From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <19009B53-F1BE-4357-9B77-BBDF9215F80A@verizon.net> References: <20111013171959.GA3814@polynum.com> <20111013172210.GD1976@vicerveza.homeunix.net> <19009B53-F1BE-4357-9B77-BBDF9215F80A@verizon.net> Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 10:20:54 +1100 Message-ID: From: Bruce Ellis To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [9fans] Sad News Topicbox-Message-UUID: 37e287a6-ead7-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 The form was colloquially known as the "I Am Great" report. brucee On 14 October 2011 09:57, Thomas wrote: > I remember his giving a talk about 5 years ago at the time of his > > retirement from Bell Labs. He was delighted that he was now =C2=A0a > > contract employee and no longer had to fill out a > > certain form annually and answer a question something like: > > "What have you done for Bell Labs this year?" > > Free at last. > > -Tom West > > > On Oct 13, 2011, at 5:19 PM, Nick LaForge wrote: > >>> It is so sad that the people most responsible for the key software >>> technologies are almost unheard of by the general public, and most >>> credit seems to be given to people that jump on the bandwagon much >>> later.. >> >>> If there was a Nobel prize for software, dmr would have been one of >>> the top on my list. >> >> The public's traditional fascination with physics makes an interesting >> comparison, considering the relative obscurity computer science >> enjoys. >> >> Physics' gifts include nuclear fission, medical imaging, aerospace, >> semiconducting... the list is enumerable. Yet the greatest celebrity >> among physicists undoubtedly is Albert Einstein, who's contributions >> are most significant theoretically (aerospace aside). =C2=A0So it seems >> fitting that a similarly theoretical and precise discipline like >> computer science should enjoy comparable status (in opposition to the >> actual situation where Gates and Jobs get the glory). =C2=A0Ironically, = the >> real reason for mathematics omission by Nobel likely was that Alfred >> Nobel thought it TOO theoretical a discipline (see >> http://mathforum.org/social/articles/ross.html). =C2=A0Regardless, it to= ok >> people like dmr (and Turing, Church, Shannon, Neumann, Dijkstra, >> Backus, Forsythe, Floyd, Hoare, Knuth, ...) to map abstract >> mathematical science onto workable machines. >> >> Maybe such a collaborative science doesn't permit hero worship? =C2=A0Dm= r's >> own publicly visible accomplishments alone make him worthy of it, yet >> his humility was so apparent ("I'm not a person who particularly had >> heros when growing up"). =C2=A0Perhaps his behind-the-scenes impact amon= g >> his colleagues at Bell Labs eclipse even what everyone else can see. >> >> But it's still sad that among those acquainted with Einstein and his >> contributions, less than 1% seem to even know who Turing was. >> >> Nick >> > > > --=20 Don't meddle in the mouth -- MVS (0416935147, +1-513-3BRUCEE)