers, and the fatalism caused by "will probably die from AIDS anyway" led to a lot more individual and organized violence. Dealing with HIV, a general explosion in commodities prices, end of the Cold War, and hands-off Chinese infrastructure investment (tied to commodities, but without trying to influence the government, and thus acceptable) has gone a long way to help Africa. Urbanization, IT/Communications (and access to regional/global markets), and foreign direct investment helps a lot too.
  - msbarnett 15y ago
    Thanks for the response, that was very informative.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
x3c 15y ago
I would argue that a cheap, environmentally clean and viable energy source would do more for world peace than all the Nobel peace prize winners combined. Dependency on oil must be the single largest threat, except maybe nuclear arms, to international stability. And I make that statement without accepting/rejecting the hypothesis that a lot of wars in the past were motivated by Oil supplies.