perm filename E88.OUT[LET,JMC] blob
sn#861876 filedate 1988-10-05 generic text, type C, neo UTF8
COMMENT ⊗ VALID 00397 PAGES
C REC PAGE DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00038 00002 ∂01-Jul-88 1347 JMC re: June 1 start date
C00039 00003 ∂01-Jul-88 1352 JMC re: Congratulations
C00040 00004 ∂02-Jul-88 1216 JMC
C00041 00005 ∂09-Jul-88 1038 JMC re: belated congrats
C00042 00006 ∂09-Jul-88 1040 JMC re: 4 seasons
C00043 00007 ∂09-Jul-88 1044 JMC
C00044 00008 ∂09-Jul-88 1439 JMC re: Kyoto Prize
C00045 00009 ∂09-Jul-88 1452 JMC re: Kyoto Prize
C00046 00010 ∂09-Jul-88 1536 JMC discussion
C00047 00011 ∂09-Jul-88 1629 JMC
C00048 00012 ∂09-Jul-88 2221 JMC re: LISP implmentations
C00049 00013 ∂10-Jul-88 1237 JMC Trilogy
C00050 00014 ∂10-Jul-88 1515 JMC acknowledgment
C00051 00015 ∂10-Jul-88 1521 JMC re: support requested ..
C00052 00016 ∂10-Jul-88 1740 JMC
C00053 00017 ∂10-Jul-88 1751 JMC
C00054 00018 ∂11-Jul-88 1251 JMC
C00055 00019 ∂11-Jul-88 1549 JMC Thanks for the reprint
C00059 00020 ∂11-Jul-88 2156 Mailer call to arms for liberals
C00065 00021 ∂11-Jul-88 2348 JMC re: typesetting "University of Kaiserslautern"
C00066 00022 ∂11-Jul-88 2353 Mailer re: Iran Airliner shoot-down
C00067 00023 ∂12-Jul-88 2015 JMC sdi
C00075 00024 ∂12-Jul-88 2127 JMC
C00076 00025 ∂12-Jul-88 2218 JMC Ding an sich
C00081 00026 ∂12-Jul-88 2219 JMC
C00090 00027 ∂13-Jul-88 0101 Mailer re: Responses
C00094 00028 ∂13-Jul-88 0137 Mailer Iran Air vs. KAL
C00097 00029 ∂13-Jul-88 1253 JMC re: metaepistemology discussion
C00101 00030 ∂13-Jul-88 2355 Mailer Singh's analogy with racial remarks
C00106 00031 ∂14-Jul-88 0033 Mailer clarification
C00107 00032 ∂14-Jul-88 0057 Mailer re: Singh's analogy with racial remarks
C00110 00033 ∂14-Jul-88 0910 JMC re: [Edith Gilbertson <GILBERTSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>: Ketonen to 40%]
C00111 00034 ∂14-Jul-88 1115 JMC re: liberals had better run for the foothills...
C00112 00035 ∂14-Jul-88 1138 Mailer Stanford and the candlelight protest
C00113 00036 ∂14-Jul-88 1158 JMC re: EDI conference
C00115 00037 ∂14-Jul-88 1321 JMC Thanks
C00116 00038 ∂14-Jul-88 1327 JMC
C00117 00039 ∂14-Jul-88 1504 JMC
C00118 00040 ∂14-Jul-88 1625 JMC re: Stanford and the candlelight protest
C00120 00041 ∂14-Jul-88 1627 JMC re: Stanford and the candlelight protest
C00121 00042 ∂15-Jul-88 1103 JMC re: Stanford and the candlelight protest
C00123 00043 ∂15-Jul-88 1106 JMC reply to message
C00124 00044 ∂15-Jul-88 1405 Mailer re: lyrics to "America" song?
C00125 00045 ∂15-Jul-88 1553 Mailer armies
C00130 00046 ∂16-Jul-88 0026 Mailer protest
C00131 00047 ∂16-Jul-88 0046 JMC re: Solid citizens drive me nuts
C00132 00048 ∂16-Jul-88 0845 JMC dinner with Sandewalls
C00133 00049 ∂16-Jul-88 0848 JMC
C00134 00050 ∂16-Jul-88 1304 JMC Smirnov
C00135 00051 ∂16-Jul-88 1326 Mailer re: Stanford and the candlelight protest
C00137 00052 ∂16-Jul-88 1357 JMC Matthew
C00138 00053 ∂16-Jul-88 1429 JMC Arkady Rabinov
C00140 00054 ∂16-Jul-88 1437 JMC Your qlisp paper
C00141 00055 ∂16-Jul-88 1715 JMC re:Stanford and the candlelight protest
C00142 00056 ∂16-Jul-88 1843 JMC miscataloging?
C00143 00057 ∂16-Jul-88 2327 JMC re: Candles
C00144 00058 ∂17-Jul-88 1232 JMC re: Comments on Free Will in "Some Philosphical Problems [vis-a-vis] AI"
C00148 00059 ∂17-Jul-88 1306 JMC Please tell
C00149 00060 ∂17-Jul-88 1328 JMC reply to message
C00150 00061 ∂17-Jul-88 1531 JMC re: reply to message
C00151 00062 ∂18-Jul-88 0111 JMC contact with von Neumann and Wiener
C00152 00063 ∂18-Jul-88 1145 Mailer protest
C00153 00064 ∂18-Jul-88 1345 JMC
C00154 00065 ∂18-Jul-88 1346 JMC
C00155 00066 ∂18-Jul-88 1403 JMC re: lyrics to "America" song?
C00156 00067 ∂18-Jul-88 2323 JMC
C00157 00068 ∂19-Jul-88 0007 JMC send documents
C00158 00069 ∂19-Jul-88 1158 JMC re: Stanford and the candlelight protest
C00159 00070 ∂19-Jul-88 1212 JMC
C00160 00071 ∂19-Jul-88 1445 JMC re: miscataloging?
C00161 00072 ∂19-Jul-88 1740 Mailer bottle bill
C00162 00073 ∂19-Jul-88 2321 JMC contexts
C00163 00074 ∂20-Jul-88 0844 JMC URGENT!!!! Information Needed for Incremental Funding
C00175 00075 ∂20-Jul-88 1124 JMC Re: URGENT Incrementals
C00177 00076 ∂20-Jul-88 1135 JMC re: Your book
C00178 00077 ∂20-Jul-88 2139 JMC re: US Territory List
C00179 00078 ∂21-Jul-88 1235 JMC re: someone with a Wall Street Journal handy?
C00181 00079 ∂21-Jul-88 1534 JMC
C00182 00080 ∂21-Jul-88 1712 JMC
C00183 00081 ∂21-Jul-88 2339 JMC re: Stanford and the candlelight protest
C00184 00082 ∂22-Jul-88 1119 JMC re: Your summer salary
C00185 00083 ∂22-Jul-88 1120 JMC re: Ian
C00186 00084 ∂22-Jul-88 1122 JMC re: Thermodynamic Depth
C00187 00085 ∂22-Jul-88 1212 JMC another paper
C00188 00086 ∂22-Jul-88 1328 JMC re: Suppes's net address
C00189 00087 ∂22-Jul-88 1336 JMC re: edi
C00190 00088 ∂23-Jul-88 2243 JMC
C00191 00089 ∂24-Jul-88 1325 JMC reply to message
C00192 00090 ∂24-Jul-88 1508 Mailer ... not about ideology. It's about competence.
C00197 00091 ∂24-Jul-88 1526 JMC free will
C00199 00092 ∂24-Jul-88 1937 Mailer recycling
C00203 00093 ∂24-Jul-88 2358 JMC
C00204 00094 ∂25-Jul-88 0007 JMC re: Bad taste in Palo Alto
C00205 00095 ∂25-Jul-88 0842 JMC re: Bad taste in Palo Alto
C00206 00096 ∂25-Jul-88 1258 JMC anchoring bookcases and other carpentry
C00207 00097 ∂25-Jul-88 1439 Mailer greenhouse and Seabrook and hydroelectric
C00211 00098 ∂25-Jul-88 2231 JMC Feigenbaum
C00212 00099 ∂26-Jul-88 1105 JMC Incremental report due
C00214 00100 ∂26-Jul-88 1435 JMC
C00215 00101 ∂26-Jul-88 1810 JMC re: Congratulations
C00216 00102 ∂28-Jul-88 1037 JMC reply to message
C00217 00103 ∂28-Jul-88 1405 JMC
C00218 00104 ∂28-Jul-88 1742 JMC re: laptops
C00219 00105 ∂29-Jul-88 1307 Mailer re: Biodegradeable diapers
C00220 00106 ∂31-Jul-88 0112 JMC letter to Aspray
C00221 00107 ∂01-Aug-88 1142 JMC Japanese inquiry
C00225 00108 ∂02-Aug-88 1104 Mailer re: Biodegradeable diapers
C00227 00109 ∂02-Aug-88 1711 JMC dinner
C00228 00110 ∂02-Aug-88 2336 Mailer re: Brian Wilson
C00229 00111 ∂04-Aug-88 1005 JMC
C00230 00112 ∂04-Aug-88 1611 JMC
C00231 00113 ∂06-Aug-88 0856 JMC Kyoto Prize
C00234 00114 ∂06-Aug-88 1051 JMC Kyoto prize
C00235 00115 ∂06-Aug-88 2124 JMC
C00236 00116 ∂06-Aug-88 2241 JMC refereed ailist issues
C00239 00117 ∂07-Aug-88 1522 JMC formal language question
C00241 00118 ∂07-Aug-88 2001 JMC re: expansion
C00242 00119 ∂08-Aug-88 1035 JMC re: Bill Gates
C00243 00120 ∂08-Aug-88 1621 JMC Quotation from review
C00245 00121 ∂08-Aug-88 1707 Mailer re: happy all 8's day
C00246 00122 ∂08-Aug-88 2254 JMC comments
C00252 00123 ∂09-Aug-88 2305 Mailer park prices
C00253 00124 ∂10-Aug-88 1928 Mailer re: insurance
C00255 00125 ∂11-Aug-88 1341 JMC ai[e88,jmc] Artificial Intelligence for NAS study
C00266 00126 ∂11-Aug-88 1724 Mailer re: insurance
C00268 00127 ∂12-Aug-88 1124 JMC re: laptops
C00269 00128 ∂12-Aug-88 1340 JMC re: Quotation from review
C00270 00129 ∂12-Aug-88 1353 JMC Kyoto prize citation
C00276 00130 ∂12-Aug-88 1747 JMC
C00277 00131 ∂12-Aug-88 2036 JMC lunch
C00278 00132 ∂13-Aug-88 1415 Mailer re: insurance - an alternate explanation
C00286 00133 ∂13-Aug-88 1504 Mailer Accuracy in Academia
C00294 00134 ∂13-Aug-88 1736 JMC linguistic usage
C00295 00135 ∂13-Aug-88 1826 JMC
C00296 00136 ∂13-Aug-88 1936 JMC re: SSP Forum
C00297 00137 ∂13-Aug-88 1937 JMC re: SSP Reading list
C00298 00138 ∂13-Aug-88 2022 JMC Diana Conklin report
C00299 00139 ∂14-Aug-88 0947 Mailer The still somewhat evil empire yields to temptation
C00308 00140 ∂14-Aug-88 1200 JMC cataloging
C00309 00141 ∂14-Aug-88 1205 JMC re: SSP Forum
C00310 00142 ∂14-Aug-88 1456 Mailer The Left's Big Idea
C00314 00143 ∂14-Aug-88 1702 JMC re: linguistic usage
C00315 00144 ∂15-Aug-88 0007 Mailer unicycle
C00316 00145 ∂15-Aug-88 1152 JMC
C00317 00146 ∂15-Aug-88 1310 JMC re: draft Soviet chapter
C00320 00147 ∂15-Aug-88 1314 JMC re: AAAI funding for CLOS workshop
C00321 00148 ∂15-Aug-88 1321 JMC re: gneral comments re recently mailed draft
C00323 00149 ∂15-Aug-88 1343 Mailer re: insurance risk
C00325 00150 ∂15-Aug-88 1412 JMC
C00326 00151 ∂15-Aug-88 1827 JMC re: unicycle
C00327 00152 ∂15-Aug-88 1828 JMC
C00328 00153 ∂16-Aug-88 1249 Mailer insurance
C00329 00154 ∂16-Aug-88 1310 JMC my book
C00330 00155 ∂16-Aug-88 1751 JMC re: lunch
C00331 00156 ∂16-Aug-88 2355 Mailer re: Traffic on Junipero Serra EIR hearing Aug 18
C00334 00157 ∂17-Aug-88 1143 JMC re: lunch
C00335 00158 ∂17-Aug-88 1155 JMC Your travel arrangement to China?
C00338 00159 ∂17-Aug-88 1157 JMC re: Your travel arrangement to China?
C00339 00160 ∂17-Aug-88 1447 Mailer re: Reed Irvine
C00343 00161 ∂17-Aug-88 1553 Mailer re: A question about vice presidential nominations
C00344 00162 ∂18-Aug-88 1634 JMC re: Reed Irvine
C00345 00163 ∂18-Aug-88 2349 JMC re: The Left's Big Idea
C00346 00164 ∂19-Aug-88 0856 JMC re: test message
C00347 00165 ∂19-Aug-88 0920 JMC lost? message
C00348 00166 ∂19-Aug-88 1059 JMC re: The Left's Big Idea
C00349 00167 ∂19-Aug-88 1100 JMC re: Does this mean you got the test message or the Soviet chapt update?
C00350 00168 ∂19-Aug-88 1202 Mailer conservative complaints about ACLU
C00355 00169 ∂19-Aug-88 1215 Mailer Technological solution to abortion issue
C00358 00170 ∂19-Aug-88 1412 JMC re: The Left's Big Idea
C00359 00171 ∂19-Aug-88 1449 JMC AI and the Vincennes incident
C00365 00172 ∂19-Aug-88 2350 Mailer re: Trillion dollar deficit
C00367 00173 ∂20-Aug-88 1136 JMC re: Trillion dollar deficit
C00370 00174 ∂20-Aug-88 1237 JMC re: Trillion dollar deficit
C00372 00175 ∂20-Aug-88 1812 JMC Grice
C00373 00176 ∂20-Aug-88 1855 JMC re: IBM RT
C00374 00177 ∂21-Aug-88 1002 JMC suggested appendix
C00375 00178 ∂21-Aug-88 1008 JMC
C00385 00179 ∂21-Aug-88 1253 JMC
C00386 00180 ∂22-Aug-88 1645 JMC more re transfer problem
C00389 00181 ∂22-Aug-88 1649 JMC re: more re transfer problem
C00390 00182 ∂22-Aug-88 2212 JMC re: AIList Digest V8 #62
C00393 00183 ∂25-Aug-88 1504 Mailer re: Pledge of Allegiance/Star-Spangled Banner
C00397 00184 ∂25-Aug-88 1800 JMC re: Exec.SummaryDraft
C00399 00185 ∂25-Aug-88 1828 Mailer Bush press conference about replacement of Quayle.
C00402 00186 ∂25-Aug-88 1841 JMC Please U.S. Mail the following
C00403 00187 ∂25-Aug-88 2033 JMC re: Bush press conference about replacement of Quayle.
C00404 00188 ∂25-Aug-88 2127 JMC Lisp calculator
C00406 00189 ∂25-Aug-88 2129 JMC
C00407 00190 ∂26-Aug-88 1044 JMC re: Phone Call
C00408 00191 ∂26-Aug-88 1406 JMC re: ISTO PI MEETING
C00409 00192 ∂26-Aug-88 1414 JMC re: ISTO PI MEETING
C00410 00193 ∂26-Aug-88 1538 JMC Tikkun articles
C00415 00194 ∂26-Aug-88 1541 JMC Casio Lisp machine
C00416 00195 ∂26-Aug-88 1547 JMC Tikkun material
C00421 00196 ∂26-Aug-88 1549 JMC
C00422 00197 ∂26-Aug-88 2051 Mailer Mighty Mouse and cocaine snorting
C00427 00198 ∂26-Aug-88 2307 Mailer re: Mighty Mouse and cocaine snorting
C00431 00199 ∂27-Aug-88 1031 JMC
C00432 00200 ∂27-Aug-88 1153 JMC
C00442 00201 ∂27-Aug-88 1919 Mailer Mighty Mouse and Cocaine
C00445 00202 ∂28-Aug-88 0134 Mailer re: MM snorting cocaine
C00448 00203 ∂28-Aug-88 1119 Mailer re: A.I.M.
C00450 00204 ∂28-Aug-88 1152 Mailer re: U.S. Politics
C00458 00205 ∂28-Aug-88 1210 JMC book
C00459 00206 ∂28-Aug-88 1226 JMC NSF waste
C00461 00207 ∂28-Aug-88 1351 JMC Special Initiative on Coordination Theory and Technology
C00469 00208 ∂28-Aug-88 1412 JMC previous message
C00470 00209 ∂28-Aug-88 1603 JMC library books
C00471 00210 ∂28-Aug-88 1630 JMC re: NSF
C00473 00211 ∂28-Aug-88 1640 JMC qualification of previous message
C00475 00212 ∂28-Aug-88 2300 JMC re: Soviet visitors
C00476 00213 ∂28-Aug-88 2301 JMC re: re: Exec.SummaryDraft
C00477 00214 ∂29-Aug-88 1022 JMC
C00478 00215 ∂29-Aug-88 1132 JMC re: congratulations
C00479 00216 ∂29-Aug-88 1132 JMC calls
C00480 00217 ∂29-Aug-88 1651 JMC re: export control meeting
C00482 00218 ∂29-Aug-88 1653 JMC re: Perceived media bias
C00483 00219 ∂29-Aug-88 2004 JMC
C00484 00220 ∂29-Aug-88 2018 Mailer re: Measuring bias (was Perceived media bias)
C00488 00221 ∂29-Aug-88 2053 JMC export control meeting
C00489 00222 ∂30-Aug-88 1526 Mailer Liberal-Conservative balance on TV
C00494 00223 ∂30-Aug-88 1749 JMC re: Oops
C00495 00224 ∂30-Aug-88 1817 JMC re: libraries
C00496 00225 ∂30-Aug-88 1834 Mailer re: Greenhouse effect
C00500 00226 ∂30-Aug-88 2011 Mailer re: JMC's posting of letter from NYT
C00501 00227 ∂30-Aug-88 2225 Mailer re: Energy Question: What ever happened to SOLAR?
C00504 00228 ∂30-Aug-88 2241 Mailer re: Greenhouse effect
C00506 00229 ∂31-Aug-88 1422 JMC
C00507 00230 ∂31-Aug-88 1441 JMC re: Research Mentor Info
C00508 00231 ∂31-Aug-88 1530 Mailer alternative fuel
C00511 00232 ∂31-Aug-88 1628 JMC re: IBM - RT
C00512 00233 ∂31-Aug-88 1729 JMC
C00513 00234 ∂31-Aug-88 1928 Mailer re: beakdown of Tax income by income...
C00515 00235 ∂31-Aug-88 1932 Mailer re: Measuring bias
C00516 00236 ∂31-Aug-88 2004 Mailer opposition to OTEC
C00519 00237 ∂01-Sep-88 0115 JMC reply to message
C00520 00238 ∂01-Sep-88 0940 JMC re: reply to message
C00521 00239 ∂01-Sep-88 1138 JMC
C00522 00240 ∂01-Sep-88 1159 JMC re: Paul Erlich's 1967 prediction of famines
C00524 00241 ∂01-Sep-88 1442 JMC re: Paycheck
C00525 00242 ∂01-Sep-88 1457 JMC re: NSF proposal
C00526 00243 ∂01-Sep-88 1511 JMC re: Special Initiative on Coordination Theory and Technology
C00527 00244 ∂01-Sep-88 2121 Mailer re: "Trickle down"
C00529 00245 ∂02-Sep-88 0955 JMC Luis Pereira at 1130
C00530 00246 ∂02-Sep-88 1054 JMC
C00531 00247 ∂02-Sep-88 1136 JMC re: nsf proposal
C00532 00248 ∂02-Sep-88 1532 JMC re: Out-of-State speeding ticket
C00533 00249 ∂02-Sep-88 1549 JMC re: letter of reference?
C00535 00250 ∂02-Sep-88 1556 JMC RT
C00536 00251 ∂02-Sep-88 1605 JMC
C00537 00252 ∂02-Sep-88 1652 JMC Keller use of Alliant
C00539 00253 ∂02-Sep-88 1656 JMC reply to message
C00540 00254 ∂02-Sep-88 1826 JMC re: IBM RT
C00541 00255 ∂02-Sep-88 2129 JMC
C00542 00256 ∂02-Sep-88 2132 JMC re: "trickle down"
C00543 00257 ∂03-Sep-88 1000 JMC knowledge level
C00545 00258 ∂03-Sep-88 1442 Mailer non-political ACLU
C00547 00259 ∂03-Sep-88 1859 Mailer lack of prosperity
C00554 00260 ∂04-Sep-88 1650 JMC chron
C00555 00261 ∂05-Sep-88 0838 Mailer re: Videotaping takeoffs/landings?
C00557 00262 ∂05-Sep-88 0906 Mailer Democracy in China
C00564 00263 ∂05-Sep-88 1322 JMC A proposal for special refereed issues of ailist - revised version.
C00567 00264 ∂05-Sep-88 1544 JMC garble?
C00569 00265 ∂05-Sep-88 2219 Mailer re: Real Estate Questions
C00570 00266 ∂05-Sep-88 2301 JMC
C00571 00267 ∂05-Sep-88 2343 JMC re: Wednesday Qlisp Meeting
C00572 00268 ∂06-Sep-88 1200 Mailer re: JERRY LEWIS TELETHON FOR M.D.
C00575 00269 ∂06-Sep-88 1432 JMC re: [Arthur Keller: Alliant maintenance ]
C00577 00270 ∂06-Sep-88 1445 JMC re: MDA telethon
C00579 00271 ∂06-Sep-88 1455 JMC re: NSF waste [sic]
C00582 00272 ∂07-Sep-88 1538 JMC Reading list
C00583 00273 ∂07-Sep-88 1540 JMC
C00584 00274 ∂07-Sep-88 1623 JMC re: Reading list
C00585 00275 ∂07-Sep-88 1632 JMC
C00586 00276 ∂07-Sep-88 1633 JMC
C00587 00277 ∂07-Sep-88 1634 JMC
C00588 00278 ∂07-Sep-88 1635 JMC
C00589 00279 ∂07-Sep-88 1635 JMC
C00590 00280 ∂07-Sep-88 1653 Mailer re: Bush's Error
C00592 00281 ∂07-Sep-88 2106 JMC re: Taxes
C00596 00282 ∂08-Sep-88 0150 JMC
C00597 00283 ∂08-Sep-88 1240 JMC reply to message
C00598 00284 ∂08-Sep-88 1352 Mailer re: Brits versus Israelis
C00599 00285 ∂08-Sep-88 1411 JMC bicycle
C00600 00286 ∂08-Sep-88 1424 JMC re: Appendices to the NSF proposal
C00601 00287 ∂08-Sep-88 1448 JMC
C00602 00288 ∂08-Sep-88 1532 JMC
C00603 00289 ∂08-Sep-88 1702 JMC
C00604 00290 ∂08-Sep-88 1703 JMC
C00605 00291 ∂08-Sep-88 2015 JMC
C00606 00292 ∂09-Sep-88 1002 Mailer re: Reaganomics
C00610 00293 ∂09-Sep-88 1448 JMC
C00611 00294 ∂09-Sep-88 1528 JMC misc
C00612 00295 ∂09-Sep-88 1558 JMC re: descriptions
C00614 00296 ∂10-Sep-88 1637 Mailer The Shroud
C00616 00297 ∂10-Sep-88 1928 Mailer re: The Shroud
C00617 00298 ∂11-Sep-88 1849 JMC
C00621 00299 ∂11-Sep-88 1957 JMC re: meeting
C00622 00300 ∂12-Sep-88 1111 JMC re: qlisp
C00623 00301 ∂12-Sep-88 1129 JMC re: NSF funding for EDI
C00624 00302 ∂12-Sep-88 1215 JMC re: engelmore
C00626 00303 ∂12-Sep-88 1911 JMC re: Orals
C00627 00304 ∂12-Sep-88 1915 JMC re: Qlisp Publications
C00628 00305 ∂12-Sep-88 2036 JMC Qlisp Publications
C00636 00306 ∂12-Sep-88 2147 Mailer psychological survey
C00638 00307 ∂12-Sep-88 2238 JMC re: Blocks
C00639 00308 ∂13-Sep-88 1228 JMC re: Memory "blocks"
C00640 00309 ∂13-Sep-88 1234 JMC reply to message
C00641 00310 ∂13-Sep-88 1235 JMC re: Jack's Program review
C00642 00311 ∂13-Sep-88 1629 JMC questions about philosophical terminology
C00643 00312 ∂13-Sep-88 1717 JMC re: survey
C00644 00313 ∂14-Sep-88 1054 JMC Contribution to China Proceedings
C00647 00314 ∂14-Sep-88 1146 JMC
C00648 00315 ∂14-Sep-88 1507 JMC re: meetings, continued
C00649 00316 ∂15-Sep-88 0004 JMC comments on The Intentional Stance
C00650 00317 ∂15-Sep-88 1209 JMC re: Categorizing the Problems of Parallel Program Development
C00651 00318 ∂15-Sep-88 1606 JMC re: check
C00652 00319 ∂15-Sep-88 1747 JMC book
C00653 00320 ∂15-Sep-88 2308 Mailer Palo Alto Co-op down to one store
C00659 00321 ∂15-Sep-88 2326 JMC review of Dennett's The Intentional Stance
C00660 00322 ∂15-Sep-88 2338 JMC re: [JONES@Score.Stanford.EDU: TA]
C00661 00323 ∂15-Sep-88 2340 JMC reply to message
C00662 00324 ∂16-Sep-88 0917 JMC darpa meeting
C00667 00325 ∂16-Sep-88 1445 JMC re: Religion
C00669 00326 ∂16-Sep-88 1452 JMC re: 3 kittens looking for a home
C00670 00327 ∂16-Sep-88 1617 JMC re: Religion
C00672 00328 ∂16-Sep-88 2001 JMC
C00673 00329 ∂17-Sep-88 1318 JMC reply to message
C00674 00330 ∂17-Sep-88 1530 JMC
C00675 00331 ∂17-Sep-88 1533 JMC bicycling
C00676 00332 ∂17-Sep-88 2043 Mailer re: Olympics
C00677 00333 ∂17-Sep-88 2046 JMC chaos
C00678 00334 ∂17-Sep-88 2102 JMC paper to Chudnovsky
C00679 00335 ∂17-Sep-88 2213 JMC
C00682 00336 ∂18-Sep-88 0010 JMC ball bearing cannon
C00683 00337 ∂18-Sep-88 1543 JMC common sense knowledge of continuous action
C00687 00338 ∂18-Sep-88 1545 JMC common sense knowledge of continuous action
C00688 00339 ∂18-Sep-88 1602 JMC phone number
C00689 00340 ∂18-Sep-88 1606 JMC
C00690 00341 ∂19-Sep-88 0934 JMC re: Memory reference
C00691 00342 ∂19-Sep-88 1304 JMC reply to message
C00695 00343 ∂19-Sep-88 1313 JMC addendum
C00697 00344 ∂19-Sep-88 1646 JMC re: Memory reference
C00698 00345 ∂19-Sep-88 1710 JMC reply to message
C00699 00346 ∂19-Sep-88 1820 JMC proposal
C00700 00347 ∂19-Sep-88 1830 JMC re: proposal
C00701 00348 ∂19-Sep-88 1832 JMC re: review of Dennett's The Intentional Stance
C00702 00349 ∂19-Sep-88 2245 Mailer Thought for today
C00703 00350 ∂20-Sep-88 1000 JMC
C00704 00351 ∂20-Sep-88 1503 Mailer
C00705 00352 ∂20-Sep-88 1559 JMC luncheon speech
C00707 00353 ∂20-Sep-88 2214 JMC re: SSP Forum
C00708 00354 ∂20-Sep-88 2215 JMC re: SSP Forum
C00709 00355 ∂20-Sep-88 2216 JMC Please tex
C00710 00356 ∂20-Sep-88 2247 JMC re: SSP Forum
C00711 00357 ∂21-Sep-88 1122 JMC
C00712 00358 ∂21-Sep-88 1220 JMC re: luncheon speech
C00713 00359 ∂21-Sep-88 1304 JMC
C00715 00360 ∂21-Sep-88 1516 JMC reply to message
C00716 00361 ∂21-Sep-88 1520 JMC reply to message
C00717 00362 ∂21-Sep-88 1811 Mailer re: long posting on El Salavdor, the sound of one hand clapping
C00719 00363 ∂21-Sep-88 2218 JMC re: reply to message
C00720 00364 ∂21-Sep-88 2307 JMC re: Fax
C00721 00365 ∂22-Sep-88 1045 JMC re: questions about philosophical terminology
C00722 00366 ∂22-Sep-88 1058 JMC re: questions about philosophical terminology
C00723 00367 ∂22-Sep-88 1445 Mailer re: El Salvador and 2 sided triangles
C00725 00368 ∂22-Sep-88 1616 Mailer re: body-surfing
C00726 00369 ∂22-Sep-88 2149 JMC reference
C00727 00370 ∂23-Sep-88 1029 JMC Bing School
C00728 00371 ∂23-Sep-88 1109 JMC re: Bing
C00729 00372 ∂23-Sep-88 1406 JMC re: Gang-of-Four
C00730 00373 ∂23-Sep-88 1416 Mailer aids
C00732 00374 ∂23-Sep-88 1455 JMC
C00734 00375 ∂23-Sep-88 1458 JMC coming to Sendai
C00735 00376 ∂23-Sep-88 1500 JMC
C00736 00377 ∂23-Sep-88 1751 JMC re: meeting
C00737 00378 ∂23-Sep-88 1801 Mailer re: Scientific literacy debate
C00739 00379 ∂23-Sep-88 2303 JMC Sorry I forgot
C00740 00380 ∂24-Sep-88 1100 JMC Kyoto paper
C00741 00381 ∂26-Sep-88 1643 JMC re: IJCAII Research Excellence Award
C00742 00382 ∂26-Sep-88 1715 Mailer re: AIDS
C00745 00383 ∂26-Sep-88 1722 JMC Computational Approaches to Scientific Discovery
C00746 00384 ∂26-Sep-88 2110 JMC re: The Grand Challenge is Foolish
C00748 00385 ∂27-Sep-88 0920 JMC re: NBC and Olympics
C00749 00386 ∂27-Sep-88 1217 Mailer NBC and Olympics
C00750 00387 ∂27-Sep-88 1259 JMC re: Marek
C00751 00388 ∂27-Sep-88 1504 JMC proposal
C00752 00389 ∂27-Sep-88 1512 JMC
C00753 00390 ∂27-Sep-88 1610 JMC MORE ADMINISTRIVIA
C00761 00391 ∂27-Sep-88 1627 Mailer apropos of previous discussion
C00763 00392 ∂27-Sep-88 1811 Mailer re: Western Regional Green Gathering, this weekend
C00764 00393 ∂27-Sep-88 2308 JMC
C00765 00394 ∂28-Sep-88 1056 JMC
C00766 00395 ∂28-Sep-88 1329 JMC re: MTC Seminar
C00767 00396 ∂28-Sep-88 2145 JMC re: Visit Oct 4.
C00768 00397 ∂28-Sep-88 2149 JMC re: Qlisp
C00778 ENDMK
C⊗;
∂01-Jul-88 1347 JMC re: June 1 start date
To: SIMPSON@VAX.DARPA.MIL
CC: CLT@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message from SIMPSON@vax.darpa.mil sent Fri 1 Jul 88 15:56:54-EDT.]
Maybe we still are miscommunicating. It's also the AI contract, for which
I believe you are Program Manager, for which we are asking for the June 1
start date.
∂01-Jul-88 1352 JMC re: Congratulations
To: jsl@ROCKY2.ROCKEFELLER.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 30 Jun 88 14:36:30 -0500.]
Many thanks. I can live with the company if he can live with me.
∂02-Jul-88 1216 JMC
To: CLT
202 694-5918 simpson
∂09-Jul-88 1038 JMC re: belated congrats
To: DEK
[In reply to message rcvd 06-Jul-88 05:42-PT.]
Thanks very much.
∂09-Jul-88 1040 JMC re: 4 seasons
To: CLT
[In reply to message rcvd 06-Jul-88 15:26-PT.]
I will get reimbursed for most of it as part of the France, Germany,
Russia trip - not from Stanford. It looks like I'll be stuck with
part though.
∂09-Jul-88 1044 JMC
To: CLT
Called Nils, left message on answering machine.
∂09-Jul-88 1439 JMC re: Kyoto Prize
To: goguen@CSL.SRI.COM
[In reply to message sent Sat, 09 Jul 88 13:45:08 -0700.]
Then you must have had something to do with it. Many thanks for your
efforts.
∂09-Jul-88 1452 JMC re: Kyoto Prize
To: goguen@CSL.SRI.COM
[In reply to message sent Sat, 09 Jul 88 14:47:50 -0700.]
Congratulations on Oxford. I look forward to visiting there.
∂09-Jul-88 1536 JMC discussion
To: proxftl!bill@BIKINI.CIS.UFL.EDU
None of the philosophers who did see the beginning of the
discussion supposed that my position was the same as
Kant's.
∂09-Jul-88 1629 JMC
To: MPS
Please monitor my answering machine when I'm away and email messages.
∂09-Jul-88 2221 JMC re: LISP implmentations
To: drl@VUSE.VANDERBILT.EDU
[In reply to message sent Sat, 9 Jul 88 22:55:47 CDT.]
There have been LISP implementations without interpreters. However,
if they are to have the "on-line" character that permits
a user to define a function and immediately use it, they
must compile directly into main memory instead of into
a file.
∂10-Jul-88 1237 JMC Trilogy
To: ubc-cs!faculty.cs.ubc.ca!voda@beaver.cs.washington.edu
What's the best way to find out about it?
∂10-Jul-88 1515 JMC acknowledgment
To: gelfond@utep-vaxa.uucp, cv00@utep.bitnet
I would also like to know which of the above works to reach you.
∂10-Jul-88 1521 JMC re: support requested ..
To: andrew%trlamct.oz@UUNET.UU.NET
[In reply to message sent Wed, 6 Jul 88 14:35:51 EST.]
I and others have proposed similar ideas in the past. The sticking
point has always been to find an editor. You say you're not he.
Join the club of other proponents of the idea, including me, who
don't volunteer to be editor.
∂10-Jul-88 1740 JMC
To: MPS
mints.2
∂10-Jul-88 1751 JMC
To: MPS
When I leave a business card in my out box, I want its contents in PHON.
∂11-Jul-88 1251 JMC
To: CLT
07-20 wed, 5pm chez nous, Susie will appear for Great Americal expedition
∂11-Jul-88 1549 JMC Thanks for the reprint
To: jsl@ROCKY2.ROCKEFELLER.EDU
of your "Genetic Recombination in Bacteria: A Discovery Account".
I also have lived in a far more friendly scientific environment
than that depicted by Watson. However, I have never, until very
recently, experienced direct scientific competition in the sense
of encountering someone whose publications might preclude some of
mine or vice versa. My recent (since 1983) work in parallel LISP, based
on some ideas I had around 1960 is directly competive with
contemporary work at M.I.T. and Japan. However, we are all
co-operating as much as feasible and plan to hold a conference
to try to agree on a standard set of additions to LISP. My work
on using logic to formalize common sense was respected and praised since
it was first published in 1958 but not followed up in any whole-hearted
way by anyone else until the last five years. Now the field is
active enough so that my slowness in understanding other people's
papers is becoming a handicap to me.
It seems to me that the different creative environments people experience
is a consequence of the different states of development of different
fields - rather than, as perhaps Kuhn or other sociologists of science
would have it, a matter of general social and institutional environment.
The general social environment has far greater influence on how the
historians and sociologists of science perceive research.
I hope your article will be influential, at least in the genetics
community, combatting some of the cynicism that scientists pick
up from the counterculturally oriented media.
