perm filename OUTGO.MSG[1,JMC]26 blob
sn#864642 filedate 1988-12-02 generic text, type C, neo UTF8
COMMENT ⊗ VALID 00237 PAGES
C REC PAGE DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00022 00002 ∂04-Oct-88 1618 JMC re: Visit Oct 4.
C00023 00003 ∂04-Oct-88 1621 JMC re: a follow up appointment?
C00024 00004 ∂04-Oct-88 1622 JMC re: Shuttle landing
C00025 00005 ∂04-Oct-88 1624 JMC re: edi
C00026 00006 ∂04-Oct-88 1641 JMC re: Schwartz
C00029 00007 ∂04-Oct-88 1642 JMC reply to message
C00030 00008 ∂04-Oct-88 1647 JMC re: Franklin Speller
C00031 00009 ∂04-Oct-88 1648 JMC Osaka
C00032 00010 ∂05-Oct-88 1533 JMC re: a follow up appointment?
C00033 00011 ∂05-Oct-88 1546 JMC re: a follow up appointment?
C00034 00012 ∂05-Oct-88 1639 JMC lunch
C00035 00013 ∂05-Oct-88 2259 JMC noise reduction project
C00036 00014 ∂06-Oct-88 0917 JMC re: triangles
C00037 00015 ∂06-Oct-88 0953 JMC photos
C00038 00016 ∂06-Oct-88 1006 JMC reply to message
C00039 00017 ∂06-Oct-88 1614 JMC re: noise reduction project
C00040 00018 ∂07-Oct-88 1649 JMC
C00041 00019 ∂07-Oct-88 1649 JMC
C00042 00020 ∂07-Oct-88 2342 JMC re: CSD-CF Rates for 1988-89
C00043 00021 ∂08-Oct-88 0015 JMC SAIL disk rates
C00044 00022 ∂08-Oct-88 1539 JMC re: CSD-CF Rates for 1988-89
C00045 00023 ∂08-Oct-88 1839 JMC disk rates
C00046 00024 ∂09-Oct-88 1357 Mailer disk use charges
C00052 00025 ∂10-Oct-88 0836 JMC re: JPL Paper
C00053 00026 ∂10-Oct-88 1452 JMC re: as you're not here and your door is closed
C00054 00027 ∂10-Oct-88 1544 JMC toner cartridges for Imagen
C00056 00028 ∂10-Oct-88 2320 JMC
C00057 00029 ∂10-Oct-88 2338 JMC
C00058 00030 ∂11-Oct-88 1103 Mailer the Presidential race
C00067 00031 ∂11-Oct-88 1358 JMC re: toner cartridges
C00068 00032 ∂11-Oct-88 1500 JMC your computer
C00069 00033 ∂11-Oct-88 1542 JMC re: Reply
C00070 00034 ∂12-Oct-88 0951 Mailer re: JMC's campaign analysis
C00073 00035 ∂12-Oct-88 1018 JMC re: bias
C00075 00036 ∂12-Oct-88 1445 Mailer presidential race
C00080 00037 ∂12-Oct-88 2348 JMC re: Your travel expenses, IFIP China.
C00081 00038 ∂12-Oct-88 2352 Mailer re: Government campaign financing (was presidential race)
C00083 00039 ∂13-Oct-88 1055 Mailer re: Alex Cockburn quote
C00084 00040 ∂13-Oct-88 1347 JMC
C00085 00041 ∂13-Oct-88 1359 Mailer October surprise
C00086 00042 ∂13-Oct-88 2138 JMC reply to message
C00087 00043 ∂13-Oct-88 2146 JMC re: Cockburn
C00088 00044 ∂13-Oct-88 2356 JMC re: Noon Saturday
C00089 00045 ∂14-Oct-88 1000 JMC
C00090 00046 ∂14-Oct-88 1411 JMC re: October surprise
C00091 00047 ∂14-Oct-88 1415 JMC re: 3rd party candidates
C00092 00048 ∂14-Oct-88 1428 JMC
C00093 00049 ∂14-Oct-88 1430 JMC re: 3rd party candidates
C00094 00050 ∂14-Oct-88 1656 JMC
C00095 00051 ∂14-Oct-88 2025 Mailer Indians of Brazil
C00097 00052 ∂14-Oct-88 2134 JMC re: triangles
C00098 00053 ∂14-Oct-88 2144 JMC re: the regular tetrahedron
C00099 00054 ∂14-Oct-88 2315 Mailer insurance initiatives
C00101 00055 ∂15-Oct-88 1121 JMC re: hello
C00102 00056 ∂16-Oct-88 1535 JMC re: briefly
C00103 00057 ∂16-Oct-88 1541 JMC re: briefly
C00105 00058 ∂16-Oct-88 1543 Mailer re: new anti-cigarette tax tactic (prop 99)
C00106 00059 ∂17-Oct-88 0916 JMC re: hello
C00107 00060 ∂17-Oct-88 0940 JMC re: hello
C00108 00061 ∂17-Oct-88 1338 JMC re: 3rd party candidates
C00109 00062 ∂17-Oct-88 1339 JMC re: Thesis
C00110 00063 ∂17-Oct-88 1418 JMC re: hello
C00111 00064 ∂17-Oct-88 1521 JMC
C00112 00065 ∂17-Oct-88 1651 JMC re: kr'89 panel
C00113 00066 ∂17-Oct-88 2102 JMC re: SSP-lunch
C00114 00067 ∂17-Oct-88 2114 Mailer re: insurance initiatives
C00116 00068 ∂18-Oct-88 1011 JMC re: this is closed form?
C00117 00069 ∂18-Oct-88 1212 Mailer re: Vote No on bond issues
C00118 00070 ∂18-Oct-88 1423 Mailer October surprise
C00119 00071 ∂18-Oct-88 1449 JMC scanners
C00120 00072 ∂18-Oct-88 1545 JMC Rota article
C00124 00073 ∂18-Oct-88 1606 Mailer re: Taxing "Smokers", Prop 99
C00131 00074 ∂18-Oct-88 1607 JMC re: Tenured Faculty Meeting
C00132 00075 ∂18-Oct-88 2159 JMC Re: Rota article
C00134 00076 ∂18-Oct-88 2255 JMC re: Rota article
C00135 00077 ∂19-Oct-88 0220 Mailer re: October surprise
C00136 00078 ∂19-Oct-88 0240 JMC bicycling
C00137 00079 ∂19-Oct-88 0244 JMC bicycling
C00138 00080 ∂19-Oct-88 1015 JMC re: hello
C00139 00081 ∂19-Oct-88 1152 JMC re: bicycling
C00140 00082 ∂19-Oct-88 1353 JMC re: qlisp for okuno
C00141 00083 ∂19-Oct-88 1403 JMC PI Meeting
C00143 00084 ∂19-Oct-88 1424 JMC re: qlisp for okuno
C00144 00085 ∂19-Oct-88 1526 JMC re: hello
C00145 00086 ∂19-Oct-88 1526 JMC
C00146 00087 ∂19-Oct-88 1730 JMC re: Dallas
C00147 00088 ∂19-Oct-88 2232 JMC ingenuity
C00149 00089 ∂20-Oct-88 1004 Mailer re: Amazon rain forest destruction
C00150 00090 ∂20-Oct-88 1510 JMC place to sit
C00151 00091 ∂20-Oct-88 1551 JMC re: some Symbolic System Forums Announcements
C00152 00092 ∂20-Oct-88 1834 JMC
C00153 00093 ∂20-Oct-88 1840 Mailer At least some Marxist-Leninists are left.
C00154 00094 ∂20-Oct-88 1903 JMC reply to message
C00155 00095 ∂20-Oct-88 2315 JMC letter[1,jmc]
C00156 00096 ∂21-Oct-88 0922 JMC Japanese visa
C00157 00097 ∂21-Oct-88 1427 JMC phone message
C00158 00098 ∂21-Oct-88 1508 JMC dinner with Susie, etc.
C00159 00099 ∂22-Oct-88 1004 JMC re: Hazel
C00160 00100 ∂22-Oct-88 1314 JMC
C00161 00101 ∂22-Oct-88 1846 Mailer Quayle
C00162 00102 ∂22-Oct-88 2256 Mailer criticism of ACLU
C00165 00103 ∂23-Oct-88 0927 JMC re: common knowledge
C00167 00104 ∂23-Oct-88 1217 Mailer The issue is competence not ideology
C00174 00105 ∂23-Oct-88 1804 JMC
C00175 00106 ∂23-Oct-88 1907 Mailer re: criticism of ACLU
C00178 00107 ∂23-Oct-88 2234 JMC
C00179 00108 ∂24-Oct-88 1015 JMC
C00180 00109 ∂24-Oct-88 1016 JMC
C00181 00110 ∂24-Oct-88 1028 JMC re: umbrella
C00182 00111 ∂24-Oct-88 1029 JMC
C00183 00112 ∂24-Oct-88 1032 JMC re: pullen
C00184 00113 ∂27-Oct-88 2315 JMC re: Office Space at CSLI
C00185 00114 ∂27-Oct-88 2319 JMC re: Alex Gorbis
C00186 00115 ∂27-Oct-88 2321 JMC re: date of my exam
C00187 00116 ∂28-Oct-88 1114 JMC Please phone
C00188 00117 ∂28-Oct-88 1322 JMC re: goto
C00189 00118 ∂28-Oct-88 1736 JMC re: PI Meeting - Speech
C00190 00119 ∂28-Oct-88 1740 JMC
C00191 00120 ∂28-Oct-88 1746 Mailer re: Warren Redlich on lawyers and stereotypes
C00194 00121 ∂28-Oct-88 1811 Mailer re: Coverup ("October Surprise")
C00195 00122 ∂30-Oct-88 1238 JMC re: Electronic mail
C00196 00123 ∂30-Oct-88 2204 Mailer re: those whales
C00198 00124 ∂30-Oct-88 2309 JMC randomness
C00199 00125 ∂31-Oct-88 1200 JMC reply to message
C00200 00126 ∂31-Oct-88 1726 JMC
C00201 00127 ∂31-Oct-88 1828 Mailer re: Crispin and Everyday Economics
C00205 00128 ∂31-Oct-88 2134 JMC
C00206 00129 ∂31-Oct-88 2154 JMC re: AIList Digest V8 #117
C00214 00130 ∂01-Nov-88 1128 Mailer re: more "pro-animal" racism/nationalism
C00220 00131 ∂01-Nov-88 1213 JMC 857-0672
C00221 00132 ∂01-Nov-88 1219 JMC re: getting ahold of Dr. John Sowa
C00222 00133 ∂01-Nov-88 1223 JMC Please find out
C00223 00134 ∂01-Nov-88 1321 Mailer anti-racism
C00225 00135 ∂01-Nov-88 1511 JMC re: anti-racism
C00227 00136 ∂01-Nov-88 1629 JMC re: Final Touches
C00243 00137 ∂01-Nov-88 2104 JMC re: russians
C00244 00138 ∂01-Nov-88 2104 JMC
C00245 00139 ∂01-Nov-88 2107 JMC Miyako Hotel
C00246 00140 ∂01-Nov-88 2157 JMC re: russians
C00248 00141 ∂02-Nov-88 1659 Mailer re: anti-racism
C00249 00142 ∂02-Nov-88 1749 Mailer re: anti-racism
C00250 00143 ∂03-Nov-88 1023 JMC reprint file
C00251 00144 ∂03-Nov-88 1026 JMC re: CSLI evening seminars
C00252 00145 ∂03-Nov-88 1034 Mailer re: Article on meat eating
C00254 00146 ∂03-Nov-88 1615 JMC re: research mentor
C00255 00147 ∂03-Nov-88 1616 JMC re: Proposal review
C00256 00148 ∂03-Nov-88 1756 Mailer re: Article on meat eating
C00260 00149 ∂03-Nov-88 2347 JMC letters
C00261 00150 ∂04-Nov-88 1128 Mailer re: more Coverup
C00263 00151 ∂04-Nov-88 1832 JMC re: CSLI Stanford Faculty Meeting
C00264 00152 ∂04-Nov-88 1835 JMC re: Mud-slinging and JMC's heroes [was Re: more Coverup]
C00265 00153 ∂05-Nov-88 0958 JMC re: You haven't sent me the number of the
C00266 00154 ∂05-Nov-88 0958 JMC re: You haven't sent me the number of the
C00267 00155 ∂05-Nov-88 2114 JMC
C00268 00156 ∂06-Nov-88 0131 JMC Meyer letter
C00269 00157 ∂06-Nov-88 0911 JMC
C00270 00158 ∂06-Nov-88 0911 JMC (→21577 17-Nov-88)
