From jaasuo at utu.fi Sun Feb 1 01:40:03 2009 From: jaasuo at utu.fi (Jaakko Suominen) Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2009 08:40:03 +0200 Subject: [SIGCIS-Members] Another question - "Giant Brains" In-Reply-To: References: <000001c9838d$850fea90$0301a8c0@evan> <498489AC.3020204@umn.edu> <8bc235380901311249u26f384ccyd77b7f1347384378@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <498543C3.7040103@utu.fi> Dear all, For two early advertisements of "Steel Brains" from Finland, see the following urls: http://users.utu.fi/jaasuo/tietokoneen-takapuoli/brunsviga1.gif http://users.utu.fi/jaasuo/tietokoneen-takapuoli/brunsviga2.gif Both of them are advertisements of Brunsviga calculators. The first one, from the year 1909 advertises in Swedish, for example: "Calculator! Why not to use a Brain of Steel, who never be tired." All the best, Jaakko Suominen, professor of digital culture, University of Turku, Finland http://www.tuug.fi/~jaakko/ From johnlaprise2008 at u.northwestern.edu Sun Feb 1 01:49:39 2009 From: johnlaprise2008 at u.northwestern.edu (John Laprise) Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2009 00:49:39 -0600 Subject: [SIGCIS-Members] Information Automation Message-ID: <014601c98439$431fce50$c95f6af0$@northwestern.edu> In 1969, National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger order the National Security Council to initiate an "information automation" project and this led to the introduction of computers to the White House. Interested parties can email me.my soon to be completed dissertation is on the adoption of computers and the origins of information policy in the White House during the 1970's. John Laprise Doctoral Candidate Media, Technology, and Society Program School of Communication Northwestern University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://sigcis.org/pipermail/members/attachments/20090201/c4769396/attachment-0001.htm From johnlaprise2008 at u.northwestern.edu Sun Feb 1 01:56:12 2009 From: johnlaprise2008 at u.northwestern.edu (John Laprise) Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2009 00:56:12 -0600 Subject: [SIGCIS-Members] Another question - "Giant Brains" In-Reply-To: <8bc235380901311249u26f384ccyd77b7f1347384378@mail.gmail.com> References: <000001c9838d$850fea90$0301a8c0@evan> <498489AC.3020204@umn.edu> <8bc235380901311249u26f384ccyd77b7f1347384378@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <014b01c9843a$2d6604c0$88320e40$@northwestern.edu> I agree Tom. However, there is an important nuance in the whole idea of handling information. During the big iron era, computers were information handling machines; but a common perception the information was numerical. Computers were highly complex difference engines. The idea that computers could automate textual information seems to emerge later. John Laprise Doctoral Candidate Media, Technology, and Society Program School of Communication Northwestern University From: members-bounces at sigcis.org [mailto:members-bounces at sigcis.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Haigh Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2009 2:50 PM To: Subject: Re: [SIGCIS-Members] Another question - "Giant Brains" The title has great retro kitsch value, but I believe that "Giant Brains" popularized a more important phrase. Berkeley defined the computer as "a machine that handles information, transfers information from one part of the machine to another and has a flexible control over the sequence of its operation." This makes it special because transfers information automatically, doesn't need minute to minute instructions -this makes "a deep break with the past" even though "machines that handle information have existed for more than 200 years." So he situates the as one in a long lineof information handling machines going back to languages as "systems for handling information", nerve cells, cave paintings, books, etc as "physical equipment for handling information." That's the context in which it makes sense to call a computer a giant brain, not because both think but because both handle information. While Shannon's information theory had obvious relevance for people building digital computers, this is the earliest (1949) expansive framing I'm aware of for the computer as a universal information processing machine. I'd be interested to hear if anyone knows of an earlier one, but it's surely the earliest one to reach a mass general audience. Tom 2009/1/31 Allan Olley Hey, Just did a quick check on JSTOR on the Science Service's The Science News-letter (what I assume Bernadette Longo refered to). The term "mechanical brain" is used about three times in the 1930s for some kind of calculator or control system. First instance in 1930 for a planetarium's control system (The Science News-Letter, Vol. 17, No. 475 (May 17, 1930), pp. 312-313) and then in 1932 to describe Bush's Differential Analyzer (The Science News-Letter, Vol. 22, No. 606 (Nov. 19, 1932), p. 320), which is also called a mathematical brain. The phrase "electronic 'brain'" is used to refer to a computing gunsight in 1944 (The Science News-Letter, Vol. 46, No. 21 (Nov. 18, 1944), p. 326) Note that for example the press release by Harvard in 1944 for the IBM ASCC/Harvard Mark I refers to it as a "super-brain." (p. 124, Cohen, _Howard Aiken: Portrait of a computer pioneer_) So I think it is safe to say that the use of the word/analogy of brain to describe a computer was popular before Berkeley. The exact phrase "giant brain" is apparently not used anywhere in JSTOR's database (which is a number of scientific and other journals) before 1950 to describe machines... I did a quick check of the NY Times and found an article from 1947 with the following title "NEW GIANT 'BRAIN' DOES WIZARD WORK; Bureau of Standards Says It Can Solve Vast Mathematical Problems in a Few Minutes" August 25, 1947, Monday Page 19, 602 words. About the Bureau of Standards plans for machines,"giant "electronic brains"" refered to, so the title may be an abreviation of that. It is based off a U.P. newswire. However this is the only pre-1949 reference, so it hardly suggests it is a popular description. Refering to early computers as giant brains is a natural way to describe them given their size and previous practice and so the phrase was probably coined more than once (like many computer algorithms that have been invented multiple times). I suspect if you did a search of all searchable newspapers and other available sources you would find a few more instances of the phrase "giant brain" however it does seem to me like Berkeley popularized the description. -- Yours Truly, Allan Olley http://individual.utoronto.ca/fofound/ On Sat, 31 Jan 2009, Bernadette Longo wrote: > Hi all -- The term "giant brains" had also been used numerous times by > the Science Service Newsletter editor during the 1930s in terms of > earlier mechanical calculators. Ditto to Jim's comments...Bernadette > Longo > > James Cortada wrote: >> >> He popularized the term, although it is not clear to me that he was the >> first to utter it. The concept had been floating around since at least >> the mid-1930s in the form of mechanically augmenting thinking. based on >> what I read in the 1930s and 1940s, I would give him--or his book >> editor--credit for the phrase. This is similar to the problem we still >> have with the word automation. It was in use at Ford Motors in the late >> 1940s but nobody knew about it or used the phrase until John Diebold >> did when he used it as the title for a best selling book published in >> the early 1950s. He told me that he had gotten the word from Ford and >> his editor encouraged him to use in the title of the book. The only >> really clever book title he ever came up with for his 7+ books. His >> experience is what taught me to spend a lot of time thinking about the >> title of any book you publish, fighting and dialoguing with