January 2017 - Members - lists.sigcis.org

Resources on Ayyadurai saga
by Thomas Haigh 23 Jan '17

23 Jan '17

Sounds like good idea. I’m busy with some other projects right now, and in any event it would be good to have somebody else take the lead on this for a while – make it more apparent to casual observers that there is a consensus in the history of computing community on this. Here are some resources that might be useful for someone thinking of writing on this issue: · http://www.sigcis.org/ayyadurai - my main page (includes links to various video and media content that would look good in a blog post, including a Xerox video). This tries to document and evaluate every historical claim made by Ayyadurai. · http://www.tomandmaria.com/Tom/Writing/CACM-SevenLessons.pdf my CACM article with lessons to be learned from the initial part of the case. This is more of a general reflection on what was going on from a media narrative viewpoint. · http://www.inventorofemail.com/ Ayyadurai’s own site · http://www.bostonmagazine.com/2012/05/shiva-ayyaduri-email-us-postal-servic… Boston globe article – not 100% reliable, but if you read to the end carefully you’ll get the right idea. · https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140901/07280928386/huffpo-publishes-biz… One of a number of solid Techdirt posts debunking Ayyadurai, this one dealing with the 2014 effort to push a misleading “History of Email” series focused exclusively on Ayyadurai. · https://www.techdirt.com/blog/?tag=shiva+ayyadurai.Other Techdirt posts from this link, including one quoting me: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140903/18514728409/huffington-post-fina… · https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/omblog/post/origins-of-e-mail-my-mea-c… Washington Post ombudsman admitting that the story was unfounded · http://www.tomandmaria.com/Tom/Writing/HistoriesOfTheInternetDRAFT.pdf Introduction to special issue of I&C on Internet History in which we mention Ayyadurai’s case as an example of an attempt to fill in the gap between people’s ordinary experience and the ARPANET story. Example of a way to acknowledge appeal of the Ayyadurai narrative without endorsing its claims. Resources on the actual history of email include * Janet Abbate’s Inventing the Internet * Craig Partridge’s Annals paper, “The Technical Development of Internet Email.” This is the best overview of the actual development of modern email. * My chapter in The Internet and American Business has some material on non-Internet email and how it was eventually assimilated: http://www.tomandmaria.com/Tom/Writing/ProtocolsForProfitDRAFT.pdf. Best wishes, Tom From: Members [mailto:members-bounces@lists.sigcis.org] On Behalf Of Christine Finn Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2017 9:09 AM To: David Golumbia <dgolumbia(a)gmail.com> Cc: Sigcis <members(a)sigcis.org> Subject: Re: [SIGCIS-Members] Shiva/Gawker, also AAAAARRRRRGGGGHHHHHHHH I'd be happy to help with this. If we can craft something I'd be pleased to help reach a wider audience. I am already in touch with the UK Sunday Times - I contribute to them - and can make time to help with this, I don't have the tech expertise you all have, but can tell the story for the general public. all best Christine On 5 January 2017 at 09:56, David Golumbia <dgolumbia(a)gmail.com <mailto:dgolumbia@gmail.com> > wrote: "This is a historic victory for truth," declared Dr. Ayyadurai. "Americans have no tolerance for fake news, lies i mean, it's by far not the most offensive part of this story, but this statement leapt out at me--you coulda fooled me, and PT Barnum, and every "reality show" producer, and Facebook, and, and... -- David Golumbia dgolumbia(a)gmail.com <mailto:dgolumbia@gmail.com> _______________________________________________ This email is relayed from members at sigcis.org <http://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://lists.sigcis.org/pipermail/members-sigcis.org/ and you can change your subscription options at http://lists.sigcis.org/listinfo.cgi/members-sigcis.org

12 13

Re: [SIGCIS-Members] 1997 IEEE Conference on the History of Computing
by Brian Randell 20 Jan '17