C00271 00159 ∂06-Nov-88 0921 JMC
C00272 00160 ∂06-Nov-88 1007 JMC
C00273 00161 ∂06-Nov-88 1033 JMC pens and meeting
C00274 00162 ∂17-Nov-88 0140 JMC Expired plan
C00275 00163 ∂17-Nov-88 2249 JMC re: AI as CS and the scientific epistemology of the common sense world
C00276 00164 ∂17-Nov-88 2250 JMC re: CSLI Stanford Faculty Meeting
C00277 00165 ∂17-Nov-88 2251 JMC re: [davies@cascade.Stanford.EDU (Byron Davies) : Knowledge quantum ]
C00278 00166 ∂17-Nov-88 2252 JMC Re: AI as CS and the scientific epistemology of the common sense world
C00280 00167 ∂17-Nov-88 2302 JMC re: Re Soviets
C00281 00168 ∂17-Nov-88 2308 JMC reply to message
C00283 00169 ∂17-Nov-88 2312 JMC re: post-docs in cs
C00284 00170 ∂17-Nov-88 2315 JMC reply to message
C00285 00171 ∂17-Nov-88 2333 JMC re: History of AI and Time Sharing
C00288 00172 ∂17-Nov-88 2340 JMC re: the history of the term "bag"
C00289 00173 ∂17-Nov-88 2344 JMC
C00290 00174 ∂17-Nov-88 2352 JMC re: Next Week's Faculty Lunch
C00291 00175 ∂17-Nov-88 2357 JMC re: New building
C00293 00176 ∂17-Nov-88 2358 JMC
C00295 00177 ∂18-Nov-88 0136 Mailer Dukakis postmortem
C00297 00178 ∂18-Nov-88 1124 JMC reply to message
C00298 00179 ∂18-Nov-88 1151 JMC accept invitation
C00299 00180 ∂18-Nov-88 1208 JMC nontransitivity
C00300 00181 ∂18-Nov-88 1659 JMC
C00358 00182 ∂19-Nov-88 1112 JMC Please find out
C00359 00183 ∂19-Nov-88 1446 JMC
C00360 00184 ∂20-Nov-88 0337 JMC Defense Data Network
C00361 00185 ∂20-Nov-88 1719 JMC re: about meeting
C00362 00186 ∂20-Nov-88 2046 JMC
C00363 00187 ∂20-Nov-88 2352 JMC
C00364 00188 ∂21-Nov-88 1006 JMC Knuth dinner party
C00365 00189 ∂21-Nov-88 1146 JMC
C00366 00190 ∂21-Nov-88 1356 JMC re: Knuth dinner party
C00367 00191 ∂21-Nov-88 1401 JMC
C00386 00192 ∂21-Nov-88 1403 JMC
C00410 00193 ∂21-Nov-88 1406 JMC re: History of Time Sharing
C00411 00194 ∂21-Nov-88 1407 JMC re: History of Time Sharing
C00412 00195 ∂22-Nov-88 1404 JMC re: computer chess
C00413 00196 ∂22-Nov-88 1408 JMC Please U.S. mail
C00414 00197 ∂22-Nov-88 1412 JMC reply to message
C00415 00198 ∂22-Nov-88 1435 JMC NSF report
C00416 00199 ∂22-Nov-88 1947 JMC re: Dover
C00417 00200 ∂22-Nov-88 2017 JMC reply to message
C00418 00201 ∂22-Nov-88 2210 JMC re: i have printed out
C00419 00202 ∂22-Nov-88 2305 JMC re: new mailing list mtc@polya now exists
C00420 00203 ∂22-Nov-88 2326 JMC reply to message
C00421 00204 ∂22-Nov-88 2331 JMC re: BBBS Call for Neuroscience Nominations
C00422 00205 ∂23-Nov-88 1509 JMC re: TAing your class on NonMonotonic Logic Winter Quarter
C00423 00206 ∂24-Nov-88 0011 JMC
C00424 00207 ∂24-Nov-88 0229 Mailer re: Beyond Language
C00426 00208 ∂24-Nov-88 2021 JMC circus
C00427 00209 ∂25-Nov-88 1700 JMC philooλsophy
C00429 00210 ∂25-Nov-88 1712 JMC
C00430 00211 ∂26-Nov-88 1301 Mailer recriminations on the election
C00431 00212 ∂26-Nov-88 1414 JMC filing
C00432 00213 ∂27-Nov-88 1031 JMC
C00433 00214 ∂28-Nov-88 0046 JMC
C00434 00215 ∂28-Nov-88 1455 JMC library book
C00435 00216 ∂28-Nov-88 1502 JMC also
C00436 00217 ∂28-Nov-88 1723 JMC wrong phone number
C00437 00218 ∂28-Nov-88 1728 JMC calling card
C00438 00219 ∂28-Nov-88 1843 Mailer
C00440 00220 ∂29-Nov-88 1424 JMC
C00441 00221 ∂29-Nov-88 1509 JMC mailing list for article
C00442 00222 ∂29-Nov-88 1540 JMC
C00443 00223 ∂29-Nov-88 1550 JMC
C00444 00224 ∂29-Nov-88 1619 JMC re: US/Japan Workshop on Parallel Lisp
C00445 00225 ∂29-Nov-88 2041 JMC English trip
C00446 00226 ∂29-Nov-88 2246 JMC re: Do you want TAs for your winter quarter class???
C00447 00227 ∂29-Nov-88 2312 JMC
C00448 00228 ∂29-Nov-88 2344 JMC
C00449 00229 ∂30-Nov-88 0932 JMC
C00450 00230 ∂01-Dec-88 1314 JMC faculty club reservations
C00451 00231 ∂01-Dec-88 1754 JMC re: Spring CS309C
C00452 00232 ∂01-Dec-88 1756 JMC re: NSF salary cap
C00453 00233 ∂01-Dec-88 2100 JMC reply to message
C00454 00234 ∂01-Dec-88 2114 Mailer re: Justifying Schultz's decision about Arafat
C00456 00235 ∂02-Dec-88 0033 Mailer International Law
C00459 00236 ∂02-Dec-88 1059 JMC solar heat
C00461 00237 ∂02-Dec-88 1351 JMC
C00464 ENDMK
C⊗;
∂04-Oct-88 1618 JMC re: Visit Oct 4.
To: jundt@SIERRA.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Wed, 28 Sep 1988 19:40:22 PDT.]
Sorry to have missed your brother-in-law. I just got back from
New York.
∂04-Oct-88 1621 JMC re: a follow up appointment?
To: HOFFMAN@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Wed 28 Sep 88 22:59:24-PDT.]
>Stoyan, Herbert Information Sciences
* University of Konstanz
* PO-Box 5560
* D-775 Konstanz 1
* Federal Republic of Germany
* tel: 07531-88-3593
* home: Kapplerbergstr. 73
* D-7753 Allensbach
* tel: 07533-3408
* (Ursula, Roland, Norman)
Probably tomorrow or Thursday, oct 5 or 6. Please phone.
∂04-Oct-88 1622 JMC re: Shuttle landing
To: andy@POLYA.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 29 Sep 88 10:29:58 PDT.]
Thanks for thinking of me. I was in the East. Also I have
no suitable contacts.
∂04-Oct-88 1624 JMC re: edi
To: JK
[In reply to message rcvd 29-Sep-88 14:27-PT.]
No. From my point of view it isn't in good enough shape, but maybe
we can work on it tomorrow, and see if they can still take it.
∂04-Oct-88 1641 JMC re: Schwartz
To: boyer@CS.UTEXAS.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 30 Sep 88 09:40:54 CDT.]
Thanks for the message. As it happened, I was in Washington Friday
for Carolyn's show-and-tell with Schwartz, and he told me about this.
It looks plausible.
∂04-Oct-88 1642 JMC reply to message
To: CN.MCS@FORSYTHE.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 30 Sep 88 13:50:04 PDT.]
I'll press him.
∂04-Oct-88 1647 JMC re: Franklin Speller
To: MPS
[In reply to message rcvd 04-Oct-88 15:33-PT.]
Tell them I don't want it. It isn't good enough yet.
∂04-Oct-88 1648 JMC Osaka
To: RC.STA@FORSYTHE.STANFORD.EDU
I have to address a meeting in Dallas on the 16th, so it doesn't
look likely, but given the time difference, maybe it can be done.
I just called my travel agent, and it can be done. I have to leave
Osaka on the 15th at 6:30pm.
------- End undelivered message -------
∂05-Oct-88 1533 JMC re: a follow up appointment?
To: HOFFMAN@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Wed 5 Oct 88 15:30:02-PDT.]
Friday is no good. This afternoon or tomorrow is possible. Next
week is also possible.
∂05-Oct-88 1546 JMC re: a follow up appointment?
To: HOFFMAN@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Wed 5 Oct 88 15:44:21-PDT.]
Make it 11am Monday, but email me telephone numbers in case I have
to postpone it.
∂05-Oct-88 1639 JMC lunch
To: helen@PSYCH.Stanford.EDU
This Saturday doesn't work, because I'm taking Timothy to Great
America; it's the last day of the season. How about the
following Saturday or dinner some time next week? I usually
eat dinner out.
∂05-Oct-88 2259 JMC noise reduction project
To: CLT
The SCHOA (Stanford Campus Home Owners Association) is asking for
project suggestions, including environmental. I would suggest
a noise reduction project if you were also willing to take part.
I have in mind better enforcement of rules on noisy machinery
and more rules if needed.
∂06-Oct-88 0917 JMC re: triangles
To: beeson@UCSCD.UCSC.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 6 Oct 88 07:53:03 PDT.]
I have no intuition or mathematics to add to what you have discovered.
∂06-Oct-88 0953 JMC photos
To: MPS
The Inamori people want more pictures. Please search the files.
Very few of my pictures at home include me.
∂06-Oct-88 1006 JMC reply to message
To: MPS
[In reply to message rcvd 06-Oct-88 09:59-PT.]
Look in files for folders labelled photographs. My flight from
Osaka is at 6:30pm, so 12-3 looks ok.
∂06-Oct-88 1614 JMC re: noise reduction project
To: CLT
[In reply to message rcvd 06-Oct-88 16:12-PT.]
OK, I'll contact SCHOA. If we run it, we can control the number
of committee meetings.
∂07-Oct-88 1649 JMC
To: JK
f91(x) ← if x > 100 then x-10 else f(f(x+11))
∂07-Oct-88 1649 JMC
To: JK
That's f91 for all three f's.
∂07-Oct-88 2342 JMC re: CSD-CF Rates for 1988-89
To: ball@Polya.Stanford.EDU, Faculty@SCORE.Stanford.EDU
CC: Facil@SCORE.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message from ball@polya.Stanford.EDU sent Fri, 7 Oct 88 09:09:01 PDT.]
