I thought the Colossus which was ran at Bletchley Park -also during WWII- was the "first" computer. Was the Colossus still classified when that interview was conducted or is this a case of different "firsts" (eg Colossus being the first electrical computer, but Harvard Mark I (I think they said she was the operator of) was the first computer of another specification?
It's largely a toss-up, as neither was fully Turing-complete. In principle Zuse's Z3 completed in 1941 was fully programmable, but no-one realised it at the time, and writing arbitrary programs on it involves using a hack which apparently wouldn't have been suitable for real use anyway. (Nonetheless, Zuse had started work on his high-level language http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plankalk%C3%BCl during the war.) The earlier Bell Labs machines and the ABC weren't fully programmable either. Babbage's Analytical Engine would have been Turing-complete but had never been built. The old Computer Museum documentary Computer Pioneers - Pioneer Computershttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qundvme1Tik&list=PL14396C9538... is pretty good.
She said something about Mark I being the first such computer in the United States, but I think the gist is true anyway, that people employed at least in the practical aspects of computing at that time were learning a lot as they went along.
Oh totally. And each computer was significantly different so while some knowledge was transferable, a lot may not have been.
Sorry if it came across as if I was undermining Graces achievements. I really didn't mean it that way at all. I was just enquiring about the classifications of early 'computers' and which came first as computers back then differed quite substantially from now and even from each other, so you get several different machines that claim to be the 'first' for various different reasons.
Very interesting - I've heard of this story before, but this was the first time I've seen an image of the notes, with the bug taped on it.
It is odd the phrasing used, in the original note: "first actual case of bug being found".
That makes me think of a couple of things:
1. Perhaps some of them were already referring to program errors as "bugs", or
2. They suspected before that bugs in the relays may be the cause of errors, but this is the first time it was confirmed.
A bit off-topic, but not too much: my kids, and all their friends, do not refer to programs or games as having "bugs" or being "buggy". The vernacular they all use (5th grade up through 9th grade) is "glitch"; e.g. the game has a glitch, or this program is glitchy, etc. I don't think I've heard them say "bug" very often, if at all, and I wonder if this is a new trend wider than just my kids and their immediate peers.
"Glitch" is the standard word in the world of video games, and as you might imagine it tends to refer to the dynamic aspects of the bug rather than the static, as this is what is immediate to the player. This is reflected in the fact that "glitch" is commonly used as a verb as well as a noun: "I was glitching the shit out of GTA last night, it was awesome." An encouraging sign for future hackers I'm sure you'll agree.
Many people, myself included had formative experiences with computers by abusing and exploiting video game glitches, as a kid it was like peeling back the edge of reality. I think you can see the connection here to the phrase "glitch in the matrix." It got to the point where I was pulling cartridges halfway out of their slot while the game was running in order to walk through walls. Halcyon days...
Yes, the first thing I thought of was "glitch in the matrix", and subsequently watched "The Matrix" with my 2 eldest children, which they enjoyed (event though to them it is an "old-time movie").
I think of glitches in terms of cartridge games, and encoded video. To me (and this is subjective of course), a glitch is not due to a programming error per se, but rather to an external influence (improper cartridge insertion, video stream interrupted, etc..) cause odd behavior.
I'm convinced that the definition of the word "glitch" is somewhat onomatopoeic. The strange feeling it creates in your mouth when you say it, with its abundant consonants feels like it reflects the artefacts it describes.
It's a nice story, but for an even earlier bug look at the first 'program' written by Ada Lovelace and Charles Babbage. In one of Lovelace's letters to Babbage she mentions finding errors in their 'table and diagram' (the program): http://i.imgur.com/zxOya1n.png
That's why it says, "first actual case of bug being found". The term bug was used before, even before Ada. Grace Hopper talks about the situation as humorous because they found an 'actual' bug this time.
I bet she never complained about the computer industry or navy being sexist and dominated by males. Even if she did, it seems like she coped rather well.
