5 ms·

Harvard Mark I

44 points by angrygoat 7y ago

williamstein 7y ago
A fun thing about this computer is that you see it (for free) every time you're in the Science Center at Harvard. You don't have to go to some special museum.
- sandworm101 7y ago
  But it wasn't actually a computer. It was technically just a calculator. The way it was designed meant that it was not the Turing-complete and/or von Neutmann-type machine that we now describe as a computer. It did some things very very well, but was not a general purpose machine capable of running any program asked of it.
  - commandlinefan 7y ago
    Well, it was still more than a calculator, since it was programmable: a calculator can add or subtract, but can't be instructed to do one and then the other without human intervention.
    - sandworm101 7y ago
      Yes and no. It is a programmable calculator, but it cannot run an unending program. It doesn't have the "go to X" functionality to bounce back and forth along a long tape of instructions. It can run a sequence of tasks, much like a player piano can, but eventually gets to the end of the program and is therefore limited. A proper computer can calculate anything. It might take trillions of years to complete some tasks, but a proper "computer" can run programs with no defined end. Calculators can only run sequences.
  - csours 7y ago
    You may know this, but for others: In the 1940s the word 'computer' would be more associated with a human performing computations (aka calculations) [0] 0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_(job_description)#Wartime_computing_and_electronics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_(job_description)#War...
  - Finnucane 7y ago
    That does not compute.
dmix 7y ago
If only WW2 lasted another 5yrs I'm curious what else would have been accomplished in that timeframe. They were all just starting to perfect some advanced technology. The motivation from people dying and patrotic goals, combined with budget (but a constrained one) and every person in the country attempting to contribute to the effort seems like a good recipe for new technology development. Especially for finding the stuff that will actually do something useful today and not in 10yrs, since it was already needed yesterday. Obviously the costs of the war outplay the value from this but it's interesting to think about.
- adventured 7y ago
  The transistor of course was 1947, so that five year addition wouldn't have pulled it forward much. I think there was a lot that could have been done with WW2 budgets + desperation to force the arrival of the microprocessor forward from 1971 by many years, 10-15 years faster perhaps.
- crimsonalucard 7y ago
  There are other alternative paths of technology that we could've went down. A turing machine is isomorphic to lambda calculus and possibly isomorphic to many other machines. Like how javascript is an arbitrary way to do frontend programming, it's possible the current computing paradigm is also arbitrary.
  - Ididntdothis 7y ago
    “it's possible the current computing paradigm is also arbitrary.” I think that’s true. Makes me wonder how things would look if you redesigned things with today’s knowledge if you didn’t have to worry about existing infrastructure.
    - crimsonalucard 7y ago
      Not just that. Arbitrary choices are made at every level of computing from even logic below the turing machine all the way up to javascript for browsers. Imagine if they decided to use 3 voltages to represent numbers. Instead of 3.5 volts for 1 and 0 volts for 0 what if we had a trinary representation 5 volts for 2, 3.5 for 1 and 0 volts for 0. Or what if analog computing took off instead. Instead of trying to make everything digital we built machines that are functions of analog voltage waveforms and poured all of our abilities into reducing noise instead of upping clock speed. Is the technology we use now the result of arbitrary choices made out of pure luck or given enough time all civilizations will develop digital computing due to inherit limitations of the physical world.
dmix 7y ago
> After two rejections,[4] he was shown a demonstration set that Charles Babbage’s son had given to Harvard University 70 years earlier. This led him to study Babbage and to add references of the Analytical Engine to his proposal It's amazing how old rediscovering old ideas can create scientific/technology revolutions.
elipsey 7y ago
TIL "patch" and "loop" didn't used to be metaphorical -- they did it physically with punch card tape! Also, that has to be the classiest enclosure ever made. Check out some of the designer's other work: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Bel_Geddes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Bel_Geddes
cpr 7y ago
This was in the lobby of the old Aiken Computing Center my undergrad years, but moved out when they built the new "cheese wedge" Gates/Ballmer building on the same spot. Always entertaining to walk by and see the "bugs" (moths) in the (then already defunct) relays...

