[HN Gopher] What Alan Turing means to us
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       What Alan Turing means to us
        
       Author : headalgorithm
       Score  : 52 points
       Date   : 2023-06-23 18:23 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.turing.ac.uk)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.turing.ac.uk)
        
       | 1091032014 wrote:
       | Some of these comments are absolutely wild. It should go without
       | saying that Alan Turing made an enormous impact on
       | computing...but it looks like it needs to be said.
       | 
       | Nobody is trying to argue that Turing is the *only* important
       | figure in computing. The fact that he is celebrated doesn't
       | negate the impact of anybody else.
       | 
       | Edited to add: For anyone who's doubting Turing's impact on
       | computing, or anyone who thinks that it's a modern phenomenon,
       | Kleene's 1971 textbook [1] makes it pretty clear that he had an
       | important impact.
       | 
       | [1]:
       | https://archive.org/details/BubliothecaMathematicaStephenCol...
        
       | hkgjjgjfjfjfjf wrote:
       | [dead]
        
       | asdf6677 wrote:
       | [flagged]
        
         | alexb_ wrote:
         | Seriously? We're saying that dating a 19 year old makes you a
         | pedophile now?
        
         | daveoc64 wrote:
         | Maybe looking up the definition of pedophile would help you out
         | here.
         | 
         | 19 is not pre-pubescent.
        
       | cubefox wrote:
       | There is an article by Schmidhuber about early theoretical
       | computer science to which Turing made contributions:
       | 
       | https://people.idsia.ch/~juergen/turing-oversold.html
       | 
       | He claims Turing's achievements are often oversold. Whether or
       | not that is true, the historical connections to Turing's
       | theoretical work are interesting.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | istillwritecode wrote:
       | I like how he tried to disprove the Riemann Hypothesis. That's
       | actually how I first heard of Alan Turing, by seeing his paper on
       | the subject. https://www-
       | users.cse.umn.edu/~odlyzko/doc/turing.zeta.pdf
        
       | gargalatas wrote:
       | Although I believe that Claude Shannon [1] was the father of
       | computers and a much more important person than Alan Turing who
       | probably had a more "controversial" personality and thus he
       | became a "cinematic" figure.
       | 
       | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claude_Shannon
        
         | 29athrowaway wrote:
         | Both were important, as well as many others, like Kurt Godel.
         | 
         | Science is about growing the frontier of knowledge, akin to
         | making a cake larger, not dividing up a cake.
        
         | kristianc wrote:
         | Possibly - but this thread is about Turing, because of an
         | article about Alan Turing, which was posted by the Alan Turing
         | institute on the anniversary of the birthday of, you guessed
         | it, Alan Turing.
         | 
         | Why the need to play one up?
        
           | gargalatas wrote:
           | Because Shannon's name has to be heard as well just for some
           | people who admire Steve Jobs as the biggest IT Idol in the
           | universe and have no idea who the hell is Dennis Ritchie.
           | Just saying..
        
             | kristianc wrote:
             | Great, write a blog post on him then and post it here for
             | us all to read.
        
         | ayhanfuat wrote:
         | Neither being gay nor being forcibly castrated has anything to
         | do with personality [1]. [1] Link to Wikipedia personality page
        
           | gargalatas wrote:
           | "While there is no generally agreed-upon definition of
           | personality"
           | 
           | Are you sure?
        
             | ayhanfuat wrote:
             | Yes, I am sure. Read the rest of the article. None of the
             | disagreement is about sexual orientation being part of
             | personality.
        
               | gargalatas wrote:
               | Well I am not, but I believe it can shape some aspects of
               | it. But since I find you so dogmatic about it how about
               | reading some papers which I really found very easily on
               | google:
               | https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/blog/finding-new-
               | home/2...
        
               | ayhanfuat wrote:
               | You claimed it was Turing's personality which made him a
               | "cinematic figure". Now you are coming with irrelevant
               | articles about how sexual orientation is linked to
               | personal traits like openness, agreeableness and
               | conscientiousness. For your argument to follow, it should
               | be that one of these made him a cinematic figure, huh?
        
       | Animats wrote:
       | Until the 1980s or so, Turing wasn't known much outside
       | mathematics, and was considered a minor figure in computing. Von
       | Neumann was the big name in computer architecture, and Friedman
       | was the big name in cryptanalysis.
       | 
       | Marian Rejewski in Poland invented the "bombe" for breaking early
       | German Enigma. Upgrades to the Enigma increased the work required
       | to crack the code substantially, and Turing was later involved in
       | developing a bigger model "bombe" that could be mass produced.
       | 
       | The next upgrade on the German side, to the "Lorenz" machine
       | (like the Enigma, but with more rotors) forced a move to
       | electronics. Hence the "Colossus" machine, which was a key-
       | tester, like a Bitcoin miner, not a general purpose computer.
       | 
       | Colossus was designed by Tommy Flowers, who got a raw deal out of
       | this. He worked for the General Post Office, which ran the UK
       | phone system, and had been working on electronic switching.
       | Because the Bletchly Park operation was classified long after the
       | war, he was unable to get funding to build a real computer after
       | the war. So he went back to phone switching. He lived until 1998,
       | so he got to see electronic computing happen without being a
       | major figure in it.
       | 
       | "Filed under Equality, diversity and inclusion."
        