20 Jan '17

Dear Alan, James, Atsushi: Thanks for your quick responses to my query. For the record, I have now made available the text of the paper I actually gave at the Williamsburg conference available at: http://homepages.cs.ncl.ac.uk/brian.randell/PapersInProceedings/Williamsbur… Cheers Brian > On 13 Jan 2017, at 14:38, David Alan Grier <grier(a)email.gwu.edu> wrote: > > Brian > I don’t believe that there were any formal proceedings - there are certainly none in the IEEE library. I was never solicited for the 0 to 1 book. My paper was published in the Annals. I believe that Luanne Johnson’s paper had the same outcome. > > David >> On Jan 13, 2017, at 8:22 AM, Brian Randell <brian.randell(a)newcastle.ac.uk> wrote: >> >> Hi: >> >> Am I right in understanding that this conference did not result in any published formal conference proceedings as such, though the book "From 0 to 1: an authoritative history of modern computing by Akera Atsushi and Frederik Nebeker” resulted from the conference five years later. >> >> My records indicate that the paper I gave at the 1997 conference ("The Development of Computers and their History”) was at the request of the editors of "From 0 to 1” replaced by a very different paper “The New Electronic Technology”. (I have a copy of the former paper to hand, but not the latter.) >> >> Have the actual papers delivered at the conference ever been published, i.e., were any actual conference proceedings ever issued? >> >> Cheers >> >> Brian Randell >> >> — >> >> School of Computing Science, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 7RU >> EMAIL = Brian.Randell(a)ncl.ac.uk PHONE = +44 191 208 7923 >> URL = http://www.ncl.ac.uk/computing/people/profile/brianrandell.html >> >> _______________________________________________ >> This email is relayed from members at 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://lists.sigcis.org/pipermail/members-sigcis.org/ and you can change your subscription options at http://lists.sigcis.org/listinfo.cgi/members-sigcis.org > — School of Computing Science, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 7RU EMAIL = Brian.Randell(a)ncl.ac.uk PHONE = +44 191 208 7923 URL = http://www.ncl.ac.uk/computing/people/profile/brianrandell.html

2 1

NYCDH Week is less than a month away!
by Kimon Keramidas 13 Jan '17

13 Jan '17

The 2nd Annual NYCDH Week is coming to an institution near you from February 6-10. Filled with talks, roundtables, networking, and probably the most impressive array of FREE workshops known to DH-kind, NYCDH Week gives individuals across the region an opportunity to learn new techniques and skills, meet new people, and make new connections. Time to Start Registering! Registration for the NYCDH Week 2017 Kickoff Gathering <http://dhweek.nycdh.org/event/nycdh-week-2017-kickoff-gathering/> and all of the Workshops <http://dhweek.nycdh.org/workshops/> is now open! Register for any event by using the RSVP tool at the bottom of the right-hand sidebar of each event page. Dr. Stephen Brier to Receive Inaugural NYCDH Award We are proud to announce that Dr. Stephen Brier of the CUNY Graduate Center and American Social History Project will be the recipient of the inaugural NYCDH Award. Dr. Brier’s career at CUNY and ASHP has included innovations in new media and public history, the development of important programs in digital pedagogy and humanities, and an unparalleled history of mentoring young scholars and building communities across the region. Dr. Brier will be receiving the first NYCDH Award and giving a keynote speech to conclude our NYCDH Week 2017 Kickoff Gathering <http://dhweek.nycdh.org/event/nycdh-week-2017-kickoff-gathering/>. Please join us in honoring Dr. Brier’s impressive contributions to the NYCDH community. Birds-of-a-Feather Lunches Our kick-off event will also for the first time include community lunches built around common interests. During lunch, DHWeek participants are encouraged to join a bird-of-a-feather group at one of a myriad of local eating establishments. The form to sign-up for a lunch with a veteran or a friend can be found here <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1j_Ca6ePKl1J-NuqsIhYXMtXXSJPoyQLm0T7HlCI…>. Last Call to Propose a Workshop! During NYCDH Week graduate students, librarians, faculty, museum workers, independent scholars, tech companies and others will be offering FREE workshops at institutions across the city. These events are free and open to everyone with an interest in the digital humanities. Are you interested in teaching a workshop? There are over two dozen workshops already planned (view the list of workshops at the DH Week website <http://dhweek.nycdh.org/>), but there is still time to get in on the fun! The deadline to propose a workshop has been extended to January 20. The proposal form can be found here <https://goo.gl/forms/NVB4TrrBcqV6vuaJ2>. For any questions regarding NYCDH Week please contact Kimon Keramidas: kimon.keramidas(a)nyu.edu <mailto:kimon.keramidas@nyu.edu>. Cheers Kimon Kimon Keramidas, Ph.D. Associate Director and Clinical Assistant Professor of Digital Humanities John W. Draper Interdisciplinary Master’s Program in Humanities and Social Thought New York University 14 University Place New York, NY 10003 E kimon.keramidas(a)nyu.edu <mailto:kimon.keramidas@nyu.edu> P 212-998-3691 T @kimonizer <http://twitter.com/kimonizer> W http://kimonkeramidas.com <http://kimonkeramidas.com/> The Interface Experience: Forty Years of Personal Computing Exhibition <http://www.bgc.bard.edu/gallery/gallery-at-bgc/past-exhibitions/the-interfa…> | Web <http://interface-experience.org/> The Interface Experience: A User’s Guide Winner of the 2016 Innovation in Print Design Award from the American Alliance of Museums <http://www.aam-us.org/> Buy Book <http://store.bgc.bard.edu/the-interface-experience-a-users-guide-by-kimon-k…>

