DOCSLIB.ORG

Memorial Tributes: Volume 21

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Memorial Tributes: Volume 21 THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS This PDF is available at http://nap.edu/24773 SHARE Memorial Tributes: Volume 21 DETAILS 406 pages | 6 x 9 | HARDBACK ISBN 978-0-309-45928-0 | DOI 10.17226/24773 CONTRIBUTORS GET THIS BOOK National Academy of Engineering FIND RELATED TITLES Visit the National Academies Press at NAP.edu and login or register to get: – Access to free PDF downloads of thousands of scientific reports – 10% off the price of print titles – Email or social media notifications of new titles related to your interests – Special offers and discounts Distribution, posting, or copying of this PDF is strictly prohibited without written permission of the National Academies Press. (Request Permission) Unless otherwise indicated, all materials in this PDF are copyrighted by the National Academy of Sciences. Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Memorial Tributes: Volume 21 Memorial Tributes NATIONAL ACADEMY OF ENGINEERING Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Memorial Tributes: Volume 21 Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Memorial Tributes: Volume 21 NATIONAL ACADEMY OF ENGINEERING OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Memorial Tributes Volume 21 THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS WASHINGTON, DC 2017 Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Memorial Tributes: Volume 21 International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-45928-0 International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-45928-1 Digital Object Identifier: https://doi.org/10.17226/24773 Additional copies of this publication are available from: The National Academies Press 500 Fifth Street NW, Keck 360 Washington, DC 20001 (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 www.nap.edu Copyright 2017 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Memorial Tributes: Volume 21 CONTENTS FOREWORD, xiii HAROLD M. AGNEW, 3 by Ricardo B. Schwarz HARL P. ALDRICH, JR., 9 by Harl P. Aldrich III WM. HOWARD ARNOLD, 15 by Howard Bruschi DAVID ATLAS, 23 by Robert J. Serafin and Richard E. Carbone HOWARD K. BIRNBAUM, 31 by Ian M. Robertson Submitted by the NAE Home Secretary JOHN A. BLUME, 37 by Anne Kiremidjian, James Gere, Helmut Krawinkler, and Haresh Shah Reprinted with the permission of the John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center, Stanford University v Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Memorial Tributes: Volume 21 vi CONTENTS STUART W. CHURCHILL, 43 by Warren D. Seider Submitted by the NAE Home Secretary WESLEY A. CLARK, 49 by Ivan E. Sutherland, Mary Allen Wilkes, Severo M. Ornstein, and Jerome R. Cox WILLIAM A. CLEVENGER, 57 by Rudolph Bonaparte THOMAS B. COOK, JR., 61 by John C. Crawford Submitted by the NAE Home Secretary J. BARRY COOKE, 69 by Nelson L. de S. Pinto ALAN COTTRELL, 75 by Peter B. Hirsch JOHN P. CRAVEN, 85 by Nicholas Johnson Submitted by the NAE Home Secretary CHARLES CRUSSARD, 91 by Jean Philibert Submitted by the NAE Home Secretary ROBERT G. DEAN, 95 by Robert A. Dalrymple THOMAS F. DONOHUE, 101 by Jan Schilling BRIAN L. EYRE, 105 by Colin Windsor and Ron Bullough Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Memorial Tributes: Volume 21 CONTENTS vii JAMES L. FLANAGAN, 109 by Bishnu S. Atal and Lawrence R. Rabiner ROBERT L. FLEISCHER, 119 by James D. Livingston and Elizabeth L. Fleischer RENATO FUCHS, 127 by Stephen W. Drew JOHN H. (JACK) GIBBONS, 133 by Sam Baldwin, Rosina Bierbaum, John Holdren, and Maxine Savitz ANDREW S. GROVE, 141 by Eugene S. Meieran GEORGE H. HEILMEIER, 149 by Nim Cheung and Jack Howell DAVID G. HOAG, 157 by Norman Sears Submitted by the NAE Home Secretary JOHN H. HORLOCK, 163 by Daniel Weinbren Submitted by the NAE Home Secretary RIK HUISKES, 169 by Van C. Mow and Bert van Rietbergen JAMES D. IDOL, JR., 173 by Floyd T. Neth Submitted by the NAE Home Secretary DONALD G. ISELIN, 179 by the Naval Facilities Engineering Command Staff Submitted by the NAE Home Secretary Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Memorial Tributes: Volume 21 viii CONTENTS J. DONOVAN JACOBS, 183 by William W. Edgerton Submitted by the NAE Home Secretary MUJID S. KAZIMI, 189 by Michael Corradini and Neil Todreas DORIS KUHLMANN-WILSDORF, 193 by Bhatka B. Rath