         | AnotherGoodName wrote:
         | The last part of your statement seems angry?
         | 
         | The story of Turing is indeed particularly interesting for the
         | chemical castration and run ins with law over the big
         | government interference in his personal life. If we talk just
         | about people who have achieved things in computing the list is
         | huge but if we discuss people who gave sp much and had
         | government then take so much it's a different list isn't it?
         | But I don't see that as being a bad thing.
         | 
         | So yes Turing is a great representative of an aspect of history
         | we should strive not to repeat. That's not a bad thing.
        
           | Animats wrote:
           | > The last part of your statement seems angry?
           | 
           | That was from the original web page.
        
             | AnotherGoodName wrote:
             | Yeah but the point is that it's ok that we consider Turing
             | special from all the others who also contributed because
             | the other circumstances make the whole story more
             | interesting.
        
             | ffssffss wrote:
             | You changed the context pretty substantially by moving it
             | to the end of the piece and putting it in scare quotes
             | though. I also read it as intentionally pejorative. You
             | might want to edit the post if that's not what you meant.
        
           | pixel3234 wrote:
           | [flagged]
        
           | pixel3234 wrote:
           | [flagged]
        
         | katamarimambo wrote:
         | peak Hacker News
        
         | adrian_b wrote:
         | Turing had very important contributions to the design of
         | several early computers, culminating in the Ferranti Mark 1,
         | the first general-purpose electronic computer available
         | commercially (in 1951, ahead of UNIVAC).
         | 
         | The most well-known contributions of Turing to the instruction
         | set architecture of Ferranti Mark 1 were a pair of instructions
         | that were added to other CPUs only many years later, i.e. the
         | equivalent of POPCNT (added by Intel only in 2009, in Nehalem)
         | and of RDRAND (added by Intel only in 2012, in Ivy Bridge).
         | 
         | No other reasons are necessary to recognize his great merits.
        
         | morelisp wrote:
         | You seem jealous, maybe because his eponymous invention was
         | useful and yours is something everyone hates.
        
         | xyzzy3000 wrote:
         | I won't say that Turing is overrated, but I will say that
         | Flowers is very, very underrated.
         | 
         | I find it astounding that Flowers wasn't even fully compensated
         | for the personal expense he took to buy the bits to make
         | Colossus.
         | 
         | Bill Tutte also deserves a mention.
        
           | Animats wrote:
           | Flowers was one of the first people to push data around with
           | tubes. There was also an IBM group working on that before
           | WWII, and by 1943 they had the "Vacuum Tube Multiplier"
           | working. That eventually became the IBM 603 in 1946.
           | 
           | I've seen one in an IBM historical display; it looks like a
           | very large hard-sided suitcase made of perforated black
           | metal. The 603 was a limited product built to answer the
           | question of whether electronics could be deployed to field
           | locations and serviced by IBM maintainers. Only 100 were
           | built. They solved the problems of making tubes work in the
           | field, so the IBM 604, the production version, was built in
           | 1948. This was the beginning of IBM's line of cost-effective
           | electronic business machines, ending with the IBM 650, which
           | was a full scale computer affordable by businesses. Knuth
           | learned to program on an IBM 650.
           | 
           | Much of early computing was about getting memory that worked,
           | tubes that worked, capacitors that worked, connectors that
           | worked, and making the things maintainable. All that didn't
           | really come together until the IBM 1401, which was the first
           | mass-produced computer that Just Worked.
           | 
           | It wasn't an architecture problem. The general ideas there
           | had been worked out in the 1930s by Eckert at Columbia
           | University, who came up with some insane mods to IBM
           | tabulating machines to use them for scientific purposes. This
           | kludge, in 1934, was the first automatic number-crunching
           | computing machine.[1] Eckert went on to become a founder of
           | UNIVAC.
           | 
           | Understand, all this was being done in an era where a
           | reliable AM radio was hard.
           | 
           | [1] http://www.columbia.edu/cu/computinghistory/switch.html
        
