COMMENT ⊗   VALID 00004 PAGES
C REC  PAGE   DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00002 00002	RUMOR ABOUT PDP-10
C00003 00003	DIRECTIONS TO GET TO LICKLIDER'S HOUSE FOR 23RD MEETING
C00011 00004	
C00034 ENDMK
C⊗;
RUMOR ABOUT PDP-10

∂12-JUL-74  1037		network site ISI
 Date: 12 JUL 1974 1036-PDT
 From: LICKLIDER at USC-ISI
 Subject: PDP-10 For Sale?
 To:   JMC at SU-AI, McCarthy
 cc:   Fields, Russell, Licklider
 
 	Rumor says Stanford has a PDP-10 for sale.  IPTO contractors
 are short of PDP-10 resources and IPTO, though short of funds, is
 therefore interested in PDP-10s.  Is there any substance to the rumor?
 
 				Regards
 
 				Lick
DIRECTIONS TO GET TO LICKLIDER'S HOUSE FOR 23RD MEETING

∂12-JUL-74  0655		network site ISI
 Date: 12 JUL 1974 0655-PDT
 From: LICKLIDER at USC-ISI
 Subject: Meeting of July 23rd
 To:   Feigenbaum, Fredkin.MAC at MULTICS, JMC at SU-AI,
 To:   Minsky at MIT-AI, A310AN02 at CMU-10A, Uncapher
 cc:   Licklider
 
 	Time and place of the July-24 meeting were
 indicated in a message you should have received yesterday or the
 day before.  Please let me know if you did not get it.
 
 	July 23, which is intended to be a discussion of longer-term
 issues among this (addressee list) smaller number of us,
 I'd like us to meet at my apartment.  It is in a building called
 'Prospect House' about half a mile from ARPA (the Architect Building
 at 1400 Wilson Blvd. in Rosslyn).  The mailing address is Apt. 850,
 1200 N. Nash St., Arlington, Va. 22209, but the entrance is actually
 on Oak St---1200 N. Oak St., but I think it has no number on the
 door because it is the only entrance in that block on the east side
 of Oak.  (All that for the info of a taxi driver.)  To get to Prospect
 House from the airport, go up the river on the parkway that runs
 along the river, do not cross any bridge to Washington, do not
 take the fork to the George Washington Parkway that offers itself
 a half-mile after you have gone under the 14th St. bridge, do
 take the left-hand fork (which leads to the Memorial Bridge), and
 just before getting to the Memorial Bridge take the road off to
 the right that runs down under the bridge right next to the George
 Washington Parkway.  Then, as soon as you get back to the main
 road after going under the Memorial Bridge, get onto the middle
 lane and avoid the fork to the right that goes to the George
 Washington Parkway.  (I am explicit about this because it is very bad
 to get onto the GWP.  You don't go quite to Maryland before you can
 get off, but almost.)  Having avoided the GWP, you are getting close.
 Take the first off-ramp, which is marked 'Rosslyn'.  Turn
 left at the end of the ramp---thruough an aperture in the center
 strip and onto the far side of the road, which immediately crosses
 over an overpass.  Then take the second right, which is 14th. St.
 Go to the end of it (2 blocks, up steep hill) and turn left on Oak.
 Prospect House is on your left, then.  If the guy who designed the
 road system in this area ever applies to you for a job, hire him.
 Program flow clontrol would be a snap for him.
 
 	I think it will suffice if we start at lunch,
 say at 12:00.  We can eat in the restaurant
 on the top of Prospect House, move to apt. 850 for afternoon talk,
 have coctails and eat again at the restaurant,
 and finish up in the evening in the arartment.  Keith will be
 available only for the evening discussion, I am sorry to say.
 