and Edgar A. Starke, Jr. WALTER B. LABERGE, 197 by Malcolm Ross O’Neill WILLIAM J. LEMESSURIER, 205 by Richard A. Henige, Jr. Submitted by the NAE Home Secretary THOMAS M. LEPS, 211 by Nelson L. de S. Pinto JOHN L. LUMLEY, 217 by Sidney Leibovich DOUGLAS C. MACMILLAN, 223 by Allen Chin Submitted by the NAE Home Secretary CHARLES E. MASSONNET, 227 by Steven J. Fenves HUDSON MATLOCK, 233 by David K. Matlock and Richard L. Tucker WALTER G. MAY, 239 by Richard Alkire JAMES W. MAYER, 245 by Thomas E. Everhart Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Memorial Tributes: Volume 21 CONTENTS ix BRAMLETTE MCCLELLAND, 249 by Alan G.Young Submitted by the NAE Home Secretary EDWARD J. MCCLUSKEY, 255 by Jeffrey D. Ullman DOUGLAS C. MOORHOUSE, 259 by Rudolph Bonaparte JOHN W. MORRIS, 265 by Henry Hatch and Hans Van Winkle GEORGE E. MUELLER, 271 by Robert L. Crippen HAYDN H. MURRAY, 277 by Jessica Elzea Kogel Submitted by the NAE Home Secretary GERALD NADLER, 283 by Stan Settles F. ROBERT NAKA, 287 by Curt H. Davis Submitted by the NAE Home Secretary GERALD T. ORLOB, 293 by Daniel P. Loucks and William W-G. Yeh YIH-HSING PAO, 299 by Francis C. Moon, Kolumban Hutter, and Wolfgang Sachse EUGENE J. PELTIER, 305 by the Naval Facilities Engineering Command Staff Submitted by the NAE Home Secretary Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Memorial Tributes: Volume 21 x CONTENTS COURTLAND D. PERKINS, 311 by Irvin Glassman, Sau-Hai (Harvey) Lam, Robert G. Jahn, and Robert M. White EGOR P. POPOV, 317 by Robin K. McGuire WILLIAM N. POUNDSTONE, 325 by Stan Suboleski SIMON RAMO, 331 by Ronald D. Sugar NORMAN C. RASMUSSEN, 337 by Kent F. Hansen This tribute is slightly adapted from a memoir that originally appeared in Biographical Memoirs of the National Academy of Sciences V. 86 (2005) and is reprinted with permission. EUGENE M. RASMUSSON, 349 Submitted by Margaret A. Lemone, Sumant Nigam, and John M. Wallace DENIS ROOKE, 357 by David Wallace Submitted by the NAE Home Secretary STEVEN B. SAMPLE, 365 by C. L. Max Nikias ROGER A. SCHMITZ, 371 by Joan F. Brennecke OLEG D. SHERBY, 375 by Jeffrey Wadsworth and William D. Nix JOEL S. SPIRA, 383 by Stephen Director and Joel Moses Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Memorial Tributes: Volume 21 CONTENTS xi JIN WU, 387 by Marshall P. Tulin APPENDIX, 391 Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Memorial Tributes: Volume 21 Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Memorial Tributes: Volume 21 FOREWORD THIS IS THE TWENTY-FIRST VOLUME in the Memorial Tributes series compiled by the National Academy of Engineering as a personal remembrance of the lives and outstanding achieve- ments of its members and foreign members. These volumes are intended to stand as an enduring record of the many contribu- tions of engineers and engineering to the benefit of humankind. In most cases, the authors of the tributes are contemporaries or colleagues who had personal knowledge of the interests and engineering accomplishments of the deceased. Through its members and foreign members, the Academy carries out the responsibilities for which it was established in 1964. Under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering was formed as a par- allel organization of outstanding engineers. Members are elected by their peers on the basis of significant contributions to engineering theory, practice, and literature or for excep- tional accomplishments in the pioneering of new and develop- ing fields of technology. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine share a responsibility to advise the federal government on matters of science and technology. The expertise and credibility that the National Academy of Engineering brings to that task stem directly from the abili- ties, interests, and achievements of our members and foreign members—our colleagues and friends—whose special gifts we remember in these pages. Julia M. Phillips Home Secretary xiii Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Memorial Tributes: Volume 21 Memorial Tributes NATIONAL ACADEMY OF ENGINEERING Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Memorial Tributes: Volume 21 Memorial Tributes NATIONAL ACADEMY OF ENGINEERING Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Memorial Tributes: Volume 21 Copyright National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Memorial Tributes: Volume 21 HAROLD