I seldom ever ask for 'citations' but in this instance the author makes a sweeping claim about everyone missing the mark when it comes to Ada Augusta, and then proceeds to quote the bulk of the existing work---none of which 'misses' anything. Color me confused...
The author believes that calling Lovelace "the first programmer" is an exaggeration, as it seems to imply that Babbage conceived of and made plans for his engine without ever having considered programs for it. Even Wikipedia says:
Her notes on the engine include what is recognised as
the first algorithm intended to be processed by a
machine; as such she is sometimes portrayed as the
"World's First Computer Programmer".
On the other hand, the article asserts:
Calling Lovelace the first programmer has always seemed
a bit silly because surely Babbage would have written
some programs for his machine. But recognizing her for
"Lovelace's Leap" seems far more realistic.
So he claims that the depiction given by Wikipedia (among other sources) misses the importance of her insight.