Incidentally, I remain a completely unreconstructed adherent of
scientism (sciencist?), believing that the advance of scientific
understanding is entirely advantageous for humanity and that
scientific methods are the key to understanding human problems as
well as those of the physical and biological world. My only
caveat is the need to avoid wishful thinking about the level
of understanding that has been achieved.
∂11-Jul-88 2156 Mailer call to arms for liberals
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
It looks like the Sandinistas are now convinced that their friends
in the U.S. can prevent any further aid to the Contras or else that
the Contras are sufficiently weakened and discouraged that they
won't take up arms again even if the tap of U.S. support is opened
a trickle. Allowing a little press freedom and freedom to demonstrate
has served its purpose and can be abandoned.
Still American liberals have a continued role to play in explaining
how the Nicaraguan people became so enraged at the anti-patriotic
La Prensa that shutting it down is the democratic thing to do.
a273 1836 11 Jul 88
AM-Nicaragua-US,0393
URGENT
U.S. Ambassador, Seven Other American Officials Expelled; La Prensa
Closed
By FILADELO ALEMAN
Associated Press Writer
MANAGUA, Nicaragua (AP) - The leftist Sandinista government on
Monday ordered U.S. Ambassador Richard Melton and seven other embassy
officials to leave the country within 72 hours, accusing them of
state terrorism.
It also closed the opposition newspaper La Prensa for 15 days, shut
down the Roman Catholic radio station, and arrested an opposition
leader.
The actions came a day after police clashed with thousands of
demonstrators at an anti-Sandinista rally.
President Daniel Ortega on Sunday described the demonstration as
being part of a U.S. plan to undermine his government and vowed to
''act with force'' against any violations of public order.
Foreign Minister Miguel D'Escoto, who announced the decision to
expel the Americans, said they were engaging in ''activities
complementary to the state terrorism the administration of U.S.
President Ronald Reagan is carrying out against Nicaragua.''
He said he called Melton to his office Monday afternoon to advise
him of the decision and gave him a sealed letter advising U.S.
Secretary of State George P. Shultz of the same.
Speaking with reporters at a Foreign Ministry news conference,
D'Escoto described Melton as ''a robot of the maniacal (Assistant
Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs Elliott) Abrams.''
Melton presented his ambassadorial credentials to the Nicaraguan
government in May. When he arrived in Nicaragua April 12, Melton, 52,
said it was a ''decisive moment in U.S.-Nicaraguan relations.''
D'Escoto said U.S. Embassy officials were at Sunday's opposition
demonstration in Nandaime, about 40 miles south of Managua.
Melton, he said, came ''in his mind to fill a leadership vacuum in
this country and he became confused.''
The government earlier accused Melton of carrying out a
destabilization plan against Nicaragua.
Melton filled the post left vacant since July 1987, when Ambassador
Harry Bergold returned to Washington.
In closing Radio Catolica, the Interior Ministry accused the station
of ''inciting to violence, disorder and lack of respect for
constitutional government.''
Monsignor Bismarck Carballo, the station's director, called the
order ''unjust and arbitrary.''
An official in the Interior Ministry press office, speaking on
condition of anonymity, said police arrested Secretary-General Miriam
Arguello of the Conservative Party for ''being the principal
instigator of yesterday's events in Nandaime.''
AP-NY-07-11-88 2125EDT
***************
∂11-Jul-88 2348 JMC re: typesetting "University of Kaiserslautern"
To: bryan@ASTERIX.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 8 Jul 88 13:38:29 PDT.]
I believe you have spelled it correctly, and it has no accents.
∂11-Jul-88 2353 Mailer re: Iran Airliner shoot-down
To: tucker@POLYA.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from tucker@polya.stanford.edu sent 12 Jul 88 05:06:05 GMT.]
Why are you are surprised at
"People stupid enough to volunteer for the armed forces deserve to
die anyway."
from a third world Stanford student (judging solely from the name). Many
of them regard anyone in their native countries who hasn't made it abroad
as stupid.
∂12-Jul-88 2015 JMC sdi
To: mcdermott-drew@YALE.ARPA
Let me begin my remarks by telling how I got involved.
In 1970 I was a good liberal and signed a statement against
ABM (anti-ballistic missile), which was like sdi except that
it was based on short range anti-missile missiles. In the end,
perhaps as part of a general anti-military mood, Congress declined
to fund it, although the anti-ABM treaty with the Soviets permitted
anti-missiles to defend the capital and/or a missile field and
we got started with a defense of some silos in North Dakota.
When I asked Jerry Feldman, who I considered somewhat to the
left of me, whether he had signed it, he said that he didn't
know whether the necessary computer programs were impossible
and doubted that George Forsythe did.
I said, "Is that what I signed?" and withdrew my signature
in time for it not to appear in the next ad. I wasn't in favor
of ABM but agreed with Feldman that one should not claim that
one's expertise favored a position just because of one's political
sympathies and alliances.
Somewhat after President Reagan's speech announcing SDI,
I was talking with Robert Jastrow, an SDI and space
station advocate and well-known space researcher,
about another matter (a demand by Senator Garn
that AI be required on the space station), I remarked that I
expected that computer people with anti-defense sympathies
would say that computer science showed that SDI was impossible.
I had in mind and mentioned CPSR (Computer Professionals for
Social Responsibility), a Palo Alto based national outfit
that was then engaged in opposing stationing the Pershings
and cruise missiles in Europe as a response to the Soviet SS-20s.
It was an imitation of Physicians for Social Responsibility and,
as I recall, didn't especially maintain that computer science
was relevant to the Pershing issue. I told Jastrow that if
someone claimed that computer science proved SDI impossible,
he could call on me to read the claims and most likely
oppose them.
Well, sure enough history repeated itself, and it was
claimed by David Parnas and Greg Nelson and David Redell that
computer science showed that SDI was impossible. I read their
arguments. It seemed to me that these arguments raised some
difficulties with SDI computer programming. A developer of
SDI could say, "Yes, those are difficulties, and we expect
to overcome them". The opponents could say, "You'll never
overcome those difficulties". After that neither would
have much to say.
The anti-SDI arguments were necessarily vague, because how
computers were to be used in an SDI system was far from specified. In
general they said that it couldn't be assured that the programs would work
perfectly the first (and presumably only) time they were actually used and
that this was necessary. They doubted that any of careful debugging,
program verification, or software redundancy would work.
My opinion is that a suitable combination of the above might
well be made to work. I imagine that when a specific software
system is proposed, both advocates and opponents can make the
arguments more concrete. Maybe I'll look at the proposals then
and express a new opinion and make some suggestions.
At present here are some considerations.
1. Systems with residual bugs often work the first time
they are tried. The bugs show up later in unexpected and
less probable circumstances. It may well be that if SDI is
activated it will work, but future military historians will
say, "If only the Soviets had tried X, SDI would have failed".
Military historians are always saying such things about
battles. It would be well if the program listing of SDI
were kept secret from the Soviets.
2. SDI is intended to deter. Under many circumstances
deterrence will be adequate if the Soviet Chief of Strategic
Rocket Forces can't assure the Politburo that destruction of
the American counterforce is assured. The Politburo has reason
to doubt such assurances, remembering what the Israelis did
to the Soviet equipped Syrian Air Force in Lebanon.
Under desperate Soviet political circumstances more might
be required.
3. In discussing the physics and computer science controversies
concerning SDI, it is necessary to remember that the same people are on
the two sides (especially in physics) as have been on the two sides on
other technological issues concerning defense. In this connection
I have to admit that my own political sympathies are with the
advocates of a strong defense, although I have some hopes that
political developments in the Soviet Union (over which we have
had no significant influence in the past and can't influence
in the future) may make possible agreements that will permit
reducing our defense costs.
I'm sorry there is no computer science meat in the
above remarks, but I really believe there isn't a lot to say.
I could comment on some of the specific points raised by
Parnas, Redell and Nelson if you like.
∂12-Jul-88 2127 JMC
To: MPS
U.S. mail a copy of the citation to David Chudnovsky.
∂12-Jul-88 2218 JMC Ding an sich
To: mcdermott-drew@YALE.ARPA
Perhaps I should have avoided the heading "ding an sich", taken
from someone else's posting, since it led to my views being
confused with Kant's.
Here are some remarks.
1. I was not concerned with the simulation possibility in
that message. My premise was that the world evolved
intelligence as biology and paleontology make likely.
Now imagine a mathematical theory of the causal systems
that can evolve intelligent subsystems. There isn't likely
to be a theorem in such a theory to the effect that
everything about the state of they system or all the laws
of the system are necessarily accessible to the intelligent
beings. What is accessible to these beings will depend
on the particular laws and on the initial configuration.
Indeed one can imagine intelligence evolving in separate
subsystems of a causal system and some of them having
much greater experimental accessibility to the basic
laws than the others.
Therefore, a philosophy of science that assigns meaning
only to propositions that are in principle verifiable
doesn't do justice to the possibilities.
Actually the situation is worse, because an idea may
seem unverifiable but later become verifiable. Kant
made that specific mistake in saying that the chemical
constitution of the sun was unknowable. Spectroscopy
was discovered a mere forty years after his death.
2. A simulation may or may not be detectable. Imagine
that the randomness of quantum mechanics were only
pseudo-randomness and sufficiently subtle experiments
could determine the random number generator. Imagine
that still other approximations were made that could
be detected. Enough of these might give sufficient
clues to enable clever people to infer the personality
of the Programmer and from that something about His
world. A Program of (say) 10**12 instructions might
allow conjecturing a lot about the world of the Programmer.
The old medieval religious idea of inferring God's purposes
from the animals and other phenomena of the world wasn't
mistaken in principle. It just didn't work. Inferring
material causes did work. Of course, what the medieval
thinkers considered acceptable evidence for such hypotheses
was wrong in principle.
3. It seems to me that we need to be open-minded about
what are meaningful hypotheses about the world and when
AI develops the ability to program human level intelligence,
these systems will also need to be open-minded. A technical
approach to this is one of the motivations of my recent work
on formalizing contexts. A goal of that work is that no
hypotheses or formalism need to be taken by the progam
My AILIST message will follow. I have decided that the
AILIST isn't a great place to comment, because my
serious remarks (and those of a few others) are swamped
by all the repetitious junk. If only someone would volunteer
to be editor of a refereed AI BBOARD. I wonder if Aaron
Sloman could be persuaded to do it. How about you?
∂12-Jul-88 2219 JMC
To: mcdermott-drew@YALE.ARPA
meta[s88,jmc] Message to AILIST on metaepistemology
∂20-Jun-88 0322 JMC Ding an sich
To: ailist@AI.AI.MIT.EDU
I want to defend the extreme point of view that it is both
meaningful and possible that the basic structure of the
world is unknowable. It is also possible that it is
knowable. It just depends on how much of the structure
of the world happens to interact with us. This is like
Kant's "Ding an sich" (the thing in itself) except that
I gather that Kant considered "Ding an sich" as unknowable
in principle, whereas I only consider that it might be
unknowable.
The basis of this position is the notion of evolution
of intelligent beings in a world not created for their
scientific convenience. There is no mathematical theorem
requiring that if a world evolves intelligent beings,
these beings must be in a position to discover all its
laws.
To illustrate this idea, consider the Life cellular
automaton proposed by John Horton Conway and studied
by him and various M.I.T. hackers and others. It's
described in Winning Ways by Berlekamp, Conway and
Guy.
Associated with each point of the two dimensional
integer lattice is a state that takes values 0 and
1. The state of a point at time t+1 is determined
by its state at time t and the states at time t of
its eight neighbors. Namely, if the number of
neigbors in state 1 is less than two or more than
4, its state at time t+1 is 0. If it has exactly two
neighbors in state 1, its state remains as it was.
If it has exactly 3 neighbors in state 1, its
new state is 1.
There is a configuration of five cells in state 1 (with neighbors
in state 0) called a glider, which reproduces itself displaced
in two units of time. There is a configuration called a glider
gun that emits gliders. There are configurations that thin out
streams of gliders from a glider gun. There are configurations
that take two streams of gliders as inputs and perform logical
operations (regarding the presence of a glider
at a given time in the stream as 1 and its absence
as 0) on them producing a new stream. Thinned streams can
cross each other and serve as wires conducting signals.
This permits the construction of general purpose computers
in the Life plane.
The Life automaton wasn't designed to admit computers. The
discovery that it did was made by hacking. Configurations
that can serve as general purpose computers can be made
in a variety of ways. The way indicated above and more
fully described in Berlekamp, et. al. is only one.
Now suppose that one or more interacting Life computers are
programmed to be physicists, i.e. to attempt to discover
the fundamental physics of their world. There is no reason
to expect a mathematical theorem about cellular automata
in general or the Life cellular automaton in particular
that says that a physicist program will be able to discover
that the fundamental physics of its world is the Life
cellular automaton.
It requires some extra attention in the design of the computer to make
sure that it has any capability to observe at all, and some that can
observe will be unable to observe enough detail. Of course, we could
program a Life computer to simulate some other "second level" cellular
automaton that admits computers, and give the "second level computer" only
the ability to observe the "second level world". In that case, it surely
couldn't find any evidence for the its world being the Life cellular
automaton. Indeed the Life automaton could simulate exceedingly slowly
any theory we like of our 3+1 dimensional world.
If a Life world physicist is provided with too narrow a philosophy
of science, and some of the consensual reality theories may indeed
be that narrow, it might not regard the hypothesis that its physics
is the Life world as meaningful. There may be Life world physicists who
regard it as meaningful and Life world philosophers of science
interacting with them who try to forbid it.
This illustrates what I mean by metaepistemology. Metaepistemology must
study what knowledge is possible for intelligent beings in a world to the
structure of the world and the physical structures and computational
programs that support scientific activity.
The traditional methods of philosophy of science are too weak to discuss
these matters, because they don't take into account how the structure of
the world and the structure of its intelligences affect what science is
possible. There is no more guarantee that the structure of our
world is observable than that Fermat's last theorem is decidable
in Peano arithmetic. Physicists are always proposing theories
of fundamental physics whose testability depends on the correctness
of other theories and the development of new apparatus. For example,
some of the current GUTS theories predict unification of the
force laws at energies of 10↑15 Mev, and there is no current
idea of how an accelerator producing such an energy might
be physically possible.
I have received messages asking me if the metaepistemology I propose
is like what has been proposed by Kant and other philosophers
or even by Winograd and Flores. As far as I can tell it's not,
and all those mentioned are subject to the criticism of the
previous paragraph.
∂13-Jul-88 0101 Mailer re: Responses
To: csli!rustcat@LABREA.Stanford.EDU,
su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from csli!rustcat@labrea.stanford.edu sent Wed, 13 Jul 88 00:36:26 PDT.]
1. My generalization applies to what third world students at Stanford
have said over the last few years on BBOARD. I don't apply it to
even to thirld world students not active on BBOARD. Perhaps my
memory of between ten and twenty contributors is incorrect.
2. The remark I complained about and considered typical was to the
effect was that people who join the armed forces deserve to be
killed. I consider it
(1) snobbishly based on the fact that the writer is in a
privileged position where joining the armed forces is not one of the
alternatives he has to consider. I and others who did serve
are inclined to resent his viewpoint. Personally, I was adequately
compensated for my service, but that was a matter of luck. Had
I been two years older or three years younger, it might have been
quite different.
(2) mildly dangerous to society under present circumstances.
Emergencies have arisen in the past in which the willingness of
young men to join or be drafted into the armed forces have been
the basis of survival of society. It's only mildly dangerous
now, because America and the world aren't in the dangerous state
of 50 years ago, when the attitude expressed by Mr. Prabhakar
was prevalent in France and England and helped convince Hitler
of the validity of his slogan "today Germany, tomorrow the world".
However, the future is unpredictable, and Mr. Prabhakar's ideas
deserve at least a protest. Should Mr. Prabhakar wish to become
a U.S. citizen, assuming he isn't already, he will have to promise
to help defend the country should it become necessary. Of course,
there are no current penalties to making this promise insincerely.
∂13-Jul-88 0137 Mailer Iran Air vs. KAL
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
There are many similarities. The essential moral difference
is that the Captain of the Vincennes thought he was in danger of
attack.
The Soviet officer who ordered the attack on the Korean airliner knew that
nothing Soviet was under attack. He decided to shoot down the airplane in
order to teach someone a lesson not to infringe on Soviet airspace.
Whether he thought he was teaching this lesson to U.S. military commanders
or didn't care who it was is controversial. There is some moral difference
between the two, but he shouldn't have shot it down even if he considered
it a military plane. Maybe he could have taken such action after repeated
infringements and many ignored protests, but this wasn't the situation.
I believe that the U.S. doctrine would not involve shooting down occasional
spy planes, and indeed there have been many Soviet infringements of
U.S. airspace, none of which resulted in much more than a protest.
Oh yes, some months before KAL007, we said the Soviets could no
longer use U.S. airports as emergency landing fields on their flights
to Cuba because of repeated overflights of airbases in Maine. This
presumably means that if a commercial airplane had to land, they might not
have got it back without paying a large penalty.
∂13-Jul-88 1253 JMC re: metaepistemology discussion
To: proxftl!bill@BIKINI.CIS.UFL.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue, 12 Jul 88 09:07:15 EDT.]
There was indeed a garble in the next paragraph. The phrase "as it relates
to" or something like it was omitted. Maybe the point is that philosophy
of science cannot be successfully treated apart from science itself. The
opportunities the world gives us to experiment and theorize are often
quite different from what scientists and philosophers of science have
previously imagined. Here are the last three paragraphs of the June 20
message.
This illustrates what I mean by metaepistemology. Metaepistemology must
study what knowledge is possible for intelligent beings in a world as it
relates to the structure of the world and the physical structures and
computational programs that support scientific activity.
The traditional methods of philosophy of science are too weak to discuss
these matters, because they don't take into account how the structure of
the world and the structure of its intelligences affect what science is
possible. There is no more guarantee that the structure of our
world is observable than that Fermat's last theorem is decidable
in Peano arithmetic. Physicists are always proposing theories
of fundamental physics whose testability depends on the correctness
of other theories and the development of new apparatus. For example,
some of the current GUTS theories predict unification of the
force laws at energies of 10↑15 Mev, and there is no current
idea of how an accelerator producing such an energy might
be physically possible.
I have received messages asking me if the metaepistemology I propose
is like what has been proposed by Kant and other philosophers
or even by Winograd and Flores. As far as I can tell it's not,
and all those mentioned are subject to the criticism of the
previous paragraph.
∂13-Jul-88 2355 Mailer Singh's analogy with racial remarks
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU, singh@GLACIER.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
One BBOARD participant has already concluded that my remarks were
racial while noting that he hadn't read them. Perhaps his
conclusion was based on the vehemence and style of the replies.
My opinion is that if my remarks had been related to race and were by a
student and came to the attention of the Stanford officials, these
officials would be inclined to attempt some act of reprisal. My further
opinion is that these officials have acted with fanaticism and/or with
extreme cowardice and in violation of what would be First Amendment rights
were Stanford a governmental institution. Moreover, in their response to
the candlelight protest they have acted dishonestly as well in giving a
far-fetched Klu Klux Klan interpretation to the candles.
This only one of the more recent dishonest acts by Stanford officialdom.
The first I remember was in connection with Shockley many years ago.
By the way when certain students actually did propose to burn a black to
death earlier this year (or was it last year) there wasn't a peep out of
protest from the Stanford officials.
When Mr. King of the BSU in his farewell article wrote that people who didn't
agree could kiss his black rear end, it seemed to me that this was
just what Stanford officialdom including the Academic Senate had
been doing.
I feel somewhat negligent of my duty in not having made a public
statement to that effect - at least a letter to the Stanford Daily,
if not to the New York Times. I did write a letter in support
of Bennett to the New York Times, but they didn't print it or
any other Stanford originated letter in support of Bennett.
As for my generalizations about third world ideology and their
applicability to the third world contributors to BBOARD, I'll
stand by it on the whole, remarking that total precision of language is
not attainable in such matters. Hmm, while Mr. Singh seems to
regard Indian military service as legitimate, I haven't read
anything that suggests that any of the third world students
regards American military service as legitimate. Many of us
Americans believe that the maintenance of American military
capability is was essential in giving these students an
alterntive to Patrice Lumumba University.
Have you figured out which black it was that Stanford students
proposed to burn to death and why the Administration raised
no objection?
Finally, I recognize that participating in a forum in which
students can also participate freely, subjects me to attack
on the ground of being a professor and not being young. I
can take that.
∂14-Jul-88 0033 Mailer clarification
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
It occurs to me that my previous message might be subject to
misinterpretation, when I said that Stanford would be in violation
of First Amendment rights were it a governmental institution. By
this I did not want to say that Stanford had not violated any
legal rights of the students involved. It may well have done so.
In any case it has violated any reasonable concept of academic
freedom.
∂14-Jul-88 0057 Mailer re: Singh's analogy with racial remarks
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
CC: singh@GLACIER.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from H.HARRY@LEAR.STANFORD.EDU sent Thu 14 Jul 88 00:32:44-PDT.]
I indeed did not remember that Mr. Singh included pro-defense statements
along with the pro-gun statements that I did remember. Therefore, I
apologize to him and consider him an exception. Of course, too many
exceptions would clobber the generalization. In fact I now consider
my original statement the BBOARD equivalent of putting one's helmet
on a stick and raising it out of the foxhole. It has certainly
drawn a lot of interesting fire. Incidentally, he might have found
a more tactful way of answering the original statement that those
who join the armed forces deserve to die.
I don't think Mr. Singh has a right to complain about including other
matters along with a reply to his remarks. Answering him isn't
my sole purpose in contributing to BBOARD.
Now that I think about it, I guess I need some clarification from
him. On the one hand, he made an analogy between my remarks and
some against which Stanford retaliated. I accepted his analogy
in part and said that Stanford was wrong. His last message
agrees that some of my criticism of Stanford may be justified
but is irrelevant to his point. What is your position on
what criticisms of groups are (a) entirely legitimate (b)
not legitimate but not punishable (c) punishable?
As to his final remark, I thought I was claiming a thick skin.
Were it thin, I'd have quit BBOARD long ago.
∂14-Jul-88 0910 JMC re: [Edith Gilbertson <GILBERTSON@Score.Stanford.EDU>: Ketonen to 40%]
To: GILBERTSON@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu 14 Jul 88 08:36:25-PDT.]
I am JMC@SAIL. I am not in the database, because it generates junk mail,
and I prefer to keep junk mail separate from regular mail. Anyway I
approve Ketonen at 40 percent.
∂14-Jul-88 1115 JMC re: liberals had better run for the foothills...
To: paulf@JESSICA.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 14 Jul 88 10:10:07 PDT.]
This was mentioned a week or two ago. The liberals are on the
offensive. Manley wants the Stanford Administration to prevent it.
∂14-Jul-88 1138 Mailer Stanford and the candlelight protest
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
When I attacked Stanford's treatment of the candlelight
protestors, I was expecting some defenders. Now I
conjecture that there aren't any. Even the most liberal
are disturbed by Stanford's behavior. However, people
may be too afraid of being charged with racism to react.
Anyway one would have to look up too much in old Daily's.
∂14-Jul-88 1158 JMC re: EDI conference
To: JK
[In reply to message rcvd 14-Jul-88 11:36-PT.]
It may be that the situation in EDI is quite different from that in
most other fields. However, most conferences with such large
registration fees are not worthwhile for academics, because there
are non-profit conferences that have more research interest. However,
if Konsynski says there isn't anything else, then you should hold your
nose and pay - from the NSF grant. It's not strictly relevant, but it
is considered ok to do a little pump priming from existing grants.
If you go, try to see what other academics are in it. Also try to
get reimbursed by MAD. I'll talk to John about it when he returns.
Maybe you should tell someone else at MAD about the conference. This
can provide a stimulus for John, or perhaps Ursula or someone else
can be asked in his absence, to make up his mind about whether he
takes getting into EDI as a serious possibility for MAD.
∂14-Jul-88 1321 JMC Thanks
To: miller@KL.SRI.COM
for your thoughtful and encouraging note.
John
∂14-Jul-88 1327 JMC
To: MPS
File the congratulatory notes together in chron - one entry.
∂14-Jul-88 1504 JMC
To: zadeh@UCBARPA.BERKELEY.EDU
Thanks for your kind note.
∂14-Jul-88 1625 JMC re: Stanford and the candlelight protest
To: dragon@JESSICA.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 14 Jul 88 15:39:01 PDT.]
This is not to BBOARD. I'm puzzled by your message. Perhaps I wasn't
clear. My opinion is that Stanford's intimidation of the candlelight
protesters was a violation of academic freedom and of the protesters'
first amendment rights. I was taking silence in response to my message
as agreement with me rather than agreement with Stanford. While your
remarks don't precisely address that point, they seem to be critical
of the Stanford Administration as well as being even more critical
of the Stanford Daily.
∂14-Jul-88 1627 JMC re: Stanford and the candlelight protest
To: dragon@JESSICA.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 14 Jul 88 15:39:01 PDT.]
Ah, now I think I understand. Almost all published criticism of Stanford
has been from the opposite point of view - from the point of view that
Stanford has been insufficiently oppressive. Perhaps you took me as
expressing that point of view.
∂15-Jul-88 1103 JMC re: Stanford and the candlelight protest
To: dragon@JESSICA.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 15 Jul 88 10:47:06 PDT.]
It now appears that we have different memories of what Stanford did.
I didn't get the impression that Stanford recognized their right
to protest at all but made up or accepted from someone else the
KKK nonsense, bullied the protesters into apologizing, and some
dean wrote an article for the Daily or Campus Report about the
need to educate them to greater "sensitivity".
Do you have more information that appeared in the Daily? Also
part of that time I was travelling and might have missed something.
∂15-Jul-88 1106 JMC reply to message
To: VAL
[In reply to message rcvd 15-Jul-88 10:48-PT.]
It's called
{\bf McCarthy, John (1982)}: {\it Coloring Maps and the Kowalski Doctrine},
and copies are in the second from the top drawer of the filing cabinet
just to the right of the entrance to my office. The reports are in
alphabetical order.
∂15-Jul-88 1405 Mailer re: lyrics to "America" song?
To: OPER.KOWTKO@Score.Stanford.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from OPER.KOWTKO@score.stanford.edu sent Fri 15 Jul 88 12:29:58-PDT.]
The version I learned in grade school had instead of "My heart belongs to thee"
"God shed his grace on thee". Although an atheist, I object to updating
traditional songs.
∂15-Jul-88 1553 Mailer armies
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
1. Many countries could well do without them. Costa Rica still manages -
but barely.
2. Unfortunately, the U.S. is not one of those countries that could
do without armed forces. It may be that the ideological collapse of
communism will create a situation in which U.S. armed forces can be
greatly reduced.
3. To be specific, communism under Stalin was in a mood to conquer as
much of the world as it could get away with. The ambitions of his
successors were less clear, but their military machines continued to
get stronger, and they tended to take such opportunities as presented
themselves. It isn't clear whether Gorbachev wants to or can reduce
Soviet military expenditures without risk to his political survival.
My guess is that he has enough political problems without interfering
with military careers.
4. Non-Soviet communism also presents a threat, but one the U.S. might
be justified in ignoring if it weren't symbiotic with Soviet strength.
5. Economic motives play an important role in military recruiting.
However, many people like a military career including the prospect
of fighting. In particular, the U.S. Marines depend on this motivation.
6. It is an oversimplification to suppose that young men are entirely
innocent victims of the ambitions of older leaders. Our evolution has
left us with combative instincts especially prominent in young men.
Fortunately, civilization often succeeds in sublimating these instincts
- even as far as BBOARD flaming. It doesn't always. It seems to me
that the L.A. gang wars, the fact that fighting is the leading cause
of death among young black men, terrorism, and the willingness of
Iranian and Iraqi youth to fight are all symptoms of this. A particularly
interesting phenomenon was observed when young Nicaraguan peasants
were asked why they were fighting for the Contras. Some could only
answer that they were angry about the Sandinista draft, and had no
answer about why this would motivate them to fight for the Contras.
7. If no-one were willing to fight, we would all be better off.
However, as long as aggressive causes can recruit fighters, others
have to be prepared to fight too. We who don't participate in the
armed forces have to support those who do.
8. The long term hope lies in improved political institutions. We
have substantial civil peace in middle class communities in advanced
industrial democracies, and industrial democracies don't go to war
with each other. Extending this to international peaceful institutions
may well occur once communism dies out.
Final remark: My outburst in response to the statement that people
stupid enough to serve in armed forces deserve to die doesn't seem
to have been accurate. The statement seems to have been motivated
by ordinary pacifism. While there still seems to me to be a characteristic
third world ideology with many irresponsible features, I don't think
I got it right enough to further defend those remarks.
∂16-Jul-88 0026 Mailer protest
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
I wonder if anyone else feels negligent in not protesting
Stanford's treatment of the candlelight protesters. If
so let me know if you would be interested in looking into
the matter further (and related matters) so as to get
the facts straight and possibly protesting in some public
way after Fall Quarter begins. One meeting to collect
facts during the summer would be desirable.
∂16-Jul-88 0046 JMC re: Solid citizens drive me nuts
To: paulf@JESSICA.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent 16 Jul 88 06:50:50 GMT.]
One atom is subcritical, and you undoubtedly have a few left over
from the atmospheric bomb tests about you somewhere.
∂16-Jul-88 0845 JMC dinner with Sandewalls
To: CLT
How about inviting them to eat at Maddalena's? Say next
Fri. or Sat. along with say two other couples, e.g.
Lifschitzs and Weyhrauchs. We could reserve the
private room.
∂16-Jul-88 0848 JMC
To: CLT
alternative is something more suitable for including kids
∂16-Jul-88 1304 JMC Smirnov
To: VAL
I have left three books on your desk. Smirnov will show up
in November. Do we have substantial common interests with him?
Whom else do we want to invite besides Mints? The general subject
is computers and philosophy, where philosophy is interpreted
as including logic.
∂16-Jul-88 1326 Mailer re: Stanford and the candlelight protest
To: poser@CRYSTALS.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from poser@crystals.stanford.edu sent Sat, 16 Jul 88 11:03:57 PDT.]
If I expressed myself in such a way that suggested I was interested
in criticizing BBOARD liberals on the issue of Stanford's treatment
of the candlelight protesters, I apologize. My goal is to go beyond
messages on BBOARD, e.g. to a protest (if appropriate as I expect)
with campus wide or even national publicity. I want to do it in such
a way as will include people across the political spectrum, e.g. we
should not have to agree with each other about the Contras or about
who should be the next President. I have got three responses so far,
including one from Bill Poser, and hope for more.
∂16-Jul-88 1357 JMC Matthew
To: elliott%slacvm.bitnet@FORSYTHE.Stanford.EDU
How is he doing? How are you doing?
∂16-Jul-88 1429 JMC Arkady Rabinov
To: uklirb!siekmann@IRA.UKA.DE
CC: AIR@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
You mentioned to me that your institute is interested in the possibility
of hiring some American AI researchers. Let me mention Arkady Rabinov in
that connection. He emigrated from the Soviet Union (Leningrad) about
1977 and is now a U.S. citizen. He was an engineer there and worked here
as a programmer. However, he undertook to switch into computer science,
the logic of AI in particular. In my opinion, he has made the transition
very successfully.
He has worked on the QLISP project, but his interests are in the logic of
AI, and I don't have enough money to support him doing that. He now has
publications in both QLISP and in nonmonotonic reasoning, especially in
the formalization of action. I can recommend him highly and Vladimir
Lifschitz, who has been helping him make the transition, will also
recommend him. However, you would basically have to decide on the basis
of his reports and publications. He is interested in working in Europe.
You can communicate with him as AIR@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU, and I would
also be glad to answer further questions, either by net mail or
by telephone.
∂16-Jul-88 1437 JMC Your qlisp paper
To: AIR@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
CC: IGS@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
In style and results, it is just what the qlisp project
requires. However, I can see a number of places where
the paper (not the experiments) need to be improved.
It should be a high priority for Igor to help you do
this. I would like to be able to send it to DARPA
with a cover letter as soon as possible, because it
tells them that we are doing what we said we would do.
I haven't read the programs and probably won't.
∂16-Jul-88 1715 JMC re:Stanford and the candlelight protest
To: poser@CRYSTALS.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Sat, 16 Jul 88 15:39:02 pdt.]
I will wait till Wednesday and count up responses and then suggest
a time for getting together.
∂16-Jul-88 1843 JMC miscataloging?
To: library@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
Bloomfield (ed) The Question of Artificial Intelligence
is listed as Q335.Q47. Doesn't the letter after the point
correspond to the editor's or author's name?
∂16-Jul-88 2327 JMC re: Candles
To: siegman@SIERRA.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Sat, 16 Jul 1988 22:26:01 PDT.]
Well, so far you've done more than the rest of us, and I would be
interested in any response you get, and we'll keep you informed.
∂17-Jul-88 1232 JMC re: Comments on Free Will in "Some Philosphical Problems [vis-a-vis] AI"
To: bwk@MITRE-BEDFORD.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Fri, 15 Jul 88 10:24:30 EDT.]
Our intuitions are entirely opposite. In my opinion, the decisive case
is when the automaton is deterministic.
Here's an argument in support of the intuition.
1. When we design programs for robots, we want them to consider
alternative subgoals. We want it to decide that some of them
are unfeasible, e.g. "I don't have enough money to charter an
airplane to go there". These are what it decides it can't do.
Some of the subgoals are feasible, i.e. these are what it
decides it can do. It selects among these according to whatever
criteria we give it.
2. When we program it to decide what others can and cannot do,
the same criteria apply. It needn't consider whether the other
person or robot has nondeterministic mechanisms.
3. We don't know what role randomness or other indeterminacy
plays is our own or other people's decision making, and we
rarely think about it in concrete cases. Decision by an
unknown complex mechanism, or even by a known mechanism
using unknown to us considerations is not readily distinguished
from randomness.
4. At the intuitive level, the concept of free will is treated like the
above notion of "can". However, complications in philosophical thinking
set in as soon as one imagines studying a decision in more detail. Namely,
the number of alternatives that regarded as possible seems to go down - in
principle if not with our actual ability to observe and analyze. We
imagine it to go down to one, and then free will seems to disappear.
5. I have an answer to that. First, imagine that someone considers an
apparently attractive alternative for a while, but finally thinks of a
consideration that leads him to find it disastrous, and says, "Well, I guess
I can't do that after all". Our linguistic intuitions permit two
usages. One usage persists in saying, "He could do that, but he
finds it disastrous". The other says, "He couldn't do it, because
it would be disastrous". Both usages are useful and used.
6. Can and free will are treatable as approximate theories as discussed
in my paper "Ascribing Mental Qualities to Machines".
∂17-Jul-88 1306 JMC Please tell
To: MPS
Luis Pereira (home: 327-4121) (office: 408 973-4095)
about time and place of Ito talk. Get info from Igor
∂17-Jul-88 1328 JMC reply to message
To: VAL
[In reply to message rcvd 17-Jul-88 13:07-PT.]
citati[s88,jmc] is the Inamori Foundation citation. However, they
should not print the part about LISP being the greatest invention
of computer science in this century. In my opinion, the computer
is the greatest invention of computer science in this century.
It seems to me that the book has application as a supplementary
textbook.
∂17-Jul-88 1531 JMC re: reply to message
To: VAL
[In reply to message rcvd 17-Jul-88 13:42-PT.]
See prize.ns[s88,jmc].
∂18-Jul-88 0111 JMC contact with von Neumann and Wiener
To: minsky@AI.AI.MIT.EDU
I was about to say in a book review that none of you, me,
Newell or Simon was a direct follower or much influenced
by von Neumann or Wiener. However, I vaguely remember
that perhaps von Neumann was on your thesis committee.
Or did he merely tell Tucker to allow your thesis topic?
Also did you ever discuss AI with Wiener and what did he
say? Likewise with Shannon. Now I've gone beyond the
book review and am merely curious.
∂18-Jul-88 1145 Mailer protest
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
I plan to try to arrange a meeting after people have had a chance to
respond to the original posting. That will be late this week.
∂18-Jul-88 1345 JMC
To: MPS
kling.1
∂18-Jul-88 1346 JMC
To: MPS
Please fix up Kling address using ACM directory.
∂18-Jul-88 1403 JMC re: lyrics to "America" song?
To: watson@POLYA.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon, 18 Jul 88 14:00:50 PDT.]