1 0

1997 IEEE Conference on the History of Computing
by Brian Randell 13 Jan '17

13 Jan '17

Hi: Am I right in understanding that this conference did not result in any published formal conference proceedings as such, though the book "From 0 to 1: an authoritative history of modern computing by Akera Atsushi and Frederik Nebeker” resulted from the conference five years later. My records indicate that the paper I gave at the 1997 conference ("The Development of Computers and their History”) was at the request of the editors of "From 0 to 1” replaced by a very different paper “The New Electronic Technology”. (I have a copy of the former paper to hand, but not the latter.) Have the actual papers delivered at the conference ever been published, i.e., were any actual conference proceedings ever issued? Cheers Brian Randell — School of Computing Science, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 7RU EMAIL = Brian.Randell(a)ncl.ac.uk PHONE = +44 191 208 7923 URL = http://www.ncl.ac.uk/computing/people/profile/brianrandell.html

2 1

Ayyadurai: it gets more complex
by Jonathan Coopersmith 12 Jan '17

12 Jan '17

While idling in traffic today, I listened to the Alex Jones show (don't ask but I learned a lot about the human body's need for selenium), and learned he had a specific guest whose efforts to uncover the truth about GMOs led to attacks to destroy him professionally as a way to discredit his GMO, um, findings. To quote, "On this *Tuesday, January 10* broadcast of the Alex Jones Show, Trump insider *Roger Stone* discusses what to expect in the last ten days before the inauguration. Also, the inventor of Email, *Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai, Ph.D.* joins the show to explain the connection he found between email and GMO’s. On today’s show we’ll also look at the Jeff Sessions confirmation… http://www.infowars.com/watch-alex-jones-show/ Jonathan Coopersmith Professor Department of History Texas A&M University College Station, TX 77843-4236 979.845.7151 979.862.4314 (fax) http://historynewsnetwork.org/blog/author/42 : latest post is "Coal Comfort. Is Hillary Clinton being 'Al Gored'?" at *http://historynewsnetwork.org/blog/153818 <http://historynewsnetwork.org/blog/153818>* * FAXED. The Rise and Fall of the Fax Machine* (Johns Hopkins University Press) is the co-recipient of the 2016 Business History Conference Hagley Prize for best book in business history. On Fri, Jan 6, 2017 at 8:35 AM, Thomas Haigh <thomas.haigh(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hello SIGCIS, > > In response to the various suggestions that a comprehensive rebuttal would > need to engage with Ayyadurai's efforts to define email in a very specific > way: yes. A comprehensive rebuttal would. That's why my page > www.sigcis.org/ayyadurai is very long and detailed, which also makes it > off > putting to casual readers. I urge anyone with an interest in the case to > read it before commenting further. > > My comment was more about a concise and convincing way to explain why this > is not a usual invention priority dispute. I do not recall anyone prior to > Ayyadurai claiming that things like mid-1970s Arpanet electronic mail or > Xerox Laurel were not email. For example, Janet Abbate's book Inventing the > Internet talks without reservation about "email" as the killer application > of the ARPANET in the mid-1970s. > > The SIGCIS community does not need to anoint a "first" for email to agree > that something produced in 1978/80/82 cannot possibly be the first email > system. Here's an analogy: not everyone believes that the Wright Brothers > were the first to fly when they took to the air in 1903. There are other > contenders, other definitions, etc. Some people favor Whitehead in 1901. > But > if someone tells you he invented the airplane in 1918 you don't need to ask > about the details of his system. A lot of well documented flying had > happened by then. Just show a dated photograph of the Red Baron. And if the > would-be inventor of the airplane justifies his claim with a new 60 point > definition of airplane you are not obliged to take that definition > seriously. > > Best wishes, > > Tom > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Members [mailto:members-bounces@lists.sigcis.org] On Behalf Of > McMillan, William W > Sent: Friday, January 06, 2017 6:56 AM > To: Sigcis <members(a)sigcis.org> > Subject: Re: [SIGCIS-Members] Resources on Ayyadurai saga > > Isn't the claim more to the well-developed metaphor of a mail system > similar > to a physical office mail system? > > For example, Kay and Xerox can claim priority to the UI desktop metaphor, > even though all the operations it implemented existed previously in > command-line systems. > > The parry and riposte to pointing out mail/messaging capabilities of early > systems is that, yes, they had similar functions, but that they had not > been > developed into a coherent metaphor for a complete real-world mail system. > > .... not that this is a valid claim ... > > Once you get into the UI widget, look-and-feel, metaphor space, the ground > gets soft. > > - Bill > > ________________________________ > From: Members [members-bounces(a)lists.sigcis.org] on behalf of Jordi Fornes > [jfornes(a)ac.upc.edu] > Sent: Friday, January 06, 2017 4:41 AM > To: Guy Fedorkow > Cc: Thomas Haigh; members(a)lists.sigcis.org > Subject: Re: [SIGCIS-Members] Resources on Ayyadurai saga > > That’s the point. What is an email? At least since 1975 (in the sixth > edition of the Unix programmer’s manual) the command “mail” exists “to send > mail to designated users”. > I have not access to the source