August 2019 - Members - lists.sigcis.org

Re: [SIGCIS-Members] Konrad Zuse's 1936 patent - German text?
by Brian Randell 24 Sep '20

24 Sep '20

Hi Mark: I have a copy of the original 1936 Zuse patent application that I had translated into English for my Origins book. (It took some finding - some of my Zemanek documents had strayed into the middle of the Zuse documents, and so had obscured them! :-) It is a type-written document, on the letterhead of Zuse’s patent attorney Dr.-Ing. Bruno Wolf, Berlin Charlottenberg 5, Kantstrasse 85, dated 9.4.36 (i.e. 9 April 1936). It is some twenty or so pages in length. However I should warn you that some of the pages are barely legible (though could probably be deciphered by someone who knows German - which I don’t). I could scan this document for you if you wish. (I have about two inches thick of documents about Zuse’s work, including a number of patents and patent applications, some pre-war, immediately some post-war, together with several typescripts from him. My plan is that this material will be added to the archive of my files held in the Special Collections section of Newcastle University Library. This already holds all the extensive correspondence that I was involved in while compiling Origins.) Cheers Brian On 24 Jan 2017, at 10:58, Mark Priestley <m.priestley(a)gmail.com<mailto:m.priestley@gmail.com>> wrote: Dear list, Zuse's 1936 patent "Method for Automatic Execution of Calculations with the Aid of Computers" is reprinted in Brian Randell's "Origins of Digital Computers" collections. Does anyone know if/where I can get hold of the German original? Thanks in advance. Mark _______________________________________________ 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 -- School of Computing Science, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 7RU, UK EMAIL = Brian.Randell(a)ncl.ac.uk<mailto:Brian.Randell@ncl.ac.uk> PHONE = +44 191 208 7923 FAX = +44 191 208 8232 URL = http://www.ncl.ac.uk/computing/people/profile/brianrandell.html

6 5

software in univ admin, admissions, budgets, research mgmt 1970-2020
by Sharon Traweek 16 Sep '19

16 Sep '19

Dear SIGCIS colleagues, from whom I have learned so much, Awkwardly, I have some large queries over a large time span (1970-2020). I am seeking information on decision making about the digital resources used in university administration, admissions, budgeting, and research management since the 1970s. Much that I have found (and witnessed) concerns decisions among a very limited set of products and then deployment strategies about the selected products, rather than what I am seeking: reflections and analysis of why only some kinds of existing products were investigated, rather than developing new resources based on the distinctive features of universities. First, I would welcome counter-examples. My preliminary inquiries suggest that much in use by universities is * based upon “customer relationship management” (CRM) platforms developed during the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s, and * were first designed for industry, then as the management ideas and practices on which they were based became outdated, the older products were then marketed to governments, and finally re-marketed to universities, with limited modifications. I do see national and regional variation in these processes. I would appreciate information about any engagements with or historical research on either of these decision processes * among software design groups to redeploy and market older products to new sectors, or * among universities to adapt older products, rather than develop new products specifically for their administrative processes. When I began asking these questions I assumed there would be much research already done on these processes; perhaps it is indeed there and I have missed it. I would appreciate any suggestions. Sincerely, Sharon Traweek Gender Studies/History, UCLA http://www.genderstudies.ucla.edu/faculty/sharon-traweek<https://exchange2010.ss.ucla.edu/owa/redir.aspx?SURL=zvqfx1SvB9Oi5PmUkMQOHJ…> Access some of my publications at https://ucla.academia.edu/STraweek<https://exchange2010.ss.ucla.edu/owa/redir.aspx?SURL=MyAq2tZ6yYDVtZY7VgdsAh…> https://www.linkedin.com/in/sharon-traweek-a257668<https://exchange2010.ss.ucla.edu/owa/redir.aspx?SURL=uzkN9PkMi8bLatbAzYgZQT…> https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Sharon_Traweek<https://exchange2010.ss.ucla.edu/owa/redir.aspx?SURL=jraQLuoJLfTYMn-Z8oqyEO…> Those sites need updating ...