editors, >> marketing people, and others until you get it right. >> >> Jim (James) W. Cortada >> IBM Institute for Business Value >> 3001 West Beltline Highway >> Madison, WI 53713 USA >> jwcorta at us.ibm.com >> 608-270-4462 >> >> Inactive hide details for "Evan Koblentz" ---01/31/2009 04:20:10 >> AM---Was the term "Giant Brains" already popular when Edmund B"Evan >> Koblentz" ---01/31/2009 04:20:10 AM---Was the term "Giant Brains" >> already popular when Edmund Berkeley used it in his 1949 book title, or >> should he get credit for po >> >> >> From: "Evan Koblentz" >> >> To: >> >> Date: 01/31/09 04:20 AM >> >> Subject: [SIGCIS-Members] Another question - "Giant Brains" >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> >> >> Was the term "Giant Brains" already popular when Edmund Berkeley used >> it in his 1949 book title, or should he get credit for popularizing it? >> I'm mentioning the term in a footnote and want to be sure credit goes >> to the right source._______________________________________________ >> This email is relayed from members at sigcis.org, the email discussion >> list of SHOT SIGCIS. The list archives are at >> http://sigcis.org/pipermail/members/ and you can change your >> subscription options at http://sigcis.org/mailman/listinfo/members >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> This email is relayed from members at sigcis.org, the email discussion >> list of SHOT SIGCIS. The list archives are at >> http://sigcis.org/pipermail/members/ and you can change your >> subscription options at http://sigcis.org/mailman/listinfo/members > > _______________________________________________ This email is relayed from members at sigcis.org, the email discussion list of SHOT SIGCIS. The list archives are at http://sigcis.org/pipermail/members/ and you can change your subscription options at http://sigcis.org/mailman/listinfo/members -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://sigcis.org/pipermail/members/attachments/20090201/51e26840/attachment-0001.htm From sue.suethomas at gmail.com Sun Feb 1 11:34:37 2009 From: sue.suethomas at gmail.com (Sue Thomas) Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2009 08:34:37 -0800 Subject: [SIGCIS-Members] The development of language and metaphor in computing and the internet Message-ID: <4985cf24.232d400a.0d0d.ffffb305@mx.google.com> Dear all I've joined this list at the suggestion of Evan Koblenz, and it certainly looks like the place I need to be! I am a UK writer/academic from De Montfort University, England, and currently British Academy - funded Visiting Scholar in the Dept of English at the University of California at Santa Barbara (UCSB). I'm interested in the use of nature metaphors in the history of computing and the internet, e.g. surfing, clouds, fields, roots, etc. This is explained in full on my website http://www.thewildsurmise.com/ I have two requests: . I will be at UCSB until the end of April and I would be delighted to hear from any list members in California who worked on the development of computers and the internet and would like to share their own knowledge. I would be happy to visit you, speak on the phone, or just email - whatever works for you and where you are. . In general terms, I would be interested to hear about any other research in this area in any part of the world. I'm starting my research here but my enquiries will extend to other countries over the next couple of years. Thanks for your attention Best wishes Sue __________ Sue Thomas Professor of New Media, De Montfort University, Leicester, UK Currently Visiting Scholar, English Dept, University of California Santa Barbara http://www.thewildsurmise.com/ sue.suethomas at gmail.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://sigcis.org/pipermail/members/attachments/20090201/40e8d02f/attachment.htm From neil.barton at uclmail.net Sun Feb 1 11:40:47 2009 From: neil.barton at uclmail.net (Roger Neil Barton) Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2009 16:40:47 -0000 Subject: [SIGCIS-Members] Another question - "Giant Brains" References: <000001c9838d$850fea90$0301a8c0@evan> <498489AC.3020204@umn.edu> <8bc235380901311249u26f384ccyd77b7f1347384378@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Like others I've really enjoyed this string. In a piece of very scientific research on a cold Sunday afternoon I googled electronic brain and discovered an article from Nov 9, 1946 in the Surrey Comet newspaper, which covers Teddington where the NPL is located. It is discussing Turing's ACE machine under the headline "Electronic Brain to be made at Teddington" as an improvement on ENIAC. A few years ago I was lost when driving near Teddington, and when I stopped to look at a map looked up and saw the blue plaque where Alan Turing lived 1945-1947 before he went to Manchester. On then searching The Times for electronic brain between 1900 and 1950 I came across a speech by Lord Mountbatten, President of the British Institution of Radio Engineers, who on October 30 1946 appeared to use the term 'electronic brain', which was incorporated into the headline. (Lord Mountbatten was very high profile, the Queen's Uncle-in-Law (& cousin) and in WWII was Supreme Allied Commander of SE Asia, Vinegar Joe Stillwell's boss) There were a number of letters protesting the term electronic brain, including one from the Director of the NPL responsible for the ACE who ever so gently blamed Mountbatten. Another protest about the term was from Prof Hartree, Dir of the Cavendish Laboratory, Cambridge. On Feb 28 there was a CUP advertisement for Hartree's new book 'Calculating Machines' described as including 'an account of ENIAC, the so-called electronic brain'. Like to have been a fly on the wall when he next met his publisher! I've no idea whether or not Tom set the list up with the ability to accept attachments but if so you will see the result of these searches. kind regards neil Dr Roger Neil Barton Visiting Research Fellow, Institute of Historical Research http://www.uclmail.net/~neil.barton/ ----- Original Message ----- From: James Cortada To: Thomas Haigh Cc: members-bounces at sigcis.org ; members at sigcis.org Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2009 10:21 PM Subject: Re: [SIGCIS-Members] Another question - "Giant Brains" So much good dialogue has taken place today on this topic that I think we should ask Evan to consolidate all of this into a short article that goes into one of the back sections of the Annals or into an article in some media journal. If that works, there are a bunch of other things we could flush out from time to time using this social networking/wisdom of crowds approach. We might even expand Evan's assignment by discussing automation next weekend and then the following weekend cybernetics. Jim (James) W. Cortada -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://sigcis.org/pipermail/members/attachments/20090201/3fc03d74/attachment-0001.htm -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Electronic Brain Nov 1 1946.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 180065 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://sigcis.org/pipermail/members/attachments/20090201/3fc03d74/attachment-0001.pdf From G.J.N.Gooday at leeds.ac.uk Sun Feb 1 20:18:15 2009 From: G.J.N.Gooday at leeds.ac.uk (Graeme Gooday) Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 01:18:15 +0000 Subject: [SIGCIS-Members] Newlyn/Phillips Machine workshop, University of Leeds Tuesday 3rd Feb 2009 Message-ID: <7E4EBDE3BB52DB4FA8FD60DCE36B537D0106EEDA@HERMES4.ds.leeds.ac.uk> List members interested in the history of analog computing might want to take a look at the outline of a workshop below at Leeds University Business School on Tuesday 3rd Feb 2009. For further information about the project to redevelop the Leeds prototype of the Newlyn/Phillips machine, contact Dr Greg Radick G.M.Radick at leeds.ac.uk or Michael Finn, ph07maf at leeds.ac.uk ________________________________ The Newlyn/Phillips machine now displayed in Leeds University Business School is the original prototype of the hydraulic computer developed by A.W.B. Phillips of the London School of Economics and Professor Walter Newlyn of the University of Leeds for modelling macro-economic systems. The machine and its descendents were highly influential in the development of Keynesian economics in the 1950s, and are of interest to economics, to historians of computing, and to historians of science (hence the involvement of Mary Morgan in the program below). 