Friday, 20 September 2013
Note on Indian Computers
The first modern Indian analog computer was apparently assembled in Calcutta (now Kolkata), in 1950. See Devaprasanna Sinha (08 2012), 'Glimpsing through Early Days of Computers in Kolkata, Computer Society of India, pgs. 5-6 [this is from Wikipedia]. (See the same source further for the first digital computer in India, at the Indian Statistical Institute in Calcutta, operational in 1956. This was purchased from the UK. http://www.csi-india.org/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=015efaaf-c6d4-4734-8b84-9240b906daa6&groupId=10616)
Wednesday, 18 September 2013
Modern Chinese mechanical computers? / 中国近代力学的计算机？
I can find very little on the subject of modern Chinese mechanical computers, so far. (I mean other than quantum mechanical computers.) Apparently there was a conference on 'Chinese mechanical computers in [the] machinery industry,' in Shanghai in October, 1992. See the site put up by the French Mechanics' Society (SFM - la Societe Francaise des Mecaniciens): http://fabri.perso.neuf.fr/sfm/LETTRESFM15.html -- but this merely mentions the conference.
There are many sources of information about the abacus, which was probably invented in Babylonia (now Iraq) thousands of years ago, and was used widely in China, among other countries. It is of course one of the major precursors of modern computers. See J.M. Pullan (1969), The History of the Abacus (New York: Praeger); also Stan Augarten (1984), Bit by Bit. An Illustrated History of Computers, pgs. 2-6.
Peter Taylor in his fascinating book Extraordinary Cities (2013) has some very interesting things to say about today's 'China globalization' -- part of the context of any contemporary non-E computing developments in the city networks of China.
Below is an attempt at a Chinese translation, courtesy of Google -- probably laughable, but I appreciate the program.
我能找到的很少在现代中国的机械计算机的主体，至今。 （我的意思是比量子力学的计算机等）显然有在上海的一个会议“中国机械电脑在[中]机械行业，在十月份，1992年见忍了由法国力学”协会（SFM网站 - LA兴业法兰西DES Mecaniciens）：http://fabri.perso.neuf.fr/sfm/LETTRESFM15.html - 但这仅仅是提到了会议。
还有约算盘，这可能是发明于巴比伦（今伊拉克）几千年前，被广泛应用于中国，其他国家之间的许多资料来源。这当然是现代计算机的主要前体之一。看到有JM Pullan（1969），珠算（纽约：普拉格）的历史;还斯坦奥加唐（1984），点点滴滴。计算机图录，编着。 2-6。
彼得·泰勒在他引人入胜的书特别的城市（2013年）有一些非常有趣的东西，说今天的“中国的全球化” - 任何当代非E计算的发展，中国的城市网络的上下文的一部分。
There are many sources of information about the abacus, which was probably invented in Babylonia (now Iraq) thousands of years ago, and was used widely in China, among other countries. It is of course one of the major precursors of modern computers. See J.M. Pullan (1969), The History of the Abacus (New York: Praeger); also Stan Augarten (1984), Bit by Bit. An Illustrated History of Computers, pgs. 2-6.
Peter Taylor in his fascinating book Extraordinary Cities (2013) has some very interesting things to say about today's 'China globalization' -- part of the context of any contemporary non-E computing developments in the city networks of China.
Below is an attempt at a Chinese translation, courtesy of Google -- probably laughable, but I appreciate the program.
我能找到的很少在现代中国的机械计算机的主体，至今。 （我的意思是比量子力学的计算机等）显然有在上海的一个会议“中国机械电脑在[中]机械行业，在十月份，1992年见忍了由法国力学”协会（SFM网站 - LA兴业法兰西DES Mecaniciens）：http://fabri.perso.neuf.fr/sfm/LETTRESFM15.html - 但这仅仅是提到了会议。
还有约算盘，这可能是发明于巴比伦（今伊拉克）几千年前，被广泛应用于中国，其他国家之间的许多资料来源。这当然是现代计算机的主要前体之一。看到有JM Pullan（1969），珠算（纽约：普拉格）的历史;还斯坦奥加唐（1984），点点滴滴。计算机图录，编着。 2-6。
彼得·泰勒在他引人入胜的书特别的城市（2013年）有一些非常有趣的东西，说今天的“中国的全球化” - 任何当代非E计算的发展，中国的城市网络的上下文的一部分。
Thursday, 12 September 2013
General reservation re quantum nanotechnology
General reservation re quantum nanotechnology:
Since below the 50-nanometre scale the quantum size effect enters, and nanotechnology is often defined as working with matter on the scale of 100 nm or smaller, it would be best to keep to the >125 nm scale, so we continue to work with micro- not nano (quantum)-tech. This is because of the ethical and ecological problems with quantum nanotech, as well as it not having been evaluated before being commercialized -- an egregious error that endangers technological progress generally.
Proponents of tech must become hard-core proponents of rigorous full-cost accounting of the tech, or they risk the future of technology itself. They must insist upon fully funded adversarial science to investigate the downside of all big tech ventures before we OK them as a society. Even if we then go ahead with the tech, we need such research in order to come up with methods of mitigation.
For more that's critical of nanotech, see the ETC Group: www.etcgroup.org. For an article on quantum-scale mechanical computing, see: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/9923965/Steam-age-computers-could-be-tailor-made-for-the-molecular-world.html. You can find celebrations of nanotech anywhere, but for some degree of thoughtfulness in supporting the technology, see the Foresight Institute: www.foresight.org.
[Need citations.]
Since below the 50-nanometre scale the quantum size effect enters, and nanotechnology is often defined as working with matter on the scale of 100 nm or smaller, it would be best to keep to the >125 nm scale, so we continue to work with micro- not nano (quantum)-tech. This is because of the ethical and ecological problems with quantum nanotech, as well as it not having been evaluated before being commercialized -- an egregious error that endangers technological progress generally.
Proponents of tech must become hard-core proponents of rigorous full-cost accounting of the tech, or they risk the future of technology itself. They must insist upon fully funded adversarial science to investigate the downside of all big tech ventures before we OK them as a society. Even if we then go ahead with the tech, we need such research in order to come up with methods of mitigation.
For more that's critical of nanotech, see the ETC Group: www.etcgroup.org. For an article on quantum-scale mechanical computing, see: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/9923965/Steam-age-computers-could-be-tailor-made-for-the-molecular-world.html. You can find celebrations of nanotech anywhere, but for some degree of thoughtfulness in supporting the technology, see the Foresight Institute: www.foresight.org.
[Need citations.]
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)