 	In this meeting, I want to go over several issues with
 you, issues pertaing to the nature of DoD support for computer
 science and artificial intelligence, ARPA and its image of itself,
 long-term funding issues (government-wide, country-wide, world-
 wide), possible new programs in CS and AI, what the trends are
 in the computer industry, prospective PMs
 and IPTO directors in the future, and so on.  I do not intend,
 of course, to try to monopolize the meeting.  It will be shaped
 mainly by what you consider important.  Part of my motivation has to
 do with the fact that I have had to stay pretty close to the
 grindstone these first six months and feel that I ahve not communicated
 sufficiently with the key people in the community.  I hope this
 discussion will be a start on the road back to strong interaction 
 between IPTO and the contractor circle.
 
 				Regards
 
 				Lick
 -------

∂10-JUL-74  0711		network site ISI
 Date: 10 JUL 1974 0711-PDT
 From: LICKLIDER at USC-ISI
 Subject: Meeting of July 24, P.S.
 To:   FEIGENBAUM at ISI, HART at SRI-AI, MCCARTHY at ISI,
 To:   JMC at SU-AI, A310AN02 at CMU-10A, PHW at MIT-AI,
 To:   Amarel at BBN, Cheatham at ISI, Fredkin.MAC at MIT-MULTICS,
 To:   Srin at ISI, Uncapher at ISI
 cc:   Fields, Licklider
 
 	In previous message, please read 'your respective programs'
 for 'our respective programs'.
 
 	It would be good for me to have, from each of you, and
 indication of who will be attending from your project.  For
 the presentation of each project's goal-objective
 plan, I have in mind 15 minutes, including questions of clarification
 but not including any protracted discussion.
 
 				Regards
 
 				Lick

INFORMATION ON THE MEETING AT ARPA ON 24TH

∂10-JUL-74  0657		network site ISI
 Date: 10 JUL 1974 0656-PDT
 From: LICKLIDER at USC-ISI
 Subject: Meeting of July 24 on AI and AP
 To:   FEIGENBAUM at ISI, HART at SRI-AI, MCCARTHY at ISI,
 To:   JMC at SU-AI, A310AN02 at CMU-10A, PHW at MIT-AI,
 To:   Amarel at BBN, Cheatham at ISI, Fredkin.MAC at MIT-MULTICS,
 To:   Srin at ISI, Uncapher at ISI
 cc:   Fields, Licklider
 
 	From returns received thus far, I conclude that
 the date is generally acceptable and that the meeting is
 on.  ARPA 8th-floor conference room, Architect Building,
 1400 Wilson Blvd., Roslyn, Arlington, Va., 9:30 AM.
 
 	It has been suggested, and I like the idea, that
 the meeting be opened up to include research group leaders (where
 different from PIs) as well as PIs.  That would include such
 notables as Balzer and London of ISI, Martin and Vezza of MIT, Wolf of
 CMU.  I want to leave the matter of extending the invitation to
 research group leaders to the decision (and, if affirmative, the
 implementation) of the PIs, each making the decision in his own
 case.  [Pat Winston, John McCarthy, Allen Newell, and perhaps others
 might consider themselves PIs for both AI and AP for this purpose.]
 
 Now let me  try to say what motivates  the meeting for me.   It is a
complex of  things.  I might start by saying why  I did not ask for a
meeting earlier: It seemed to me that there had been several meetings
of  AI  people and  several  of  AP people,  most  of  them not  very
effective  for one reason or  another, and that most  of you were, or
could well be, somewhat put  out or put off by  an on-again-off-again
quality,  or a  sporadic  franticness, or  an ad  hockery,  in ARPA's
efforts  to  'organize'  the  two   program  areas.    I  have   been
deliberately trying  to cool  it and  to let  the dust settle  before
taking further initiative.  
 	The basic motivation behind the meeting is that IPTO is
 in a poor position, vis-a-vis ARPA Hq., in not having written and
 coherent plans for the two program areas, AI and AP, and that I
 want to correct that defect.  What I see as being needed is an
 internal ARPA planning exercise for each of the areas, not a big
 deal in which all the researchers convene for two months
 and write a planning book.  On the other hand, it doesn't make much sense
 for IPTO to construct a plan out of whole cloth.  The plan has to
 reflect the goals, objectives, time scales, and so on of the fields.
 So one of the things I want us to do in the meeting is to talk
 about goals, objectives, time scales, and the like, using specific
 examples as well as general definitions, and get ourselves
 to a point at which we are communicating effectively in the planning
 area that has become so important in ARPA in recent years.  I
 do not suppose that, at the end of the meeting, I'll have all I
 need to put together the two plans I need, but I expect to be
 partly on the way, and in good communication with each of you.
 In the process of getting into the area just discussed, I expect to
 give you the picture of ARPA that I have built up in my six months
 here.
 
