the first two paragraphs basically doesn't give any context.

Than you are soo deep into that it becomes very niche.

There is plenty of space between black and white.

I have taste just no skill in drawing. I don't need an artist, i need a graphics designer and now i can replace a graphics designer with GenAI.

Plenty of Artists can draw very well, but what they learn in the industry is to learn to draw for someone else in an aligned art style etc. That has nothing to do with Art.

Very few people earn there living with being artists.

Its the same thing with all the other people. Look at masterpieces of woodworkers etc. They look interesting, nice but they normall just work for someone else doing their craft not their art.

So the Nobel commite was wrong to decide this because you think otherwise?

Interesting. Any more indepth analys about this?

Btw. you don't just build AlphaFold by doing only 'computers'. Take a look at any good docmentary about it and you will see that they do discuss chemistry on a deep level

Deepmind isn't a chemistry company. Demiss Hassabis isn't a chemist. A tool they developed in their area may turn out to be useful in Chemistry. They may spend some relatively short time and effort to apply their tool to Chemistry. They can do the same thing in many areas in every few years and collect all the Nobel's in many areas. That effort is worth for a prize but the context is different.

It is possible that some committee members might have raised this same concern in their discussions.

relatively short : in comparison to real chemists, whose work is the basis for this development.

This is my first interaction in Hackernews, and I was expecting a more polite discussion. I just expressed my idea. You could ask for my explanations.

You didn't start a discussion with a good argument from begin with though.

And i personally really think if people from a different field, jump into a new field and revolutionize it, a nobel price is not a bad thing to appreciate this effort.