I didn’t know anything about the integrated circuit before the three readings regarding both its invention and large scale production, and I appreciated learning about the Navajo women in conjunction with Jack Kilby and Robert Noyce. Hearing about the role that a seemingly unlikely population of women played in the production of what is one of the most important foundational technologies to our modern digital age, really helped me break down my own perception of what innovation looks like as a whole. It is so easy to focus inventors and sensationalize and idolize them while completely ignoring all the necessary aspects of production following invention and all the people that are involved in that process.
Of course, these three readings together didn’t capture the whole story, but they did encourage me to look at innovation as an event that may start with particular individuals, but is ultimately carried out by a very large population of people who will often times remain unnamed. The first integrated circuits started it all, but then there was also the necessary subsequent improvements, the efforts for large scale production, the various ideas that this technology inspired in others and so on, all of which has brought us to where we are today.
Within your analysis, I am personally intrigued by your mention of the integrated circuit. To further develop your point, I conducted some small outside research so that I, and the class as a whole, can understand what is the integrated circuit, how it works, and what have we learned so far about it.
The first problem I encountered was the difference between the universal definition of an integrated circuit. For example, the dictionary defines it as “an electronic circuit formed on a small piece of semi conducting material, performing the same function as a larger circuit made from discrete components” while several computer-science related websites defined it as “a small wafer, usually made of silicon, that can hold anywhere from hundreds to millions of transistors, resistors, and capacitors”. Although the second definition contains technical terms unfamiliar to us, the inclusion of the word “transistors” allow for a further understanding of how an integrated circuit works.
Looking back a week, the reading “Foundations of Computing” by O’Regan explains how AND, OR, and NOT operations from Boolean Logic can be applied as switches, or transistors, for binary arithmetic to take place. Connecting these two sources and our lessons on binary numbers, we rise a level of abstraction to understand that these integrated circuits and their transistors enable the computer to compute, store, and execute data. Therefore, it is trough this integrated circuit that the computer can add numbers together as well as to display an image on a screen. Although this research included a lot of technical terms that are not necessary for the class, I truly believe they serve as another building block for us to analyze the functionality and restrictions of a digital computer.
I really enjoyed your point how reading about the Navajo women forced you to reconsider the scope of innovation. I had a similar reaction when hearing of this in class. For me, it made me realize that we often leave out the stories of those who made production of technologies possible. The individuals who pioneer new forms are rightly celebrated, but mass production is really what made the technology become what it is. What is the purpose if not everyone can benefit, and how will people benefit without means of production?
The groups who made mass production possible should be rightfully celebrated. Even today, smart phones surely would not be possible without all of the manufacturing that occurs overseas. We as individuals should do our best to recognize the contributions made by other groups involved in the process rather than just the originators. I think it’s best to view everything as a process.