 	The second factor in the motivation of the meeting (for me)
 is more immediately pertinent to AP than to AI, but it is likely
 to be pertinent to AI in the future.  It has its roots in ARPA's
 interaction with Congress.  One outcome of last spring's interaction
 was guidance from one committee to the effect that, when we next
 present the AP  program, we should do so with a listing of definite
 accomplishments.  I want to discuss with you what kinds of accomplish-
 ments are judged appropriate for presentation to a congressional
 committee (or staff thereof), what kinds of accomplishments are
 feasible on the short time scale, how long or short the time scale
 actually is, etc.  In this connection, I do not want to disrupt the
 ongoing research that is not likely, in any event, to produce
 'bullets', but I shall try to convey my assessment that it is in our
 interest to redirect some parts of the work if they would produce
 definite achievements upon redirection and not otherwise.
 
 		The preparation that I would like most from you is your
 consideration and formulation of the goal-objective structures of
 our respective programs in AI and in AP.  I'd like to devote
 a considerable part of the meeting to your presentations
 of those structures, with the objectives set on a time scale.  I
 fully understand, or think I do, that such plans can rarely be
 expected to proceed for long without being changed, and I have not
 thought of holding anyone to a stated plan if changes will
 improve the expected result.  I just want you to realize that I am
 in a position in which one always has to have a plan, and to be without
 one is to live dangerously, to be with one that does not approximately
 match what is actually going on is to invite disaster.  At the same
 time, I want you to know [it is true] that IPTO really wants to get
 great research and exploratory development done without unnecessarily
 bugging the guys who do it.
 
 	That has to be it for now.  I am late for work.  Maybe there 
 will be more from me, maybe not.  Please send message
 or telephone if there are questions or problems.
 
 	Incidentally, Craig Fields is going to help
 me in AI and AP work, but I am going to be the ARPA PM for the two
 fields for some time.
 
 				Regards
 
 				Lick
 

∂8-JUL-74  0739		network site ISI
 Date:  8 JUL 1974 0737-PDT
 From: LICKLIDER at USC-ISI
 Subject: Meeting Place
 To:   JMC at SU-AI
 cc:   Licklider
 
 	Please forgive me for not responding to or at least
 acknowledging your suggestion of the meeting place at Lahe Mohonk.
 It looks like a beautiful place, and Louise took an instant liking
 to it (on the basis of the literature you sent, for which thanks).
 Because I am having to be away too much the next few weeks, I felt
 it necessary to have the meetings of the 23rd and 24th here in
 Washington.  My plan is to have the smaller one (23rd) in my
 apartment, which is only a few blocks from ARPA, has a view,
 and is near a restaurant, and the larger in the ARPA Conference Room.
 As i promised, I'll get out a note on purposes, issues, etc.  All
 responses reeived to date are favorable to the proposed dates.
 
