82,903
edits
Talk:Reg tech: Difference between revisions
→Digitisation of information: a history
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
You might want to call the data on these cards “symbols”, but they are not: a symbol is a linguistic representation of on one [[substrate]] of something else. A symbol requires interpretation — an imaginative connection of the symbol with the thing it represents. In “reading” the punched card, Jacquard’s loom did not interpret anything. The cards contained unambiguous, binary instructions to carry out specific functions — namely to create the intricate oriental patterns so sought after in the salons of haute couture in 19th century Paris. | You might want to call the data on these cards “symbols”, but they are not: a symbol is a linguistic representation of on one [[substrate]] of something else. A symbol requires interpretation — an imaginative connection of the symbol with the thing it represents. In “reading” the punched card, Jacquard’s loom did not interpret anything. The cards contained unambiguous, binary instructions to carry out specific functions — namely to create the intricate oriental patterns so sought after in the salons of haute couture in 19th century Paris. | ||
Jacquard’s machine offered more than just flexibility. It separated the information comprising a given pattern from the machine that made it. It was printed on the cards. Information — binary data needing no intelligence, interpretation or skill to process — was suddenly portable. Jacquard could send instructions for the latest weave from Paris to Lyon without having to transport a bloody great automated loom down there. | Jacquard’s machine offered more than just flexibility. It separated the information comprising a given pattern from the machine that made it. It was printed on the cards. Information — binary data needing no intelligence, interpretation or skill to process — was suddenly portable. Jacquard could send instructions for the latest weave from Paris to Lyon by popping a box of cards on one of those new french mail coaches,<ref>Je suis obligé, la Wikipèdia.</ref> without having to transport a bloody great automated loom down there with it. | ||
So to the stages of computerisation of human tools. | |||
“A device for reliably carrying out a defined function” is not a bad general definition for a “machine” and there were certainly machines before 1804: the innovation was to abstract the instructions from the basic engineering of the tool. You cannot extract the “instructions” built into the engineering of a scythe (when force is applied, use sharp blade to cut wheat) or a water-wheel blades are set at an angle such that when wind blows or, water flows, it pushes blade sideways and rotates the wheel. | “A device for reliably carrying out a defined function” is not a bad general definition for a “machine” and there were certainly machines before 1804: the innovation was to abstract the instructions from the basic engineering of the tool. You cannot extract the “instructions” built into the engineering of a scythe (when force is applied, use sharp blade to cut wheat) or a water-wheel blades are set at an angle such that when wind blows or, water flows, it pushes blade sideways and rotates the wheel. | ||
It will work without human intervention but, as long as the water keeps flowing, won’t stop. This embedded natural coding: <when“ water pressure is applied here, rotate this way>”. Such | It will work without human intervention but, as long as the water keeps flowing, won’t stop. This embedded natural coding: <when“ water pressure is applied here, rotate this way>”. Such | ||