Yes, yes, that's what I wrote. I suspect you had some comment that
didn't get mailed.
∂18-Jul-88 2323 JMC
To: CLT
Look at READ.NS[E88,JMC].
∂19-Jul-88 0007 JMC send documents
To: MPS
Please print two files
prize.ns[s88,jmc]
and
citati[s88,jmc]
and have them telefaxed to 422-7309. Then phone Karma Thomas,
Lowell Wood's secretary, and ask her to check that they arrived
properly. Tell her that Lowell Wood asked me to send them to
him. If there is any problem phone me right away.
∂19-Jul-88 1158 JMC re: Stanford and the candlelight protest
To: S.SALUT@LEAR.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue 19 Jul 88 11:50:36-PDT.]
I'm not especially looking for faculty, and I think we'll have to
do something more substantial than merely signing something. I plan
to call a meeting after a few days when more people have had a chance
to respond.
∂19-Jul-88 1212 JMC
To: MPS
Please phone the Graduate School of Business and ask for a catalog.
∂19-Jul-88 1445 JMC re: miscataloging?
To: LIBRARY@Score.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue 19 Jul 88 13:01:37-PDT.]
Thanks for the explanation. I don't use PC Week with any regularity,
and I have other reasons for visiting the Physics Library. So don't
consider me a reason for subscribing.
∂19-Jul-88 1740 Mailer bottle bill
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Would whoever was insulted by the one cent return explain why there
should be a bottle bill in the first place. Why not let the market
decide whether bottles and cans are worth recycling? While I can
think of various answers from which I expect to dissent, I'd better
not give any now for fear of dragging a red herring across the
trail.
∂19-Jul-88 2321 JMC contexts
To: VAL
Onward!
∂20-Jul-88 0844 JMC URGENT!!!! Information Needed for Incremental Funding
To: CLT
∂20-Jul-88 0842 boesch@vax.darpa.mil URGENT!!!! Information Needed for Incremental Funding
Received: from vax.darpa.mil by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 20 Jul 88 08:41:51 PDT
Received: from sun46.darpa.mil by vax.darpa.mil (5.54/5.51)
id AA10480; Wed, 20 Jul 88 11:33:35 EDT
Posted-Date: Wed, 20 Jul 88 11:20:53 EDT
Message-Id: <8807201520.AA02225@sun46.darpa.mil>
Received: from LOCALHOST by sun46.darpa.mil (5.54/5.51)
id AA02225; Wed, 20 Jul 88 11:20:57 EDT
To: dpsys-pi@vax.darpa.mil
Subject: URGENT!!!! Information Needed for Incremental Funding
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 88 11:20:53 EDT
From: boesch@vax.darpa.mil
July is here and with it the annual DARPA short-fuze request for
data to support the Fall funding increments. We need the following
information by return email, not later than next Monday (25 July),
in order to keep things moving:
a. Two short paragraphs (250 words max): "FY88 Accomplishemnts",
and "FY89 Proposed Efforts". Please be concise, there is a premium
on clear statements of "the big picture", NOT on detail.
b. The following financial data, accurate as of June 30, 1988
(you may have made such a report recently, if so please be patient
and make it again):
(1) basic contract dollar amount
(2) dollar amounts and purposes of options
(3) total spending authority received to date
(4) total billed to date
(5) monthly expenditure rate (if not uniform, provide monthly
profile, July 88 thru Dec 89)
(6) any major non-salary expenses expected now thru Dec 89
(7) date next increment of funds is needed
(8) additional funding needed to carry effort thru Dec 89 or
end of contract, whichever is sooner
Please note that it is critical to your Fall funding increment for
this information to arrive at DARPA by 25 July.
Thanks for helping us support you.
Brian Boesch
PS: I am working with Mark Pullen and Bill Scherlis to come up with a
separation of the technical and managerial with the budget being a
separate report. This will allow us to automatically keep reasonably
accurate financial records for the projects in work.
I am interested in conducting an experiment in this area.
If possible please submit this round of budget information in the
format below. I accomplisment and technical information may be in the
same or separate email. If it is impossible to do the following
report by Monday then just use any free format you have in the past.
If you have questions feel free to make assumptions and notate with
comments. Also your comments on this report would be appreciated.
I am not trying to increase work but to increase probability of
getting everyone paid on time. (Without funding gaps).
The following is a first cut at a machine processable report of the
information essential to tracking the overall health of the project.
The essence is that this could be submitted by email on quarterly
intervals or as needed. There should be only rare changes to most of
the information. (Basically the changes would be the gradual
replacement of planned with actual expendatures.
For each contract/task you will make up one of these files. And as
time goes on you will edit it to change projections of spend to
actuals, to add spend-auths, to update gov't action dates, and the
free format text for objectives and accomplishments.
The first word in the line is the key to the automatic processor. Spell
it exactly as shown. Whitespace may be any number of tabs or spaces.
Commas or dollar signs in dollar amounts are optional and may be
included or not. Dates must be month/day/year leading zeros are not
required but are allowed (no spaces). Blank lines are ok.
All fields must be present (except task for non tasking contract, or OPTION).
SPEND and SPEND-AUTH will have varying numbers of lines depending
on contract and number of spend-auths received.
Order of lines of the report is not mandatory, but should be basically
as shown.
!
**********************************************
* TENATIVE EMAIL COST REPORTING FORMAT *
**********************************************
CONTRACTOR contractors name
CONTRACT-NUM contract number
CONTRACT-NAME contract title
TASK-CODE two letter task code (TBD) - if tasking contract
TASK-NAME option name - if tasking contract
AGENT agent
PI-NAME nnnnnnnnnnnnn
PROJECT-NET-ADDR email address for proj
START-WORK mm/dd/yy - date of contract work start
START-CONTRACT mm/dd/yy - date of contract signature
END-DATE mm/dd/yy - date of end of contract
CONTRACT-COST xxxxxx - total cost of contract
(excluding options)
OPTION number mm/dd/yy xxxxx - invoked option
. (additional option lines as needed)
DATE mm/dd/yy - effective date of this report
FUNDING-NEEDED mm/dd/yy - est of last date funded
GOV-ACTION-RQD mm/dd/yy what - date of next gov't action
(funding approve plan ...)
SPEND-AUTH mm/dd/yy fy xxxxx - date and cumulative funding rec'd
SPEND-AUTH mm/dd/yy fy xxxxx
. (one line per contract obligation (spending authority)
. fy is year of the money. mm/dd/yy is the date of the obligation)
. This is an exact dollar figure that should increase as more money
. is obligated against the contract
.
PLANNED-SPEND GFY1 qtr1 qtr2 qtr3 qtr4
PLANNED-SPEND GFY2 qtr1 qtr2 qtr3 qtr4
PLANNED-SPEND GFY3 qtr1 qtr2 qtr3 qtr4
... the amount that was planned for expendature at contract start.
This is a reference against which actual spend will be tracked
It will not change unless contract mods are made to
increase/decrease scope.
Dollar values may be in dollars or in "K" dollars so either
3000000 or 3,000,000 or 3,000K or 3000k are equivalent.
SPEND GFY1 qtr1 qtr2 qtr3 qtr4
SPEND GFY2 qtr1 qtr2 qtr3 qtr4
SPEND GFY3 qtr1 qtr2 qtr3 qtr4
...
. amount expended/planned for expend in each quarter of the CY
all numbers in past are actual.
All numbers before report DATE are actuals. Numbers after
report date are planned.
NON-SALARY-EXPENSES
(any significant non-salary expenses this period)
!
***********************************************************
* EXAMPLE OF THE USE FOR A HYPOTHETICAL RESEARCH PROJECT. *
***********************************************************
CONTRACTOR Al's Bakery
CONTRACT-NUM N12345-87-C-1234
CONTRACT-NAME Research in Leavening Techniques
AGENT SPAWAR
PI-NAME Al T Baker
PROJECT-NET-ADDR al@baker.com
START-WORK 02/1/87
START-CONTRACT 05/12/87
END-DATE 04/11/89
CONTRACT-COST 470394
DATE 07/20/88
CONTRACT-MONTH 13
FUNDING-NEEDED 10/3/88
SPEND-AUTH 05/12/87 87 257,123
SPEND-AUTH 10/3/87 88 310,637
PLANNED-SPEND 87 0 0 87k 52k
PLANNED-SPEND 88 52k 52k 52k 52k
PLANNED-SPEND 89 52k 52k 19394
SPEND 87 0 0 60k 51k
SPEND 88 55k 50k 51k 52k
SPEND 89 52k 52k 47k
NON-SALARY-EXPENSES
none
GOV-ACTION-RQD 10/15/88 More money
∂20-Jul-88 1124 JMC Re: URGENT Incrementals
To: CLT
∂20-Jul-88 1023 boesch@vax.darpa.mil Re: URGENT Incrementals
Received: from vax.darpa.mil by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 20 Jul 88 10:23:05 PDT
Received: from sun46.darpa.mil by vax.darpa.mil (5.54/5.51)
id AA10864; Wed, 20 Jul 88 13:18:42 EDT
Posted-Date: Wed, 20 Jul 88 13:06:02 EDT
Message-Id: <8807201706.AA02319@sun46.darpa.mil>
Received: from LOCALHOST by sun46.darpa.mil (5.54/5.51)
id AA02319; Wed, 20 Jul 88 13:06:04 EDT
To: dpsys-pi@vax.darpa.mil
Subject: Re: URGENT Incrementals
Date: Wed, 20 Jul 88 13:06:02 EDT
From: boesch@vax.darpa.mil
I was lazy. I am only interested for efforts for which I am PM.
Please do not duplicate effort already sent in for other PM's.
Brian
∂20-Jul-88 1135 JMC re: Your book
To: VAL
[In reply to message rcvd 20-Jul-88 11:23-PT.]
Thanks! Now I'll surely have lots of afterthoughts.
∂20-Jul-88 2139 JMC re: US Territory List
To: paulf@JESSICA.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent 20 Jul 88 18:15:12 GMT.]
The U.S. Virgin Islands were purchased from Denmark.
∂21-Jul-88 1235 JMC re: someone with a Wall Street Journal handy?
To: S.SALUT@LEAR.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu 21 Jul 88 10:43:18-PDT.]
a045 0343 21 Jul 88
PM-Dollar-Gold,0336
Dollar Mixed, Gold Eases, Silver Trading Hectic
.
.
.
Other dollar rates at midmorning, compared with late Wednesday:
-1.8607 West German marks, up from 1.8520
-1.5350 Swiss francs, down from 1.5360
-6.2420 French francs, down from 6.2455
-2.0919 Dutch guilders, up from 2.0910
-1,372.00 Italian lire, up from 1,371.50
-1.1960 Canadian dollars, up from 1.1959
In London, one British pound cost $1.7190, more expensive for buyers
than late Wednesday's $1.7085.
∂21-Jul-88 1534 JMC
To: MPS
Where are the 1988 chron files?
∂21-Jul-88 1712 JMC
To: MPS
I have reported my phone out of order - the phone, not the line.
∂21-Jul-88 2339 JMC re: Stanford and the candlelight protest
To: J.JBRENNER@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu 21 Jul 88 23:33:06-PDT.]
I wasn't going to propose taking up his case. That could involve getting
lots of facts and still ending up with something rather murky. The
candlelight protest is much more clear, because it seems to me
that Diane Conklin's report on the subject contains internal evidence
that she was involved in violating the free speech rights of the
candlelight protesters.
∂22-Jul-88 1119 JMC re: Your summer salary
To: CLT
[In reply to message rcvd 22-Jul-88 10:03-PT.]
Wait and see.
∂22-Jul-88 1120 JMC re: Ian
To: CLT
[In reply to message rcvd 22-Jul-88 10:04-PT.]
So far as I know, there have never been any comments about any
such memo.
∂22-Jul-88 1122 JMC re: Thermodynamic Depth
To: THEORYNT%NDSUVM1.BITNET@FORSYTHE.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 22 Jul 88 09:12:29 CDT.]
Rockefeller University is in New York City. You can telephone Pagels.
∂22-Jul-88 1212 JMC another paper
To: VAL
Please look at light.re5[ess,jmc] with a view to including it
in the set of papers.
∂22-Jul-88 1328 JMC re: Suppes's net address
To: VAL
[In reply to message rcvd 22-Jul-88 13:04-PT.]
You can ask his secretary on 3-3111. Mail sent to him at csli
may be forwarded to another location.
∂22-Jul-88 1336 JMC re: edi
To: JK
[In reply to message rcvd 22-Jul-88 12:58-PT.]
He'll be back in the U.S.A. on Monday.
∂23-Jul-88 2243 JMC
To: ME
Can I DIAL numbers with area codes?
∂24-Jul-88 1325 JMC reply to message
To: JK
[In reply to message rcvd 24-Jul-88 11:56-PT.]
If you are in MJH, copies of my papers are in the middle two drawers
of the filing cabinet to your right next to the door of my office.
The papers are in folders alphabetical by title. Don't take the
last copy of anything. Otherwise Pat can get it for you tomorrow.
∂24-Jul-88 1508 Mailer ... not about ideology. It's about competence.
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
The New York Times emphasized the following part of Dukakis's
acceptance speech by putting it in a box.
I don't think I have to tell any of you how
much we Americans expect of ourselves or how much
we have a right to expect from those we elect to
public office. Because this election is not about
ideology. It's about competence. It's not about
overthrowing governments in Central America;
it's about creating jobs in middle America ... It's
not about insider trading on Wall Street; it's about
creating opportunity on Main Street. And it's not
about meaningless labels. It's about American values.
Well, dear liberals, either he's lying or he has double-crossed you.
Basically, he's said he has no disagreement with Reaganomics, he only
promises to do it better. For example, it seems he goes along with the
reduction of the top Federal income tax rate from 55 percent to 28
percent. Reagan claimed this would increase the fraction of taxes
collected from the rich as a percentage total income taxes , and indeed it
did. However, the true liberals grumble that it increased the fraction of
U.S. personal income going to the top one percent, and it did that too. I
suppose Dukakis sides with Reagan in considering prosperity more
important than equity.
It also seems he has no complaint about our having installed the
Pershings in Europe, now that it seems to be getting rid of the SS-20s.
He seems to accept Reagan's position that tax reduction was more
likely to reduce unemployment than Government job creation programs.
Perhaps he will even give up his ideological objection to nuclear
power which has prevented the completed Seabrook plant in New Hampshire
from operating. Its 10 mile evacuation zone overlaps Massachusetts,
and Dukakis refuses to make a plan thus putting additional hundreds
of thousands of tons of CO2 into the atmosphere and doing his
bit for the greenhouse effect.
It's this last bit that makes me believe that he's lying. If you Jackson
liberals lie low about ideology till after November, Dukakis will revive
all the ideology in his inaugural address and in his appointments to
office.
This seems to be a strategy devised by a committee of PR men, and
it would seem to be best served by minimizing debates and
calling scandals the main issue rather than emphasizing policy.
∂24-Jul-88 1526 JMC free will
To: AIList@AI.AI.MIT.EDU
[In reply to message sent Sun 24 Jul 1988 02:00-EDT.]
Almost all the discussion is too vague to be a contribution. Let me
suggest that AI people concentrate their attention on the question of how
a deterministic robot should be programmed to reason about its own free
will, as this free will relates both to its past choices and to its future
choices. Can we program it to do better in the future than it did in the
past by reasoning that it could have done something different from what it
did, and this would have had a better outcome? If yes, how should it be
programmed? If no, then doesn't this make robots permanently inferior to
humans in learning from experience?
Philosophers may be excused. They are allowed take the view that
the above questions are too grubbily technical to concern them.
∂24-Jul-88 1937 Mailer recycling
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
My opinion is that recycling and the bottle bill are just another
moralistic fad like the energy religion. Here are my reasons.
1. We are nowhere near out of space for storing waste. It's just
a question of how high we pile it. Ancient civilizations often
lived on top of their waste up to a few hundred feet. After
several thousand years we might have a real problem. I once
encountered a waste expert on a plane where he was going to
a conference and asked him whether it was feasible to build
the existing dumps much higher. He said it was, but then
you have to cover them to reduce leaching.
2. People who throw bottles out of cars won't be deterred by
any reasonable bottle deposit. Fining them $500 when caught
works better.
3. There is plenty of energy to be had, once faddism disappears,
as all fads do in time.
It may be that waste collection fees sometimes don't cover
the land cost of the dumps. Formerly this cost was considered
zero in many cities, because it was considered that land fill
was good for parks, and filling swamps was considered a good
idea. Probably it often still is, though maybe not around
New York City. The New York media people and ideology factories
tend to export ideas relevant to New York to the rest of the
world.
Now for a few meta-remarks. Using the phrase "the American
love affair with X" is a dishonest rhetorical device, although
many of its users aren't dishonest; they are merely copying
others. It has the following dishonest and intellectually
cheap aspects.
1. X doesn't have to be defined precisely. In the present
case "the American love affair with throwing things `away'",
it isn't meant to be interpreted literally.
2. People's reasons for doing what they do needn't be stated
and refuted.
3. The author of the phrase is usually an American. He isn't
criticizing himself; he is defining himself as superior without
having to say exactly why.
∂24-Jul-88 2358 JMC
To: MPS
Did you send both sets of papers to Rodman?
∂25-Jul-88 0007 JMC re: Bad taste in Palo Alto
To: ilan@GANG-OF-FOUR.STANFORD.EDU,
su-etc@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
CC: ilan@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message from ilan@gang-of-four.stanford.edu sent Sun, 24 Jul 88 22:57:25 PDT.]
Even when run by someone named Sophie?
∂25-Jul-88 0842 JMC re: Bad taste in Palo Alto
To: ilan@GANG-OF-FOUR.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon, 25 Jul 88 02:23:29 PDT.]
Sorry, I missed the reference.
∂25-Jul-88 1258 JMC anchoring bookcases and other carpentry
To: CLT
I have hired the Stanford carpenter who anchored my office bookcases to
do ours at home. He will come tomorrow at 5pm. If there is any other
carpentry to be done, he should be asked to do it too. In particular,
we should ask him if he can fix the door to the downstairs porch.
The time can be changed if needed but not to Stanford working hours.
∂25-Jul-88 1439 Mailer greenhouse and Seabrook and hydroelectric
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
We are still burning coal, oil and natural gas to produce electricity,
all of which put CO2 into the atmosphere. Coal puts in the most,
per kilowatt hour produced, because oil and gas are partially burning
hydrogen which only puts water in the atmosphere. Both nuclear and
hydro power are needed. Beyond the use of nuclear power for electricity
generation lies the problem of using it to power cars. Livermore is
just finishing off a project on an aluminum-air battery, which potentially
will give a car putting no CO2 into the atmosphere and with the same
performance and range as a gasoline powered car. The project has
allegedly been turned over to private industry. I say allegedly, because
it isn't clear how vigorously the private company will pursue it given
the present low priced gasoline. Moreover, electric cars require electricity
to charge the batteries, and the estimates of electricity requirements
coming from the environmentalist politicians don't take this into
account. A few of the environmentalist Congressmen are beginning to come
around on nuclear energy as the CO2 problem is gradually rubbed in to their
consciousness. If we get a whole string of hot, dry summers they'll
gradually switch.
However, this refers to politicians already in office, who can
afford to be somewhat patriotic. The environmentalist movement has
been a political movement for many years (almost 20). Politics is about
getting office and power, and slogans are the tools. It almost doesn't
matter what the facts turn out to be; they won't change their slogans
if it means giving up their claim to power.
Therefore, we need to figure out some way of humoring them. If
only the Sierra Club, etc. politicians could be persuaded that their
route to power now lies in being pro-nuclear. We need to figure out
how they can keep their paranoia and even keep the same enemies but
work to solving the energy problem rather than exacerbating it. Maybe
the Dukakis slogan "the issue is competence, not ideology" has
possibilities. They could say, "We were never against nuclear power,
just against the incompetence of the utilities". There was and is
plenty of incompetence they could inveigh against.
∂25-Jul-88 2231 JMC Feigenbaum
To: JK
says Prof. Jerry Miller is the person to talk to in the Business
School. I'll call him tomorrow, and if it seems useful, arrange
for both of us to see him.
∂26-Jul-88 1105 JMC Incremental report due
To: CLT
∂26-Jul-88 1054 scherlis@vax.darpa.mil Incremental report due
Received: from vax.darpa.mil by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 26 Jul 88 10:54:40 PDT
Received: from sun45.darpa.mil by vax.darpa.mil (5.54/5.51)
id AA06280; Tue, 26 Jul 88 13:53:10 EDT
Posted-Date: Tue 26 Jul 88 13:51:54-EDT
Received: by sun45.darpa.mil (5.54/5.51)
id AA01137; Tue, 26 Jul 88 13:51:56 EDT
Date: Tue 26 Jul 88 13:51:54-EDT
From: William L. Scherlis <SCHERLIS@vax.darpa.mil>
Subject: Incremental report due
To: rpg@sail.stanford.edu, jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Message-Id: <585942714.0.SCHERLIS@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
Mail-System-Version: <SUN-MM(217)+TOPSLIB(128)@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
Please send the Incremental Funding report today. It is urgently required.
Thanks.
-------
∂26-Jul-88 1435 JMC
To: JK
We have an appointment in my office tomorrow at 11 with Prof. James R. Miller.
∂26-Jul-88 1810 JMC re: Congratulations
To: minker@JACKSUN.CS.UMD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue, 26 Jul 88 20:31:09 EDT.]
Thanks for your message.
∂28-Jul-88 1037 JMC reply to message
To: VAL
[In reply to message rcvd 28-Jul-88 10:28-PT.]
In Pub it represented a pounds sign. It was a 250 English pound bet.
∂28-Jul-88 1405 JMC
To: CLT
The carpenter will come tomorrow at 5 instead of today.
∂28-Jul-88 1742 JMC re: laptops
To: SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu 28 Jul 88 17:16:54-PDT.]
I might be interested and would be interested in what the results
of your shopping have been - more in terms of what's available
than in who offers the lowest price.
∂29-Jul-88 1307 Mailer re: Biodegradeable diapers
To: LEHMANN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from LEHMANN@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU sent Fri, 29 Jul 88 09:40:10 PDT.]
Suggest verifying biodegradability by feeding sample of each kind
of diaper to a goat and examining extent to which each is subsequently
biodegraded.
∂31-Jul-88 0112 JMC letter to Aspray
To: MPS
Due to a misunderstanding with my secretary, a preliminary
version of the review of the Bloomfield book was sent to
you. Enclosed is a final version. While the book is rather
bad, I took the occasion to express opinions about how
this kind of thing has to be done.
∂01-Aug-88 1142 JMC Japanese inquiry
To: IGS@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Igor, please reply to this and express interest in receiving his documentation.
∂01-Aug-88 1135 TANAKAT%JPNTSCVM.BITNET@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU
Received: from lindy.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 1 Aug 88 11:35:33 PDT
Received: by lindy.Stanford.EDU (4.0/4.7); Mon, 1 Aug 88 11:35:18 PDT
Received: by Forsythe.Stanford.EDU; Mon, 1 Aug 88 11:36:15 PDT
Received: by JPNTSCVM (Mailer X1.25) id 1305; Mon, 01 Aug 88 13:05:15 JST
Date: MON, 1 AUG 1988 13:02 JST
From: (Mr.) TANAKA Tomoyuki (alias Escher) <TANAKAT%JPNTSCVM.BITNET@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU>
To: <jmc@sail.stanford.edu>
Dear Professor McCarthy,
I am a researcher at IBM Research, Tokyo Research Laboratory. We
are designing a Lisp system for the TOP-1, a shared-memory
multiprocessor workstation under development at our lab. (Some of
the hardware aspects of the TOP-1 workstation have recently been
written up as a couple of articles. I'll be happy to send you
these if you're interested.)
We are trying to gather information about other concurrent Lisp
projects. Perhaps you noticed our "Bibliography on Multiprocessor
Lisp Systems and Applications", which was (accidentally)
published in the latest issue of Lisp Pointers.
Last week we had the pleasure of having Prof. Feigenbaum visit
our lab. He told us very briefly about the Qlisp system being
developed by Stanford Univ. and Lucid, and he also mentioned
another concurrent Lisp system that your group is working on.
Prof. Feigenbaum suggested that we contact you directly, and gave
us your e-mail address.
The aspects that we are most interested in are the following:
* shared-memory or message-passing model
* the underlying hardware
* the basic constructs related to concurrency
* based on Common Lisp or Scheme
* if based on Common Lisp, how multiple values, catch/throw,
etc. are dealt with
If there is a write-up of the Lisp system that your group is
working on, we'd very grateful if you could send us a copy.
Thank you very much, and best wishes.
(Mr.) TANAKA Tomoyuki (Tanaka is my family name.)
;;; IBM Research, Tokyo Research Laboratory
;;; 5-19, Sanbancho, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 102, Japan
;;;
;;; BITNET: tanakat@jpntscvm.bitnet
∂02-Aug-88 1104 Mailer re: Biodegradeable diapers
To: LEHMANN@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU,
Hiller@Score.Stanford.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from LEHMANN@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU sent Fri, 29 Jul 88 09:40:10 PDT.]
Having had experience with both, I can confidently assert that disposable
diapers are a lot more convenient and less odorous than cloth diapers.
Assuming that a disposable diaper compresses to 200 cc, the 18 billion
diapers buried per year come to about 3 million cubic meters. A one
square kilometer National Diaper Graveyard would thereby gain 3 meters per
year in height. In 300 years it would reach a kilometer in height and
we'd need another one. Ancient civilizations built on their trash until
they lived on mounds hundreds of feet high. My opinion is that trash
disposal is another easy problem made hard by the environmentalists.
Of course, reactionaries like me are always inclined to suspect
environmentalists of insincerity as well as irrationality. Are there
any users of cloth diapers out there in BBOARD land?
∂02-Aug-88 1711 JMC dinner
To: VAL
Would you and Elena like to have dinner with us
and the Sandewall's next Tuesday evening? It will
probably be at a restaurant.
∂02-Aug-88 2336 Mailer re: Brian Wilson
To: B.BILLL@Macbeth.Stanford.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from B.BILLL@macbeth.stanford.edu sent Tue 2 Aug 88 22:25:39-PDT.]
That's Brian Willson. Yes, they knew he was there but couldn't stop the
train in time.
∂04-Aug-88 1005 JMC
To: MPS
I'll be in about 2pm.
∂04-Aug-88 1611 JMC
To: MPS
Looks like I won't be in today.
∂06-Aug-88 0856 JMC Kyoto Prize
To: CLT
∂06-Aug-88 0212 @RELAY.CS.NET:masahiko@nuesun.ntt.jp Kyoto Prize
Received: from RELAY.CS.NET by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 6 Aug 88 02:12:40 PDT
Received: from relay2.cs.net by RELAY.CS.NET id am13720; 6 Aug 88 5:07 EDT
Received: from ntt.jp by RELAY.CS.NET id aa14750; 6 Aug 88 4:42 EDT
Received: by ntt-sh.ntt.jp (3.2/ntt-sh-01) with TCP; Sat, 6 Aug 88 17:18:04 JST
Received: by MECL.NTT.jp (3.2/NTTcs02) with TCP; Sat, 6 Aug 88 17:16:02 JST
Date: Sat, 6 Aug 88 17:16:02 JST
From: Masahiko Sato <masahiko@nuesun.ntt.jp>
Message-Id: <8808060816.AA06946@MECL.NTT.jp>
To: jmc%sail.stanford.edu@ntt.jp
Cc: clt%sail.stanford.edu@ntt.jp
Subject: Kyoto Prize
Congratulations to you for receiving a Kyoto Prize.
The Inamori Foundations asked me to organize the workshop to be held on
November 12. The workshop will consist of a one hour lecture by you
and four 30 min. lectures by Japanese researchers.
I would like you to suggest me the title of the workhop. Tentatively,
I am thinking of "Logic in Artificial Intelligence" and "Artificial
Intelligence and Logic" as possible titles. Please let me know your
opinion.
Professor Ito told me that you and Carolyn will come to Sendai before
you go to Kyoto. Professor Ito and I hope to have an informal seminar
with you and Carolyn, and a public lecture by you. As I will have to
attend an international logic symposium to be held in Nagoya from
November 7, it will be most convenient for me if you could to Sendai
come in the week of Oct. 31 - Nov. 5. (Nov. 3 is a national holiday.)
masahiko
P.S. Professor Ito asked me to send his regards to you.
∂06-Aug-88 1051 JMC Kyoto prize
To: MS@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
CC: CLT@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Thank you for the congratulations. Either title is ok, but I would
suggest "Logic, Artificial Intelligence and Common Sense Reasoning",
if it's not too long.
Our travel plans are still uncertain.
∂06-Aug-88 2124 JMC
To: CLT
Ask them to fence side yard.
∂06-Aug-88 2241 JMC refereed ailist issues
ailist@AI.AI.MIT.EDU
A proposal for special refereed issues of ailist - revised version.
The large majority of contributions to the AILIST are
incompletely thought out and based on insufficient
knowledge. On the other hand interesting topics
arise, and some contributions are worthwhile. I would
like to suggest that certain issues (numbers) of the
AILIST consist of refereed contributions. The editor,
and there would have to be an editor besides Nick unless
he wanted to add that to his responsibilities, would submit
contributions to a panel of referees. These might require
shortening and other improvements in contributions, would
reject some entirely on the basis of ignorance or duplication
of previous thought. There would be a limit on length, of say
200 lines, with most kept under 50. The object is discussion
and not electronic publication of formal papers. Rejected
contributions could, if the author so desired, be included
in the unrefereed issues. Readers could decide for themselves
how to divide their reading between the two.
Is there a volunteer for editor, and who would volunteer to referee?
Five referees might do for a start. I won't volunteer for editor, but
I do volunteer to get the process started and to edit one issue and
the subsequent discussion. The topic is ontology is Quine's sense.
What domains should the variables of AI programs range over?
∂07-Aug-88 1522 JMC formal language question
To: VRP@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
I have been thinking about a notion of "absolute proof", which is
an ordinary proof supplemented by any information that may reduce
the amount of computation required to verify it. In this connection
the following technical question arises.
Let L1 be a context free language. We call L2 an expansion
of L1 if L2 has additional symbols in its alphabet and a string s
belongs to L2 iff s' belongs to L1, where s' is obtained from
s by deleting all symbols not belonging to L1. We further require
that every sentence of L1 has an expansion in L2.
When does a context free language have a finite state expansion?
I don't know whether the answer is "always" or "only when L1 is
finite state". Carolyn tells me I won't find the answer in
Hopcroft and Ullman.
More generally we are interested in when a language has an
expansion of a simpler character.
∂07-Aug-88 2001 JMC re: expansion
To: pratt@JEEVES.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Sun, 7 Aug 88 18:25:14 PDT.]
Thanks. Perhaps it means that there is no notion of proof absolutely
trivial to verify, but next I'll try proofs with pointers, but in
which the verifier has finite temporary storage except for the
pointers.
∂08-Aug-88 1035 JMC re: Bill Gates
To: nilsson@TENAYA.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon, 8 Aug 88 09:23:53 PDT.]
I plan to be here on Dec 1 and have put the possibility in my calendar.
∂08-Aug-88 1621 JMC Quotation from review
To: reddy@FAS.RI.CMU.EDU
I have used variants of this, sometimes throwing in a few Faradays
in order to refer to experimental work.
#. Like his predecessor critics of artificial intelligence,
Taube, Dreyfus and Lighthill,
Weizenbaum is impatient, implying that if the problem hasn't been
solved in twenty years, it is time to give up. Genetics took about a
century to go from Mendel to the genetic code for proteins, and still
has a long way to go before we will fully understand the genetics
and evolution of intelligence and behavior. Artificial intelligence
may be just as difficult. My current answer to the question of when
machines will reach human-level intelligence is that a precise
calculation shows that we are between 1.7 and 3.1 Einsteins and .3
Manhattan Projects away from the goal. However, the current research
is producing the information on which the Einstein will base himself
and is producing useful capabilities all the time.
∂08-Aug-88 1707 Mailer re: happy all 8's day
To: Crispin@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU, SU-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from Crispin@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU sent Mon, 8 Aug 88 14:48:44 PDT.]
I plan a real celebration on 8/8/8888. I'm sending myself a reminder
on the computer.
∂08-Aug-88 2254 JMC comments
To: GOODMAN%uamis@RVAX.CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU,
DUANE.ADAMS@C.CS.CMU.EDU, BLUMENTHAL@A.ISI.EDU,
DONGARRA@ANL-MCS.ARPA, GANNON%RDVAX.DEC@DECWRL.DEC.COM,
JAHIR@ATHENA.MIT.EDU, HEARN@RAND-UNIX.ARPA, JLH@SIERRA.Stanford.EDU,
JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU, KNEMEYER@A.ISI.EDU, MCHENRY@GUVAX.BITNET,
OUSTER@GINGER.BERKELEY.EDU, Ralston@MCC.COM, CWEISSMAN@DOCKMASTER.ARPA
global[e88,jmc] Comments on draft of Global Trends in Computer Technology
1. I think the report assumes to much about what the attitude of the
U.S. toward the Soviet bloc is likely to be during the lifetime of
the report. If a definite attitude were to be chosen, I have no
quarrel with the moderately hardnosed line of the report, but with
only a little more work the report could be useful over a spectrum
of attitudes.
To take one view, suppose the U.S. decided to help the
Soviet Union a little. How would we do it? In my opinion, the
thing to do would be to encourage use of normal commercial channels,
especially including post-sale service for both software and
hardware. Such an attitude might arise in the U.S. Government
if major progress is made on disarmament or, even better, the
Soviet Union were unilaterally to reduce the fraction of its
GNP going into the military.
Also one can imagine swaps involving access to technology for
the Soviets in exchange for much freer access to Soviet territory, e.g.
the elimination of closed cities.
On the other hand, one can also imagine things getting
much worse if Gorbachev were forced out under the nationalist slogan
that he was selling out to the West. The we and our allies would
be inclined to more severe restrictions, and the report should also
provide some technical basis for that.
2. The section on software is rather strongly oriented toward
the "strongly typed" style of programming languages. LISP and
Prolog are not mentioned and AI is not mentioned in that section.
I'm not sure that it matters very much, but I suppose the Government
might want guidance at some point on the export control of LISP,
Prolog and expert system shells.
I recognize that I should have written a section on AI, but I
couldn't bring myself to do it, especially as I have no current
knowledge of Soviet AI.
3. Standardization didn't begin 15 years ago. IBM tape formats
became standard in the late 1950s. The 360 became somewhat of
a standard in 1964 with RCA and Japanese companies deciding to
make compatible machines. The Soviet decision to standardize
on 360 architecture dates from 1965 or 1966. Algol was an
attempt to standardize programming language for numerical
computation.
4. Software is easier to control than the report suggests, because
adopting it depends not merely on acquiring a copy but on maintaining
access to updates, documentation and bug fixes. I remember being
told that often the Soviet copies of the documentation don't correspond
to the software they have managed to copy. Adopting a major piece
of software may involve a commitment to continual adaptation to
hardware, operating system and network changes. If the co-operation
of the original software producer isn't available, the user may
have to cut loose from compatibility at some time. My impression
is that the Soviets have often had to do this.
This means that offering regular access to software maintenance
can be a bigger carrot than the report indicates. Of course,
not all Soviets are aware of this, but some are.
5. The BESM-6 was not up-to-date when it came out because of
its limitation to a 32K word memory. This was just after the
360 offered a 32 bit address, cut down to 24 by IBM shortsightedness.
∂09-Aug-88 2305 Mailer park prices
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
This discussion reminds of many years ago (1953) when I was a member
of the Stanford Alpine Club. Its members developed incredible
snobbishness directed at mere tourists. I don't see that a backpacker
is so morally superior to a family with children in a camper or an
elderly couple in an RV to deserve a square mile for his private
use more than the latter deserve a campsite.
I think many of the pro-wilderness arguments are mere snobbery.
∂10-Aug-88 1928 Mailer re: insurance
To: andy@CAYUGA.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from andy@cayuga.stanford.edu sent Wed, 10 Aug 88 16:39:08 PDT.]
What method of verification that he didn't drive more miles does Peter
Karp propose? Is he willing to pay for an insurance company employee
to check his odometer? Is he willing to agree that if he has misrepresented
the number of miles he has driven, the insurance company doesn't have to
pay his liability? If he is willing to agree to that, would he still
be an insured driver within the meaning of the law?
