Slashdot Mirror
Alan Turing Gets an Apology From Prime Minister Brown
99luftballon writes "The British government has officially apologized for the treatment of Alan Turing in the post war era. An online petition got more than enough signatures to force an official statement and Prime Minister Gordon Brown has issued a lengthy apology. 'Thousands of people have come together to demand justice for Alan Turing and recognition of the appalling way he was treated. While Turing was dealt with under the law of the time and we can't put the clock back, his treatment was of course utterly unfair and I am pleased to have the chance to say how deeply sorry I and we all are for what happened to him. So on behalf of the British government, and all those who live freely thanks to Alan's work I am very proud to say: we're sorry, you deserved so much better.'"
If only Alan was alive today...
It's nice to see a politician who can actually pass the Turing test.
A truly excellent pizza parlor is a delight unto the heavens. Treasure the sauce and the toppings!
Don't get me wrong, I feel the statement is fine and all that, just strikes me as weird to put those two concepts together.
Bullshit. The British Government happily ignores these online petitions whenever it doesn't suit them to agree. It's simply a matter of them saying something like "We expect the results of an investigation into this matter. We will make a decision in due course. Thanks for playing." They normally rephrase that last part though.
I'd say since about 24 hours ago or however long it was. Seems to have worked.
Why bother
Humility is an honourable trait.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Despite the awful treatment he was exposed to at the time, it is comforting to see him finally recogonized for what he really was.
This was long overdue, to be sure, but even now it means so much to so many people. I believe we all owe Turing, whether we know it or not.
Any time a government admits, "Ok, we screwed up," it's a big deal, and it's usually a sign of change for the better.
I suppose we should be pleased that Brown has issued this apology, just a shame he's part of a government that knew about torture of terrorism suspects under interrogation. I don't think chemical castration is any worse, and it was even legal at the time. How times have changed eh? Now the government only does awful things to you without evidence and when you've not even had a trial.
To stop this turning into a rant though, I salute you Alan Turing for bringing philosophy into Computer Science through all your pioneering AI work. You deserved far better.
"...thanks to a coalition of computer scientists, historians and LGBT activists, we have this year a chance to mark and celebrate another contribution to Britainâ(TM)s fight against the darkness of dictatorship; that of code-breaker Alan Turing."
Read: We got ganged up on and were forced to issue an apology for treating Alan Turing like shit.
I'm glad the apology was (finally) issued, but was it just me, or did it seem like it was given somewhat grudgingly?
It's a shame they didn't at least pay passing tribute to Turing's full accomplishments. Cracking Enigma and "quite brilliant mathemetician" don't do the man justice. I like Wikipedia's "often considered to be the father of modern computer science" as a starting point.
What they did to a human, let alone him... no, a simple apology just won't do.
I believe you mean "a puff".
Nothing more than a computer-theory-inventing-second-world-war-winning-hero puff.
NO SIG
You got your apology to a dead man from a man who did not wrong him. I hope you (the petitioners) feel better, because it certainly accomplishes nothing else.
"16MB (fuck off, MiB fascists)" - The Mighty Buzzard
"Alan and the many thousands of other gay men who were convicted as he was convicted under homophobic laws were treated terribly."
It is not too late. Homosexuals still exist, even homosexuals that were alive back then.
Stop me if someone else has already addressed this point-but why not re-animate him as a zombie? Gay Zombie Turing would be amazed at the amount of rights homosexuals have today, although I assume he'd be more appalled at what passes for sophistication these days.
(-1, Raw and Uncut is the only way to read)
Whoopdie Shit. Nothing quite beats apologizing for leading someone to suicide because they didn't love what your government decreed everyone should love...long after their death. Maybe next time the government will, I dunno, apologize in their lifetime! Better still, how about not doing something grossly inhumane to someone? Hell, Turing did good things for these assholes and all he got was shame and suffering from them. Any "deeply sorry" just comes off as "Well I guess I better do this before someone throws a rock through my window" in my eyes.
Of course, the Government doesn't want you to know that Alan was actually assassinated by a covert agency after he discovered the Turing-Lovecraft Theorem.
Seriously though, this was long overdue. RIP Alan Turing.
When the action requested in the petition does not cost any money. Words are cheap.
"ised for the treatment of Alan Turing in the post war era. An online petition got more than enough signatures to force an official statement..."
That's just the sort of encouragement these 'sign my [useless] online petition' people need.
I'm all for protesting, but an online petition is one small step above... scratch that... exactly equivalent to moaning about an issue on slashdot.
That the gov't reacted is not because of the power of the online petition, it was far more likely simply because it was a convenient and symbolic gesture that would distract news media from more critical stories.
Its been a little longer than 24 hours.... I know that there have been hundreds of petitions over at least 30 years... I've signed a fair amount of them over the years.
Though those are the old fashioned in-the-rain gathering signatures on paper type....
Bah, this is just Labour trying to score a couple of brownie points since they're about to get trounced in the election next year.
Some PR drone probably stumbled across the petition and thought "Ok, this sounds like a good idea and it won't hurt the government's image, we might as well do it".
Slashdot: news for Apple. Stuff that Apple.
about time! The man was a genius.
If you experienced the momentary outtage of slashdot - my bad. Big burrito lunch, you understand.
Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
It's not even just that there are people alive today who were persecuted in years past -- 93 state governments still persecute homosexuals, 7 by the death penalty.
On many nights when I was studying Computer Science at Manchester University, I sat next to Turing's statue outside the college after going out in the village. The apology is "nice", but really means nothing at all..
Though at least our government made it. Finally.
True, but this is for Alan Turing personally. This statement should not be diluted to be more generally applicable. Let this one be for him alone, since he was the victim in this particular instance. Rather, if another public statement is required, then work toward that.
I believe you mean a "poof" not a "puff"
This is the same as when the Catholic Church apologized to Galileo Galilei: too little, too late. What good is to recognize a wrong done so many years ago to a person already dead?
Historic Apology?
Yes, but I'm not sure the ones apologizing CAN be really sorry for something they didn't directly do.
There's an excellent short story Oracle by Greg Egan imagining what would have happened if Turing's life had gone slightly differently. Egan portrays a very interesting world with heavy emphasis on how Turing might have interacted with C.S. Lewis. See http://gregegan.customer.netspace.net.au/MISC/ORACLE/Oracle.html.
I guess in 50 years some sorry assed figurehead will be apologizing to everyone who wasn't "allowed" to marry in this day and age.
Since when is an online petition worth more than a squirt of piss?
I'm pretty sure aiming a quart of piss at PM Brown wouldn't have gotten the same response.
Pretty sure, anyway. Ya never know with those Brits...
It makes nothing to the great dead man who suffered this injustice, but the acceptance, by the government, that it was a wrongdoing, turns it more difficult to happen again. And this is far from nothing.
"We can't put the clock back" sounds awfully inappropriate in an apology for chemically castrating someone.
http://twitter.com/OLDTELEGRAM
I read Spycatcher a long while ago. Wright seemed like a guy who made many solid technical contributions to the geekdom of spy craft. Clearly, later in life he had some axes to grind. One of which is the terrible way the Official Skinflint Act was used to deny benefits to long serving members of the secret service. Like what they say about Area 51: the only secret there is the massive waste of taxpayer dollars.
Peter Wright - Wikipedia
Because of the interest and because of the rancour following the pension, in 1985, he decided to publish his memoirs in Australia in order to make ends meet. The British government did all it could to suppress publication, under the pretext that such a publication would be in violation of the Official Secrets Act. They brought an injunction against Wright in Sydney. The Australian court, however, ruled against the British government, thus turning a book that might have had moderate success into an international best seller. Furthermore, the verdict not only vindicated Wright but also represented a victory for press freedom. The publication of Spycatcher temporarily unlocked the doors of official secrecy as far as former intelligence officers were concerned. With the enactment of the 1989 Official Secrets Bill, an absolute prohibition on revelations by serving or former intelligence officers was imposed.
The British governing class always seemed to care a lot more about that stiff upper lip thing, than rewarding those who toil in mandatory obscurity.
The other aspect that boggles the mind is the "gays are communist pinkos" circularity. If you castrate your war heroes, I think you might just be priming the pump for defection. It's not gays as such who are unreliable, but anyone who fears arbitrary persecution by their own government.
Another thing I've sometimes wondered: notwithstanding the official secrets act, where was Churchill when Turing could have used a solid character witness, such as "the official secrets act prohibits me from discussing the details, but in my opinion, if you do this, you'll shame the British empire for 100 years" or some distinctly British harrumph to that effect.
The real shame here is the amount of power held by the people who knew better.
Randroids don't pass the Turing test.
Apologizing or not- neither one helps Alan Turing now.
But this sets a precedent. By apologizing for this behavior in the past it cements it as being definitely not OK and that can help others.
Feel free to add more. 1. We are happy when anyone gets laid 2. The heterosexual geeks aren't threatened. I mean if we can't get girls to find us attractive no gay guy would. 3. Decreases denominator in available (girl/guy) ratio.
I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
This is good.
Very good.
As an old, straight, white guy, I think this is just wonderful.
Governments hate to apologize.
This is good.
Dave Barnes 9 breweries within walking distance of my house
Brown's an ass. What kind of guy says that Turing is most famous for breaking Enigma codes. Turing is famous for his contribution to AI and most importantly the Turing test and the Turing award (Computer Science's Nobel prize equivalent) If Gordon Brown was paying tribute to Alfred Nobel he would probably forget to mention the Nobel prize and talk about how Nobel made his money selling dynamite to the Czar. As I said what an ass. Pity the brits that they have idiots for leaders (its not new started with Thatcher)
**Life is too short to be serious**
And here I was thinking the "puff" was a new extension on the "fag" metaphor...
(maybe you have to be English/Australian to get that)
Oscar Wilde
There's an interesting point - is there anyone still alive today who was prosecuted under the laws? Could they get any compensation, or will they only get just words too?
Still, Brown's tolerance for LGBT people and their sexuality probably doesn't extend as far as the Spanner case, where gay sadomasochists were imprisoned for consensual S&M. When the Labour Government passed the recent law on "extreme" consensual adult images, they cited the Spanner case as justification for the new law. I'm bisexual, and masochist - but despite the welcome improvements to gay rights on the one hand, overall I can't say Labour have made me feel better regarding my sexuality over the last twelve years.