2 1

ACM FAT* 2020: Call for Critiquing/Rethinking FAT* Sessions and for Tutorials
by Veale, Michael 29 Aug '19

29 Aug '19

The 2020 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency in Computing Systems (ACM FAT* 2020) in Barcelona, Spain on January 27–30 2020 promises to be a lively event, with almost 300 submitted full papers across 5 tracks now under review. There is still time to get involved! This can be either through: 1. A session for the CRAFT programme — flexible sessions (e.g. panels, debates, unconferences, art exhibit) focussed on Critiquing and Rethinking Accountability, Fairness and Transparency (in the spirit of the CRACT workshop at NeurIPS). 2. A tutorial for the main conference. ## CRAFT: Critiquing and Rethinking Accountability, Fairness and Transparency ## The success of the field of fairness, accountability, and transparency has also attracted much critique and renewed attention to the limitations of achieving these goals in systems that implement statistical, machine learning, optimization, or autonomous computing techniques. A number of prominent studies acknowledge that addressing societal problems embedded in such computing systems may require more holistic approaches. In the spirit of reflection and response, we invite academics of all disciplines and people representing different communities of practice (including journalism, advocacy, organizing, education, art, public authorities) to contribute to a program that will be subject to its own review process and that will be embedded in the ACM FAT* conference. These sessions might, for example, be any of the following (or more): Interactive Workshop / Panel / Debate / Unconference / Art Exhibit or Other Artistic Intervention / Site Visit / Poster or Demo Session / Lightning Talk(s) / Rump Session. This is not, however, a route for submission of a conventional academic paper. They need not be organised by academics: all interested groups are more than welcome to submit. We are especially interested in proposals that: * Are accessible to people coming from multiple communities of practice (academic, industry, journalistic, artistic, activist, organizing, etc.) * Go beyond a conventional academic approach of critiquing FAT* * Offer a vision that helps fulfil the aims of the CRAFT call Chairs: Seda Guerses, TU Delft Seeta Peña Gangadharan, London School of Economics Suresh Venkatasubramanian, U Utah | CRAFT proposal pre-registration: September 9th | CRAFT proposal submission: September 12th | CRAFT notification date: October 3th | https://fatconference.org/2020/callforcraft.html ## TUTORIALS ## We are soliciting three types of tutorials for 2020: hands-on tutorials, translation tutorials, and implications tutorials. We will give presenters 45 or 90 minutes for translation and implication tutorials, and 90 or 180 minutes for hands-on. * Hands-on tutorials should offer a broad audience the chance to experiment with new software packages designed to support ACM FAT* efforts. * Translation tools translate between disciplines; for instance, by explaining computer science concepts in a way that will be practically useful for lawyers, policy makers, social scientists and other practitioners, or by explaining legal, policy, or social science concepts in a way that will guide computer scientists in their future technical explorations. * Implications tutorials should cover known legal, policy, or socio-economic effects of unfair algorithmic systems, lack of interpretability of machine learning models, biases in the data, or other ACM FAT* related issues. | Tutorials proposal pre-registration: September 9th | Tutorials proposal submission: September 12th | Tutorials notification date: October 3th | https://fatconference.org/2020/callfortutorials.html Chairs: Reuben Binns, Oxford University Michèle Finck, Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition Margaret Mitchell, Google -- Michael Veale Lecturer in Digital Rights and Regulation Faculty of Laws, University College London @mikarv / https://michae.lv

1 0

Fwd: Imagining an AI Commons: A One-Day Workshop on AI and the Commons
by Luke Stark 26 Aug '19