I regard the proposed unjustified increases in disk rates having no
relation to costs as grossly discriminatory against me and the way I
have been using the SAIL computer for the last 20 years. To whom in
the Controller's office can I protest?
∂08-Oct-88 0015 JMC SAIL disk rates
To: nilsson@TENAYA.Stanford.EDU
The CSD-CF committee or Jim Ball or somebody has decided on disk
rates that are driving me off the computer system that I created
22 years ago. Unless this is changed, I am going to start some
major form of non-co-operation with CSD.
∂08-Oct-88 1539 JMC re: CSD-CF Rates for 1988-89
To: ARK
[In reply to message rcvd 08-Oct-88 12:06-PT.]
Then I don't understand why the message referred to an increase in
disk rates. Or did I misread it?
∂08-Oct-88 1839 JMC disk rates
To: faculty@SCORE.Stanford.EDU
While disk charges on SAIL are still grossly too high, I misunderstood
a reference to charges on Polya increasing as referring to SAIL. On
SAIL they decreased. My apologies.
∂09-Oct-88 1357 Mailer disk use charges
To: faculty@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU, su-computers@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Let me explain why I was angry by what I thought was an
increase in SAIL charges for disk use, and why I think the
present charges are bad policy.
1. The charges are way out of line with costs for disk file -
by a factor larger than 10 and perhaps larger than 100. SAIL's
present (somewhat reduced) charges of $2.75 per megabit month
would pay for RAM chips to store the files in two months and for
buying disk units in one month.
2. The rationale of the policy of high disk charges is to get
approximately one third of the income from login time, one third
from compute charges and one third from disk use. From a purely
administrative point of view, this rule of thumb makes as much
sense as any other rule of thumb.
3. It is also true that an individual can assure himself of keeping
down his disk charges by pruning files regularly and by judicious use
of archival computers and tape. Moralists like the idea of rewarding
virtue and punishing sin, and maybe some people imagine that keeping
unnecessary files is just the kind of minor sin that is appropriately
punished by the charge algorithm.
4. So what's wrong with it?
I invented the idea of time-shared computing in 1957 - first
memo January 1959 and first publication 1960. The idea is
that an individual should do his computing at his leisure,
sitting at a terminal in his own office or home and that the
operating system should insure that when he was thinking
the system was fully available to others, and when he was
ready to compute he should get prompt service. Specifically
included in the idea was a feature, first proposed in 1945
by Vannevar Bush in his (non-computer) Memex article, that
a person should keep all his personal files in the machine.
It seemed to me then that this meant that as soon as technology
made it possible, a person should be able to keep a copy of all
he ever wrote permanently on-line as well as all his correspondence
to the extent to which the correspondence was capturable in
computer memory.
By the early 1970s, disk technology had advanced to the point
where this was economically feasible, and I adopted it as a personal policy.
I deviated from it a few times when there was a big delay in
getting new disks at SAIL. I would dearly like to get those
old files back, but at present prices I can't afford even my
present files.
I would like everyone to be able to adopt the same policy of
keeping a permanent record on-line of everything he has ever
typed into a computer.
At present the Computer Science Department doesn't even allow
for keeping technical reports and PhD theses on-line. This
is because disk charge policy is determined by administrative
convenience assisted by a lack of imagination. There are too
many young fogeys in the Department, who, two months after
learning how things are done, imagine that they have been
done this way from eternity and will continue to be done
this way for eternity.
It is of a piece with the fact that the ACM is five to ten
years behind the American Mathematical Society in the use
of computers in publication.
5. Of course, CSD-CF has to recover its costs. These costs
are primarily personnel costs associated with the variety
of computer systems maintained. There is only a tiny
co-efficient directly proportional to the amount of disk
file. A better algorithm is required that will make it
possible and normal to maintain large personal files.
∂10-Oct-88 0836 JMC re: JPL Paper
To: thomason@B.GP.CS.CMU.EDU
[In reply to message sent Sun, 9 Oct 1988 20:21:27 EDT.]
No more prizes, but more work for this prize. I finished
the Kyoto prize popular lecture, but I'm supposed to
write up my technical lecture also. However, they haven't
specified a deadline for that. The TEX part will be easy;
that's how I work. Maybe I can make the Dec 1 date if
I can put off writing up the technical lecture till after
I give it.
∂10-Oct-88 1452 JMC re: as you're not here and your door is closed
To: HOFFMAN@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon 10 Oct 88 11:09:09-PDT.]
Wrong. I was merely late, although I had forgotten through misfiling.
Best is to telephone me when you are in a position to come over
right away. 3-4430. Not this afternoon, unless you want to come
to my house 857-0872.
∂10-Oct-88 1544 JMC toner cartridges for Imagen
To: tom@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
The toner cartridge for the Imagen at home ran out and I replaced
it by the spare provided when the Imagen was installed. The
spare was out-of-date and should have been used by March 1988.
However, it seems to be working ok. Because the Imagen is used
slowly I would like to postpone getting another cartridge until
this one is nearly exhausted, but I don't want to take a chance
on running out. The cartridge is labelled 92285A EP-Cartridge,
color: black and is made by Hewlett-Packard. It is also
labelled Code: R34-0002-004. If this is the same cartridge
as is used by the Imagens in MJH, I'll not worry, but will
suppose that it is a regularly used supply.
∂10-Oct-88 2320 JMC
To: CLT
I'll continue with Hazel's lessons.
∂10-Oct-88 2338 JMC
To: MS@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
CC: CLT@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Unfortunately, we can't come to Sendai this trip.
∂11-Oct-88 1103 Mailer the Presidential race
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Here's a try at analyzing what's going on. The key is in Dukakis's
acceptance speech at the Democratic convention. He said, ``The issue
is not ideology but competence.'' The Democrats have tried ideology
unsuccessfully several times. Indeed Democrat activists are mainly
motivated by ideology, and it is necessary to bow to ideology to win
the nomination as Dukakis successfully did.
For example, Dukakis blocked the Seabrook nuclear plant in New
Hampshire by refusing to make an evacuation plan for the bit of its 10
mile circle that extends into Massachusetts in spite of the report of
the Harvard professor he commissioned to look into the matter. This
got him the support of anti-nuclear activists nationwide without
disturbing the general public outside of New Hampshire, which he
doesn't expect to win anyway. He took an extreme stand against SDI in
the primaries and has fuzzed his position since. However, don't
worry, liberals. If he is elected he will appoint people in favor of
all liberal nostrums, e.g. ``comparable worth'', a proposal to decide
politically how much one job should pay relative to another. His
Harvard advisers advocate substantial unilateral disarmament, and
these people expect the relevant positions in a Dukakis
administration.
However, it was also necessary to avoid spelling out any
ideological concessions to the conservative sentiments of the voters,
because this would incite the rhetorical wrath of his ideological
constituencies. For example, conceding on comparable worth would
excite cries of betrayal from the feminist politicians.
The strategy of attacking the Republican vice-presidential
nominee, whoever he might be, was decided before the Democrats knew
who Bush would choose. The Democrats knew this would resonate in the
press.
The Republicans seem to have decided that the Democratic
strategy may win some votes but not enough to decide the election.
Therefore, Bush has concentrated on just a few of the issues that
divide Republicans from Democrats, e.g. the relation between the
criminal law reforms achieved by the ACLU and the Democrats and the
rate of crime. The Bush camp considers that a small margin of victory
is quite likely, and there is no reason to rock the boat by any
innovations. It looks like they're right.
A major motivation for choosing Quayle was to keep the
conservatives in line. This choice gives the conservatives someone in
a strong position for 1996, while requiring no policy commitments that
they can cash in in 1989. The conservatives, like all ideologically
motivated people, are quite disappointed in what their man in office
managed to accomplish. There has been no action on abortion, school
prayer, zapping the ideological use of Legal Services, and only a
little restraint on the growth of the part of the GNP taken by
Government. Also to many of them, the growth of the national debt is
more salient than the success of Reagan policies in reducing inflation
and unemployment and getting rid of the SS-20 missiles. Anyway they
were pacified by Quayle.
(My own opinion is that Reagan accomplished more for the
conservative agenda than any other politician would have been able to
do. Time and again he got programs through the Democrat House of
Representatives. Of course, his inattention cost a lot in many
matters where only the Executive part of the Government was involved.
Even this, however, blurred his conflicts with the House and may have
contributed to his success there. He has made fundamental changes in
how American politicians, journalists and even political scientists
view the world. For example, writers on all sides refer to the
"Soviet Empire", even though few use the adjective "evil".)
Anyway that's why we have a dull election campaign. Both
sides want it that way.
Many people would like a more interesting campaign with both
candidates hammering away at the genuine issues that divide them. For
example, they could debate SDI, debate whether the U.S. should make
unilateral concessions to Gorbachev in order to keep him in power,
debate whether the Sandinistas are good guys, debate comparable worth,
abortions and school prayer. I'm not sure this would be better for
the country, although it would be more interesting.
If this were done, whoever won would have ideological debts to
pay. Each constituency on the winning side would say that it was
their getting out the vote that won. The actual results would depend
on compromises in Congress, because no President has the power to
simply keep the policy promises that elected him.
Over the long haul the U.S. political system has been
more innovative than that of Europe with its sharper ideological
divisions among parties and with its long term individual
leaders of parties who succeed in imposing ideological discipline.
The reason is that when not distracted by personal interest,
our Congressmen are freer to make compromises in the interest
of the country. We don't have the permanent impasses that
afflict Italy for example.
∂11-Oct-88 1358 JMC re: toner cartridges
To: BALDWIN@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
CC: tom@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message from BALDWIN@Score.Stanford.EDU sent Tue 11 Oct 88 13:37:57-PDT.]
Thanks. What I need to know is whether continued availability is reasonably
assured, or should I get another now and take the risk that it will be
outdated when my present one runs out?
∂11-Oct-88 1500 JMC your computer
To: shoham@Score.Stanford.EDU
I have it in my office. If you like, I'll have your secretary
put it in your office.
∂11-Oct-88 1542 JMC re: Reply
To: barwise@RUSSELL.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue, 11 Oct 88 15:41:20 PDT.]
This sounds like something I would like to do. Send it over, and
I'll estimate how long it will take me to reply.
∂12-Oct-88 0951 Mailer re: JMC's campaign analysis
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 Wed, 12 Oct 88 09:15:47 PDT.]
What Bush would do if elected is a substantial unknown compared to
what Dukakis would do. Dukakis has been a governor for some time,
and while he doubtless hoped for higher office, he could never have
given it high probability. Therefore, he probably showed most of
his qualities. Rather left wing Democrat moderated by experience.
Bush has been aimed at becoming President for a long time. As
Vice-President, he has supported Reagan. This is what the job
calls for, and it is also the strategy most likely to win
Reagan's support for his own campaign. He didn't get Reagan
to endorse him in the primaries, but it was clear he didn't
need it. In the main election Reagan has put more work into
supporting Bush than any recent President has put into his
successor's campaign.
Anyway Bush has been discrete, so what he would do as President
is rather unknown. Someone whose opinions I am inclined to
respect told me that he has good advisers, but I don't even
know who they are. They aren't my friends at Hoover, unless
these are very discreet. I don't like his anti-atheist remark;
it suggests a man with strong suppressed prejudices that the
Presidency might bring out. However, as MRC's moderate
messages suggests, we atheists probably don't have too
much to worry about. The problem might be elsewhere.
∂12-Oct-88 1018 JMC re: bias
To: KARP@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Wed, 12 Oct 88 10:05:15 PDT.]
I haven't been paying attention to the campaign as such. I don't
watch TV and usually skip the daily articles on what the
candidates said that day. There is legitimate criticism
of Dukakis's support of ACLU positions on restricting
the use of evidence and making more difficult the criteria
for questioning. Bush may have gone beyond what I would
consider legitimate in that direction, but I don't know
what temptations I would be subject to if I were running
for President. I would probably run an overly intellectual
campaign and lose.