M. AGNEW 1921–2013 Elected in 1976 “Pioneering contributions in weapons engineering and combining science and engineering into effective technology.” BY RICARDO B. SCHWARZ HAROLD MELVIN AGNEW, a scientist who worked on the Manhattan Project that gave the United States its first atomic bomb and who later became the third director of Los Alamos National Laboratory, died September 29, 2013, at his home in Solana Beach, California. He was 92. He was born March 28, 1921, in Denver, the only child of a stonecutter father and homemaker mother. He attended South Denver High School and the University of Denver, where he majored in chemistry. After the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor brought the United States into World War II, Agnew and his girlfriend, Beverly Jackson, attempted to join the US Army Air Corps together. But Joyce Stearns, head of the Physics Department at the University of Denver, persuaded them to instead join him at the University of Chicago, where Stearns became deputy head of the Metallurgical Laboratory. In Chicago, Harold worked with Enrico Fermi and others on the construction of Chicago Pile-1, the first graphite- moderated nuclear reactor.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Unrestricted Immigration and the Foreign Dominance Of
    Unrestricted Immigration and the Foreign Dominance of United States Nobel Prize Winners in Science: Irrefutable Data and Exemplary Family Narratives—Backup Data and Information Andrew A. Beveridge, Queens and Graduate Center CUNY and Social Explorer, Inc. Lynn Caporale, Strategic Scientific Advisor and Author The following slides were presented at the recent meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. This project and paper is an outgrowth of that session, and will combine qualitative data on Nobel Prize Winners family histories along with analyses of the pattern of Nobel Winners. The first set of slides show some of the patterns so far found, and will be augmented for the formal paper. The second set of slides shows some examples of the Nobel families. The authors a developing a systematic data base of Nobel Winners (mainly US), their careers and their family histories. This turned out to be much more challenging than expected, since many winners do not emphasize their family origins in their own biographies or autobiographies or other commentary. Dr. Caporale has reached out to some laureates or their families to elicit that information. We plan to systematically compare the laureates to the population in the US at large, including immigrants and non‐immigrants at various periods. Outline of Presentation • A preliminary examination of the 609 Nobel Prize Winners, 291 of whom were at an American Institution when they received the Nobel in physics, chemistry or physiology and medicine • Will look at patterns of
    [Show full text]
  • Biographies of Edison Lecturers
    Harold Agnew, UC San Diego Professor Agnew was born in Denver, Colorado, in 1921. He received a B.A. in chemistry from the University of Denver in 1942. He joined Fermi’s research group at Chicago as a graduate student in 1942. He was sent to Columbia and then moved with Fermi back to Chicago and participated in the construction of the pile under the west stands of Stagg Field. He was a witness at the initiation of the first controlled nuclear chain reaction on December 2, 1942. Following this event he moved to Los Alamos in 1943. He participated at the Trinity test, the first test explosion of a nuclear bomb at the White Sands Missile test facility in New Mexico. On August 6, 1945; he flew with the 509th Composite Group to Hiroshima with Luis Alvarez (UC Berkeley) and Bernie Waldman (Notre Dame). He participated at the measurement of the yield of the first atomic bomb directly from air over the target. In 1946 he returned to Chicago to complete his graduate studies and received a Ph.D. in 1949 under Fermi’s direction. Following his stay at Chicago he returned to Los Alamos in the Physics Division and eventually became the Weapons Division leader (1964-70). In 1970 he became director of the Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory. In 1979 he retired and became president of General Atomics and retired in 1983. Harold Agnew was scientific advisor to SACEUR at NATO (1961-64), a member of the President’s Science Advisory Committee (1965-73), and a White House science councilor (1982-89).
