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

Royal pardon for codebreaker Alan Turing

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 163 posts

Re: Royal pardon for codebreaker Alan Turing

#131

Post by jiggy2011 »

SimonPStevens wrote: post #126

What I find most intriguing about this is the how a law that was enforced only 50 years ago has so quickly become abhorrent to the majority of the population. It's an interesting thought experiment to consider which laws we routinely use today to punish people will become morally unacceptable in the next 50 years. Copyright and patent laws, and laws used against Snowden's whistle blowing are some obvious ones that ar…

I doubt that we would need to make human driving illegal. More likely automated cars become so popular and cheap that a generation grows up without learning how to drive manually and outside of a subset of enthusiasts human driven cars simply start to disappear from the market.

We already have driving assistance systems like ABS and computers which will automatically apply brakes which can reduce the risk of accidents but we don't mandate that all vehicles on the road use them.

Re: Royal pardon for codebreaker Alan Turing

#132

Post by SimonPStevens »

jiggy2011 wrote: post #131
SimonPStevens wrote: post #126

What I find most intriguing about this is the how a law that was enforced only 50 years ago has so quickly become abhorrent to the majority of the population. It's an interesting thought experiment to consider which laws we routinely use today to punish people will become morally unacceptable in the next 50 years. Copyright and patent laws, and laws used against Snowden's whistle blowing are some obvious ones that ar…

I doubt that we would need to make human driving illegal. More likely automated cars become so popular and cheap that a generation grows up without learning how to drive manually and outside of a subset of enthusiasts human driven cars simply start to disappear from the market. We already have driving assistance systems like ABS and computers which will automatically apply brakes which can reduce the risk of accident…

Computer breaking is still relatively new. Give the law time to catch up. Seatbelts were optional when I was a child, but mandatory now (UK).

But yes, I do agree. Human driving may well just become unpopular rather than illegal.

Re: Royal pardon for codebreaker Alan Turing

#133

Post by mkingston »

lostlogin wrote: post #88
_Simon wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"If it was my tax pound I'd support this." Well that's easy to say when it isn't. It is my tax pound and I don't. I don't support the posthumous pardon at all, and those calling for the posthumous knighthood are getting ridiculous. Everyone recognises the value of Turing's input to both the war effort and greater modern life, but sadly the man took his own life. Arguing over whose fault it was it pointless. Pardoning…

Are there abused or disenfranchised groups you do support payments being made to as a form of compensation? Paying out clearly does nothing for Turing, I mean that payment to those still alive could be helpful. For example, the New Zealand government has paid out groups that suffered due to government action like land unfairly taken. I fully support this.

The NZ government continues to make payments to Maori (an indigenous people lostlogin refers to). Maori are in a socioeconomically inferior position overall, partly (largely?) as a consequence of European misdeeds less than two centuries ago. I think most people who know of the similar (but much worse) socioeconomic positions of the Australian Aborigines and native American people will probably agree making compensation is the right thing to do.

Suppose however that the Maori had a socioeconomically superior position. Would it still be the right thing to do to pay them for past misdeeds? Technically, I would say yes. Practically, probably not.

As an illustrative example, consider the way Chinese immigrants were treated during the gold rushes ~1850-1900. Though the situation is somewhat different; I'd contend that if Maori were being compensated only for past misdeeds, descendants of Chinese immigrants from that time should be also. (But of course Chinese people are in a higher socioeconomic group than Maori).

[Warning: speculation rife in the following paragraph] So, the NZ government pays Maori because it's a politically acceptable (politically beneficial, probably) way to provide Maori with some stimulus to increase their socioeconomic standing. I expect that had Maori been able to summon the socioeconomic standing (and corresponding political power) earlier they would've received compensation earlier. Had they never had a relatively lower socioeconomic standing they may never have felt aggrieved as a result of wrong-doings and not pursued payment at all.

An aside: Another complicating factor in the NZ situation is that the legal basis of Crown ownership of NZ is somewhat shaky. There appears to have been some "mistranslation" that occurred in the Treaty of Waitangi, meaning Maori believe they are the sovereign owners of NZ, while The Crown believes it is.

Re: Royal pardon for codebreaker Alan Turing

#134

Post by 3am »

alan_cx wrote: post #71

This is politically motivated nonsense. At right wing government trying to prove its not homophobic. Yes the Queen issued the pardon, but it wont have been done without the government being consulted. Pardoning one person like this when thousands suffered is an insult. They should have either pardoned everyone who was convicted under these laws, or none of them. Favouring one man because of his historical significanc…

I find it useful to ignore what motivations people have and focus on what they actually do. This is obviously a good thing - it was an immoral law and Turing deserves a pardon.