∂11-Aug-88 1341 JMC ai[e88,jmc] Artificial Intelligence for NAS study
To: BLUMENTHAL@A.ISI.EDU
Artificial intelligence (AI) is the study of how machines can
be made to perform tasks of kinds that require intelligence in human
beings. Mostly the machines in question are computers, and making
them behave intelligently involves programming them appropriately and
providing them with suitably encoded database of facts about the
domain in which they are to work. The most successful work in AI
has involved treating it as a branch of computer science, i.e.
as concerned with the relation between a situation involving
knowledge and possibilities for action and the achievement of goals.
Athough information about how humans solve problems is used as a guide,
AI is not primarily concerned with psychology. Of course, AI research
interacts with research in information processing psychology.
AI has both scientific and technological aspects, and
these are not very sharply separated. The present scientific
understanding of intellectual processes is rather limited,
and these limitations are reflected in the technology the
present scientific knowledge can support. Nevertheless, a
useful technology of ``expert systems'' has developed in the last
15 years, and hundreds of companies world-wide are involved in
exploiting various aspects of it.
Scientific research in AI is largely concentrated in universities,
especially American universities. The field is served by
international scientific journals and by national and international
conferences. Results are published in an entirely open literature.
At least there is no case of some important result coming into
the open after a substantial period of secrecy.
The American lead in AI science is probably larger than in
most fields of computer science. The most prominent AI researchers
are mostly American. This lead is based on an early start in the
1950s and early support by the U.S. Department of Defense via DARPA.
American lead in computer technology was also important, because good
computers are important for AI research. However, for the last ten
years, the progress of AI science has been primarily limited by
conceptual difficulties rather than by hardware. In principle, the
next major discoveries could be made anywhere in the world, but in
fact the conceptual advances have mainly been made in the U.S.
Communist ruled countries, i.e. the Soviet Union, China
and Eastern Europe have done little important work in AI. This
is the result of their own policies rather than a result of any
attempt to keep information from them. The ideological objections
to AI became unimportant in the 1950s, so this can't account for
it. The hierarchical and gerontological structure of their scientific
organization has probably been the main factor in delaying their
start in new fields. Whereever progress in AI has depended on the
patronage of prominent physicists, mathematicians and biologists,
progress has been slow.
Also they don't send people abroad enough for
them to absorb the culture of new fields.
The technology of AI has the following components.
1. The educational system produces trained and creative
people.
2. Computer companies produce suitable computers. Some of
these, e.g. the LISP machines and now a few logic programming
machines (especially Japanese) are designed primarily for AI work.
However, general purpose computers and workstations are also
suitable for AI, except that the IBM 370 and its imitations
have made this rather difficult. Since the Soviets have based
their largest computer effort on imitating IBM, this has certainly
delayed them.
3. Languages suitable for writing AI programs are required.
Mostly this has involved dialects of LISP, but Prolog and its variants
have more recently become important. The Eastern countries haven't
done much here, although Hungarians have become active in Prolog.
4. Commercial ``AI shells'' have recently been developed.
These systems allow the more convenient development of expert
systems. This is important, because in expert systems, development
time and the ability to modify the system is the most important
component of cost. There doesn't seem to have been export of Western
AI shells to the East. The Institute of Cybernetics in Tallinn,
Estonia has developed and expert system shell called PRIZ that has
even been exported to Sweden. It seems to be rather limited.
5. For many applications, expert systems have to be
connected to databases and other programs. Numerous specialized
products exist for doing this, especially for making connections
to commercial systems based on IBM technology.
6. The previous components are all auxiliary to the
main technology, the writing and installation of the expert
systems. This is done both by companies needing the expert
systems and by specialist companies working under contract.
Fitting the expert system into the user's operations can be
a larger task than writing it. Both tasks involve interaction
with the people possessing expert knowledge of the domain in
question.
Expert system technolgy is not mature in the West and
is just beginning in the Eastern bloc. Their institutional
systems which often involve major discrepancies between how
institutions are supposed to behave and how they normally do
behave surely make difficulties for computer systems in
general and for expert systems in particular. Whereever
under-the-table deals including bribery are required,
it will probably be impossible to use expert systems. Secrecy
also brings difficulties.
Successful Soviet use of Western AI technology
will depend on their maintaining reliable continued access to manuals,
changes in software and doctrine for usage. The theft or
illegal export of programs leaves the recipient in a difficult
position. In the Soviet and East German case this has often
involved giving up compatibility and going on their own after
a certain point. One can imagine maintaining continued access
through dummy Western companies that transmit bug reports in
one direction and updates in the other, and whether such conduits
exist might be worth investigating.
If political developments take place that involve increased
Soviet access to Western technology, e.g. in exchange for concessions
in some other area such as Soviet territorial secrecy, the most
important step would be their use of conventional international
channels for maintenance of software systems.
∂11-Aug-88 1724 Mailer re: insurance
To: KARP@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from KARP@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU sent Thu, 11 Aug 88 16:29:31 PDT.]
Insurance companies do compete with one another in offering special
rates. Of course, the easiest way of offering good rates to safe
drivers is to figure out how to exclude certain categories, e.g.
certain categories of young men. However, when these categories
can only get very expensive insurance, they scream loud enough so
that the regulators of insurance often force the rest of us to
support the bad driving of a few.
What evidence would be required to support the proposition that
"insurers are slime"? Surely, it can't be as simple as to argue
that if they weren't slime they would make a certain discrimination.
It would be surprising if the profitability of the insurance industry
is a lot above that of financial industry in general, since otherwise
all those losing Texas bankers would have gone into insurance instead.
∂12-Aug-88 1124 JMC re: laptops
To: SHOHAM@Score.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri 12 Aug 88 10:07:07-PDT.]
I'd like to see your machine when you get it.
∂12-Aug-88 1340 JMC re: Quotation from review
To: Raj.Reddy@FAS.RI.CMU.EDU
[In reply to message sent Friday, 12 August 1988 16:28:10 EDT.]
I'm not sure that appeared in print, and I have doubtless used different
numbers from time to time. Make it 1.7 Einsteins, 2 Maxwells, 5 Faradays
and .2 Manhattan projects if you like. By the way, I vaguely recall
you said something about mentioning the Kyoto prize. I could email you
a copy of the citation if you like.
∂12-Aug-88 1353 JMC Kyoto prize citation
To: Raj.Reddy@FAS.RI.CMU.EDU
\centerline{ACHIEVEMENTS OF THE KYOTO PRIZE 1988 LAUREATE}
\centerline{ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY}
\bigskip
Dr. John McCarthy is a pioneer in the research of artificial
intelligence (A.I.), which is currently one of the most
attractive fields in computer science. Since the genesis of
A.I., he has challenged the basic problems of this field as a
leader and is called ``the father of Artificial Intelligence''.
Dr. McCarthy entered California Institute of Technology at
the age of 16 and took an interest in A.I. research already in his
school days. Among colleagues during the postgraduate course of
the Princeton University was Dr. Marvin Minsky, and these two
young researchers later become the two greatest authorities of
A.I. Dr. McCarthy first studied A.I. based on automaton and
edited, a publication titled ``Automata Studies'' with Dr. Shannon.
This book had a great influence on the automaton studies in Japan
in those days.
One of Dr. McCarthy's achievements is the study of ``Common
Sense Reasoning'', in which the logic of common sense reasoning
was formalized to provide reasoning capabilities equal to that of
humans to computers. From the study of ``Programs with Common
Sense'' in 1950's to the recent ``Circumscription'', a form of non-
monotonic reasoning, he has consistently proposed new theories
beyond the scope of the conventional inference of information
science, contributing the development of this field.
However, his most outstanding work may be creation of LISP,
a programming language for symbolic processing. Conventional
programming languages were designed for numerical processing,
while LISP was designed based on the idea what functions are
required for effective symbolic processing. Most of current A.I.
research use LISP, and it is indispensable for that purpose.
His concept gave a significant influence on the present
programming languages and is considered to the greatest invention
in this century in the field of computer science.
Besides, Dr. McCarthy has reported a number of theses that
established the foundation of basic computation theory for the
present software science. In the field of computer engineering,
he proposed the basic concept of the time sharing system (TSS)
and was involved in its production. This is highly acclaimed as
a work that opened up a way toward the development of the present
large cmputers.
In addition to these acadmmic contributions, Dr. McCarthy
started the first project of A.I. at MIT in 1958 and established
the Artificial Intelligence Lab there. After having moved to
Stanford University, he also established the A.I. laboratory at
the University. He was the president of the American
Association for Artificial Intelligence for 1983 - 1984 and
contributed to instruction of younger researchers and development
of the associaton. Dr. McCarthy was awarded the 1971 A.M.
Turing Award and the first Research Excellence Award of IJCAI in
1985.
He has visited Japan several times since 1969. During his
visits, he gave lectures at the research Institute for
Mathematical Sciences of Kyoto University and other places,
stayed at Kyoto as a co-worker, and taught many young
researchers. He is also a Japanophile who loves Kyoto.
\bye
∂12-Aug-88 1747 JMC
To: AIR@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Clark, Professor Keith, Dept. of Computing, Imperial College of Science and
Technology, University of London, 180 Queen's Gate, London SW7 2BZ
01 589 5111. x2752 sec'y
01-262-8486 (weekdays)
049-12-2277 (weekends).
253-85-53-83 (mother home)
klc@doc.ic.ac.uk.
∂12-Aug-88 2036 JMC lunch
To: elliott%slacvm.bitnet@FORSYTHE.STANFORD.EDU
Any day next week is ok with me.
∂13-Aug-88 1415 Mailer re: insurance - an alternate explanation
To: ramsey@PORTIA.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from ramsey@portia.stanford.edu sent 12 Aug 88 22:56:34 GMT.]
I agree with what Ramsey Haddad has written about insurance and want to
add a few points.
1. The politics of insurance regulators is probably far more harmful
to rationality than the "greed" of the insurance companies. The
politics primarily takes the form of "representing" some group and
fiddling the regulations so as to get that group the most favorable
rates. Another aspect is trying to encourage some behavior by
rewarding it with favorable rates. These regulations often are ill
thought out, and have effects different from what their perpetrators
intended. But by then they have created an interest in favor of them,
e.g. among insurance agents selling in certain markets (whose interest
is not identical with that of the insurance companies). Bureaucracy
makes them slow to change, and economic interest created by the
regulations makes change far more difficult than mere bureaucracy.
As an aside, in my view the strongest argument against any form of
socialism, even city planning withing a capitalist society, is not
the incompetence of "pointy-headed bureaucrats" and professors to
decide what is best. Rather it is the creation of interests that
"put politics in command". ("Putting politics in command" was
a Maoist slogan whose implementation was a disaster for China).
2. Naturally the marketing strategists of insurance companies
find ways of getting around the prohibitions of certain
discriminations. One way is to specialize in certain markets.
For example, suppose an insurance company has a reason to believe that
young, black males with a tendency to drink have lots of accidents but
isn't allowed to discriminate against them and also believes that
teachers include few young black males with a tendency to drink.
It can then specialize its advertisements to the media that teachers
read. If it believes that students with good grades are less likely
to drink, it can offer attractive rates to such students.
3. Most likely, some groups have such a high frequency of accidents
and such low incomes that they can't afford insurance at rational
rates. From the point of view of average cost to society they
should be prevented from driving. However, this is infeasible
in our present society. Therefore, there are "assigned risk pools"
supplemented by uninsured motorist coverage.
4. The above is a rationalization of the present behavior of
insurance companies. However, they certainly aren't perfect
and could certainly behave better than they do. Maybe different
regulations would be useful, given that liberalism is strong
enough in our society to make regulation politically inevitable.
However, improving regulation must be based on knowledge obtained
by study.
The effect of Peter Karp's calling the insurance
companies "slime", because they don't make certain discriminations
he considers rational, is to make it somewhat more probable
that regulations will be made under the slogan of punishing
the insurance companies for being "slime". While Peter Karp
rejoices in punishing the slime, the regulators spouting this
slogan will reward whoever put them in office. I don't know
enough about the politics of insurance regulation to predict
who this will be. However, one principle is applicable.
The regulators will take bribes from whoever has money or
other power and wants to influence the regulations. Obvious
candidates are insurance companies and groups of insurance agents.
There may be others. What they will do for these bribes is make
ostensibly neutral regulations that actually discriminate in favor of
the bribers. Lawyers of many kinds will share in the largesse.
Such bribes are sometimes straight illegal payoffs. They may
also be PAC campaign contributions that are legal. More complex
bribery is also possible. For example, if environmentalist
politicians have some power, they may get support for their favorite
new wilderness in exchange for support of favoring the kind of policy
that Allstate writes over those written by Farmer's.
5. As in most areas of human activity, it is better to
avoid or minimize government regulation of insurance. Since
we humans find it difficult to avoid developing and expressing
hostilities, it is probably better to express them as sports
fans. Even with the probability of injuring someone, Peter Karp
might do less harm throwing beer bottles at the L.A. Rams.
Alternatively, he could become an actual expert on insurance.
∂13-Aug-88 1504 Mailer Accuracy in Academia
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
A few years ago, Reid Irvine, a conservative publicist,
started a publication called Accuracy in Academia. Irvine
is also the publisher of Accuracy in Media, which specializes
in complaining about liberal or pro-Soviet bias in American
newspapers and TV.
The announced purpose of Accuracy in Academia was to
expose leftist bias in college and university courses and to
complain about professors using their courses for political
indoctrination. The announcement gave rise to complaints that
Accuracy in Academia was a threat to academic freedom, that its
complaints would result in witch hunts in which professors would
be fired for their views. Even Sidney Hook deplored Accuracy
in Academia, expressing this fear.
My own immediate opinion was that there could be no
objection to Accuracy in Academia per se. Anyone has a right
to allege bias in anything. That's part of freedom of speech.
Defending academic freedom has to take the form of opposing
actual attempts to fire someone, or, more delicately, deny
him tenure.
There was some flap on BBOARD, and I announced my
intention to subscribe to Accuracy in Academia's publication
Campus Report and eventually report my opinion. It's this.
Their Campus Report has a substantial component of
complaint about indoctrination in courses. For example,
the 1988 June issue has an article entitled "Racism in
Black Studies" about a course taught by the chairman
of the Black Studies Department of the City College of New York,
Dr. Leonard Jeffries. The article is based on articles published in
the CCNY student newspaper by a white student who took Jeffries's
course. The articles in the CCNY newspaper reported various
extreme anti-white statements and statements that whites were
biologically inferior to blacks in various ways.
Their Campus Report (not Stanford's publication of the same name)
interviewed Jeffries and reported his explanations and denials.
It reported some inconclusive administrative activity related
to the complaints about the course. It wasn't clear whether
the administrators contemplating acting against the professor
or against the student who complained or against the student
newspaper that published the complaint or any of the above.
The have published similar complaints about feminist
extremism and left wing anti-U.S. political indoctrination.
When they complain against indoctrination, it often takes
the form of complaints against requiring students to take
actions implementing the professors' political opinions.
In my reading of Campus Report, I have never seen them
advocate administrative action.
However, I was surprised to discover that the main
thrust of Accuracy in Media was a defense of academic freedom.
The situation as they report it, and as I believe it to be,
is that various countercultural beliefs are so strong in the
academic world, that they can and do interfere with the
academic freedom of people who oppose them.
The other two front page articles in the June Campus Report
are entitled "Black Studies Prof Purged" and "Male Purged in Women's
Studies". The first refers to the Black Studies Department at the
University of Massachusetts kicking out Professor Julius Lester for
criticizing the late James Baldwin, black novelist, for defending
Jesse Jackson's use of the phrase Hymietown for New York City. Lester
had been in the Department for 17 years, and his views had changed.
In particular, he converted to Judaism, and when he was kicked out
of Black Studies transferred to Judaic studies.
The second article article refers to a male student
kicked out of a women's studies course for being "hostile" and
"disruptive".
Campus Report also refers to Dartmouth students suspended
for arguing with a black professor. As for Stanford, it reports
on the attack on Hoover, the forced retirement of Glenn Campbell
and the argument over Western Culture. I find myself in agreement
with them in all these points, especially with an article by
Thomas Sowell defending Hoover. Sowell is a black, conservative
social scientist and newspaper columnist, who is a Senior
Fellow at Hoover.
Maybe Accuracy in Academia might be a threat to academic
freedom if the right had some power in the academic world, but it
doesn't act that way now. Instead it is a defender of academic
freedom, since the left has the power. I believe Hook has also come
to this opinion.
I'll leave the 1988 June issue in the CSD lounge.
There's lots more worth reading in it.
∂13-Aug-88 1736 JMC linguistic usage
To: winograd@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
When a specific word is mentioned in an article on linguistics, e.g.
"but", is it put in quotes or put in italics, or is there some other
convention?
∂13-Aug-88 1826 JMC
To: MPS
Please put the catalog for the home books in the file homlib[1,jmc].
∂13-Aug-88 1936 JMC re: SSP Forum
To: HOFFMAN@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Sat 13 Aug 88 17:41:53-PDT.]
I should like to give a presentation at the symbolic systems forum.
∂13-Aug-88 1937 JMC re: SSP Reading list
To: ssp-faculty@RUSSELL.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message from HOFFMAN@CSLI.Stanford.EDU sent Sat 13 Aug 88 17:41:53-PDT.]
The list seems rather fluffy to me.
∂13-Aug-88 2022 JMC Diana Conklin report
To: MPS
There is a report by Diana Conklin, Director of Residential Deans,
on the vigil at Otero. Probably it was in Campus Report, but it isn't
in the issues you have on file. It would have been after May 25 and
before the end of June. Please get me a copy of the report,
asking either Campus Report or Diana Conklin. As usual, I had it
but mislaid it.
∂14-Aug-88 0947 Mailer The still somewhat evil empire yields to temptation
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
a202 0909 14 Aug 88
AM-Baby Parts, Bjt,0836
Infant Slaughter-Organ Transplant Rumors Frustrate Officials
By RUTH SINAI
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - U.S. officials are frustrated by persistent
reports - some blamed on Soviet disinformation - that Latin American
children are being butchered for organ transplants in the United
States.
The reports have been crisscrossing the globe for the past 20
months, confounding U.S. officials who have been trying to locate
their genesis, track their progress and provide credible denials.
The latest report surfaced last week in Paraguay, after police
raided a house and found seven infants and several pregnant women who
apparently planned to give their babies up for adoption.
A juvenile judge, Angel Campos, said that while he had no proof, he
believed some of the babies might be dismembered in the United States
for their organs, which could then be sold for hundreds of dollars.
The story, circulated by a respected news agency, has been making
the rounds of the world press this week despite adamant denials from
the U.S. Embassy in Asuncion.
The U.S. Information Agency has concluded that all the reports are
based on unsubstantiated rumors which began in Honduras. Its yearlong
investigation - aided by the FBI, the Department of Health and Human
Services and other agencies - has failed to find any proof of the
charges.
''The original misinformation would not have spread so far and wide
if it had not been for the way it was cynically used and embellished
with deliberate distortions in a disinformation campaign by several
communist countries, with the Soviet Union and Cuba taking the
lead,'' according to a report on Soviet disinformation prepared by
USIA for Congress.
The United Network for Organ Sharing, which oversees organ
transplants in the United States, has also denied the charges.
''It's very frustrating when you don't know who's spreading such
rumors,'' said Kelle Straw, a spokeswoman for the non-profit
organization, which receives some of its funds from the government.
Ms. Straw said the United Network had never found any leads to
follow in its own investigation of the reports.
''And anyway, it's ridiculous,'' she said. ''Children don't make
good donors; their organs aren't fully developed.''
In its report to Congress, the U.S. Information Agency cited dozens
of other such reports which have surfaced in places as diverse as
Bangladesh and Morocco, some in Communist Party newspapers and others
in independent publications.
''The rumor is gruesome enough so that it would feed on itself
without any help,'' said Todd Leventhal, an agency official who
prepared the report and has been monitoring the ''baby parts'' case
as it is known in the government.
''But because the Soviets are involved, we're seeing more of these
reports and with more of an anti-American slant,'' he added.
Latin America, where thousands of babies are adopted by foreigners
every year, is a fertile ground for breeding such rumors.
In its report to Congress, the USIA concluded it is sometimes hard
to tell which of the baby parts allegations are ''due to
misinformation and which is due to disinformation.''
But Leventhal said disinformation experts in the United States can
tell whether the Soviets are behind a certain report according to the
newspapers carrying such a story and the slant that it takes.
In some cases, the Soviet role is quite obvious, he said.
On July 25, 1987, the official Soviet newspaper Izvestia reported
that an international Mafia brings up disabled children in Guatemala
and sends them to the United States. ''There, the butcher medics cut
out their hearts, kidneys and eyes,'' the Izvestia report said.
The newspaper cited officials of the Geneva-based Defense for
Children, International, as the source of its information. The
organization accused Izvestia of turning out ''a veritable
masterpiece: an astute mix of quotes taken out of context,
journalistic comment, established fact and unfounded allegations.''
The course of the baby parts story constitutes a fascinating study
in the life of a rumor.
The USIA has traced the original report to Leonardo Villeda
Bermudez, formerly Honduras' top social welfare official. Bermudez
was quoted as saying in January 1987 that he was told by some social
workers several years previously about people seeking to adopt
disabled children so they could sell them ''for parts'' in the United
States.
His comments were circulated worldwide by a respected news agency,
lending them sufficient credibility and exposure so that they have
been cited repeatedly since then despite his retraction the day after
his remarks were reported.
In his retraction, Bermudez said ''he confused a simple rumor'' with
facts. Other Honduran officials denied there was any proof of such
practices.
But more than a year later, his comments were still circulating, and
were quoted - among other places - in the Venezuelan newspaper El
Nacional.
''It just won't die. Just when we think we've managed to get rid of
it, it pops up again,'' said Leventhal.
AP-NY-08-14-88 1149EDT
***************
∂14-Aug-88 1200 JMC cataloging
To: MPS
The second batch of books from home is in your office.
There may be as many as 50 batches. It now seems to me
that it would be better to use the same file but put the
home catalog on a separate page. That way I can find
a book in one search, whether it be at home or in the
office.
∂14-Aug-88 1205 JMC re: SSP Forum
To: HOFFMAN@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Sun 14 Aug 88 10:58:13-PDT.]
I have many topics. It seems to me that the most suitable
is the general topic "Formalizing Common Sense Knowledge and
Reasoning in Mathematical Logic". I can give this talk at
whatever level is appropriate for the audience.
∂14-Aug-88 1456 Mailer The Left's Big Idea
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Todays NYT reviews "Political Passages", a collection of essays by
former 1960s radicals, some quite prominent. It quotes one
David Horowitz
"Compassion is not what inspired our parents' political choices. Nor
is compassin what inspired the Left to which you and I both belonged -
the New Left which forgot the people it liberated in Indochina once
their murderers and oppressors were red, which never gave a thought
to the Cubans it helped bury alive in Castro's jails, which is still
indifferent to the genocides of Marxist conquest - the fates of the
Cambodias and Tibets ... that no longer exist.
Compassion is not what motivates the Left, which is oblivious to the
human suffering its generations have caused. What motivates the left
is the totalitarian idea. The idea that is more important than
reality itself. What motivates the Left is the idea of the future in
which everything is changed, everything is transcended. The future in
which the present is already annihilated. In which its reality no
longer exists.
What motivates the Left is an idea whose true consciousness is this:
Everything human is alien. Because everything that is flesh and
blood humanity is only the disposable past. Because all that exists
deserves to perish. This is the consciousness that makes mass
murderers of well-intentioned humanists and earnest progressives,
the Hegelian liberators of the socialist cause."
Well that was a nice rant, and it contains part of the truth,
especially about the most extreme left. However, there have also
been non-leftist messianic visions of remaking the world totally that
also led to mass murder.
Most political partisans, including leftists, aren't that
visionary. They are mainly motivated by the hostilities of their
political tribe for the other tribe.
The biggest corruptive tendency of political activity is that
one's interest in what one imagines to be good policies, becomes
transformed entirely into interest in getting the power to put
policy into effect.
∂14-Aug-88 1702 JMC re: linguistic usage
To: loire!winograd@LABREA.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Sun, 14 Aug 88 14:50:36 PDT.]
Thanks.
∂15-Aug-88 0007 Mailer unicycle
To: su-market@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
for sale. Flat tire. Best offer.
∂15-Aug-88 1152 JMC
To: ME
I have my own magic number now.
∂15-Aug-88 1310 JMC re: draft Soviet chapter
To: GOODMAN%uamis@RVAX.CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon, 15 Aug 88 10:11 MST.]
I'd like to see the revised Soviet chapter. I think the following point
should be made.
A major reason for the Soviet lag behind Western computer science and
technology is their institutional reluctance to send people abroad and
to permit the Western suppliers they do use to set up service
organizations within the Soviet Union of the kind suppliers use in the
rest of the world. In principle, one would suppose that perestroika
would include overcoming this reluctance, but it hasn't yet. If they
do overcome it, the problem of Western control of Soviet access to
Western technology will change substantially.
Remark (not proposed for inclusion): Enn Tyugu in Tallinn told me that
his institute could but didn't acquire certain Western computers
"illegally". I didn't ask him why. I presume "illegally" means illegally
according to Western laws and regulations. My guess is that if he
had such computers, Soviet security regulations might preclude his
rather free reception of Western guests. Besides his Estonian preference
for contacts with the West, I suppose he finds the guests more
valuable than a few extra computers.
∂15-Aug-88 1314 JMC re: AAAI funding for CLOS workshop
To: Gregor.pa@XEROX.COM
[In reply to message sent Mon, 15 Aug 88 12:58 PDT.]
I am no longer in charge of AAAI funding of workshops. Peter Hart has
that job now. It seems like a reasonable request to AAAI.
∂15-Aug-88 1321 JMC re: gneral comments re recently mailed draft
To: GOODMAN%uamis@RVAX.CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU,
DUANE.ADAMS@C.CS.CMU.EDU, BLUMENTHAL@A.ISI.EDU,
DONGARRA@ANL-MCS.ARPA, GANNON%RDVAX.DEC@decwrl.dec.com,
JAHIR@ATHENA.MIT.EDU, HEARN@RAND-UNIX.ARPA, JLH@SIERRA.STANFORD.EDU,
KNEMEYER@A.ISI.EDU, MCHENRY@GUVAX.BITNET, OUSTER@GINGER.BERKELEY.EDU,
Ralston@MCC.COM, CWEISSMAN@DOCKMASTER.ARPA
[In reply to message from GOODMAN%uamis@rvax.ccit.arizona.edu sent Mon, 15 Aug 88 10:25 MST.]
The main source of possible controversy in the report is making
political assumptions about the Soviet Union and about what U.S.
policy should be. The implicit assumptions made in various sections
of the report seem plausible to me, but we can't predict how they will
look even six months from now. We can avoid this by explicitly
addressing the the technological aspects of a range of policies, U.S.
and Soviet. It seems to me that there is essentially only one
dimension to cover - how restrictive the U.S and its allies decide to
be.
∂15-Aug-88 1343 Mailer re: insurance risk
To: Crispin@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from Crispin@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU sent Mon, 15 Aug 88 12:40:31 PDT.]
Crispin is right that the evaluation of risk factors is inexact. If
you want to put risk factors into laws and regulations about who has
to pay how much for insurance, this is insuperable. However, in areas
where judgment is permitted, e.g. insuring a ship going into the
Persian Gulf or a concert against riot damage, there are successful
underwriters and unsuccessful ones. The succesful ones quote rates
their clients find competitive and avoid quoting rates that lead to
loss on the average. The current tendency, however, is to suspect
judgment of being discriminatory and to put "politics in command".
∂15-Aug-88 1412 JMC
To: AIR@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Luis Pereira (home: 327-4121) (office: 408 973-4095)
offers a lecture about declarative debugging in logic programming
concurrent Prolog
∂15-Aug-88 1827 JMC re: unicycle
To: barry@PYRPS5.PYRAMID.COM
[In reply to message sent Mon, 15 Aug 88 15:42:44 PDT.]
It seems to be in good condition, and I believe I bought it new many
years ago and gave up trying to ride it rather quickly.
The brand is Lloyd.
It hasn't had many falls, and the seat looks ok.
It is normal height, i.e. there's no chain.
The wheel is about 24 inches in diameter.
To see it phone 723-4430 office or 857-0672 home. I have it in my
car at the moment, so you can see it at my office or at home.
∂15-Aug-88 1828 JMC
To: MPS
Ask me about expense reports tomorrow.
∂16-Aug-88 1249 Mailer insurance
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Today's New York Times has an informative article on the insurance
initiatives on the California November ballot. It's very complicated,
but it looks like all the initiatives will improve the situation
somewhat - even the trial lawyers are making some concessions. However,
the ones that limit recovery for pain and suffering and limit the
percentage lawyers can take of the large settlements may do some
real good.
∂16-Aug-88 1310 JMC my book
To: VAL
I don't think Ablex does this, but I object to the use of
imitation computer-readable fonts on the cover.
∂16-Aug-88 1751 JMC re: lunch
To: ELLIOTT%SLACVM.BITNET@FORSYTHE.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent 16 Aug 88 17:01 PST.]
Thursday doesn't work. Tomorrow, Friday or next week except Wednesday?
∂16-Aug-88 2355 Mailer re: Traffic on Junipero Serra; EIR hearing Aug 18
To: siegman@SIERRA.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from siegman@sierra.stanford.edu sent Tue, 16 Aug 1988 22:12:06 PDT.]
My opinion is that it is unreasonable to have no good
North-South route between El Camino and 280. It is doubtful that
much of the traffic on Junipero Serra can reasonably take either
El Camino or 280. Stanford has far smaller ratio of road
to area or to traffic generation than any other land owner.
It has blocked off enough roads so that a fair amount of traffic
with both origin and destination at Stanford goes on Palo Alto
streets. Both of the routes I take from my Campus home to my
office go off Campus. I think that eventually Junipero Serra
should be widened and sunk with pedestrian bridges over it.
In doing that the County will have to buy the row of homes
along Junipero Serra just as Palo Alto bought the homes
along Oregon Avenue when it was widened.
The anti-growth sentiment is what is making housing
so expensive in this area. It is recreating a society in
which inherited wealth will determine living conditions as
it did in the nineteenth century. I remember that after
World War II it was possible for someone coming out of the
Army to get married, make down payments on a house and car
and support a non-working wife. Now a society based on
inherited wealth is again being created.
I'll explain the relation between the previous two paragraphs
on another occasion.
∂17-Aug-88 1143 JMC re: lunch
To: ELLIOTT%SLACVM.BITNET@FORSYTHE.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent 17 Aug 88 11:40 PST.]
That will be fine. See you then.
∂17-Aug-88 1155 JMC Your travel arrangement to China?
To: MPS
∂15-Jun-88 0109 yang%vax.runit.unit.uninett@TOR.nta.no Your travel arrangement to China?
Received: from tor.nta.no by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 15 Jun 88 01:05:09 PDT
Posted-Date: 15 Jun 88 10:02 +0100
Received: by tor.nta.no (5.54/3.21)
id AA14465; Wed, 15 Jun 88 10:06:39 +0200
Date: 15 Jun 88 10:02 +0100
From: Jianhua Yang <yang%vax.runit.unit.uninett@TOR.nta.no>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <300*yang@vax.runit.unit.uninett>
Subject: Your travel arrangement to China?
Dear Prof. John McCarthy,
I sent you the enclosed message for a time ago.
It might be lost somewhere on the way to you.
However, would you please give me the cost figures
for your travel to China which is to be covered by
the conference, as soon as possible? I need the figures
to prepare/review the conference budget, before
we (I and Prof. Arne Solvberg) leave Norway in
the end of next week (24, 25 June).
Thanks in advance for your help!
Sincerely yours,
Jianhua Yang
Encl.: the previous message:
-----
Send-date: Wed, 25 May 1988 12:48:28 UTC+0100
From: Jianhua Yang <yang@vax.runit.unit.uninett>
To: John McCarthy <JMC@sail.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Your travel arrangement to China.
INVITED SPEAKER TO THE IFIP CONFERENCE IN CHINA, JULY 1988.
Dear Prof. John McCarthy,
May I ask you how you are planning to arrange your
travel to China and back to the states? May I ask you
for the estimated cost figures for your travel to/from China
which will be covered by the conference budget? I have
to look at the conference budget for the last time, I hope.
Thanks for your help!
Sincerely yours
Jianhua Yang.
--------
∂17-Aug-88 1157 JMC re: Your travel arrangement to China?
To: yang%vax.runit.unit.uninett@TOR.NTA.NO
[In reply to message sent 15 Jun 88 10:02 +0100.]
To what address do I mail you my expenses for the Guangzhou trip?
∂17-Aug-88 1447 Mailer re: Reed Irvine
To: D.DAVEB@HAMLET.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from D.DAVEB@hamlet.stanford.edu sent Wed 17 Aug 88 12:50:57-PDT.]
Do you have a reason for believing that Irvine is wrong about the
sequence? Other than which side of controversies you normally
find yourself supporting. If there is interest, I can bring in
the issue of Accuracy in Media in which the cartoon is discussed.
I didn't see the Mighty Mouse cartoon, but Irvine claims he showed
the segment to a bunch of Congressional staffers who agreed with
his informant that it looked more like snorting cocaine than anything
else. I remember Fritz the Cat with pleasure, but it wouldn't surprise
me at all if Ralph Bakshi would think it cute to put one over on
bourgeois society by showing Mighty Mouse sniffing cocaine. Irvine
quotes the producer as having said that she could get away with things
in productions for children that you could never get away with
in productions for adults.
I don't suppose anyone around here has access to the cartoon so that
we could see for ourselves. However, I would be handicapped in making
up my own mind what is shown, because I've never seen anyone snorting
cocaine.
I left Accuracy in Academia in the CS Lounge, and it would be better
to discuss what it actually says. The following seems somewhat
relevant.
In 1623, Galileo attacked his most dangerous Jesuit
opponent, Orazio Grassi, himself a reputed scientist.
To prove that motion produced heat, Grassi had cited a
first century AD author who claimed that the ancient
Babylonians had cooked eggs by whirling them around in
a sling.
``Now we have eggs'', replied Galileo, ``and slings,
and strong men to whirl them, and yet they will not
become cooked: nay if they were hot at first, they
quickly become cold ... Will he rather trust the
relation by others of what was done 2,000 years ago in
Babylon than what he can at this moment verify in his
own person. Sunday Telegraph, 1988 May 15.
∂17-Aug-88 1553 Mailer re: A question about vice presidential nominations
To: P.PR@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from P.PR@macbeth.stanford.edu sent Wed 17 Aug 88 15:10:47-PDT.]
Russell Baker has a funny column in today's New York Times
entitled "a Quayle in the Bush" advocating that Bush nominate
Reagan as Vice-President and then resign after winning. He
claims that the 25th? Amendment only says that no-one can
be elected President more than twice.
∂18-Aug-88 1634 JMC re: Reed Irvine
To: D.DAVEB@LEAR.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu 18 Aug 88 12:36:31-PDT.]
The Galileo quote was intended to suggest reading what Irvine actually
had to say. Since I subscribe to Accuracy in Media as well as Accuracy
in Academia, I can bring in the relevant issue if you like. Incidentally,
Irvine gets excited about two causes a month. He is undoubtedly a real
pain in the neck to those he criticizes, but he often has good reason.
The producer quoted was not Bakshi but some woman whose name I forget.
I suppose he was the director rather than the producer.
∂18-Aug-88 2349 JMC re: The Left's Big Idea
To: ddaniel@PORTIA.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 18 Aug 88 21:56:21 PDT.]
If you have the issue, I would like the opportunity to make copies of
the letters and articles you mention.
∂19-Aug-88 0856 JMC re: test message
To: GOODMAN%uamis@RVAX.CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 19 Aug 88 06:42 MST.]
I got it. I lose on those outgoing messages that go to bitnet addresses.
∂19-Aug-88 0920 JMC lost? message
To: ailist.request@AI.AI.MIT.EDU
On August 6 I MAILed a message to AILIST proposing some
refereed pages for AILIST. I haven't seen it appear.
Are you holding it for some reason or didn't you get it?
It was entitled
refereed ailist issues.