code of BSD Unix, but it was developed with > a source control revision system, so it should be available somewhere. I'm > almost certain that the “mail” command in 4 BSD (circa 1980) sent mail > over > TCP/IP. > > At all events, we need a definition of email, accepted by the community of > experts, before talk about “firsts” (in my opinion, a trap keyword in > history of science). > > Best wishes, > > — > Dr Jordi Fornés > jfornes(a)ac.upc.edu<mailto:jfornes@ac.upc.edu> > +34 934 054 064 > Computer Architecture Department > Room D6-102 > Campus Nord, Barcelona > > > > > > On 5 Jan 2017, at 20:30, Guy Fedorkow > <guy.fedorkow(a)gmail.com<mailto:guy.fedorkow@gmail.com>> wrote: > > Tom, > As I remember from the last round, the disagreement seemed to be over the > definition of "email", wasn't it? I don't think there was a denial that > messages were sent between computer terminals prior to the plucky young > contributor's work, but that only after that point did the technology truly > deserve the appellation "EMAIL", as allegedly proven by the grant of > copyright? > It does seem like there's been a certain fluidity in choosing whether the > argument of the day is based on the name or the functional > characteristics... > But a refutation might want to consider both factors, i.e., evidence that > the term email was in wide use, and that the claimed functionality (beyond > just sending a message, although I don't remember what it was) was in use > prior to the alleged invention. > /guy > > > On 1/5/2017 12:56 PM, Thomas Haigh wrote: > Thanks Dave, > > The other advice I have for anyone commenting on this case is to keep the > argument simple. > > There are a lot of invention controversies along the lines of “Big famous > company X says that it invented technology Y in (date 2), but actually > plucky inventor Z had previously come up with the same technology in (date > 1). Because date 1 is earlier than date 2 we should remember plucky > inventor > Z as the true inventor of Y, despite the PR and legal resources of company > X > which denied him recognition.” That’s the narrative that Ayyadurai is > telling about himself, and reporters are liable to turn it into an > Ayyadurai > vs. Tomlinson contest. Discussion of such claims head in the direction of > debates on whether plucky inventor Z’s simple prototype really counts as > inventing the technology. > > What’s different about this case is that plucky inventor Z claims to have > invented email in either 1980 or, more recently, in 1978 (and has shown > code > snippets that appears to come from 1982). Whereas historians already knew > that simple electronic mail systems were in use at MIT in 1965, that > electronic mail was sent over what became the Internet in 1971, that spam > was sent in 1978, that Xerox had a recognizably modern GUI client by that > time etc. So the features of Ayyadurai’s system are not the important thing > in assessing his claim to be “the inventor of email.” I have no reason to > doubt that he produced a perfectly good local email system. But Ayyadurai > is > only “the inventor of email” if nothing done prior to 1978 (or 1980 or > 1982) > was email. In other words, he’s trying to use the classic “plucky > suppressed inventor” narrative even though his date 1 is many years later > than the established date 2. > > To rebut this claim one doesn’t need to designate any individual as THE > inventor of email, merely to reiterate the historical consensus that email > is a synonym for electronic mail and that electronic mail was in use prior > to 1978 (or 1980 or 1982). However smart and likeable you are, you can’t > invent something that’s already been invented. > > Best wishes, > > Tom > > From: dave.walden.family(a)gmail.com<mailto:dave.walden.family@gmail.com> > [mailto:dave.walden.family@gmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2017 10:02 AM > To: Thomas Haigh <thomas.haigh(a)gmail.com><mailto:thomas.haigh@gmail.com> > Cc: Christine Finn > <christine.finn(a)gmail.com><mailto:christine.finn@gmail.com>; David > Golumbia > <dgolumbia(a)gmail.com><mailto:dgolumbia@gmail.com>; > Sigcis<members(a)sigcis.org><mailto:members@sigcis.org> > Subject: Re: [SIGCIS-Members] Resources on Ayyadurai saga > > Maybe the document should be something like a friend-of-court brief that is > provided to the defense attorney rather than a public document and the > court > if the case ever goes to court. There is plenty of time for public > documents later. I would think that passing Tom's list below to the > defense > attorney would already be useful. > Best regards, Dave > http://walden-family.com/bbn/email-invention.html (not updated in several > years) > > Sent from my iPad > > > _______________________________________________ > This email is relayed from members at sigcis.org<http://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://lists.sigcis.org/pipermail/members-sigcis.org/ > and you can change your subscription options at > http://lists.sigcis.org/listinfo.cgi/members-sigcis.org > > _______________________________________________ > This email is relayed from members at 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://lists.sigcis.org/pipermail/members-sigcis.org/ and you can change > your subscription options at > http://lists.sigcis.org/listinfo.cgi/members-sigcis.org > > _______________________________________________ > This email is relayed from members at 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://lists.sigcis.org/pipermail/members-sigcis.org/ and > you can change your subscription options at http://lists.sigcis.org/ > listinfo.cgi/members-sigcis.org >