1.30 - 3.00 Open Workshop. Chair Professor Giuseppe Fontana, Leeds University Business School 1. Introduction to the Leeds Machine Project. Dr Greg Radick (Centre for History and Philosophy of Science, University of Leeds) 2. "The Creation of the Newlyn/Phillips Hydraulic Machine" Professor Mary Morgan (LSE) Walter Newlyn's role in inventing the famous hydraulic model of the macro-economy known as the Phillips Machine has often been overlooked, yet his contributions to the machine's design and creation were as important as those of Bill Phillips. Phillips famously knew little economics, whereas Newlyn understood the circulation of money from his participation in the pre-War commodities market. This paper discusses how they combined their different expertises - and their shared pleasure in getting things to work - to create the first prototype, the Mark I machine, for Leeds (forerunner of the better-known Mark II machine, an example of which is housed in the London Science Museum). 3. "Resurrecting the Cambridge Machine", Dr Allan McRobie (Cambridge University Engineering Department) With objects of historical significance there is always a dynamic tension between conservation and restoration. Given the existence of the beautifully conserved Machine in the Science Museum, the decision was made by the Dept of Economics in Cambridge to restore their Machine to full working order, albeit with minimal intrusion on the original workings. Over the summer of 2003, Allan - with help from technicians in the Engineering Dept and advice from economists - undertook the refurbishment. The Cambridge Machine now works and - moreover - is safe to work with. Allan has since given many working demonstrations of the Machine to a wide variety of audiences. This short talk describes what was involved, with a view to assessing what might be involved in the Leeds Machine project. 3.00 - 4.00 Coffee / Visit to the Leeds Machine ________________________________________________________________________ __________________ Graeme Gooday, Professor of the History of Science and Technology & National Teaching Fellow Department of Philosophy Woodhouse Lane University of Leeds LEEDS LS2 9JT United Kingdom E-mail: g.j.n.gooday at leeds.ac.uk Phone: 0113 343 3274 FAX: 0113 343 3265 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://sigcis.org/pipermail/members/attachments/20090202/8f5cee10/attachment.htm From G.J.N.Gooday at leeds.ac.uk Sun Feb 1 21:21:25 2009 From: G.J.N.Gooday at leeds.ac.uk (Graeme Gooday) Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 02:21:25 +0000 Subject: [SIGCIS-Members] Newlyn/Phillips Machine workshop, University of Leeds Tuesday 3rd Feb 2009 In-Reply-To: <7E4EBDE3BB52DB4FA8FD60DCE36B537D0106EEDA@HERMES4.ds.leeds.ac.uk> References: <7E4EBDE3BB52DB4FA8FD60DCE36B537D0106EEDA@HERMES4.ds.leeds.ac.uk> Message-ID: <7E4EBDE3BB52DB4FA8FD60DCE36B537D0106EEE4@HERMES4.ds.leeds.ac.uk> Apologies to the list for the spurious 'high importance' status of my recent message below (that was just an artefact of a precursor version...) GG ________________________________ From: members-bounces at sigcis.org [mailto:members-bounces at sigcis.org] On Behalf Of Graeme Gooday Sent: 02 February 2009 01:18 To: members at sigcis.org Subject: [SIGCIS-Members] Newlyn/Phillips Machine workshop,University of Leeds Tuesday 3rd Feb 2009 Importance: High List members interested in the history of analog computing might want to take a look at the outline of a workshop below at Leeds University Business School on Tuesday 3rd Feb 2009. For further information about the project to redevelop the Leeds prototype of the Newlyn/Phillips machine, contact Dr Greg Radick G.M.Radick at leeds.ac.uk or Michael Finn, ph07maf at leeds.ac.uk ________________________________ The Newlyn/Phillips machine now displayed in Leeds University Business School is the original prototype of the hydraulic computer developed by A.W.B. Phillips of the London School of Economics and Professor Walter Newlyn of the University of Leeds for modelling macro-economic systems. The machine and its descendents were highly influential in the development of Keynesian economics in the 1950s, and are of interest to economics, to historians of computing, and to historians of science (hence the involvement of Mary Morgan in the program below). 1.30 - 3.00 Open Workshop. Chair Professor Giuseppe Fontana, Leeds University Business School 1. Introduction to the Leeds Machine Project. Dr Greg Radick (Centre for History and Philosophy of Science, University of Leeds) 2. "The Creation of the Newlyn/Phillips Hydraulic Machine" Professor Mary Morgan (LSE) Walter Newlyn's role in inventing the famous hydraulic model of the macro-economy known as the Phillips Machine has often been overlooked, yet his contributions to the machine's design and creation were as important as those of Bill Phillips. Phillips famously knew little economics, whereas Newlyn understood the circulation of money from his participation in the pre-War commodities market. This paper discusses how they combined their different expertises - and their shared pleasure in getting things to work - to create the first prototype, the Mark I machine, for Leeds (forerunner of the better-known Mark II machine, an example of which is housed in the London Science Museum). 3. "Resurrecting the Cambridge Machine", Dr Allan McRobie (Cambridge University Engineering Department) With objects of historical significance there is always a dynamic tension between conservation and restoration. Given the existence of the beautifully conserved Machine in the Science Museum, the decision was made by the Dept of Economics in Cambridge to restore their Machine to full working order, albeit with minimal intrusion on the original workings. Over the summer of 2003, Allan - with help from technicians in the Engineering Dept and advice from economists - undertook the refurbishment. The Cambridge Machine now works and - moreover - is safe to work with. Allan has since given many working demonstrations of the Machine to a wide variety of audiences. This short talk describes what was involved, with a view to assessing what might be involved in the Leeds Machine project. 3.00 - 4.00 Coffee / Visit to the Leeds Machine ________________________________________________________________________ __________________ Graeme Gooday, Professor of the History of Science and Technology & National Teaching Fellow Department of Philosophy Woodhouse Lane University of Leeds LEEDS LS2 9JT United Kingdom E-mail: g.j.n.gooday at leeds.ac.uk Phone: 0113 343 3274 FAX: 0113 343 3265 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://sigcis.org/pipermail/members/attachments/20090202/aff2c2c1/attachment-0001.htm From sandramols at yahoo.co.uk Mon Feb 2 04:16:00 2009 From: sandramols at yahoo.co.uk (Sandra Mols) Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 09:16:00 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [SIGCIS-Members] Another question - "Giant Brains" References: <000001c9838d$850fea90$0301a8c0@evan> <498489AC.3020204@umn.edu> <8bc235380901311249u26f384ccyd77b7f1347384378@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <503307.6006.qm@web25304.