Anonymous at Mon, 14 Oct 2024 13:46:32 UTC No. 16430872

>>16430850
I'm pretty sure they've done more for science than you ever will. If it make scientifically illiterate, anti-science rednecks and internet conspiracy theorist seethe, then so be it.

Anonymous at Mon, 14 Oct 2024 13:50:47 UTC No. 16430879

>>16430872
False dichotomy. Neither OP nor anyone else here claims they deserve a Nobel Prize. OP's claim is that there are scientists better deserving of a Nobel than the business dudes running a company with models that impress normie.

Anonymous at Mon, 14 Oct 2024 14:11:49 UTC No. 16430915

Well, Alphafold wouldn’t happen without the Google Deepmind AI tech so yes AI is important.

Anonymous at Mon, 14 Oct 2024 14:49:55 UTC No. 16430993

>>16430850
Don’t know about chemistry, but everyone in my physics department jumped on the AI hype train for those sweet grants. It was one of the reasons I quit. If a retard from the DoE sees the magic word on a grant proposal, the proposal gets approved. If you have an original proposal but dare not use the sacred Omnissiah, then forget about the money. It particularly egregious in my subfield of HEP theory. We’ve got idiot professors literally cooking up data to “investigate” mathematical structures that the AI shouldn’t touch with a 10 ft pole. Shit like investigating string vacua by basically pointing at the sky 10 gazillion times and pushing the choices through a black box. It gets even worse when you realize that physicists shove rigor up their asses when doing math and end up with nonsensical results due to singular operators. My friend in numerical analysis constantly seethes at having to work with engineers and physicists who make these banal mistakes.

Anonymous at Mon, 14 Oct 2024 14:56:42 UTC No. 16431010

>>16430993
lol during covid people would slap that into any wildlife/agricultural research for free grant bux.
>uh yeah I'm testing white-tailed deer for covid lol please fund my lab

Anonymous at Mon, 14 Oct 2024 18:19:29 UTC No. 16431479

>>16430850
The nobel has been fraudulent for a long time
notable example include, obama and kissinger getting the peace prize or the medical award going to lobotomies it was never limited to the social fields

Anonymous at Mon, 14 Oct 2024 18:27:33 UTC No. 16431501

>>16431479

The recent award for the covid vaccine research is further proof that all prizes in all categories are compromised, not just the silly categories (peace, literature). It should be brought up much more frequently in any discussion which correctly identifies the Nobel as the sham prize that it is.

Anonymous at Tue, 15 Oct 2024 12:16:14 UTC No. 16432770

>>16431501
I think there is bigger awareness of it than ever. We know about Noble disease (aka Nobel laurates being fucking idiots in other domains yet pushing their crazy theories because of their status and fame), this year's results in physics were heavily criticised in even very normie spaces like reddit science subs and by youtubers like Sabine Hossenfelder. So yeah, I think the prize will lose its status in the next few years.

Anonymous at Tue, 15 Oct 2024 18:36:59 UTC No. 16433280

>>16430850
>not even scientists but CEO
Nigger, are you serious? Have you atleast read his wiki page?

Anonymous at Tue, 15 Oct 2024 19:11:05 UTC No. 16433341

>>16433280
>anon gets his pp wet because Demis is smart
ok and? he's not a working scientist and definitely not a chemist. stop simping for him, he won't let you fuck him.
He's a CEO who supervised creating a tool that is still a black box so it's absurd to give the prize to him. Even with AlphaFold, protein folding still isn’t solved. Just because the model can predict structure from sequence, it doesn’t mean we have any new insight into what causes a protein to fold the way that it does. And the Nobel prize should be given to researchers who expand our knowledge of their fields. AlphaFold has the potential to be incredibly useful, but we didn’t gain any new knowledge of how proteins fold from it.

Anonymous at Tue, 15 Oct 2024 20:58:59 UTC No. 16433444

>>16433341
>he's not a working scientist
He has a PHD, was working at MIT and he definitely took a part in creation of alphafold.
>definitely not a chemist
Turns out you don't have to be a chemist to influence chemistry.
> but we didn’t gain any new knowledge of how proteins fold from it.
Well I'm going to appeal to authority and say that nobel committee thinks otherwise.

Anonymous at Tue, 15 Oct 2024 21:46:47 UTC No. 16433477

>>16432770

please let the nobel die jesus fucking christ

>>16433444

>appeal to authority
source: bro just trust the committee!

Anonymous at Tue, 15 Oct 2024 22:16:38 UTC No. 16433511

>>16433477
more like, "source: the committee".
form your own science club, faggot.

Anonymous at Tue, 15 Oct 2024 22:53:10 UTC No. 16433572

>>16430850
Every nobel comes with a $1 million award. Make of that what you will.

Anonymous at Wed, 16 Oct 2024 06:19:51 UTC No. 16433988

>>16430879
The models achieve scientific progress, e.g. >>16430915

I agree that the prize itself should go to the actual researchers though and not the businessbros

Anonymous at Wed, 16 Oct 2024 06:40:39 UTC No. 16433999

>>16433988
I'm interested what serious progress in chemistry has been enabled by alphafold. A quick google search indicates that zero drugs have been discovered using alphafold. It might be a useful technique but it seems a little early for a Nobel prize.

Certainly nothing important has happened in physics due to any kind of machine learning. It might be useful to optimise this or that but there are physics algorithms like DMRG that have had a much larger impact and no meme prize.

Anonymous at Wed, 16 Oct 2024 06:49:03 UTC No. 16434001

You guys still haven't noticed that science is dead? lmao
All good students and PhDs leave for the industry, earn cash and watch it all burn.

Anonymous at Wed, 16 Oct 2024 06:50:33 UTC No. 16434003

>>16430915
>>16433988
AlphaFold isn't science you dipshits.

Anonymous at Wed, 16 Oct 2024 06:53:35 UTC No. 16434007

>>16430850
the nobel price committee has been paid off since at least 2019, it is known

Anonymous at Wed, 16 Oct 2024 06:58:55 UTC No. 16434015

>>16430872
>I'm pretty sure they've done more for science than you ever will.
For computer science, not for chemistry and physics

Anonymous at Wed, 16 Oct 2024 07:02:25 UTC No. 16434017

>>16434015
CS will solve all the sciences. CSfags were right all along

Anonymous at Wed, 16 Oct 2024 10:52:10 UTC No. 16434180

>>16433444
You don't have to trust, it's simply a matter of knowing a thing or two about chemistry and not being a freaking idiot. Alphafold is like the rest of the AI: it spews something without explaining how it works. It's not a matter of opinion lol.

Anonymous at Wed, 16 Oct 2024 12:01:57 UTC No. 16434248

>>16434180
>it spews something without explaining how it works
Why is this bad? The point of science is predicting the results of experiments, explanations are not part of the scientific method

Anonymous at Wed, 16 Oct 2024 19:45:31 UTC No. 16435045

>>16434248
>The point of science is predicting the results of experiments
That's quite specifically NOT what science is about.

Anonymous at Wed, 16 Oct 2024 19:55:20 UTC No. 16435066

>>16430850
Science isn't fucked, the Nobel awards are

Anonymous at Wed, 16 Oct 2024 19:58:36 UTC No. 16435074

>>16430850
Yes sir you figured it out science is dead theoretical physics killed it. Anons We must revive the sciences.