January 2015 - Members - lists.sigcis.org

Query re Gordon Welchman
by Dave Walden 18 Jan '15

18 Jan '15

Hello, Around 1951, Welchman taught what is said to be the first course on digital computer in MIT's electrical engineer department. I am wondering if anyone on this list has more information or a pointer to more information regarding Welchman and this course. From Brian Randell, I already have a statement by Welchman that he taught the course. I have sent a query to the MIT Archives. I have sent a query to Joel Greenberg (via the Bletchly Park website -- a direct email address will be appreciated) who wrote the recent biography of Welchman and Ultra to see if he (Greenberg) has anything about this course in the documents he obtained from the Welchman family. I will also ask Bob Everett or Jay Forrester if they know anything about the course. Best regards, Dave -- home address: 12 Linden Rd., E. Sandwich, MA 02537 home ph=508-888-7655; cell ph = 503-757-3137 (often don't carry it) email address: dave(a)walden-family.com; website: <http://www.walden-family.com/bbn/>http://www.walden-family.com/

2 2

ENIAC history
by Ceruzzi, Paul 16 Jan '15

16 Jan '15

It is fascinating to see Tom and others finding new and interesting things to say about the ENIAC and its programmers, a topic that some of us thought was tapped out years ago. I've been asked to write a short piece about the ENIAC in context. I was reluctant to trot out the old cliché about how much power you have in a cell phone, etc. But I did come across this app for the iPhone, which puts the ENIAC in an interesting light: http://www.winchester.com/learning-center/ballistics-calculator/Pages/balli… Maybe this is old news to many of you, but it was a surprise to me. A ballistics calculator that does what the ENIAC was originally built for. So it is not just an "ENIAC in a box"; it is "The Aberdeen Proving Ground in a box." Recall that in addition to the ENIAC, Aberdeen also had IBM punched card equipment, including some custom-designed by Wallace Eckert (the IBM PSRC), a Bell Labs Model V relay computer, teams of human (mostly women) computers, and Lord knows what else. Who could have thought we'd come to this? Paul

3 3

My CACM column on "The Tears of Donald Knuth"
by Thomas Haigh 16 Jan '15

16 Jan '15

Hello Everyone, Thought you might be interested in my latest "Historical Reflections" column in Communications of the ACM, titled "The Tears of Donald Knuth: Has the History of Computing Taken a Tragic Turn?" (I thought about calling it "Flow My Tears, The Computer Scientist Said," in honor of a 1970s Philip K. Dick novel). http://cacm.acm.org/magazines/2015/1/181633-the-tears-of-donald-knuth/fullte xt The piece builds on SIGCIS list discussion from last summer, when the video of Knuth's talk, "Let's Not Dumb Down the History of Computer Science" was posted online (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAXdDEQveKw) Knuth's talk was, in turn, centered on his distress at reading Martin Campbell-Kelly's paper "The History of the History of Software," which he saw as celebrating a regrettable shift away from technical history of computing. Campbell-Kelly recently published his own response to Knuth in IEEE Annals: http://www.computer.org/csdl/mags/an/2014/03/man2014030096.pdf. As a Ph.D. historian my natural sympathies are with the turn towards broader historical approaches praised by Campbell-Kelly, but I have also come to appreciate the value and rigor of more technical kinds of history (including early programming tools and techniques by both Knuth and Campbell-Kelly). So I attempted to be fair to both perspectives, while stressing that the history of computer science accounts for a quite small proportion of the work now being done on the history of computing. I also argue the realities of academic society mean that the kinds of history favored by Knuth will only flourish if computer scientists themselves make a significant investment in historical work. Finally I took the opportunity to cite some outstanding work on the history of computer science and to publicize some new initiatives and scholars in the area. Such is the allure of Knuth's name that the column was seized on by tech aggregation sites such as Slashdot, Hacker News, and Reddit when it first appeared online over the Christmas break. It's also been tweeted and blogged, and currently has about 75,000 downloads - more than the all the other articles in the January CACM combined. I can't say that the online discussions were particularly well informed, although they do include some thoughtful comments along with sentiments such as "Gawd academia disgusts me. These "historians" would be more useful to society if they dug cans and bottles out of the trash." Anything that makes more people think about the history of computing and its purpose is a good thing for the field. I'd like to thank those who commented on drafts of the column, including Len Shustek, Dave Walden, David Hemmendinger, Bill Aspray, Chuck House, and Paul Fishwick. Not all of them agreed with all of my points, but I did find their input very useful in sharpening the argument and presenting my thoughts in a way less likely to unnecessarily offend computer scientists. Best wishes for the New Year, Tom

