Talk:Ken Olsen
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] MIT Degrees
User:Sakhalinrf claimed that Olsen had EECS (Electrical Engineering and Computer Science) degrees from MIT. First of all, there were no degree programs in CS anywhere in 1950 when he earned his Bachelor of Science degree, and secondly this states clearly that his degrees were in EE.--Rogerd 22:20, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] My reply
I already responded to you on your user page, so I will just cut and paste my comments here.
First off, your link that you gave me, which is here this is itself wrong. That article states that he has an M.A. degree in electrical engineering from MIT. MIT has never given out M.A. degrees in anything, and especially not in engineering.
Secondly, I will tell you my source - it is the MIT Infinite Connection website, which is the MIT alumni website that lists every alumni's degrees. If you are a member of the MIT community, you can go there and check it for yourself. Infinite Connection states the following.
• 1950, SB - Bachelor Of Science, Course 6 - Elec Eng & Comp Sci • 1952, SM - Master Of Science, Course 6 - Elec Eng & Comp Sci
Infinite conection is available at this website. https://alum.mit.edu/login.vhtml If you have an affiliation with MIT, or know somebody who does, you will be able to see for yourself. If you don't, maybe I can send you the file or otherwise arrange for you to get temporary access to the database.
But the point is, that's MIT's own alumni database. If MIT itself says that Olsen has a degree in EECS, then he has a degree in EECS. You might say that MIT is wrong, but hey, I don't know what to tell you. MIT has the right to say whatever it wants regarding what degrees it hands out. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sakhalinrf (talk • contribs) 19:58, November 13, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] It was just EE in 1950
See MIT EECS Department Facts for the history of the department. The department was not renamed to "Electrical Engineering and Computer Science" until 1975. As far as the alumni database goes.... I would guess that it stores the degree as a Course number (in this case, 6) and prints out whatever the current name of the department is. AFAIK, the EE and CS degrees are separate, anyway - you get a degree in Electrical Engineering or in Computer Science and Engineering, but not in EECS. FreplySpang (talk) 07:03, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] My reply to that
I understand what you are saying, but I'm afraid that I don't think that matters.
Here's the listing of the various types of course 6 subjects that MIT includes in its alumni database, along with the number of people who earned degrees in that type in parantheses:
"6 - Elec Eng & Comp Sci (12788) 61 - Electrical Engrg (4731) 62 - Elec Eng & Comp Sci (1841) 63 - Computer Sci & Engrg (3806) 6A - Elec Eng - Internshp (2229) 6B - Elec Eng (Illumintg) (5) 6C - Elec Eng Communictns (101) 6D - Eecs- Doctoral (1077) 6H - Eecs-Sm Pre Hst (4) 6M - Eecs-Sm / Eng (1254) 6P - Elec Eng & Comp Sci (2180) 6T - Eecs Sm/tech & Pol (30) 6W - Elec Engrg Woodshole (22)"
So if MIT wanted to designate Ken Olsen's degree as a Electrical Engineering degree (and not an EECS degree), then the answer is simple. Just designate his degree as a "61" degree. But they don't do that. They choose to desiginate his degree as a "6" degree.
Now, I do agree that it's "weird" to give Ken Olsen an EECS degree when EECS wasn't even taught. But hey, MIT has the right to decide what sort of degree he gets. We may think that MIT is wrong to do that, but hey, that's MIT's decision to make, not ours. After all, MIT confers formal Electrical Engineering (course 61) degrees on nearly 5000 of its graduates. So if it chooses to grant Ken Olsen with an EECS degree (course 6) and not an Electrical Engineering degree (course 61), I would assume that MIT has a reason to do that. We may disagree with the reason, but it's MIT's call, not ours.
Sakhalinrf 20:54, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] The Snake Oil Comment
Are we really upholding a neutral point of view by not giving context to the snake oil comment? A fuller version of it that I can find is:
"Asked to comment on the recent uproar over the AT&T and Sun Microsystems Inc. Unix-development alliance, Olsen, without mentioning particular companies, likened some vendors of Unix products to 'snake oil' salesmen and said the claim that Unix will resolve incompatibility problems within multi-vendor networks is 'a naive idea.'"
Andrew.langmead 14:01, 25 January 2006 (UTC)