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Another potential source for reflections is the popular press from the late 1940s, through which the news of EDSAC, ENIAC etc percolated around. The Renwick papers held at Cambridge Uni Library (engineer who worked with Wilkes on the EDSAC mercury delay lines) contain a few papers published in such press that display the same kind of 'brain' comments, expanding interestingly on how right/wrong it is to attribute 'brain' characteristics to a machine, howeve sophisticated and engineeringly impressive. I never found, though, the use of 'giant brain' as an expression in these. The emphasis seems more on the programming possibility, electronics, and marvels of speed the combination allows. Berkeley might have a first in creating the term. Best, Sandra Renwick Papers - CSAC 84.2.82 ? Box 1-File D3: Series of Press Cuttings and Photographs from 1940s?1950s Daily mail, October 1947 ? A Don Builds A Memory. 4ft. tubes in his ?brain? ? Anonymous Cambridge Daily News, 3rd October 1947? ?Brain? will know the answers to 1,000 questions a minute ? Anonymous Discovery , February 1948 ? Cambridge?s High-Speed Calculator ? Anonymous, p.40 Daily Telegraph, 17.6.49 ? New ?Brain? Store Orders. Calculations At 15,000 A Minute ? Anonymous The Star, 5.7.49 ? ?Merrick Winn Sees A Room Full of Astonishing Gadgets ? It?s A MECHANICAL BRAIN? ? Winn, M. The Spectator, 15.7.49 ? Nicolson, H. - Marginal Comment ? p.76 ---------------- From: James Cortada To: Thomas Haigh Cc: members-bounces at sigcis.org; members at sigcis.org Sent: Saturday, 31 January, 2009 23:21:37 Subject: Re: [SIGCIS-Members] Another question - "Giant Brains" So much good dialogue has taken place today on this topic that I think we should ask Evan to consolidate all of this into a short article that goes into one of the back sections of the Annals or into an article in some media journal. If that works, there are a bunch of other things we could flush out from time to time using this social networking/wisdom of crowds approach. We might even expand Evan's assignment by discussing automation next weekend and then the following weekend cybernetics. Jim (James) W. Cortada IBM Institute for Business Value 3001 West Beltline Highway Madison, WI 53713 USA jwcorta at us.ibm.com 608-270-4462 Thomas Haigh ---01/31/2009 02:50:21 PM---The title has great retro kitsch value, but I believe that "Giant Brains" popularized a more important phrase. Berkeley defined From: Thomas Haigh To: members at sigcis.org Date: 01/31/09 02:50 PM Subject: Re: [SIGCIS-Members] Another question - "Giant Brains" ________________________________ The title has great retro kitsch value, but I believe that "Giant Brains" popularized a more important phrase. Berkeley defined the computer as "a machine that handles information, transfers information from one part of the machine to another and has a flexible control over the sequence of its operation." This makes it special because transfers information automatically, doesn't need minute to minute instructions -this makes "a deep break with the past" even though "machines that handle information have existed for more than 200 years." So he situates the as one in a long lineof information handling machines going back to languages as "systems for handling information", nerve cells, cave paintings, books, etc as "physical equipment for handling information." That's the context in which it makes sense to call a computer a giant brain, not because both think but because both handle information. While Shannon's information theory had obvious relevance for people building digital computers, this is the earliest (1949) expansive framing I'm aware of for the computer as a universal information processing machine. I'd be interested to hear if anyone knows of an earlier one, but it's surely the earliest one to reach a mass general audience. Tom 2009/1/31 Allan Olley Hey, Just did a quick check on JSTOR on the Science Service's The Science News-letter (what I assume Bernadette Longo refered to). The term "mechanical brain" is used about three times in the 1930s for some kind of calculator or control system. First instance in 1930 for a planetarium's control system (The Science News-Letter, Vol. 17, No. 475 (May 17, 1930), pp. 312-313) and then in 1932 to describe Bush's Differential Analyzer (The Science News-Letter, Vol. 22, No. 606 (Nov. 19, 1932), p. 320), which is also called a mathematical brain. The phrase "electronic 'brain'" is used to refer to a computing gunsight in 1944 (The Science News-Letter, Vol. 46, No. 21 (Nov. 18, 1944), p. 326) Note that for example the press release by Harvard in 1944 for the IBM ASCC/Harvard Mark I refers to it as a "super-brain." (p. 124, Cohen, _Howard Aiken: Portrait of a computer pioneer_) So I think it is safe to say that the use of the word/analogy of brain to describe a computer was popular before Berkeley. The exact phrase "giant brain" is apparently not used anywhere in JSTOR's database (which is a number of scientific and other journals) before 1950 to describe machines... I did a quick check of the NY Times and found an article from 1947 with the following title "NEW GIANT 'BRAIN' DOES WIZARD WORK; Bureau of Standards Says It Can Solve Vast Mathematical Problems in a Few Minutes" August 25, 1947, Monday Page 19, 602 words. About the Bureau of Standards plans for machines,"giant "electronic brains"" refered to, so the title may be an abreviation of that. It is based off a U.P. newswire. However this is the only pre-1949 reference, so it hardly suggests it is a popular description. Refering to early computers as giant brains is a natural way to describe them given their size and previous practice and so the phrase was probably coined more than once (like many computer algorithms that have been invented multiple times). I suspect if you did a search of all searchable newspapers and other available sources you would find a few more instances of the phrase "giant brain" however it does seem to me like Berkeley popularized the description. -- Yours Truly, Allan Olley http://individual.utoronto.ca/fofound/ On Sat, 31 Jan 2009, Bernadette Longo wrote: > Hi all -- The term "giant brains" had also been used numerous times by > the Science Service Newsletter editor during the 1930s in terms of > earlier mechanical calculators. Ditto to Jim's comments...Bernadette > Longo > > James Cortada wrote: >> >> He popularized the term, although it is not clear to me that he was the >> first to utter it. The concept had been floating around since at least >> the mid-1930s in the form of mechanically augmenting thinking. based on >> what I read in the 1930s and 1940s, I would give him--or his book >> editor--credit for the phrase. This is similar to the problem we still >> have with the word automation. It was in use at Ford Motors in the late >> 1940s but nobody knew about it or used the phrase until John Diebold >> did when he used it as the title for a best selling book published in >> the early 1950s. He told me that he had gotten the word from Ford and >> his editor encouraged him to use in the title of the book. The only >> really clever book title he ever came up with for his 7+ books. His >> experience is what taught me to spend a lot of time thinking about the >> title of any book you publish, fighting and dialoguing with editors, >> marketing people, and others until you get it right. >> >> Jim (James) W. Cortada >> IBM Institute for Business Value >> 3001 West Beltline Highway >> Madison, WI 53713 USA >> jwcorta at us.ibm.com >> 608-270-4462 >> >> Inactive hide details for "Evan Koblentz" ---01/31/2009 04:20:10 >> AM---Was the term "Giant Brains" already popular when Edmund B"Evan >> Koblentz" ---01/31/2009 04:20:10 AM---Was the term "Giant Brains" >> already popular when Edmund Berkeley used it in his 1949 book title, or >> should he get credit for po >> >> >> From: "Evan Koblentz" >> >> To: >> >> Date: 01/31/09 04:20 AM >> >> Subject: [SIGCIS-Members] Another question - "Giant Brains" >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> >> >> Was