

Alan Turing's Body - wrongc0ntinent
http://theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/12/alan-turings-body/282641/

======
postitnotecode
I'm not sure if the article is supposed to be attacking the people that
convicted Turing or the legalese used by the Crown in the pardon. On both
counts, it seems to miss the mark and just wander greatly.

Unless there's precedent for not using formal wording in the pardon, I don't
see what the author's point is.

~~~
mtdewcmu
Agreed. I think a pardon from the Queen is a nice gesture. Of course, it can't
take back the wrong. But it is a nice gesture.

~~~
yaddayadda
I think the article can best be summed up in two of its paragraphs, which
highlight the Queen's gesture as incomplete and suggest a more complete
gesture ...

> "We can’t change Turing’s experience with a pardon. But his legacy mandates
> that we emulate, create, and codify humane and humble bodies politic,
> whether with law or with software, to steward and respect bodies natural."

> "According to Buzzfeed’s Jim Waterson, 75,000 men were convicted under the
> same law as Turing, some 26,000 of whom are still alive. (The law was
> repealed in 1967.) We might start by pardoning, or apologizing to, all those
> other men."

~~~
teamonkey
> We might start by pardoning, or apologizing to, all those other men."

The British government's apology in 2009 was an apology to all affected by
these laws, not just Turing. I'm not sure how the author missed that, having
quoted directly from the apology earlier in the article.

~~~
yaddayadda
I'm seeing two apologies mentioned: Gordan Brown's, and the failed legislative
apology.

Gordon Brown's, while somewhat ambiguous, reads as though Gordan Brown is
apologizing only to Turing. He does acknowledge the injustices suffered by
others, but states, "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." [1]

The legislative apology starts off, "A Bill to give a statutory pardon to Alan
Mathison Turing for offences under section 11 of the Criminal Amendment Act
1885 of which he was convicted on 31 March 1952.", which strikes me as
extremely specific to Turing, and wasn't even approved. [2]

[1] [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/gordon-
brown/617011...](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/gordon-
brown/6170112/Gordon-Brown-Im-proud-to-say-sorry-to-a-real-war-hero.html)

[2] [http://www.theguardian.com/uk/the-
northerner/2012/jul/25/ala...](http://www.theguardian.com/uk/the-
northerner/2012/jul/25/alan-turing-private-members-bill-lord-
sharkey?CMP=twt_fd)

------
dnautics
I found most retrospectives on Alan Turing in the wake of the pardon to be
dissatisfying; but not this one. This one was wonderful.