On the one hand, they propose laws banning hate speech that could cover accusing gay people of being child abusers; but on the other, they themselves compare "extreme" adult images to child porn, and sadomasochism to pedophilia.
...Brown knows
True, but this is for Alan Turing personally. This statement should not be diluted to be more generally applicable. Let this one be for him alone, since he was the victim in this particular instance. Rather, if another public statement is required, then work toward that.
This misunderstands the purpose of such things. They're never for the person they're "for". Heck, even funerals are for the sake of the living, not the dead.
"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
Nice gesture. Now they should give him the honour he deserved while he was alive. Considering his contributions to the war effort and Computer Science, he should be knighted.
Van Jones probably thinks otherwise...
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/healthcare/la-na-van-jones7-2009sep07,0,6923895.story
I believe you mean "a puff".
Nothing more than a computer-theory-inventing-second-world-war-winning-hero puff.
I believe you mean 'a poof'. And not with a long 'O' sound like poo. Short, like woof.
This might be a first step, but the British government fucked over whole groups (and races) of people that deserve an apology at least as much as the venerated Mr. Turing.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
No. Laws that are unjust should be disobeyed.
You're missing the point. Brown is not apologizing for Britain having behaved *illegally*, or for having prosecuted Turing. The law was applied as written at the time (I'm assuming; I haven't checked). He's apologizing for Britain's treatment of Turing, period. The law was unjust, and the results horrific. Britain is recognizing this and doing the only thing it can at this point: express its regret.
so his punishment was fair and reasonable under the circumstances.
You don't actually say anything that can be parsed as an argument, so it isn't clear what your point is other than the completely batshit insane statement I've quoted. However, assuming you have an argument, I think it would look something like:
1) What the law says is always 100% perfectly fair and reasonable
2) Everyone ought to be equal under the law
3) Alan Turing was the same as everyone
-----
Ergo, Alan Turing's treatment under the law was 100% perfectly fair and reasonable.
The reason why this conclusion is batshit insane is that your first premise is anti-empirical gibberish. What the law says is only moderately fair and reasonable most of the time, even in the most aggressively democratic countries, and it is completely unfair and unreasonable much of the time even then.
Moral judgement is higher than the law when it comes to, well, judging human action, and we can clearly see today that the law under which Turing was persecuted (yes, persecuted) was neither fair nor reasonable. It was vicious, stupid, pointless, hateful and small-minded.
Whether or not a formal apology from a politician today is warranted, the fact remains that the law was wrong by any sane standard, and the people brutalized by it might perhaps be forgiven for thinking they are owed a little bit of apology today.
Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
I'm glad to see an apology for Turing's treatment being set straight. Alan Turing definitely didn't deserve the bad treatment that was inflicted upon him for his sexual orientation. He certainly deserves this apology.
One historical note is that several models of computers (or actual computers) preceded the more formal computer science, but naturally, the theoretical work of Turing (and related early CS pioneers such as Alonzo Church), and their rigour should also be highly regarded.
We have two eyes and ten fingers so we will type five times as much as we read. http://www.shlomifish.org/
Aunt-Mummy asked that you should call!
Incest is a cultural and possibly biological bad thing... I suppose I could agree that they shouldn't be involved in that either. I do not think it would be common and the abusive stuff would still be a crime (one could classify it as abuse and get it MOSTLY illegal without messing the right to choose a partner.)
Multiple spouses? I suppose those happen already, just not in the legal system... Legally, its 1 at a time but that doesn't seem to change a whole lot. Again, normal people don't do it without cultural support for it. Women with rights probably are extremely unlikely to agree to other wives. For the most part, I think today we have about the same stats regardless of the legal system.
Age? Well its rather silly to put numbers on it. Every now and then I hear about some poor child (18 or 19) fooling around with a 16-17 year old and getting labeled a sex offender. Where has the purpose for judges gone??? (they are there to inject some "common sense" not brainless apply law by guidelines.)
Government needs more restriction on its power to enforce the belief systems of the majority onto minorities. This INCLUDES marriage! A standard contractual agreement is all that is required to give the benefits of legal marriage-- without any restrictions--- relatives, room mates, etc. should be possible. If you want marriage go to a private entity for it. It is a bad idea to mislabel civil unions "Marriage" and dilute the language.
---
Me, I find the behavior of the UK continually ironic. I think they should give Turning more than just a formal apology. He should be held up as an example of how flawed humans can be so that future generations have more examples to hopefully learn from. Given the size of his contribution, he should get a holiday.
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
You crazy Yanks and your bizarre 'English' language. The correct UK spelling is B-U-D-W-E-I-S-E-R. And it comes in pints, not quarts.
~Idarubicin
What pointless idiocy. Instead of making useless gestures like this, why doesn't Gordon Brown apologize for something he is currently doing that future generations will criticize. Oh! Wait...he doesn't know what that might be. This kind of behavior is brain dead.
When idiots like Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad can
make statements like âoeIn Iran we donâ(TM)t have homosexuals like in your country.â
in the modern era no less (2007), and while homosexuality remains illegal and punishable
in any number of dismal, backward countries,
it's important that public statements of the wrongfulness of persecuting
homosexuals be aired, if only to counterbalance the ravings of
fundamentalists and pig-ignorant foreign presidents...