           | ly3xqhl8g9 wrote:
           | A realpolitik lesson for the scientists of the future: next
           | time you have the power, hold it, don't squander it on
           | politicians, begging for crumbs, grants and the decency of a
           | private life. Oppenheimer should have continued his quote
           | "now I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds" with "bow to
           | me mortals, cause it is I that controls the machine" not
           | "here you go Mr. Truman, go nuts with the bombs".
           | 
           | Also, Turing can never be overrated, beyond being the one who
           | pulled us into a new metaphysics of computability (alongside
           | Alonzo Church and others, sure), he will also be the one to
           | bring the 22nd century into a new metaphysics of
           | morphogenetic freedom [1] [2] [3]. Not sure about Flowers,
           | but Turing knew there were realms of computationality way
           | beyond their present tubes and levers.
           | 
           | [1] 1952, Alan M. Turing, _The Chemical Basis of
           | Morphogenesis_ , https://www.dna.caltech.edu/courses/cs191/pa
           | perscs191/turing...
           | 
           | [2] "The Collective Intelligence of Cells During
           | Morphogenesis with Dr. Michael Levin",
           | https://youtu.be/p4Fm7jLNrpg?t=125
           | 
           | [3] "Morphogenesis: Geometry, Physics, and Biology with Dr.
           | Lakshminarayanan Mahadevan",
           | https://youtu.be/b1-sEhB5h8Y?t=85
        
           | KnobbleMcKnees wrote:
           | I learned about Turing at university in the 2000s, before his
           | personal history became a vogue subject. Specifically, I
           | learned about Turing machines and the halting problem,
           | alongside Von Neumann machines and such.
           | 
           | It wasn't until later that I learned about Turing's suffering
           | due to his sexuality.
           | 
           | so I am quite curious: why is Flowers underrated? What
           | contributions did he make to his fields similar to Turing's?
        
             | adrian_b wrote:
             | Most of his important work has been done during the War and
             | it was classified (being applied in electronic
             | cryptographic machines), so he was not allowed to brag
             | about it.
        
         | kristianc wrote:
         | Turing's work wasn't fully understood or appreciated until the
         | the 1980s specifically because many of the documents which
         | revealed the extent of his contributions were classified by the
         | UK government until then, and yes because of the social
         | attitudes of the time, particularly regarding his sexuality.
         | Without those two things he would have got far more credit than
         | he actually did.
         | 
         | The declassification, and a thawing of social attitudes toward
         | LGBT people enabled Turing to be recognized as the figure he is
         | today. So yes, file it under equality, diversity and inclusion
         | all you want.
        
         | 908B64B197 wrote:
         | > Until the 1980s or so, Turing wasn't known much outside
         | mathematics, and was considered a minor figure in computing.
         | Von Neumann was the big name in computer architecture, and
         | Friedman was the big name in cryptanalysis.
         | 
         | Big part of that is because a lot of what he did was kept
         | classified or not publicized too much by the British
         | government. They seem to have done a complete 180 on this
         | relatively recently (now that tech and SV are all over the
         | news) and seem to want to brand anything computing related with
         | his name.
         | 
         | Am-I the only one that finds is odd how the British government
         | brags about Alan Turing after what they did to him? Having a
         | government research center named after him seems particularly
         | strange after what they had him endure. The state forced him to
         | undergo chemical castration because of his homosexuality. Same
         | state kept his achievements and contribution to the war effort
         | a secret up until after his death, so they could persecute a
         | war hero without the public knowing about it.
         | 
         | Crazy to think he was convicted in 1952. Same year Elizabeth
         | became Queen and head of the British government. She could have
         | simply overturned his conviction, as British law allowed her to
         | do so. But she and the crown chose not to.
         | 
         | The man saved women, men, children, of all races and
         | orientations from an horrible end. Had he not cracked the
         | enigma's cryptography, there would most likely remain nothing
         | today of the crown that persecuted him. Blown to dust by the
         | Luftwaffe.
         | 
         | If only the British government had extended the same humanity
         | to Turing himself.
        
       | 908B64B197 wrote:
       | A lot of what Turing did was kept classified or not publicized
       | too much by the British government. They seem to have done a
       | complete 180 on this relatively recently (now that tech and SV
       | are all over the news) and seem to want to brand anything
       | computing related with his name.
       | 
       | Am-I the only one that finds is odd how the British government
       | brags about Alan Turing after what they did to him? Having a
       | government research center named after him seems particularly
       | strange after what they had him endure. The state forced him to
       | undergo chemical castration because of his homosexuality. Same
       | state kept his achievements and contribution to the war effort a
       | secret up until after his death, so they could persecute a war
       | hero without the public knowing about it.
       | 
       | Crazy to think he was convicted in 1952. Same year Elizabeth
       | became Queen and head of the British government. She could have
       | simply overturned his conviction, as British law allowed her to
       | do so. But she and the crown chose not to.
       | 
       | The man saved women, men, children, of all races and orientations
       | from an horrible end. Had he not cracked the enigma's
       | cryptography, there would most likely remain nothing today of the
       | crown that persecuted him. Blown to dust by the Luftwaffe.
       | 
       | If only the British government had extended the same humanity to
       | Turing himself.
        
         | _Wintermute wrote:
         | "The British Government" isn't some singular immortal person. I
         | imagine the people in charge of naming this academic institute
         | had nothing to do with his conviction or homosexuality laws in
         | the 1950s, they most likely weren't even alive then.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-06-24 23:00 UTC)