[jcranmer]

To expand on your point here: there are generally two inroads into computer science from other disciplines. You can view it is an extension of electrical engineering and the actual development of computing hardware, or you can view it as a development of an "applied math" curriculum.

From that viewpoint, the article here is mostly complaining that Turing has had little impact on the development of computer science if you only look at it from the first perspective. Except the ACM in particular generally hews more towards the second perspective--of the ~50 Turing Awards, at best a dozen of them aren't heavily rooted in a view from the second perspective.

In other words, this amounts to a complaint that the organization that honors the people who make contributions to the math-y side of computer science names its award for doing so after the one of the most important math-y contributors of computer science as opposed to one of the people who actually built contributors.

[tbrownaw]

But that first viewpoint is called Computer Engineering, and is distinct from Computer Science.

[skavi]

As distinct as two neighboring disciplines can be. (not very much IMO)

[lou1306]

Good point. Of course, one may retort that Turing also contributed to the second perspective. Sure, his work at Bletchley Park was secret for a while, but his involvement in developing the Ferranti Mark 1 [1] was well known.

[1] https://www.turing.org.uk/scrapbook/manmach.html