∂19-Aug-88 1059 JMC re: The Left's Big Idea
To: ddaniel@PORTIA.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 19 Aug 88 10:50:23 PDT.]
If you are on Campus, 356 Polya or Campus mail to me at
the Computer Science Department.
∂19-Aug-88 1100 JMC re: Does this mean you got the test message or the Soviet chapt update?
To: GOODMAN%uamis@RVAX.CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 19 Aug 88 09:52 MST.]
Sorry, I got the test message.
∂19-Aug-88 1202 Mailer conservative complaints about ACLU
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Defenders of an organization or cause are often inclined to
misunderstand the complaints against it. Sometimes this
misunderstanding is so persistently in the face of hearing
or reading the complaints to amount to misrepresentation.
Complaints about ACLU are, of course, to be mixed with
complaints about the judges who rule in favor of ACLU
supported lawsuits.
Although I believe the ACLU has what can fairly be called
a leftist bias, I wouldn't call it a down-the-line leftist
organizations. A large part of the left doesn't recognize
that people they dislike have any rights at all, and this
can't be said of ACLU. The example currently cited is their
defense of Oliver North on the grounds that his Congressional
testimony required by previous court orders makes any subsequent
prosecution contaminated by self incrimination. As one who
agrees with what North was trying to accomplish in the National
Security Council, I feel extremely limited gratitude for
this ACLU intervention.
Here are some of the conservative complaints I have read about and
remember, but I don't have the articles handy, so I don't claim
accuracy.
1. Protection of criminals. It is complained that the
increase in violent crime and the domination of "ghettoes" by
criminals is substantially a consequence of ACLU initiated
court decisions. It seems to me that ACLU's attitude toward this
complaint is that the increase in crime is not ACLU's business.
If enforcing civil rights causes an increase in crime, that is
unfortunate but necessary. Of course, there is also dispute about
what constitutes civil rights. One of the sharpest disputes
concerns the Miranda Supreme Court decision. This suppresses
evidence collected improperly. The police and conservatives
say that the technicalities concerning what constitutes
"improperly" mean that many murderers are released and commit
more murders. It is proposed that sanctions against improper
collection of evidence be imposed separately and that the
evidence not be suppressed. The Miranda issue is one of many.
2. The ACLU among others have succeeded in getting
court decisions that the prohibition against Congress "passing
any law respecting the establishment of religion" prevents
parochial school from being served by school buses in communities
that have voted to bus students to all schools, public and private.
Conservatives also grumble about protection of anti-religious
statements in textbooks on free speech grounds while forbidding
pro-religious statements on separation-of-church-and-state grounds.
3. "pro-life" vs. "pro-choice".
4. ACLU alliances with leftists, including communists,
against people, including public officials, with whom ACLU
disagrees.
In the above, I am recounting what I recall conservatives
writing. I don't remember enough to say whether I agree with all
the criticisms, except on point 1, where I indeed agree with
the conservative criticism.
∂19-Aug-88 1215 Mailer Technological solution to abortion issue
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Imagine that it becomes possible to remove a fetus at any stage
of pregnancy and keep it viable with no more trouble to the woman
than is involved in an abortion. This is not the case at present,
but it may happen.
Consider the following possibilities.
1. The right-to-life people propose that abortion be modified
to procedures that remove the fetus but keep it alive. Would this
be acceptable to the pro-choice people? It might be claimed that
the "choice" they're pro includes an absolute right to make sure
that no new life results. What about it, pro-choicers?
2. Suppose that
(1) The pro-life people demand Government support for
bringing the fetus to term and supporting the resulting children.
(2) Two variants. (a) Fetus is brought to term outside
a human body. (b) A mother is required, and this has two variants.
(b1) Right to life women volunteer to carry the fetuses. (b2) Women
are hired to carry the fetuses to term, e.g. poor black women or
Third World women.
(3) What if Government money isn't involved? The right-to-lifers
volunteer to carry the fetuses and raise the children.
I find technological solutions to "moral problems" interesting. The
reactions to such proposals are also interesting. Many people are
so interested in fighting the moral battle on one side or the other,
that obviating the problem technologically seems offensive.
∂19-Aug-88 1412 JMC re: The Left's Big Idea
To: ddaniel@PORTIA.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 19 Aug 88 10:50:23 PDT.]
If you bring it by, and I'm not there and my secretary Pat Simmons in room 358
is there, she can xerox the articles on the spot and give the magazine
back to you.
∂19-Aug-88 1449 JMC AI and the Vincennes incident
To: ailist@AI.AI.MIT.EDU
I agree with those who have said that AI was not involved in the
incident. The question I want to discuss is the opposite of those
previously raised. Namely, what would have been required so that
AI could have prevented the tragedy?
We begin with the apparent fact that no-one thought about the Aegis
missile control system being used in a situation in which discrimination
between civilian traffic and attacking airplanes would be required.
"No-one" includes both the Navy and the critics. There was a lot
of criticism of Aegis over a period of years before 1988. All the
criticism that I know about concerned whether it could stop multiple
missile attacks as it was designed to do. None of it concerned the
possibility of its being used in the situation that arose. Not even
after it was known that the Vincennes was deployed in the Persian
Gulf was the issue of shooting down airliners (or news helicopters) raised.
It would have been better if the issue had been raised, but it appears
that we Earthmen, regardless of political position, aren't smart
enough to have done so. Now that a tragedy has occurred, changes will
be made in operating procedures and probably also in equipment and
software. However, it seems reasonably likely in the future
additional unanticipated requirements will lead to tragedy.
Maybe an institutional change would bring about improvement, e.g.
more brainstorming sessions about scenarios that might occur. The
very intensity of the debate about whether the Aegis could stop
missiles might have insured that any brainstorming that occurred
would have concerned that issue.
Well, if we Earthmen aren't smart enough to anticipate trouble,
let's ask if we Earthmen are smart enough and have the AI or other
computer technology to design AI systems
that might help with unanticipated requirements.
My conclusion is that we probably don't have the technology yet.
Remember that I'm not talking about explicitly dealing with the
problem of not shooting down civilian airliners. Now that the
problem is identified, plenty can be done about that.
Here's the scenario.
Optimum level of AI.
Captain Rogers: Aegis, we're being sent to the Persian Gulf
to protect our ships from potential attack.
Aegis (which has been reading the A.P. wire, Aviation Week, and
the Official Airline Guide on-line edition): Captain, there may
arise a problem of distinguishing attackers from civilian planes.
It would be very embarassing to shoot down a civilian plane. Maybe
we need some new programs and procedures.
I think everyone knowledgable will agree that this dialog is beyond
the present state of AI technology. We'd better back off and
ask what is the minimum level of AI technology that might have
been helpful.
Consider an expert system on naval deployment, perhaps not part
of Aegis itself.
Admiral: We're deploying an Aegis cruiser to the Persian Gulf.
System: What kinds of airplanes are likely to present within
radar range?
Admiral: Iranian military planes, Iraqi military planes, Kuwaiti
planes, American military planes, planes and helicopters hired
by oil companies, civilian airliners.
System: What is the relative importance of these kinds of airplanes
as threats?
It seems conceivable that such an expert system could have been
built and that interaction with it might have made someone think
about the problem.
∂19-Aug-88 2350 Mailer re: Trillion dollar deficit
To: helen@PSYCH.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from helen@psych.stanford.edu sent Fri, 19 Aug 88 21:09:49 PDT.]
Clausen is indeed defensive, and moreover he has always been a political
liberal. These days this means ignoring the questions of unemployment
and inflation, which have both gone down as the economy expanded,
and concentrating on the trade deficit and the national debt which
constitute the bad news. To the individual the debt is rather
abstract, and the trade deficit means that the foreigners continue
to prefer dollars and investment in the U.S. to the goods they make.
According to their predictions disaster has been six months away
since about 1983.
Welcome back to BBOARD, Helen.
∂20-Aug-88 1136 JMC re: Trillion dollar deficit
To: helen@PSYCH.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Sat, 20 Aug 88 08:54:51 PDT.]
1. With regard to Clausen, I read somewhere about his liberal reputation.
However, I have somewhat more direct information. A long time ago,
I knew a young woman in SF who ran a somewhat hip computer center
called Resource 1. Clausen was the financial angel. This was long
before Reagan, probably in the early 70s.
2. I don't know Hotelly.
3. No-one, liberal or conservative, as far as I know, predicted the
unprecedentedly long economic expansion under Reagan with simultaneously
low unemployment and inflation. People used to believe in something
called the Lasher curve that related the two and said that you could
get reduce one only at the cost of increasing the other. They also
said that the U.S. economy had moved into a stage in which the sum
of the two (the so-called misery index) had to be higher than it
had been. The only thing that's different about the preseent era
that can account for the prosperity is Reagan's holding out against
tax increases at whatever cost in national debt. Sooner or later
the foreigners will have all they want of our paper, and then
the dollar will go down, and our standard of living will reduce
to the extent that increased prices of imports make it do so.
This will revive some industries now limited by imports. Whether
the adjustment will involve a recession is, in my opinion, nothing
either liberal or conservative (this is not the only dimension
on which economist vary) economists can genuinely predict.
∂20-Aug-88 1237 JMC re: Trillion dollar deficit
To: helen@PSYCH.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Sat, 20 Aug 88 12:29:06 PDT.]
I don't pay good attention, but I'm pretty sure my taxes went down,
because I was paying at a marginal rate of 55 percent (state and
federal) and will pay for this year's income at a marginal rate
of 37.3 percent.
The percent of all Federal taxes paid by the top 5 percent of taxpayers
went up, but the percent of their incomes paid by these taxpayers
went down, because their taxable incomes increased. The reaction
to this fact makes a nice projective test of social attitudes.
If you think taxes are to collect money fairly you may be pleased.
If you think their purpose should be to equalize take-home-income,
you are likely to be displeased. The percentage who pay no taxes
at all because of low income also increased.
∂20-Aug-88 1812 JMC Grice
To: suppes@CSLI.Stanford.EDU
I hereby confirm my acceptance of your offer of Grice references.
∂20-Aug-88 1855 JMC re: IBM RT
To: binford@BOA-CONSTRICTOR.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Sat, 20 Aug 88 18:25:48 PDT.]
I've forgotten how much main memory it has. I think it has two or three
70 megabyte disks. You can come and look at it and also look at
the documentation. IBM is trying to decide whether they own it
or whether Stanford does.
∂21-Aug-88 1002 JMC suggested appendix
To: goodman@MIS.ARIZONA.EDU
My next message is a draft report written by the friend I mentioned
to you. I asked him whether he would agree to its inclusion in
our report as an appendix, and he said ok, but after a little thought
preferred to have his name omitted. He still has curiosity about the
East.
I think we should include it. I told you his name, and you can
telephone him if you want.
What he wrote agrees with the impressions I have received and is
enormously more detailed and soundly based. We might correct
his English.
∂21-Aug-88 1008 JMC
To: goodman@MIS.ARIZONA.EDU
The Impact of Comcon to the Computer Industry in the East
(The author of this draft, a West German, prefers to remain anonymous.)
After a visit in East Germany
It is well known that management is the main problem of the east,
not the secret service. Out of 10 decisions one might be fair
7 are medium and 2 are bad.
In the past the Comecon had decided to copy IBM. This was
a good decision in respect to the difficult synchronization problems
which necessary come along if one starts to develop a common computer
system in 6 different countries. It enabled system constructors in
case of contradiction to prove immediately who is responsible for the
mess: Plug into IBM! It was a bad decision in respect to the development
of an own computer science. Work in industrial software engineering
was mainly redoing western programming.
In the first years after the decision to copy IBM some reasonable
work was done --- one could speak of a success in some way: In
Karl-Marx-Stadt\/Chemnitz they developed a circuit for the IBM360\/370
which was not so bad. The software copying resulted in understanded
and redone program code for IBM's operating systems DOS and OS,
including compilers and various application programs. All these were
documented, understood, and could be maintained and updated.
The crisis of this method was already visible wehn a programmer
named Brusdailins could achieve a last success: TSO was adapted to
East Germany's IBM-360\/370 version.
Over the years the bulk of software to be analyzed, commented,
and understood grew more and more. OS-MVT or VM370 are much greater
systems as OS-MFT or DOS. More and more of the programs were used
directly --- without analysis and understanding. The documentation
was not translated but used directly by adding two title pages over
a copy of the English original. At present, mainly binaries out of
the west are used directly. The complicated work of reassembling,
commenting and understanding is mainly stopped.
The East is moderately dependent from western hardware
industry but completely from software industry. If somebody
woud organize the transfer of some tape with a 2-years copy
of INGRES including some vires --- the whole computation in
the East could catapulted astray.
The hard application of Comcon could not prevent the
delivery of computers into the east. There are enough pathways
through Singapore and other places which allow for secret
shipment of the devices. There are a lot of VAXes now alone
in East Germany --- at least more than 100. The machines seem
to be 750s and 780s --- one cannot get more information about
it.
The situation in software is similar to that in the
case of hardware: A lot of program systems are usable: VMS,
UNIX, Oracle 4.1, ADABAS, dBase, MS\/DOS, Wordstar.*
Of course, all programs got new names: VMS is now SVP,
UNIX is now MUTOS, Oracle is now ALLDBS, INGRES is now DABA32,
dBase is now REDABAS, MS\/DOS is now DCP, Wordstar is Text30.
The actual version of Oracle used is 4.1, there is already
a version 5.0 --- but without the DB-Administrator --- which came
vial Bulgaria. The documentation is for the version 4.2. This
is one of the two main results of the Comcon regime: {\bf There
are no sources for the software, the documentation does not
cover the used versions.} Because of the problem to steal some
software and the documentation together this should be
understandable.
It can be that at some place they have the documentation
of a version that is needed at another place. But there's no
communication between he users at low level: It is strictly
forbidden. In consequence --- there's no interaction in case
of difficulty, no distribution of knowledge. This is the other
main result of the Comcon regime: {\bf Everything which is
related to material which is restricted by Comcon is secret.}
Therefore, not everybody is allowed to work with --- he\/she
must be trustworthy in the sense of the communist system, i.e.
went through a security check. They are in general the less
qualified people who have the right security level.
Whereas the stagnation in the field of software will be
a deadly weakness of the east computer industry there is still
activity in the hardware branch. After copying the IBM series ---
which is still done: there is a project to switch the old circuit
to XA (the extended architecture of IBM - the interest moved
to DEC: The pdp11 was copied in the USSR already at the begin
of the 1980's (as M4). Now Robotron in Dresden has completed
a copy of the VAX780, which seems to be as fast as the original
but 10 times larger in volume. There are various versions of
ATs and XTs. Their power seems to be comparable --- their
stability is not.
A general problem is still the periphery of computers:
Display units, disk units of various size, floppy drives etc.
are slower and less reliable as their western models. Data
storage material has the same characteristics --- and it is
spare: If you have enough floppies to store your texts or
data you are very lucky. A eastern computer user may never
own a streamer tape with all his\/her stuff.
To sum up, the Comcon practice is quite effective. This
works not in the way its inventors might have seen before but
results in big difficulties of the east to use western hard
and software in such a way as to become competitionable.
* Other names are Framework an Ariadne.
Note added after oral communication with author. (1) He cited
an example where the head of an organization had a completer
description of as Western database but wouldn't share it with
his subordinates, making it useless. (2) Many people refuse
to accept secret information in order to avoid the
communication and travel restrictions that go with it.
∂21-Aug-88 1253 JMC
To: MPS
Please find two xerox boxes to replace the big box for moving books.
∂22-Aug-88 1645 JMC more re transfer problem
To: ME
∂22-Aug-88 1522 GOODMAN%uamis@rvax.ccit.arizona.edu more re transfer problem
Received: from rvax.ccit.arizona.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 22 Aug 88 15:21:51 PDT
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 88 14:51 MST
From: GOODMAN%uamis@rvax.ccit.arizona.edu
Subject: more re transfer problem
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu
X-VMS-To: MCCARTHY
From: UACCIT::POSTMASTER 22-AUG-1988 12:04
To: UAMIS::GOODMAN,POSTMASTER
Subj: returned mail from stanformd
I believe that your mail was returned because
the addressee JMC does not have an account on
the target machine sail.stanford.edu. I suggest
either sending mail to the system administrator
of sail.stanford.edu or the postmaster requestinf
assistance locating or obtaining the appropriate
userid@destination_node information.
It looks like JMC accesses the network from
an unregistered machine via sail, so that it
might appear that he//she is sending from sail.
This is the name and email address of the system
administrator for sail.stanford.edu:
Martin Frost me@sail.stanford.edu
If you are unsuccessful at obtaining help from
stanford people about one of their users, send
me mail and I will try to assist.
Regards,
Postmaster@rvax.ccit.arizona.edu (internet)
Postmaster@arizrvax.bitnet (bitnet)
UACCIT::Postmaster (decnet)
∂22-Aug-88 1649 JMC re: more re transfer problem
To: GOODMAN%uamis@RVAX.CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU, ME@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon, 22 Aug 88 14:51 MST.]
Your mail man is quite wrong. I am almost the original and main user
of SAIL.STANFORD.EDU. I have forwarded is message to the afore-mentioned
Martin Frost. Maybe he will fix the problem. It's unclear why I
receive some of your messages but not all. Maybe they came when
the machine was down or in some strange state on the verge of
going down.
∂22-Aug-88 2212 JMC re: AIList Digest V8 #62
To: AIList@AI.AI.MIT.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon 22 Aug 1988 22:21-EDT.]
Burning Giordano Bruno presents problems for many religions that Hiroshima
doesn't present for science. Science doesn't claim that scientific
discoveries can't be used in war. There would be problems for anyone
who claimed that 1930s science would avert World War II. As far as
I know, not one person in the world made that claim. There are also
problems for people who claimed that Marxism was a science, that
countries ruled by Marxism would not commit crimes and that
the Soviet Union was ruled by Marxism. Plenty of people believed
that and denied that, for example, the millions murdered as kulaks
were murdered.
A religion that claimed that the Catholic Church was protected
from doing evil by God, that the Catholic Church was responsible
for the killing of Bruno and that killing Bruno was a crime
have problems. Many other religious people who believe that
God will prevent their leaders from certain crimes and errors
have problems every time one of them is caught.
To have problems of this kind requires a certain complex of
beliefs, but such complexes are relatively common. If certain
people were found to have committed certain crimes, it would
disconcert me a lot.
∂25-Aug-88 1504 Mailer re: Pledge of Allegiance/Star-Spangled Banner
To: P.DRAVID@GSB-WHY.STANFORD.EDU, SU-ETC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from P.DRAVID@GSB-WHY.Stanford.EDU sent Thu 25 Aug 88 14:33:30-PDT.]
About 1940, in a case involving Jehovah's Witnesses and sponsored by
the ACLU, the Supreme Court decided that no individual, in this case
school children, could be compelled to recite the Pledge of
Allegiance. So far as I know, this decision is not presently disputed.
There is no law or regulation requiring any event, not sponsored by the
Government itself, to include any patriotic observance. It is strictly
a custom. There are some laws requiring that the U.S. flag, if used,
be treated in certain respectful ways. These laws took a beating during
the 1960s, i.e. they were widely violated with impunity.
I believe there are no laws requiring patriotic observances at Government
sponsored events, but I would believe that there are regulations of
particular Government agencies, especially the armed services requiring
that it be done in particular ways. Every parade I attended as a soldier
involved procedures that I suppose were matters of regulation. Their
violation would have been insubordination, which is punishable in the
military.
The State of Massachusetts can require whatever observances it wants to
in its schools, except religious ones. It cannot, however, require any
individual to take part.
It seems to me that the 1950s law including "under God" in the Pledge
of Allegiance is in contradiction to recent Supreme Court decisions.
However, if some members of the Court are inclined to challenge it,
their prudence probably tells them that doing so might result in a
Constitutional Amendment reversing their decision. While the religious
haven't ever succeeded in getting a Constitutional Amendment in favor
of any of their causes, I'll bet they would succeed if the Supreme
Court took the "under God" out of the Pledge.
Although an atheist, I don't feel strongly about any of these formal
observances and have never, to my knowledge, suffered for my open
lack of belief. I'd rather use the limited energy I have to devote
to civil rights matters to substantive issues rather than to oppress
the religious in revenge for their ancestors' mistreatment of unbelievers.
∂25-Aug-88 1800 JMC re: Exec.SummaryDraft
To: BLUMENTHAL@a.ISI.EDU, duane.adams@C.CS.CMU.EDU,
gannon%rdvax.dec@decwrl.dec.com, hearn@RAND-UNIX.ARPA, jlh@SIERRA.STANFORD.EDU,
mchenry@MIS.ARIZONA.EDU, ouster@GINGER.BERKELEY.EDU,
thornj@max.acs.washington.edu, CWeissman@DOCKMASTER.ARPA,
troywil@IBM.COM
CC: goodman@MIS.ARIZONA.EDU
[In reply to message from BLUMENTHAL@A.ISI.EDU sent Thu 25 Aug 88 18:15:25-EDT.]
Missing from the summary is any mention of whether COCOM policies have
had substantial effect in reducing technology transfer. Is this
omission intentional, e.g. because people couldn't agree, or did
people just forget to address the issue? My own opinion, reinforced
by a draft report from a recent German visitor to East Germany, is
that COCOM regulations have had a large effect, mostly by reinforcing
the difficulties that the bureaucratic, feudalistic and secretive
aspects of these societies already make for progress in technology use
and development. I believe that the West may be able to negotiate
large concessions in other areas for the relaxation or elimination of
COCOM.
In general the summary spends too much space on reciting truisms.
∂25-Aug-88 1828 Mailer Bush press conference about replacement of Quayle.
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
It seems to me that the following is one of the most remarkable
examples of self-sacrifice for the good of the party and country
I have ever seen. Unfortunately, computer difficulties prevented
our receiving the beginning of the wire service dispatch. The
following seems to be the end of Quayle's statement. Doubtless
the full version will be in tomorrow's newspapers.
... At first I thought the
the issues raised by the press over my National Guard service
were trivial and motivated by partisan considerations. I have
thought and prayed about the matter and have come to a different
conclusion. With God's guidance and after discussion with
Vice-President Bush, I have decided to withdraw my name from
the Republican Vice-Presidential nomination.
The press is right. The most important issue concerning a man
of my generation is the extent to which he served his country
in its time of trouble - the time of the struggle to prevent
the tragedy that occurred when the communists conquered Indochina.
Therefore, I have asked the Vice-President, and he has agreed, to
replace me with a man whose record of service is much stronger than
mine and whose continued work for national defense has been carried
out under difficult conditions and at the cost of great sacrifices.
In this change of heart the press has played a most important role
in emphasizing that just doing what is required is not enough for
someone aspiring to the position of Vice-President of the United
States.
Therefore, I hope you will give your full support to my replacement,
the new Republican candidate for Vice-President, Lieutenant Colonel
Oliver North, U.S. Marines, retired.
∂25-Aug-88 1841 JMC Please U.S. Mail the following
To: MPS
To: Professor Victoria Fromkin, UCLA
a TEXed copy of glasno[w88,jmc]
To: Dr. Alex Jacobson, Inference Corporation
the Kyoto Prize citation. Also enter the name and description
of that file in file[let,jmc].
∂25-Aug-88 2033 JMC re: Bush press conference about replacement of Quayle.
To: LES
[In reply to message rcvd 25-Aug-88 20:11-PT.]
Les, are you sure you want an explanation. Perhaps you didn't read
to the end.
∂25-Aug-88 2127 JMC Lisp calculator
To: MS@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
I would be glad to receive the calculator in Kyoto assuming Casio clears it
with the Inamori Foundation, whose guest I will be and with whom
I have agreed to clear any scheduled events. Most likely, I will come
to Japan slightly before the Inamori events, but this is not yet clear.
DARPA is having a meeting of Principal Investigators overlapping the
final tourist days of the Inamori events, so I won't be able to stay
past the end of the Inamori events. Thanks for your efforts.
I'll get back to you about space for Kameyama, but apart from the desk
problem, we'll be glad to receive him.
∂25-Aug-88 2129 JMC
To: MS@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
test message
∂26-Aug-88 1044 JMC re: Phone Call
To: MPS
[In reply to message rcvd 26-Aug-88 10:34-PT.]
Thanks, that's Panofsky, in case you ever need to spell it.
∂26-Aug-88 1406 JMC re: ISTO PI MEETING
To: boesch@VAX.DARPA.MIL
[In reply to message sent Fri, 26 Aug 88 16:42:51 EDT.]
There is a partial conflict between my time in Kyoto receiving the
Kyoto Prize, although the essential ceremonial part of the Kyoto
meeting occurs earlier. In any case, we will be represented and
I will come for the latter part of the ISTO meeting.
∂26-Aug-88 1414 JMC re: ISTO PI MEETING
To: dayal@CCA.CCA.COM
[In reply to message sent Fri, 26 Aug 88 17:07:18 EDT.]
Presumably you didn't intend to send copies of your reply to Boesch
to his whole mailing list.
∂26-Aug-88 1538 JMC Tikkun articles
To: ddaniel@POLYA.Stanford.EDU
Thanks for the material from Tikkun and sorry about misprinting
the location of my office. I used to have an office in Polya,
22 years ago.
As to the letters, evaluating them depends partly on knowing who knew,
suspected, or was negligent in not investigating what when, e.g.
concerning the murder of Betty van Patten by the Black Panthers.
(According to Horowitz's article in Bunzel's Political Passages, she
was recommended to the Panthers as a bookkeeper, discovered that they
were involved in some crime, I think drug dealing, and was murdered to
keep her mouth shut).
To me, Horowitz has the better of it, because he did evaluate
his own role in the events in the article referred to, whereas Gitlin
and Kazin essentially confine themselves to defense by counterattack.
Defense by counterattack has some relevance, and all sides indulge in
it, but evaluation of the actions of one's own side, and especially
one's own actions is even more important. In this respect, I think
the right has gone farther than the left - at some political cost.
For example, Jean Kirkpatrick's article on the difference between
authoritarianism and totalitarianism discusses and accepts the fact
that from her point of view it is necessary to support allies who
have committed certain crimes against humanity. Her article contains
some evaluation of the gains and losses from this.
Gitlin and Kazin offer no new information about the relation
of the New Left to the crimes of the Black Panthers or any evaluation
of the New Left's support of the communists in Indochina. Instead
they find a possible weak point, according to present knowledge,
in Horowitz's attack, i.e. his having mentioned Nicaragua, and
concentrate on that.
As for liberalism vs. communitarianism, I'm not sure what
either author is talking about, especially how it applies to any
current issues. I can't even tell whether they would disagree about
busing or minority quotas. Lasch is right about the import of Rawls's
book. Partly this is my ignorance about the contemporary intellectual
scene. I don't know who call themselves communitarians today. and
whether they use it or used it to justify communist tyrannies, e.g.
with the argument that poor peasants don't care about the niceties of
bourgeois democracy, like free speech and voting.
My own opinion, is that the more experience we have with the
elaborations on liberalism, the better Mill's original version looks.
∂26-Aug-88 1541 JMC Casio Lisp machine
To: MS@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Let me add to what I said previously that I am flattered and
grateful to the Casio engineers for being willing to go to
all that trouble and that I will try to be helpful in trying
out their calculator. It would be interesting to meet some
of them.
∂26-Aug-88 1547 JMC Tikkun material
To: ddaniel@PORTIA.Stanford.EDU
Thanks for the material from Tikkun and sorry about misprinting
the location of my office. I used to have an office in Polya,
22 years ago.
As to the letters, evaluating them depends partly on knowing who knew,
suspected, or was negligent in not investigating what when, e.g.
concerning the murder of Betty van Patten by the Black Panthers.
(According to Horowitz's article in Bunzel's Political Passages, she
was recommended to the Panthers as a bookkeeper, discovered that they
were involved in some crime, I think drug dealing, and was murdered to
keep her mouth shut).
To me, Horowitz has the better of it, because he did evaluate
his own role in the events in the article referred to, whereas Gitlin
and Kazin essentially confine themselves to defense by counterattack.
Defense by counterattack has some relevance, and all sides indulge in
it, but evaluation of the actions of one's own side, and especially
one's own actions is even more important. In this respect, I think
the right has gone farther than the left - at some political cost.
For example, Jean Kirkpatrick's article on the difference between
authoritarianism and totalitarianism discusses and accepts the fact
that from her point of view it is necessary to support allies who
have committed certain crimes against humanity. Her article contains
some evaluation of the gains and losses from this.
Gitlin and Kazin offer no new information about the relation
of the New Left to the crimes of the Black Panthers or any evaluation
of the New Left's support of the communists in Indochina. Instead
they find a possible weak point, according to present knowledge,
in Horowitz's attack, i.e. his having mentioned Nicaragua, and
concentrate on that.
As for liberalism vs. communitarianism, I'm not sure what
either author is talking about, especially how it applies to any
current issues. I can't even tell whether they would disagree about
busing or minority quotas. Lasch is right about the import of Rawls's
book. Partly this is my ignorance about the contemporary intellectual
scene. I don't know who call themselves communitarians today. and
whether they use it or used it to justify communist tyrannies, e.g.
with the argument that poor peasants don't care about the niceties of
bourgeois democracy, like free speech and voting.
My own opinion, is that the more experience we have with the
elaborations on liberalism, the better Mill's original version looks.
------- End undelivered message -------
∂26-Aug-88 1549 JMC
To: MPS
ren china[e88,jmc]=china
∂26-Aug-88 2051 Mailer Mighty Mouse and cocaine snorting
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Here's an excerpt from the August-B Accuracy in Media. They had
previously devoted a whole issue to attacking CBS for allowing
a segment that they interpreted as promoting drug use.
HERE'S SOME GOOD NEWS. AT THE END OF JULY CBS FIRED
GEORGE DESSART, ITS VICE PRESIDENT for program
practices. He's the man who should have kept the
coke-snorting scene out of the Mighty Mouse cartoon and
who certainly should have had it removed when a mother
complained about it last December. Instead, he
insisted to the end that we shouldn't believe our eyes
and should take his word for it when he said MM was
only enjoying the scent of a mixture of "stems,
tomatoes, and crushed flowers." CBS had announced that
it was cutting that scene out of the cartoon two weeks
before it axed Dessart.
THOSE OF YOU WHO WROTE LETTERS TO ADVERTISERS
PROTESTING MIGHTY MOUSE DESERVE SOME of the credit for
this. One of those advertisers, Mars, Inc., the maker
of M & Ms and Mars candy bars, acted on your
complaints. They got a copy of the tape and viewed it.
They didn't like what they saw. Edward J. Stegemann,
vice president, secretary and general counsel of Mars,
sent a stinging letter to CBS President Lawrence Tisch.
He said " we first learned of this outrageous episode
when a deluge of consumer and internal complaints
emerged." He said the cartoon was "one of the most
irresponsible and unprofessional examples of network
programming we have ever heard about." He sadi CBS
owed the public an apology. He wanted assurances that
Mars could count on CBS to show common sense in the
future. AIM has run an ad in Broadcasting magazine
praising Mars. If you want to show your appreciation,
write to Forrest E. Mars, Mars, Inc., 6885 Elm St.,
McLean, VA 22101. And when an advertiser tells you
they can't complain about a program, tell them about
Mars, Inc.
Not having seen the cartoon and never having seen anyone
snort cocaine, I still have no independent opinion about
whether Mighty Mouse was doing that. I have to admit,
however, that my image of the entertainment media's
anti-establishment self-image, makes the whole affair
seem plausible. Because the mother who complained to
Accuracy in Media had a videotape, presumably because
her children were watching a videotape in the first
place, Accuracy in Media was able to get independent
support for her interpretation. However, it may be that
the Mars people didn't really know what snorting cocaine
looked like.
Has it been shown on TV? Has anyone heard of smelling a
mixture of "stems, tomatoes and crushed flowers" and was
that interpretation somehow supported by the Mighty Mouse
plot?
∂26-Aug-88 2307 Mailer re: Mighty Mouse and cocaine snorting
To: Crispin@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
CC: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from Crispin@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU sent Fri, 26 Aug 88 22:27:45 PDT.]
I would like to bypass the matter of whether "CBS is a network of effete
wimps" and whether Accuracy in Media is a "bunch of right wing clods"
and get to the issue of the sequence itself.
First suppose that Bakshi was indeed being cute - and that he considered
it elegant to get a sequence of Mighty Mouse sniffing cocaine as a way
into a children's program as a way of expressing contempt for the
anti-drug campaign of the Administration and other "right-thinking"
people. Imagine that Bakshi bragged about it, and there was an
audio tape. One extreme point of view is the following.
1. Bakshi is an artist, and artists have the unrestricted right to express
themselves. Neither the public, nor an advertiser, nor CBS itself
has any right to complain. In particular, CBS has no right to violate
the artistic integrity of Mighty Mouse by cutting out the sequence.
The opposite point of view is the following.
2. Drugs are a serious threat, and popularizing them is an offense
agaist morality. All the above have a right to complain, and CBS
was right in firing the relevant executive.
Another point of view is.
3. The whole thing is a tempest in a teapot. So Bakshi twitted
the anti-drug campaign by putting in an ambiguous sequence that
admitted the interpretation that Mighty Mouse was snorting
cocaine. It should be taken as a joke, and maybe CBS should
clip it out if people grumble, but it's not worth a fuss
and certainly not worth firing a vice president.
4. Left is good, right is bad, and since Accuracy in Media are
known rightists, it's clear what side one should be on. Details
are irrelevant.
5. The reverse of 4.
Have I got the possible positions? I read Mark Crispin's
position as 4, and I suspect he read's mine as 5.
∂27-Aug-88 1031 JMC
To: CLT
Should I look at a telescope as a birthday present for Harold?
∂27-Aug-88 1153 JMC
To: CLT
Looks good, although perhaps we shouldn't call the storage room large.
∂27-Aug-88 1919 Mailer Mighty Mouse and Cocaine
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
I have finally reached an opinion of my own. It is conditional on
the following facts I can't personally verify.
1. Drugs generally and cocaine in particular are serious problems
in certain communities, e.g. among poor blacks. In particular,
they increase violent crime, robbery and gang domination of
communities.
2. Children in these communities are subject to considerable peer
pressure and pressure from older people and gangs to join the drug
culture.
3. Those pushing back, parents, schools and police are at a considerable
disadvantage.
4. Children in these communities watch TV a lot and are impressed
by what seems to be chic.
5. It would look to a significant number of children that Mighty
Mouse was snorting cocaine. An additional number of children would
hear of it from their peers. (The original complaint started when
a child told his mother Mighty Mouse was snorting cocaine).
If the above are true it was very bad to include the sequence in
question and correct to remove it. Moreover, if anyone did it
deliberately, it was morally criminal although not legally
criminal.
I would be curious if anyone has information bearing on the above
facts or has opinions concerning the reasoning from them.
∂28-Aug-88 0134 Mailer re: MM snorting cocaine
To: helen@PSYCH.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from helen@psych.stanford.edu sent Sat, 27 Aug 88 19:18:40 PDT.]
1. I'll defend Accuracy in Media, which I have been reading for a
year, as vigourously grumbling about media presentations they find
inaccurate or offensive. Complaints about inaccuracy far dominate
complaints like this one. Sometimes their complaints seem to me more
clearly justified that at other times. Their complaints are about
leftist bias as a rule.
2. Indeed cartoon characters were always doing strange things,
but I have never heard complaint about them before. I believe,
from media evidence only, that the drug situation among poor
black communities, etc. is far worse than it has ever been and that part of
the problem is that drugs are regarded as chic. My opinion on
this is not changeable by mere scorn.
3. As to media arrogance and bias, I recommend two books I saw
reviewed in Commentary. "Beyond Malice: The Media's Years of
Reckoning" by Richard M. Clurman and "The Coming Battle for the Media"
by William Rusher. The reviews in the September Commentary may
summarize the arguments sufficiently for some people.
∂28-Aug-88 1119 Mailer re: A.I.M.
To: P.DRAVID@GSB-WHY.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from P.DRAVID@GSB-WHY.Stanford.EDU sent Sun 28 Aug 88 02:01:28-PDT.]
Ajay Dravid has too easy a way to decide what he thinks of Accuracy in
Media and other matters. It's a check off method. If you learn what
they say about one issue, you can put them in a category - good or
bad. Accuracy in Media discusses about 100 issues per year.