Regardless, I'm confused what your point is here. It seems like you're implying that modern women complain too much about sexism and the majority of men in the workplace. To this... I encourage you to look, well, pretty much anywhere on the web to see its veracity:
I don't know about you, but as a man in CS, I'd rather attract women to come to tech rather than ostracize them or marginalize them. I don't want my workplace to become a frat.
I wasn't aware that the gender balance was tipped towards the female side for so long. Thanks for the information.
I agree with your final point, but to be honest in my personal experience, I've only encountered one case of sexism in my career, and the man in question was frowned upon pretty universally for his remarks. All in all, I've seen women treated with the same amount of respect respect (and generally more kindness and less petty rivalry) then their male counterparts.
A lot of the stories I read about sexism in the tech industry seem to complain about problems that aren't really there (most recently, a parent complaining that teachers should enforce positive discrimination for females in computer science classes to attract a more balanced gender palette).
I agree that it would be nice to attract more female coworkers to the programming craft, much like it would probably be nice to attract more male nurses into healthcare.
But I'm rather annoyed at the "big deal" people seem to be making of this (as far as I've experienced) mostly imaginary gender discrimination problem in our field. It could be that this problem is geologically clustered (I don't live in the US), and the problem is really much bigger in other parts of the world, but from where I'm standing, women don't have it worse than men in my profession.
I expect you've only noticed one case of sexism. That only one case was overt enough that, despite being a man, it affected you. Many women in the field have countless stories of discrimination. The article I think you're referring to was a parent complaining about a teacher not reacting to harassment and bullying her daughter was receiving simply for being female in a computer science class. To the extent that her daughter no longer wanted to study computer science. That's a far cry from arguing in favor of "positive discrimination".
But here's the thing: it doesn't really matter what you have or haven't experienced. What matters are the experiences of the people being discriminated against. As I said, these stories are everywhere; if someone says they were made to feel a certain way (such as: unwelcome) it's not your prerogative to question whether that was a valid way to feel.
Privilege is a concept used in anti-racist, anti-sexist, and similar anti-oppression movements.
Anti-oppressionists use "privilege" to describe a set of perceived advantages (or lack of disadvantages) enjoyed by a majority group, who are usually unaware of the privilege they possess. It is a term of art that may not align particularly well with the general-use word "privilege" or the programming term "privilege".
A privileged person is not necessarily prejudiced (sexist, racist, etc) as an individual, but may be part of a broader pattern of -ism even though unaware of it. *
The key point here is "usually unaware of the privilege they possess."
There was a reason for many years I invented a gender neutral first name for myself to use online in place of my birth first name -- to avoid harassment and exceptionalism [http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Exceptionalism]
Viewing privilege as something possessed by all individuals of the superficially-structurally-favored class is a dangerous, and potentially counterproductive concept. Racist, sexist, and other group-biased social structures often constrain and disadvantage individual members of the notionally "priveleged" class -- particularly those least interested in preserving the bias.
Insofar as their is real privilege, it belongs to those whose desires align with the role assigned to their class, but even that notion of privilege has some danger, because to a certain extent those desires can be shaped and constrained by the structural bias.
But, more to the point, simply asserting that any argument against the existence of privilege by those in the class asserted by those claiming to be advantaged by a structural bias is invalid because part of the concept of privilege is that those who hold it are often unaware of it is fundamentally flawed.
(Also, the use of "majority" when the intent is to refer to the structurally-favored class is problematic; apartheid South Africa is a good example of this problem in regard to discussion of racism, but its a problem with sexism, too, unless you are asserting that the female sex is the structurally-advantage group, which is inconsistent with your reference to male privilege.)
>Racist, sexist, and other group-biased social structures often constrain and disadvantage individual members of the notionally "priveleged" class -- particularly those least interested in preserving the bias.
Agreed. I'm not saying everything is black and white. It's a generic concept.