3 2

irc during the first gulf war and the siege of sarajevo
by maxigas 08 Jan '17

08 Jan '17

Dear members, I am looking for primary/secondary sources on the (activist) use of Internet Relay Chat during the First Gulf War and the Siege of Sarajevo. At the moment I am not interested in email and other networking efforts, and I found some sources on those. Thanks much, ps: Internet Unleashed, a popular guide from 1995 seems to have a couple of lines, but I cannot find a copy online either. :[ -- maxigas, kiberpunk FA00 8129 13E9 2617 C614 0901 7879 63BC 287E D166 http://relay70.metatron.ai/ "This was a matter for speculation, though one could be fairly certain that the type annotations are necessary because otherwise there is nothing to indicate that you are familiar with mathematical logic." ~ http://kingjamesprogramming.tumblr.com/

1 0

Humbul 1988
by Christine Finn 07 Jan '17

07 Jan '17

Dear all, When I was researching Artifacts at Oxford in 2000, I asked Computer Services what archive there was of the university's own computer history. I was given a cardboard box of random stuff, and told I could take what was useful. The attached image is what I grabbed. It dates from 1988, and relates to Humbul. I got no joy from Leicester at that time, but have since been hoping to piece together the story of this "first reply from a foreign user; hooray". It always gives my students a laugh when I show them this aimge: me - so recent! them: so ancient! I expect many of you will decipher a lot from this scant data. Anyway, am adding it as part of the early email story... best, Christine