7 10

Re: [SIGCIS-Members] My CACM column on "The Tears of Donald Knuth"
by Matthew Kirschenbaum 16 Jan '15

16 Jan '15

This would be my main question as well: What, if anything, makes source material for the history of computer science more difficult to grapple with than that of any other era or topic? In fact I suspect there *are* some pretty compelling ways to come at that somewhat tendentious question, but that they have more to do (as I take it Tom was suggesting back in his original CACM piece) with the institutionalization and socialization of historiography itself in and around CS, and not the mere "technical" pedigree of the material. I have in mind here access to archives and primary sources, as well as differing standards of documentation in different quadrants of CS. I've certainly run up against this in my work on word processing, though I realize that's still more history of software than CS proper. Best, Matt On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 2:33 PM, Janet Abbate <abbate(a)vt.edu> wrote: > Dave, that's a great idea for a SIGCIS panel. We could ask participants to > compile and present either a historical overview of the main milestones in > their computing speciality, or a list of its major concepts, tools or > approaches (whatever the main "outputs" are in their specialty). The > "computing speciality" could be as broad or narrow as they feel comfortable > discussing. > > As Tom points out, the obstacle to historians is knowing *what* we need to > learn about computer science. Actually learning the material is no harder > than learning other esoteric material historians have to grapple with. > > Bonus: We could see some lively debate if the panelists come up with > non-intersecting lists of the great achievements in their field. : ) > > Janet > > On Jan 15, 2015, at 8:40 30AM, Dave Walden wrote: > > > There are lots of people who already know a lot of computer science who > could be encouraged to help research or write more history, for example, > > - I know an undergraduate history major who then got a PhD in computer > science > > - lots of us who studied and practice computer science for our career > have retired and now have time to research and/or write computing history > > How about a SIGCIS session at SHOT oriented to one-time practitioners > and advertising for their participation on lists where they might see the > session announcement, e.g., on the Internet History list. > > Any of the above might also be willing to collaborate in a piece of > history research. > > I know lots of us who have spent lots of time helping popular authors of > computing history understand the technology. We could also help > professionally trained historians if they asked us, either as named > co-authors and full collaborators or simply helping with technology in the > background with an acknowledgement at the end of the paper. If we don't > know the technology area ourselves, we probably know someone who knows who > might be willing to help. > > Of course, there is also quite a number of professionally trained > historians who have undergraduate and perhaps graduate degrees in computer > science. > > > > > > > > At 07:59 PM 1/14/2015, Nabeel Siddiqui wrote: > > > >> Dear all, > >> > >> Janet beat me to it, but I had a similar reaction upon reading the > article.Â I believe that two additional factors will lead to the technical > history of computer science diminishing even further. Â > >> > >> First, it is nearly impossible for a graduate student to currently > spend time gaining a technical understanding of computer science and still > stay competitive for jobs in a humanities field.Â As Tom noted, there are > no jobs available for a student that wanted to do this kind of work. I > would take the technical history of computer science to be, at best, suited > for an intellectual history position.Â Intellectual history itself has > eschewed this type of approach and now heavily focuses on social history. > There, even a student trained in intellectual history would have a hard > time gaining a foothold in the academy.Â A student would likely have to > learn the technical literature on their own unless they were specifically > admitted to a program to study the history of computers. In my own > interdisciplinary program of American Studies, I have had the opportunity > to take a great deal of independent studies, but I have still had a > difficult time taking a course outside of humanities departments. Â > >> > >> Two, while this listserv is an exception, few historians of science are > trained in computer science in any significant way.Â The few that are > usually have their undergraduate degrees in computer science rather than > vice versa.Â While some of these people have been able to dable in both > history and computer science, I would say it is getting rarer with newer > students.Â In fact, I have found that many students of computer science > now take more courses in "marketable" skills like programming and > networking.Â While these contain a technical component, I don't know how > many in the future would have the training necessary to understand old > technical documents that may contain approaches that are outdated or > unnecessary for their own work. Â > >> > >> I would love to see some fellowships or opportunities for humanities > graduate students to counter this.Â In my own research on personal > computers, I come through a great deal of articles dealing with technical > topics in early hobbyist magazines.Â Unfortunately, because these hobbyist > magazines assume that their readers are other engineers, things like > schematics, code, etc. is often lost on me.Â I don't believe a historian > necessarily needs to know this to gain the gist of the articles, but it > would be helpful.Â Business historians have been doing this for a while > with workshops that teach economics and finance basics.Â Digital > humanities scholars have also been at the forefront of humanities oriented > technical training with workshops on programming and statistics. Â > >> > >> Sincerely, > >> > >> Nabeel > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > > This email is relayed from members(a)sigcis.org, the email discussion > list of SHOT SIGCIS. Opinions expressed here are those of the member > posting and are not reviewed, edited, or endorsed by 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(a)sigcis.org, the email discussion list > of SHOT SIGCIS. Opinions expressed here are those of the member posting and > are not reviewed, edited, or endorsed by 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 > -- Matthew Kirschenbaum Associate Professor of English Associate Director, Maryland Institute for Technology in the Humanities (MITH) University of Maryland 301-405-8505 or 301-314-7111 (fax) http://mkirschenbaum.net and @mkirschenbaum on Twitter Track Changes tumblr: http://trackchangesbook.tumblr.com/