    [Show full text]
  • Thomas Edison Vs Nikola Tesla THOMAS EDISON VS NIKOLA TESLA
    M C SCIENTIFIC RIVALRIES PHERSON AND SCANDALS In the early 1880s, only a few wealthy people had electric lighting in their homes. Everyone else had to use more dangerous lighting, such as gas lamps. Eager companies wanted to be the first to supply electricity to more Americans. The early providers would set the standards—and reap great profits. Inventor THOMAS EDISON already had a leading role in the industry: he had in- vented the fi rst reliable electrical lightbulb. By 1882 his Edison Electric Light Company was distributing electricity using a system called direct current, or DC. But an inventor named NIKOLA TESLA challenged Edison. Tesla believed that an alternating cur- CURRENTS THE OF rent—or AC—system would be better. With an AC system, one power station could deliver electricity across many miles, compared to only about one mile for DC. Each inventor had his backers. Business tycoon George Westinghouse put his money behind Tesla and built AC power stations. Meanwhile, Edison and his DC backers said that AC could easily electrocute people. Edison believed this risk would sway public opinion toward DC power. The battle over which system would become standard became known as the War of the Currents. This book tells the story of that war and the ways in which both kinds of electric power changed the world. READ ABOUT ALL OF THE OF THE SCIENTIFIC RIVALRIES AND SCANDALS BATTLE OF THE DINOSAUR BONES: Othniel Charles Marsh vs Edward Drinker Cope DECODING OUR DNA: Craig Venter vs the Human Genome Project CURRENTS THE RACE TO DISCOVER THE
    [Show full text]
  • How USAF's Missile Program Helped the Nation Off the Pad
    Iii ANNIVERSARY There was no lack of rocketry art when Sputnik jolted the US and the free world. The Army, Navy, and Air Force had all been working with missiles for some years, and many rocket spe- cialists had foreseen the future significance of space. But the national capabilities were splintered. As NASA came into being, with a strong need for large-scale program know-how, it was the Air Force, fresh from its missile management experience, that could offer the most useful aid in getting the space program under way . How USAF's Missile Program Helped the Nation off the Pad BY WILLIAM LEA VITT ASSOCIATE EDITOR, AIR FORCE/SPACE DIGEST "From this effort has emerged not only the major portion of our national missile force but also the prime base of technology and management skill underpinning the total national space effort. Many of our space accomplishments to date—both military and civilian—simply could not have been undertaken successfully with- out the prior experience gained in the Air Force missile development program." —SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE EUGENE M. ZUCKERT T IS a fact, documented in the public prints, Just one aspect of this sizable Air Force role has in congressional reports, and above all, on been the large number of Air Force officers who have launch pads and tracking sites around the served the National Aeronautics and Space Adminis- world, that the US Air Force has made mas- tration on direct loan or in supportive Air Force efforts, sive contributions of men, hardware, and since the civilian space agency's establishment in 1958.