2 1

Email Book
by Esther Milne 07 Jan '17

07 Jan '17

Hi everyone, I've been an archive lurker for a couple of months so I thought it was time to introduce myself. I'm an academic writing a book commissioned by MIT called 'Email and the Everyday: Homes, Institutions, Markets'. Despite its 45 year history, surprisingly there have been no monographs dedicated to email. Of course there are many journal articles, conference presentations and research projects that examine email communication. And the leading internet histories all discuss email but there is not the sustained analysis we've seen with other technologies and media forms. So I'm getting in touch with a few questions. Keen to hear your views! Currently, I'm writing about mailing list culture and moderation. What would you say are the key mailing lists for IT/email/computer history? And do you think mailing lists still have a role to play despite the popularity of alternatives offered by social media? The other topic I'm researching at the moment is the email provider sector. So, both commercial and open source email client programmers or providers. If anyone is working in this area I'd be keen to talk. Thanks for listening - email me off list if that's easier. Like I say, I would love to hear from you! cheers, Esther Associate Professor Esther Milne Department of Media and Communication Swinburne University, Melbourne, AUSTRALIA emilne(a)swin.edu.au ||| @esthermilne ||| https://swin.academia.edu/EstherMilne

6 6

Ayyadurai: keeping it simple
by Thomas Haigh 06 Jan '17

06 Jan '17

Hello SIGCIS, In response to the various suggestions that a comprehensive rebuttal would need to engage with Ayyadurai's efforts to define email in a very specific way: yes. A comprehensive rebuttal would. That's why my page www.sigcis.org/ayyadurai is very long and detailed, which also makes it off putting to casual readers. I urge anyone with an interest in the case to read it before commenting further. My comment was more about a concise and convincing way to explain why this is not a usual invention priority dispute. I do not recall anyone prior to Ayyadurai claiming that things like mid-1970s Arpanet electronic mail or Xerox Laurel were not email. For example, Janet Abbate's book Inventing the Internet talks without reservation about "email" as the killer application of the ARPANET in the mid-1970s. The SIGCIS community does not need to anoint a "first" for email to agree that something produced in 1978/80/82 cannot possibly be the first email system. Here's an analogy: not everyone believes that the Wright Brothers were the first to fly when they took to the air in 1903. There are other contenders, other definitions, etc. Some people favor Whitehead in 1901. But if someone tells you he invented the airplane in 1918 you don't need to ask about the details of his system. A lot of well documented flying had happened by then. Just show a dated photograph of the Red Baron. And if the would-be inventor of the airplane justifies his claim with a new 60 point definition of airplane you are not obliged to take that definition seriously. Best wishes, Tom -----Original Message----- From: Members [mailto:members-bounces@lists.sigcis.org] On Behalf Of McMillan, William W Sent: Friday, January 06, 2017 6:56 AM To: Sigcis <members(a)sigcis.org> Subject: Re: [SIGCIS-Members] Resources on Ayyadurai saga Isn't the claim more to the well-developed metaphor of a mail system similar to a physical office mail system? For example, Kay and Xerox can claim priority to the UI desktop metaphor, even though all the operations it implemented existed previously in command-line systems. The parry and riposte to pointing out mail/messaging capabilities of early systems is that, yes, they had similar functions, but that they had not been developed into a coherent metaphor for a complete real-world mail system. .... not that this is a valid claim ... Once you get into the UI widget, look-and-feel, metaphor space, the ground gets soft. - Bill ________________________________ From: Members [members-bounces(a)lists.sigcis.org] on behalf of Jordi Fornes [jfornes(a)ac.upc.edu] Sent: Friday, January 06, 2017 4:41 AM To: Guy Fedorkow Cc: Thomas Haigh; members(a)lists.sigcis.org Subject: Re: [SIGCIS-Members] Resources on Ayyadurai saga Thats the point. What is an email? At least since 1975 (in the sixth edition of the Unix programmers manual) the command mail exists to send mail to designated users. I have not access to the source code of BSD Unix, but it was developed with a source control revision system, so it should be available somewhere. I'm almost certain that the mail command in 4 BSD (circa 1980) sent mail over TCP/IP. At all events, we need a definition of email, accepted by the community of experts, before talk about firsts (in my opinion, a trap keyword in history of science). Best wishes, Dr Jordi Fornés jfornes(a)ac.upc.edu<mailto:jfornes@ac.upc.edu> +34 934 054 064 Computer Architecture Department Room D6-102 Campus Nord, Barcelona On 5 Jan 2017, at 20:30, Guy Fedorkow <guy.fedorkow(a)gmail.com<mailto:guy.fedorkow@gmail.com>> wrote: Tom, As I remember from the last round, the disagreement seemed to be over the definition of "email", wasn't it? I don't think there was a