We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Project Gutenberg is lauded as one of the earliest digitisation initiatives, a mythology that Michael Hart, its founder perpetuated through to his death in 2011. In this Element, the author re-examines the extant historical evidence to challenge some of Hart's bolder claims and resituates the significance of Project Gutenberg in relation to broader trends in online document delivery and digitisation in the latter half of the twentieth century, especially in the World Wide Web's first decade (the 1990s). Through this re-appraisal, the author instead suggests that Hart's Project is significant as an example of what Millicent Weber has termed a “digital publishing collective” whereby a group of volunteers engage in producing content and that process is as meaningful as the final product.
Edited by
Mary S. Morgan, London School of Economics and Political Science,Kim M. Hajek, London School of Economics and Political Science,Dominic J. Berry, London School of Economics and Political Science
This chapter explores narratives that informed two influential attempts to automate and consolidate mathematics in large computing systems during the second half of the twentieth century – the QED system and the MACSYMA system. These narratives were both political (aligning the automation of mathematics with certain cultural values) and epistemic (each laid out a vision of what mathematics entailed such that it could and should be automated). These narratives united political and epistemic considerations especially with regards to representation: how will mathematical objects and procedures be translated into computer languages and operations and encoded in memory? How much freedom or conformity will be required of those who use and build these systems? MACSYMA and QED represented opposite approaches to these questions: preserving pluralism with a heterogeneous modular design vs requiring that all mathematics be translated into one shared root logic. The narratives explored here shaped, explained and justified the representational choices made in each system and aligned them with specific political and epistemic projects.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.