Skip to main content

Fact checking George Dyson (where he taps me on the shoulder)

It's no secret that I wasn't impressed by George Dyson's book "Turing's Cathedral" because it skewed history in a particular way a bit too much, and I felt that the title exploited the Turing anniversary. But I was struck by something he said in a StrataConf EU keynote.

He said that in 1953 there were only 53 kilobytes of random-access memory in computers in use and showed a picture of a February 1953 report entitled "A Survey of Automatic Digital Computers" published by the US Office of Naval Research. I thought that sounded odd, so I tracked down a copy of the report.


In fact, he makes the same claim in the book, but I'd overlooked it:


So, I started going through the report looking at machines that were operational in March 1953 according to the report. Just concentrating on binary machines I quickly found that random-access memory was well past 53KB.  By the time you reach E (the machines are in alphabetical order) there were 85,856 bytes of memory (in the ACE Pilot, APE(R)C, AVIDAC, BARK, EBIAC, CADAC, CSIRO Mark 1, EDSAC 1,  EDVAC, ELECOM 100 and ERA 1101).

So, then I wondered if, given that Dyson is oddly obsessed with the Williams Tube memory storage (making it the basis of his really odd "Turing Machines are one-dimensional, von Neumann machines two dimensional metaphor) if he was only counting machines that used fast electrostatic memory (he does, after all, say 'high-speed' in the book).

The machines that were operational in March 1953 with that type of memory are (according to the report): AVIDAC (5,120 bytes), ILLIAC (5,120 bytes), IAS Machine (5,120 bytes), Manchester Machine (645 bytes), MANIAC (5,120 bytes), ORDVAC (5,120 bytes), SEAC (2,816 bytes), SWAC (1,152 bytes), UTEC (768 bytes), Whirlwind (4,096 bytes).  That's a total of 35,077 bytes.

Reading the report it's clear that there was more than 53KB of memory in March 1953 and that it was spread across a variety of different memory types (magnetic drums, acoustic/mercury delay lines and electrostatic techniques).

It's a nice soundbite that in "1953 there were 53KB of memory", but like everything else in Dyson's book it's important to read it in the light of his fundamental idea that von Neumann's IAS machine is the Ur Machine.

PS After my talk at StrataConf I attended the FOO Party where all the speakers and others get together at the end of the conference. While chatting with someone, I felt a tap on my shoulder and turned round to hear "I really enjoyed your talk today. Marvellous to hear about LEO". The finger belonged to George Dyson.

So, of course, I had to own my opinions and ask him straight to his face about things I've written. I still don't understand his explanation of the one dimensional/two dimensional thing, but he convinced me that he's right about the 53KB in '53 thing. Apparently, there are two other important machines not mentioned in the US Navy report: one at IBM and another at RAND. He was just counting high-speed electrostatic memory as I'd guessed. And given that he spent 6 years researching the book he's probably got that part right!

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

How to write a successful blog post

First, a quick clarification of 'successful'. In this instance, I mean a blog post that receives a large number of page views. For my, little blog the most successful post ever got almost 57,000 page views. Not a lot by some other standards, but I was pretty happy about it. Looking at the top 10 blog posts (by page views) on my site, I've tried to distill some wisdom about what made them successful. Your blog posting mileage may vary. 1. Avoid using the passive voice The Microsoft Word grammar checker has probably been telling you this for years, but the passive voice excludes the people involved in your blog post. And that includes you, the author, and the reader. By using personal pronouns like I, you and we, you will include the reader in your blog post. When I first started this blog I avoid using "I" because I thought I was being narcissistic. But we all like to read about other people, people help anchor a story in reality. Without people your bl

Your last name contains invalid characters

My last name is "Graham-Cumming". But here's a typical form response when I enter it: Does the web site have any idea how rude it is to claim that my last name contains invalid characters? Clearly not. What they actually meant is: our web site will not accept that hyphen in your last name. But do they say that? No, of course not. They decide to shove in my face the claim that there's something wrong with my name. There's nothing wrong with my name, just as there's nothing wrong with someone whose first name is Jean-Marie, or someone whose last name is O'Reilly. What is wrong is that way this is being handled. If the system can't cope with non-letters and spaces it needs to say that. How about the following error message: Our system is unable to process last names that contain non-letters, please replace them with spaces. Don't blame me for having a last name that your system doesn't like, whose fault is that? Saying "Your

The Elevator Button Problem

User interface design is hard. It's hard because people perceive apparently simple things very differently. For example, take a look at this interface to an elevator: From flickr Now imagine the following situation. You are on the third floor of this building and you wish to go to the tenth. The elevator is on the fifth floor and there's an indicator that tells you where it is. Which button do you press? Most people probably say: "press up" since they want to go up. Not long ago I watched someone do the opposite and questioned them about their behavior. They said: "well the elevator is on the fifth floor and I am on the third, so I want it to come down to me". Much can be learnt about the design of user interfaces by considering this, apparently, simple interface. If you think about the elevator button problem you'll find that something so simple has hidden depths. How do people learn about elevator calling? What's the right amount of