<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)">
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>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. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>John Laprise<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Doctoral Candidate<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Media, Technology, and Society Program<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>School of Communication<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Northwestern University<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>
members-bounces@sigcis.org [mailto:members-bounces@sigcis.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Thomas
Haigh<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Saturday, January 31, 2009 2:50 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> <br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [SIGCIS-Members] Another question - "Giant
Brains"<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>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. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>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.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>Tom<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>2009/1/31 Allan Olley <<a
href="mailto:allan.olley@utoronto.ca">allan.olley@utoronto.ca</a>><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=MsoNormal>Hey,<br>
Just did a quick check on JSTOR on the Science
Service's The<br>
Science News-letter (what I assume Bernadette Longo refered to). The term<br>
"mechanical brain" is used about three times in the 1930s for some
kind<br>
of calculator or control system. First instance in 1930 for a<br>
planetarium's control system (The Science News-Letter, Vol.<br>
17, No. 475 (May 17, 1930), pp. 312-313) and then in 1932 to describe<br>
Bush's Differential Analyzer (The Science News-Letter, Vol. 22, No. 606<br>
(Nov. 19, 1932), p. 320), which is also called a mathematical brain. The<br>
phrase "electronic 'brain'" is used to refer to a computing gunsight
in<br>
1944 (The Science News-Letter, Vol. 46, No. 21 (Nov. 18, 1944), p. 326)<br>
Note that for example the press release by Harvard in 1944 for the<br>
IBM ASCC/Harvard Mark I refers to it as a "super-brain." (p. 124,
Cohen,<br>
_Howard Aiken: Portrait of a computer pioneer_) So I think it is safe to<br>
say that the use of the word/analogy of brain to describe a computer was<br>
popular before Berkeley.<br>
The exact phrase "giant brain" is
apparently not used anywhere in<br>
JSTOR's database (which is a number of scientific and other journals)<br>
before 1950 to describe machines...<br>
I did a quick check of the NY Times and found an
article from 1947<br>
with the following title "NEW GIANT 'BRAIN' DOES WIZARD WORK; Bureau of<br>
Standards Says It Can Solve Vast Mathematical Problems in a Few Minutes"<br>
August 25, 1947, Monday Page 19, 602 words. About the Bureau of Standards<br>
plans for machines,"giant "electronic brains"" refered to,
so the title<br>
may be an abreviation of that. It is based off a U.P. newswire. However<br>
this is the only pre-1949 reference, so it hardly suggests it is a popular<br>
description.<br>
Refering to early computers as giant brains is a
natural way to<br>
describe them given their size and previous practice and so the phrase<br>
was probably coined more than once (like many computer algorithms that<br>
have been invented multiple times). I suspect if you did a search of all<br>
searchable newspapers and other available sources you would find a few<br>
more instances of the phrase "giant brain" however it does seem to me<br>
like Berkeley popularized the description.<br>
<span style='color:#888888'>--<br>
Yours Truly,<br>
Allan Olley<br>
<br>
<a href="http://individual.utoronto.ca/fofound/" target="_blank">http://individual.utoronto.ca/fofound/</a></span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><br>
On Sat, 31 Jan 2009, Bernadette Longo wrote:<br>
<br>
> Hi all -- The term "giant brains" had also been used numerous
times by<br>
> the Science Service Newsletter editor during the 1930s in terms of<br>
> earlier mechanical calculators. Ditto to Jim's comments...Bernadette<br>
> Longo<br>
><br>
> James Cortada wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> He popularized the term, although it is not clear to me that he was
the<br>
>> first to utter it. The concept had been floating around since at least<br>
>> the mid-1930s in the form of mechanically augmenting thinking. based
on<br>
>> what I read in the 1930s and 1940s, I would give him--or his book<br>
>> editor--credit for the phrase. This is similar to the problem we still<br>
>> have with the word automation. It was in use at Ford Motors in the
late<br>
>> 1940s but nobody knew about it or used the phrase until John Diebold<br>
>> did when he used it as the title for a best selling book published in<br>
>> the early 1950s. He told me that he had gotten the word from Ford and<br>
>> his editor encouraged him to use in the title of the book. The only<br>
>> really clever book title he ever came up with for his 7+ books. His<br>
>> experience is what taught me to spend a lot of time thinking about the<br>
>> title of any book you publish, fighting and dialoguing with editors,<br>
>> marketing people, and others until you get it right.<br>
>><br>
>> Jim (James) W. Cortada<br>
>> IBM Institute for Business Value<br>
>> 3001 West Beltline Highway<br>
>> Madison, WI 53713 USA<br>
>> <a href="mailto:jwcorta@us.ibm.com">jwcorta@us.ibm.com</a><br>
>> 608-270-4462<br>
>><br>
>> Inactive hide details for "Evan Koblentz" ---01/31/2009
04:20:10<br>
>> AM---Was the term "Giant Brains" already popular when Edmund
B"Evan<br>
>> Koblentz" ---01/31/2009 04:20:10 AM---Was the term "Giant
Brains"<br>
>> already popular when Edmund Berkeley used it in his 1949 book title,
or<br>
>> should he get credit for po<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> From: "Evan Koblentz" <<a
href="mailto:evan@snarc.net">evan@snarc.net</a>><br>
>><br>
>> To: <<a href="mailto:members@sigcis.org">members@sigcis.org</a>><br>
>><br>
>> Date: 01/31/09 04:20 AM<br>
>><br>
>> Subject: [SIGCIS-Members] Another question - "Giant
Brains"<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>>
------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> Was the term "Giant Brains" already popular when Edmund
Berkeley used<br>
>> it in his 1949 book title, or should he get credit for popularizing
it?<br>
>> I'm mentioning the term in a footnote and want to be sure credit goes<br>
>> to the right source._______________________________________________<br>
>> This email is relayed from <a href="mailto:members@sigcis.org">members@sigcis.org</a>,
the email discussion<br>
>> list of SHOT SIGCIS. The list archives are at<br>
>> <a href="http://sigcis.org/pipermail/members/" target="_blank">http://sigcis.org/pipermail/members/</a>
and you can change your<br>
>> subscription options at <a
href="http://sigcis.org/mailman/listinfo/members" target="_blank">http://sigcis.org/mailman/listinfo/members</a><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
>><br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> This email is relayed from <a href="mailto:members@sigcis.org">members@sigcis.org</a>,
the email discussion<br>
>> list of SHOT SIGCIS. The list archives are at<br>
>> <a href="http://sigcis.org/pipermail/members/" target="_blank">http://sigcis.org/pipermail/members/</a>
and you can change your<br>
>> subscription options at <a
href="http://sigcis.org/mailman/listinfo/members" target="_blank">http://sigcis.org/mailman/listinfo/members</a><br>
><br>
><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
This email is relayed from <a href="mailto:members@sigcis.org">members@sigcis.org</a>,
the email discussion list of SHOT SIGCIS. The list archives are at <a
href="http://sigcis.org/pipermail/members/" target="_blank">http://sigcis.org/pipermail/members/</a>
and you can change your subscription options at <a
href="http://sigcis.org/mailman/listinfo/members" target="_blank">http://sigcis.org/mailman/listinfo/members</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>