Now also a GPU is named after Ada Lovelace
https://www.pcgamer.com/nvidias-next-generation-ada-lovelace-gpus-are-rumored-to-consume-scary-amounts-of-power/

On 2/25/22 11:42 AM, mockturtle wrote:
> Now also a GPU is named after Ada Lovelace
> https://www.pcgamer.com/nvidias-next-generation-ada-lovelace-gpus-are-rumored-to-consume-scary-amounts-of-power/

That's nice ... but does it have anything to do with
her thoughts on computing machines ? :-)

Babbage knew how to build a computer - but he was fixated
on using them to create math tables for navigation and such.
Lovelace/Byron saw the potential far better - realized that
anything that could in some way be rendered into numbers
could be manipulated by computing machines.

Poor Babbage ... he had it right, but the hardware of the
time was gears and cogs.

On Sunday, February 27, 2022 at 5:24:01 PM UTC+11, 25.BX943 wrote:
> On 2/25/22 11:42 AM, mockturtle wrote:
> > Now also a GPU is named after Ada Lovelace
> > https://www.pcgamer.com/nvidias-next-generation-ada-lovelace-gpus-are-rumored-to-consume-scary-amounts-of-power/
> That's nice ... but does it have anything to do with
> her thoughts on computing machines ? :-)
>
> Babbage knew how to build a computer - but he was fixated
> on using them to create math tables for navigation and such.
..
That's how it started, but he progressed to develop
an "analytical engine" -- a computer, for which Ada Lovelace
wrote programs.
..
> Lovelace/Byron saw the potential far better - realized that
> anything that could in some way be rendered into numbers
> could be manipulated by computing machines.
>
> Poor Babbage ... he had it right, but the hardware of the
> time was gears and cogs.

On 2/27/22 2:55 AM, Robin Vowels wrote:
> On Sunday, February 27, 2022 at 5:24:01 PM UTC+11, 25.BX943 wrote:
>> On 2/25/22 11:42 AM, mockturtle wrote:
>>> Now also a GPU is named after Ada Lovelace
>>> https://www.pcgamer.com/nvidias-next-generation-ada-lovelace-gpus-are-rumored-to-consume-scary-amounts-of-power/
>> That's nice ... but does it have anything to do with
>> her thoughts on computing machines ? :-)
>>
>> Babbage knew how to build a computer - but he was fixated
>> on using them to create math tables for navigation and such.
> .
> That's how it started, but he progressed to develop
> an "analytical engine" -- a computer, for which Ada Lovelace
> wrote programs.

Timeline ... she came in as he was trying to raise money
for the 'analytical engine'. I think he'd sold exactly two
of his 'difference engines' (to the Royal Navy I think)
but nobody else was interested. Those were VERY complicated
devices in and of themselves, very expensive to make.

Babbage dropped in on Ada's hubby with a sales pitch. She
sat in on his overly-tekkie description of the AE. The next
morning she'd written a small program for the hypothetical
device (it had one small bug). Her interest piqued, she
struck up a closer association with Babbage (as pen-pals
and 'biz partners' apparently, nothing naughtier was ever
mentioned). She wrote up what amounted to sales ads for
the thing - which tended to be half her own expositions
on the subject.

However Babbage never really did seem to see the wider
possibilities of his AE. He still saw the use as doing
practical math - just with more flexibility than the
old DE. Ada was the only one who seemed to grasp the
more exotic implication - anything that *could* be
represented as numbers could be manipulated/analyzed/
transformed by such a machine.

So, while Babbage is the god of computers, Lovelace is
the goddess of modern "computing". Babbage's vision was
severely limited by the hardware of the era - gears and
cogs and cams. Lovelace's vision was not dependent on
the hardware, you can easily code her programming examples
into Python or Pascal, 'C' ... or Ada ... and they work.

Alas her life was rather short - some disease, maybe cancer -
and she spent her last couple of years totally doped-up and
unable to pursue her ideas.

In any case, they both had it right - but Babbage was the
one thwarted by the tech. A remarkable set of people, just
100 years too early. The proto Woz and Jobs ???

Oh, and let's not forget that Babbage got his idea for the AE
from the Jacquard loom when he visited Jacquard's factory -
another inspired bit of tech. And yes Jacquard had his own
'systems programmer' in the back room, the only guy who knew
how the control cards should be punched - the machine was
probably HIS idea, but he gets no credit and nobody even
seems sure of his name ... the boss slapped HIS name on it
and that's all anyone remembers (sound familiar ? :-)

On Tuesday, March 8, 2022 at 12:55:17 PM UTC+11, 25.BX943 wrote:
> On 2/27/22 2:55 AM, Robin Vowels wrote:
> > On Sunday, February 27, 2022 at 5:24:01 PM UTC+11, 25.BX943 wrote:
> >> On 2/25/22 11:42 AM, mockturtle wrote:
> >>> Now also a GPU is named after Ada Lovelace
> >>> https://www.pcgamer.com/nvidias-next-generation-ada-lovelace-gpus-are-rumored-to-consume-scary-amounts-of-power/
> >> That's nice ... but does it have anything to do with
> >> her thoughts on computing machines ? :-)
> >>
> >> Babbage knew how to build a computer - but he was fixated
> >> on using them to create math tables for navigation and such.
> > .
> > That's how it started, but he progressed to develop
> > an "analytical engine" -- a computer, for which Ada Lovelace
> > wrote programs.
> Timeline ... she came in as he was trying to raise money
> for the 'analytical engine'. I think he'd sold exactly two
> of his 'difference engines' (to the Royal Navy I think)
> but nobody else was interested. Those were VERY complicated
> devices in and of themselves, very expensive to make.
>
> Babbage dropped in on Ada's hubby with a sales pitch. She
> sat in on his overly-tekkie description of the AE. The next
> morning she'd written a small program for the hypothetical
> device (it had one small bug). Her interest piqued, she
> struck up a closer association with Babbage (as pen-pals
> and 'biz partners' apparently, nothing naughtier was ever
> mentioned). She wrote up what amounted to sales ads for
> the thing - which tended to be half her own expositions
> on the subject.
>
> However Babbage never really did seem to see the wider
> possibilities of his AE. He still saw the use as doing
> practical math - just with more flexibility than the
> old DE.
..
That was important enough in itself, and anything more
would have been of no interest to those Babbage was trying to
interest as backers.
..
> Ada was the only one who seemed to grasp the
> more exotic implication - anything that *could* be
> represented as numbers could be manipulated/analyzed/
> transformed by such a machine.
>
> So, while Babbage is the god of computers, Lovelace is
> the goddess of modern "computing". Babbage's vision was
> severely limited by the hardware of the era - gears and
> cogs and cams. Lovelace's vision was not dependent on
> the hardware, you can easily code her programming examples
> into Python or Pascal, 'C' ... or Ada ... and they work.
>
> Alas her life was rather short - some disease, maybe cancer -
> and she spent her last couple of years totally doped-up and
> unable to pursue her ideas.
>
> In any case, they both had it right - but Babbage was the
> one thwarted by the tech. A remarkable set of people, just
> 100 years too early. The proto Woz and Jobs ???
>
> Oh, and let's not forget that Babbage got his idea for the AE
> from the Jacquard loom when he visited Jacquard's factory -
> another inspired bit of tech. And yes Jacquard had his own
> 'systems programmer' in the back room, the only guy who knew
> how the control cards should be punched - the machine was
> probably HIS idea, but he gets no credit and nobody even
> seems sure of his name ... the boss slapped HIS name on it
> and that's all anyone remembers (sound familiar ? :-)