Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Nobel Peace Prize 2019

nobelprize.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 95 posts

Re: The Nobel Peace Prize 2019

#31

Post by estomagordo »

Nokinside wrote: post #20
input_sh wrote: post #9

Well, this is a much less controversial choice compared to the Nobel Prize in Literature 2019.

The literature price committee's has zero credibility after the scandal. The nominations are just trying to signal something related to the functioning of committee. Let's pick man and a woman who signal we are better people now, somehow.

I fail to see how the literature price committee's credibility has somehow sunken because of the scandals within the academy. The committee now consists partly of non-academy members and surely the academy itsel must be better off after its purgatory?

Re: The Nobel Peace Prize 2019

#32

Post by draugadrotten »

jansan wrote: post #29
nxpnsv wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not really a truthful reading of what she is communicating.

"I want you to panic" is exactly what she said: https://youtu.be/RjsLm5PCdVQ?t=145

...and 30 years earlier, another girl, 12 year old Severn Cullis-Suzuki, said the same thing in the UN: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOp5ATk_rlM

Re: The Nobel Peace Prize 2019

#33

Post by goatinaboat »

peter303 wrote: post #7

I will see Greta in Denver Friday afternoon at a climate rally. She is young and a voice of her generation. Many future possibilities for her and repairing the climate crisis. I respect the Nobels decision to award the prize to this peace broker. So many global issues that need attention.

If she wants to make a difference her next speech will be delivered in Beijing, not Denver. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_di... for why.

Re: The Nobel Peace Prize 2019

#34

Post by jansan »

draugadrotten wrote: post #32
jansan wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I want you to panic" is exactly what she said: https://youtu.be/RjsLm5PCdVQ?t=145

...and 30 years earlier, another girl, 12 year old Severn Cullis-Suzuki, said the same thing in the UN: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZOp5ATk_rlM

...and 30 years ago this infamous news article was published: https://www.apnews.com/bd45c372caf118ec99964ea547880cd0

At that time we had only 10 years to fix the problem, now scientists graciously give us 12 years.

Re: The Nobel Peace Prize 2019

#35

Post by maaaats »

lb1lf wrote: post #16
batmenace wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see why not? The prizes are handed out by the Nobel foundation, which is independent of government, and as far as I know, financially self-sustaining, so there are no sponsors to upset, and no government that has oversight.

-That they are, but by foreign powers (China is not the only one!), its independence is often cast in doubt. Doubly so as the Norwegian parliament elect members to the Nobel committee, and they tend to choose has-been politicians to put them out to pasture. The result being that while the committee is nominally independent, its ties to government are strong enough for China, for instance, to put relations with Norway…

I'd think that proves the opposite: Even though it hurt the Norwegian government's relationship with China, the committee still went ahead with their decision.

Re: The Nobel Peace Prize 2019

#36

Post by mraison »

goatinaboat wrote: post #33
peter303 wrote: post #7

I will see Greta in Denver Friday afternoon at a climate rally. She is young and a voice of her generation. Many future possibilities for her and repairing the climate crisis. I respect the Nobels decision to award the prize to this peace broker. So many global issues that need attention.

If she wants to make a difference her next speech will be delivered in Beijing, not Denver. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_di... for why.

I assume you're looking at overall CO2 emissions rather than per-capita emissions.

The page you linked shows fossil CO2 emissions per capita:

China: 7.7t CO2/cap/yr

USA: 15.7t CO2/cap/yr

Denver seems like a good place to give a speech.

Of course, country size does matter, but it's unfair to simply compare total emissions when there's such a huge difference in population size.

Re: The Nobel Peace Prize 2019

#37

Post by krona »

Tepix wrote: post #15
phil_folrida wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you talking about Greta Thunberg, I would think so, I don't know enough about her, what do you recommend from her? I fail to see what or why she is important, we are past good speech in terms of ecology, what actions does she recommends?

Of course. She is creating a lot of attention for the mismatch between scientists' (in particular IPCC) insights and recommendations and politicians (in)actions and failure to reach the goals they set themselves. > what actions does she recommend She recommends we listen to the science. Nothing more, nothing less.

She recommends we listen to the science.

Consensus is a probability distribution.

Greta talks about the 'findings' of approximately 4% of the IPCC scientists conclusions, on one extreme of the consensus.

Obviously none of the models are available to examine, so we'll take their word for it, like a child would.

Re: The Nobel Peace Prize 2019

#39

Post by arrrg »

mcv wrote: post #21
arrrg wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Up front I just have to say that this comment is not meant as a criticism of the choice. These are just my loose thoughts on the particulars of this prize. Without wanting to say anything about this year’s winner (if only because of a lack of my personal knowledge which, to be honest, is probably embarrasing): The prize has sometimes been awarded in a very aspirational way, i.e. not so much for past work, but more as…

Other Nobel Prizes sometimes do get awarded decades after the research they're rewarding, in order to see the impact of the result, whether it actually turned out to be true, etc. I wouldn't mind if they did something similar with the Peace Prize. Obama's prize, for example, was clearly too early. Although it would have worked if it had been given to the American voter instead. To elect a black president in a country…

But I would argue that because of the political nature of the prize (and the deliberate political nature of it) the Peace Prize is unlike the other Prizes and should maybe be awarded differently, i.e. while being less certain about whether the choice is a good one.

But I can also see and understand your point of view. It’s just a different (and also valid) idea of what the Prize is supposed to be.

Re: The Nobel Peace Prize 2019

#40

Post by yodon »

mraison wrote: post #36
goatinaboat wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If she wants to make a difference her next speech will be delivered in Beijing, not Denver. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_di... for why.

I assume you're looking at overall CO2 emissions rather than per-capita emissions. The page you linked shows fossil CO2 emissions per capita: China: 7.7t CO2/cap/yr USA: 15.7t CO2/cap/yr Denver seems like a good place to give a speech. Of course, country size does matter, but it's unfair to simply compare total emissions when there's such a huge difference in population size.

Multiply the per-capita numbers by the sizes of the country and you see that in terms of total emissions China is the most critical player. Worse, per-capita emissions are strongly correlated with consumer buying power so the more China's economy grows the more it's per-capita and total emissions are likely to grow.

It's important to reduce emissions everywhere, but China is the key player to watch.

Post reply on HN