1 0

Re: [SIGCIS-Members] My CACM column on "The Tears of Donald Knuth"
by Dave Walden 16 Jan '15

16 Jan '15

There are lots of people who already know a lot of computer science who could be encouraged to help research or write more history, for example, - I know an undergraduate history major who then got a PhD in computer science - lots of us who studied and practice computer science for our career have retired and now have time to research and/or write computing history How about a SIGCIS session at SHOT oriented to one-time practitioners and advertising for their participation on lists where they might see the session announcement, e.g., on the Internet History list. Any of the above might also be willing to collaborate in a piece of history research. I know lots of us who have spent lots of time helping popular authors of computing history understand the technology. We could also help professionally trained historians if they asked us, either as named co-authors and full collaborators or simply helping with technology in the background with an acknowledgement at the end of the paper. If we don't know the technology area ourselves, we probably know someone who knows who might be willing to help. Of course, there is also quite a number of professionally trained historians who have undergraduate and perhaps graduate degrees in computer science. At 07:59 PM 1/14/2015, Nabeel Siddiqui wrote: >Dear all, > >Janet beat me to it, but I had a similar >reaction upon reading the article.Â I believe >that two additional factors will lead to the >technical history of computer science diminishing even further. Â > >First, it is nearly impossible for a graduate >student to currently spend time gaining a >technical understanding of computer science and >still stay competitive for jobs in a humanities >field.Â As Tom noted, there are no jobs >available for a student that wanted to do this >kind of work. I would take the technical history >of computer science to be, at best, suited for >an intellectual history position.Â Intellectual >history itself has eschewed this type of >approach and now heavily focuses on social >history. There, even a student trained in >intellectual history would have a hard time >gaining a foothold in the academy.Â A student >would likely have to learn the technical >literature on their own unless they were >specifically admitted to a program to study the >history of computers. In my own >interdisciplinary program of American Studies, I >have had the opportunity to take a great deal of >independent studies, but I have still had a >difficult time taking a course outside of humanities departments. Â > >Two, while this listserv is an exception, few >historians of science are trained in computer >science in any significant way.Â The few that >are usually have their undergraduate degrees in >computer science rather than vice versa.Â While >some of these people have been able to dable in >both history and computer science, I would say >it is getting rarer with newer students.Â In >fact, I have found that many students of >computer science now take more courses in >"marketable" skills like programming and >networking.Â While these contain a technical >component, I don't know how many in the future >would have the training necessary to understand >old technical documents that may contain >approaches that are outdated or unnecessary for their own work. Â > >I would love to see some fellowships or >opportunities for humanities graduate students >to counter this.Â In my own research on >personal computers, I come through a great deal >of articles dealing with technical topics in >early hobbyist magazines.Â Unfortunately, >because these hobbyist magazines assume that >their readers are other engineers, things like >schematics, code, etc. is often lost on me.Â I >don't believe a historian necessarily needs to >know this to gain the gist of the articles, but >it would be helpful.Â Business historians have >been doing this for a while with workshops that >teach economics and finance basics.Â Digital >humanities scholars have also been at the >forefront of humanities oriented technical >training with workshops on programming and statistics. Â > >Sincerely, > >Nabeel >

