Hacker News Reader

Comment by mjburgess | Hacker News Reader

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

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...

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.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com