May 2010 - Members - lists.sigcis.org

Fwd: H-Net Review Publication: 'The Evolution of Punched-Card Systems'
by julie hugsted 15 May '10

15 May '10

Hello, For those of you that are not on the H-SCI-MED-TECH mailing list and have not seen this announcement, it might have interest Best Julie ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Nathan Ensmenger, H-SCI-MED-TECH <smtedit(a)mail.h-net.msu.edu> Date: 2010/5/11 Subject: H-Net Review Publication: 'The Evolution of Punched-Card Systems' To: H-SCI-MED-TECH(a)h-net.msu.edu Lars Heide. Punched-Card Systems and the Early Information Explosion, 1880--1945. Baltimore Johns Hopkins University Press, 2009. 369 pp. $65.00 (cloth), ISBN 978-0-8018-9143-4. Reviewed by Larry Frohmann (State University of New York at Stony Brook) Published on H-German (May, 2010) Commissioned by Benita Blessing The Evolution of Punched-Card Systems From their first major use in tabulating the 1890 United States > census to the breakthrough of digital computers and magnetic storage in the 1970s, punched cards were the dominant technology for processing the vast amounts of information needed by large, complex enterprises and the modern social state. As Lars Heide makes clear in _Punched-Card Systems_, without this information-processing capability, the modern world would have looked quite different, and certainly less modern. Heide's prodigiously researched book provides a comparative study of the development of punched-card technology and its application in the United States, England, France, and Germany from the 1880s to the end of World War II. His point of departure is a dissatisfaction or discomfort with works in the sociology of technology that focus primarily on the social impact of technology, while treating its development as an external factor. Instead, Heide's aim here is to develop an excentric or peripheral account that will explain the trajectory of technological development--i.e., the decision to pursue or neglect a technically feasible path of innovation--not in terms of a company's ability to develop and market a given technology, but rather as an attempt to meet the demands of its real or imagined users and uses. To demonstrate the fruitfulness of this approach, Heide follows the development of punched-card technology through four successive moments of provisional path stability, or technological "closure," relating to its use for, first, the compilation of counting-based census statistics; second, the processing of general statistics, third, bookkeeping; and fourth, the operation of large population registries. The bulk of the book documents in great detail the wide variety of user-related factors that shaped the development of these applications in different national contexts. Such factors included: the obstacles presented by prior commitment to an alternate path of technological development; conditions of access to patented technologies; the intrinsic complexity of punched-card technologies, the ability to accumulate relevant expertise, the ability to leverage knowledge in related manufacturing fields, and associated difficulties in manufacture and operational reliability; the degree to which the acceptance of one technology was dependent on the development of ancillary technologies (such as the ability to print the results of calculations or to store and operate with intermediate sums); success in exploiting prime mover advantages (or the failure to do so); the ability to raise sufficient operating capital and effectively manage it; the development of business or social processes of such scale and complexity that they could no longer be adequately controlled through the use of manual methods of data management; the willingness of potential public- and private-sector users to invest in new data-processing technologies that could only be profitably employed on a continuous basis; and the adoption of punched-card technology by a user influential enough to serve as a model for other potential users. Although these factors may cumulatively shed a great deal of light on the theoretical question that Heide set for himself, it is less clear that potential readers will share this particular set of concerns. Ultimately, Heide's decision to bracket the question of how this new technology affected the organization and strategic functioning of firms and states or the meaning of the information explosion that appears in the book's title will limit the appeal of the book. The one point where Heide looks beyond the dynamics of technological change is his discussion in the final chapter of the use of punched cards to maintain large population registries. These registries enhanced the ability of nation-states to locate and control their individual inhabitants. In this vein, card systems changed over time in relation to different organizations' technological needs, resulting in systems that were significantly different and more powerful than the original system. Examples of institutions that developed more sophisticated punched-card technology include the U.S. Social Security system, the French national population and military mobilization registry, and the belated efforts of the Nazis to develop an automated registry of the entire population that would help identify and exclude unwelcome members of society. The one point where Heide looks beyond the dynamics of technological change is his discussion of the use of punched cards to maintain large population registries that enhanced the ability of nation-states to locate and control their individual inhabitants. Technologically, the card systems developed for the American Social Security system, the French national population and military mobilization registry, and the belated efforts of the Nazis to develop an automated registry to facilitate the mobilization of the population and the identification and exclusion of community aliens all required new punched-card technologies that were different and more powerful than those developed for existing bookkeeping systems. In the long-simmering debate over the role of census data, population registries, the _Volks_- and _Judenkarteien_, and punched-card systems in the perpetration of the Holocaust, Heide stakes out a rather moderate position. He argues, echoing claims made by others, that the information contained in the nationwide network of locally maintained manual population registries set up on the basis of the 1938 _Reichsmeldeordnung_ was, in conjunction with other information available to the police and security agencies, more than adequate to seek out Jews for deportation. This ability becomes all the more important since it was possible even in the absence of an automated national registry whose development was, in any case, blocked by the resistance of the Gauleiter and other officials to the further centralization of power in the hands of Albert Speer. The book ultimately remains a narrowly focused study in the sociology of technology. It does not address either the question of how this new technology affected the organization and strategic functioning of firms and states. Nor does Heide discuss the meaning of the information explosion that appears in the book's title. Without asking Heide to have written a different book that would add to the substantial literature that does address these topics, there is no way to dismiss the problem that Heide's decision to ignore these issues will limit the appeal of the book for many audiences. Citation: Larry Frohmann. Review of Heide, Lars, _Punched-Card Systems and the Early Information Explosion, 1880--1945_. H-German, H-Net Reviews. May, 2010. URL: http://www.h-net.org/reviews/showrev.php?id=30100 This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License. -- Julie Katrine Hugsted phone: DK: (+ 45) 51 92 02 83

