[aspenmayer]

I never said she was the first, but I don’t disagree. She was still in the room when it happened, and she published her findings. Kind of a big deal for a woman of her time.

> According to what Lovelace’s biographer Betty Alexandra Toole, author of Ada, The Enchantress of Numbers: Poetical Science (Strawberry Press, 1998) explained to OpenMind, “she saw what Babbage did not see: the machine might work on other things beside numbers, e.g. symbols.” For Swade, Lovelace was “remarkably visionary” and “saw the reach of computers extending beyond mathematics into life and science.” Woolley recalls the fact that Lovelace noticed how the punch card system of Babbage’s machine was similar to that of the complex looms of the time.” When she observed that ‘the Analytical Engine weaves algebraic patterns just as the Jacquard loom weaves flowers and leaves’, she showed what imagination could reveal that mathematics alone could not.”

https://www.bbvaopenmind.com/en/technology/visionaries/ada-l...

[globular-toast]

Well she was an extremely privileged woman. Same with Grace Hopper. They both had unique access to one-of-a-kind equipment at the time. So you're really not saying much more than she was in a unique position in history. Being important to computer science and just "being along for the ride" are two different things. The difference with Grace Hopper is that she very clearly made contributions that still affect us to this day. It's not so clear when it comes to Lovelace.