WTF. That's a fucking ignorant remark.
You know, I'm having a bit of a bad day, so there's more venom in me than there normally is. And I might sometimes hesitate to attack a person for being stupid, since I might have committed an isomorphic stupidity myself.
But today, I am not going to care, I am just going to vent. Right now, I feel contempt for the arrogant ignorance of whoever said that. Lacking context, it's hard to know exactly where they are coming from. Is it some transhumanist, whose definition of "something important" reduces to research on life extension / nanotechnology / artificial intelligence / whatever activities it is whose importance they appreciate? Is it just someone, as one comment suggests, who uses applied math rather than working in pure math?
Could it be a comment, not about math, but about the sort of math that wins the Fields Medal? Possible, but unlikely. Anyway, this will be the core of my rebuttal: progress in math is progress in expanding what's thinkable. There was a time when we didn't have the concept of chaos theory, or sets, or calculus, or... by god the remark is so retarded, it reduces me to tumblr levels of illiterate vituperation.
Yeah. It's quite retarded in the context as well. Bostrom's basically going on and on of how it is crunch time for the philosophy to solve eternal questions of ethics and such, and how this specific philosophy is so much more important.
Let's say someone actually solved those eternal questions.
To be specific, let's say we understood suffering. We can look at a description of a physical system, and then tell how much suffering that system is experiencing.
What does he think such answer would even look like? Picture a piece of paper, it has the answer on it, ...
http://www.mathunion.org/general/prizes/2014
On August 13, 2014, at the opening ceremony of the [International Congress of Mathematicians](http://www.icm2014.org)) the Fields Medals, the Nevanlinna Prize and several other prizes were announced.
A full list of awardees with short citations:
Fields medals:
Artur Avila
Quanta Magazine on Artur Avila
Manjul Bhargava
Quanta Magazine on Manjul Bhargava
Martin Hairer
Quanta Magazine on Martin Hairer
Maryam Mirzakhani
Quanta Magazine on Maryam Mirzakhani
Nevalinna prize:
Subhash Khot
Quanta Magazine on Subhash Khot
Gauss Prize:
Stanley Osher
Chern Medal Award:
Phillip Griffiths
Leelavati Prize:
Adrián Paenza
In addition to that, Georgia Benkart was announced as the 2014 ICM Emmy Noether lecturer.
It might be interesting to note a curious fact about the new group of Fields medalists:
However, this unusual diversity of nationalities does not necessarily translate into a corresponding diversity of institutions, since (according to wikipedia) three out of four winners work in (or at least are affiliated with) universities that have already had awardees in the past.
Some notes on the works by Fields medalists can be found on Terence Tao's blog.
A related discussion on Hacker News.