10,000 People Sign Petition to Honor Alan Turing by Putting Him on the £10 Note | Hacker News Reader

10,000 People Sign Petition to Honor Alan Turing by Putting Him on the £10 Note

theatlantic.com

209 pointsNoBorders36 comments

Not sure I value the positioning of ones face on currency as many do. But I do love the man and while I'm here I'll leave this peculiar bit of foresight from him which reminds me of Siri:

"One day ladies will take their computers for walks in the park and tell each other, "My little computer said such a funny thing this morning."

The petition, for any UK readers who might wish to sign it. http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/31659

A cultural note: Most online petitions are worthless useless spammy nonsense.

UK epetitions are different, because with enough signatures (currently 100,000) the topic becomes eligible for debate in parliament.

I wouldn't say that most online petitions are worthless. Rather people's signatures are useless if the petition is targeted for UK (as in this case) and people from USA sign it.

All you really get with a UK e-petition after 100,000 votes is it being sent to some low-end bureaucrat who may (or may not) forward it to the 'Backbench Business Committee'.

There have only been a couple of issues that have been taken seriously in parliament through e-petitions.

First was the details of the Hillsborough disaster and second was taking away state benefits from those convicted during the London riots.

Britain can never do enough to make right the wrongs it inflicted on Alan Turing, but it should never stop trying.

There are priceless things, but for the rest, money represent the ability of humanity to communicate and exchange economic value so I often think about them as a symbol of what we've managed to achieve since the ancient times. And just like we evolved to exchange promissory value on a piece of paper, humanity made huge progress in self-governance and mutual respect. From the dawn ages of absolute kingdoms we've evolved to constitutional monarchies and democratic republics. We've abolished slavery, enabled universal voting in most parts of the world and probably in some decades almost everyone will have the right to marry the person they love.

Alan Turing was among the most brilliant persons of his time, yet in his society he ended up injected with estrogen, which left him impotent (he also developed breasts and one year after this therapy he used cyanide to kill himself - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing ). If you're in UK, please sign this petition. It would be a huge honor to have on the very symbol of economic exchange Alan's face - a memory of our wrong-doings and of the progress that we made until now and the one that is yet to come.

It is progressive to have a gay computer scientist and mathematician on a note. A lot of current British national identity and history is built around WW2, so "fought the Nazis" will also help the chances.

I've always been quite proud of having Darwin there, perhaps a commemorative note?

Darwin is not really related to computer science, but without Georges Booles, computers do not have existed ever.

Why does the profession of the individual dictate if they can be on a note?

Specifically, how would Darwin's lack of computer skills matter in this debate at all? I'm confused.

My comment was not about having someone on a note but having a programmer/computer scientist on a note. Darwin is not related to Turing while Booles is. Ideally we should have Booles on the front of the note and Turing on the back.

Ah, that was not immediately obvious to me that both Darwin and Turing would be on the note. I could see them both being there as progressive scientists. Here in the US, we only have one person (usually a former president) on our notes, and a reminder of our religion on the back.

So, leg up with Darwin already.

I just think Turing is a great choice to troll the religious conservatives - replacing a creationist with a homosexual.

You can be religious and still accept homosexuality. It's a shame it even gets brought up. Let us remember Turing for being a great Mathematician.

I think his homosexuality mainly gets brought up because of the manner of his death.

For instance, John Nash was apparently stripped of his security clearances due to being caught soliciting men in toilets, which wasn't even alluded to in the Hollywood version, but given that he wasn't then arrested and driven to suicide and furthermore is still alive and re-married (so we have to be 'sensitive' about him), this is not overly dwelt on by those who seek to tell his story.

Maybe you meant "evolutionist"?

I'm fairly certain Darwin was an Evolutionist rather than a Creationist ;-)

Also I don't think the UK really has the same caliber of religious conservatives as the US (I don't recall creationism being a thing there, for example)

No - we came up with this really clever plan to get rid of most of the religous nutcases in the late 17th century.

The UK is considerable less religious than the USA. The UK Conservative Party (i.e. the right wing party), are in favour of open, equal marraige. The current Conversative Prime Minister has stated he supports gay marriage because he's a conservative. The established church of the UK (sort of the Church of England (also Church of Ireland, Church in Wales, Scottish one who's name I've forgotten)), has gay bishops.

A quick tutorial for UK/American readers:

The UK has an official state religion - but nobody (including it's bishops) mentions God because people would think they were mad. The US bans all links between the state and religion - so all politicians must mention God at all times or people would think they are mad.

In the UK "conservatives" are a moderately right of centre party that believe in lower taxes and lower spending. In the US "conservatives" are people who don't believe in electricity.

The current Series E £5 and £10 note are due for replacement anyway. The £20 and £50 notes are already Series F.

Traditionally the famous person depicted on the banknote is changed with each series: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banknotes_of_the_pound_sterling...

I wish Tommy Flowers contribution got more recognition too - maybe they could put him on a fiver?

I like having Darwin on the £10, but I'd like to have Turing on a note as well. Maybe the £5 would be better, though that would mean getting rid of Elizabeth Fry, who I believe is the only woman currently on the currency (except Her Majesty of course), which may upset some people. The other options are the 20 and 50, which have Adam Smith and Boulton and Watt, respectively.

I took the £10 note to be a binary pun.

They are "retiring" Darwin and will be replacing him with someone else anyway. May as well make it Alan Turing.

Let's start similar petition for Donald Knuth in the US.

and introduce a 3.14$ cut ?

Maybe, maybe... But then we'd have to arrange things so that the rate of inflation decreases every year in such a way that the value of the note converges to pi dollars.

I realize you were trying to be cute but comparing the two individuals in this context is tacky and makes light of the terrible manner in which Turing was treated. Until our society advances more I think it is best to avoid using homophobia as the basis of a witty remark...

The context of this is "put a famous mathematician on the £10" so it hardly makes light of anything.

So the impetus behind this is purely to recognize Turing's contribution to math?

Obviously not, it's near impossible to get into a discussion about Alan Turing without bringing up the way he was treated. However British money already features scientists (Turing, if selected, will replace Darwin) and this has far more to do with recognizing Turing's accomplishments than his treatment.

There are many people who think that it's a good idea to feature scientists on money and making that suggestion for US money isn't in anyway taking Turing's treatment lightly.

You honestly think that months after the pardon refusal this has more to do with recognizing his math/sci accomplishments than his treatment? Is the atlantic in the minority for mentioning "moral turpitude" before enigma?

If that's the case it seems like waiting a little while and letting the pardon refusal fade from recent memory would be a more effective advocacy tactic.

Yes absolutely. If he made no discoveries at all we wouldn't even know who he was.

Do you honestly believe that using this discussion as a starting point for a general discussion on having scientists on money is insensitive?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com