the term "Giant Brains" already popular when Edmund Berkeley used >> it in his 1949 book title, or should he get credit for popularizing it? >> I'm mentioning the term in a footnote and want to be sure credit goes >> to the right source._______________________________________________ >> This email is relayed from members at sigcis.org, the email discussion >> list of SHOT SIGCIS. The list archives are at >> http://sigcis.org/pipermail/members/and you can change your >> subscription options at http://sigcis.org/mailman/listinfo/members >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> This email is relayed from members at sigcis.org, the email discussion >> list of SHOT SIGCIS. The list archives are at >> http://sigcis.org/pipermail/members/and you can change your >> subscription options at http://sigcis.org/mailman/listinfo/members > > _______________________________________________ This email is relayed from members at sigcis.org, the email discussion list of SHOT SIGCIS. The list archives are at http://sigcis.org/pipermail/members/and you can change your subscription options at http://sigcis.org/mailman/listinfo/members_______________________________________________ This email is relayed from members at sigcis.org, the email discussion list of SHOT SIGCIS. The list archives are at http://sigcis.org/pipermail/members/ and you can change your subscription options at http://sigcis.org/mailman/listinfo/members -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://sigcis.org/pipermail/members/attachments/20090202/2aefa59d/attachment-0001.htm From CeruzziP at si.edu Mon Feb 2 08:42:22 2009 From: CeruzziP at si.edu (Ceruzzi, Paul) Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 08:42:22 -0500 Subject: [SIGCIS-Members] Mechanical Brain metaphor In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <39E881CB59D4454295FDDDA5605EE7FC01762433@SI-ECL01.US.SINET.SI.EDU> Konrad Zuse independently came up with the same analogy in 1937. In his diary from June 20 of that year, he wrote: "For about a year now I have been considering the concept of a mechanical brain." [mechanischen Gehirns] The diary entry is reproduced in his autobiography, p. 68-69. The notion came to him after he decided to use the binary system in his calculating machine, then realizing that the same binary logic devices that were used to calculate could also be used to make logical decisions: he called the former a "mathematical brain," and the latter a "language brain." No mention of giant size, although his eventual realization of the concept, in the Z4, was physically quite large. What is interesting here is that this was Zuse's private diary, so he was using the analogy to gain an understanding of the computer for himself, not to explain it to others (although he would do that later). The whole issue of anthropomorphizing the computer has a long and contentious history. Eckert & Mauchly were especially angry with von Neumann for taking their ideas, expressed in the language of electrical engineering, and expressing them in terms used by those studying the human nervous system & brain. Paul E. Ceruzzi, MRC 311, National Air and Space Museum, PO Box 37012, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC 20013-7012. phone: 202-633-2414. p.s.: I agree that this ought to be written up somewhere. Maybe Sandra & I could put hit in our blog: Sandra? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 09:16:00 +0000 (GMT) From: Sandra Mols Subject: Re: [SIGCIS-Members] Another question - "Giant Brains" To: Sigcis Message-ID: <503307.6006.qm at web25304.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Another potential source for reflections is the popular press from the late 1940s, through which the news of EDSAC, ENIAC etc percolated around. The Renwick papers held at Cambridge Uni Library (engineer who worked with Wilkes on the EDSAC mercury delay lines) contain a few papers published in such press that display the same kind of 'brain' comments, expanding interestingly on how right/wrong it is to attribute 'brain' characteristics to a machine, howeve sophisticated and engineeringly impressive. I never found, though, the use of 'giant brain' as an expression in these. The emphasis seems more on the programming possibility, electronics, and marvels of speed the combination allows. Berkeley might have a first in creating the term. Best, Sandra Renwick Papers - CSAC 84.2.82 ? Box 1-File D3: Series of Press Cuttings and Photographs from 1940s?1950s Daily mail, October 1947 ? A Don Builds A Memory. 4ft. tubes in his ?brain? ? Anonymous Cambridge Daily News, 3rd October 1947? ?Brain? will know the answers to 1,000 questions a minute ? Anonymous Discovery , February 1948 ? Cambridge?s High-Speed Calculator ? Anonymous, p.40 Daily Telegraph, 17.6.49 ? New ?Brain? Store Orders. Calculations At 15,000 A Minute ? Anonymous The Star, 5.7.49 ? ?Merrick Winn Sees A Room Full of Astonishing Gadgets ? It?s A MECHANICAL BRAIN? ? Winn, M. The Spectator, 15.7.49 ? Nicolson, H. - Marginal Comment ? p.76 ---------------- From johnlaprise2008 at u.northwestern.edu Mon Feb 9 14:52:15 2009 From: johnlaprise2008 at u.northwestern.edu (John Laprise) Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2009 13:52:15 -0600 Subject: [SIGCIS-Members] Congressional Research Service Report Dump Message-ID: <000501c98aef$ee023a30$ca06ae90$@northwestern.edu> Wikileaks has taken receipt of the complete catalog of Congressional Research Service (CRS) reports. The CRS writes non-partisan reports on every conceivable topic addressed by Congress. All of these materials are supposed to be in the public domain but are released to the public at the discretion of members. Previously, only a very select few reports were ever made public. Apparently (and my guess), some member of congress who wished to remain anonymous gave them all to wikileaks. Their website is understandably under a considerable load at the moment. http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Change_you_can_download:_a_billion_in_secret_Congr essional_reports John Laprise Doctoral Candidate Media, Technology, and Society Program School of Communication Northwestern University -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://sigcis.org/pipermail/members/attachments/20090209/98a00b52/attachment.htm From tangjd at jmu.edu Tue Feb 10 08:23:03 2009 From: tangjd at jmu.edu (Jeffrey D. Tang) Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 08:23:03 -0500 (EST) Subject: [SIGCIS-Members] Computer History Museum Book Prize Message-ID: <20090210082303.BJA50293@mpmail2.jmu.edu> The Computer History Museum Prize is awarded by SIGCIS to the author of an outstanding book in the history of computing broadly conceived, published during the prior three years (e.g. books published in 2006-2008 are eligible for the inaugural 2009 award). Books in translation are eligible for three years following the date of their publication in English. The prize of $1000, established through the generosity of an anonymous donor who wishes to honor the Computer History Museum, is administered by SIGCIS, SHOT?s special interest group for computers, information and society. Publishers, authors, and other interested members of the computer-history community are invited to nominate books. Send one copy of the nominated title to each of the committee members listed below. To be considered, book submissions must be postmarked by 1 April 2009. For more information, please contact the prize committee chair or SIGCIS secretary (secretary at sigcis.org). Thomas J. Misa [chair] Charles Babbage Institute 211 Andersen Library 222 - 21st Avenue South University of Minnesota Minneapolis, MN 55455 tmisa at umn.edu Paul E. Ceruzzi MRC 311 National Air and Space Museum PO Box 37012 Smithsonian Institution Washington, DC 20013-7012 CeruzziP at si.edu Jennifer S. Light Northwestern University School of Communication Frances Searle Building 