Talk:History of computing

Talk Page Archives

Archive 1, 9-24-07: Talk:History_of_computing/Archive1

Philosophy

Thanks to Robert_King for helping me develop an initial draft of this page. What do people think of this as an approach for this page?Pat Palmer 18:53, 24 September 2007 (CDT)

• Because "History of computing" is a potentially enormous topic, I'd like to organize this article in chronological order, with a bullet list under the main headings. (NOTE: I'm trying to illustrate this starting with the earliest items in the article, and will work on converting the existing material to this form when I can. This takes time, as new "starter" articles need to be created.)
• Each bullet item should be only a few sentences long, pointing off to a longer article on the topic discussed. Limit: one paragraph per item.
• Ideally, each bullet item should include one key reference (so that, eventually, there will be a decent bibliography for each item listed).
• For now, I'd like to suspend decisions about whether a bullet item "deserves" to be on the list. Instead, please register any comments on this page. We will then seek expert oversight to help make longterm decisions about what "makes the list" or doesn't make the list.

Is there any value in having a section on the future of computing and/or the tie-in from science fiction's view of computers to what has come about? Karl D. Schubert 15:30, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

As a guy who used read an enormous amount of SF (and write some), I would be interested in tie-ins between the fictionalized visions and the reality -- it might have to be another article, although not necessarily so. Just off the top of my head, I can think of novels that were essentially about computers: Heinlein's Moon Is a Harsh Mistress; Frank Herbert's novel about a spaceship in trouble in which the crew spends the whole book (very tediously indeed) fixing the computer, only to discover that they have created God (or a god); the Forbin or Colossus series, I forget who wrote the books; HAL, of course, in 2001; Harley Is Four, I think, and many others. Hayford Peirce 18:02, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

When H.A.R.L.I.E. was One' (Human Analog Robot, Life Information Equivalent, from my wetware RAM) had the first discussion I ever read of a computer virus, which was called that, although it would be closer to a worm in today's technology. Harlie, David's son, does justify his existence by writing a proposal for a Graphic Omniscient Device (note acronym). It does raise a problem that I believe we will someday face: can you shut off a self-aware computer?

RAH's Starman Jones had computers as a center point, but it totally missed how they would be built; it was not much more than an early desktop calculator. Howard C. Berkowitz 01:11, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Those, plus a number of interesting ones by James P. Hogan ("Thrice Upon a Time") and Joe Haldeman ("Old Twentieth" as a recent one) and "The Adolescence of P-1" by Thomas Ryan. So, sounds like there is enough interest in this for us to put a section in on this, too. I do think it's good to separate fiction from reality but I also wonder if it's really necessary to make it a separate article vs. a section in this one. More thoughts? Karl D. Schubert 15:51, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

next steps

I've put a bunch of placeholders for history since 1950. Those need a SHORT paragraph with pointers off to other articles. I've tried to hit the major trends. In most cases, I placed an occurrence in the decade where it became mainstream, rather than the one in which research leading to it began. I'd love to have some help filling in this stuff. Anyone?Pat Palmer 01:07, 3 May 2008 (CDT)

archive of former starting paragraph

I am saving this here in case we want to reinstate it, but I think I want to open the article differently: The earliest reference to the term, in 1631, comes from the French word with the same meaning, derived from the Latin word computare meaning "to count, to sum up." The word is formed from two roots: com- meaning "with", and +putare meaning "to reckon" (originally "to prune."). According to the first definition given by the Oxford English Dictionary, a computer is: "One who computes; a calculator, reckoner; spec. a person employed to make calculations in an observatory, in surveying, etc."Pat Palmer 16:31, 3 May 2008 (CDT)

archiving hidden timeline code here

Though it doesn't show up.Pat Palmer 16:33, 3 May 2008 (CDT)

"Timelines" are a subpage, now, anyway... J. Noel Chiappa 17:26, 3 May 2008 (CDT)

another archived bit

I am removing this, for now: Not all of this may be regarded as positive, however; the explosive intrusion in life of the computer in all its facets is sometimes referred to as the digital revolution. It may have a place somewhere; I'm not sure it belongs here.Pat Palmer 16:54, 3 May 2008 (CDT)

Perhaps we need an article on digital Luddism. –Tom Morris 04:20, 22 September 2008 (CDT)

Needs work

All the "Oh my", "Honey, I shrunk the music" stuff gets grating after about five seconds. I'm going to remove it. –Tom Morris 04:20, 22 September 2008 (CDT)

Title does not fit

This article is about computers, computing machines, or automated computing, or something similar, but not about "computing", as is also indicated by the definition. It should therefore be moved to title better reflecting its content. Peter Schmitt 19:06, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Good point. Howard C. Berkowitz 15:58, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

This page looks like hell

Whatever happened to the really good rewrite and lots of hours that were put into a functional page? There are headers without paragraphs; "personalized" topics... it looks really unprofessional. It needs cleaning up or being moved to a personal workspace and developed that way. It's pretty unfit for a quality article appearance, even for one short in content. Robert W King 04:40, 27 July 2011 (UTC)