3 4

Mauchly video published
by Evan Koblentz 14 Jan '15

14 Jan '15

SIGCIS'rs, My user group, MARCH, just published a two-part video of John Mauchly keynoting the 1977 Trenton Computer Festival. He is introduced by Western Electric engineer Claude Kagan (who also led a high school computer club here in central New Jersey from the mid-1960s to mid-1970s). There are further comments from Kay Mauchly, followed by audience Q&A. Special thanks to Trenton Computer Festival co-founders Al Katz and Sol Libes for allowing us to post this video. https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL_e5fSxflvrxXO5Ddh9ZXX-cli94zF3Pc

1 0

My CACM column on "The Tears of Donald Knuth"
by Thomas Haigh 14 Jan '15

14 Jan '15

Hello Everyone, I thought you might be interested in my latest "Historical Reflections" column in Communications of the ACM, titled "The Tears of Donald Knuth: Has the History of Computing Taken a Tragic Turn?" (I thought about calling it "Flow My Tears, The Computer Scientist Said," in honor of a 1970s Philip K. Dick novel). http://cacm.acm.org/magazines/2015/1/181633-the-tears-of-donald-knuth/fullte xt The piece builds on SIGCIS list discussion from last summer, when the video of Knuth's talk, "Let's Not Dumb Down the History of Computer Science" was posted online (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAXdDEQveKw) Knuth's talk was, in turn, centered on his distress at reading Martin Campbell-Kelly's paper "The History of the History of Software," which he saw as celebrating a regrettable shift away from technical history of computing. Campbell-Kelly recently published his own response to Knuth in IEEE Annals: http://www.computer.org/csdl/mags/an/2014/03/man2014030096.pdf. As a Ph.D. historian my natural sympathies are with the turn towards broader historical approaches praised by Campbell-Kelly, but I have also come to appreciate the value and rigor of more technical kinds of history (including early programming tools and techniques by both Knuth and Campbell-Kelly). So I attempted to be fair to both perspectives, while stressing that the history of computer science accounts for a quite small proportion of the work now being done on the history of computing. I also argue the realities of academic society mean that the kinds of history favored by Knuth will only flourish if computer scientists themselves make a significant investment in historical work. Finally I took the opportunity to cite some outstanding work on the history of computer science from the past two decades and to publicize some current initiatives and new scholars in the area. Such is the allure of Knuth's name that the column was seized on by tech aggregation sites such as Slashdot, Hacker News, and Reddit when it first appeared online over the Christmas break. It's also been tweeted and blogged, and currently has about 75,000 downloads - more than the all the other articles in the January CACM combined. I can't say that the online discussions were uniformly well informed, although they do include some thoughtful comments along with sentiments such as "Gawd academia disgusts me. These "historians" would be more useful to society if they dug cans and bottles out of the trash." Anything that makes more people think about the history of computing and its purpose is a good thing for the field. I'd like to thank those who commented on drafts of the column, including Len Shustek, Dave Walden, David Hemmendinger, Bill Aspray, Chuck House, and Paul Fishwick. Not all of them agreed with all of my points, but I did find their input very useful in sharpening the argument and presenting my thoughts in a way less likely to unnecessarily offend computer scientists. Best wishes for the New Year, Tom