44 points by angrygoat 7y ago

A fun thing about this computer is that you see it (for free) every time you're in the Science Center at Harvard. You don't have to go to some special museum.

sandworm101 7y ago
But it wasn't actually a computer. It was technically just a calculator. The way it was designed meant that it was not the Turing-complete and/or von Neutmann-type machine that we now describe as a computer. It did some things very very well, but was not a general purpose machine capable of running any program asked of it.
- commandlinefan 7y ago
  Well, it was still more than a calculator, since it was programmable: a calculator can add or subtract, but can't be instructed to do one and then the other without human intervention.
  - sandworm101 7y ago
    Yes and no. It is a programmable calculator, but it cannot run an unending program. It doesn't have the "go to X" functionality to bounce back and forth along a long tape of instructions. It can run a sequence of tasks, much like a player piano can, but eventually gets to the end of the program and is therefore limited. A proper computer can calculate anything. It might take trillions of years to complete some tasks, but a proper "computer" can run programs with no defined end. Calculators can only run sequences.
- csours 7y ago
  You may know this, but for others: In the 1940s the word 'computer' would be more associated with a human performing computations (aka calculations) [0] 0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_(job_description)#Wartime_computing_and_electronics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_(job_description)#War...
- Finnucane 7y ago
  That does not compute.

dmix 7y ago

If only WW2 lasted another 5yrs I'm curious what else would have been accomplished in that timeframe. They were all just starting to perfect some advanced technology. The motivation from people dying and patrotic goals, combined with budget (but a constrained one) and every person in the country attempting to contribute to the effort seems like a good recipe for new technology development. Especially for finding the stuff that will actually do something useful today and not in 10yrs, since it was already needed yesterday. Obviously the costs of the war outplay the value from this but it's interesting to think about.

adventured 7y ago
The transistor of course was 1947, so that five year addition wouldn't have pulled it forward much. I think there was a lot that could have been done with WW2 budgets + desperation to force the arrival of the microprocessor forward from 1971 by many years, 10-15 years faster perhaps.
crimsonalucard 7y ago
There are other alternative paths of technology that we could've went down. A turing machine is isomorphic to lambda calculus and possibly isomorphic to many other machines. Like how javascript is an arbitrary way to do frontend programming, it's possible the current computing paradigm is also arbitrary.
- Ididntdothis 7y ago
  “it's possible the current computing paradigm is also arbitrary.” I think that’s true. Makes me wonder how things would look if you redesigned things with today’s knowledge if you didn’t have to worry about existing infrastructure.
  - crimsonalucard 7y ago
    Not just that. Arbitrary choices are made at every level of computing from even logic below the turing machine all the way up to javascript for browsers. Imagine if they decided to use 3 voltages to represent numbers. Instead of 3.5 volts for 1 and 0 volts for 0 what if we had a trinary representation 5 volts for 2, 3.5 for 1 and 0 volts for 0. Or what if analog computing took off instead. Instead of trying to make everything digital we built machines that are functions of analog voltage waveforms and poured all of our abilities into reducing noise instead of upping clock speed. Is the technology we use now the result of arbitrary choices made out of pure luck or given enough time all civilizations will develop digital computing due to inherit limitations of the physical world.

dmix 7y ago

> After two rejections,[4] he was shown a demonstration set that Charles Babbage’s son had given to Harvard University 70 years earlier. This led him to study Babbage and to add references of the Analytical Engine to his proposal It's amazing how old rediscovering old ideas can create scientific/technology revolutions.

elipsey 7y ago

TIL "patch" and "loop" didn't used to be metaphorical -- they did it physically with punch card tape! Also, that has to be the classiest enclosure ever made. Check out some of the designer's other work: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Bel_Geddes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Bel_Geddes

cpr 7y ago

This was in the lobby of the old Aiken Computing Center my undergrad years, but moved out when they built the new "cheese wedge" Gates/Ballmer building on the same spot. Always entertaining to walk by and see the "bugs" (moths) in the (then already defunct) relays...