Juneteenth and the Power of Access to Information: What Computer Science Can Learn from Delayed Freedom

Dr. Kai Dupe • June 17, 2026

The true promise of computing is not found in the machines we build, but in the human potential we unlock when knowledge becomes accessible to everyone.

Every year on June 19, we celebrate Juneteenth, commemorating the day in 1865 when enslaved African Americans in Texas learned that they were free. Although President Abraham Lincoln had issued the Emancipation Proclamation more than two years earlier, many enslaved people in Texas remained in bondage until Union troops arrived and enforced emancipation.


I often reflect on a profound question: What does it mean that freedom existed, but access to the information about that freedom did not?


As a computer scientist and educator, I find this question remarkably relevant today.


At its core, computer science is the study of information—how it is represented, processed, transmitted, and made accessible. We build systems that store data, connect people, and enable communication at unprecedented scales. Yet Juneteenth reminds us that information is not merely technical. Information has power. Access to information can shape opportunities, influence outcomes, and, in some cases, determine whether people experience freedom or exclusion.


We live in an age where information is seemingly everywhere. Yet access remains uneven. Millions of people still lack reliable internet connectivity. Students in underserved communities often have fewer opportunities to learn computing and artificial intelligence. Entire communities can find themselves on the wrong side of the digital divide, not because they lack talent or potential, but because they lack access.


The lesson of Juneteenth is that delayed information can have profound human consequences.


As educators, we should ask ourselves whether our students have equitable access to the knowledge, tools, and learning experiences that prepare them for the future. As technologists, we should consider whether the systems we design expand access or inadvertently create new barriers. As leaders, we should remember that innovation is meaningful only when its benefits are broadly shared.


The history of Juneteenth teaches us that information delayed can delay opportunity, participation, and even freedom itself.


Perhaps this is one of the most important lessons computer science can learn from history: Technology is not simply about creating faster processors, smarter algorithms, or more sophisticated applications. It is about ensuring that knowledge reaches people, empowers communities, and opens doors that might otherwise remain closed.


On Juneteenth, we remember the celebration of freedom finally realized. We should also remember the cost of information withheld and recommit ourselves to building a future in which access to knowledge is not a privilege for some, but an opportunity available to all.


The true promise of computing is not found in the machines we build, but in the human potential we unlock when knowledge becomes accessible to everyone.


By Dr. Kai Dupe September 18, 2026
A mentor gives you advice. A sponsor creates opportunities.
By Dr. Kai Dupe August 20, 2026
Representation alone will not solve the persistent racial disparities in computing.
By Dr. Kai Dupe July 28, 2026
The truth is that most software applications exist to manage information.
By Dr. Kai Dupe July 1, 2026
Artificial intelligence has become the newest member of nearly every software development team.
By Dr. Kai Dupe June 3, 2026
One of the reasons I value the MCT program so highly is that it represents more than technical knowledge.
By Dr. Kai Dupe May 22, 2026
Software engineering is not simply coding.
By Dr. Kai Dupe May 15, 2026
Companies often promote the idea that technical skill alone determines success.
By Dr. Kai Dupe May 3, 2026
Hackathons also strengthen teamwork and communication skills.
By Dr. Kai Dupe April 22, 2026
Stepping onto the campus of Morehouse College this past weekend for Admitted Students Day was more than a visit—it was a moment of reflection. As I watched young Black men walk with purpose across the yard, I found myself asking a simple but profound question: What would it have been like for me to study computer science here? My journey into computing was shaped in environments where I was often the only Black man in the room. That reality brings with it an unspoken weight—the need to prove you belong, the awareness of being watched, and sometimes, the quiet isolation that comes with underrepresentation. Standing at Morehouse, I realized that this burden is not a given. It is a condition of the environment. At Morehouse, the environment is different by design. Here, Black men are not anomalies—they are the standard. I imagined what it would feel like to learn algorithms, data structures, and software development in a space where my identity was not questioned but affirmed. Where excellence is expected, not in spite of who you are, but because of it. As a computer science professor, I understand the academic rigor required to succeed in this field. There is no shortcut through recursion, no bypass around debugging, no substitute for disciplined problem-solving. But what struck me during my visit is how much context matters. When students are free from the psychological burden of proving they belong, they can redirect that energy toward mastering the material. They can collaborate more openly, ask questions more freely, and take intellectual risks without fear. I also thought about legacy. At Morehouse, students walk the same grounds as Martin Luther King Jr.. That kind of history does something to a person. It raises the bar—not just academically, but personally. It invites students to see their education not just as a pathway to a career, but as preparation for impact. Leaving campus, I felt inspired—but also reflective. I cannot rewrite my journey, but I can appreciate what spaces like Morehouse offer the next generation. For a Black male pursuing computer science, it is more than a degree. It is an opportunity to develop skill, confidence, and identity in alignment. And that combination is powerful.
By Dr. Kai Dupe March 25, 2026
If you walk into most computer science classrooms today, you might assume that computing has always been a male-dominated field. As someone who has spent decades in the industry and now teaches the next generation of developers, I can tell you—that assumption is not only common, it’s historically inaccurate. In the early days of computing, many of the first programmers were women. Ada Lovelace is widely recognized as the first computer programmer, having written what we would now call an algorithm for Charles Babbage’s Analytical Engine. Fast forward to the 1940s, and women were programming some of the first electronic computers, including ENIAC. These were not peripheral roles. These women were solving complex computational problems, often inventing programming techniques as they went (Abbate, 2012). So what happened? From a systems perspective, the answer is not mysterious—it’s structural. In its early stages, programming was considered clerical work. It required precision, patience, and attention to detail—qualities that, at the time, were socially assigned to women. But as computing became more central to business, government, and innovation, its status changed. What was once seen as routine work became prestigious and lucrative. And when that shift happened, the demographics shifted with it. By the 1980s, we see a clear inflection point. Personal computers entered the home—but they were marketed primarily to boys. This created an early access gap that translated into confidence, experience, and eventually career pathways. At the same time, hiring practices and workplace cultures began to favor men, reinforcing a feedback loop that pushed women out of the field (Hicks, 2017). Over time, the narrative changed. Computing was no longer something women had built—it became something they were seen as entering late. But that narrative is not just incomplete—it’s a distortion. Understanding this history is not about nostalgia; it’s about accuracy. When students learn that women were foundational to computing, it reshapes how they think about the field. Diversity is no longer framed as a modern intervention—it is recognized as part of computing’s original DNA. In my classroom, I’ve seen what happens when students encounter this truth. It disrupts assumptions. It broadens participation. And perhaps most importantly, it changes who students believe belongs in this space. So, if women were the original programmers, what happened? Part of the answer lies in systems—education, marketing, hiring, and culture. But another part lies in storytelling. The stories we tell about computing shape who feels invited to participate in it. As educators, technologists, and leaders, we have an opportunity—and a responsibility—to tell that story more accurately. References Abbate, J. (2012). Recoding Gender: Women’s Changing Participation in Computing. MIT Press. Hicks, M. (2017). Programmed Inequality: How Britain Discarded Women Technologists and Lost Its Edge in Computing. MIT Press. Evans, C. L. (2018). Broad Band: The Untold Story of the Women Who Made the Internet. Portfolio. Shetterly, M. L. (2016). Hidden Figures. HarperCollins.