1 0

CiE 2015 in Bucharest
by Liesbeth De Mol 14 Jan '15

14 Jan '15

Dear all, as some of you know, the Association for Computability in Europe organizes since more than 10 years now the annual interdisciplinary CiE conference. The public consists mostly of computer scientists, logicians and mathematicians but from the very first conference onward, the organizers have tried to build bridges with historians and philosophers of computing. Amongst others they organize special sessions on the history and/or philosophy of computing every year. With the discussion that was started after "Knuth's tears" (see e.g. Tom's recent piece <http://cacm.acm.org/magazines/2015/1/181633-the-tears-of-donald-knuth/fullt…> in the CACM) in the background of my mind, I think that this conference offers a great opportunity for those of you who also want to present their work to and discuss it with non-historians. The extended deadline is January 21 and you can find the (final) cfp below, my very best wishes, Liesbeth. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CiE 2015: 3rd CfP - EXTENDED DEADLINE and BEST STUDENT PAPER AWARD ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- FINAL CALL FOR PAPERS (incl. deadline extension due to popular demand) 3rd CALL FOR PAPERS: COMPUTABILITY IN EUROPE 2015: Evolving Computability Bucharest, Romania June 29 - July 3 http://fmi.unibuc.ro/CiE2015/ IMPORTANT DATES: EXTENDED Submission Deadline for LNCS: 21 January 2015 Notification of authors: 9 March 2015 Deadline for final revisions: 6 April 2015 CiE 2015 is the 11-th conference organized by CiE (Computability in Europe), a European association of mathematicians, logicians, computer scientists, philosophers, physicists and others interested in new developments in computability and their underlying significance for the real world. Previous meetings have taken place in Amsterdam (2005), Swansea (2006), Siena (2007), Athens (2008), Heidelberg (2009), Ponta Delgada (2010), Sofia (2011), Cambridge (2012), Milan (2013) and Budapest (2014) Evolution of the universe, and us within it, invite a parallel evolution in understanding. The CiE agenda - fundamental and engaged - targets the extracting and developing of computational models basic to current challenges. From the origins of life, to the understanding of human mentality, to the characterising of quantum randomness - computability theoretic questions arise in many guises. The CiE community, this coming year meeting for the first time in Bucharest, carries forward the search for coherence, depth and new thinking across this rich and vital field of research. In all cases we are looking for fundamental and theoretical submissions. In line with other conferences in this series, CiE 2015 has a broad scope and provides a forum for the discussion of theoretical and practical issues in Computability with an emphasis on new paradigms of computation and the development of their mathematical theory. We particularly invite papers that build bridges between different parts of the research community. For topics covered by the conference, please visit http://fmi.unibuc.ro/CiE2015/topics.html AWARDS: The best student paper award is presented to the author(s) of the best paper, as selected by the PC, written solely by student author(s). This award is sponsored by Springer. FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES: CiE 2015 has received funding from ASL (Association for Symbolic Logic) and EATCS (European Association for Theoretical Computer Science) that allows students who are members of ASL or EATCS and want to attend CiE 2015 to apply for travel funds or a reduction of the early registration fee. Preference will be given to presenters of accepted papers. Applications for ASL travel grants have to be addressed directly to ASL, with a strict deadline of March 28, 2015. Applications for EATCS travel grants have to be sent to cie2015(a)fmi.unibuc.ro <mailto:cie2015@fmi.unibuc.ro> prior to the early registration deadline. TUTORIAL SPEAKERS * John Reif (Duke Unversity) * Steve Simpson (Pennsylvania State University) PLENARY SPEAKERS * Ann Copestake (University of Cambridge) * Mircea Dumitru (University of Bucharest, Public Lecture) * Pawel Gawrychowski (Max-Planck-Institut fuer Informatik) * Julia Knight (University of Notre Dame) * Anca Muscholl (Universite Bordeaux) * Gheorghe Paun (Romanian Academy) * Alexander Razborov (University of Chicago and Steklov Mathematical Institute) * Vlatko Vedral (University of Oxford) SPECIAL SESSIONS on * Representing streams (Organizers: Joerg Endrullis and Dimtri Hendriks) * Automata, logic and infinite games (Organizers: Dietmar Berwanger and Ioana Leustean) * Reverse mathematics (Organizers: Damir Dzhafarov and Alberto Marcone) * Classical computability theory (Organizers: Marat Arslanov and Steffen Lempp) * Bio-inspired computation (Organizers: Andrei Paun and Petr Sosik) * History and philosophy of computing (Organizers: Christine Proust and Marco Benini) The speakers of the special sessions may be find at http://fmi.unibuc.ro/CiE2015/sessions.html The PROGRAMME COMMITTEE consists of: * Marat Arslanov (Kazan) * Jeremy Avigad (Pittsburgh) * Veronica Becher (Buenos Aires) * Arnold Beckmann (Swansea) * Laurent Bienvenu (Paris) * Alessandra Carbone (Paris) * Gabriel Ciobanu (Iasi) * S Barry Cooper (Leeds) * Laura Crosilla (Leeds) * Liesbeth De Mol (Ghent) * Walter Dean (Warwick) * Volker Diekert (Stuttgart) * Damir Dzhafarov (Storrs, Connecticut) * Peter van Emde Boas (Amsterdam) * Rachel Epstein (Harvard) * Johanna Franklin (Hempstead, NY) * Neil Ghani (Glasgow) * Joel David Hamkins (New York) * Rosalie Iemhoff (Utrecht) * Emmanuel Jeandel (LORIA) * Natasha Jonoska (Tampa, FL) * Antonina Kolokolova (St.John's, NL) * Antonin Kucera (Prague) * Oliver Kutz (Magdeburg) * Benedikt Loewe (Hamburg & Amsterdam) * Jack Lutz (Ames, IA) * Florin Manea (Kiel) * Alberto Marcone (Udine) * Radu Mardare (Aalborg) * Joe Miller (Madison, WI) * Russell Miller (Flushing, NY) * Mia Minnes (La Jolla, CA) * Victor Mitrana (Bucharest, co-chair) * Ian Pratt-Hartmann (Manchester) * Dag Normann (Oslo) * Mehrnoosh Sadrzadeh (London) * Anne Smith (St Andrews) * Mariya Soskova (Sofia, co-chair) * Susan Stepney (York) * Paul Spirakis (Patras & Liverpool) * Jacobo Toran (Ulm) * Marius Zimand (Towson, MD) The PROGRAMME COMMITTEE cordially invites all researchers (European and non-European) in computability related areas to submit their papers (in PDF format, maximum 10 pages using the LNCS style) for presentation at CiE 2015. The submission site https://www.easychair.org/conferences/?conf=cie2015 is open. For submission instructions consult http://fmi.unibuc.ro/CiE2015/submission.html The CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS will be published by LNCS, Springer Verlag. The CONFERENCE POSTER can be downloaded from http://fmi.unibuc.ro/CiE2015/images/CiE_Poster.jpg