26 Aug '19

Potentially of interest... > > Hi, > I am writing to invite you to participate in the Imagining an AI Commons: A One-Day Workshop on AI and the Commons > either participant or as a speaker. Could the call be shared with your members? > > The workshop seeks to develop a vision for a commons-based approach to the future of AI. It is an intervention to develop democratic approaches to digital disruption and understand transformations in citizen engagement. The workshop will produce a public report on the possibility of an AI as well as a series of video interviews capturing the discussion. > > Please see details below or visit to read more and apply: https://machineagencies.org/events/aicommons-cfp/ <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__machineagencies.org_ev…> > > Imagining an AI Commons: A One-Day Workshop on AI and the Commons > > 6 December 2019 > Montreal, Quebec > > Hosted at Machine Agencies, Milieux Institute, Concordia University > > (Please find the submission form <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__machineagencies.org_ev…> here) > > How can artificial intelligence be oriented toward the common good? The belief in AI for good has widespread acceptance in the industry and among governments. Declarations from around the globe—Canada, China, South Korea, France, and more <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__medium.com_politics-2D…>—call for the development of AI to have a social purpose. But what is that purpose? > > The workshop seeks to develop a vision for a commons-based approach to the future of AI. It is an intervention to develop democratic approaches to digital disruption and understand transformations in citizen engagement. The workshop will produce a public report on the possibility of an AI as well as a series of video interviews capturing the discussion. > > Without clear direction, AI risks becoming privatized and at odds with a common world. In a recent study, researchers calculated the costs of training a deep neural network model for use in natural language processing. Their findings are alarming. The energy required can result in CO2 emissions equal to the lifetime emissions of five cars. Meanwhile, the financial cost of the computing needed to carry out this research has become so high that academic researchers cannot participate, enclosing AI innovation within the profit-oriented technology industry. > > A commons approach to AI seeks to mitigate these harms, just as commons approaches in other areas have intervened in environmental devastation and the privatization and commodification of knowledge. The term “commons” was initially rooted in theories about the conditions and consequences of sharing resources. But theorists and activists have worked to broaden it, naming new commons in order to advocate for their protection while developing praxis to govern them. This shift in understanding has been greatly informed by indigenous scholarship and indigenous people’s histories, epistemologies, and practices, which offer a wealth of approaches to the management and preservation of common resources, material and otherwise. > > In this workshop, we invite you to reflect broadly on artificial intelligence and its relation to the commons as you consider the following questions: > What should an AI Commons be? > How could a commons-based approach guide the development of AI? > How does a commons approach differ from proposed ethical or rights-based frameworks? > How could the development of AI today—including the infrastructure and knowledge at its foundation—become a commons? > What forms of collective action and governance would be necessary? What movements and efforts already exist? > What latent commons or undercommons might we find in thinking about AI? > Could AI reshape how we think about the commons, leading to new theories or practices? > How might related (or unrelated) approaches to the commons be understood through AI and the commons (e.g., making kin, new materialism, infrastructures of care, or platform cooperativism)? > What histories and instances of the commons does an AI commons require for context and inspiration? > How might we imagine a future common world for the machines, environments, humans, and other life drawn together by the industrial efforts around AI? > How can humans, AI, and other agents collaborate equitably in these commons? > How might AI reproduce sustainably within the natural commons, unseating extractive and settler approaches to common worlds? > We invite people from diverse professions and communities to contribute as either a workshop participant or a speaker. Participants are expected to prepare a short 500-word position statement on one of these questions to be shared before the workshop then workshopped in groups to draft a shared response to these questions to be integrated into a public position paper. Speakers are expected to prepare a short 15-minute presentation, participate in a roundtable and animate around 1-2 of these questions. > > The workshop is invite only. Some travel funds will be available for speakers. > > Please apply at: https://machineagencies.org/events/aicommons-cfp/ <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__machineagencies.org_ev…> > > This workshop is supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, the Center for the Study of Democratic Citizenship and the Milieux Institute for Arts + Technology at Concordia University. > > > Be good, > Fenwick McKelvey > https://fenwickmckelvey.com <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__fenwickmckelvey.com&d=…> > Associate Professor, Communication Studies, Concordia University > > Director, Algorithmic Media Observatory > https://amo-oma.ca <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__amo-2Doma.ca&d=DwMGaQ&…> > New book: Internet Daemons out now > https://internetdaemons.com <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__internetdaemons.com&d=…>

1 0

Book -- "E. F. Codd and Relational Theory" - by Chris Date
by Cliff Jones 26 Aug '19