What was actually said:
Hey it seems that this Turing gay, uh, guy, made it possible to do all the snooping on our citizens. We are now able to store AND process all this data about everybody as Orwell intended it to be.
Thanks Turing. You were not that bad after all.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
I cannot really understand the cynicism in almost all the comments to this post. Despite the fact that Alan Turing deserved and still deserves a lot more than he got, I find this symbolic step still a positive one, not something to bash repeatedly in 90+% of all the comments. It was an online petition for an apology and it worked.
I actually see something special here: The petition was "online" - using a network of computers, all of which are essentially Turing machines. So in some sense, his legacy played a major role in bringing Slashdot-minded people together, in their creation of an online petition and thus the issuing of an apology - symbolic perhaps, but still deeply meaningful.
The most eloquent comment on this site I have seen for a long time.
If this were really happening, what would you think?
Seriously, first the catholics come out and agrees the earth is round. Now the English come out and admit they were wrong about mistreating a man over his sexual preference.
This is a trend that I don't like! The day I see white hatted, "god fearing" Alabamans who spend most of their days sitting on their porch drinking cheap beer voting in favor of gun control and marrying into other races I'm going to just shoot myself because then we'll know the earth is coming to an end.
This world is just getting to crazy. If you can't depend on the stupidity of humanity, what can you possibly depend on?
Bah, this is just Labour trying to score a couple of brownie points since they're about to get trounced in the election next year. Some PR drone probably stumbled across the petition and thought "Ok, this sounds like a good idea and it won't hurt the government's image, we might as well do it".
Doing something because it's a good idea and the public approve. So it's like democracy then?
Let me ask, is there ever a time when you wouldn't think what you've put?
If this were really happening, what would you think?
Apparently the movement in Britain to legitimate homosexuality began as a rebellion against the infusion of Judeo-Christian ideals in society and the onerous ethical requirements of the Victorian era. That said, I argue that it is no accident that during the era it was said that the sun never sets on the British Empire, while these days other powers are in ascendancy.
Indeed. In an era when Britain would forcefully deny the rights of other nations and dominate them militarily all around the world, it also denied human sexuality and imposed an equally immoral view of "ethical requirements" on people regardless of how they felt about it. In the era when Britain stopped being so thoroughly evil to the core, it ceased both to impose empire on others and to enforce the most abhorrent of Judeo-Christian ideals upon its own citizens. Both the lack of an empire and the lack of Victorian standards are signs of an increasingly moral and ethical British society. I too agree that this is no accident, both are signs of increasing enlightenment among the British (and the world at large).
"Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
Nice, now you should make the Queen apologize, she was the only one in "power" back then, and she let the government threw one the greatest minds of the 20th century into a shithole.
Since the British government set up the petitions site, instead of people doing their own on random forums?
I was provoked by Mr Browns statement which completely failed to mention Alan Turings contribution to computing science. The statement only addressess his war effort. By not recognizing Turing's contribution to science, Brown elegantly but cowardly avoids the issue of whether Turing deserves a nighthood or not (war heroes seldom get nighted). Indeed, the Enigma cracking helped saved the Europe I live in but at the same time it helped spawn the technology that is my passion and my paycheck.
"Windows are for cheaters" - Bruce Springsteen
Now its been recognized that hackers were witch-hunted, persecuted and even worse, maybe we can ask our governments to stop doing so (Reverse engineering lawsuits, DMCA, software patents, ...) and recognize the value of our work?
But if you take this as "a victory for LGBT" and not let this be for his memory alone, then you have robbed and victimized him yet again.
When it's good PR and doesn't cost the politicians any time, effort or deviation from their current plans.
Obama should do the same for Robert Oppenheimer
He was "proud" to apologize.
Turing's discoveries were significant and seminal contributions to the British war effort and no doubt resulted in Germany losing the war.
Given the above that "apology" was way to little, certainly way too late for Alan Turing.
It was also only offered under political pressure to do so.
Under those circumstances it is worthless!
... sanctimonious germanophobic fag overlords.
Does budweiser come in pints?
I thought it was just margarita glasses with a cocktail umbrella? Maybe bottles too.
Gosh, Ayn Rand was awful!
I am cynical as to the government's motives in issuing the apology (timing, it's cheap to do etc)
However
as of today, as a result of the apology, there are two outcomes I am delighted with, firstly, Turing's family have seen his name cleared, and secondly, an enormous number more Britons since yesterday are aware of the great man who we were fortunate to have, and a few bigots will have had their prejudices challenged by their possible recognition of their need for gratitude to a gay man.
It would be good for Tommy Flowers name to get its recognition too though, the apology we should make to him is 'sorry we made you scrap Colossus and pretend you never built it'.
As a gay programmer myself, it often amazed the people I worked with that the two parts of my personality weren't in conflict. I very seldom ran into predjudice, though. In fact, often I was recognized as a good teacher and the other employees felt free to come and ask my help when they had a tough coding problem.
Alan Turing has been an idol of mine for a long time, and he was treated badly, yes. But more important than the apology is the recognition that there have been contributions of significance to the world by gay men and women and transgendered persons. Our history has been actively suppressed for centuries, but we are finally being recognized as having value in the modern age.