2240 Campus Drive, Room 2-152 Evanston, IL 60208-2952 light at northwestern.edu From mge at info.fundp.ac.be Mon Feb 16 10:34:04 2009 From: mge at info.fundp.ac.be (Marie Gevers) Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 16:34:04 +0100 Subject: [SIGCIS-Members] Origin of the words 'program' and 'programming'? Message-ID: <200902161534.n1GFY4ol026664@backus.info.fundp.ac.be> Could anybody tell me when and in which circumstances the words 'program' and 'programming' did appear? Marie Gevers Dr. Marie d'UDEKEM-GEVERS Charg?e d'enseignement et ma?tre de conf?rence Conseill?re ? la formation Facult? d'Informatique Facultes Universitaires Notre-Dame de la Paix Rue Grandgagnage 21 B.5000 Namur Belgique T?l.: 32 (0) 81 72 49 73 FAX : 32 (0) 81 72 49 67 http://www.fundp.ac.be/universite/personnes/page_view/01001574/ From neil.barton at uclmail.net Mon Feb 16 11:35:09 2009 From: neil.barton at uclmail.net (Roger Neil Barton) Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 16:35:09 -0000 Subject: [SIGCIS-Members] Origin of the words 'program' and 'programming'? References: <200902161534.n1GFY4ol026664@backus.info.fundp.ac.be> Message-ID: The OED (which is usually not very good on anything technological) gives the following etymology. My studies on this go back to 1965 and I vaguely remember being taught that government programs and network analysis came into it somewhere. 9. a. A sequence of operations that a machine can be set to perform automatically. 1942 J. W. MAUCHLY Use High Speed Vacuum Tube Devices for Calculating (Moore School of Electr. Engin., Univ. Pennsylvania) in B. Randell Origins Digital Computers (1973) 330 Mechanical devices..see to it that the numerical result from an operation in one machine is properly transferred to some other machine, which is selected by a suitable program device;..this program device is capable of arranging a cycle of different transfers and operations in each cycle. 1945 J. P. ECKERT et al. Descr. ENIAC (PB 86242) (Moore School of Electr. Engin., Univ. of Pennsylvania) 1 The intended use of the ENIAC is to compute large families of solutions all based on the same program of operations. 1954 Amer. Machinist 25 Oct. 136/1 The operator..sets a combination of switches calling for table movements equivalent to blueprint dimensions, or a 'program', then presses a starting button. 1962 E. BRUTON Automation vi. 74 An automatic washing machine may be designed to wash for four minutes, empty, and spin-dry for ten. This is its programme. b. Now usu. in form program. A series of coded instructions and definitions which when fed into a computer automatically directs its operation in performing a particular task. Also in extended use: something conceived of as encoding and determining a process, esp. genetically. stored program: see STORED adj. 1c. Cf. quots. 1942, 1945 at sense 9a, in which one can see the beginnings of this sense. 1947 Math. Tables & Other Aids to Computation II. 358 An important limitation upon programming is that the machine must adhere to a prescribed linear course of operation. It cannot at any point choose between two subsequent programs on the basis of results already obtained. 1950 Phil. Mag. 41 256 The problem of constructing a computing routine or 'program' for a modern general purpose computer which will enable it to play chess. 1953 Proc. IRE 41 1247/1 This conditional instruction makes it possible for the programmer to write programs which take different courses of action depending upon the results of previous computation. 1960 Times 4 Oct. (Computer Suppl.) p. v/3 To prepare this sequence of instructions, or program (a spelling now adopted in computer terminology), the programmer will have broken down an operation into its simplest elements. 1971 Times Lit. Suppl. 4 June 635/2 The next world chess champion could quite conceivably be a computer programme. kind regards neil Dr Roger Neil Barton Visiting Research Fellow, Institute of Historical Research http://www.uclmail.net/~neil.barton/ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Marie Gevers" To: Sent: Monday, February 16, 2009 3:34 PM Subject: [SIGCIS-Members] Origin of the words 'program' and 'programming'? Could anybody tell me when and in which circumstances the words 'program' and 'programming' did appear? Marie Gevers Dr. Marie d'UDEKEM-GEVERS Charg?e d'enseignement et ma?tre de conf?rence Conseill?re ? la formation Facult? d'Informatique Facultes Universitaires Notre-Dame de la Paix Rue Grandgagnage 21 B.5000 Namur Belgique T?l.: 32 (0) 81 72 49 73 FAX : 32 (0) 81 72 49 67 http://www.fundp.ac.be/universite/personnes/page_view/01001574/ _______________________________________________ This email is relayed from members at sigcis.org, the email discussion list of SHOT SIGCIS. The list archives are at http://sigcis.org/pipermail/members/ and you can change your subscription options at http://sigcis.org/mailman/listinfo/members From paul at mcjones.org Mon Feb 16 11:41:48 2009 From: paul at mcjones.org (Paul McJones) Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 08:41:48 -0800 Subject: [SIGCIS-Members] Origin of the words 'program' and 'programming'? In-Reply-To: References: <200902161534.n1GFY4ol026664@backus.info.fundp.ac.be> Message-ID: <4999974C.3050408@mcjones.org> Another "data point" suggests that by 1951 the term was well established, because it was used in the title of what was apparently the first book on programming: /The preparation of programs for an electronic digital computer/ by Wilkes, Wheeler, and Gill Paul McJones Roger Neil Barton wrote: > The OED (which is usually not very good on anything technological) gives the > following etymology. My studies on this go back to 1965 and I vaguely > remember being taught that government programs and network analysis came > into it somewhere. > > 9. a. A sequence of operations that a machine can be set to perform > automatically. > > 1942 J. W. MAUCHLY Use High Speed Vacuum Tube Devices for Calculating (Moore > School of Electr. Engin., Univ. Pennsylvania) in B. Randell Origins Digital > Computers (1973) 330 Mechanical devices..see to it that the numerical result > from an operation in one machine is properly transferred to some other > machine, which is selected by a suitable program device;..this program > device is capable of arranging a cycle of different transfers and operations > in each cycle. 1945 J. P. ECKERT et al. Descr. ENIAC (PB 86242) (Moore > School of Electr. Engin., Univ. of Pennsylvania) 1 The intended use of the > ENIAC is to compute large families of solutions all based on the same > program of operations. 1954 Amer. Machinist 25 Oct. 136/1 The operator..sets > a combination of switches calling for table movements equivalent to > blueprint dimensions, or a 'program', then presses a starting button. 1962 > E. BRUTON Automation vi. 74 An automatic washing machine may be designed to > wash for four minutes, empty, and spin-dry for ten. This is its programme. > b. Now usu. in form program. A series of coded instructions and > definitions which when fed into a computer automatically directs its > operation in performing a particular task. Also in extended use: something > conceived of as encoding and determining a process, esp. genetically. > stored program: see STORED adj. 1c. > Cf. quots. 1942, 1945 at sense 9a, in which one can see the beginnings of > this sense. > > 1947 Math. Tables & Other Aids to Computation II. 358 An important > limitation upon programming is that the machine must adhere to a prescribed > linear course of operation. It cannot at any point choose between two > subsequent programs on the basis of results already obtained. 1950 Phil. > Mag. 41 256 The problem of constructing a computing routine or 'program' for > a modern general purpose computer which will enable it to play chess. 1953 > Proc. IRE 41 1247/1 This conditional instruction makes it possible for the > programmer to write programs which take different courses of action > depending upon the results of previous computation. 