3 2

CFP SIGCIS Workshop (October 2010) Deadline 1 JULY
by Thomas Haigh 07 May '10

07 May '10

Hello everyone, A proud moment for SIGCIS as we issue the call for our second annual workshop, held in conjunction with the SHOT meeting. There is a theme we hope will lead to some interesting new ways of thinking about work in the field, but contributions on all topics are welcome. Please contribute your work and help to firmly establish this as the annual peer reviewed academic gathering the field has long needed. We are particularly keen to welcome graduate students for regular presentations and a projected dissertations in progress session. SIGCIS has a little money to assist graduate students with travel costs and we hope to raise a little more before the meeting. (Remember the Mahoney Fund - details at http://www.sigcis.org/?q=mahoney) See below for the call, and remember to send your questions to the workshop chair Jeff Tang, tangjd(a)jmu.edu. Tom Haigh (www.tomandmaria.com/tom) CALL FOR PAPERS SIGCIS Workshop 2010: Materiality and Immateriality in the History of Computing Sunday October 3 2010, Tacoma, Washington For the latest updates see http://www.sigcis.org/?q=workshop10. The Society for the History of Technology's Special Interest Group for Computers, Information and Society (SIGCIS - www.sigcis.org) welcomes submissions for its latest one day scholarly workshop on Materiality and Immateriality in the History of Computing. The workshop will be held in Tacoma Washington all day on Sunday, October 3 2010. This is the final day of the annual SHOT meeting. SHOT has reserved that day for SIG events and therefore the symposium will not overlap scheduled sessions in the main program. For details on the main SHOT meeting see http://www.historyoftechnology.org/annual_meeting.html In keeping with the conference theme contributions that consider material aspects of the history of information technology (people, things, places, physical technologies and their relationship to work, practice, users, standards, and so on), immaterial aspects of the history of computing (logical standards, program code, theory, virtual technologies/environments/communities) or the relationship between the two are articularly welcome. However our practice is to welcome contributions on all topics related to the history of computing whether or not there is an explicit connection with the annual theme. Our membership is interdisciplinary and proposals are expected from the perspectives of business history, labor history, social history, science studies and the history of science as well as from historians of technology. Proposals for entire sessions and individual presenters are both welcome. We hope to run special sessions featuring dissertations in progress and other works in progress. The workshop is a great opportunity to get helpful feedback on your projects in a relaxed and supportive environment. All proposals will be subject to a peer review process. Suggested Formats: Individual contributions can fit one of a variety of formats 1. Traditional 20 to 25-minute presentations followed by a question and answer session with the SIGCIS community. In this case a one-page abstract (maximum 400 words) will be reviewed and included in the electronic conference program. Abstracts should address the paper's topic, argument, evidence used, and contribution to the existing literature. A full version of the paper should be sent to the session commentator at least a week prior to the meeting. 2. Dissertation proposals. We hope to include a dissertations in progress session, in which individuals will present their ongoing dissertation work and seek feedback from the history of computing community. In this case submit your dissertation proposal, which will be included in the electronic conference program if accepted. Participants will be encouraged to read this prior to the session. You will have five to ten minutes to introduce the material, leaving the bulk of time available for discussion. 