A truly amusing lady.

http://news.com.com/100+years+of+Grace+Hopper/2100-1007_3-6142101.html

100 years of Grace Hopper

By Colin Barker Story last modified Sat Dec 09 08:35:44 PST 2006

For most people who work in IT, the programming language COBOL is as dead as the dodo.

Yet Grace Hopper, the woman credited with establishing COBOL (Common Business-Oriented Language) as the language of business, would be pleased to know [She was suggesting that COBOL should be abandoned in the late 1970s when I met her (see below) Bob] that 100 years after her birth, the language still underpins many applications that keep modern businesses going.

This Saturday is the centennial of Grace Hopper, who was born on December 9, 1906. Often referred to as "the mother of COBOL," her contribution to the theory and practice of programming is commonly appreciated as enormous. She is credited, among other achievements, with being the first person to develop a compiled program in an age when computers worked by running programs that were interpreted one line at a time.

Hopper got her first degree in mathematics and physics at Yale University and her master's in the same subjects. She taught at Vassar College before joining the U.S. Naval Reserve in 1943 and working on one of the earliest electronic calculators, the Harvard Mark 1. She was in her element working as, effectively, one of the world's first computer programmers--and she was very good at it. (For a comprehensive bio, read Wikipedia's entry on Hopper.)

She continued working on the Harvard Mark 1 and Mark 2 before moving to another company in 1949 to work on the Univac 1, where she developed the compiler.

After returning to the Navy, she worked on validating software written in the new language, COBOL, with which her name would be indelibly associated. Her greatest achievement in computing was here, as she gradually evolved the idea that software should be easy to use instead of being a long string of mathematical functions and notations.

From that point came the principle that programs should be easy enough for businesspeople to use and understand; [Amazing how far we have deviated from that principle... Bob] in principle, COBOL is for the businessperson, not the scientist.

"COBOL is still in use today and plays a part in those programs that keep businesses running," said Julian Dobbins, director of product management at Micro Focus, one of the key companies still developing for the language. "(Analyst firm) Gartner reckons that 75 percent of business transactions are still done in COBOL."

Banks and other financial institutions are chiefly accountable for this high figure. Systems that run banking transactions, such as those used by ATMs, were largely written years ago and are still running. [No inclination to innovate or even improve. Bob] They are economical and efficient, and COBOL code is easy to fix if these go wrong, so, the argument goes, why change them?

What is Open Source worth? The code could reveal capabilities, but would not automatically suggest a response (other than “Duck!”) We either trust the Brits or we don't...

http://politics.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/12/10/0151206&from=rss

U.S. Refuses to Hand Over Fighter Source Code to UK

Posted by Zonk on Saturday December 09, @10:27PM from the should-have-read-the-EULA-first dept. Software Politics

orbitalia writes "The UK is heavily involved in the JSF (Joint Strike Fighter program) but has recently considered abandoning the project because the US refuses to share the source code. The UK had intended to purchase $120 billion dollars worth of aircraft to operate on two new aircraft carriers, but is now seriously considering Plan 'B'. This is likely to be further investments in the Eurofighter Typhoon project."

From the article: "It appeared that Tony Blair and George Bush had solved the impasse in May, when they announced an agreement in principle that the UK would be given access to the classified details on conditions of strict secrecy. The news was widely seen as evidence that the Prime Minister's close alliance with the American President did have benefits for Britain ... 'If the UK does not obtain the assurances it needs from the US then it should not sign the Memorandum of Understanding covering production, sustainment and follow-on development,' the MPs insisted."

Doesn't this just scream “Business opportunity” to you?

http://gear.ign.com/articles/749/749883p1.html

RIAA Petitions Judges to Lower Artist Royalties

Aggressively litigious group has claimed to protect musicians in the past. Now believes musicians deserve less for "innovative" music distribution.

by Gerry Block December 7, 2006 -

The RIAA rose to public prominence around the year 2000 when the growth of internet file sharing and music piracy was blamed for rapidly declining album sales at the time. The RIAA's subsequent highly publicized and aggressive litigious action against those the group identified as distributors of copyrighted music, which has famously included grandmothers, single mothers in economic hardship, and children, won the organization little sympathy from the general public. While protecting copyrights is a fully legitimate concern, many believe the piracy that blossomed in first blush of the Napster and KaZaa was primarily due to the fact that there were no viable legal means to acquire music in mp3 format via the internet. That changed when Apple launched the iTunes Music Store, the subsequent massive success of which would seem to illustrate consumers' willingness to pay for music files on the internet if they are conveniently available.

... On December 1 The Hollywood Reporter revealed that the RIAA is currently petitioning the panel of federal government Copyright Royalty Judges to lower the rates paid to publishers and songwriters for use of lyrics and melodies in applications like cell phone ring tones and other digital recordings. The last time the American government set the rate was in 1981, but since that time, the RIAA argues in its petition, a lot has changed.

"While record companies and music publishers were able to agree on royalty rates during that 25-year period, the assumptions on which those decisions were based have changed beyond recognition," the RIAA brief reads.