God bless Alan Turing, and Gordon Brown. Every little bit of kindness and generosity makes the world a better place for all of mankind.
Nitewing '98
Everything works...in theory.
Except the response to most of the petitions on that site is "What do you think this is? A democracy?" or a generic statement about something unrelated.
You speak for everyone apologized to, do you?
I predictede earlier that they'd do it because it makes political sense. And it's no skin off their noses.
"The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
It's about goddamn time! Your crazy government turned him into a freak. This man was responsible for the deaths of so many Nazis its not even funny and crazy authoritarian society drove him to suicide.
Being a Jew and owning a business was made illegal in Germany in the '30s. I guess there's nothing to apologise for there, either.
Here have some fish to go with that chip on your shoulder.
"sadomasochism to pedophilia [sic]"? That PDF says nothing of the sort.
No one cares about your "orientation". They only think about it because you preach it day in, day out.
This post contains benzene, nitrosamines, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide.
It's good that the establishment have repudiated their former behaviour, but it was a mistake to campaign to demand one - that implied that the ruling class's had a right to dictate people's personal behaviour, but that that right had merely been misused in Turing's case. Also, Gordo refers approvingly to the fight against fascism. What a pity that this anti-fascist fervour on his part wasn't in evidence when he voted in favour of the invasion of Iraq, a decision that led to mass civilian deaths, imprisonment without trial and torture on a scale that any fascist would have been proud of.
Bastard! /me wipes tea off monitor
Exactly, and there are few cases that merit this kind of apology more than A. Turing. This guy was a great scientist, and has helped tremendously defeating the Axe during WWII, so UK should really be grateful. Typically the kind of guy that bring more that it takes from society....Yet he was judged under a disgusting law (one that condamned people for private action where all participants where willing and free), one law that lowered UK exactly to the same level as the Axe itself. State ingratitude and hypocrite morality at it's finest...
Imho apology is more than deserved, comes much too late (but better late than never), and is much too lenient as a mea culpa (but again, better too little than nothing...especially from governments, as they are notably reluctant to make any apologies... )
A woolly woofter
Jay Wiseman (author of SM101) said it best:
"Being into S&M is like being gay 25 years ago"
More true now than ever.
In other news, the Prime Minister also apologised for the burning of Joan of Arc and Bishops Ridley and Latimer.
"Apologising" for things other people did is a great way to look good without any risk of admitting your own faults and mistakes. Indeed, it can be a subtle way of rebuking those people for their shortcomings, with the implication that you yourself are free from them.
By apologising for the witch-hunt Turing was subjected to, Brown manages to give the impression that he is unprejudiced, not a bigot, modern, and humble enough to admit past mistakes. To quote the brilliantly-worded title of Carol Tavris and Elliot Aronson's book, "Mistakes Were Made (But Not By Me)". http://tinyurl.com/mlmjt6
Why do I have the feeling that plenty of people in Brown's 21st century Britain are being persecuted - right now - for beliefs and characteristics that our leaders find just as frightening and alien as earlier British politicians found Turing's homosexuality (and intelligence)?
I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
No one cares about your "orientation".
Actually, they do. GPs "orientation" (and mine too) is grounds for dismissal or denial of jobs such as teaching (because we will obviously be a threat to the children) and we are the target of one of the most fucked up laws ever to be passed (Im not affected yet, Kenny McAskill has still to get his trainwreck me-too law passed up in Scotland). 3 years in jail and life on the sex offender register for possessing a photo of an act which is perfectly legal to do. This is not a "chip on your shoulder".
Google for "Consenting Adult Action Network" and they have the details. Oh, its mildly NSFW (in case you didnt guess already :) )
Prime Minister: 2009 has been a year of deep reflection â" a chance for
Britain, as a nation, to commemorate the profound debts we owe to those who
came before. A unique combination of anniversaries and events have stirred
in us that sense of pride and gratitude which characterise the British
experience. Earlier this year I stood with Presidents Sarkozy and Obama to
honour the service and the sacrifice of the heroes who stormed the beaches
of Normandy 65 years ago. And just last week, we marked the 70 years which
have passed since the British government declared its willingness to take
up arms against Fascism and declared the outbreak of World War Two. So I am
both pleased and proud that, thanks to a coalition of computer scientists,
historians and LGBT activists, we have this year a chance to mark and
celebrate another contribution to Britainâ(TM)s fight against the darkness of
dictatorship; that of code-breaker Alan Turing.
Turing was a quite brilliant mathematician, most famous for his work on
breaking the German Enigma codes. It is no exaggeration to say that,
without his outstanding contribution, the history of World War Two could
well have been very different. He truly was one of those individuals we can
point to whose unique contribution helped to turn the tide of war. The debt
of gratitude he is owed makes it all the more horrifying, therefore, that
he was treated so inhumanely. In 1952, he was convicted of âgross
indecencyâ(TM) â" in effect, tried for being gay. His sentence â" and he
was faced with the miserable choice of this or prison - was chemical
castration by a series of injections of female hormones. He took his own
life just two years later.
Thousands of people have come together to demand justice for Alan Turing
and recognition of the appalling way he was treated. While Turing was dealt
with under the law of the time and we can't put the clock back, his
treatment was of course utterly unfair and I am pleased to have the chance
to say how deeply sorry I and we all are for what happened to him. Alan and
the many thousands of other gay men who were convicted as he was convicted
under homophobic laws were treated terribly. Over the years millions more
lived in fear of conviction.