3. Works in progress. This is your chance to receive informal and expert discussion of draft dissertation chapters, journal articles, or book chapters. Submit a one page abstract (maximum 400 words) including discussion of the current state of the work and any specific kinds of feedback you are seeking. If your proposal is accepted you will need to supply the draft for discussion by 1 September for inclusion in the electronic program for the workshop. You will have five to ten minutes to introduce the material, leaving the bulk of time available for discussion. 4. Proposals in other formats are also welcome. For example round table discussions, demonstrations of software of interest to historians of computing, or "author meets critics" sessions. We follow the normal format for a history meeting. That is: selection on abstracts rather than full papers, no submission of full papers for regular sessions (although works in progress and dissertation proposals must be submitted in advance for inclusion on the workshop website), and no publication of proceedings (and presenters are welcome to submit their work the SIGCIS Member Contributions collection). However presenters in regular sessions will be required to share some version of their paper at least two weeks in advance with the session commentator so that he or she can prepare insightful and helpful remarks People already scheduled to participate on the main SHOT program are welcome to submit an additional proposal to the SIGCIS workshop, but should make sure that there is no overlap between the two presentations All submissions should be made online via the SIGCIS website. Individual submissions should be made at http://www.sigcis.org/?q=workshop10a . Note that this requires a one page curriculum vitae as well as the proposal itself in the form described above. Proposals for complete sessions should be made at http://www.sigcis.org/?q=workshop10b. They should include: * a description of the session that explains how individual papers contribute to an overall theme * the names and email addresses of each presenter * an abstract and title for each presentation (in the form described above) * a one-page c.v. for each presenter and other participant (including commentator or chair if named) Travel Support: The top financial priority of SIGCIS is the support of travel expenses for graduate students, visiting faculty without institutional travel support, and others who would be unable to attend the meeting without travel assistance. The submission includes a box to check if you fall into one of these categories and would like to be considered for an award. These is no need to apply separately, though depending on the volume of requests and available resources we may need to contact you for further information before making a decision. Details on our travel grant program are at www.sigcis.org/q=travelaward <http://www.sigcis.org/?q=travelaward> . Funding sources include donations from SIGCIS members at our annual meeting, income from the Mahoney Fund http://www.sigcis.org/?q=mahoney and support from MIT Press for our annual book auction. Please note that the SHOT Executive Council has told us that presenting at our workshop is not considered as participation in the SHOT program and so does not realistically make you eligible for the main SHOT travel grant program. Last Year's Workshop: This is the second annual SIGCIS workshop. The inaugural 2009 event featured a plenary session followed by six further sessions grouped into two tracks. More than fifty people attended, many staying an extra night and attending a group dinner in the evening after the workshop. You can last year's program at http://www.sigcis.org/?q=workshop09c and a report from the Charles Babbage Institute at http://www.cbi.umn.edu/newsletter/article3.html. We expect to follow a similar format this year. Questions should be addressed to Jeffrey Tang who is serving as chair of the workshop organizing committee. Email tangjd(a)jmu.edu.

1 0

Re: [SIGCIS-Members] Internet history and online genealogy
by Janet Abbate 04 May '10