∂12-Oct-88 1445 Mailer presidential race
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
The October Atlantic Monthly has articles by William F. Buckley
and Arthur Schlesinger in favor of Bush and Dukakis respectively.
Read these articles if you want something less superficial than
TV. I suspect that reading them will confirm you in the views
you already have.
As you might expect I found Buckley rather convincing and
Schlesinger weak and inclined to avoid certain issues. Two
examples:
Schlesinger praised Reagan for the INF treaty but wrote that
perhaps Reagan's trillion dollar military buildup was unnecessary
to achieve it. He didn't mention the installation of the
Pershings and cruise missiles in Europe, which were the trade-off
for the Soviet SS-20s that had been installed in the 1970s.
Schlesinger wrote that the Reagan Administration has enshrined
greed. Buckley wrote that the tax reduction has increased taxes
paid by the wealthy with the specific example of the capital
gains tax. Here we have the two men arguing past each other. I
have no idea how any Republican would answer the charge that
greed has been enshrined. The argument is entirely anecdotal.
Here's a counter-anecdote. The marginal federal income tax rate
has gone down from 70 percent to 28 percent. When it was 70
percent, the Federal Government essentially paid 70 percent of
any donation to charity, e.g. to Stanford University. Now it
pays 28 percent, and the donor pays the rest. One of the fears
of universities was that the reduction would greatly reduce
donations. As I understand it, donations have increased. This
suggests that the wealthy haven't become more greedy. Doubtless,
more anecdotes on the other side can be cited, but it's hard to
how either point could be proved. Buckley claims, citing an
incautious statement by J. K. Galbraith, that many liberals
believe that tax rates should be punitive on people with high
incomes. That seems somewhat plausible to me, but it's hard to
really know about people's motivations.
Anyway there's more substance in these articles than in a month of TV.
Here's a proposal to encourage greater voter attention to actual
issues.
Suppose the Federal Government agreed to pay for mailing a 60
page electoral magazine to all registered voters throughout the
country one month before the election. Each party would get 30
pages, which it could divide as it chose between its own initial
statement and refutation of the other side's statement. It would
be glossy, large print, and would contain such pictures the sides
chose to offer. Maybe the Feds could also finance the
distribution of two half hour videotapes, made by the two sides
under the same conditions, for the benefit of those who found
that format more acceptable. The two sides could still spend
their own and matching money on 30 second TV spots.
∂12-Oct-88 2348 JMC re: Your travel expenses, IFIP China.
To: YANG%NORUNIT.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
[In reply to message sent Wed, 12 Oct 88 13:04:43 ECT.]
I'll try again to find the ticket. If not I can supply a duplicate
bill from the travel agency and my certification that I have not
claimed reimbursement from any other source.
∂12-Oct-88 2352 Mailer re: Government campaign financing (was presidential race)
To: J.JBRENNER@Macbeth.Stanford.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from J.JBRENNER@macbeth.stanford.edu sent Wed 12 Oct 88 21:54:51-PDT.]
Mr. Brenner is under a misapprehension. There is public financing
of Presidential campaigns at present - both in the primaries and
the election itself. The Government matches funds raised by
the candidates up to some maximum. The minor parties get less,
because the can raise less on their own. There are some trigger
conditions; perhaps a certain amount of money has to be raised
from each state.
∂13-Oct-88 1055 Mailer re: Alex Cockburn quote
To: roberts@POLYA.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from roberts@polya.stanford.edu sent 13 Oct 88 16:16:11 GMT.]
In addition to his other activities, Alexander Cockburn is the
Wall Street Journal's house leftist, i.e. he is one of their
rotating stable of commentators. Readers of the WSJ were much
amused a few months ago when he (slightly indierectly) accused
Gorbachev of selling out the Afghanistan communists. He used a
more delicate word than "communist", but I forget what it was.
∂13-Oct-88 1347 JMC
To: helen@PSYCH.Stanford.EDU
Noon Saturday, but where should I pick you up?
∂13-Oct-88 1359 Mailer October surprise
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
It looks like the traditional October surprise has arrived on schedule.
∂13-Oct-88 2138 JMC reply to message
To: RC.STA@FORSYTHE.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 13 Oct 88 17:44:19 PDT.]
You can get my standard biography from my secretary, mps@sail.stanford.edu.
∂13-Oct-88 2146 JMC re: Cockburn
To: ilan@GANG-OF-FOUR.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 13 Oct 88 19:41:26 PDT.]
I'm curious, but maybe not enough to read the book. Does it have
a particular theme that you can state?
∂13-Oct-88 2356 JMC re: Noon Saturday
To: helen@PSYCH.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 13 Oct 88 23:50:23 PDT.]
Let it be so.
∂14-Oct-88 1000 JMC
To: MPS
Please send me a message saying when you will be gone.
∂14-Oct-88 1411 JMC re: October surprise
To: S.SALUT@LEAR.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri 14 Oct 88 14:00:50-PDT.]
That's not of sufficient magnitude to affect the election. I was
thinking of the charge that Reagan and Bush were plotting with
Iran before Reagan was elected. That's the sort of surprise that
the advocates of a losing candidate are supposed to try to bring
out in October. How often it actually happens, I don't know.
∂14-Oct-88 1415 JMC re: 3rd party candidates
To: P.EPSTEIN@GSB-WHY.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri 14 Oct 88 13:39:22-PDT.]
I thought Madison and Jefferson were allies. Also I think the
Republican Party started as a third party - or maybe the Whig
Party broke up before the Republican Party formed.
∂14-Oct-88 1428 JMC
To: MPS
ewert.1[let,jmc]
∂14-Oct-88 1430 JMC re: 3rd party candidates
To: P.EPSTEIN@GSB-WHY.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri 14 Oct 88 14:19:26-PDT.]
It's the Republicans that were new. 1856 was the first year they
had a candidate - John C. Fremont. Slogan: Free men, free soil, Fremont.
∂14-Oct-88 1656 JMC
To: CLT
ua 809 sf 1230 nov 7, arr osaka 5pm nov 8
nov 11 ua 810 osaka 630pm, 1045am for Carolyn
ua 810 osaka 630pm, arr 1045am, ua478 1240-609pm
∂14-Oct-88 2025 Mailer Indians of Brazil
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
"In Gorotire, a remote bluff in a bend of the Fresco River,
the case has become an occasion for deep tribal solidarity
among the close to 9,000 Kaiapo. The tribe is preparing an
uncommon show of strength for the day, Oct. 14, when Kube-i
must appear in court in Belem, a large city at the mouth of
the Amazon River. Plans call for several hundred warriors from
Gorotire and a dozen other Kaiapo villages to accompany him
on the 15-hour journey and dance and protest outside the court.
For days messages have been shooting back and forth over the
radio link among the vilages. Small planes must pick up warriors
from the most isolated communities and bring them to Gotorire,
where a dirt road begins."
- NYT October 14
∂14-Oct-88 2134 JMC re: triangles
To: beeson@UCSCD.UCSC.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 14 Oct 88 21:36:15 PDT.]
It looks good. I think about this last for a bit.
∂14-Oct-88 2144 JMC re: the regular tetrahedron
To: beeson@UCSCD.UCSC.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 14 Oct 88 21:39:31 PDT.]
That seems reasonable, but do you have any special reason for it?
∂14-Oct-88 2315 Mailer insurance initiatives
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
A conservative organization called Consumer Alert suggests
voting for Proposition 104 as the most sound and the
least radical. They don't seem to recommend NO votes
on the others, but it seems to be implied.
104 has, according to them, both good and
bad aspects. It limits "pain and suffering" awards and
contingency fees. It bars banks from getting into the
insurance business, which Consumer Alert regrets as
limiting competition. It is supported by the insurance
industry and Calif. STate Auto Association and opposed
by Ralph Nader, Calif. Trial Lawyers Association and
Common Cause. They have convinced me. I'll
leave their 4 page recommendation in the CS lounge.
∂15-Oct-88 1121 JMC re: hello
To: meyer@THEORY.LCS.MIT.EDU
[In reply to message sent Sat, 15 Oct 88 13:37:43 EDT.]
Got your messsage.
∂16-Oct-88 1535 JMC re: briefly
To: HOFFMAN@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Sun 16 Oct 88 14:22:09-PDT.]
Whatever format suits him suits me, but it occurs to me that each of
us might prepare 4 or 5 questions or issues that he would like the
other to discuss - written on half a page, so that it could be
distributed to the audience. I suppose the issue might be
``Can computer programs have beliefs and be intelligent.''
You should ask him about the formulation. Again, I expect to agree
to whatever he might propose.
∂16-Oct-88 1541 JMC re: briefly
To: HOFFMAN@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Sun 16 Oct 88 14:22:09-PDT.]
John McCarthy has worked on problems associated with the logic
approach to AI for 30 years and will discuss what has been
accomplished and what seem to be the next problems. This
involves representing by mathematical logical sentences what a
computer program should know about the common sense world in
general and about specific situations. What it can infer about
what actions will achieve its goals is determined by logical
inference including both logical deduction and formalized
nonmonotonic reasoning.
∂16-Oct-88 1543 Mailer re: new anti-cigarette tax tactic (prop 99)
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 Sun, 16 Oct 88 09:31:53 pdt.]
I think I voted for that one, but now I have second thoughts.
Is it just persecution of another minority - the smokers?
∂17-Oct-88 0916 JMC re: hello
To: meyer@THEORY.LCS.MIT.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon, 17 Oct 88 10:58:20 EDT.]
If you can pay travel expenses, yes, otherwise no.
∂17-Oct-88 0940 JMC re: hello
To: meyer@THEORY.LCS.MIT.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon, 17 Oct 88 12:27:02 EDT.]
I have a call in to someone in New York who may have Russell's address -
said to be in California.
∂17-Oct-88 1338 JMC re: 3rd party candidates
To: P.EPSTEIN@GSB-WHY.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon 17 Oct 88 12:36:16-PDT.]
You're still confused. The Republican Party ran its first
candidate in 1856. In 1860, the Democrats( formerly the
Republican-Democratic Party) split on the slavery issue, and
Abraham Lincoln was elected as a Republican. This triggered the
Civil War, which started just before Lincoln took office in March
1861. After the war, which ended in April 1865, the Republicans
were dominant until about 1880, when Grover Cleveland was elected
as a Democrat.
∂17-Oct-88 1339 JMC re: Thesis
To: JSW@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message rcvd 17-Oct-88 11:50-PT.]
That will be fine. I expect to be in all afternoon.
∂17-Oct-88 1418 JMC re: hello
To: meyer@THEORY.LCS.MIT.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon, 17 Oct 88 14:32:13 EDT.]
Steve Russell, 415 578-1900, is the only one of that group I would
currently recommend. I haven't talked to him in some years, but
he did the first LISP interpreter, based on what I considered a
purely theoretical demonstration that a universal LISP function was
more compact and understandable than a universal Turing machine.
∂17-Oct-88 1521 JMC
To: CLT
Kornberg, who was away last week, called with more questions.
∂17-Oct-88 1651 JMC re: kr'89 panel
To: VAL
[In reply to message sent Tue, 11 Oct 88 17:45:16 edt.]
I agree with your answer.
∂17-Oct-88 2102 JMC re: SSP-lunch
To: HELEN@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon 17 Oct 88 12:07:18-PDT.]
I'll come to lunch Friday.
∂17-Oct-88 2114 Mailer re: insurance initiatives
To: pallas@POLYA.Stanford.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from pallas@polya.stanford.edu sent 17 Oct 88 16:37:31 GMT.]