1960 Times 4 Oct. > (Computer Suppl.) p. v/3 To prepare this sequence of instructions, or > program (a spelling now adopted in computer terminology), the programmer > will have broken down an operation into its simplest elements. 1971 Times > Lit. Suppl. 4 June 635/2 The next world chess champion could quite > conceivably be a computer programme. > > kind regards > neil > > Dr Roger Neil Barton > Visiting Research Fellow, Institute of Historical Research > http://www.uclmail.net/~neil.barton/ > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Marie Gevers" > To: > Sent: Monday, February 16, 2009 3:34 PM > Subject: [SIGCIS-Members] Origin of the words 'program' and 'programming'? > > > Could anybody tell me when and in which circumstances the words > 'program' and 'programming' did appear? > > Marie Gevers > > Dr. Marie d'UDEKEM-GEVERS > Charg?e d'enseignement et ma?tre de conf?rence > Conseill?re ? la formation > > Facult? d'Informatique > Facultes Universitaires Notre-Dame de la Paix > Rue Grandgagnage 21 > B.5000 Namur > Belgique > T?l.: 32 (0) 81 72 49 73 > FAX : 32 (0) 81 72 49 67 > http://www.fundp.ac.be/universite/personnes/page_view/01001574/ > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://sigcis.org/pipermail/members/attachments/20090216/7fa44dd7/attachment-0001.htm From nathanen at sas.upenn.edu Mon Feb 16 11:50:23 2009 From: nathanen at sas.upenn.edu (Nathan Ensmenger) Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 11:50:23 -0500 Subject: [SIGCIS-Members] Origin of the words 'program' and 'programming'? In-Reply-To: <200902161534.n1GFY4ol026664@backus.info.fundp.ac.be> References: <200902161534.n1GFY4ol026664@backus.info.fundp.ac.be> Message-ID: On Feb 16, 2009, at 10:34 AM, Marie Gevers wrote: > Could anybody tell me when and in which circumstances the words > 'program' and 'programming' did appear? > > Marie Gevers There is a nice discussion of this question in David Grier, "The ENIAC, the verb 'to program' and the Emergence of Digital Computers," Annals of the History of Computing 18:1 (1996), 51-55. -Nathan -- Nathan Ensmenger Assistant Professor, Undergraduate Chair History & Sociology of Science University of Pennsylvania www.sas.upenn.edu/~nathanen From grier at gwu.edu Mon Feb 16 14:26:30 2009 From: grier at gwu.edu (David Alan Grier) Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 14:26:30 -0500 Subject: [SIGCIS-Members] Origin of the words 'program' and 'programming'? In-Reply-To: References: <200902161534.n1GFY4ol026664@backus.info.fundp.ac.be> Message-ID: Marie, It transfers through the ENIAC from radio engineering. It is first used to describe the control signals that synchronize the computation on the ENIAC. From that sense, it moves to the commands stored in memory that control those signals and finally acquires modern meaning. It was in place by the time the Manchester Baby and ACE are operational, though it alternated with other terms through the early 1950s. The builders of the IAS architecture machines are probably the ones that cement it in place. David Grier On Feb 16, 2009, at 11:50 AM, Nathan Ensmenger wrote: > > >> Could anybody tell me when and in which circumstances the words >> 'program' and 'programming' did appear? >> >> Marie Gevers > From announce at inesweb.org Tue Feb 17 21:51:38 2009 From: announce at inesweb.org (INES Announcements) Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 21:51:38 -0500 Subject: [SIGCIS-Members] Announcing new journal: Engineering Studies! Also please join INES! Message-ID: <340a6ca0902171851p24885711m8401a2d51e12f760@mail.gmail.com> Colleagues interested in scholarly studies of engineers and engineering, We are writing to ask your help in building interdisciplinary engineering studies as an international field of scholarly research by joining the International Network for Engineering Studies (INES) and contributing manuscripts to its new journal Engineering Studies: Journal of the International Network for Engineering Studies. INES was born in Paris, France in 2004. The founding co-coordinators are Maria Paula Diogo (History, U Lisbon, Portugal), Gary Downey (STS and Engineering Education, Virginia Tech) and Chyuan-Yuan Wu (Sociology and STS, National Tsing Hua U, Taiwan). INES supports workshops and the journal, as well as the sharing of bibliographies and syllabi (the latter beginning Fall 2009, see http://www.inesweb.org/ for details). The publisher Routledge/Taylor & Francis offers INES members the amazingly low subscription rate of US $46, their cost. INES membership, including the subscription, is US $56. The extra US $10 is for bank and web costs, and to subsidize members who qualify for the discounted rate of US $46 (students, retired persons, residents of non-OECD countries). The standard individual rate is US $190 US / ? 98 / ? 152. Please go to the INES site now and join! (http://www.inesweb.org/join). [Note: if you are willing to sponsor a member for one year at the discounted rate or are in need of such sponsorship, contact Crystal Harrell at crcrigge at vt.edu. She is serving as matchmaker.] Please also contact your library representative personally and ask him/her to purchase a library subscription. The rate is reasonable. A library recommendation form is available at: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/library.asp (We recommend a phone call given that libraries are currently making difficult choices.) Finally, please consider submitting a manuscript. See below for aims and scope. For complete submission guidelines, see www.tandf.co.uk/journals/engineeringstudies . The editors are Gary Downey (Virginia Tech) and Juan Lucena (Colorado School of Mines). They are supported by Jen Schneider (Colorado School of Mines) as Managing Editor, Brent Jesiek (Purdue) as Web Editor, and Kacey Beddoes (Virginia Tech) as Assistant Editor, as well as 12 Associate Editors and 30 Editorial Board members (see below for names and affiliations). Best, Gary Downey, Maria Paula Diogo, and Chyuan-Yuan Wu INES Co-Organizers Brent Jesiek INES Web Editor *-- * *Engineering Studies: Journal of the International Network for Engineering Studies * *Aims and Scope * Engineering Studies is an interdisciplinary, international journal devoted to the scholarly study of engineers and engineering. Its mission is threefold: (1) to advance research in historical, social, cultural, political, philosophical, rhetorical, and organizational studies of engineers and engineering; (2) to help build and serve diverse communities of researchers interested in engineering studies; and (3) to link scholarly work in engineering studies to broader discussions and debates about engineering education, research, practice, policy, and representation. Engineering Studies is published three times yearly by Routledge, an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, beginning in 2009. *Vision Statement* The field of engineering studies is a diverse, interdisciplinary arena of scholarly research built around the question: What are the relationships among the technical and the nontechnical dimensions of engineering practices, and how do these relationships change over time and from place to place? Addressing and responding to this question can sometimes involve researchers as critical participants in the practices they study, including, for example, engineering formation, engineering work, engineering design, equality and diversity in engineering (gender, racial, ethnic, class, geopolitical), and engineering service to society. Engineering Studies juxtaposes contributions from distinct disciplinary and analytical perspectives to encourage authors and readers to look beyond familiar theoretical, topical, temporal, and geographical boundaries for insight and guidance. The diversity in the editorial staff and board is designed to map the diversity in the