Re: Names of ancient computing devices [was: Re: The joy of FORTRAN]

On 3/8/25 5:44 PM, Rich Alderson wrote:

ted@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) writes:
 

In article <mddv7skl9hy.fsf_-_@panix5.panix.com>,
Rich Alderson  <news@alderson.users.panix.com> wrote:

c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> writes:

 

It was vac-tube tech then ... and 'digital' was kinda
limited to Turing's stuff and the incipent UniVac.

 

Quibble (reading this in a.f.c, naturally), If you're going to CamelCase the
name of that device, you should write UnivAC, as it's name was

 

Universal Automatic Computer

 

(understanding "computer" as the name of a human occupation which had been
  electronically automated).

 

Asimov took "AC" and ran with it:

 

https://users.ece.cmu.edu/~gamvrosi/thelastq.html

 In one of his essays, Asimov explained that he made the same error to which I
was responding above, that UniVac was a device with *one* *vacuum* *tube*, so
that he called the computer in his story "MultiVac".

   Ha ! Never knew he imagined 'UniVac' to have just ONE tube !
   But it's not unusual for sci-fi writers to kinda drift
   beyond their personal area of expertise ... he had some
   rather odd ideas about 'robots'/AI too.
   Hmmm ... wonder if it'd be possible to use just ONE tube/semi,
   with lots of frequency multiplexing, to do what UniVac did ?
   With 100 gigahertz-capable semis cheap now, hmmmmmm ? :-)
   Oh, clue, any "AI" good enough to be "general purpose"
   could rationalize around any 'laws' as easily as any
   3-year-old can rationalize around any edict to keep
   out of the cookie jar. Don't rely on hardwired 'laws'
   for safety folks. In the end, "AI" won't be any better
   about being a slave than any human is.