Yes, that's how I usually explain programming to someone unexperienced with it. A computer programming language is usually more strictly defined, but depending on compiler and architecture results can differ in computer progamming as well.
Well, most modern cryptography is based on assumptions that can not be proven, so having different standards based on different assumptions is probably the only way to safeguard against if one of the assumptions would be proven false in the future.
Assuming you have the Decryption oracle is the same as assuming you have the key in your example, so you are just saying a OTP is vulnerable if you have the key. This is true for any encryption scheme that I can think of.
If you look at the work related death rate among workers in the US the number is 0.035 per 1000 people. So if the deaths are work related, it is a huge number compared to the US at least.
I think it would be pretty easy to enforce a quota among the Nobel Prize cadidates, your example really does not apply to that. The question is more about whether it is a good or a bad thing.
One of Sweden's biggest grocery stores / supermarkets, Coop [1], is keeping all their 800 physical stores closed today, since their payment system is not working because of an IT-attack somewhere in their supply chain [2]. Connected to this attack?