1 0

SIGCIS public presence / media page
by Rebecca Slayton 13 Jan '15

13 Jan '15

Hello everyone, Several of us have been talking about how SIGCIS can better reach its various publics, and we are looking for feedback on the following options. I have bolded some questions that we hope you will address, ideally in a message to me (rs849(a)cornell.edu<mailto:rs849@cornell.edu>) rather than the whole list, so that we don’t subject everyone to a deluge! I will compile responses after one week or so, so if possible please reply by November 28. Since SIGCIS is a volunteer organization, and therefore can’t do anything too labor-intensive, we will likely start small. In addition to the bolded questions below, please also let us know which of the following options you think should have the greatest priority. 1. We are considering creating a media page that would trumpet our collective expertise a bit, and be directed to (at least) three potential constituencies: journalists and other popular writers; lawyers seeking expert witnesses; and contractors looking for professional historians. At a minimum, it would include a keyword searchable “experts directory” which would link to the profiles generated and maintained by the SIGCIS membership. For an example, see http://cisac.fsi.stanford.edu/people/mediaguide Note that this would rely upon members keeping their profiles up to date! Should we create this media page and send periodic reminders that members should update their profiles? 2. The media page could include a menu of “topics” linked to specific experts. This menu could be a simple dropdown (as shown here http://cisac.fsi.stanford.edu/people/mediaguide ) or a page displaying all areas at once, ideally with images (as shown here http://cisac.fsi.stanford.edu/research ) This prompts (at least) two questions. o Would you like the media page to include a topics list or not? If so, what topics would you suggest? o How should members be linked to topics? If members are allowed to link themselves to the topics of their choosing, we risk the occasional person claiming more expertise than is warranted. Alternately, members could request an administrator or group of administrators to add links to specific topics, vetting the requests very lightly. This latter option would ideally include an explicit basis for creating and/or refusing a linkage (even if refusals were very occasional). A relevant peer reviewed publication (PhD dissertations included) is one potential criterion; others could be proposed. 3. The media page could include a field in which individuals could pose questions, which would be vetted by an administrator and then sent to the list if appropriate. We would want to include explicit language to deter high schoolers and others looking a quick answer to homework questions, etc. 4. The media page could include a link to a page on “Popular controversies in computer history,” which Evan Koblentz has generously volunteered to help create and manage. This would give the membership some opportunity to address factual questions or clear problems in the popular literature, hopefully without appearing too pedantic and without obscuring the very real ambiguities that come up in historical records and interpretation. If you would like to see this page created, what controversies would you like to see included, and what content could you contribute? 5. We could make the SIGCIS homepage AND the media page more visually appealing by scrolling through some pictures related to our topics (for an example of a homepage that scrolls through automatically, see http://cisac.fsi.stanford.edu/ the difference is we’d want something that represents our topics; pictures of ourselves would likely go elsewhere on the site). Do you have any images that we could use without running into expensive copyright issues? Obviously there are many other options and models out there, but hopefully this can get the conversation started. Please let us know your thoughts on which of these options we should, and should not, be pursuing (and with what priority). Thanks! Rebecca (with the help of Evan Koblentz, Tom Haigh, Andy Russell, Ramesh Subramanian, and Chris Leslie) Rebecca Slayton Assistant Professor, Cornell University Department of Science & Technology Studies Judith Reppy Institute for Peace and Conflict Studies 334 Rockefeller Hall | Fax 607-255-6044