 				Regards
 
 				Lick

∂4-JUL-74  0259		network site ISI
 Date:  4 JUL 1974 0258-PDT
 From: LICKLIDER at USC-ISI
 Subject: Meeting of PIs of ARPA/IPTO-Supported AI and AP Projects
 To:   FEIGENBAUM at ISI, HART at SRI-AI, MCCARTHY at ISI,
 To:   JMC at SU-AI, A310AN02 at CMU-10A, PHW at MIT-AI,
 To:   Amarel at BBN, Cheatham at ISI, Fredkin.MAC at MIT-MULTICS,
 To:   Uncapher at ISI
 cc:   Licklider
 
 	If you have a long memory, you will recall that I have
 been trying to arrange a meeting of the PIs of AI and AP.  The
 purpose is to examine the trends and issues in the two fields and
 ARPA's support of them and, particularly, to chart areas in which
 it may be possible to demonstrate visible achievements of clear
 value to DoD.  In AP, as I have indicated, IPTO has a definite
 need for several such achievements for inclusion in reports
 to Congress next spring---which translates into 'December' in IPTO.
 In AI, there is not quite the same immediate pressure, but it will
 be desirable to have the achievement/accomplishment situation well
 in hand.  Beyond this specific IPTO need, which I want to get
 squared away this month and then reviewed in early November, there
 are several general issues that we should discuss.
 
 	On the basis of telephone communications with some but not
 all of you, it appears that July 24 is the best date.  I'd like very
 much to have the meeting then, and to have it here in
 Washington, in the ARPA 8th-floor conference room.  Please let me
 know ASAP whether you can make the meeting at that time and plance.
 
 	To avoid confusion, let me explain that I am asking for
 another, separate meeting of a small group that partly overlaps
 this one, and that the date of the other meeting is July 23.
 I do not want the juxtaposition of the two meetings to cause
 a problem about which is which or when.  The AI-AP meeting
 is to be the 24th unless that date is impossible for some of you.
 
 	Now a very brief note about the outcome of the 'Apportionment'
 exercise.  Both AI and AP came through unscathed, I
 am happy to report, and the 'National Software Works' (Software
 Production Technology) got some additional funds that it needed.
 As the exercise was winding down, however, ARPA was hit by an overall
 deferment of a rather large amount of money, and a big chunk of that
 devolved upon IPTO's program element called 'Advanced Command-Control-
 Communication Technology' or 'ACCCT'.  'Deferment' means that
 the funds may or may not come back in the fall.  Informed guesses
 about the probability of their return vary so greatly that I shall not
 pass on a figure.  Anyway, that event does not impinge directly
 upon AI and AP.
 
 	Except for the ACCCT problem and for the fact that the
 exercise ran on for several weeks instead of taking one afternoon
 as I had expected, I am happy with the outcome of Apportionment.
 In ACCCT, however, I am (we are) feeling bruised and bloody, and
 if management by exception is the procedure of choice ACCCT will be
 my exception for a couple of weeks.
 
 	I'll try to get a note off to you shortly suggesting
 some topics to think about in preparation for the meeting.  Please
 let me know by net message (Licklider@ISI or Licklider@BBN) or
 telephone (202 OXford-4-5921) whether or not you can make the meeting
 on the 24th of July.
 
 	Have a good Fourth.
 
 				Regards
 
 				Lick

∂3-JUL-74  0331		network site ISI
 Date:  3 JUL 1974 0330-PDT
 From: LICKLIDER at USC-ISI
 Subject: Meeting Date, Vision Application
 To:   JMC at SU-AI, McCarthy at ISI
 cc:   Licklider
 
 	Have focussed on July 23-24 for pair of meetings, 23rd
 for discussion of longterm issues with you, Minsky, Fredkin, Newell,
 Feigenbaum, and 24th for meeting of PIs of AI and AP.  23rd okay
 for first group, 24th okay for most of second group and practically
 definite now.
 
 	Have asked Kent Kresa, Dir of ARPA office
 concerned with remotely piloted  vehicles, to suggest dates for
 briefing on vision and automatically controlled planes.
 
 	I did receive both your messages.
 
 	The SUMEX machine is coming onto the network.  There has
 been a suggestion that the SU IMP be moved to another location at
 SU.  I do not want to incur additional and unnecessary expenses,
 but I want to leave optimization up to you, Feigenbaum, Cerf, et
 al---i.e., to the people who are near the problem and understand
 it.  Please let me know if there is any part of the matter IPTO
 should involve itself in.
 
 				Regards
 
 				Lick
 -------