26 Aug '19

The title is E. F. Codd and Relational Theory (subtitle A Detailed Review and Analysis of Codd’s Major Database Writings), written by myself and available from Lulu Press, Inc. (www.lulu.com<http://www.lulu.com/>) now, also from other outlets (Amazon, Barnes & Noble, etc.) very soon. The following text from the back cover gives a good idea of what the book is all about: E. F. Codd’s relational model of data has been described as one of the three greatest inventions of all time (the other two being agriculture and the scientific method), and his receipt of the 1981 ACM Turing Award—the top award in computer science—for inventing it was thoroughly deserved. The papers in which Codd first described his model were staggering in their originality; they had, and continue to have, a huge impact on just about every aspect of the way we do business in the world today. And yet few people, even in the professional database community, are truly familiar with those papers. This book is an attempt to remedy this sorry state of affairs. In it, well known author C. J. Date provides a detailed examination of all of Codd’s major technical publications, explaining the nature of his contribution in depth, and in particular highlighting not only the many things he got right but also some of the things he got wrong. Of course, database theory and practice have evolved considerably since Codd first defined his relational model, back in 1969. This book draws on decades of experience to present the most up to date treatment of the material possible. Anyone with a professional interest in databases can benefit from the insights it contains. The book is product independent. If you’d actually like to buy a copy of this book—please note that the price is set deliberately low!—please go to www.lulu.com<http://www.lulu.com/> and check out the category “computers & internet.” Alternatively, as noted above the book should be available on Amazon, Barnes & Noble, and possibly elsewhere online very soon. Chris Date

1 0

History of Formal Methods Workshop
by Brian Randell 20 Aug '19

20 Aug '19

Hi - here is a message from my (senior) fellow workshop director, who is currently having difficulties posting to Sigcis. Cheers Brian Randell -------- Dear all, Registration is now open for the workshop ‘History of Formal Methods 2019’. You can see information and accepted talks on the website: https://sites.google.com/view/hfm2019/home. The workshop is part of the FM’19 World Congress and registration is via that website: http://formalmethods2019.inesctec.pt/?page_id=2363. It is vitally important that all registrants wanting to come to the workshop state their intention to attend while registering for FM. This should be done by selecting the workshop from the dropdown list if registering for just one workshop; or for larger registrations, the free text field should be used. If you have already registered for FM’19 but did not include this information, please email contactfm2019(a)inesctec.pt. The area of formal methods is a central part of theoretical computing. It grew out of work started in the 1960s to address errors in programming, as well as to bring mathematical foundations into computing. It has since become an important research area in its own right. Some formal methods have pedigrees of more than fifty years; others are very recent and will make their professional debuts elsewhere at FM’19. Looking back over the history of formal methods shows an intriguing research area with a complex intertwining of theory and practice; a struggle between academic rigour and practical utility. One key motif is a frustrating lack of uptake in industry and an ever-increasing arsenal of tools to ease this. Now is a good time to explore the history of formal methods, to utilise the first-hand retrospectives and experiences of ageing researchers who participated, and to engage professional historians with the material. The topic provides the opportunity to explore questions like the utility of science, time versus money versus quality in software engineering, relations between industry and academic, and many more. The papers submitted to the workshop span a range of topics, including insider stories and consideration from the outside. The workshop should have a mixed audience of both historians and technical researchers: a key aim is to get formalists interested in their history. Best, Troy Astarte School of Computing Newcastle University — School of Computing, Newcastle University, 1 Science Square, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE4 5TG EMAIL = Brian.Randell(a)ncl.ac.uk PHONE = +44 191 208 7923 URL = http://www.ncl.ac.uk/computing/people/profile/brianrandell.html