field and support its persistence. While prospective authors are invited to reflect on and anticipate how their work might prove helpful to others elsewhere, both within the academy and beyond, they can also feel comfortable imagining familiar audiences and producing familiar modes of analysis and interpretation. The heterogeneity of perspectives in engineering studies is its lifeblood, and the goal is high quality scholarship in every case. *Volume 1, Issue 1, Spring 2009* "Doing Gender in Engineering Workplace Cultures: Part I - Observations From The Field" Wendy Faulkner, University of Edinburgh "The Engineer as Judge: Engineering Analysis and Political Economy in Eighteenth Century France" Antoine Picon, Harvard Graduate School of Design and Ecole nationale des Ponts et Chauss?es "An Historico-Ethical Perspective on Engineering Education: From Use and Convenience to Policy Engagement" Carl Mitcham, Colorado School of Mines "What is Engineering Studies For?: Dominant Practices and Scalable Scholarship" Gary Lee Downey Virginia Tech *Associate Editors* Atsushi Akera, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, USA Diane Bailey, Stanford University, USA Konstantinos Chatzis, Universit? Paris-Est - LATTS (UMR CNRS), France Maria Paula Diogo, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Portugal Joseph Herkert, Arizona State University, USA Ann Johnson, University of South Carolina, USA Ulrik J?rgensen, Technical University of Denmark, Denmark Scott Knowles, Drexel University, USA Donna Riley, Smith College, USA Julia Williams, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology, USA Matthew Wisnioski, Virginia Tech, USA Chyuan-Yuan Wu, National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan *Editorial Advisory Board* Marcos Azevedo da Silveira, Pontificia Universidad Catolica- Rio, Brasil Stephen R. Barley, Stanford University, USA Sharon Beder, University of Wollongong, Australia Bruno Belhoste, Universit? Paris 1 Panth?on-Sorbonne, France Li Bocong, Chinese Academy of Sciences, China Taft Broome, Howard University, USA Louis Bucciarelli, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA Ivan da Costa Marques, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Brasil Michael Davis, Illinois Institute of Technology, USA Christelle Didier, Universit? Catholique de Lille, France Wendy Faulkner, University of Edinburgh, UK David E. Goldberg, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA Irina Gouzevitch, Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle, France Andr? Grelon, L'Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales, France Jang Gyu Lee, Seoul National University, Korea Deborah Johnson, University of Virginia, USA Ronald Kline, Cornell University, USA Eda Kranakis, University of Ottawa, Canada Gideon Kunda, Tel Aviv University, Israel Jack Lohmann, Georgia Institute of Technology, USA Tony Marjoram, UNESCO, France Peter Meiksins, Cleveland State University, USA Carl Mitcham, Colorado School of Mines, USA Antoine Picon, Harvard University, USA Bruce Seely, Michigan Technological University, USA Sheri Sheppard, Stanford University, USA Amy Slaton, Drexel University, USA Knut H. S?rensen, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway Dominique Vinck, University of Grenoble, France Rosalind Williams, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://sigcis.org/pipermail/members/attachments/20090217/55dac6b4/attachment.htm From thaigh at computer.org Mon Feb 23 13:26:40 2009 From: thaigh at computer.org (Thomas Haigh) Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 12:26:40 -0600 Subject: [SIGCIS-Members] SHOT 2009 CFP. Deadline March 30. SIGCIS panels being assembled soon. Message-ID: <006f01c995e4$4687b230$d3971690$@org> Hello everyone, It's that time of year again. SHOT, our parent society, meets in Pittsburgh on 15-19 October. The deadline for proposals is March 30, in about five weeks time. In case you are unfamiliar with SHOT's procedures, here is a capsule version: SHOT allows submission of individual paper proposals or proposals for panels. Panels are usually three or four papers plus a commentator devoted to a coherent topic or theme. However the call mentions openness to other formats. Reviews are made on the basis of abstracts. Full papers are not required at any point for review and are not published. However, if your paper is accepted you are expected to send some kind of draft to the commentator ahead of time. SHOT does not release any comments from reviewers. As at other history conferences people sometimes literally read their papers, but more lively styles of presentation are welcome. The theme is "Reform(ed) Technologies" which seems oriented toward industrial decay but, according to the call, also includes "new uses of old technologies, and issues of maintenance." The theme is not usually a big deal at SHOT, but it doesn't hurt to invoke it where possible. The full CFP is online at http://www.historyoftechnology.org/annual_meeting/2009SHOT_cfp.pdf The history of computing has been well represented at the last few conferences. Many of the panels including computer material are submitted independently of SIGCIS. However, we also try to organize coherent panels based on submissions from members. Interested people send in draft abstracts, which I then help to edit and attempt to assemble into thematically arranged panel proposals. This went very well for the 2007 meeting, where we received 12 promising abstracts and submitted three successful panel proposals. It went less well for 2008, where only one of our session proposals was accepted. So whether going with a SIGCIS organized panel helps your chances or not will depend on whether 2008 was a blip or a trend. If you are interested in taking part in a SIGCIS organized panel then please email me WITHIN THE NEXT WEEK a short description of the research you are interested in presenting. Do not reply to the entire list. I will assemble these, circulate them among people who are interested, and start to look for themes. If possible panel themes emerge I may send another general call to SIGCIS members for additional proposals on a particular theme. There are two additional reasons you might want to consider taking part in a SIGCIS-organized panel. The first is that we have the ability to offer some supplemental funding for graduate students who are presenting at the meeting. See http://www.sigcis.org/?q=node/55. This works along with SHOT's own travel assistance for graduate students and other needy types, http://www.historyoftechnology.org/awards/travelgrants.html. Our funds are limited, so priority will be given to students on SIGCIS sponsored panels. The second is that SIGCIS plans to offer a full day of workshop programming on the final day of the conference. So if, as happened last year, a worthy SIGCIS panel proposal is rejected for the main conference then it would stand a good chance of appearing on the SIGCIS program. Our provisional workshop theme is "Mike Mahoney and the Histories of Computing(s)." Of course we hope to do more with this workshop than just salvage conference panels, so look out for more information on the workshop format over the next month or two. SHOT allows SIGs to sponsor panels but has never clarified what this means with any formal policy or procedure. So far we have only sponsored panels we organized, but if you have a panel you are organizing but would like to attach SIGCIS sponsorship then let us know and we'll try to come up with our own policy for this. As well as the sessions themselves, SIGCIS usually organizes an informal dinner on one evening and holds its official lunch meeting on another day. Both have been very well attended recently and provide a great opportunity for meeting others in the field in a friendly environment. So we hope to see as many of you as possible in Pittsburgh this autumn. Best wishes, Tom Haigh www.tomandmaria.com/tom