denial that messages were sent between computer terminals prior to the plucky young contributor's work, but that only after that point did the technology truly deserve the appellation "EMAIL", as allegedly proven by the grant of copyright? It does seem like there's been a certain fluidity in choosing whether the argument of the day is based on the name or the functional characteristics... But a refutation might want to consider both factors, i.e., evidence that the term email was in wide use, and that the claimed functionality (beyond just sending a message, although I don't remember what it was) was in use prior to the alleged invention. /guy On 1/5/2017 12:56 PM, Thomas Haigh wrote: Thanks Dave, The other advice I have for anyone commenting on this case is to keep the argument simple. There are a lot of invention controversies along the lines of Big famous company X says that it invented technology Y in (date 2), but actually plucky inventor Z had previously come up with the same technology in (date 1). Because date 1 is earlier than date 2 we should remember plucky inventor Z as the true inventor of Y, despite the PR and legal resources of company X which denied him recognition. Thats the narrative that Ayyadurai is telling about himself, and reporters are liable to turn it into an Ayyadurai vs. Tomlinson contest. Discussion of such claims head in the direction of debates on whether plucky inventor Zs simple prototype really counts as inventing the technology. Whats different about this case is that plucky inventor Z claims to have invented email in either 1980 or, more recently, in 1978 (and has shown code snippets that appears to come from 1982). Whereas historians already knew that simple electronic mail systems were in use at MIT in 1965, that electronic mail was sent over what became the Internet in 1971, that spam was sent in 1978, that Xerox had a recognizably modern GUI client by that time etc. So the features of Ayyadurais system are not the important thing in assessing his claim to be the inventor of email. I have no reason to doubt that he produced a perfectly good local email system. But Ayyadurai is only the inventor of email if nothing done prior to 1978 (or 1980 or 1982) was email. In other words, hes trying to use the classic plucky suppressed inventor narrative even though his date 1 is many years later than the established date 2. To rebut this claim one doesnt need to designate any individual as THE inventor of email, merely to reiterate the historical consensus that email is a synonym for electronic mail and that electronic mail was in use prior to 1978 (or 1980 or 1982). However smart and likeable you are, you cant invent something thats already been invented. Best wishes, Tom From: dave.walden.family(a)gmail.com<mailto:dave.walden.family@gmail.com> [mailto:dave.walden.family@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2017 10:02 AM To: Thomas Haigh <thomas.haigh(a)gmail.com><mailto:thomas.haigh@gmail.com> Cc: Christine Finn <christine.finn(a)gmail.com><mailto:christine.finn@gmail.com>; David Golumbia <dgolumbia(a)gmail.com><mailto:dgolumbia@gmail.com>; Sigcis<members(a)sigcis.org><mailto:members@sigcis.org> Subject: Re: [SIGCIS-Members] Resources on Ayyadurai saga Maybe the document should be something like a friend-of-court brief that is provided to the defense attorney rather than a public document and the court if the case ever goes to court. There is plenty of time for public documents later. I would think that passing Tom's list below to the defense attorney would already be useful. Best regards, Dave http://walden-family.com/bbn/email-invention.html (not updated in several years) Sent from my iPad _______________________________________________ This email is relayed from members at sigcis.org<http://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://lists.sigcis.org/pipermail/members-sigcis.org/ and you can change your subscription options at http://lists.sigcis.org/listinfo.cgi/members-sigcis.org _______________________________________________ This email is relayed from members at 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://lists.sigcis.org/pipermail/members-sigcis.org/ and you can change your subscription options at http://lists.sigcis.org/listinfo.cgi/members-sigcis.org

1 0

Shiva/Gawker, also AAAAARRRRRGGGGHHHHHHHH
by Evan Koblentz 05 Jan '17

05 Jan '17

I strongly advise putting on a helmet before reading because you will want to bang your heads against the wall extremely hard. I know I do. http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/gawker-media-pays-dr-shiva-ayyadura… From the press release: -------------------- Gawker Media has paid Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai a $750,000 settlement payment and later this month will permanently remove its libelous article about him, which denied Dr. Ayyadurai's invention of email. Victory over Gawker Media "This is a historic victory for truth," declared Dr. Ayyadurai. "Americans have no tolerance for fake news, lies or cyberbullying. A 14-year-old kid working in Newark, New Jersey in 1978 invented email. This settlement honors that innovation." There is no reasonable dispute that Dr. Ayyadurai is the inventor of email. --------------------

8 10