Sometimes but rarely they win. Their complaint is accepted by the
media they complain about. If you want to form an opinion, you should
look into (say) ten of the complaints they make. I believe that
liberals, not hard leftists, who have done so agree that some of the
complaints have validity. Of course, conservatives agree with a lot
more.
Accuracy in Media is sometimes accused of advocating Government
censorship. In my year of reading it and its companion, Accuracy in
Academia, it has never done that. One of the common faults of the media
is to take any criticism as an attack on the First Amendment.
∂28-Aug-88 1152 Mailer re: U.S. Politics
To: P.DRAVID@GSB-WHY.STANFORD.EDU, SU-ETC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from P.DRAVID@GSB-WHY.Stanford.EDU sent Sun 28 Aug 88 01:20:17-PDT.]
The American presidential system, with its balance of powers, has certain
important differences from a parliamentary system. Some people regard
them as disadvantages, others as advantages. Compare it with the
British system. Margaret Thatcher, an energetic and creative politician,
has had a majority in Parliament for nine years and can have it for another
three or four. Any bill she decides upon, within limits imposed by the
possibility of a revolt in her own party, she gets. There is very rarely
suspense about the outcome of a vote in Parliament or even about who will
vote for and who will vote against. The Opposition party is just as
disciplined as the Government. There is no motivation for individual
members of the two parties to come to agreement or to form parliamentary
alliances. The Parliamentary committee system is rudimentary, because
almost always the committee deliberations will merely be exercises in
rhetoric in favor of predetermined positions. On the other hand, the
ideological positions of the parties are rather clear. Only electoral
failure causes modification.
The American system, or at least the American tradition, favors individual
legislative creativity, favors agreements of legislators from different
parties and alliances below the level of party. This enrages ideologists
on both the left and right, because they are always finding themselves
betrayed by compromises made by people they have helped elect. The number
of interests represented by long persistent blocs in the American Congress
is far larger than those represented by blocs in other systems.
Which is better?
The usual arguments are short range and special. People, both politicians
and political scientists, frustrated by not getting their way in some
important matter can often see that they would achieve some goal in the
other system. Therefore, they advocate it.
There is an objective way to measure provided we have a notion of
political progress and suppose that all the major democracies make
progress. Take, for example, those laws against racial discrimination
which are uncontroversial today and which exist today in both
parliamentary and presidential systems. You can ask which system
took the initiative. To which system can the reform be credited.
Conversely, we can take unsuccesful ideas which were adopted and later
reversed and which have few advocates today, e.g. prohibition.
We can suppose that it is a virtue of a political system to have
initiated the successful laws, i.e. the ones that become uncontroversial,
and to have avoided the unsuccessful laws, those whose reversal
eventually became uncontroversial. Of course, someone who believes
that the course of politics is monotonically downhill wouldn't accept
this criterion.
I'm not a political scientist, and I'm not about to study systematically
which system is better. However, my subjective impression is that the
U.S. has initiated more ideas that were adopted worldwide and had fewer
political disasters. However, some bad ideas, like prohibition, were
first tried in the U.S.
When one considers innovation at a lower political level, i.e. ideas
that can be adopted on the level of a U.S. state, it seems to me that
the U.S. is clearly ahead. Even though states' rights have been
enormously encroached upon, U.S. states have contributed and tested
many legislative ideas that have subsequently been adopted worldwide.
The West German Laender, corresponding to U.S. states, which were
set up after World War II in partial imitation of the U.S. system
have been quite innovative, and the French decentralization movement
of the 1980s is substantially motivated by their success in a European
environment.
To someone who believes that the world will be saved if only people
loyal to the doctrine he favors get full power, all these political
compromise and shilly-shallying will be sickening. The parliamentary
system will seem better and government by insurrection or even by a
military junta of the people with correct ideas will seem even better
than that. To me, however, the compromise form of government designed
in 1787 seems pretty good, and even most of the reasoning in its
favor written by James Madison in the Federalist papers
seems still validly applicable to our own times.
∂28-Aug-88 1210 JMC book
To: MPS
How to Build a Habitable Planet can go back to the library,
but I want to buy a copy. The bookstore won't order it for
me because the publisher is not a regular one. Look in the
book to find out how to order it.
∂28-Aug-88 1226 JMC NSF waste
To: faculty@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
Perhaps many of you have received an NSF brochure
entitled "Special Initiative on Coordination Theory
and Technology". It solicits multi-investigator
proposals for up to $400,000. Of course, the money
for this means that there will be less for unsolicited
proposals unrestricted as to content.
I would have no idea what kinds of proposals are considered
appropriate for this program, and it seems ill-thought out.
I don't know how such programs come into existence, but I
guess it's boring for an NSF program manager to simply
send out for review and evaluate proposals, and programs
initiated within NSF are more fun to run. Perhaps some
scientific friends of the program manager held a conference
claiming a need for this and lobbied for it. I believe the
scientific and professional societies should take the
initiative in proposing that NSF devote only a small fraction
of its budget to "special initiatives" and the need for them
be evaluated very carefully.
∂28-Aug-88 1351 JMC Special Initiative on Coordination Theory and Technology
To: lrosenberg@NOTE.NSF.GOV
CC: faculty@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU, reddy@FAS.RI.CMU.EDU
I received your four page announcement of this program and it filled
my heart with terror.
My first reaction was the following message sent to computer science
faculty at Stanford.
∂28-Aug-88 1226 JMC NSF waste To:faculty@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
Perhaps many of you have received an NSF brochure
entitled "Special Initiative on Coordination Theory and
Technology". It solicits multi-investigator proposals
for up to $400,000. Of course, the money for this
means that there will be less for unsolicited proposals
unrestricted as to content.
I would have no idea what kinds of proposals
are considered appropriate for this program, and it
seems ill-thought out. I don't know how such programs
come into existence, but I guess it's boring for an NSF
program manager to simply send out for review and
evaluate proposals, and programs initiated within NSF
are more fun to run. Perhaps some scientific friends
of the program manager held a conference claiming a
need for this and lobbied for it. I believe the
scientific and professional societies should take the
initiative in proposing that NSF devote only a small
fraction of its budget to "special initiatives" and the
need for them be evaluated very carefully.
Perhaps I was hasty, and I see that one can apply to you directly
for more information. Therefore, I am requesting information
as follows.
1. What is the full justification for the program, i.e.
the document on which NSF management signed off?
2. What combination of NSF and outside initiative led
to the program?
3. What is the planned duration of the program and at
what level is it funded?
4. What other programs are being squeezed for its funding?
Please consider this a Freedom of Information Act request
if possible. If regulations don't permit this being considered
such a request, e.g. if some form must be filled out, please let me
know. Also if you think we could both be satisfied by something
less formal, I will consider withdrawing the formal aspect of
the request. If some information is available right away and other
information will take longer, please send the former first.
∂28-Aug-88 1412 JMC previous message
To: faculty@SCORE.Stanford.EDU
It should have been addressed to lrosenberg@note.nsf.gov in case any
of you want to contact him directly. It was retransmitted to what is,
I hope, the correct address.
∂28-Aug-88 1603 JMC library books
To: MPS
Please get me the books listed in books[e88,jmc]. All are in Green Library
except one that is in the philosophy library.
∂28-Aug-88 1630 JMC re: NSF
To: RPG
[In reply to message rcvd 28-Aug-88 15:26-PT.]
I have no objection in principle to multi-investigator projects provided
they compete on the same quality grounds with single investigator projects.
I guess I don't even object to solicitations for work in particular areas
provided funds aren't pre-allocated to it. Assuming that funds are
pre-allocated was a mistake of mine. Not making it clear whether they
are pre-allocated was a mistake of NSF's.
I don't understand about the scientific societies. I have in mind AAAI
and ACM and they have a very broad membership.
You're probably right about tact. However, both Congress and NSF have
recently begun to favor ill-motivated giant enterprises, e.g. the
supercomputer centers. One doesn't persuade program managers that
the money should really be in someone else's program. I don't think
I could get more than a soothing message without the FOI request.
Why don't you try a soft inquiry regretting the harsh tone of mine,
and see what you get? If you get more, I'll drop the matter.
I think I need to qualify my previous message to Lawrence Rosenberg
and will do it.
∂28-Aug-88 1640 JMC qualification of previous message
To: lrosenberg@NOTE.NSF.GOV
CC: faculty@SCORE.Stanford.EDU, reddy@FAS.RI.CMU.EDU
A comment on my previous message has led me to qualify it.
If there were no pre-allocation of money to the Special Initiative, my
objections would be much less. However, the convening of a "panel of
experts" for this one program strongly suggests that at least implicit
commitments have been made to spend money even if the science and
engineering is weaker than in other proposals. So my request for
information still stands.
I should also make explicit that I have no specific objection to
multi-disciplinary or multi-investigator proposals provided they
compete directly with other proposals.
∂28-Aug-88 2300 JMC re: Soviet visitors
To: VAL
[In reply to message rcvd 28-Aug-88 21:48-PT.]
That's right. See you tomorrow.
∂28-Aug-88 2301 JMC re: re: Exec.SummaryDraft
To: GOODMAN@MIS.ARIZONA.EDU
[In reply to message sent Sun, 28 Aug 88 21:46:02 MST.]
Too bad for now, but maybe they'll come around eventually.
∂29-Aug-88 1022 JMC
To: MPS
People I remember inviting, mostly via Helen Morales
David Holloway
Sid Drell
Alex Dallin
Alex George
Condalezza Rice, poly sci
David Holloway
John Lewis
David Berstein
Ted Postol
Helen Morales, Isis, 320 Galvez,
Robert Conquest
Mikhail Bernstam,(o: 3-0527) (h: 323-8152)
∂29-Aug-88 1132 JMC re: congratulations
To: ATM%UWACDC.ACS.WASHINGTON.EDU@FORSYTHE.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon, 29 Aug 1988 10:25 PDT.]
Thanks for the message. There apparently won't be very many small
children. Few people can afford both small children and houses
in that neighborhood. I believe the Japanese have a category for
foreigners with simplified bowing rules. We're going to Japan
in November. We were going to buy the new house anyway, but this
sure makes it a lot easier.
∂29-Aug-88 1132 JMC calls
To: CLT
I did manage to pass the buck on my Russians for a while and make calls.
Thomson-McKinnon can loan up to 50 percent of the value of stocks.
The "personal banker", Matt Calagaris, can go higher if the given that
the purpose is not to buy stock. The broker, John Petrick, (Cate's on
vacation) says that the bank requires physical possession of the stock
certificates, which takes 4 to 6 weeks.
∂29-Aug-88 1651 JMC re: export control meeting
To: GOODMAN%uamis@RVAX.CCIT.ARIZONA.EDU,
DUANE.ADAMS@C.CS.CMU.EDU, BLUMENTHAL@a.ISI.EDU,
DONGARRA@ANL-MCS.ARPA, GANNON%RDVAX.DEC@decwrl.dec.com,
JAHIR@ATHENA.MIT.EDU, HEARN@RAND-UNIX.ARPA, JLH@SIERRA.STANFORD.EDU,
KNEMEYER@a.ISI.EDU, MCHENRY@GUVAX.BITNET, OUSTER@GINGER.BERKELEY.EDU,
Ralston@MCC.COM, CWEISSMAN@DOCKMASTER.ARPA
[In reply to message from GOODMAN%uamis@rvax.ccit.arizona.edu sent Mon, 29 Aug 88 10:13 MST.]
My own opinion is that the U.S. should be creative, but this doesn't mean
this committee. We are not in a position to help much in deciding what
the West should offer in exchange for relaxing COCOM. For example, it
might be decided that some COCOM restrictions might be relaxed in exchange
for relaxation of some of the Soviet territorial secrecy restrictions.
How much for how much is for the diplomats to suggest and the politicians
to decide.
∂29-Aug-88 1653 JMC re: Perceived media bias
To: helen@PSYCH.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon, 29 Aug 88 11:43:33 PDT.]
I'll try to find the book and post the reference. The Stanford expert is
Seymour Martin Lipset.
∂29-Aug-88 2004 JMC
To: ME
Can you find me an address that will work for
MCHENRY@GUVAX.BITNET
∂29-Aug-88 2018 Mailer re: Measuring bias (was Perceived media bias)
To: csli!poser@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from csli!poser@csli.stanford.edu sent Mon, 29 Aug 88 18:28:42 PDT.]
Marotta's study only did for Stanford what has been done by various
people, e.g. Lipset, for American faculties generally. I believe
Marotta included all the social science departments, which are those
to which Hoover should be compared. The general result, which there
is every reason applies to Stanford also, is that political orientation
depends strongly on field. Moreover, the people tended to have that
orientation long before they entered the field. Engineers and
business school people tend to be conservative, but engineering
faculty are not as conservative as engineers generally. In the
sciences, mathematicians tend to the left, chemists to the right.
The social sciences are all quite liberal.
All this is old hat. The only significant point Marotta could have
is that the bias at Stanford is more extreme than elsewhere. He
can use this to add to anecdotal evidence about appointments being
denied to conservatives by departmental votes. He can also fairly
use it to defend Hoover against charges of bias.
Of course, there are two interpretations of the leftward tilt of
political science professors. One interpretation is that the
profound study of political science shows that leftist policies
are better. The other is that people of conservative mind have
better things to do than become professors of political science.
Neither hypothesis seems easily testable.
Maybe it could be tested whether the PhDs in political science
are more or less leftist than the same people were as undergraduates,
but that would be hard to measure accurately, even assuming
someone were motivated to try.
I'll try to find the references when I get time. If anyone wants
to do it first, go through back issues of the magazine Public
Opinion. It has opinion studies of many subgroups of the
population.
∂29-Aug-88 2053 JMC export control meeting
To: MCHENRY%GUVAX.BITNET@FORSYTHE.STANFORD.EDU
(resent because our mailer loses on bitnet)
My own opinion is that the U.S. should be creative, but this doesn't mean
this committee. We are not in a position to help much in deciding what
the West should offer in exchange for relaxing COCOM. For example, it
might be decided that some COCOM restrictions might be relaxed in exchange
for relaxation of some of the Soviet territorial secrecy restrictions.
How much for how much is for the diplomats to suggest and the politicians
to decide.
∂30-Aug-88 1526 Mailer Liberal-Conservative balance on TV
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
The following letter appeared in the New York Times on August 30 and
is an estimate of the liberal-conservative balance. I don't watch
TV, so I would be interested in other people's agreement or
disagreement with his characterization of the liberal or
conservative orientation of the individuals he mentions.
Eric Alterman pays high tribute to a handful of
conservative commentators who appear frequently on
television and whose articles are often published in
some of our leading newspapers (Op-Ed, Aug. 2). Mr.
Alterman seems to believe that John McLaughlin, Bob
Novak, Pat Buchanan, Morton Kondracke (all of the
McLaughlin television program), William F. Buckley Jr.
(who has his own television program) and George Will
(who is one of the crowd on ABC's ``This Week with
David Brinkley) have succeedded not only in shifting
the terms of the political debate, but also in
redefining the English language.
Mr. Alterman fails to mention any of the
liberals who appear on these and other popular
television programs. Are they such insignificant
personalities? Or is he angry at them because they have
failed to put those upstart conservatives in their
place?
The McLaughlin group is noted for including articulate
liberals and conservatives, all of whom speak their
minds forcefully. There is Jack Germond, Eleanor
Clift, Hodding Carter and Michael Kinsley, to name a
few. Mr. Will has to offset such liberal heavyweights
as Sam Donaldson, Tom Wicker, Mr. Carter ann Mary Ann
Dolan. Mr. Buckley is noted for inviting liberals and
leftists to joust with him on ``Firing Line.''
There are also numerous programs whoe hosts are
liberals: Chris Wallace on ``Meet the Press,'' Lesley
Stahl on ``Face the Nation'' and Ted Koppel on
``Nightline'' for half an hour five days a week. There
is the very popular and influential liberal Phil
Donahue, who works his magic for an hour each day.
There is PBS's "Washington Week in Review,", where the
liberal host and liberal reporters seldom if ever
disagree with one another in interpreting the week's
events.
And how could Mr. Alterman have overlooked that John
Chancellor, a liberal, has the great privilege of
editorializing on the NBC Nightly News several times a
week, doing explicitly what the liberal anchors and
reporters of the network news organizations do
covertly? - Reed Irvine
Opinions are also solicited on whether the letter omits important
commentators on either side.
∂30-Aug-88 1749 JMC re: Oops
To: RTC
[In reply to message rcvd 30-Aug-88 17:24-PT.]
You didn't send it to me.
∂30-Aug-88 1817 JMC re: libraries
To: nilsson@TENAYA.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue, 30 Aug 88 16:23:22 PDT.]
I guess I owe them some help, so I'll volunteer.
∂30-Aug-88 1834 Mailer re: Greenhouse effect
To: rick@HANAUMA.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from rick@hanauma.stanford.edu sent Tue, 30 Aug 88 16:11:18 pdt.]
According to statements of middle 70s, there will be enough coal for seven
hundred years even if we use it to make synthetic oil. The greenhouse effect
might be serious long before then. Also it might not. One way to reverse it
would be to cut down the forests of Canada and the Soviet Union but not
burn the wood. Then replace them by fast growing trees. That could remove
a lot of CO2 from the air, and the procedure could be repeated as often
as necessary.
More practical is to accelerate the use of nuclear power for electricity
and develop electric cars or use electricity to hydrogenize coal or
to make hydrogen for vehicle fuel. Nuclear electricity won't do enough
of the job by itself unless it is also used to make vehicle fuel.
The less anti-progress environmentalists, e.g. Senator Wirthlin of
Colorado, are gradually coming to realize that their opposition to
nuclear energy was a mistake. So far as I know, the Sierra Club
continues its "blind opposition to progress".
If it is really true that the heat balance of the earth can be
significantly affected by small amounts of chemicals in the upper
atmosphere, this should be thought of as a means of humanity
getting control of these aspects of its environment - in the short
run preventing an excessive rise in temperature and in the long
run averting the next ice age.
In order for people and governments to think seriously about this
it is necessary to overcome the thoughtless idea that nature, left
alone is benign, or that there is such a thing as "the balance of
nature." In fact nature fluctuates on various time-scales without
regard to the welfare of humanity or any other species.
∂30-Aug-88 2011 Mailer re: JMC's posting of letter from NYT
To: gopi@SONOMA.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from gopi@sonoma.stanford.edu sent Tue, 30 Aug 88 19:18:46 PDT.]
Oh, well. Now everyone, thanks to Mr. Gopinath,
can state an opinion of the accuracy of Mr. Irvine's characterizations
without having to evaluate even one of them.
∂30-Aug-88 2225 Mailer re: Energy Question: What ever happened to SOLAR?
To: helen@PSYCH.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from helen@psych.stanford.edu sent Tue, 30 Aug 88 21:48:02 PDT.]
The latest Science, which I read and put for the taking outside my
office door, has an article on a new solar cell, getting above
30 percent efficiency, assuming it is provided with sufficiently
concentrated sunlight, e.g. concentrated by mirrors. As an
incidental matter, the article mentions the cost reductions that
would be required before solar energy would compete with nuclear
or fossil fuel energy. The basis for this estimate, e.g. what
latitude and what cloudiness are assumed, isn't given. The Solar
Energy Research Institute in Colorado, which is the main Government
operated research organization is mentioned, and its address might
be given. One of the solar cells used in a two layer combination
was designed at Stanford, and the designer is referred to. The
Stanford outfit that would have a reference is the Energy Modeling
Forum, and Jim Sweeney, LB.JLS@FORSYTHE, is the Director.
The reason for the lack of news is that, while there has been
progress, costs are still far too high for any but the most
specialized uses. They are still a factor of 10 or so above
the cost of nuclear or coal-produced electricity. Whether
they will come down enough is doubtful. Many of the favorable
predictions for solar energy have been based on even more
doubtful estimates of cost increases for its competitors.
Articles about this are a bit dull for the front pages, but should be
found on or close to the religion page.
∂30-Aug-88 2241 Mailer re: Greenhouse effect
To: rick@HANAUMA.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from rick@hanauma.stanford.edu sent Tue, 30 Aug 88 22:11:39 pdt.]
Mr. Ottolini has misread my suggestion. It was to cut down the trees
and NOT burn them, just stack them somewhere or put them at the bottoms
of swamps. Then replant with fast growing trees. The net effect is
to remove carbon from the atmosphere. My point was that it is possible
for humanity to remove carbon from the atmosphere - if it becomes
important to do so. Logging all of Siberia and Canada would be
expensive but cheaper than tolerating some of the scenarios that
have been proposed as consequences of the greenhouse effect.
∂31-Aug-88 1422 JMC
To: helen@PSYCH.Stanford.EDU
If you want the Science issue re solar, I'll ID mail it.
∂31-Aug-88 1441 JMC re: Research Mentor Info
To: HEMENWAY@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Wed 31 Aug 88 14:30:08-PDT.]
Leave it as is.
∂31-Aug-88 1530 Mailer alternative fuel
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
I have a German report (in English) on a project involving hydrogen
as a fuel for vehicles. Burning hydrogen produces only water - no
CO2. Hydrogen has to be produced using another source of energy.
At present hydrogen is commercially produced from natural gas, but
this has no long term potential for general use, because burning
hydrogen produced in this way gives less energy and puts the CO2
into the atmosphere as part of the hydrogen production process.
The long term solution is electrolysis of water, but this requires
electric energy. It will be the key to using nuclear energy to
power vehicles, but electricity costs are too high to compete with
present fuels unless and until CO2 emissions have to be eliminated.
It would then be affordable but painful, provided present French costs
of nuclear electricity generation could be achieved.
The German project is a mere token. The only way of using hydrogen
as a vehicle fuel is as a liquid. However, handling liquid hydrogen
in a road vehicle requires an expensive and lengthy development
process. The German project stores the hydrogen as a metal hydride.
This is not so difficult, but the weight of the hydride required
to store the hydrogen is too much to give the vehicle a reasonable
range. Therefore, their actual project is even more token. There
is an auxiliary gasoline tank, and at low power only hydrogen is
burned and when high power is required only gasoline. The range
is 150 km, about half that of a gasoline powered car. All the
contraption does is reduce emissions but not as much as using
catalysts.
Many energy projects, U.S. as well as German, have this token
character.
If anyone wants the report, he can have a copy.
∂31-Aug-88 1628 JMC re: IBM - RT
To: wheaton@ATHENA.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Wed, 31 Aug 88 16:23:31 PDT.]
I don't think he reached a conclusion on whether it would suit him.
Would you call him about it? There is documentation here if he wants
it. Also IBM still doesn't seem to know if they own it or whether
Stanford does.
Jim Kirby, 3-4296, is the relevant ibmer for the RT
the serial number is 26-0000832
∂31-Aug-88 1729 JMC
To: IGS@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
I have borrowed LISP LORE.
∂31-Aug-88 1928 Mailer re: beakdown of Tax income by income...
To: BILLW@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from BILLW@score.stanford.edu sent Wed 31 Aug 88 15:17:32-PDT.]
This information is included in The Statistical Abstract of the United
States, a valuable book published annually by the Feds for about $28.
The latest edition I have is 1986, and the latest tax data it has is
1983. Unfortunately, the information you request would have to be
computed from two tables. (1) Average and marginal tax rates for
selected income groups. (2) Adjusted gross income by source
of income and income class. If anyone wishes to make the calculation,
he should use the 1988 Statistical Abstract.
I'm not sure what expenses are subtracted in computing adjusted gross income.
∂31-Aug-88 1932 Mailer re: Measuring bias
To: poser@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from poser@csli.stanford.edu sent Wed, 31 Aug 88 18:11:24 PDT.]
The Hoover example cited is forcing Campbell to retire at 65. After
this two major administrative appointments were made of people over
65, including former President Lyman. Naturally, a reason was given
as to why the two cases were incomparable.
∂31-Aug-88 2004 Mailer opposition to OTEC
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
The environmentalist opposition to OTEC reminds me of the
following statements by various adherents of environmentalism
and what I call the energy religion. My interpretation is
that many "environmentalists" want to reform us far more than
they want energy problems solved.
"If you ask me, it'd be a little short of disastrous for
us to discover a source of clean, cheap, abundant energy
because of what we would do with it. We ought to be looking
for energy sources that are adequate for our needs, but that won't
give us the excesses of concentrated energy with which we could
do mischief to the earth or to each other."
- Amory Lovins in %2The Mother Earth%1 - Plowboy Interview, Nov/Dec 1977, p. 22
"...Giving society cheap, abundant energy ... would be the equivalent
of giving an idiot child a machine gun." Paul Ehrlich, %2An Ecologist's
Perspective on Nuclear Power%1, May/June 1975 issue of
Federation of American Scientists Public Issue Report. Ehrlich
is a Stanford Professor and was a supporter of the 1967 idea that
a major famine in the underdeveloped world was inevitable by 1975.
"We can and should seize upon the energy crisis as a good excuse and
great opportunity for making some very fundamental changes that we
should be making anyhow for other reasons." - Russell Train,
%2Science%1 184 p. 1050, 7 June 1974. Train was head of EPA in the
Nixon (and maybe also Ford) Administration. His appointment was, from
my point of view, one more example of the folly of appeasing fanatics
by appointing one of them to public office.
∂01-Sep-88 0115 JMC reply to message
To: helen@PSYCH.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 1 Sep 88 00:33:52 PDT.]
Can't complain. Lunch would be fine. Today, i.e. Friday, or any day
next week. Suggest off campus.
∂01-Sep-88 0940 JMC re: reply to message
To: helen@PSYCH.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 1 Sep 88 09:30:31 PDT.]
OK, how about noon in BACK of your bldg towards MJH.
That's the shortest route through the present obstacle course
to my car. Let's try El Dorado, then.
∂01-Sep-88 1138 JMC
To: VAL
nsf[w88,jmc] 1988 NSF Basic Research in AI Proposal
∂01-Sep-88 1159 JMC re: Paul Erlich's 1967 prediction of famines
To: helen@PSYCH.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SCORE.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message from helen@psych.stanford.edu sent Thu, 1 Sep 88 10:18:40 PDT.]
Ehrlich wasn't referring to such minor famines as that in Ethiopia, caused
by a tyrannical government and alleviatable by shipment of food in so
far as the government would allow it. He predicted famine of a magnitude
that forced the developed world, especially the U.S. into triage, some
countries were ok, some could be saved by our action, and some were doomed
no matter what we did and therefore shouldn't be helped. I'll find more
precise quotes.
∂01-Sep-88 1442 JMC re: Paycheck
To: MPS
[In reply to message rcvd 01-Sep-88 14:28-PT.]
That will be qlisp.
∂01-Sep-88 1457 JMC re: NSF proposal
To: VAL
[In reply to message rcvd 01-Sep-88 14:53-PT.]
July 1989 is a realistic starting date, but it is customary to use an
unrealistic starting date. Therefore, let's use January 1989. The
outline looks excellent. Yes, include Arkady.
∂01-Sep-88 1511 JMC re: Special Initiative on Coordination Theory and Technology
To: lrosenbe@NOTE.NSF.GOV
[In reply to message sent Thu, 01 Sep 88 17:48:46 -0400.]
I received both your Aug 29 and your Sept 1 messages with same
content.
∂01-Sep-88 2121 Mailer re: "Trickle down"
To: helen@PSYCH.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from helen@psych.stanford.edu sent Thu, 1 Sep 88 19:14:23 PDT.]
Adam Smith said,
"It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the
baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their
own self interest." - An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the
Wealth of Nations, book 1, ch. 2.
Many have proposed societies based on benevolence rather than self
interest. Some such have got power to rearrange society. The
results have been depressing. I would be grateful if Helen would
elaborate her ideas about how one might do better than "trickle
down".
∂02-Sep-88 0955 JMC Luis Pereira at 1130
To: VAL
He is a Portuguese logic programmer coming at 1130, and I suggest
we also have lunch with him at the Faculty Club.
∂02-Sep-88 1054 JMC
To: MS@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Thanks again.
∂02-Sep-88 1136 JMC re: nsf proposal
To: VAL
[In reply to message rcvd 02-Sep-88 11:13-PT.]
I haven't written that yet. In fact I guess that's where I got stuck.
Perhaps we should omit that promise. I suppose we could write something
brief.
∂02-Sep-88 1532 JMC re: Out-of-State speeding ticket
To: J.JIMJAM@LEAR.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri 2 Sep 88 12:49:17-PDT.]
Presumably you have a California driver's license or one from some
other state in the U.S. The consequences of ignoring the Oregon
ticket depends on the agreements between Oregon and California (or
your home state) regarding such matters. The intent of such
agreements is that out-of-state tickets should have the same
consequences as in-state tickets. However, many of them aren't fully
implemented. I have never heard of its having immigration consequences.
∂02-Sep-88 1549 JMC re: letter of reference?
To: pauls@BOULDER.COLORADO.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 1 Sep 88 11:29:35 MDT.]
I'm flattered by your considering me as a reference, considering that
I have an approach to AI quite different from the one I believe you
have been following. I'm willing to do it - partially. Namely, if
the send me the papers, I will comment on the ones that are of
scientific interest to me and which don't require more preparation
to understand than I have time for. If they ask for comparison with
several other people working in the connectionist paradigm, I may
have to pass on that also. If they are interested under those
conditions, I am willing.
∂02-Sep-88 1556 JMC RT
To: ullman@Score.Stanford.EDU
1. Take all the stuff.
2. Give me a receipt for the stuff, reading serial numbers off the
separate boxes.
3. Tell George Wheaton.
Jim Kirby, 3-4296, is the relevant ibmer for the RT
the serial number is 26-0000832
∂02-Sep-88 1605 JMC
To: sloan@Score.Stanford.EDU
For what period are we appointing Ian Mason?
∂02-Sep-88 1652 JMC Keller use of Alliant
To: CLT@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
CC: JJW@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
CC: ARK@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
I think I've made the right decision, and no action is called for now,
but this is in keeping you informed about everything that has financial
consequences - even things that have favorable financial consequences.
Arthur and Joe came in about Arthur's proposal to use the Alliant
for database studies. Joe thinks it won't interfere. Arthur and
I had talked about this previously, and Arthur put some hardware
money in his NSF proposal. The NSF proposal was granted, but the
hardware money was chopped. He has $300 per month earmarked for
this purpose. I told him that for that he couldn't afford to use
the Alliant, and he would have to divert some of his people money.
It could be used to pay some of our people, e.g. Joe. The rate
should be established according to what other people are charging
other people for using a machine of this class. Joe and he will
come up with an algorithm. When they do, you should also look at
it. Let me know if you think of some additional considerations.
∂02-Sep-88 1656 JMC reply to message
To: SLOAN@Score.Stanford.EDU
CC: CLT@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri 2 Sep 88 16:44:58-PDT.]
Mason's appointment should be for 3 years or coterminous with funding,
whichever comes sooner. Unless you hear otherwise, any appointment in my
groups is for two years or coterminous, unless I say something else.
I sometimes forget to put time limits on appointments, so I would be
grateful if you would ask me when I've forgotten.
∂02-Sep-88 1826 JMC re: IBM RT
To: binford@BOA-CONSTRICTOR.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 2 Sep 88 17:41:24 PDT.]
I suspect it is, from your point of view, obsolete in that it
has the first model CPU. Today seems to be RT day, because
about two hours ago, Jeff Ullman came by and asked for it, so
I said he could have it. He hasn't actually taken it yet,
though.
∂02-Sep-88 2129 JMC
To: JJW@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
∂02-Sep-88 2108 CLT Keller use of Alliant
Another thing you might try to get paid for is the maintenance
contract -- which is close to 3k a month.
∂02-Sep-88 2132 JMC re: "trickle down"
To: PEYTON@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU,
su-etc@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message from PEYTON@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU sent Fri, 2 Sep 88 16:46:39 PDT.]
Where do you get the overcrowded schools? Palo Alto Unified School
District has been closing schools because of lack of students.
∂03-Sep-88 1000 JMC knowledge level
To: IT21%SYSB.SALFORD.AC.UK@MITVMA.MIT.EDU
You may be interested in my paper
*{\bf McCarthy, John (1979)}:
>``Ascribing Mental Qualities to Machines'' in {\it Philosophical Perspectives
*in Artificial Intelligence}, Ringle, Martin (ed.), Harvester Press, July 1979.
*% .<<aim 326, MENTAL[F76,JMC],
*% mental.tex[f76,jmc]>>.
It discusses some of the same topics as does Newell. As to whether
logic is at the knowledge level or the symbol level (and taking these
concepts as still somewhat vague), this might depend on whether you
regard logic purely syntactically or take semantics into account
also. If your library doesn't have the book, and it probably won't,
I can send you a copy of the paper.
∂03-Sep-88 1442 Mailer non-political ACLU
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Here's the beginning of a solicitation I received from the
ACLU.
"I'm 37 years old, and Ronald Reagan's presidency will last the
rest of my life."
The ACLU may believe that Reagan's judicial appointments
are a disaster for civil liberties, but once they make this the
dominant fact, they can no longer claim to be non-political.
Someone who agrees with ACLU on civil liberties and, for
example, with Reagan on economic issues is being told the
latter is of negligible importance. In fact, ACLU attacks
Reagan also on the economic grounds.
"Reagan's judges are very wealthy, with one out of
five a millionaire."
Side remark: With the inflation in California housing, I would be
surprised if one in five of Stanford full professors weren't a
millionaires, i.e. has a million net worth. Being a millionaire ain't
what it used to be.
∂03-Sep-88 1859 Mailer lack of prosperity
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
I begin by remarking that "trickle down" was invented as a
pejorative term by liberals who accused conservatives of
having a "trickle down" theory, presumably as opposed to
the liberals who propose direct measures to aid the poor.
We are indeed not as prosperous as we were in 1965, and this
has a variety of causes. Here are some in order of the
importance which I ascribe to them.
1. "tune in, turn on and drop out". Enormous productivity and
inventiveness was lost when a significant segment of the
intellectual youth dropped out wholly or partially. Almost
all of them dropped in but at a lower level of skill and
creativity than they otherwise would have had. We cannot know
if they would have made many of the inventions we now owe
to their Japanese contemporaries if they had stayed in. The
drop in engineering majors was very striking, and engineering
majors are still way down.
2. environmentalism and safety. Productivity in
coal mining, both underground and surface, dropped in half
between 1969 and 1979. I'm not saying this was bad, but
the increased health and safety was not cheap. What was
bad were the excesses of environmentalism. But for the
anti-nuclear campaigns, we would be where France is today -
75 percent of electricity from nuclear energy. France
didn't commit itself to going fully nuclear for electricity until
after the first oil crisis in 1973, whereas American utilities started
in 1966. France will be the big winner of the next oil
crisis, with Japan close behind.
3. Environmentalism also bears a large part of the responsibility
for the inflation in housing. Environmentalist opposition to
more housing in this area helped the value of my house to rise
from about $60,000 to $500,000. I win, but my children lose.
They can't afford to buy houses until they are much older or
until I drop dead. They are helping to create a nineteenth
century society in which inherited wealth determines social
position. Right after World War II, any GI who got a working
class job could afford the down payment and the payments on
a house. Maybe most environmental measures have some virtues, but
taken together they have enormous costs.
4. The increasing cost of government. The fraction of GNP taken by
government continued to increase (though more slowly) during the
Reagan era. Some increases in social programs, as well as in defense,
were supported by the Administration. Others were part of entitlement
programs that the Administration could not avoid increasing without
the consent of the Democrats in Congress. The largest increase was
probably in Social Security, and there's more to come. Fortunately
for me, but unfortunately for them, when I retire, there will be
plenty of baby boomers in their working years paying the payroll tax.
When they retire, the fact that they had few children will cause a
crisis in Social Security.
The key point is that Social Security, unlike (say) TIAA, isn't
funded, i.e. the benefits aren't financed by investing the
contributions of the future beneficiaries. We pay less in payroll tax
than we will get back, and the future working population will have to
support our benefits. I'm not complaining.
All this is more of an inconvenience than a tragedy.
The advance of technology will eventually bail us out, although
some other countries that have committed only a subset of
our foolishness, may exceed us in prosperity.
However, it would be nice to do better. Here's my
recipe.
1. More engineers, less lawyers.
2. More rational environmentalism. I'll believe it when
the Sierra Club reverses its anti-nuclear stand.