04 May '10

Thanks to everyone who responded to this. I had referred him to the US National Archives, since genealogical queries are a major portion of the information requests they get from the public, but I had no special knowledge of the Internet side of this. Janet > Begin forwarded message: > > > From: Josh Tapper <josh.tapper(a)gmail.com> > > Date: April 30, 2010 2:48:42 PM EDT > > To: abbate(a)computer.org > > Subject: question, re: Internet history and online genealogy > > > > Dear Prof. Abbate, > > > > My name is Josh Tapper;; I'm a freelance journalist and student at > > the Columbia Graduate School of Journalism in New York. For the > > past few months I've been reporting a story on the rise of > > mainstream, or popular, genealogy and what that means for the field > > at large. Ancestry.com, an online genealogy search engine and data > > compiler, is the world's most prominent source for genealogical > > research. Essentially, it controls how people do genealogy. > > > > Generally speaking, genealogy has been on the web for years. I've > > often heard that it's one of the most search topics. I've also > > heard that genealogy (and porn) was behind most Internet activity. > > > > I was hoping you might be able to comment on the historical > > relationship between genealogy and the Internet. If not, would you > > be able to recommend someone who might? > > > > Thank you very much, > > > > -Josh Tapper > > M.S. Magazine '10 > > Columbia Graduate School of Journalism > Dr. Janet Abbate Dept. of Science & Technology in Society Virginia Tech

1 0

Fwd: question, re: Internet history and online genealogy
by Janet Abbate 04 May '10

04 May '10

If anyone knows about this and cares to respond, please reply directly to josh.tapper(a)gmail.com. Thanks, Janet Begin forwarded message: > From: Josh Tapper <josh.tapper(a)gmail.com> > Date: April 30, 2010 2:48:42 PM EDT > To: abbate(a)computer.org > Subject: question, re: Internet history and online genealogy > > Dear Prof. Abbate, > > My name is Josh Tapper;; I'm a freelance journalist and student at > the Columbia Graduate School of Journalism in New York. For the > past few months I've been reporting a story on the rise of > mainstream, or popular, genealogy and what that means for the field > at large. Ancestry.com, an online genealogy search engine and data > compiler, is the world's most prominent source for genealogical > research. Essentially, it controls how people do genealogy. > > Generally speaking, genealogy has been on the web for years. I've > often heard that it's one of the most search topics. I've also > heard that genealogy (and porn) was behind most Internet activity. > > I was hoping you might be able to comment on the historical > relationship between genealogy and the Internet. If not, would you > be able to recommend someone who might? > > Thank you very much, > > -Josh Tapper > M.S. Magazine '10 > Columbia Graduate School of Journalism Dr. Janet Abbate Dept. of Science & Technology in Society Virginia Tech

2 1

ACM history grants ---> revised deadline THIS Friday (7 May)
by Thomas Misa 03 May '10

03 May '10

Hi all, The ACM History Committee extends the deadline for submitting fellowship proposals to THIS Friday, owing to some uncertainty in the publicity. A reminder that there are TWO grants being offered. A $5,000 award for a project focusing on ACM's institutional history and a $2500 travel award for a project on ACM members, activities, networks. (You needn't specify which award.) All you need to do -- and you must do this! -- is explain how your project relates to the ACM in some fashion. Best, Tom ======================= ACM History Committee Fellowships in ACM History The Association for Computing Machinery, founded in 1947, is the oldest and largest educational and scientific society dedicated to the computing profession, and today has members in more than 100 countries. To encourage historical research, the ACM History Committee plans to make two awards. One, a travel grant of $2,500 to support historical research on the wide variety of ACM-related activities, including ACM members, officers, and prize winners. Second, a fellowship grant of $5,000 focusing on ACM’s rich institutional history, including consideration of its organization, publications, SIG activities, and sponsored conferences. Successful candidates for either award may be of any rank, from graduate students through senior researchers. To Apply: Applicants for either award should send a 2-page CV as well as a 750-word project description that [a] describes the proposed research project; [b] identifies the importance of specific ACM historical materials, whether traditional archival collections or online historical materials (oral histories, digitized conference papers, ACM organizational records, et al.); [c] discusses the project’s planned outcome (e.g. conference paper, journal article, book or dissertation chapter, teaching resource, museum exhibit, etc.); and [d] outlines a timeline for completing the project, generally within one calendar year of the award, including a final project report. In preparing a proposal, applicants should examine the extensive list of “ACM Research Materials” posted at <history.acm.org/content.php?do=links> as well as “Sources for ACM History,” CACM 50 #5 (May 2007): 36-41 <doi.acm.org/10.1145/1230819.1230836>. Other research materials relating to ACM’s rich history may also be used. Applicants should include a letter of endorsement from their home institution or an external scholarly reference. Proposals are due by [revised:] 7 May 2010. Proposals should be submitted as .pdf documents to <history-webmaster(a)acm.org>. Notification of awards will be made within six weeks.

1 0