Perhaps ideal conservatives against all change exist. I don't recall
meeting any. However, some of us ``conservatives'' are actually
reactionaries and remember a time before there were such enormous
personal injury verdicts. The limitations of pain and suffering
awards in Prop. 104 were attractions. No fault also seems worth
trying here. I put the issue of Consumer Alert in the CSD Lounge,
so you can see for yourself what it says.
∂18-Oct-88 1011 JMC re: this is closed form?
To: rwg@RUSSIAN.SPA.SYMBOLICS.COM
[In reply to message sent Tue, 18 Oct 88 03:19 PDT.]
What's your opinion of Mathematica?
∂18-Oct-88 1212 Mailer re: Vote No on bond issues
To: holstege@Polya.Stanford.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from holstege@polya.stanford.edu sent 18 Oct 88 13:56:01 GMT.]
Mary Holstege's argument has convinced me that I should have voted
no on the bond issues. Alas, I voted yes (absentee) on a few of them.
∂18-Oct-88 1423 Mailer October surprise
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
There is a tradition in American politics that one side or the
other will present startling charges just beore the election.
The traditional name is the October surpris. It needs just
enough credibility to last through the elction. Here it is
October 18, and we have posters for Coverup right on schedule.
Line up, suckers. Dukakis has to decide whether to endorse it.
I gather that so far he has said nothing.
∂18-Oct-88 1449 JMC scanners
To: fkl@JESSICA.Stanford.EDU
Professor Alphonse Juilland, 321-7819, of the French Department would
like to be able to scan some French novels into a computer and
asked me about it. I got your name as the expert on such matters.
Would you phone him at the above home number? He works at home mostly.
∂18-Oct-88 1545 JMC Rota article
To: barwise@CSLI.Stanford.EDU
It just arrived today, and I've just read it. Are you sure you
want to publish it? It's rather bad history, journalism and
amateur philosophy. There is one aspect that puzzles me. It
is dated December 26, 1985. Subsequent to that date, Rota got
Los Alamos to sponsor a meeting on AI and a special issue of
Daedalus devoted to AI. Daedalus is the publication of the
American Academy of Arts and Sciences. Rota took part both in
preparatory meetings in Boston and in the meeting at Los Alamos.
The special issue came out at the beginning of this year. Does
he really have nothing to add to his 1985 paper based on all these
meetings he attended, and the special issue he helped edit?
If you still want me to write a few pages of reply to it, I would
spend one page on listing some errors, and the rest on a de novo
treatment of Mathematics and AI, but the latter wouldn't be based
on his random remarks.
Incidentally, I would remark that if the Notices wants to go in
for science journalism, then it has to employ a ``fact checker''
like the New Yorker and other respectable publishers. I remember
being asked a large number of detailed questions by a New Yorker
fact checker when they published a Jeremy Bernstein profile of
Marvin Minsky.
A few errors:
Minsky's thesis was 1954, not 1953. His adviser was Albert
Tucker, not Lefschetz, and the readers included John Tukey, John
von Neumann and Lloyd Shapley. It was 400 pages not 1,000 pages.
It cost me a long distance call to verify these facts, but it
would have only been an intra-M.I.T. call for Rota.
Lefschetz was my adviser, but my thesis was 23 pages and on
differential equations. I mention it, because Lefschetz, who
was Department Chairman, may in later years have confused the
two of us.
The characterization of hackers is an exaggeration, and I'd bet
that the role of Feynman is misremembered. A call to Danny Hillis,
the head of Thinking Machines and who can and does write rather well
would establish some facts. Hillis is young, but not as young
as Rota says, and some of the people active in Thinking Machines
are older than Rota.
He might mention that Jack Schwartz is now Director of DARPA's
Information Science and Technology Office and hasn't been exactly
generous to AI.
Maybe Rota sent you the wrong manuscript. Surely he must think
all the effort he put into the Daedalus issue taught him something.
∂18-Oct-88 1606 Mailer re: Taxing "Smokers", Prop 99
To: rhw@SIERRA.Stanford.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
CC: "c.cole@macbeth"@SIERRA.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from rhw@sierra.stanford.edu sent Tue, 18 Oct 1988 15:15:48 PDT.]
The motive for 99 might be partly financial. The liberals are
discouraged about the prospects for repealing proposition 13 and
are looking for other sources.
I think initiatives are a good thing. If we look at what has been
passed, they aren't more harmful than what the legislature has
passed.
I favor the Gann initiative. As an AIDS victim, he has had a lot of
time to think about it, and it only proposes to treat AIDS as other
communicable diseases have been treated in the past. The opposition
is based on the idea that homosexuals have been oppressed, and since
AIDS mostly afflicts them, we should change past public health practice
in order to accomodate their preferences. While the homosexual
organizations oppose nonvoluntary AIDS testing, and aggressive contact
tracing, there is every reason to believe that these measures will
reduce the number of homosexuals who die of AIDS. Compulsory contact
tracing has greatly reduced other infectious diseases.
∂18-Oct-88 1607 JMC re: Tenured Faculty Meeting
To: BSCOTT@SCORE.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue 18 Oct 88 15:58:17-PDT.]
I intend to abstain.
∂18-Oct-88 2159 JMC Re: Rota article
To: VAL
∂18-Oct-88 2022 barwise@russell.Stanford.EDU Re: Rota article
Received: from russell.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 18 Oct 88 20:22:35 PDT
Received: from localhost by russell.Stanford.EDU (4.0/4.7); Tue, 18 Oct 88 20:24:58 PDT
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Re: Rota article
In-Reply-To: Your message of 18 Oct 88 15:45:00 PDT.
<l4sff@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Address: CSLI, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305 (415) 723-0110
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 88 20:24:56 PDT
From: Jon Barwise <barwise@russell.Stanford.EDU>
Oh, dear, sounds bad. I assumed he knew what he was talking about. I
guess I had better write him and either reject the paper (which is a
bit hard since I invited him to submit something) or at least suggest
that he improve it, update it, and check up on his facts.
Thanks. Why don't you forget this version.
Jon
∂18-Oct-88 2255 JMC re: Rota article
To: barwise@RUSSELL.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue, 18 Oct 88 20:24:56 PDT.]
OK. If at some time it seems reasonable, I would be glad to write
a Notices article on mathematics and AI, emphasizing the extent to
which AI does and doesn't present problems of primary mathematical
interest.
∂19-Oct-88 0220 Mailer re: October surprise
To: les@GANG-OF-FOUR.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from les@gang-of-four.stanford.edu sent 19 Oct 88 08:46:43 GMT.]
Nothing like a good conspiracy theory. It would be interesting to
elaborate it. To begin with, are Jesse Jackson and Michael Dukakis
part of the conspiracy?
∂19-Oct-88 0240 JMC bicycling
To: elliott%slacv.bitnet@FORSYTHE.Stanford.EDU
I had other commitments for the last several weekends, but are you
cycling this Saturday? I've been around the loop twice recently.
∂19-Oct-88 0244 JMC bicycling
To: elliott%slacvm.bitnet@FORSYTHE.Stanford.EDU
I had other commitments for the last several weekends, but are you
and Sue cycling this Saturday? I've been around the loop twice recently.
∂19-Oct-88 1015 JMC re: hello
To: meyer@THEORY.LCS.MIT.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon, 17 Oct 88 14:32:13 EDT.]
Could someone make me a hotel reservation convenient to the celebration,
Tuesday and Wednesday nights?
∂19-Oct-88 1152 JMC re: bicycling
To: ELLIOTT%SLACVM.BITNET@FORSYTHE.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent 19 Oct 88 11:47 PST.]
That's a good time. Shall we meet at Foothill and Campus Drive again?
If you phone me at home just before you leave home, I'll get to the meeting
place on time.
∂19-Oct-88 1353 JMC re: qlisp for okuno
To: CLT
[In reply to message rcvd 19-Oct-88 13:22-PT.]
That's too thin an argument. I would rather make the argument that
the Japanese are our allies, and they have done good work on LISP and
that collaboration with them is worthwhile.
∂19-Oct-88 1403 JMC PI Meeting
To: MPS
∂19-Oct-88 1333 pimeet@vax.darpa.mil PI Meeting
Received: from vax.darpa.mil by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 19 Oct 88 13:33:13 PDT
Posted-Date: Wed 19 Oct 88 13:46:03-EDT
Received: by vax.darpa.mil (5.54/5.51)
id AA08113; Wed, 19 Oct 88 13:46:05 EDT
Date: Wed 19 Oct 88 13:46:03-EDT
From: Mark Pullen <PIMEET@vax.darpa.mil>
Subject: PI Meeting
To: ISTO-PI-LIST@vax.darpa.mil
Message-Id: <593286363.0.PIMEET@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
Mail-System-Version: <VAX-MM(217)+TOPSLIB(128)@VAX.DARPA.MIL>
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Just a reminder that the cut-off for hotel reservations at the Hyatt is
this Friday, October 21. Please be sure to take care of this soon.
Also, for those of you who were told that there were no rooms available
at the Hyatt and subsequently booked the Hilton, please feel free to
change your reservations to the Hyatt. There really is plenty of room!
Hyatt Reservations: 214/453-8400.
Juanita Walton
-------
∂19-Oct-88 1424 JMC re: qlisp for okuno
To: CLT
[In reply to message rcvd 19-Oct-88 14:06-PT.]
We can mention it, but we should discuss it with Pullen, and even
better Schwartz, in Dallas.
∂19-Oct-88 1526 JMC re: hello
To: meyer@THEORY.LCS.MIT.EDU
[In reply to message sent Wed, 19 Oct 88 14:13:12 EDT.]
I tracked down Fredkin in Japan, and I will be staying with him,
so I won't need a hotel reservation after all.
∂19-Oct-88 1526 JMC
To: ME
Boise hasn't responded since yesterday.
∂19-Oct-88 1730 JMC re: Dallas
To: MPS
[In reply to message rcvd 19-Oct-88 16:42-PT.]
Take the one without penalty to San Jose. The meeting in Dallas ends at noon.
∂19-Oct-88 2232 JMC ingenuity
To: CLT
Timothy wasn't sleepy and after I put him down reappeared and
demanded to sleep in my bed. I put him there, but he kept
coming back in the office. I finally got annoyed enough to
put him back in his own bed to the accompaniment of some tears.
Another ten minutes went by and he reappeared in a quiet mood
with his bottle and made a small speech saying the bottle was
empty and he wanted more milk. I agreed to that and said
"Come on downstairs". He replied, "I'll wait for you",
and I went down to heat some milk. When I came back up I
couldn't find him in my room or anywhere. Eventually
I discovered him in my bed absolutely quiet and flattened
out so much that I had missed him. He took the bottle and
has been quiet.
∂20-Oct-88 1004 Mailer re: Amazon rain forest destruction
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 Thu, 20 Oct 88 08:48:58 pdt.]
ABC News has the right to order anyone to do anything. Noncompliance
risks the ire of ABC News. The battle about destroying the forest
in Brazil is basically among Brazilians with ABC as a kibitzer.
∂20-Oct-88 1510 JMC place to sit
To: john@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
If there is a place for me to sit at CSLI, I would use it
occasionally, especially around the time of interesting
CSLI events but also as an escape from distractions.
∂20-Oct-88 1551 JMC re: some Symbolic System Forums Announcements
To: HOFFMAN@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu 20 Oct 88 15:03:08-PDT.]
That's Sweet Hall.
∂20-Oct-88 1834 JMC
To: JK
How is the 91 function doing?
∂20-Oct-88 1840 Mailer At least some Marxist-Leninists are left.
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
a258 1819 20 Oct 88
By BRYNA BRENNAN
Associated Press Writer
MANAGUA, Nicaragua (AP) - Hurricane Joan left at least 11 people
dead in Venezuela and then sent tens of thousands of people fleeing
for safety as it closed in on Central America Thursday with heavy
rain and 105 mph winds.
