> “It feels good,” Dettmers said when I asked him how it felt to have contributed to what some are calling a “Sputnik moment” in AI. I'll present an alternativ

> “It feels good,” Dettmers said when I asked him how it felt to have contributed to what some are calling a “Sputnik moment” in AI. I'll present an alternative narrative for the "Sputnik moment" trope, as described by someone who lived through it. In "Introduction of Computers in Chemical Structure Information Systems, or What Is Not Recorded in the Annals", once easily available at https://www.asis.org/History/12-lynch.pdf https://www.asis.org/History/12-lynch.pdf but now only in archive.org at https://web.archive.org/web/20130702201907/https://www.asis.org/History/12-lynch.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20130702201907/https://www.asis.... "There were great stirrings in science information at that time because of Sputnik, the challenge to the United States from the Soviet Union in October 1957. Sputnik’s beep-beep tones took the world totally by surprise. When the dust had settled, it became apparent that the Soviets had published their intentions in the open literature, but the science information system in the West was in disarray. The system had not been considered sufficiently important nor was it well enough funded to keep up with the vast increases in the numbers of scientists employed and publishing in the postwar period." In this interpretation, the issue isn't publishing in the open, but rather who is paying attention to what's published.