COMMENT ⊗   VALID 00002 PAGES 
RECORD PAGE   DESCRIPTION
 00001 00001
 00002 00002	\\M0BDR25\M1BDI25\M2NGR30\M3XMAS25\.
 00008 ENDMK
⊗;
\\M0BDR25;\M1BDI25;\M2NGR30;\M3XMAS25;\.
\F2\CARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE LABORATORY
\CCOMPUTER SCIENCE DEPARTMENT
\CSTANFORD UNIVERSITY
\CSTANFORD, CALIFORNIA 94305
\F0
\C8 April 1973

Dr. Howard Greyber
Director of Meetings
AAAS
1515 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005

Dear Dr. Greyber:

\J	I would like to try to  organize  a  symposium  at  the  1974
meeting  on  the  long  term future of the automobile.  The issue has
been raised of whether the country can afford to and should count  on
the  automobile  for  personal  transportation  in  the immediate and
longterm future. However, it seems to me that the issue  has  usually
been  treated  obliquely  as  part  of  a  discussion of a particular
"crisis" such as pollution or energy, and it would  be  worthwhile  to
discuss it squarely.

	The  panelists  would  be  asked  to  discuss  the  following
questions:

	1. What do  you  think  is  the  long  term  future  for  the
automobile in America?

	2.  If  you favor a long term future for the automobile, what
changes in technology or social organization to you see as required?
What improvements in cars or thier use do you see as desirable, and
how might they be accomplished?

	3.  If   you   favor   emphasizing   some   other   form   of
transportation, what technological and social problems must be solved
and what proposals do you have?

	I should say that my own opinion is that the  automobile  can
and  should continue to dominate personal transportation until it can
be replaced by something that also provides privacy,  ability  to  go
from  door  to  door, ability to carry goods of various kinds, and no
more requirement than cars have for expensive rights  of  way.  If  a
practical personal flying machine could be created, this would do it.
In the mean time, the problems of the automobile can be solved.

	I have in mind the following kinds of speakers, but I haven't
contacted anyone yet:

	1.   A  scientific  opponent  of  the  automobile  -  perhaps
Professor David  White  of  M.I.T.   It  should  be  someone  who  is
technically aware in both energy and environment.  I have discussed
the issue with him, but perhaps I can find someone with stronger views
and more interest.

	2. A humanist opponent of the automobile, i.e. someone who thinks the
problems shouldn't be solved even if they could.

	3. Dr. Ernest Starkman of General Motors.  He is now a  vice-
president for environmental affairs or research (I am not sure of his
exact position), and was formerly in charge of the scientific side of
the California Air Resources Board.

	4.  An  advocate  of hydrogen fueled cars - i.e. a person who
wants to keep cars but believes that new technology is required.

	5. If it is customary for organizers to participate in  their
own  panels,  I would take the point of view that computer control of
cars is ultimately feasible and desirable.\. 

					Sincerely yours,



					John McCarthy
					Professor of Computer Science
					Director, Artificial Intelligence Laboratory