Probably not, it's stated in the TFA, the controversy is because Lovelace was a woman and some people think propping her up is basically a DEI retcon in history, the rest of us don't care. But I don't think it's anything whatsoever to do with actual computers
> All but one of the programs cited in her notes had been prepared by Babbage from three to seven years earlier. The exception was prepared by Babbage for her, although she did detect a "bug" in it. Not only is there no evidence that Ada ever prepared a program for the Analytical Engine, but her correspondence with Babbage shows that she did not have the knowledge to do so.
> Bruce Collier wrote that Lovelace "made a considerable contribution to publicizing the Analytical Engine, but there is no evidence that she advanced the design or theory of it in any way"
The common claims are that Ada Lovelace was the first person to write a computer program, or that she was actually the primary driver in developing the analytical engine. Both such claims fall into the area "DEI retcon" as you choose to phrase it.
Although on a more pedantic note, Babbage wasn't the first person to program a computer either. Computers that aren't Turing complete are still computers. The Jacquard loom is one such example, and unlike the analytical engine it was actually built and put to practical use.
It's always been strange to me, given that Lovelace's program was a note in some documents that she was preparing under Babbage's directions as a scribe of sorts, that so many people assume it was her work and not Babbage's. Based on other details of her life she was clearly a very intelligent and talented woman, but the obsession with attributing the first ever computer program to her seems entirely ideologically motivated.
> Lovelace's program was a note in some documents that she was preparing under Babbage's directions as a scribe of sorts
It was not the case. She was translating someone else’s article, and it does not seem she did it under direction or supervision.
> so many people assume it was her work and not Babbage's.
What she did was quite common. She had ideas about the thing she was translating and thus added them as notes. All fairly straightforward.
> the obsession with attributing the first ever computer program to her seems entirely ideologically motivated.
To me the obsession that some people (not you, but some definitely do and use the same arguments) have with bringing her down is entirely ideologically motivated. She was recognised for a long time, and while there are discussions about exactly who was first and such (as there always are when discussing History), her role was mostly uncontroversial. Also bear in mind that calculator and then programmer were women’s jobs until some point in the 2nd half of the 20th century. Having a woman write code was not controversial before the establishment of the bro culture.
> To me the obsession that some people (not you, but some definitely do and use the same arguments) have with bringing her down is entirely ideologically motivated
There really aren't more of those than there are people trying to give more credit to those women than there is evidence for. In the end there are foul play from both sides, but currently one side is dominating academia so there is much more need to argue against that side than the other.
If you believe that all arguments must be evenly matched, to the point that you have an obligation to bolster the weaker side, you’re signing up for supporting some despicable ideas.
I understand and support steel-manning arguments in order to test one’s own convictions. But applied in actual debates with actual consequences, at some point you end up as the kneejerk contrarian that nobody takes seriously, and that undermines the truth seeking aspect of discussion.
Seriously. As the article states, while everyone else was like "Wow cool we will make a machine that makes calculating things easier"
Meanwhile Ada over here going "Oh shit this can do literally anything that can be done by steps of math. Someday machines following that formula will make music"
Ada is not the first programmer. Ada is the first computer scientist. She understood the ramifications of what we would eventually call "turing complete" systems, and understood the value of "general purpose" in a general purpose computer, and seemingly understood that more than just numbers could be represented and calculated in a computer.
Funny indeed.Ada Lovelace has been persistantly recognised for a very long time, but has never been held up as a sufferget type mayrter, as by all accounts, she enjoyed herself out on the bleeding edge and is still making people uncomfortable 150 years after not fitting into any stereotypes then.
Its clear from the footnotes that, whatever crowd
around Babage and Lovelace, grasped the possibilities.
Also interesting is that durring the apollo moon mission, the memory modules for the guidance computers were crafted by some of the last lace makers, working by hand, to survive the introduction of the jaquard looms and there punch cards.
The parent asks about the Difference Engine. Lovelace wrote about the (more powerful) Analytical Engine. Nobody is denying the Analytical engine was a computer.
