Mikey: key term = “repression of the state”. Fred Turner - machines associated with the military industrial complex become rebranded as liberatory devices.
The ‘generalization’ problem: how do you separate an algorithm from its context? Felicia: how did it become possible to allude to images/metaphors so far away. Mirowski’s claim: computer scientists had a physics envy.
prehistoric orientalizing = distinct but related to the popularizing metaphors.
Lindsay: algorithms seen very much as a threat to bourgeios individuality, rather than a buttress.
Felicia: rest of the dissertation is about the tautology of ‘plans’ and ‘planning’ with computer science.
Holly: what is really at stake in the democratization of programming, of making it better. How does the democratization of an academic field relate to the politics of democratization. The definition of an algorithm actually emerges with Ada Lovelace (100 years before, in the Babbage context) potentially a really strong connection to capital / Marx. an elegant kick - any metaphor throws us into material history.
Felicia’s broader argument = state planning is a positive conception of the history of algorithms.
aside: in the archaeological register, regarding Mesopotamian history: should be compared to Israel/Palestine and the coloniality of archaeology.
resonant with Marx’s comment in the Grundrisse, the man is the key to the ape.
Shriram, Will, and the way that CS is taught.
ACM defines computing as the definition of a procedure.
one interesting aspect here is the _computer_ itself as a logical entity.this is particularly interesting as a site of intervention for CS education, i.e. building a distribution system rather than a bank.