I am proud that those days are gone and that in the last 12 years this
government has done so much to make life fairer and more equal for our LGBT
community. This recognition of Alanâ(TM)s status as one of Britainâ(TM)s most
famous victims of homophobia is another step towards equality and long
overdue.
But even more than that, Alan deserves recognition for his contribution to
humankind. For those of us born after 1945, into a Europe which is united,
democratic and at peace, it is hard to imagine that our continent was once
the theatre of mankindâ(TM)s darkest hour. It is difficult to believe that in
living memory, people could become so consumed by hate â" by
anti-Semitism, by homophobia, by xenophobia and other murderous prejudices
â" that the gas chambers and crematoria became a piece of the European
landscape as surely as the galleries and universities and concert halls
which had marked out the European civilisation for hundreds of years. It is
thanks to men and women who were totally committed to fighting fascism,
people like Alan Turing, that the horrors of the Holocaust and of total war
are part of Europeâ(TM)s history and not Europeâ(TM)s present.
So on behalf of the British government, and all those who live freely
thanks to Alanâ(TM)s work I am very proud to say: weâ(TM)re sorry, you deserved
so much better.
Gordon Brown
Hello troll! You alone show that this kind of bigoted attitude is alive and well today. You're the kind who ridicule bisexual and gay people for "preaching", when all we want there too is to be left alone in peace.
No I don't preach it daily, anymore than you preach your sexuality daily, or anything you complain about here on Slashdot. I do however have the right to contribute to a discussion on a public forum. If you have a problem with that, go somewhere else where opinions aren't welcome.
No one cares about your "orientation".
Did you even read my post (not sure why you put the scare quotes - and I didn't even say "orientation", so please go back and read it)? I only wish they didn't care. When they stop criminalising it, then you can get back to me.
They most certainly do care - why not go whine about them instead?
That PDF says nothing of the sort.
It's not direct, but it does specifically list sadomasochism and pedophilia as things that should be excluded. Anyhow, that's not the main issue, and was more an example - there's plenty more issues, as I listed in my post.
Here have some fish to go with that chip on your shoulder.
Get back to me when you actually can construct an argument. What are you, 12?
You're setting up a false dichotomy between silence and issuing an apology. You can apologise for something you did, directly or via delegation, but an expression of disagreement with something your predecessor's predecessor's ... predecessor did shouldn't be termed an apology. By saying that he apologises, Brown is pretending that he was to blame, which is a pointless fiction.
It's worth noting that the Brits obviously drink it anyway. Funny thing that, but I guess if you can stomach British cuisine then Budweiser isn't so bad.
I am officially gone from
That's how it's served at the bar. However, the receptacle it's collected in prior to bottling holds a pint of liquid, and can usually be found on the end of a catheter.
Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
And I'm so fucking sorry for the way we treated the Neanderthals. There's a symbol of reconciliation for you.
As many people have said before me; a rather helpless statement made by a politico who's certain to be out when the next election comes. Yet reading this reduced me to a slobbering blob of pudding in front of my monitor when I read it.
Religion is what happens when nature strikes and groupthink goes wrong.
There's a Turing machine for that.
If I were on a desert island, and had one nutritious mod point left to eat, I would give it to to you sir.
Reply to That ||
Gosh, Ayn Rand was awful!
I have thrown one book into the garbage, in my 35 years of life, and it was Atlas Shrugged. Normally I would have given the book to a thrift shop or a friend, or placed at my front curb for a passerby, but something in me knew that copy had to just disappear, vanish, never to be seen again. I didn't want to be the one responsible for passing that poison on to someone else. Didn't even make it past 45% of the story.
Any post-Anthem Rand, is pretty much trash worthy.
Reply to That ||
Meanwhile, somewhere off the coast of England, a colossal killbot picks up the news headline from a radio transmission and pauses to reconsider its mission of vengeance.
At least Budweiser is served COLD.
Is that true? Do they really drink imported American beer in the UK? I would think they drink something that is brewed there and *called* Budweiser. (Most Kirin beer in the US is actually brewed in Canada, you have to hunt for the Japanese stuff.)
All ideas^H^H^H^H^Hprocesses in this post are Patent Pending. (as well as the process of patenting all postings)
physical death closes the window for justice. If there's something beyond, then, I'm not sure..
It is unwise to ascribe motive
I know - 0.001% of the world does, and hurray for them.
For the rest of us; he's gone, for a loooooong time. Now move along.
If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
Many to go. Whereas Turing's contributions are laudable, they do not justify him being singled out. Many of other innocent, nameless people suffered under the same law. What about them?
Indeed. In an era when Britain would forcefully deny the rights of other nations and dominate them militarily all around the world, it also denied human sexuality and imposed an equally immoral view of "ethical requirements" on people regardless of how they felt about it.
