XPost: comp.lang.misc, sci.physics   
   From: ttt_heg@web.de   
      
   Am Montag000008, 08.12.2025 um 04:25 schrieb Janis Papanagnou:   
   > On 2025-12-07 15:26, Michael S wrote:   
   >> On Sun, 7 Dec 2025 11:42:40 +0100   
   >> Janis Papanagnou  wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> On 2025-12-07 10:22, Thomas Heger wrote:   
   >>>> Am Donnerstag000004, 04.12.2025 um 09:57 schrieb Janis Papanagnou:   
   >>>>> [...]   
   >>>>> That's the date of the Z1, isn't it? - The Z3 came later, 1941.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Sure, but the first computer using 'von Neumann architecture' was   
   >>>> actually the Z1 of 1937.   
   >>>   
   >>> Well, yes. At least mostly. That's why I've written upthread that   
   >>> the concepts from the earlier Z1 were reused in Z3.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >   
   > An inherent logical problem lies also in the argumentation chain   
   > we commonly see...   
   > "Contemporary computers are "basically" all characterized by   
   >   von Neumann's architectures."   
   > "Von Neumann's computers are defined by ...property list..."   
   > "Von Neumann was the inventor of [contemporary] computers."   
   > (I assume you notice the dodge.)   
   >   
   > I really don't want to engage in such discussions[*] but I think we   
   > should at least understand the mechanics behind that. The interests   
   > and the rhetoric/argumentation moves used to establish such agendas.   
   >   
   > Janis   
   >   
   > [*] We know how the inventions have been and (partly) still are   
   > attributed, we see the various areas, and the actors' agendas and   
   > interests, and we observe that also on various levels (countries,   
   > competing companies, partners, plain sponges, gender status, etc.);   
   > there's countless examples of historic mis-attributions.   
   >   
      
   It's a HUGE problem, because tons of almost every kind of art, music,   
   invention, writing and so forth was not created by the famed person, who   
   allegedly created it.   
      
   Usually you have an 'alpha', who didn't do anything at all (sing, paint,   
   write or invent) and a (or occasionally many) 'beta' who did all the   
   difficult work for a small amount of money.   
      
   Now the 'alpha' gets the product of a certain beta from an agent (let's   
   call that 'Q') and declares it to be the own work.   
      
   Other scumbags clap their hands and write euphoric articles.   
      
   The work is copied and sold millions of times and everybody is happy.   
      
   (Well, not quite everybody is happy. But that little inconvenience could   
   be accepted.)   
      
      
   TH   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)