3. Restrict the growth of Government. In my opinion, Reagan
is a hero for bulling through tax reduction and maintaining
his threat to veto tax increases. I doubt that Bush is as
strong-minded although he promises.
∂04-Sep-88 1650 JMC chron
To: MPS
It seems only to go up to july 25. Anyway I need to find an
nsf brochure about co-ordinated research and give Jussi a copy.
Where do you keep the stuff before you file it. Perhaps you
could file it physically as soon as you get it but have a
movable label "unindexed". Then I could find something I
have given you by looking through the unindexed material provided
it doesn't get too voluminous.
∂05-Sep-88 0838 Mailer re: Videotaping takeoffs/landings?
To: rsf@PESCADERO.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from rsf@pescadero.stanford.edu sent Mon, 5 Sep 88 00:46:01 PDT.]
I never heard of a proposal to videotape takeoffs and landings, and
I used to be a regular reader of Aviation Week. My guess is that the
proposal has never been made by people in a position to get even an
article written. Maybe its a good idea.
Maybe it's not. Most airports don't have accidents more often than
once every 20 years, but maybe it's still worthwhile. a big airport
has several runways which may be active simultaneously. Planes would
have to be followed from (say) the inner marker until well after
takeoff. There would have to be several cameras, and the tracking
would have to be automatic. Who wants to work on an automatic
airplane tracker?
An alternative would be to put more sensors in the airplane, so that
the position of the flaps would be included in what the black box
records. As airplanes become increasingly fly-by-wire, this will
be easier.
∂05-Sep-88 0906 Mailer Democracy in China
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Wise guys, including Stanford and Harvard professors,
who said that Western democracy was irrelevant to China, should
comment on this.
a069 0609 05 Sep 88
PM-China-Dissident,0626
China's Top Dissident Says Anti-Marxist Feeling Widespread
By DAN BIERS
Associated Press Writer
HONG KONG (AP) - China's leading dissident said today that
anti-Marxist feeling is widespread in Communist China, but that
obstacles to independent labor or political groups remain formidable
in the authoritarian state.
''Many people don't agree with Marxism, even workers and students,''
Fang Lizhi, a 52-year-old astrophysicist, said during an interview
with four Western journalists. ''Even people of my generation ...
don't believe in Marxism.''
Fang supports a multiparty democracy over one-party Communist rule
and believes the first step toward political reform should be seeking
freedom of speech and of the press, which is now strictly controlled
by the state.
Taiwan, the seat of the Nationalist Party that still claims to be
the legitimate ruler of all China, could provide an example of
political reform with the recent end of a ban on opposition parties,
Fang said.
Although Taiwan's multiparty system is just getting started, ''at
least it's better than the (Chinese) mainland,'' Fang said.
But Fang acknowledged conditions are not yet ripe for formation of
new political groups in China.
''They should wait (until) the private economy becomes dominant, or
at least becomes a larger factor,'' said Fang, who stressed that the
emergence of an independent middle class may be key to creating new
political forces.
In the past decade, senior leader Deng Xiaoping has introduced a
number of market-oriented economic reforms to stimulate production
and modernize China after the 1966-76 Cultural Revolution nearly
destroyed the economy.
Private enterprise is flourishing in some regions, although China's
leaders still believe in central economic planning.
Fang was purged from the party last year when authorities accused
him of inciting pro-democracy student demonstrations in several
cities.
He was forced to resign from his post as vice president of the
Science and Technology University in Hefei, Anhui province, and was
transferred to the Beijing Observatory, where he continues his
research and writing.
Workers share many of the students demands for political freedom but
face a daunting task organizing independent groups such as the
outlawed Solidarity labor movement in Poland, Fang said.
''The organization of dissident organizations, something like an
independent union, is very difficult'' because of strong government
opposition, he said.
Many Chinese students regard Fang as a hero for his outspoken
criticism of the Communist government. When he spoke informally to a
group at Beijing University earlier this year, a crowd of students
thrust books, envelopes and paper money for him to sign.
Chinese authorities have allowed Fang to travel overseas despite his
criticism. Fang acknowledged that Beijing may be trying to improve
its image by allowing him to speak out but added: ''I also use the
opportunity to say more.''
The astrophysicist said he does not want to get into politics or
form a political party. Instead, he views his role as ''introducing
some concepts'' to China, such as democracy.
Fang believes democracy can work in China despite the nation's
dynastic history of authoritarian rule and unwieldy size of more than
1 billion people. He suggests democracy would help reduce many of the
country's ills, including rampant corruption.
During the interview, he harshly rejected Marxism as the worst thing
in China.
Fang says it is difficult to know the precise policy position of any
leader because China has ''no glasnost,'' a reference to the Soviet
leader Mikhail S. Gorbachev's policy of openness.
Fang and and his wife, Li Shuxian, a professor of physics at Beijing
University, were briefly in the British colony on the southeastern
coast of China at the invitation of a local college. They arrived
after visiting Australia and Singapore.
AP-NY-09-05-88 0853EDT
***************
∂05-Sep-88 1322 JMC A proposal for special refereed issues of ailist - revised version.
To: ailist@AI.AI.MIT.EDU
The large majority of contributions to the AILIST are
incompletely thought out and based on insufficient
knowledge. On the other hand interesting topics
arise, and some contributions are worthwhile. I would
like to suggest that certain issues (numbers) of the
AILIST consist of refereed contributions. The editor,
and there would have to be an editor besides Nick unless
he wanted to add that to his responsibilities, would submit
contributions to a panel of referees. These might require
shortening and other improvements in contributions, would
reject some entirely on the basis of ignorance or duplication
of previous thought. There would be a limit on length, of say
200 lines, with most kept under 50. The object is discussion
and not electronic publication of formal papers. Rejected
contributions could, if the author so desired, be included
in the unrefereed issues. Readers could decide for themselves
how to divide their reading between the two.
Is there a volunteer for editor, and who would volunteer to referee?
Five referees might do for a start. I won't volunteer for editor, but
I do volunteer to get the process started and to edit one issue and
the subsequent discussion. The topic is ontology is Quine's sense.
What domains should the variables of AI programs range over?
∂05-Sep-88 1544 JMC garble?
To: d69%taunos.bitnet@FORSYTHE.STANFORD.EDU
I'm about to respond in a letter to the editor to the
criticism in your review of my article in the Daedalus special issue
on AI. However, the second sentence quoted from your review seems to
be garbled. Can you confirm it or give me a corrected version? On
page 21, you wrote,
``The claim that ordinary reasonable thinking is
nonmonotonic is false. The examples McCarthy takes are
not of violation of logic but of statements taken in
the context in which they are stated, the context
statements taken as stated and agreed upon, and of
statements of context easily and naturally altered upon
correction.''
By the way, would you accept the correction that I didn't say all
ordinary thinking is nonmonotonic - only some important parts of it?
Sincerely,
John McCarthy
∂05-Sep-88 2219 Mailer re: Real Estate Questions
To: HEWETT@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from HEWETT@sumex-aim.stanford.edu sent Mon, 5 Sep 88 16:45:43 PDT.]
Sales and, I believe sales prices, are recorded by the County, so try
the phone numbers of Santa Clara County. Stanford just got out a list
of the asking and sales prices of Stanford houses sold this year up
to August. Perhaps prior year lists are available in Room 105
Encina.
∂05-Sep-88 2301 JMC
To: helen@PSYCH.Stanford.EDU
See you at noon.
∂05-Sep-88 2343 JMC re: Wednesday Qlisp Meeting
To: pehoushe@GANG-OF-FOUR.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon, 5 Sep 88 23:30:45 PDT.]
I expect to be there.
∂06-Sep-88 1200 Mailer re: JERRY LEWIS TELETHON FOR M.D.
To: ilan@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU, SU-ETC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
CC: ilan@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from P.DRAVID@GSB-WHY.Stanford.EDU sent Tue 6 Sep 88 01:12:56-PDT.]
Ilan says,
"Personally I prefer that the government (NSF, NIH...) choose for me
what kind of medical research is the most valid."
My experience is that any one body choosing "what kind of research
is the most valid" misses important possibilities. In the 1950s,
the scientific establishment regarded computing as auxiliary to
conventional science. It didn't recognize the existence of computer
science. The formation of ARPA, and its recognition of the need to
support the scientific basis of the defense computer-based systems,
was what put U.S. computer science ahead of the world. I don't know
whether the ideas that MDA supports are significantly different from
those of the NIH establishment, but a variety of sources of support
has been important in many fields. As another example, the Government
backed the wrong horses in integrated circuits around 1960. The
Texas Instruments silicon-on-silicon approach, which won out, had
been explicitly rejected by the Government, by ARPA I think, as
insufficiently ambitious.
∂06-Sep-88 1432 JMC re: [Arthur Keller: Alliant maintenance ]
To: weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU, CLT@SAIL.Stanford.EDU,
weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU, ARK@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message from weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU sent Tue, 06 Sep 88 13:08:29 PDT.]
When I suggested determining an appropriate share of costs, I suggested
basing it on what other people are charging each other for comparable
computing. I would like such information, if it can be obtained, before
reaching a decision. If it can't be obtained, we'll have to decide on
what we know. Are there other comparable situations?
∂06-Sep-88 1445 JMC re: MDA telethon
To: ilan@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU,
su-etc@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message from ilan@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU sent Tue, 6 Sep 88 12:57:41 PDT.]
I am supposing that MDA, like the American Cancer Society,etc., has a
program of research grants and scientific advisory board that it uses
to decide among applicants for its research grants. Another possibility
is that it operates a research laboratory of its own, but I haven't heard
of that. Other charities have occasioned adverse comment in publications
like Science if they have supported research irrationally and sometimes if
they have wasted the money on an excessive organization. Perhaps Ilan
wasted his phone call. If he ascertains the regular number of the
organization rather than asking the pledge taker the research, he might obtain
a brochure on their program of supporting research. I would bet this
brochure, if it exists, is available from the Stanford Vice-Provost for
Research office or from the office of the Stanford Medical School. After
all, a Stanford researcher who wants some of this money has to start
somewhere.
∂06-Sep-88 1455 JMC re: NSF waste [sic]
To: loire!winograd@LABREA.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue, 6 Sep 88 10:07:06 PDT.]
My grumble wasn't about the specific program but about the general
idea of robbing investigator initiated research in favor of programs
invented by NSF. DARPA is indeed different from NSF, because it has
no responsibility to support research in general. If it decides that
one area is more relevant to defense than another, it can act
arbitrarily. I have my doubts about neural networks and am dubious
about the scientific coherence of the Strategic Computing program,
but I would have to have specific information in order to criticize,
whereas I criticize NSF earmarking on principle.
I am indeed doubtful about NSF thinking about what resarch is worth
encouraging, because their program managers are not strong enough
scientifically. Nor do I favor making the job attractive enough,
even if it could be done, to convert the strongest scientists into
program managers. Fortunately, the program managers seem to be
strong enough to make reasonable decisions as to where to send the
proposals for review and to read the reviews that result.
I would be glad to get more information about how this particular
program came to exist.
∂07-Sep-88 1538 JMC Reading list
To: helen@RUSSELL.Stanford.EDU, ssp-faculty@RUSSELL.Stanford.EDU
I would favor putting Daniel Dennett's "The Intentional Stance" on the
Symbolic Systems on the reading list. It could readily directly replace
Pylyshyn' book, for example. It is more appropriate for people interested
in symbolic systems and much more comprehensible. Also it's correct.
It could also replace Gardener.
∂07-Sep-88 1540 JMC
To: NSH
I need to talk to you.
∂07-Sep-88 1623 JMC re: Reading list
To: wheaton@ATHENA.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Wed, 7 Sep 88 16:19:55 PDT.]
No. Dennett's book concentrates on philosophy. I don't know what
they consider as the center of the subject. Maybe there isn't a
single book. On the other hand, Dennett's book is very worthwhile
and doesn't presume substantial prior knowledge, provided you
skip the paragraphs in which he debates other philosophers.
∂07-Sep-88 1632 JMC
To: CLT
∂21-Jul-88 1046 MPS Ill
I am sorry, but I had to go home. I wasn't feeling well when
I got up, and I am feeling worse now. Hope I feel better and
can come in tomorrow. If not, I will have Rosemary e-mail
you a message. Have a good day. Thanks
Pat
∂07-Sep-88 1633 JMC
To: CLT
∂23-Aug-88 1307 MPS PTO
I have some persnal business to take care to today so
I will be leaving around 2:00. Okay?
Pat
∂07-Sep-88 1634 JMC
To: CLT
∂26-Aug-88 1620 MPS
Betty Scott called and gave us all permission
to leave because of the weather. 4:15. See you
Monday. Have a good one.
Pat
∂07-Sep-88 1635 JMC
To: CLT
∂01-Aug-88 0846 RFN
TO: Prof. McCarthy
FROM: Rosemary
RE: Pat Simmons
will be in at noon today, August 1.
∂07-Sep-88 1635 JMC
To: CLT
∂22-Aug-88 0859 RFN
TO: John McCarthy
FROM: Rosemary
RE: Pat Simmons
will not be in today, August 22.
∂07-Sep-88 1653 Mailer re: Bush's Error
To: cohn@POLYA.Stanford.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from cohn@polya.stanford.edu sent 7 Sep 88 23:23:41 GMT.]
It is hard to imagine someone of Bush's age making an error about Pearl
Harbor day. However, it is easy to imagine Bush employing a speech
writer young enough to make such an error. My conjecture, therefore,
is that Bush is, and very likely Dukakis also, is performing in
automatic mode from fatigue. Amusing result can probably be
obtained by clandestine modification of a page of a candidate's
speech or by slipping in an extra teleprompter card. The media
could have a field day tracing the crime.
∂07-Sep-88 2106 JMC re: Taxes
To: ddaniel@PORTIA.Stanford.EDU, su-etc@LABREA.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message from ddaniel@portia.stanford.edu sent 8 Sep 88 00:56:20 GMT.]
A value-added tax (VAT) is applied at each stage of production and
commercial processes. Thus an autombile manufacturer pays tax on the
difference between the price he gets for the car from the dealer and
what he has paid for steel, carburetors, etc. The dealer pays tax on
the difference between what he paid the manufacturer and what he gets
from the customer. The way the accounting is done is that when the
steel manufacturer delivers steel, he also supplies a document
attesting that the tax on the value he added has been paid. The
advantage of VAT over a sales tax is that certain forms of double
taxation are avoided. Thus if the steel seller paid sales tax on the
price of the steel he sold and the car manufacturer paid tax on the
whole price of the car the steel would be taxed twice. The car
manufacturer could avoid this by making the steel himself. This is
called a perverse incentive. Double taxation is minimized by trying
to distinguish retail sales from others, but it's a mess. Economists
generally agree that value-added taxes are more rational than sales
taxes. However, any change in taxes is bound to mean that some people
pay more than before and some pay less, so there will be opposition.
I'm not sure whether this is independent of whether the
tax is progressive. With a retail sales tax it is possible
to exempt certain items. California and most other states
exempt food (except restaurant meals)
and medicines. This helps those who spend most of their
money on food to be prepared at home which fits the
old-fashioned image of the poor. Those poor who eat
mainly at McDonald's are taxed.
Western European countries all use VAT, but for competitive
reasons it doesn't apply to exports from EEC.
∂08-Sep-88 0150 JMC
To: MPS
My daughter Sarah will be in about 10 to learn book cataloging.
∂08-Sep-88 1240 JMC reply to message
To: VAL
[In reply to message rcvd 08-Sep-88 12:32-PT.]
Yes, you're safe now, but we still have to reduce staff.
∂08-Sep-88 1352 Mailer re: Brits versus Israelis
To: helen@PSYCH.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from helen@psych.stanford.edu sent Thu, 8 Sep 88 12:22:15 PDT.]
Probably many people don't know what the situation in Ireland is. Would
Helen please give her understanding of it, what she advocates that
the British do and what she thinks the consequences would be.
∂08-Sep-88 1411 JMC bicycle
To: elliott%slacvm.bitnet@FORSYTHE.STANFORD.EDU
I bought the Specialized from Wheelsmith and just rode it home.
Want to go for a (slow) ride Saturday?
∂08-Sep-88 1424 JMC re: Appendices to the NSF proposal
To: VAL
[In reply to message rcvd 08-Sep-88 14:17-PT.]
That looks good. If Les is around ask him if he is willing to give you
a proposal bureaucracy lesson.
∂08-Sep-88 1448 JMC
To: CLT
Glenn Shemp, 723-2284, 5pm Tuesday, fasten bookcases
∂08-Sep-88 1532 JMC
To: CLT
I spoke to Shankar.
∂08-Sep-88 1702 JMC
To: sloan@Score.Stanford.EDU
Sarah will come see you about 3pm tomorrow.
∂08-Sep-88 1703 JMC
To: MPS
Please get Arlen stuff. Sarah won't be in till afternoon.
∂08-Sep-88 2015 JMC
To: CLT
$12K check from Bull arrived and is on file cabinet.
∂09-Sep-88 1002 Mailer re: Reaganomics
To: goddard@SIERRA.Stanford.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from goddard@sierra.stanford.edu sent Fri, 9 Sep 1988 9:33:18 PDT.]
As I understand it, from the point of view of the stockholders in
the banks, they are being allowed to fail. It is the depositors
who are being rescued. A libertarian might say that even this is
too much, and the depositors should be required to protect themselves
by looking at the loan policies of the banks into which they put
their money. Alternatively, instead of the FDIC (Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation), there should be private deposit insurance offered
by ordinary insurance companies to banks. One would deposit ones
money only in banks where deposits are insured by an insurance
company with suitable resources. If the insurance companies
were free to accept or reject applicants for deposit insurance policies,
they would accept only those whose loan policies seemed sound.
However, some liberal S.O.B.s would demand that the insurance
companies not be allowed to discriminate against banks in
their communities. Come to think of it, these might be
conservative Texas S.O.B.s also.
There is another factor. Remember when the banks were competing for
your deposits by offering high interest rates. A bank that didn't
compete wouldn't get the deposits. However, a bank that pays high
interest can only survive if it can lend the deposited money at even
higher interest rates. In order to do so, banks had to accept risks
that turned out badly - both in the Third World and in the U.S. Helen
might have a case that this was a consequence of deregulation, but it
seems to me that removing interest rate limitations preceded the
Reagan Administration. Most of the bad Third World loans were made
in the 70s and maybe some of the Texas real estate loans were also.
∂09-Sep-88 1448 JMC
To: IGS@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
I need to talk to you.
∂09-Sep-88 1528 JMC misc
To: woodfill@POLYA.Stanford.EDU
Automata Studies - Shannon and McCarthy
Gedanken experiments with Sequential Machines - E. Moore
∂09-Sep-88 1558 JMC re: descriptions
To: HELEN@RUSSELL.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri 9 Sep 88 15:52:16-PDT.]
John McCarthy works on formalizing common sense knowledge and reasoning
using mathematical logical languages.
{\bf McCarthy, John (1979)}:
``First Order Theories of Individual Concepts and Propositions'',
in Michie, Donald (ed.) {\it Machine Intelligence 9}, (University of
Edinburgh Press, Edinburgh).
{\bf McCarthy, John (1979)}:
``Ascribing Mental Qualities to Machines'' in {\it Philosophical Perspectives
in Artificial Intelligence}, Ringle, Martin (ed.), Harvester Press, July 1979.
{\bf McCarthy, John (1983)}: ``Some Expert Systems Need Common Sense'',
in {\it Computer Culture: The Scientific, Intellectual and Social Impact
of the Computer}, Heinz Pagels, ed.
vol. 426, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.
{\bf McCarthy, John (1986)}:
{\bf McCarthy, John (1986)}:
``Applications of Circumscription to Formalizing Common Sense Knowledge''
{\it Artificial Intelligence}, April 1986
∂10-Sep-88 1637 Mailer The Shroud
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
I will bet MRC $50 the Catholic Church will accept the evidence that
the Shroud is spurious if the radio-carbon date indicates this. With
less certainty, I'll bet (no money this time) there will be no
significant dissent. After all, the renaissance Catholic Church
accepted the idea that the Donation of Constantine was a 9th? century
forgery. The Donation of Constantine was a document purporting to be
from the 4th century Roman Emperor Constantine ceding certain temporal
sovereignties to the Pope. The evidence that it was a forgery was
that it was written in much later Latin than that of Constantine's
time.
∂10-Sep-88 1928 Mailer re: The Shroud
To: Crispin@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
CC: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from Crispin@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU sent Sat, 10 Sep 88 19:07:23 PDT.]
I won't bet that no individual will continue to believe in the
authenticity of the Shroud. What would be your criterion for
a sect? If we can agree on a criterion for sect, I'll still
make the bet.
∂11-Sep-88 1849 JMC
To: CLT
∂11-Sep-88 1841 @RELAY.CS.NET:ito%ito.ito.ecei.tohoku.junet@UTOKYO-RELAY.CSNET
Received: from RELAY.CS.NET by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 11 Sep 88 18:41:11 PDT
Received: from relay2.cs.net by RELAY.CS.NET id ac17674; 11 Sep 88 21:39 EDT
Received: from utokyo-relay by RELAY.CS.NET id ah10884; 11 Sep 88 21:31 EDT
Received: by ccut.cc.u-tokyo.junet (5.51/6.3Junet-1.0/CSNET-JUNET)
id AA18937; Mon, 12 Sep 88 08:27:16 JST
Received: by nttlab.ntt.jp (3.2/6.2NTT.h) with TCP; Mon, 12 Sep 88 04:49:50 JST
Received: by cctu_as.cc.tohoku.junet (3.2/6.3Junet-1.0)
id AA17458; Mon, 12 Sep 88 04:21:43 JST
Received: by aoba.ito.ecei.tohoku.junet (4.12/6.3Junet-1.0)
id AA00262; Sun, 11 Sep 88 22:46:47 jst
Received: by ito.ito.ecei.tohoku.junet (4.12/6.3Junet-1.0)
id AA00285; Sun, 11 Sep 88 17:25:08 jst
Date: Sun, 11 Sep 88 17:25:08 jst
From: Takayasu ITO <ito%ito.ito.ecei.tohoku.junet@UTOKYO-RELAY.CSNET>
Return-Path: <ito@ito.ito.ecei.tohoku.junet>
Message-Id: <8809110825.AA00285@ito.ito.ecei.tohoku.junet>
To: JMC%sail.stanford.edu%relay.cs.net%u-tokyo.junet@UTOKYO-RELAY.CSNET
Subject: Your travel plan
After returning from Stanford and Snowbird I talked with Masahiko,who is now
visiting Martin-Lof.
Both of us are pleased if you and Carolyn are able to come to Sendai before
the ceremony of Kyoto Prize.
If you are able to come to Sendai,Masahiko and I are interested in having a
small seminar on Logic and Computation,having at most 15 people including us.
We will support your travel from Tokyo to Sendai.
If the Inamori Foundation has no objection and you agree,we will plan to have
your lecture at Tohoku University.
{If you will bring Timothy our wives or my daughter will take care of him
while you are visiting the university.}
Please let me know if you are able to come to Sendai.Carolyn knows how to
mail to me. By the way my mail address has been changed as follows:
ito@ito.ecei.tohoku.junet
although the previous mail should work until next August.
Sincerely,
Takayasu Ito
∂11-Sep-88 1957 JMC re: meeting
To: NSH
[In reply to message rcvd 11-Sep-88 19:31-PT.]
2pm would be ok. I have a doctor's appointment at 3.
∂12-Sep-88 1111 JMC re: qlisp
To: CLT
[In reply to message rcvd 12-Sep-88 09:34-PT.]
I expect we'll need the reduced budget in any case.
∂12-Sep-88 1129 JMC re: NSF funding for EDI
To: JK
[In reply to message rcvd 12-Sep-88 11:20-PT.]
Go ahead. I'll have to send him a message anyway.
∂12-Sep-88 1215 JMC re: engelmore
To: JK
[In reply to message rcvd 12-Sep-88 12:08-PT.]
Talk to Kahn, but last time I talked to him, he didn't have any money.
However, he knows quite a bit, since he was director of ISTO for some
years. Simpson may be informative, and is worth a brief try, but ask
him whether there is a real prospect of money. My impression is that
they currently in a mode of trying to save what they can of the projects
they are now supporting. But maybe there is a different program for
which EDI is relevant. It might be attractive to them to support some
AI under a non-AI name, but that idea should be introduced delicately.
∂12-Sep-88 1911 JMC re: Orals
To: JSW@SAIL.Stanford.EDU,
ullman@POLYA.STANFORD.EDU, RPG@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message from JSW rcvd 12-Sep-88 16:19-PT.]
I prefer the week of Oct 24 but early the next week would also be
ok.
∂12-Sep-88 1915 JMC re: Qlisp Publications
To: rivin@GANG-OF-FOUR.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon, 12 Sep 88 12:18 PDT.]
I am pleased by your message. Now there are some points to argue
about. I would suggest that you express you opinions at greater
length in a message to the Qlisp list. In particular, the points
on which you differ with RPG on the one hand and Dan on the other
should be expressed (politely). Then we can discuss it and try
to reach a consensus, or at least a consensus on where we differ.
My initial reaction is agree with you in your differences with
both parties.
∂12-Sep-88 2036 JMC Qlisp Publications
To: CLT
∂12-Sep-88 1221 @IGNORANT.Stanford.EDU:rivin@GANG-OF-FOUR.Stanford.EDU Qlisp Publications
Received: from IGNORANT.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 12 Sep 88 12:21:09 PDT
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 88 12:18 PDT
From: Igor Rivin <rivin@GANG-OF-FOUR.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Qlisp Publications
To: jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <19880912191849.0.RIVIN@IGNORANT.Stanford.EDU>
This memo pertains to the recent controversy over Rabinov and Rivin's
paper on Arkady's parallel GCD implementation, and on some larger
issues. I should be glad to have your views on the points presented
below.
First, let me summarize the GCD paper.
A parallel algorithm is implemented (in a number of ways), and the
language features necessary to effect this implementation are described.
Some of the implementations are very simple, others require rather
sophisticated synchronization. The language is shown to have sufficient
power to express the synchronization required.
The performance of the various implementations is measured and is found
to be somewhat below naive expectations. The reasons (both algorithmic
and implementational) for this shortfall are deduced and as a result
suggestions are made as to the most profitable ways to improve
performance of the Qlisp system.
I contend that, at least in principle, this is precisely the kind of
paper the "applications" arm of the Qlisp effort is expected to produce.
Undoubtedly, this is different from a more expository style of paper, to
wit "Here is an algorithm and its serial implementation. Now here are
three of the LETs replaced by QLETs with simple propositional
arguments. Now watch the new code run 7.5 times as fast as the old code
on our eight processors."
Though there is certainly a place for this kind of paper, it should be
noted that it places any kind of credit for the success of the
experiment squarely on the fundamental design of the language and on the
implementation, precisely because it stresses that the performance gains
are achieved easily, by programming in a natural and obvious style. I am
not at all sure, therefore, that it does anything to further the cause
of the applications effort.
Returning now back to the specifics, although the sheer performance of
Arkady's code is perhaps not as high as we might like, it actually
compares favorably with results reported in practically every other
parallel Lisp report I have seen, including the recent Lisp Conference
paper on Qlisp by Gabriel and Goldman.
As an aside, Ron's talk at the conference (actually it was more like
Ron's and Dick's talk) was notably more negative than the paper,
claiming, in essence, that the Qlisp constructs are too low-level, lack
the power to express what people really want to express and make it
fairly difficult to obtain reasonable performance. As an alternative,
they (Ron and Dick) suggest the unfortunately named "qmondo" construct,
somewhat akin in style to some of the CommonLisp sequence operators
(that is, it takes numerous keyword arguments which control the precise
functionality). This proposal seems to have been treated more or less as
a joke by the audience, not without reason.
Since Gabriel bears a lot of responsiblity for the Qlisp project, it
would seem to me that anything he says is viewed as more or less the
"party line".
Returning from this aside, there seems to also be the question of using
Dan's results to bolster our performance figures (by the way, I have
asked him numerous time to run the GCD code on his system, with a
notable lack of response). There appear to me the following objections
to this.
Firstly, Dan's system has never been described (again, in spite of
numerous imprecations to do a write up), and I don't feel it would be
proper, to use it as a "black box".
Secondly, the system is not robust (I, for one, have had problems in the
past simply getting it to load), and is known to, for example, not
being able to survive a garbage collection. Thus, I don't think it is in
anywhere near the condition to be publicized yet.
Lastly, and most importantly, Dan's programming paradigm, to my mind,
is completely contrary to that of Qlisp. He advocates an "apparently
uncontrolled" style of parallelism, putting all the control into the
hands of the particular implementation (and more specifically the
scheduler). Thus it would seem to me that using results obtained with
his system in place of the "official" Qlisp results would be tantamount
to repudiating Qlisp, in my opinion. This is not a step to be taken
lightly. At the very least one needs to be aware that it is being taken.
Igor
∂12-Sep-88 2147 Mailer psychological survey
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Daniel Dennett's book "The Intentional Stance" raised the following
psychological question in my mind. Under what kinds of headings
(if any) is information filed in the brain. It doesn't seem to
be under names, because one often doesn't know a name, and people,
e.g. me, sometimes have blocks on the names of people they know well.
It occurred to me that names of people and other things (I recently
blocked on the name of the flower agapanthus(sp?)), are special
in this respect. One has blocks on names but never on certain
other properties. For example, I never have a block on a person's
sex.
A block (for this purpose) is different from simply not remembering.
What is blocked is something that has been used many times, and
once it is recalled, it stays again.
The question for the BBOARD public is this.
Do you ever have blocks on anything but names?
Anecdotes to JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU.
I highly recommend the Dennett book.
∂12-Sep-88 2238 JMC re: Blocks
To: rokicki@POLYA.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon, 12 Sep 88 22:34:05 PDT.]
Thanks. I'll post a summary, when I get more replies.
∂13-Sep-88 1228 JMC re: Memory "blocks"
To: helen@PSYCH.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue, 13 Sep 88 11:27:59 PDT.]
Yes, I'm interested in references. In connection with something else,
I'm especially interested in episodic memory. The messages I've been
getting are extremely diverse. Nobody else seems to think there is
much special about names, although no-one claims to have forgotten
an acquaintance's sex. I think perhaps I have your block where
writing the first elements of a list interferes with recalling the
others.
∂13-Sep-88 1234 JMC reply to message
To: JK
[In reply to message rcvd 13-Sep-88 12:21-PT.]
I'm impressed with your progress in making contacts. I think you should
try to have something new to supplement my paper ASAP. I would be glad
to attend a meeting or two.
∂13-Sep-88 1235 JMC re: Jack's Program review
To: RPG
[In reply to message rcvd 13-Sep-88 09:53-PT.]
If it turns out to include qlisp, I prefer the 30th.
∂13-Sep-88 1629 JMC questions about philosophical terminology
To: israel@RUSSELL.Stanford.EDU
I have been reading Dennett's Intentional Stance, and I
have some questions about terminology and about the
positions taken by various philosophers. Also I'm somewhat
interested in what the frog's eye tells the frog's brain.
Would you have time to discuss these points?
∂13-Sep-88 1717 JMC re: survey
To: rhw@SIERRA.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue, 13 Sep 1988 10:48:29 PDT.]
copyright 1987
∂14-Sep-88 1054 JMC Contribution to China Proceedings
To: MPS
∂14-Sep-88 0801 @forsythe.stanford.edu:MEERSMAN@HTIKUB5.BITNET Contribution to China Proceedings
Received: from forsythe.stanford.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 14 Sep 88 08:01:25 PDT
Received: by Forsythe.Stanford.EDU; Wed, 14 Sep 88 08:01:20 PDT
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 88 16:57 N
From: <MEERSMAN%HTIKUB5.BITNET@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Contribution to China Proceedings
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
X-Original-To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Dear Prof. McCarthy,
You should have received the transcript of your talk in Guangzhou from us by
now. By the end of this month I would appreciate to have your comments and
corrections so as to include the material in the proceedings. A manually
annotated copy will do fine as last resort, but of course I would prefer it if
you could provide me with a reworked version. Please limit corrections to the
discussion part to linguitic interventions since I would like to preserve the
spirit of it--I think the discussion went quite well.
Again, thank you for your contribution so far-- am looking forward to the
final result.
As for your expenses, this has to be settled with the organization chair
which managed the budget. This is
Prof. Dr. A. Solvberg
NORUNIT--Tech. Univ. of Trondheim
Trondheim NTH
Norway
e-mail : solvberg@norunit.bitnet
Kind regards,
Robert Meersman
Program Chm. and Proceedings Editor
∂14-Sep-88 1146 JMC
To: CLT
I talked to Squires. It's not our move at the instant as far as he is concerned.
∂14-Sep-88 1507 JMC re: meetings, continued
To: NFIELDS@VAX.DARPA.MIL
CC: CLT@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Wed 14 Sep 88 15:15:39-EDT.]
Carolyn Talcott and John McCarthy at 2pm on September 30.
∂15-Sep-88 0004 JMC comments on The Intentional Stance
To: harnad@MIND.PRINCETON.EDU
I have just finished extensive comments on that book.
If your project isn't too far along and if you are interested,
I could supply a condensation of some remarks from an
AI point of view.
∂15-Sep-88 1209 JMC re: Categorizing the Problems of Parallel Program Development
To: pehoushe@GANG-OF-FOUR.STANFORD.EDU
CC: JJW@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 15 Sep 88 11:37:11 PDT.]
Write the paper. If I can get a draft by Sept 30 when I go to Washington,
it would be good.
∂15-Sep-88 1606 JMC re: check
To: BERGMAN@SCORE.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu 15 Sep 88 15:57:37-PDT.]
thanks.
∂15-Sep-88 1747 JMC book
To: MPS
Please try to get from the library something called the
Hixon Symposium on Cerebral Mechanisms in Behavior. The
symposium was held in 1949, and I have already checked that
it is not in Socrates. If the Stanford library doesn't have
it, ask for them to check RLIN. I'll pay for a copy to be
transmitted the quickest way, because I want it for my
Inamori Foundation lecture, and they have started to press
me.
∂15-Sep-88 2308 Mailer Palo Alto Co-op down to one store
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
I have been a member of the Palo Alto Co-op since 1953 (with
an interruption while I was out of the area). It was started
in 1935 with the motivation that consumers should own their
own stores. At one time it did 20 percent of the grocery
business in Palo Alto, and at one time it had five stores.
It is selling its Menlo Park and California Avenue stores
and Sunday it will be down to the one store on Middlefield
Avenue. This was necessary to avoid immediate bankruptcy
according to the last issue of Co-op News to be mailed to
members and which arrived today.
The Co-op has been in difficulties since the 1960s. It
had its last profitable year in 1983.
I haven't been an especially enthusiastic member, since
my opinions about the importance of co-operative ventures
changed, but I shopped there when I found myself in
the neighborhood or for certain specialties. It never
has paid a cash patronage refund during the whole time I
have been a member.
It seems to me that the following are the reasons for its
failure.
1. A major premise of its formation was false. This was that
large profits were being made in the grocery business that
could be reclaimed for consumers if they only owned their
own stores. In fact the profit margin in groceries is
one or two percent of sales, and even small mistakes can
make it go negative. There were many failures of commercial
groceries in Palo Alto.
2. The prosperous liberals who took part in its formation and
guided its early years grew old, became inactive and died.
It never attracted the same enthusiasts to apply to it
the management experience gained in their own businesses.
3. The enthusiasts who remained steered its politics sharply
to the left, although this only took the form of articles
in Co-op News and publicity for various boycotts. I doubt
that this was important in loss of patronage, but it
probably reduced the number of enthusiasts. Also those
who remained may have devoted a lot of their energy to
the more usual left wing causes.
I think the extreme left was quite unsuccessful in looting
it, although they were successful in looting some 1960s
co-operative ventures like the Free University's co-operative
coffee shop located where Rudyard's Pub is now.
4. Some unsuccessful socially motivated ventures were tried,
like a store in East Palo Alto. Repeated armed robberies
contributed to its rather prompt closure. However, the Co-op
was broke at the time the venture was proposed, and it was
alleged that the investment in the East Palo Alto store came
entirely from donations.
5. The most obvious financial drain was its failure to keep its
employees at arms length financially. According to last issue of
Co-op News, its wage costs per unit of sales is the highest in the
Palo Alto area. Doubtless its employees are not highly paid
in any absolute sense, but its customers pursue their own
interests as they see them, and Co-op apparently couldn't
compete on price.