1 0

Register now for History of Formal Methods 2019!
by Troy Astarte 20 Aug '19

20 Aug '19

Dear all, Registration is now open for the workshop ‘History of Formal Methods 2019’. You can see information and accepted talks on the website: https://sites.google.com/view/hfm2019/home. The workshop is part of the FM’19 World Congress and registration is via that website: http://formalmethods2019.inesctec.pt/?page_id=2363. It is vitally important that all registrants wanting to come to the workshop state their intention to attend while registering for FM. This should be done by selecting the workshop from the dropdown list if registering for just one workshop; or for larger registrations, the free text field should be used. If you have already registered for FM’19 but did not include this information, please email contactfm2019(a)inesctec.pt<mailto:contactfm2019@inesctec.pt>. The area of formal methods is a central part of theoretical computing. It grew out of work started in the 1960s to address errors in programming, as well as to bring mathematical foundations into computing. It has since become an important research area in its own right. Some formal methods have pedigrees of more than fifty years; others are very recent and will make their professional debuts elsewhere at FM’19. Looking back over the history of formal methods shows an intriguing research area with a complex intertwining of theory and practice; a struggle between academic rigour and practical utility. One key motif is a frustrating lack of uptake in industry and an ever-increasing arsenal of tools to ease this. Now is a good time to explore the history of formal methods, to utilise the first-hand retrospectives and experiences of ageing researchers who participated, and to engage professional historians with the material. The topic provides the opportunity to explore questions like the utility of science, time versus money versus quality in software engineering, relations between industry and academic, and many more. The papers submitted to the workshop span a range of topics, including insider stories and consideration from the outside. The workshop should have a mixed audience of both historians and technical researchers: a key aim is to get formalists interested in their history. Best, Troy Astarte School of Computing Newcastle University

1 0

Less academic approach to tech
by Barbara Alexandra Szerlip 19 Aug '19

19 Aug '19

Dear Members, It's been suggested that my "Generalist" (cap 'G') approach to tech would be of interest to SIGCIS' membership at large. I'd appreciate connecting to those with a less dry, more humanistic aesthetic. Please find links to some of my "Vintage Tech" columns (*Believer Magazine*) below. Best, Alex (B. Alexandra Szerlip) https://believermag.com/logger/vintage-tech-1/ https://believermag.com/logger/vintage-tech-the-ballpoint-pen/ https://believermag.com/logger/vintage-tech-3/ https://believermag.com/logger/vintage-tech-4-tyrian-purple/ https://believermag.com/logger/vintage-tech-invisible-ink/

1 0

REMINDER: Acceptable Use Policy and the Statement of Community Values
by Irish, Sharon Lee 19 Aug '19

19 Aug '19

Dear listserv members, This is an occasional reminder of the Acceptable Use Policy and the Statement of Community Values. As many of us gear up for new terms, it seems appropriate to share this again; SIGCIS officers put considerable time and substantial thought into these documents. The Statement of Community Values is on the About page of the sigcis.org site, https://www.sigcis.org/about_values The Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) is also on the sigcis.org site https://www.sigcis.org/aup; we will revisit these policies, as needed. We, the volunteer moderators, use this AUP as our guide to manage the listserv; any response to messages is post-facto. If you, dear members, want to call our attention to a post, you may do so by emailing us at members-owner at lists.sigcis.org<http://lists.sigcis.org/listinfo.cgi/members-sigcis.org> A description of the Moderator Responsibilities and Guidelines, as well as contact information for each of us, is posted at https://www.sigcis.org/listserv We would welcome more moderators, and invite you to send a note of interest or questions to any of us. Best wishes, Sharon Irish Bill McMillan Janet Toland Barbara Walker The current moderators

1 0

Eisinga planetarium - the world's oldest orrery
by Brian Randell 13 Aug '19

13 Aug '19

Hi: A colleague just sent me this information about the world’s oldest orrery at the Eise Eisinga Planetarium (in The Netherlands) and sent the attached photos of the orrery and the clockwork mechanisms. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eise_Eisinga_Planetarium http://www.bbc.com/travel/story/20180320-the-worlds-oldest-working-planetar… (Googling told me: "The London instrument maker John Rowley (circa 1668-1728) made the first orrery for Charles Boyle around 1713, but planetary models have existed since ancient times.” - from the Whipple Museum of the History of Science, Cambridge.) I’d never heard of this amazing huge clockwork “calculating” device, so couldn’t resist passing it on to SIGCIS. Cheers Brian Randell [cid:D66386F4-6978-4881-8F60-0BD555780DA4@ncl.ac.uk][cid:03E1B423-EF72-4562-952B-A62BA13C2D32@ncl.ac.uk][cid:41F00402-42F9-4AEC-AA1F-BCBD339C476A@ncl.ac.uk] — School of Computing, Newcastle University, 1 Science Square, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE4 5TG EMAIL = Brian.Randell(a)ncl.ac.uk<mailto:Brian.Randell@ncl.ac.uk> PHONE = +44 191 208 7923 URL = http://www.ncl.ac.uk/computing/people/profile/brianrandell.html

1 0