<story><title>Vannevar Bush Engineered the 20th Century</title><url>https://spectrum.ieee.org/vannevar-bush</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>ricksunny</author><text>I think the most enduring mystery of #Vannevar Bush is why his name is no longer a household one today, in the way that Edison&amp;#x27;s is or that we have every reason to expect Musk&amp;#x27;s to be 80 years from now.&lt;p&gt;This is one article that speaks to that, notably writing from 1990.
&lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.latimes.com&amp;#x2F;archives&amp;#x2F;la-xpm-1990-05-24-fi-444-story.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.latimes.com&amp;#x2F;archives&amp;#x2F;la-xpm-1990-05-24-fi-444-st...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;By the way, I do recommend reading what remains the only biography of Vannevar, &amp;quot;Endless Frontier&amp;quot;, written by the same author as OP&amp;#x27;s article, G Pascal Zachary. It is quite good. The subject probably merits multiple biographies just as many other pivotal people in history also have multiple biographies to provide different angles or more nuance as more information comes to light.</text></item><item><author>ricksunny</author><text>I gave a talk on Vannevar Bush &amp;amp; innovation at a &amp;#x27;pop-up city&amp;#x27; just two weeks ago:&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;docs.google.com&amp;#x2F;presentation&amp;#x2F;d&amp;#x2F;11rXfniJtbvzAgSMv2WpxGWsRkjXucre23mtRriTtpls&amp;#x2F;edit?usp=drivesdk&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;docs.google.com&amp;#x2F;presentation&amp;#x2F;d&amp;#x2F;11rXfniJtbvzAgSMv2Wpx...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;He really transformed US innovation. Some good, some questionable, and some stories probably yet to be told. Hope you enjoy. I&amp;#x27;m working on uploading the video of the talk here over the next couple of days. If any questions I&amp;#x27;ll try to field them here.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>tcmart14</author><text>My guess is that because Bush, from my memory of everything I learned about him, was mostly behind the scenes. Edison for example, kept himself in the news as the face of everything, even doing photo-ops to present himself as an eccentric genius. Bush was preferred to be glue behind the scenes for the most part. Probably like how we may all know Eisenhower as the face of D-Day, who yes, played a big role, but none of us probably know the name of the guy on his staff who handled every excruciating detail of the logistics of it all (which is probably one of the most impressive parts of D-Day).&lt;p&gt;Addition: Also sort of like how everyone knows Edison as the man behind the light bulb, but not very many people can name the people on Edison&amp;#x27;s team that helped with the light bulb.</text></comment>
<story><title>Vannevar Bush Engineered the 20th Century</title><url>https://spectrum.ieee.org/vannevar-bush</url></story><parent_chain><item><author>ricksunny</author><text>I think the most enduring mystery of #Vannevar Bush is why his name is no longer a household one today, in the way that Edison&amp;#x27;s is or that we have every reason to expect Musk&amp;#x27;s to be 80 years from now.&lt;p&gt;This is one article that speaks to that, notably writing from 1990.
&lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.latimes.com&amp;#x2F;archives&amp;#x2F;la-xpm-1990-05-24-fi-444-story.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;www.latimes.com&amp;#x2F;archives&amp;#x2F;la-xpm-1990-05-24-fi-444-st...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;By the way, I do recommend reading what remains the only biography of Vannevar, &amp;quot;Endless Frontier&amp;quot;, written by the same author as OP&amp;#x27;s article, G Pascal Zachary. It is quite good. The subject probably merits multiple biographies just as many other pivotal people in history also have multiple biographies to provide different angles or more nuance as more information comes to light.</text></item><item><author>ricksunny</author><text>I gave a talk on Vannevar Bush &amp;amp; innovation at a &amp;#x27;pop-up city&amp;#x27; just two weeks ago:&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;docs.google.com&amp;#x2F;presentation&amp;#x2F;d&amp;#x2F;11rXfniJtbvzAgSMv2WpxGWsRkjXucre23mtRriTtpls&amp;#x2F;edit?usp=drivesdk&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;https:&amp;#x2F;&amp;#x2F;docs.google.com&amp;#x2F;presentation&amp;#x2F;d&amp;#x2F;11rXfniJtbvzAgSMv2Wpx...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;p&gt;He really transformed US innovation. Some good, some questionable, and some stories probably yet to be told. Hope you enjoy. I&amp;#x27;m working on uploading the video of the talk here over the next couple of days. If any questions I&amp;#x27;ll try to field them here.</text></item></parent_chain><comment><author>transpute</author><text>Good article, thanks.&lt;p&gt;&lt;i&gt;&amp;gt; Bush knew how to map, build and manage the relationships and organizations necessary to get things done. He knew how to craft the human networks that could build the technological networks..  At OSRD’s height.. roughly two-thirds of the nation’s physicists were working for him.. Bush ambiguously noted that his role was far more administrative than technical: “I made no technical contribution to the war effort,” he wrote. “Not a single idea of mine ever amounted to shucks. At times, I have been called an ‘atomic scientist.’ It would be fully as accurate to call me a child psychologist.”&lt;/i&gt;</text></comment>