6. I got the impression that there may be different opinions of the
cause of their present sudden crisis, and I would be curious if anyone
else knows them.
I am sorry to see the Co-op disappear after 53 years of existence.
∂15-Sep-88 2326 JMC review of Dennett's The Intentional Stance
To: bobrow@XEROX.COM
I would like to do such a review. Is Bibel still the review
editor? If so, what's his current net address?
∂15-Sep-88 2338 JMC re: [JONES@Score.Stanford.EDU: TA]
To: rivin@GANG-OF-FOUR.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Wed, 14 Sep 88 17:19 PDT.]
I can't see the Department changing its mind on this.
∂15-Sep-88 2340 JMC reply to message
To: VAL
[In reply to message rcvd 14-Sep-88 15:01-PT.]
I can't think of more reasons now.
∂16-Sep-88 0917 JMC darpa meeting
To: VAL@SAIL.Stanford.EDU, JK@SAIL.Stanford.EDU, AIR@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
I have in mind connecting communication with logic along the
lines of cbcl.
∂16-Sep-88 0738 pullen@vax.darpa.mil Call for White Papers - DARPA/ISTO PI Meeting
Received: from vax.darpa.mil by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 16 Sep 88 07:38:34 PDT
Received: from sun30.darpa.mil by vax.darpa.mil (5.54/5.51)
id AA10514; Fri, 16 Sep 88 09:42:14 EDT
Posted-Date: Fri 16 Sep 88 09:42:27-EDT
Received: by sun30.darpa.mil (5.54/5.51)
id AA17209; Fri, 16 Sep 88 09:42:28 EDT
Date: Fri 16 Sep 88 09:42:27-EDT
From: Mark Pullen <PULLEN@vax.darpa.mil>
Subject: Call for White Papers - DARPA/ISTO PI Meeting
To: ISTO-PI-LIST@vax.darpa.mil
Cc: Pullen@vax.darpa.mil
Message-Id: <590420547.0.PULLEN@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
Mail-System-Version: <SUN-MM(217)+TOPSLIB(128)@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
Dear PI,
The purpose of this message is to invite you to submit topics for
discussion sessions at the upcoming DARPA/ISTO Principal Investigators
Meeting. These topics will be used by the Program Committee to
assemble several parallel discussion sessions on "new ideas".
We plan two blocks of such discussions, as well as other blocks
reporting on current research.
The following rules apply to the topics:
- must be a multi-group effort; we seek new directions for the
research community, not research proposals
- must be cross-cutting and interdisciplinary (to support the
"cross fertilization" goal of the meeting); we expect the best
minds in AI, Networking, Command and Control, Distributed Systems,
Computer Architectures, Software, VLSI Design, Robotics, and
Computer Science/Engineering in general to attend this meeting
- you must be prepared to present the idea and lead the discussion,
length detemined by the topic; could be part of a session of
short items, or have a whole session to itself (please recommend
time to be allotted)
Please submit your ideas in the form of a two-page white paper. Papers
selected for discussion will be printed in the Meeting Notes, so make
them fit on two 8.5 by 11 inch pages with 1 inch margins, printed in
12 pt type. Send them over the net to pimeet@vax.darpa.mil, or mail
to DARPA.ISTO, ATTN: PI Meeting, 1400 Wilson Blvd, Arlington VA 22209.
Papers must arrive here by 30 September to be considered.
Mark Pullen for Jack Schwartz
and the Staff of DARPA/ISTO
-------
∂16-Sep-88 1445 JMC re: Religion
To: DANTE@EDWARDS-2060.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Fri 16 Sep 88 14:23:55-PDT.]
I recognize that this is not the present position of the Catholic Church,
and maybe it never was. I didn't have it confused with infallibility
of the Pope. However, there is an interesting book by Andrew D. White
called The Warfare of Science and Theology in Christendom in which he
claims at some length that the Pope staked his infallibility against
Galileo. White was the first president of Cornell University, and
I suppose he had to claim to be some kind of Christian to be a
university president around the turn of the century, but as an
orthodox atheist, I found nothing heretical in what he wrote.
∂16-Sep-88 1452 JMC re: 3 kittens looking for a home
To: HK.DEB@FORSYTHE.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 16 Sep 88 06:24:56 PDT.]
Your message comes out on our screens as from "Dorothy Bender". Are
you the real Dorothy Bender or just a simulation. If you're the
real Dorothy Bender, how about lunch some time? If the simulation,
I'm still willing to consider it, but need to specify that I can't
get by on simulated food, and also I don't eat partly grown cats.
∂16-Sep-88 1617 JMC re: Religion
To: DANTE@EDWARDS-2060.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Fri 16 Sep 88 15:32:04-PDT.]
There are many theories of the form, "If only Galileo had done X or not
done Y, he wouldn't have had trouble with the inquisition." The one
about writing in Italian is new to me. White didn't say that the Pope
mentioned infallibility directly in talking to or about Galileo. His
argument was more complicated. Anyway, the infallibility of the Pope
only became a formal doctrine in 1861 (or was it 1871). The only bishop
who voted against it was the bishop of Little Rock, Arkansas.
My own understanding is that the practice of calling physical theories
heretical was a rather temporary consequence of the Counter-Reformation.
While the Catholic Church didn't admit error in connection with Galileo
for a long time, they abandoned the practice very quickly - maybe
immediately.
∂16-Sep-88 2001 JMC
To: CLT
Please explain about the headache.
∂17-Sep-88 1318 JMC reply to message
To: JK
[In reply to message rcvd 17-Sep-88 11:19-PT.]
It looks pretty good. Maybe I'll add something. Perhaps we should
add Vladimir part time.
∂17-Sep-88 1530 JMC
To: JK
{\bf McCarthy, John (1982)}: ``Common Business Communication Language'', in
{\it Textverarbeitung und B\"urosysteme}, Albert Endres and J\"urgen Reetz, eds.
R. Oldenbourg Verlag, Munich and Vienna 1982.
% cbcl[f75,jmc]
∂17-Sep-88 1533 JMC bicycling
To: elliott%slacvm.bitnet@FORSYTHE.STANFORD.EDU
Sorry to have missed you. I suppose you called home when I
was in the office. I eventually went via Page Mill, Arastradero
Alpine and Sand Hill. Just got back.
∂17-Sep-88 2043 Mailer re: Olympics
To: ilan@GANG-OF-FOUR.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from ilan@gang-of-four.stanford.edu sent Sat, 17 Sep 88 18:40:09 PDT.]
It seems to me normal and ok for U.S. media to emphasize U.S. teams.
Certainly local media emphasize local teams. At the Los Angeles
Olympics, however, there was a grumble from foreigners that the
TV feed available to them overemphasized Americans. I don't know
whether they were grumbling about something they bought when they
could have operated their own.
∂17-Sep-88 2046 JMC chaos
To: sussman@AI.AI.MIT.EDU
Is it possible that the chaos you got for Pluto is a consequence
of considering it to have zero mass? Perhaps reacting back on
the orbits of other planets stabilizes the orbit of a given
planet. You could try adding a planet of zero mass in the
inner solar system.
∂17-Sep-88 2102 JMC paper to Chudnovsky
To: MPS
Please make a copy of the paper by Sussman and Wisdom (see chron) and
mail it to David Chudnovsky at his home address.
∂17-Sep-88 2213 JMC
To: JK
John McCarthy was born in Boston in 1927 and grew up there
and in Los Angeles. He received the B.S. in mathematics in 1948 from
the California Institute of Technology and the Ph.D. from Princeton
University in 1951 also in mathematics. He has taught at Princeton
Dartmouth, M.I.T. and at Stanford. He has been Professor of Computer
Science since 1962 and Director of the Artificial Intelligence Laboratory at
Stanford since 1965.
He is one of the founders of artificial intelligence research,
emphasizing epistemological problems, i.e. the problem of what information
and what modes of reasoning are required for intelligent behavior.
He originated the LISP programming language for computing with
symbolic expressions, was one of the first to propose and design
time-sharing computer systems, and pioneered in using mathematical
logic to prove the correctness of computer programs.
He has also written papers on the social implications of computer
and other technology.
He received the A.M. Turing award of the Association for
Computing Machinery in 1971 for his contributions to computer science.
He received the first Research Excellence Award of the International
Conference on Artificial Intelligence in 1985. He received the Kyoto
Prize in 1988.
His recent work includes formalization of non-monotonic reasoning
whereby people and computers draw conjectural conclusions by
assuming that complications are absent from a situation.
∂18-Sep-88 0010 JMC ball bearing cannon
To: minsky@AI.AI.MIT.EDU
Jearl Walker's Amateur Scientist column in the October Scientific American
contains a discussion of ball bearing cannons. It doesn't mention your
1952 ideas. His references are later.
∂18-Sep-88 1543 JMC common sense knowledge of continuous action
To: fishwick@BIKINI.CIS.UFL.EDU, ailist@AI.AI.MIT.EDU
If Genesereth and Nilsson didn't give an example to illustrate
why differential equations aren't enough, they should have.
The example I like to give when I lecture is that of spilling
the water glass on the lectern. If the front row is very
close, it might get wet, but usually not even that. The
Navier-Stokes equations govern the flow of the spilled water
but are entirely useless in this common sense situation.
No-one can acquire the initial conditions or integrate the
equations sufficiently rapidly. Moreover, absorbtion of water
by the materials it flows over is probably a strong enough
effect, so that more than the Navier-Stokes equations would
be necessary.
Thus there is no "scientific theory" involving differential
equations, queuing theory, etc. that can be used by a robot
to determine what can be expected when a glass of water
is spilled, given what information is actually available
to an observer. To use the terminology of my 1969 paper
with Pat Hayes, the differential equations don't form
an epistemologically adequate model of the phenomenon, i.e.
a model that uses the information actually available.
While some people are interested in modelling human performance
as an aspect of psychology, my interest is artificial intelligence.
There is no conflict with science. What we need is a scientific
theory that can use the information available to a robot
with human opportunities to observe and do as well as a
human in predicting what will happen. Thus our goal is a scientific
common sense.
The Navier-Stokes equations are important in (1) the design
of airplane wings, (2) in the derivation of general inequalities,
some of which might even be translatable into terms common sense
can use. For example, the Bernouilli effect, once a person has
(usually with difficulty) integrated it into his common sense
knowledge can be useful for qualitatively predicting the effects of
winds flowing over a house.
Finally, the Navier Stokes equations are imbedded in a framework
of common sense knowledge and reasoning that determine the
conditions under which they are applied to the design of airplane
wings, etc.
∂18-Sep-88 1545 JMC common sense knowledge of continuous action
To: fishwick@BIKINI.CIS.UFL.EDU
I would be interested in your reaction to the previous
message also sent to the ailist. The other lists you
mention didn't have addresses that are complete from
here. Therefore, you are welcome to forward my previous
message to any list whose members might be interested.
∂18-Sep-88 1602 JMC phone number
To: "elliott@slacvm.bitnet"@FORSYTHE.STANFORD.EDU
What's your home number?
∂18-Sep-88 1606 JMC
To: elliott%slacvm.bitnet@FORSYTHE.STANFORD.EDU
What's your home phone number?
∂19-Sep-88 0934 JMC re: Memory reference
To: helen@PSYCH.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon, 19 Sep 88 09:27:25 PDT.]
Thanks. How about lunch tomorrow? The Galleria in Town and Country
Village is a new pasta place.
∂19-Sep-88 1304 JMC reply to message
To: fishwick@FISH.CIS.UFL.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon, 19 Sep 88 11:13:16 EDT.]
I note that sometimes dialogs appear in ailist as single entities. I
am sending this message only to you, so that the dialog won't appear
in ailist piecemeal, but when we finish, pehaps we can ship the whole
dialog or even an edited version, deleting false starts.
I would like to change the example slightly to make it clearer what
capability we might want to give a robot. Suppose someone spills
his glass on the table, and the robot is sitting at the table. It
will have to do a triage on the papers on the table, deciding that
some don't have to be rescued, others can't be rescued and some can
be rescued if it acts quickly.
My relevant experience is probably between 5 and 20 occasions.
I don't disagree with your remarks on lack of a mathematical theory.
The remarks on pattern recognition are vague, and I would be surprised
if you knew how to make them precise. What patterns are meant? In
particular which of the numerous aspects of an experience go into
the pattern? There are two subcases. (1) You are permitted to design
the pattern recognition framework knowing that saving papers from
wetness is the problem. (2) Only your general annoyance avoidance
mechanism is in question. Any liquid spilling specialization must
come out of the general mechanism. Here are some concepts I consider
relevant.
1. Epistemological adequacy. The general patterns or facts or other
mechanisms concerning liquids must be capable of dealing with the
information available to the robot at the time. We can suppose the
robot has a TV camera and a microphone as its inputs. A lumped model
can be provided if the work in forming it is done in advance, and you
specify how the results of this preliminary physics is to be connected
to the TV picture.
2. Elaboration tolerance. Suppose the particular table has trenches
in it and that a squeegee is at hand. The idea of using the squeegee
to sweep the liquid off the table or into a trench should be usable
within half a second. I call it elaboration tolerance, because it
involves the ability of the system to make use of new information.
Another possible elaboration that might come to mind is someone saying
to put an arm on the table to keep the liquid away from a particularly
manuscript by Hubert Dreyfus.
∂19-Sep-88 1313 JMC addendum
To: fishwick@FISH.CIS.UFL.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon, 19 Sep 88 11:13:16 EDT.]
I think that using physics to build a lumped model is appropriate provided
the result ends up in an epistemologically adequate form.
As Genesereth and Nilsson said in their book, the problem of representing
qualitative information about continuous actions and events is even
more unsolved than the corresponding problem for discrete actions.
Nevertheless, I suggest a contest to come up with the best description
of what needs to be added to a robot to deal with the liquid spilling
on the table and threatening the papers. I suggest that the entries
be short enough to fit in paragraph or two and be readable by humans,
but that the criterion for success be concreteness. I'll try but first
I'd like to see a pattern or two.
∂19-Sep-88 1646 JMC re: Memory reference
To: helen@PSYCH.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon, 19 Sep 88 14:58:36 PDT.]
Tentatively Oct 1 looks good. The tentatively relates to the fact
that I will be in Washington Sept 30 with the intention of returning
that night. However, if there is some improbable reason to stay over,
I'll have to call you. What will your telephone co-ordinates be?
Will you still be accessible as helen@psych.stanford.edu?
Congratulations I presume on the new job.
∂19-Sep-88 1710 JMC reply to message
To: VAL
[In reply to message rcvd 19-Sep-88 17:06-PT.]
With whom did you discuss the budget? It looks ok in the main, but
I don't see a provision for salary increases. This is usually in
Stanford budgets. It doesn't constitute an obligation to raise
salaries precisely in accordance with it.
∂19-Sep-88 1820 JMC proposal
To: VAL
Let's talk about it with Carolyn tomorrow. We should talk to NSF
about it before we turn it in. Since Carolyn and I are going to
be in Washington on Friday Sept 30, it seems to me that maybe
you should come to.
∂19-Sep-88 1830 JMC re: proposal
To: VAL
[In reply to message rcvd 19-Sep-88 18:26-PT.]
How about 1030?
∂19-Sep-88 1832 JMC re: review of Dennett's The Intentional Stance
To: stefik.pa@XEROX.COM
[In reply to message sent 19 Sep 88 18:14 PDT.]
I have a copy, but for certain reasons, I'd be glad to have a review
copy also.
∂19-Sep-88 2245 Mailer Thought for today
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Since the whole affair had become one of religion, the
vanquished were of course exterminated. - Voltaire
∂20-Sep-88 1000 JMC
To: CLT
∂20-Sep-88 0938 JDP Pat
To: JMC
CC: MPS
She will not be in today. -dan
∂20-Sep-88 1503 Mailer
To: su-jobs@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Wanted LISP hacker with master's 312 282-8810, Al Katz.
∂20-Sep-88 1559 JMC luncheon speech
To: pullen@VAX.DARPA.MIL
CC: CLT@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Thanks for the kind words about the prestigious award. Unfortunately,
part of the meeting for receiving the afore-mentioned prestigious
award overlaps the DARPA meeting. However, the 13th is labelled
"sightseeing in Nara" and the 14th "sightseeing in Kyoto". If I could
interpret this literally, I could skip the sightseeing in Kyoto and
make it to give the aforementioned luncheon talk. I need to talk to
the Inamori Foundation and find out if that's really true. I'm a bit
overdue on my lecture manuscript for them and would like to call them
later this week when I've got it. Anyway, I can probably make the
15th, and can let you know later this week, but if the 16th or 17th
luncheon is all the same to you, it would give me more flexibility in
my international relations.
∂20-Sep-88 2214 JMC re: SSP Forum
To: HOFFMAN@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue 20 Sep 88 22:09:46-PDT.]
October 21 would be good for me.
∂20-Sep-88 2215 JMC re: SSP Forum
To: HOFFMAN@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue 20 Sep 88 22:09:46-PDT.]
The middle of next week would be ok for getting together.
∂20-Sep-88 2216 JMC Please tex
To: MPS
review[w88,jmc] and send a copy to Prof. Joseph Berger in the
Sociology Department.
Also please put some copies in my reprint file. Also copies
of my Daedalus article if I don't have them already.
∂20-Sep-88 2247 JMC re: SSP Forum
To: HOFFMAN@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue 20 Sep 88 22:40:57-PDT.]
Make it Wednesday at 11 at my office 356 MJH.
∂21-Sep-88 1122 JMC
To: MPS
Please tex IBM.ABS[e88,jmc] for IBM.
∂21-Sep-88 1220 JMC re: luncheon speech
To: PULLEN@VAX.DARPA.MIL
[In reply to message sent Wed 21 Sep 88 15:07:05-EDT.]
Thanks.
∂21-Sep-88 1304 JMC
To: JK
cbcl[e88,jmc] Prose for cbcl proposal
We propose to study languages for communication of business
transaction information between computers belonging to separate
organizations and develop language features that will be an
improvement on the languages presently used for electronic data
interchange (EDI). The improvement will be in the direction of
increasing the variety of messages that may be transmitted without
requiring revisions of the language. This will be accomplished by
taking into account useful features of natural language and also
developments in artificial intelligence, especially recent work in
formalizing nonmonotonic reasoning.
Some of our proposals for improvement are described in
(McCarthy 1983), but they will be reconsidered and extended
in the light of the EDI systems that have been developed and
more recent AI and natural language research.
∂21-Sep-88 1516 JMC reply to message
To: JK
[In reply to message rcvd 21-Sep-88 14:45-PT.]
I have a printout of Winograd and Flores. If I can find it you can
have it. I also don't agree with it at all and would not want our
thing to be confused with it. My paper mentions features of natural
language that we want in our artificial language. I'll tinker some
more with prose to be sure to avoid the confusion.
∂21-Sep-88 1520 JMC reply to message
To: davism@ACF4.NYU.EDU
[In reply to message sent Wed, 21 Sep 88 17:47:25 EDT.]
OK, in about a month. Can I assume that someone else will deal in detail
with your work in mathematical logic and computability?
∂21-Sep-88 1811 Mailer re: long posting on El Salavdor, the sound of one hand clapping
To: bill@ISL.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from bill@isl.stanford.edu sent Wed, 21 Sep 88 17:31:29 PDT.]
The NEST Foundation message seems dishonest to me. It mentions a
civil war and criticizes the behavior of one side and says nothing
about the other. Perhaps this is the answer to the Zen riddle about
"the sound of one hand clapping". It avoids taking a position for or
against the El Salvador rebels, only on the El Salvador Government's
efforts to fight them. It utters slogans like those of the rebels but
doesn't mention them. It speaks of peasant self-help organizations,
but maybe this is another name for the rebels' supply organizations.
Perhaps NEST is a supporter of the rebels, but doesn't want to say so
to this audience.
∂21-Sep-88 2218 JMC re: reply to message
To: davism@ACF4.NYU.EDU
[In reply to message sent Wed, 21 Sep 88 23:13:56 EDT.]
I often require prompting.
∂21-Sep-88 2307 JMC re: Fax
To: cheriton@PESCADERO.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Wed, 21 Sep 88 22:53:01 PDT.]
According to Gene Golub, Nils has agreed to getting a departmental
fax, and Betty Scott says the task has been delegated to Yvette
Sloan.
∂22-Sep-88 1045 JMC re: questions about philosophical terminology
To: ISRAEL@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu 22 Sep 88 10:40:17-PDT.]
How about tomorrow morning, and I'll come over there, since I haven't
ever seen the new CSLI building? Is 10 a good time?
∂22-Sep-88 1058 JMC re: questions about philosophical terminology
To: ISRAEL@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu 22 Sep 88 10:50:27-PDT.]
See you there and then.
∂22-Sep-88 1445 Mailer re: El Salvador and 2 sided triangles
To: PEYTON@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from PEYTON@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU sent Thu, 22 Sep 88 11:42:16 PDT.]
I suppose I don't have any actual objection to NEST provided their
aid doesn't go to buy arms or publicity for the El Salvador rebels.
This is a real concern. For example, NORAID appeals for help for
"political prisoners" in Northern Ireland, but much of the money
seems to go for arms for the IRA. Can the advocates of NEST tell
us how the money received is distributed?
∂22-Sep-88 1616 Mailer re: body-surfing
To: bill@ISL.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from bill@isl.stanford.edu sent 21 Sep 88 18:57:03 GMT.]
Let me make my question about NEST more concrete. Who is on their
board of directors, whose reputation might insure that the aid is
going to aid people suffering from the civil war and not to just
one side. Indeed we need some assurance that NEST isn't a moneymaking
scam. Who is the president of it? All we are offered is a P. O. Box.
∂22-Sep-88 2149 JMC reference
To: VAL
I still have "to be published" on your Formal Theories of
Action. Can you give me the current reference?
∂23-Sep-88 1029 JMC Bing School
To: CLT
It has a waiting list. I signed us up for a tour, where we
can observe from behind glass. The time is 9am on Friday, October
28. 1pm on Monday, Oct 24 is also available.
∂23-Sep-88 1109 JMC re: Bing
To: CLT
[In reply to message rcvd 23-Sep-88 10:51-PT.]
Hard to imagine more than a half hour.
∂23-Sep-88 1406 JMC re: Gang-of-Four
To: weening@GANG-OF-FOUR.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 23 Sep 88 13:19:51 PDT.]
Not yet.
∂23-Sep-88 1416 Mailer aids
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
The House of Representatives just passed a compromise bill on AIDS testing.
It omits an anti-discrimination provision to which conservatives object
and omits any compulsory testing on any groups to which liberals object.
According to the Atlantic Monthly, Illinois, which has mandatory pre-marital
AIDS testing found 11 postives among 90,000 tested. There was no further
information and no comment, although the statistic appeared in a section
devoted to exotic statistics.
My question is this. Does 11 out of 90,000 support or oppose the
law? If you like, we can further suppose that 1 additional case of
AIDS virus was undetected and that 2 out of the 11 were false positives,
a fact which was determined on retesting.
You may speculate about what the fiancees did in the 11 cases.
∂23-Sep-88 1455 JMC
To: JK
cbcl[e88,jmc] Prose for cbcl proposal
We propose to study languages for communication of business
transaction information between programs in computers belonging to
separate organizations. We also propose to develop certain new
language features that correct deficiencies of the languages presently
used for electronic data interchange (EDI). The improvement will be
in the direction of increasing the variety of messages that may be
transmitted without requiring revisions of the language. This will be
accomplished by taking into account recent developments in artificial
intelligence, especially work in formalizing nonmonotonic reasoning.
Some of our proposals for improvement are described in
(McCarthy 1983), but they will be reconsidered and extended
in the light of the EDI systems that have been developed and
more recent AI and natural language research.
∂23-Sep-88 1458 JMC coming to Sendai
To: MS@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
My present plan is to come to Sendai on Sunday, November 6 and go
from there to Kyoto on the 8th. I'm still working on Carolyn to
get here to come to and give a talk.
∂23-Sep-88 1500 JMC
To: MS@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
That's to get her to come and give a talk on her recent work.
∂23-Sep-88 1751 JMC re: meeting
To: JK
[In reply to message rcvd 23-Sep-88 16:54-PT.]
On that day, the MAD Board of Directors meets all day.
∂23-Sep-88 1801 Mailer re: Scientific literacy debate
To: rick@HANAUMA.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from rick@hanauma.stanford.edu sent Fri, 23 Sep 88 16:35:30 pdt.]
It seems to me that the scientific literacy problem isn't so much for
the general public as among the media, the legal profession and even
among scientists. The number of causes for which a few people with
scientific credentials are willing to speak in opposition to general
scientific opinion has greatly increased. Therefore, the public's
trust in scientists has decreased. 20 years ago the police would have
called the nearest chemistry department and asked if iron oxide
presents a hazard and would have accepted the negative answer. Now
some lawyer would worry that it might be thought that the chemistry
department was in the pay of the interests.
At Stanford we have Paul Ehrlich.
∂23-Sep-88 2303 JMC Sorry I forgot
To: israel@RUSSELL.Stanford.EDU
our appointment. I'd like to reschedule it when I get back
next week.
∂24-Sep-88 1100 JMC Kyoto paper
To: MPS
I'm going to Portland for the weekend. If the Inamori Foundation
people call tell them that you can fax them a version immediately
if they're nervous, but I'm making further changes this weekend
and plan to put them in on Monday evening. A final version should
be ready Tuesday morning. The file is kyoto.2[e88,jmc] and needs
to be TEXed.
∂26-Sep-88 1643 JMC re: IJCAII Research Excellence Award
To: bibel%vision.ubc.cdn@RELAY.UBC.CA
[In reply to message sent 24 Sep 88 13:42 -0700.]
My ordering is Newell, Minsky, Nilsson.
∂26-Sep-88 1715 Mailer re: AIDS
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from JMC sent Fri, 23 Sep 88 15:59:50 pdt.]
A false positive rate of even one percent isn't too high provided
retesting including different and perhaps more expensive tests
are provided, as I'll bet they are. My own opinon is that 11
positives out of 90,000 is enough to make the program worthwhile.
This reminds me that I was once a false positive. Just after
I got my PhD I was an instructor at Princeton Unviversity in New
Jersey and I got a phone call from my mother in Los Angeles. Q:
What's this about you having tuberculosis? A: First I ever heard of
it. It seems that a chest x-ray. In those days they did mass chest
x-ray screening for tuberculosis found a suspicious area in one of my
lungs. Mercer County in New Jersey feared (according to its policy) I
would become a public charger there, discovered that my previous
address was in Los Angeles County and attempted to pass the buck to
them. Los Angeles County feared (according to its policy) that I
would become a public charge in Los Angeles, but discovered I had
parents in Los Angeles to whom the buck might be passed. Fortunately,
I had a negative tuberculin test, which settled the matter. The
tubeculin test establishes the negative quite decisively, but
unfortunately in those days a substantial fraction of the population
had positive tuberculin tests. In 1968 what was probably the same
lung area was suspected of being lung cancer. To establish the
negative in that case was more expensive.
∂26-Sep-88 1722 JMC Computational Approaches to Scientific Discovery
To: shrager.pa@XEROX.COM
I would like to be invited to your symposium. I have an only Stanford
report that discusses the notion of creativity and argues that a creative
solution of the statement of a problem is one that involves entities
that are not formed from the entities mentioned in the statement of
the problem by functional composition. In particular, there can be
easy creativity.
∂26-Sep-88 2110 JMC re: The Grand Challenge is Foolish
To: AIList@AI.AI.MIT.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon 26 Sep 1988 23:22-EDT.]
I shall have to read the article in Science to see if the Computer
Science and Technology Board has behaved as foolishly as it seems.
Computer science is science and AI is the part of computer science
concerned with achieving goals in certain kinds of complex
environments. However, defining the goals of AI in terms of reading a
physics book is like defining the goal of plasma physics in terms of
making SDI work. It confuses science with engineering.
If the Computer Science and Technology Board takes science seriously
then they have to get technical - or rather scientific. They might
attempt to evaluate the progress in learning algorithms, higher
order unification or nonmonotonic reasoning.
If John Nagle thinks that "The lesson of the last five years seems to
be that throwing money at AI is not enormously productive.", he is
also confusing science with engineering. It's like saying that the
lesson of the last five years of astronomy has been unproductive.
Progress in science is measured in longer periods than that.
∂27-Sep-88 0920 JMC re: NBC and Olympics
To: Crispin@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon, 26 Sep 88 23:57:48 PDT.]
There were probably tens of thousands of viewers who recognized the
Chinese characters for China and got pleasure out of noticing NBC's
error and telling their friends about it. Mark, would you deny them
that?
"For what do we live, but to make sport for our neighbors, and laugh
at them in our turn?" - Jane Austen's Mr. Bennet.
∂27-Sep-88 1217 Mailer NBC and Olympics
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
There were probably tens of thousands of viewers who recognized the
Chinese characters for China and got pleasure out of noticing NBC's
error and telling their friends about it. Mark, would you deny them
that?
"For what do we live, but to make sport for our neighbors, and laugh
at them in our turn?" - Jane Austen's Mr. Bennet.
∂27-Sep-88 1259 JMC re: Marek
To: VAL
[In reply to message rcvd 27-Sep-88 12:44-PT.]
Unfortunately, it has to be no.
∂27-Sep-88 1504 JMC proposal
To: lrosenbe@NOTE.NSF.GOV
CC: JK@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Let me swear on a stack of bibles that when I grumbled about your program,
it hadn't occurred to me that my Common Business Communication Languages
had any relation to the program.
∂27-Sep-88 1512 JMC
To: LES
408 970-8970 is Pitt's current office number.
∂27-Sep-88 1610 JMC MORE ADMINISTRIVIA
To: CLT
∂27-Sep-88 1546 scherlis@vax.darpa.mil MORE ADMINISTRIVIA
Received: from vax.darpa.mil by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 27 Sep 88 15:46:26 PDT
Received: from sun45.darpa.mil by vax.darpa.mil (5.54/5.51)
id AA10140; Tue, 27 Sep 88 18:26:41 EDT
Posted-Date: Tue 27 Sep 88 18:26:47-EDT
Received: by sun45.darpa.mil (5.54/5.51)
id AA06988; Tue, 27 Sep 88 18:26:49 EDT
Date: Tue 27 Sep 88 18:26:47-EDT
From: William L. Scherlis <SCHERLIS@vax.darpa.mil>
Subject: MORE ADMINISTRIVIA
To: SW-PI@vax.darpa.mil
Cc: nfields@vax.darpa.mil
Message-Id: <591402407.0.SCHERLIS@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
Mail-System-Version: <SUN-MM(217)+TOPSLIB(128)@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
To the Software and Algorithms PIs:
Well, another administrative request has surfaced, though this
is easier to satisfy than taking a red-eye flight here for a half-hour
briefing! Mark Pullen has asked the program managers to send the
message below to all the PIs in their communities. The material
requested is entirely financial and contractual, so you can forward
this directly to your financial manager. Please take care to use the
correct syntax in your response. Thanks!
We'll send you your "task code" designator later. If
you don't get it by Monday, please send a note to Nicole
Fields (nfleids@vax.darpa.mil 202-694-5800).
Bill
===============================================================
MEMO FOR PI OF TASK: ___________________, TASK CODE: __
The Director of DARPA has initiated a program to increase visibility
of project funding. Because the information we need for this
purpose is not available in a timely form, we are asking each
Principal Investigator to provide the funding information listed
below. In the future we will ask for updates on a quarterly basis.
(We know many of you recently provided some of this information.
Please be patient and report again in the new format.)
The following information is required, by email if possible, not
later than 15 Oct 88. All amounts are in thousands of dollars.
1. Task Name (from first line of this message)
2. PI Name
3. Task Code (from first line of this message)
4. Contract number
5. Contract start date
6. Contract value (without options)
7. Total spending authority received to date
8. Total amount billed as of 30 Sep 88
9. Amount billed for recurring costs (personnel, etc.), Jan thru Mar 88
10. Amount billed for recurring costs, Apr thru Jun 88
11. Amount billed for recurring costs, Jul thru Sep 88
12. Amount billed for non-recurring costs (equipment, etc.) Jan thru
Sep 88 (if 9 thru 12 are not yet billed, use best estimate)
13. Amount expected to be billed for recurring costs, Oct thru Dec 88
14. Amount expected to be billed for recurring costs, Jan thru Mar 89
15. Amount expected to be billed for recurring costs, Apr thru Jun 89
16. Amount expected to be billed for recurring costs, Jul thru Sep 89
17. Amount expected to be billed for recurring costs, Oct thru Dec 89
18. Amount expected to be billed for non-recurring costs, Oct 88
thru Dec 89
NOTE: 13 thru 18 should represent the spending authority you need
for the period Oct 88 thru Dec 89.
We plan to input directly to our database from your message, so please
use the item numbers above, and separate data from description with a
colon. If any item is zero, please provide it anyhow. Example:
1. Task Name: Advanced Computing Environment
2. PI Name: J.J. Smith
3. Task Code: Z1
4. Contract number: N00139-87-C-0876
5. Contract start date: 1 Dec 87
6. Contract value: $811K
7. Spending auth received: $225K
8. Billed as of 30 Sep 88: $167K
9. Recurring exp Jan-Mar 88: $31K
10. Recurring exp Apr-Jun 88: $46K
11. Recurring exp Jul-Sep 88: $58K
12. Non-recurring exp Jan-Sep 88: $32K
13. Recurring exp Oct-Dec 88: $48K
14. Recurring exp Jan-Mar 89: $50K
15. Recurring exp Apr-Jun 89: $53K
16. Recurring exp Jul-Sep 89: $61K
17. Recurring exp Oct-Dec 89: $49K
18. Non-recurring exp Oct 88-Dec 89: $84K
Please send your report to pi-data@vax.darpa.mil, not later than
15 Oct 88. Questions on the report procedure may also be directed
to that address, or to Juanita Walton at 202-694-4001.
If you do not have email available, mail to PI-Data,
DARPA/ISTO, 1400 Wilson Blvd, Arlington, VA 22209.
We try to keep the reporting workload on the research community as
light as possible. Thank you for helping us support you.
(Program Manager's name goes here)
-------
-------
-------
∂27-Sep-88 1627 Mailer apropos of previous discussion
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
From the Economist 10-16 Sept. p37, issue in cs lounge
From our Manila correspondent.
Making a killing
Communists in the Philisppines are rich; at least rich for communists.
In a country where the average person has an icome of about $500 a year,
a communist in the New People's Army can expect to pocket twice that.
Details of the rebels' unexpected affluence have come from files seized
in raids on their hideouts. More than $15m, it seems was collected last
year by left wing groups, much of it from church organizations in Western
Europe which were presumably unaware that their donations would end up in
the coffers of the New People's army.
(there's much more).
∂27-Sep-88 1811 Mailer re: Western Regional Green Gathering, this weekend
To: croft@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU, su-events@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from croft@csli.stanford.edu sent Tue, 27 Sep 88 16:00:14 PDT.]
I wonder how long it will take for the Greens to realize that if they
are serious about preserving the environment, they will have to become
advocates of nuclear energy.
∂27-Sep-88 2308 JMC
To: MPS
Be sure and TEX a new copy of kyoto.2[e88,jmc].
∂28-Sep-88 1056 JMC
To: helen@PSYCH.Stanford.EDU
It turns out I'll be in New York on Saturday.
∂28-Sep-88 1329 JMC re: MTC Seminar
To: tah@LINZ.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent 28 Sep 88 13:24:28 PDT.]
Please put jmc-lists@sail on the mtc mailing list.
∂28-Sep-88 2145 JMC re: Visit Oct 4.
To: jundt@SIERRA.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Wed, 28 Sep 1988 19:40:22 PDT.]
11am will probably be ok.
∂28-Sep-88 2149 JMC re: Qlisp
To: RPG@SAIL.Stanford.EDU, boesch@VAX.DARPA.MIL
CC: squires@VAX.DARPA.MIL, scherlis@VAX.DARPA.MIL,
CLT@SAIL.Stanford.EDU, pullen@VAX.DARPA.MIL
[In reply to message from RPG rcvd 28-Sep-88 17:35-PT.]
I have had to give notice to people working on Qlisp.