15 Feb
2017
15 Feb
'17
7:24 a.m.
On 2017-02-15 8:33 AM, william degnan wrote:
On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 11:46 PM, Fred Cisin <cisin
at xenosoft.com> wrote:
Even if your argument weren't absurd and offensive, Hopper isn't who any
sensible imaginary "anti-tech revolutionary" would go for. They'd
rightly go after the legacy of people like Zuckerberg, Thiel, Altman,
etc who *are* weaponising tech. They won't even remember what Hopper did.
--Toby
On Tue, 14 Feb 2017, Ken Seefried wrote:
Grace Hopper checks all the boxes of an acceptable historical figure,
today...100 years from now in the midst of an "anti technology" movement
... I'd be fascinated at a justification for this
opinion that squared
with "John C. Calhoun?s legacy as a white supremacist and a national
leader who passionately promoted slavery as a ?positive good?".
And, once he graduated from Yale in 1804, he turned his back on the
college, with no further significant involvement, and didn't give them
money!
famous alum, before Yale had any other famous alums.
I'd say that Grace Hopper had a better legacy.
http://vintagecomputer.net/browse_thread.cfm?id=654
(Revolutionary Force Bombs IBM Office ... Computerword March 18, 1970)
Bill