Said era was the apex of human civilization. Indians and Chinese of sufficient family background and educational level acknowledge the benefits British colonialism brought to human civilization in excess of the costs. It's only hella dumb, inferior, and physically ugly, low-class monkey-ass ooga-booga people who have a problem with it. (i.e. you) > Both the lack of an empire and the lack of Victorian standards are signs of an increasingly moral and ethical British society. The lack of empire and moral standards are signs of an irrelevant and backwards dadaist society that has no morals or ethics. The UK is nothing but a bunch of God-damned degenerate shits these days. (i.e. you)
I too agree that this is no accident, both are signs of increasing enlightenment among the British (and the world at large).
Enlightenment amongst the world at large? No there isn't. The world is filled with hideous, backwards-caste shits. It is imperative that your type be reduced in number by 90% or more because the brand of retardation you spread is the last thing the world needs more of.
For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods
S&M is relevant to straight people too.
The problem is some people have a hard time understanding the concept of "consenting adults".
Its like calling someone "Sales Assistant Smith".
I really don't care about the queen because she isn't an elected anything. She is just the byproduct of a decadent age.
I do care about elected governments talking on behalf of the state they represent and their people.
I don't mean to troll, but can Gordon Brown please apologize for even more serious crimes against humanity? Such as this one?
Have you? Turing seems to have been a fairly public minded man (Never having met him, it's tough to be sure). It seems reasonable, even quite likely, that Turing would have preferred this to a victory both for himself AND LGBT community. Though he would probably have had no idea what I just said (both LGBT as a demographic and the idea of their being a community of such people being after his time), I thik he probably would have agreed with the sentiment.
I don't need a million points of light, just two points of multi-mode fiber and a 10 Gig-E router.
You cannot make it up to Turing. This is not for him. This is for the speaker, to make him feel better about himself. Ok, enough cynicism: this is a promise, to not fuck up again. So quit talking about Turing or 1950 government-backed homophobia, and look around and see if you're still being similarly unjust, to your own society's detriment.
You will find that there are still many people who are being mistreated for no good reason. And it's systematic and institutionalized. Look at your criminal laws and you'll see "crimes" that lack victims -- the only victim being the "criminal" himself, and the victimizer being the government. "Oh, but it's for their own good! They should conform to our norm, and if they do, they will live better lives." Fuck you.
Homosexuals still exist, even homosexuals that were alive back then.
Ahh,you've seen Lemonparty as well.
How can a law be "homophobic"? Phobia is an attribute of a person. It may have been restrictive to the legal activities of consenting adults but not does not mean it was homophobic. The law was against buggery specifically and indeed at least from the 1956 Sexual Offences Act buggery between any persons was a felony.
Turings activity that he was arrested for would still have been illegal here in 1994 as the age of consent for homosexual buggery was 21 until then when it was reduced to 18. If he'd buggered a girl a few years later it would have still been illegal. So the offence of government in this specific case was either not allowing any member of the population to take part in buggery or allowing homosexuals an alternative option of hormone treatment?!
I wonder why he chose not to go to prison (2 years was noted in the 1865 Criminal Law Amendment Act, not sure if this was changed in the 1912 Act) - that would seem to be the action you would take if you felt your actions were justified; being in prison is entirely reversible. Instead he apparently chose the alternative hormone treatment. Perhaps he felt himself that his actions were inappropriate? Curious.
You seriously misunderstand that sentence. What it means is: this legislation defines sexual orientation narrowly, as meaning one of straight/gay/bi. It doesn't compare S&M with pedophilia, except to make the wholly accurate statement that neither of them are covered by the Employment Equality (Sexual Orientation) Regulations 2003.
Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
It is a homophobic law because it was a law that discriminted against homosexuality, even in private.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_turing#Conviction_for_gross_indecency
IANAL (no pun intended), but I don't think it is related to anal sex in particular but "gross indecency" between males:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_Law_Amendment_Act_1885#Section_11
Finally, about the word "homophobia". A word's meaning goes beyond its etymology. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/homophobia
and she gets $35 mil a year. Turing revolutionizes the way we think and he gets convicted for NOTHING and ultimately dies early. I'd have to say our culture is pretty F'IN INSANE!!!
"all those who live freely thanks to Alan's work"
Huh, that's a very cryptic statement!
-- thinkyhead software and media
As a recent college graduate, I have to say that's about the best description of the humanities departments at my university that I've ever heard. I'm so glad I'm an engineer and don't have to deal with all the fluff and wishful thinking posing as reality anymore.
Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it.
Galileo is not impressed.
3A 4E 22 05 C1 83 0B 7A
It's random, but my posting it here is probably considered illegal to someone.
Etymology is often pushed by those with an axe to grind, "homophobia" or "homophobic" is just a stick like "bigot" that people use as a replacement for an argument. The law was not homophobic unless you redefine homophobia, in which case the law was also cheesecake.
The proper argument the GP should have made was Turing "[...] was convicted under laws that discriminated unjustly based on sexual preference and was treated terribly.".
Any insight into the prison question?
The GP, i.e. myself, was just quoting the exact words of the formal apology. The point I was trying to make is that I think this apology has a great symbolic value for homosexuals.
And I'm not redefining anything, I provided a link to the dictionary entry which shows that "homophobia means discrimination against homosexuals" is a valid statement. Then, saying that a law is homophobic because it discriminates against homosexuals is also valid.