.
.
.
President Daniel Ortega enacted an emergency law banning
communications media from reporting unauthorized news about the
hurricane.
.
.
.
∂20-Oct-88 1903 JMC reply to message
To: JK
[In reply to message rcvd 20-Oct-88 18:59-PT.]
What I would like to see first is the proof that there is such an
object satisfying the equation - remembering that if not all the
functions involved were continuous, there need not be any.
∂20-Oct-88 2315 JMC letter[1,jmc]
To: MPS
Please decorate beckma.4 and try to enter the letters you have
done for me in letter[1,jmc]. You told me you forgot some.
∂21-Oct-88 0922 JMC Japanese visa
To: CLT
The Japanese visa stamped in my passport is good for five years,
so I suppose yours is also, but you had better check it.
∂21-Oct-88 1427 JMC phone message
To: MPS
Monday morning, please phone the SE2 office 212 840-6595 and
tell them that the award I won is the Kyoto prize of the Inamori
Foundation.
∂21-Oct-88 1508 JMC dinner with Susie, etc.
To: CLT
Susie, Dan, Kitty Rose and Joseph will be here tonight. I plan to take
Timothy to dinner with them. Are you interested in coming?
∂22-Oct-88 1004 JMC re: Hazel
To: CLT
[In reply to message rcvd 22-Oct-88 10:02-PT.]
It was done.
∂22-Oct-88 1314 JMC
To: CLT
Bonnie Britten-Straight, friend of Gunthers,
might be interested in renting our house for a while.
408 427-0181
∂22-Oct-88 1846 Mailer Quayle
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Quayle was recently defended as an effective Senator by Ted Kennedy.
Curiously, the latest Accuracy in Media attacks the media for attacking
Quayle and makes a comparison between Quayle's record and that of Jack
Kennedy up to the time Kennedy ran for President. It claims that Quayle
got more important bills passed and had better attendance. It remarks
that Kennedy had one accomplishment as Senator that Quayle didn't;
Kennedy wrote a best-selling book. How many BBoard readers have
read Kennedy's book?
∂22-Oct-88 2256 Mailer criticism of ACLU
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
The Oct 31 New Republic includes a critical article on the
ACLU's activities since 1973. It credits ACLU with its
early contributions to civil liberties and then accuses
the ACLU of ``hostility to the processes of constitutional
democracy. This hostility takes two forms: first, in
attempts to override democratic processes, and replace
them with judicial decrees, in ever larger spheres of
public life, and second, in attempts to expand individual
`rights' without regard for countervailing public
interests.''
The examples of ACLU positions specifically criticized
include (1) support for a court order requiring the
city of Richmond to award 30 percent of public works
contracts to minority firms. (2) opposition to laws
requiring informing parents of minors having abortions.
(3) a prisoners' rights lower court decision requiring
individual cells for prisoners and other things.
(4) claiming that a person's privacy was violated when
police in an airplane spotted marijuana plants and
later got a search warrant, the Joyce Brown case.
The writer also grumbles that he was refused access to
past annual reports when he visited ACLU headquarters.
This article doesn't mention ACLU's recent more specifically
political stands, e.g. on Nicaragua, with which Bush
surely disagrees and has the right to suggest that
Dukakis supports.
∂23-Oct-88 0927 JMC re: common knowledge
To: barwise@RUSSELL.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Sun, 23 Oct 88 08:44:55 PDT.]
The following paper includes axioms for common knowledge that has
the desired property. The basic forem of the axioms dates from
about 1960 but weren't published. I don't know that I made a
point of the observation, because I considered it obvious. If
that makes it too complicated for a reference, I don't mind.
{\bf McCarthy, John (1977)}:
``On The Model Theory of Knowledge'' (with M. Sato, S. Igarashi, and
T. Hayashi), {\it Proceedings of the Fifth International Joint Conference
on Artificial Intelligence}, M.I.T., Cambridge, Mass.
∂23-Oct-88 1217 Mailer The issue is competence not ideology
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
This slogan of Dukakis's acceptance speech is responsible for the
trivial nature of the campaign. The Democrats lost twice to
Reagan with ideological campaigns and now are trying to sneak
into office in disguise. Consider some issues.
1. comparable worth. This is perhaps NOW's chief issue,
but they have been silent. If Dukakis wins, they'll start
pounding the table.
2. the Supreme Court. The choice between (say) another
try at Bork and Lawrence Tribe would not be made by Dukakis on
the basis of who had better papers published in law reviews. It
would be made on the basis of ideology.
3. Nicaragua. The Democrats essentially got their way,
but those in favor of repeating the Carter Administration action
of giving $75 million to the Sandinistas will come out if Dukakis
is elected.
4. Nuclear energy. Dukakis prevented the Seabrook plant
from operating by claiming that the bit of its 10 mile zone that
extends into Massachusett can't be evacuated. However, he
doesn't mention this in the campaign.
All the various issue organizations that support the
Democrats are going along with the "competence" strategy and
keeping their mouths shut. This includes the AFL-CIO, Jackson,
NOW, NEA, ACLU, NAACP, the Institute of Policy Studies and all
manner of ideologically liberal academics. Even the BBOARD
liberals have laid off issues and concentrated on Quayle.
Of course, the liberal organizations will resume
publicity right after the election regardless of who wins. If
Dukakis wins, they'll claim their reward. If Dukakis loses,
they'll ascribe his loss to not advancing their claim. For
example, maybe NOW will claim that Dukakis lost his advantage
among women by not pushing comparable worth.
The only people who are pushing their views these days
are the anti-abortion activists. They just recently discovered
civil disobedience as a tactic and are getting a big kick out
of it. They couldn't stop even if it were adversely affecting
Bush, and it doesn't seem to be. I don't recall Bush even being
asked what he thinks of them. But then they don't ask Dukakis
either.
The Bush campaign has substantially gone along with this
approach. Why should they change when it seems that they're winning?
Right wing ideologists will also come out of the woodwork right
after the election.
The one hook Bush has used is to take advantage of one of
Dukakis's mistakes. It was Dukakis who first used the phrase
"card carrying member of the ACLU" to refer to himself. Bush
took it up. Journalists and academics who know about McCarthyism
in the 1950s have used it to counter-attack against Bush by
comparing his use of the phrase with Joe McCarthy's. It is
barely conceivable that the Bush campaign used the phrase
precisely in order to provoke this counter-attack which keeps the
phrase before the public. Remember that relatively few voters
have much memory of that period and even fewer fully share the
liberal mythology about it. The actual effect of keeping the
ACLU salient in the public mind is to cause people to evaluate
the candidates according to their memory of ACLU positions. Few
remember the ACLU defense of free speech that lasted through the
fifties, when the main victories were won. More remember the
ACLU positions since 1973 in favor of quotas and for what many
regard as extreme positions about what rights the Constitution
gives criminals.
By showing off their historical knowledge about what
"card-carrying" meant in the 1950s, the liberals have done some
of Bush's work for him. After the election we may find out
whether the Bush people anticipated this effect. If so, we can
be sure that someone will try to take credit for thinking of it.
Perhaps he will be able to command really high consulting fees
from the Democrats next time.
∂23-Oct-88 1804 JMC
To: rdz@SCORE.Stanford.EDU
No thanks. Ate too recently.
∂23-Oct-88 1907 Mailer re: criticism of ACLU
To: pallas@POLYA.Stanford.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from pallas@polya.stanford.edu sent 23 Oct 88 21:28:22 GMT.]
ACLU support didn't mean in any of the cases cited, the ACLU merely issuing
a press release. It involved, it was explicitly stated in some case
and I take it to be true in all, the ACLU filing a brief in the case,
i.e. spending its money. The case cited in the New Republic article
involve "among other claims" a slow elevator to the exercise area,
private cells, and access to a xerox machine in the prison library.
I didn't quote them before, because I don't know what the main claims
were.
Basically, I agree with Inder that a prisoner's rights should include
protection from violence by other prisoners. In the Texas case, however,
reducing the authority of the system to use prisoners to maintain
order, resulted in rule of the prisons by gangs and more than 50
intra-prison murders. Of course, the ACLU could say that if only
the state of Texas had given new prisons higher priority than new
schools, secure new prisons could have been built. I don't know
if ACLU was involved in the Texas case.
My purpose in citing the New Republic article was to show that
some people have substantive reasons for disagreeing with ACLU
and trying to connect political rivals with ACLU positions.
My guess is that the criticisms have merit, but I haven't remembered
enough of what I read previously to offer a tight argument.
Another major criticism is that ACLU has gone on to interpret
major left-right political disagreements as civil rights issues.
This lost them people like Thornburgh many years ago.
∂23-Oct-88 2234 JMC
To: suppes@CSLI.Stanford.EDU
Ershov, Andrei P. Computation Center, Novosibirsk 630090, USSR
(work in Novosibirsk: 8-3832 35 03 52) (home: 35 57 38)
Acad. A. P. Ershov, Chairman
USSR Council of Cybernetics
117333 Moscow, ul. Vavilova 40
USSR
∂24-Oct-88 1015 JMC
To: CLT
Frank Rosa, painter
408 985-2160 after 5pm
∂24-Oct-88 1016 JMC
To: CLT
notes[1,jmc] is an expanding file of notes of all kinds.
∂24-Oct-88 1028 JMC re: umbrella
To: CLT
[In reply to message rcvd 24-Oct-88 10:24-PT.]
OK about Friedland. Is it time to harass Pullen? I will
be at Rockefeller University, Founders Hall tonight, at
Fred Seitz's office there tomorrow, and at Fredkin's
617 277-4444 Tuesday and Wednesday nights. Back Thursday
night.
∂24-Oct-88 1029 JMC
To: CLT
I unprotected notes.
∂24-Oct-88 1032 JMC re: pullen
To: CLT
[In reply to message rcvd 24-Oct-88 10:31-PT.]
Wait on Okuno. This is better discussed in person.
∂27-Oct-88 2315 JMC re: Office Space at CSLI
To: BETSY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue 25 Oct 88 16:36:03-PDT.]
Those arrangements seem fine, and maybe I will coincide with my office
mates at some time. I'll pass on the terminal for the time being.
∂27-Oct-88 2319 JMC re: Alex Gorbis
To: littell@POLYA.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 27 Oct 88 10:47:41 PDT.]
I should be charged to the DARPA Formal Reasoning contract, i.e.
same as Lifschitz.
∂27-Oct-88 2321 JMC re: date of my exam
To: GLB
[In reply to message rcvd 25-Oct-88 17:41-PT.]
Nov 22 is ok with me.
∂28-Oct-88 1114 JMC Please phone
To: MPS
John Denning, 851-0121, and tell him that I will be teaching Epistemological
Problems of AI and Technological Opportunities for Humanity Winter Quarter.
∂28-Oct-88 1322 JMC re: goto
To: CLT
[In reply to message rcvd 28-Oct-88 11:28-PT.]
ok.
∂28-Oct-88 1736 JMC re: PI Meeting - Speech
To: PIMEET@VAX.DARPA.MIL
[In reply to message sent Fri 28 Oct 88 20:30:05-EDT.]
LISP, Mathematical Logic and Artificial Intelligence
∂28-Oct-88 1740 JMC
To: VAL
suppes 321-6594.
∂28-Oct-88 1746 Mailer re: Warren Redlich on lawyers and stereotypes
To: ginsberg@POLYA.Stanford.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from ginsberg@polya.stanford.edu sent 29 Oct 88 00:26:19 GMT.]