>use of "majority" when the intent is to refer to the structurally-favored class is problematic
A minority group is a sociological category within a demographic. Rather than a relational "social group", as the term would indicate, the term refers to a category that is differentiated and defined by the social majority, that is, those who hold the majority of positions of social power in a society. The differentiation can be based on one or more observable human characteristics, including, for example, ethnicity, race, gender, wealth, health or sexual orientation. Usage of the term is applied to various situations and civilizations within history, despite its popular mis-association with a numerical, statistical minority. In the social sciences, the term "minority" is used to refer to categories of persons who hold few positions of social power and whose position in society is underprivileged.
The grandparent sounds like he [I can assume that it is a he, but I don't usually use gendered pronouns with an unknown speaker] is speaking from a very privileged prospective of not experiencing sexism himself, thus not realizing it is there.
I went to college in the late 1980s and early 1990s, and I can testify that about 30-40% of the CS students were female. And even then some people were expressing concern about how male-dominated the field was becoming.
[A]pparently in 1987, 42% of software developers were women, and computer programming was considered a female position in the 1960's.
Yes, and those female programmers in the 1960s were referred to in ads that said things like "What has sixteen legs, eight waggly tongues, and costs you at least $40,000 a year?" In those days programming was considered a menial and lightweight clerical task -- perfect for "women's work". Once we realized that programming was actually hard, the boys took over.
That's not what I meant. I meant that as soon as the men realized it was challenging work, they decided it was men's work and worked to keep women out of it.
Grace Hopper joined the Navy in the WAVES program during World War II. WAVES stands for Women Accepted for Volunteer Emergency Service. According to Wikipedia[1]
WAVES on 30 July 1942 was established as a World War II division of the U.S. Navy, that consisted entirely of women in the 1940s, but on 12 June 1948, women gained permanent status in the armed services of the United States. The name was the acronym for "Women Accepted for Volunteer Emergency Service"[1] (as well as an allusion to ocean waves). The word "emergency" implied that the acceptance of women was due to the unusual circumstances of World War II, and at the end of the war the women would not be allowed to continue in Navy careers, but it or its successors continued for decades afterwards.
Within their first year, the WAVES were 27,000 strong. A large proportion of the WAVES did clerical work, but some took positions in the aviation community, medical professions, communications, intelligence, storekeeper, science and technology.
The WAVES could not serve aboard combat ships or aircraft, and initially were restricted to duty in the continental United States. Late in World War II, they were authorized to serve in certain U.S. possessions, and a number were sent to Hawaii. The war ended before any WAVES could be sent to other locations.
It wasn't until six years after WAVES was formed on June 12 1948, women gained permanent status in the armed services. Grace Hopper absolutely wouldn't have been welcome in the Navy if it wasn't for World War II. After WWII they let woman continue in the armed services since they were already there, and they were providing some vital roles, and HEY THE WORLD DIDN'T END AFTER ALL.
Does it even matter? I don't get why you would bring gender into this discussion to begin with. Yes she had her genitals on the inside, but by focusing on that issue rather than the actual subject matter, you're perpetuating the notion that there's a difference between male and female operators. And by saying "I bet she never complained" you're demeaning women as much as the small minded men who feel the need to insult their peers because of their gender.
So can we please stop beating the old gender topic and just get on with our jobs as equals.
> I bet she never complained about the computer industry or navy being sexist and dominated by males. Even if she did, it seems like she coped rather well.
However, I'm having trouble coping with the endless stream of idiotic sexist bullshit I hear from certain HN posters.
I'm in the Navy. While it's not nearly as bad as it used to be, the Navy is the military branch that made Tailhook famous, and the recent Article 32 hearing held at the Washington Navy Yard for the Academy sexual assault case shows that there is still a long way to go before we can say that sexism isn't a problem in the Navy.
The rallying cry of male chauvinist pigs everywhere. "A few women have managed to succeed despite the massive number of artificial obstacles we put in their path, so the rest of you should just quit whining."