I've heard the worst arguments using etymology (my native language, spanish, has many words with latin roots, which leads to many stupid arguments). For example, I could argue that, since homo means "the same" in Greek, "homophobia" is "the fear to those who are equal". Which of course is nonsense. Also, homophobia is not even a Greek word, as it was coined in modern times.
And I have no insights on why Turing chose chemical castration over prison (or if this was even a choice). One possibility is that he thought prison was worst, even more if he went to prison for being gay.
The other possibility, that he thought he was a deviant himself, is not to be discarded. I know that I had a hard time coming to terms with my own homosexuality. Having strong figures around yourself telling you that homosexuality is a sin or inherently wrong is a force to be reckoned with.
I'm not sure if there is anyone alive who was prosecuted under that law. But the victims of these kind of laws are not only those who were prosecuted, but also those who had to live their lives in secrecy and shame.
I recommend you "A very British sex scandal". There you'll see interviews with people who were alive "back then"
If somebody preaches sexuality, that's heterosexuals. Preachers literally preach marriage and their views on sexuality.
It's about fraking time.
"I wouldn't recommend sex, drugs or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me." --Hunter S. Thompson
...Alan Turing has still living relatives. Last time I checked, 1952 wasn't that long ago and there could still be plenty of victims (and perpetrators) still living in England. And, of course, while Turing is gone, the the government remains.
But you, apparently, can read people's minds.
God, you're an asshole.
Yet he was judged under a disgusting law (one that condamned people for private action where all participants where willing and free
Paedophiles could argue the law still DOES do this.. do you believe preventing adults from having sex with children is a "disgusting law" ?
I am the maverick of Slashdot
In this context, "willing" implies that one is both old enough and mentally competent to give informed consent. Most societies say 18 years old is "old enough." Arguments could be made (not necessarily by me) to lower it to ~16 in cases when the older partner is ~20 years old, but only child predators like NAMBLA members want to significantly change the definition of implied consent.
Don't conflate gay rights with pedophile rights. They're not even remotely similar.
...with all due respect it is highly unlikely that any other homosexuals contributed more to Britain than Turing did.
Your mistake is in the assumption the laws exist due to logical reasons and that they were made by people aware of the other laws.
Its an emotional illogically based law stemming from pop culture and nothing else. The rest is merely rationalization to make it sound legitimate.
Eugenics was ok in the USA until the push against it which reached its peak during WW2 where the ideas were taken too far (and not based on reason either.) Now you can't have a serious discussion without WW2 extremities killing it.
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
Reproduction has almost nothing to do with Civil Unions or much to do with sex anymore; especially for gay people! The world is 2/3 over populated, reproduction is now a problem not a need. Religions promote procreation to increase membership and thereby power and influence; therefore, adding to the problem. They politically control the issue which is why its void of logic and reasonable debate is dead.
Many people confuse Marriage with Civil Unions; I find a vast majority confuse those with procreation.
Everybody (even religious nuts) considers a childless marriage a marriage; so therefore, its not a mandatory part of its definition. The secular and legal definitions are even more lax.
Your culture's concept of family is not universal. Some cultures have defined family by cohabitation not by sex and offspring. Some separate sex from coupling; some are not as stuck on THEIR kids but feel the children are the community's responsibility. Elements are in all, but some stress parts differently with profound outcomes.
It is ethnocentric to impose the marriage; specifically the Jewish/Christian concept upon others - EVERY BIT as much as its ethnocentric to discriminate against GAY people. (At least the majority no longer stones gay people.)
"Marriage" (for lack of a non-charged term) is about relationships not solely for the purpose of offspring. You can regulate reproduction without touching marriage.
I agree that logically, if you can regulate incest for genetic reasons you surely can regulate genetic diseases far more likely to cause troubles for the exact same reasons. Its not a slippery slope (which BTW is a fallacy not a trend.) The incest laws are irrational and pre-date the science; its cultural based; any attempt to rationalize them leads to contradictions.
Here is a bigger question:
You need a license to drive a car; why don't you need one for having a child?
Adoption is heavily regulated; why isn't procreation? (sex is not procreation BTW)
I have a fist, yet I can't bash in your face despite having a "natural right" to do so.
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
The problem is people unlike the parent poster who do not understand you can never legislate solutions to these conundrums.
The reasons judges and juries exist is to insert some interpretation and sense to the rigid rules. They are flawed people as well but they are nearer the situation than those writing the laws; its a simple logistics problem.
Too many people do not understand that the law IS a strong guideline and is not absolute!
Their politicians then add to the bloat of the system with pointless guidelines, mandatory sentencing, and complex laws trying to control all future situations is a futile attempt that hurts society.
Somebody gaming the system isn't too hard to spot but by the letter of the law they get away with it. For some reasons we don't want juries to know about jury nullification or to recommend punishments outside the prescribed options.
In the USA, common sense largely died off long ago. For example:
We now have to buy insurance just in case some fool hurts himself on our property. Its one thing if you put bear traps in your yard... and another if a stupid kid drowns at your cabin when you are not there.
Some countries have Judge duty. The entry point is there- you can spent money to go deeper into the system but for small claims and stupid claims it works cheaply and educates the people being judges. Yes, bad timing could cost you-- but now you are screwed $$$ either way. Fear of the overly complex system that has turned into a exclusive club terrorizes citizens as much a farmer in a showdown with hired gunfighter.
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news