Two years ago, I gave a keynote address to a conference on AI and
law. and met lots of lawyers there. When I remarked to Marvin
Minsky that there were lots a smart and creative people among
lawyers, he replied, "Yes, what a tragedy." I entirely agree
with Minsky. I have met many lawyers since, and I don't agree
with Crispin that they are bad people on the whole. However,
they have created a system that unnecessarily employs lots of
them. Two weeks ago I spent a day in Federal Court in New York
as an expert witness in a patent suit about video games. There
were 25 people in that court room, not one of whom was a
spectator, and each of whom seemed to be doing a professional job
in the system that has been created.
My opinion is that the Japanese are much better off with a less
developed legal system. The injustice against Koreans has nothing
to do with a lack of lawyers.
The patent lawyer with whom I dealt was a pleasant fellow and had
his initial education as an electrical engineer. I fear that he
found being a lawyer a more interesting job, although the country
would probably have been better off had he remained an engineer.
∂28-Oct-88 1811 Mailer re: Coverup ("October Surprise")
To: cheshire!conor@LABREA.STANFORD.EDU,
su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from cheshire!conor@labrea.stanford.edu sent 29 Oct 88 00:47:46 GMT.]
Someone at M.I.T., where I was this week, told me that the Boston
Globe, no friend of the right, had examined the allegations in
Coverup and decided they weren't worth pursuing.
∂30-Oct-88 1238 JMC re: Electronic mail
To: JSW@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message rcvd 30-Oct-88 03:59-PT.]
I'm glad of your interest but won't do more on the MAIL issue until
I get back from Japan. Let's talk about it.
∂30-Oct-88 2204 Mailer re: those whales
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 Sun, 30 Oct 88 20:12:59 PST.]
In 1952 it was considered A GOOD DEED to eat whale meat, and the
Bell Labs cafeteria served it. It was rather tough and I don't
recall it tasting particularly good, certainly not as good as beef.
As to "The humane thing to do would have been to dispatch the three of
them immediately", we could have an election on the subject of whom it would
be the humane thing to dispatch immediately. This would enliven matters,
since the presidential election seems to have reached a stage of boring
BBOARD readers. Any nomination speeches?
∂30-Oct-88 2309 JMC randomness
To: RPG
"An even worse example can be found in the 1985 LISP text by Gabriel [10]
which uses a = 17 and m = 251. Again, the multiplier is not a primitive
root of the modulus and the resulting period in this case is just 125."
∂31-Oct-88 1200 JMC reply to message
To: RPG
[In reply to message rcvd 31-Oct-88 10:33-PT.]
I suggest you don't bother. If I understand you correctly, since the
LISP benchmarks aren't genuine Monte Carlo problems, it doesn't matter
if the random number generator isn't too good. It might be worthwhile,
however, to take the advice in the article for the random number generator
in Lucid's Common Lisp.
∂31-Oct-88 1726 JMC
To: VAL
Everything is presumed to remain in the state in which it is.
- Leibniz's Principles of Topical Knowledge in his
An Introduction to a Secret Encyclopedia
∂31-Oct-88 1828 Mailer re: Crispin and Everyday Economics
To: berglund@POLYA.Stanford.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from berglund@polya.stanford.edu sent Mon, 31 Oct 88 15:11:29 PDT.]
Berglund is basically correct. In fact one company I know billed
expert consulting time at $2,000 per day. However, there is another
reason why lawyers and salesmen can sometimes command really
enormous incomes. This is because they are close to where money
changes hands. Whether a customer buys a $10 million computer
is a discrete event, and the salesman's contribution to it is
apparent. At least the company may well believe that without
this great salesman, the sale would have been lost. Likewise,
a company faced with a lawsuit may believe that having the
best lawyer makes several million dollars difference in
what they will have to pay.
Now engineers can make even more difference IN THE LONG RUN.
To take one example, John Backus's successful leadership of
the Fortran group, probably meant some billions of dollars
to IBM in the long run. However, there will never be any
precise evaluation of how much difference it made. Moreover,
the immediate effect of an engineer's invention on his employer
is a request to spend money to develop it. Therefore, engineers
may be often well paid, but unless they start their own companies,
they will never get the very large sums that some salesmen and
engineers get. IBM made Backus an IBM Fellow, which means he
does what he likes. That's better than most companies do, but
it's tiny compared to the differece he probably made in their
income. I invented Lisp in 1958-59, but I can't even
get a free Lisp machine out of the companies that make them.
I find that normal if ungrateful. Right now, of course, they're
losing money, and they probably think I should pay them.
∂31-Oct-88 2134 JMC
To: VAL
Whom shall I telephone at Ablex to find out the schedule?
∂31-Oct-88 2154 JMC re: AIList Digest V8 #117
To: AIList@AI.AI.MIT.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon 31 Oct 1988 20:39-EST.]
AI as computer science and the scientific epistemology of the
common sense world.
Intelligence can be studied
(1) through the physiology of the brain,
(2) through psychology,
(3) through studying the tasks presented in the achievement of
goals in the common sense world.
No one of the approaches can be excluded by a priori arguments,
and I believe that all three will eventually succeed, but one
will succeed more quickly than the other two and will help mop up
the other two. I have left out sociology, because I think its
contribution will be peripheral.
AI is the third approach. It proceeds mainly in computer science
departments, and many of its methods are akin to other computer
science topics. It involves experimenting with computer programs
and sometimes hardware and rarely includes either psychological
or physiological experiments with humans or animals. It isn't
further from other computer science topics than they are from
each other and there are more and more hybrids of AI with
other CS topics all the time.
Perhaps Simon doesn't like the term AI, because his and Newell's
work involves a hybrid with psychology and has involved psychological
experiments as well as experimental computer programming. Surely
some people should pursue that mixture, which has sometimes
been fruitful, but most AI researchers stick to experimental
programming and also AI theory.
In my opinion the core of AI is the study of the common sense world
and how a system can find out how to achieve its goals. Achieving
goals in the common sense world involves a different kind of
information situation than science has had to deal with previously.
This fact causes most scientists to make mistakes in thinking about
it. Some pick an aspect of the world that permits a conventional
mathematical treatment and retreat into it. The result is that
their results often have only a metaphorical relation to intelligence.
Others demand differential equations and spend their time rejecting
approaches that don't have them.
Why does the common sense world demand a different approach? Here are
some reasons.
(1) Only partial information is available. It is partial not merely
quantitatively but also qualitatively. We don't know all the
relevant phenomena. Nevertheless, humans can often achieve goals
using this information, and there is no reason humans can't understand
the processes required to do it well enough to program them in computers.
(2) The concepts used in common sense reasoning have a qualitatively
approximate character. This is treated in my paper ``Ascribing
Mental Qualities to Machines.''
(3) The theories that can be obtained will not be fully predictive
of behavior. They will predict only when certain conditions are
met. Curiously, while many scientists demand fully predictive theories,
when they build digital hardware, they accept engineering specifications
that aren't fully predictive. For example, consider a flip-flop with
a J input, a K input and a clock input. The manufacturer specifies
what will happen if the clock is turned on for long enough and then
turned of provided exactly one of the J and K inputs remains high
during this period and the other remains low. The specifications
do not say what will happen if both are high or both are low or
if they change while the clock is turned on. The manufacturer
doesn't guarantee that all the flip-flops he sells will behave
in the same way under these conditions or that he won't change
without notice how they behave. All he guarantees is what
will happen when the flip-flop is used in accordance with the
``design rules''. Computer scientists are also quite properly
uninterested in non-standard usage. This contrasts with linear
circuit theory which in principle tells how a linear circuit will
respond to any input function of time. Newtonian and
non-relativistic quantum mechanics tell how particles respond to
arbitrary forces. Quantum field theory seems to be more picky.
Many programs have specified behavior only for inputs meeting
certain conditions, and some programming languages refrain
from specifying what will happen if certain conditions aren't
met. The implementer make the compiler do whatever is convenient
or even not figure out what will happen.
What we can learn about the common sense world is like what is
specified about the flip-flop, only even more limited.
Therefore, some people regard the common sense world as unfair
and refuse to do science about it.
∂01-Nov-88 1128 Mailer re: more "pro-animal" racism/nationalism
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 Tue, 1 Nov 88 10:49:14 PST.]
In my opinion, the eskimoes might just as well have eaten the whales
as they would have done 15 years ago. However, Crispin is wrong in
supposing that the motivation of the save-the-whales people and
the people who support the campaign against Koreans eating dogs
is racism. These people are against red-blooded American deer
hunters and alligator hunters also. The sentiment has its gradations,
ranging from objections to torturing animals for the fun of it too
objections to swatting mosquitoes and the Jains who make an effort
to avoid stepping on bugs. If there were a feasible way to avoid
millions of intestinal bacteria dying every time a person defecates,
some would favor that. Most people are in the middle, eating meat
but objecting to wanton cruelty to animals. Now that most of us
no longer face daily choices like that in beating a donkey or
not getting it to pull the cart to the field, we have, on the
average, become nicer to animals. We also don't have to kill our
own chickens. We do swat flies, but many draw the line at
boiling a lobster beginning with a live lobster in the pot.
The sentiment is motivated by fellow feeling for animals, derived
from fellow feeling for people. A dog's affection for his
master is an adaptation of the instincts of a puppy to follow its
mother, the instinct of a mother dog to not eat her puppies and
the instinct of a dog to defer to a pack leader. Our ancestors
killed dogs deficient in this modification. Similarly the master's
affection for his dog is an adaptation of our affection for children
or something like that.
However, the movements for animal rights involve another human
tendency, the tendency to see others as immoral and to attack
them in various ways. There is a lot of free floating aggressiveness
around that gets sopped up in various causes, each of which
combines some kind of fellow feeling with aggressiveness. Perhaps
the combination is related to our instincts to form tribes
that are hostile to other tribes. Racism is only one of the
manifestations of this instinct and probably not the most dangerous
one in America at the moment. At Stanford anti-racism has
done more damage recently.
Other movements that combine humanitarian instincts with tribal
hostility are feminism, the pro-abortion meovement, the anti-abortion
movement, anti-capitalism and environmentalism. This doesn't
prove that the goals of any particular cause is wrong, but all
of them have a tendency to fight alligators rather than drain
the swamp. Movements generated by causes also become careers
for their professionals.
Two final remarks:
1. The chief contribution of the peace movement to world peace has
probably been its tendency to divert people with a tendency to
violence into relatively peaceful forms of protest.
2. I worry about the possible end of the cold war between the U.S.
and the Soviet Union. The combative tendencies of the countries
of Western Europe have been diverted into arming against the Soviet
Union, but this hasn't led to war. Perhaps an arms race against
a foe too distant or frightening to attack is the most peaceful
mode of existence present day human political organization permits.
This suggests world government as a means of preventing war, but
my opinion, alas, is that world government would be, in the long
run, a much greater disaster for humanity than even nuclear war.
∂01-Nov-88 1213 JMC 857-0672
To: CLT
We can keep it. We need to phone the Business office a week before
we move.
∂01-Nov-88 1219 JMC re: getting ahold of Dr. John Sowa
To: iris@CIVE.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue, 1 Nov 88 12:01:55 pst.]
He's a friend of Gio Wiederhold who would probably have his current
email address. If he doesn't have it, I have an old one I can find
for you.
∂01-Nov-88 1223 JMC Please find out
To: MPS
whether there was a PhD student named Dany Guindi and what
connection I had with him. He gave me as a reference, and
I don't remember him at all.
∂01-Nov-88 1321 Mailer anti-racism
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Reading the November 1 Stanford Daily confirms my impression that
``anti-racism'' has become the basis one more form of oppressive
moralism --- what Mencken called ``wowserism''. I fear that we
will have required courses on ``other cultures'' which will
amount to indoctrination with the students pressured into
parrotting the views of the professors in order to get good
grades. I fear we will even see instances of students being
required to give acceptable analyses of the concealed racist
views of conservative candidates for office. The left, led at
present by Jackson Democrats and the dominant part of the
academic community including Stanford, has shown no capacity for
distinguishing opposition to its own political agenda from
racism.