    [Show full text]
  • William Preston and the Revolutionary Settlement
    Journal of Backcountry Studies EDITOR’S NOTE: This is the third and last installment of the author’s 1990 University of Maryland dissertation, directed by Professor Emory Evans, to be republished in JBS. Dr. Osborn is President of Pacific Union College. William Preston and the Revolutionary Settlement BY RICHARD OSBORN Patriot (1775-1778) Revolutions ultimately conclude with a large scale resolution in the major political, social, and economic issues raised by the upheaval. During the final two years of the American Revolution, William Preston struggled to anticipate and participate in the emerging American regime. For Preston, the American Revolution involved two challenges--Indians and Loyalists. The outcome of his struggles with both groups would help determine the results of the Revolution in Virginia. If Preston could keep the various Indian tribes subdued with minimal help from the rest of Virginia, then more Virginians would be free to join the American armies fighting the English. But if he was unsuccessful, Virginia would have to divert resources and manpower away from the broader colonial effort to its own protection. The other challenge represented an internal one. A large number of Loyalist neighbors continually tested Preston's abilities to forge a unified government on the frontier which could, in turn, challenge the Indians effectivel y and the British, if they brought the war to Virginia. In these struggles, he even had to prove he was a Patriot. Preston clearly placed his allegiance with the revolutionary movement when he joined with other freeholders from Fincastle County on January 20, 1775 to organize their local county committee in response to requests by the Continental Congress that such committees be established.
    [Show full text]
  • Barbara Simons Was Appointed to the Board of Advisors of the U.S
    An expert on electronic voting, Dr. Barbara Simons was appointed to the Board of Advisors of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission in 2008. She co-authored Broken Ballots: Will Your Vote Count? with Prof. Douglas Jones. She was a member of the National Workshop on Internet Voting that was convened at the request of President Clinton and produced a report on Internet Voting in 2001. She also participated on the Security Peer Review Group for the US Department of Defense’s Internet voting project (SERVE) and co-authored the report that led to the cancellation of SERVE because of security concerns. Simons co-chaired the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) study of statewide databases of registered voters, and she co-authored the League of Women Voters report on election auditing. Simons was President of ACM, the nation’s oldest and largest educational and scientific society for computing professionals, from July 1998 until June 2000. She founded ACM’s US Public Policy Committee (USACM) in 1993 and served for many years as the Chair or co- Chair of USACM. In 2005 Simons became the only woman to receive the Distinguished Engineering Alumni Award from the College of Engineering of U.C. Berkeley. She is also a Fellow of ACM and the American Association for the Advancement of Science. She received the Alumnus of the Year Award from the Berkeley Computer Science Department, the Distinguished Service Award from Computing Research Association, the Making a Difference Award from ACM’s Special Interest Group on Computing and Society, the Norbert Wiener Award from Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility, the Outstanding Contribution Award from ACM, and the Pioneer Award from the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 6.Qxd
    CHAPTER 6: The NASA Family The melding of all of the NASA centers, contractors, universities, and often strong personalities associated with each of them into the productive and efficient organization necessary to complete NASA’s space missions became both more critical and more difficult as NASA turned its attention from Gemini to Apollo. The approach and style and, indeed, the personality of each NASA center differed sharply. The Manned Spacecraft Center was distinctive among all the rest. Fortune magazine suggested in 1967 that the scale of NASA’s operation required a whole new approach and style of management: “To master such massively complex and expensive problems, the