I also find it useful to not let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Just because Turing deserves even more honors and everyone prosecuted by that evil law deserves to be pardoned doesn't mean that we can't celebrate this one step.

Also, it's kind of selfish (even though he's dead) to feel that the conviction should have stood. This corrects an injustice, and it must be done, regardless of the arguable societal benefits otherwise.

Re: Royal pardon for codebreaker Alan Turing

#135

Post by infruset »

hahainternet wrote: post #127
infruset wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Granted. But still, symbolically, that's how it sounds, so maybe there's a problem with this system? What I mean is that even if it's done at the request of the government, that's only a description of the political backstage, but in public it is expressed as the monarchy's doing ("royal" pardon).

> so maybe there's a problem with this system? There are many problems. When you find a better system to replace it with, then let us know. Until then throwing away a millenia of history so we can have President Cameron sounds like hell to me.

Well, any democratic system in which no citizen is institutionally above every other citizen by mere reason of being born certainly seems better to me.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to troll. It's just that I would have a really hard time living in a country where such privileges by birth exist.

Re: Royal pardon for codebreaker Alan Turing

#136

Post by gizmo686 »

SimonPStevens wrote: post #126

What I find most intriguing about this is the how a law that was enforced only 50 years ago has so quickly become abhorrent to the majority of the population. It's an interesting thought experiment to consider which laws we routinely use today to punish people will become morally unacceptable in the next 50 years. Copyright and patent laws, and laws used against Snowden's whistle blowing are some obvious ones that ar…

The cases you cite seem fundamentally different from the anti-gay laws under discussion. Copyright and patent laws, even if we look back and say they were stupid, we would still be able to point to the problems that they were designed to solve (of which they have solved somewhat), and view them as a reasonable attempt. Similarly, we would recognize that humans driving cars was okay not because of of a poor moral system, but rather because we had no better alternative.

I suspect that some of the areas we will look back on in a similar way are drug laws and sex laws (we still have prostitution, child porn, and statutory rape, all of which seem immoral only in a cultural sense).

Re: Royal pardon for codebreaker Alan Turing

#138

Post by rmc »

lostlogin wrote: post #29
ska wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you may have hit on the crux of it. If any stronger repudiation were offered, would that be the government opening itself up to 25000 expensive lawsuits?

I hope so, it should pay, and heavily. If it was my tax pound I'd support this. The minimum amount of harm this discrimination caused is pretty high, and there is little than can be done to correct this. Financial compensation is about the best thing actually possible, so do it while the victims are still alive. The lame option of waiting until 99% of the victims are dead, then offering some kind of pardon is vastly…

How far back would you be willing to go? The UK has been around a long time. Witch burnings in the middle ages? Land confiscation in Ireland in the 17th Century? Abuses of The East India Company in India? The Harrowing of the North by William the Conqueror in the 11th century?

Re: Royal pardon for codebreaker Alan Turing

#139

Post by rmc »

SimonPStevens wrote: post #126

What I find most intriguing about this is the how a law that was enforced only 50 years ago has so quickly become abhorrent to the majority of the population. It's an interesting thought experiment to consider which laws we routinely use today to punish people will become morally unacceptable in the next 50 years. Copyright and patent laws, and laws used against Snowden's whistle blowing are some obvious ones that ar…

I think trans rights are something that in 50 years time will be like gay rights now. We'll look back 50 years to today and think the treatment by society of trans people was barbaric.

In 50 years time Chelsea Manning might get an apology because medication she needed wasn't given to her in prison.

Re: Royal pardon for codebreaker Alan Turing

#140

Post by mcv »

acheron wrote: post #18

75,000 men were convicted under the same law, of whom 26,000 are still alive. [1] Only Turing has been "pardoned". My understanding [2] is that the "pardon" implies there was nothing wrong with the law as such, just that Turing is forgiven for having broken it. So while I guess this is better than nothing, I don't know if it's really the way to go about it. [1] http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201314/ldhans…

It's a step. A few years ago, they apologized for it, and people responded by demanding a pardon. Now there's a pardon. Maybe in a few years they'll pardon and apologize to everybody else who was convicted under that law.

Only a time machine can change what happened, but every gesture is something. It can't be made right, but acknowledgement of the wrong is still good.

Post reply on HN