2 2

CFP: Taylor's World Conference, Sept 24-25, 2015
by Andrew Russell 13 Jan '15

13 Jan '15

Colleagues - Some of you may be interested in a conference we are hosting at Stevens Institute of Technology in September 2015, on the life and legacy of Frederick Winslow Taylor. As you will see from the description below, we hope to host a broad and interdisciplinary gathering that will include significant consideration of Taylorism in the digital age. Prof. Simon Head (NYU and Oxford, author of Mindless: Why Smarter Machines are Making Dumber Humans) has agreed to give a keynote address. For details, please see below and visit the conference website, https://www.stevens.edu/library/taylorsworld. Submissions are due March 1, 2015. Please share and cross-post widely! Andy —————————————————————————————— https://www.stevens.edu/library/taylorsworld Call for Papers On September 24th and 25th, 2015, Stevens Institute of Technology will be hosting a conference on the life and legacy of Frederick Winslow Taylor, a graduate of Stevens who is widely recognized as the father of scientific management. The event marks the centennial of Taylor’s death in 1915, and will explore both Taylor’s place in history and his legacy in the 21st century. We welcome proposals for either individual papers or full panels. Potential topics include but are in no way limited to: Taylor’s influence on contemporary management practice The movement of Taylor’s ideas around the globe Vestiges of Taylorism in digital media and labor, including Digital Turking and other forms of crowd sourcing The place of organized labor, race, gender, and sexuality in Taylor’s thought and work Taylor’s place in intellectual and cultural history Taylor’s influence on sports technologies, especially golf and tennis The effect of Taylorism on business strategy and technological change Stevens Institute of Technology <http://www.stevens.edu/>is located in Hoboken, NJ, directly across the Hudson River from New York City. Founded in 1870, Stevens students, faculty, and partners leverage their collective real-world experience and culture of innovation, research and entrepreneurship to confront global challenges in engineering, science, systems and technology management. In 1933, Stevens Institute of Technology held a Fiftieth Anniversary celebration of the graduation of Frederick Winslow Taylor. At that time his family, friends and associates presented personal mementos, books, documents and graphic material to Stevens in his memory. It was an important occasion to which many close friends and associates came to honor him. Upon the death of Dr. Taylor's widow, his sons, Dr. Kempton P.A. Taylor and Mr. Robert P.A. Taylor, presented the Taylor archive <https://www.stevens.edu/library/collections/frederick-winslow-taylor> to Stevens in 1949. Please submit proposals for papers or panels by 1 March 2015, by filling out submission proposal form <https://www.stevens.edu/library/taylorsworldsubmission>. Paper proposals should be 250–500 words; panel proposals should collect individual paper abstracts of that same length and also include a brief description of the panel’s overarching theme. Panel proposals may also suggest possible commentators. All other inquiries about the conference can be sent to Leah Loscutoff, lloscuto(a)stevens.edu <mailto:lloscuto@stevens.edu>. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Andrew L. Russell, Ph.D. Director, Program in Science & Technology Studies Associate Professor, History College of Arts & Letters Stevens Institute of Technology Hoboken, New Jersey 07030 t. 201-216-5400 || f. 201-216-8245 arussell(a)stevens.edu || @RussellProf www.stevens.edu/cal/sts <http://www.stevens.edu/cal/sts> || www.arussell.org <http://www.arussell.org/> Open Standards and the Digital Age: History, Ideology, and Networks (Now available from Cambridge University Press <http://www.cambridge.org/us/knowledge/academic_discountpromotion/?site_loca…> and Amazon.com <http://www.amazon.com/Open-Standards-Digital-Age-Enterprise/dp/1107612047/>)

1 0