agency has mobilized some 20,000 individual firms, more than 400,000 workers, and 200 colleges and universities in a combine of the most advanced resources of American civilization.” The author referred to some of the eight NASA centers and assorted field installations as “pockets of sovereignty” which exercised an enormous degree of independence and autonomy.1 An enduring part of the management problem throughout the Mercury and Gemini programs that became compounded under Apollo, because of its greater technical challenges, was the diversity and distinctiveness of each of the NASA centers. The diverse cultures and capabilities represented by each of the centers were at once the space program’s greatest resource and its Achilles’ heel. NASA was a hybrid organization. At its heart was Langley Memorial Aeronautical Laboratory established by Congress in 1917 near Hampton, Virginia, and formally dedicated in 1920. It became the Langley Research Center. Langley created the Ames Aeronautical Laboratory at Moffett Field, California, in 1939.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2013.Pdf
    ATOMIC HERITAGE FOUNDATION Preserving & Interpreting Manhattan Project History & Legacy preserving history ANNUAL REPORT 2013 WHY WE SHOULD PRESERVE THE MANHATTAN PROJECT “The factories and bombs that Manhattan Project scientists, engineers, and workers built were physical objects that depended for their operation on physics, chemistry, metallurgy, and other nat- ural sciences, but their social reality - their meaning, if you will - was human, social, political....We preserve what we value of the physical past because it specifically embodies our social past....When we lose parts of our physical past, we lose parts of our common social past as well.” “The new knowledge of nuclear energy has undoubtedly limited national sovereignty and scaled down the destructiveness of war. If that’s not a good enough reason to work for and contribute to the Manhattan Project’s historic preservation, what would be? It’s certainly good enough for me.” ~Richard Rhodes, “Why We Should Preserve the Manhattan Project,” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, May/June 2006 Photographs clockwise from top: J. Robert Oppenheimer, General Leslie R. Groves pinning an award on Enrico Fermi, Leona Woods Marshall, the Alpha Racetrack at the Y-12 Plant, and the Bethe House on Bathtub Row. Front cover: A Bruggeman Ranch property. Back cover: Bronze statues by Susanne Vertel of J. Robert Oppenheimer and General Leslie Groves at Los Alamos. Table of Contents BOARD MEMBERS & ADVISORY COMMITTEE........3 Cindy Kelly, Dorothy and Clay Per- Letter from the President..........................................4
    [Show full text]
  • 1908 Journal
    1 SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES. Monday, October 12, 1908. The court met pursuant to law. Present: The Chief Justice, Mr. Justice Harlan, Mr. Justice Brewer, Mr. Justice White, Mr. Justice Peckham, Mr. Justice McKenna, Mr. Justice Holmes, Mr. Justice Day and Mr. Justice Moody. James A. Fowler of Knoxville, Tenn., Ethel M. Colford of Wash- ington, D. C., Florence A. Colford of Washington, D. C, Charles R. Hemenway of Honolulu, Hawaii, William S. Montgomery of Xew York City, Amos Van Etten of Kingston, N. Y., Robert H. Thompson of Jackson, Miss., William J. Danford of Los Angeles, Cal., Webster Ballinger of Washington, D. C., Oscar A. Trippet of Los Angeles, Cal., John A. Van Arsdale of Buffalo, N. Y., James J. Barbour of Chicago, 111., John Maxey Zane of Chicago, 111., Theodore F. Horstman of Cincinnati, Ohio, Thomas B. Jones of New York City, John W. Brady of Austin, Tex., W. A. Kincaid of Manila, P. I., George H. Whipple of San Francisco, Cal., Charles W. Stapleton of Mew York City, Horace N. Hawkins of Denver, Colo., and William L. Houston of Washington, D. C, were admitted to practice. The Chief Justice announced that all motions noticed for to-day would be heard to-morrow, and that the court would then commence the call of the docket, pursuant to the twenty-sixth rule. Adjourned until to-morrow at 12 o'clock. The day call for Tuesday, October 13, will be as follows: Nos. 92, 209 (and 210), 198, 206, 248 (and 249 and 250), 270 (and 271, 272, 273, 274 and 275), 182, 238 (and 239 and 240), 286 (and 287, 288, 289, 290, 291 and 292) and 167.
    [Show full text]
  • Barbara Simons Hacking the Election?
    Joint Distinguished Colloquium in Interdisciplinary & Applied Mathematics & Columbia Data Science Institute Colloquium Barbara Simons IBM Research (retired) Hacking the Election? Why We won’t be able to Verify the Outcome of the 2016 Election Partially as a result of hanging chads, almost $4 billion dollars was allocated by Con- gress in 2002 to “modernize” our elections. The rush to spend money before there were any meaningful federal standards or testing resulted in the purchase of a large number of poorly designed and insecure voting systems. Most of these old systems still in use are way past their use-by date, with ancient software that may no longer be maintained and physical components in need of replacements that may no lon- ger be manufactured. Election officials trying to cope with failing voting systems and inadequate funding may consider what they hope are cheaper alternatives, such as Internet voting. Statewide databases of registered voters were also mandated in the 2002 legislation. Again, there are no standards, no independent review of the databases, and no guide- lines for states. As of this writing, we know that the Arizona and Illinois voter registra- tion databases were hacked into, with Russia viewed as the most likely culprit. I’ll present a very brief overview of how computers have made our elections more in- secure, and what needs to be done (both technical and legal) to move to an evidence based voting system. I’ll also discuss some of the false claims made about Internet voting, as well as why Internet voting is a major security threat to our democracy.
    [Show full text]
  • Facebook Timeline
    Facebook Timeline 2003 October • Mark Zuckerberg releases Facemash, the predecessor to Facebook. It was described as a Harvard University version of Hot or Not. 2004 January • Zuckerberg begins writing Facebook. • Zuckerberg registers thefacebook.com domain. February • Zuckerberg launches Facebook on February 4. 650 Harvard students joined thefacebook.com in the first week of launch. March • Facebook expands to MIT, Boston University, Boston College, Northeastern University, Stanford University, Dartmouth College, Columbia University, and Yale University. April • Zuckerberg, Dustin Moskovitz, and Eduardo Saverin form Thefacebook.com LLC, a partnership. June • Facebook receives its first investment from PayPal co-founder Peter Thiel for US$500,000. • Facebook incorporates into a new company, and Napster co-founder Sean Parker becomes its president. • Facebook moves its base of operations to Palo Alto, California. N. Lee, Facebook Nation, DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4614-5308-6, 211 Ó Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013 212 Facebook Timeline August • To compete with growing campus-only service i2hub, Zuckerberg launches Wirehog. It is a precursor to Facebook Platform applications. September • ConnectU files a lawsuit against Zuckerberg and other Facebook founders, resulting in a $65 million settlement. October • Maurice Werdegar of WTI Partner provides Facebook a $300,000 three-year credit line. December • Facebook achieves its one millionth registered user. 2005 February • Maurice Werdegar of WTI Partner provides Facebook a second $300,000 credit line and a $25,000 equity investment. April • Venture capital firm Accel Partners invests $12.7 million into Facebook. Accel’s partner and President Jim Breyer also puts up $1 million of his own money.
    [Show full text]
  • The Renaissance Society of America Annual Meeting
    CHICAGO 30 March–1 April 2017 RSA 2017 Annual Meeting, Chicago, 30 March–1 April Photograph © 2017 The Art Institute of Chicago. Institute The Art © 2017 Photograph of Chicago. Institute The Art © 2017 Photograph The Renaissance Society of America Annual Meeting The Renaissance Society of America Annual Meeting Program Chicago 30 March–1 April 2017 Front and back covers: Jacob Halder and Workshop, English, Greenwich, active 1576–1608. Portions of a Field Armor, ca. 1590. Steel, etched and gilded, iron, brass, and leather. George F. Harding Collection, 1982.2241a-h. Art Institute of Chicago. Contents RSA Executive Board .......................................................................5 RSA Staff ........................................................................................6 RSA Donors in 2016 .......................................................................7 RSA Life Members ...........................................................................8 RSA Patron Members....................................................................... 9 Sponsors ........................................................................................ 10 Program Committee .......................................................................10 Discipline Representatives, 2015–17 ...............................................10 Participating Associate Organizations ............................................. 11 Registration and Book Exhibition ...................................................14 Policy on Recording and Live
    [Show full text]