∂01-Nov-88 1511 JMC re: anti-racism
To: G.GSB@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue 1 Nov 88 14:55:12-PST.]
I am replying just to you, because I don't see an indication in your
message that it was also to su-etc and I don't see it in our su-etc.
If there is something I don't understand about how bboard replies
work at Macbeth, I'd like to know.
I fear indoctrination for several reasons.
1. The motivation of the proposals for required courses is that people
don't have the beliefs they should.
2. Many of the people demanding required courses will regard them
as tokens unless they indoctrinate.
3. If opinion polls taken after the courses, show that students don't
have the correct views, there will be demand to indoctrinate even more.
4. The people who will want jobs teaching these courses have shown
little respect for freedom of opinion. Many of them regard all education
as indoctrination and only want it to be their kind of indoctrination.
∂01-Nov-88 1629 JMC re: Final Touches
To: BLUMENTHAL@a.ISI.EDU, duane.adams@CS.CMU.EDU, dongarra@MCS.ANL.GOV,
gannon%rdvax.dec@decwrl.dec.com, gossard@CADLAB2.MIT.EDU,
hearn@RAND-UNIX.ARPA, jlh@VSOP.STANFORD.EDU,
mchenry%guvax.bitnet@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU, ouster@GINGER.BERKELEY.EDU,
ralston@MCC.COM, thornj@max.acs.washington.edu, CWeissman@DOCKMASTER.ARPA,
troywil@IBM.COM
[In reply to message from BLUMENTHAL@A.ISI.EDU sent Tue 1 Nov 88 17:20:47-EST.]
I have been thinking about Soviet access to Western computer
technology on lines somewhat orthogonal to the committee's deliberations.
I'm sorry I didn't write it up sooner, because I think it's too late
to incorporate its ideas in the report even if the committee considered
it appropriate. I would like to refer to the committee report when it
is released. Here are my ideas, and I would welcome comments including
comments about where it might be appropriate to direct the essay.
%soviet[f88,jmc] Terms for Soviet access to Western computer technology
\input memo.tex[let,jmc]
\title{TERMS FOR SOVIET ACCESS TO WESTERN COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY}
The object of this essay is to suggest that the United
States and its allies undertake to set terms for greatly
increased Soviet access to Western computer and other electronic
technology. We will also have to sell the Soviets on changing
their ways of importing technology and on the advantages of paying
the price we ask.
Here are some considerations.
1. The Soviets are far behind in these areas. They have been
behind ever since the computer industry started and are not catching up.
2. The Western countries through the COCOM consortium restrict
technology exports to the Soviet Union for defense reasons. In the
computer area the newest technologies are restricted, but the restrictions
on any particular technology are removed after some years, averaging
five years.
3. The Soviets import some Western computer technology in
compliance with the restrictions.
4. The Soviets steal other technology, chiefly through getting
unscrupulous Western businessmen to set up dummy companies, purchase
the computers and smuggle them. Every so often Western countries catch
someone at it and arrest them. Only small numbers of computers are
illegally imported. Probably they are mainly imported to be copied
rather than just for use. The Soviets copied the IBM 360/370 line starting
in the middle 1960s with only moderate success. In the middle 1970s
they started making computers compatible with the D.E.C PDP-11 and
more recently the VAX. This hasn't been very successful either.
5. Theft as a means of getting technology has serious disadvantages
for the Soviets. Here are some.
a. The documentation obtained often doesn't agree with the
hardware.
b. The normal use of computer technology involves continued
communication between the users of the hardware or software and the
suppliers. This communication involves correcting users' mistakes, resolving
ambiguities and incompleteness in the documentation, getting bugs that
have arisen in the users' work corrected, and getting information about
projected improvements in the software and hardware. The Soviets and
their allies have no reliable way of communicating with the suppliers
of the technology they steal. As a result initial compatibility with foreign
technology often lost when the Soviets have to improvise a solution to
a problem that arises. Their solution is likely to be incompatibile with
changes made by the supplier.
c. The KGB or whoever steals the technology insists that
the technology be kept under wraps, and this interferes with communication
within the Soviet Union.
d. Institutions with stolen technology are restricted
in their communication with foreigners.
6. Very likely the KGB doesn't understand the difficulties
their methods make for their Soviet customers. Most likely they are
proud of their intelligence coups. Our intelligence people are chagrined
at the KGB's successes but may not be in a position to analyze how much
use Soviet industry gets from it.
7. The COCOM restrictions have important effects in
limiting Soviet computer technology. However, they are
probably less than the effects of the Soviets' own restrictions on
their ability to absorb foreign technology. Here are some details.
a. They restrict foreign travel by their own scientists
and engineers far beyond the restrictions imposed by their lack
of foreign currency. While they get all the important foreign
scientific journals in their central libraries,
distribution throughout the country is weak, and there are very
few individual subscriptions. This makes use of foreign ideas
difficult, and encourages complacency about how well they are
doing.
b. When they do buy foreign computers legally, they usually
restrict their contacts with the service organizations of the
companies from which they purchase. For example, they don't
let them set up service organizations within the Soviet Union.
This makes service calls very difficult.
8. The Gorbachev reforms are making the Soviet Union
more congenial to many people all over the world. Lots of
people didn't see the defense importance of observing COCOM
restrictions in the past, and this number will increase. The
number of suppliers has increased. The COCOM system may weaken
considerably.
9. It would increase the Soviet standard of living
considerably over the long term to induce the West to
relax or abandon restrictions on technology transfer. It
would be to their advantage to pay a considerable price
for this relaxation. Running a technology race with the
rest of the world is something they can't win.
10. The Soviet standard of living hasn't been the
dominant consideration with the Politburo in the past, and it
isn't obvious today what its priority is relative to military
advantage.
11. Some Western people favor relaxing the restrictions
unilaterally to encourage Gorbachev, to promote peace, because
they consider them wasted effort or for other reasons. They have
had some success from time to time, but there is no reason to
suppose they will get the West to abandon the restrictions to an
extent that would remove them as a hindrance to Soviet
technology. Therefore, the West has bargaining power.
12. To the extent that the West is agreeable, the best Soviet
strategy is to rejoin the world technologically. This means
buying Western products and technology from a variety of countries
using the same commercial practices as are used among Western
countries. It means letting Western companies set up sales and
service organizations within the Soviet Union. It means letting
Soviet organizations deal directly with foreign companies, rather
than only through the Ministry of Foreign Trade. It means letting
Soviet engineers and scientists subscribe freely to foreign
publications and travel abroad freely when it advances their work.
13. The advantages of rejoining the world technologically
will not be obvious to organizations like the KGB, proud of their
success in stealing technology. It also goes against the
tendency of the Party to control everything. However, the
Gorbachev Administration has been taking some steps in this
direction.
14. The West needs to figure out how to sell the Soviets
on the advantages of rejoining the world. Otherwise, the negotiations
will fail, because the Soviet diplomats won't find the price
worth paying.
15. It is beyond the scope of this paper to treat comprehensively
the price we should ask. Here are a few considerations.
a. The Soviets might like agreements purely in the
technological area - we exchange our technology for theirs. However,
we have so much more that they need than vice-versa that purely
technological exchanges won't go very far.
b. We should imagine a sequence of successively more
comprehensive agreements.
c. Reduction of Soviet territorial and industrial
secrecy should be part of the price. Giving up some of the military
advantage this secrecy gives them will make disarmament agreements
more verifiable. Some of this secrecy was pointless anyway, and
we are getting some concessions for nothing. For example, they now
have promised the Soviet public to publish correct maps, including
a road atlas of the Soviet Union.
d. Probably the main concessions have to be in
the military area. They need to give up some of their conventional
armaments advantage in Europe, maybe even their draft.
16. Experts frequently have said, ``The Soviets will never
give up X'', only to be confounded by events. We should enter
negotiations without preconceptions about what they might agree to.
17. According to Arkady Shevchenko, the Soviets have never
feared an unprovoked Western attack. This suggests that we make
no presumptions about their state of mind based on ideas of symmetry
between their situation and ours.
18. The single most effective way for them to improve their
standard of living is to reduce military and police expenditures.
Howver, this offers institutional difficulties, the extent of which
we cannot predict.
\noindent Summary.
1. The West should decide on terms for reducing technological
restrictions. Otherwise, they may just evaporate with no corresponding
gain in Western security and with reinforcement of the KGB doctrine
that the West consists of villains and suckers.
2. We need to sell the Soviets on the advantages to their
standard of living of rejoining the world technologically.
∂01-Nov-88 2104 JMC re: russians
To: SHOHAM@SCORE.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue 1 Nov 88 19:47:47-PST.]
I suggest you ask Vladimir these questions. Let him become an expert
on Soviet AI.
∂01-Nov-88 2104 JMC
To: CLT
Miyako Hotel, Kyoto
771-7111
∂01-Nov-88 2107 JMC Miyako Hotel
To: CLT
The number for Hazel to dial is 011 81 75 771-7111#.
The # is not strictly necessary. It tells the system
that the number has been finished. Otherwise, it
waits a while before it concludes that there aren't
any more digits.
∂01-Nov-88 2157 JMC re: russians
To: SHOHAM@SCORE.Stanford.EDU
CC: VAL@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue 1 Nov 88 21:42:38-PST.]
Oh dear. To tell the truth I haven't been paying much attention
lately. Donald Michie at the Turing Institute in Strathclyde
might know more, but even his attention may have lapsed. Try
to get Vladimir to ask questions when he goes to Tallinn in
December. One person in Moscow to ask is Victor Briabrin
at the USSR Academy of Sciences Computation Center and
Andrei Ershov in Novosibirsk. Enn Tyugu at the Institute
of Cybernetics in Tallinn might also know who's who.
∂02-Nov-88 1659 Mailer re: anti-racism
To: RTC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from RTC rcvd 02-Nov-88 16:11-PT.]
Mencken could well have coined it before the 1920s. However, Webster's
Collegiate refers to the word as chiefly Australian but of unknown origin.
∂02-Nov-88 1749 Mailer re: anti-racism
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 3 Nov 88 01:39:52 GMT.]
The 7th edition of Webster's Collegiate doesn't give a date.
Does a later edition, or do you mean a different dictionary? Of
course, if any dictionary gives an 1890 date, Mencken becomes
just a popularizer of the word in the U.S.
∂03-Nov-88 1023 JMC reprint file
To: MPS
I've just taken the last copy of Ascribing Mental Qualities to Machines
and we need more right away. Please check the reprint drawers for others
that need replenishment.
∂03-Nov-88 1026 JMC re: CSLI evening seminars
To: SHOHAM@SCORE.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu 3 Nov 88 09:52:15-PST.]
Sounds good to me, although I'll be in Dallas November 16.
∂03-Nov-88 1034 Mailer re: Article on meat eating
To: singh@GLACIER.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from singh@glacier.stanford.edu sent 3 Nov 1988 0953-PST.]
I notice what seems to be misinformation in the article, and I suspect there's
lots more.
The scratches on the teeth show that Ramapithecus ate lots of vegetables.
They don't show that they didn't eat meat when they could get it. For a
long time people thought chimpanzees were strictly vegetarian, and this
turned out not to be true. To jump to conclusions about an animal represented
by a few fossils is very brave. However, this is characteristic of
"science" in support of ideology.
∂03-Nov-88 1615 JMC re: research mentor
To: scales@POLYA.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 3 Nov 88 10:56:32 PDT.]
I will be away for two weeks, so I suggest you talk to Joe Weening,
and he can tell you about the project.
∂03-Nov-88 1616 JMC re: Proposal review
To: mzemanko@NOTE.NSF.GOV
[In reply to message sent Thu, 03 Nov 88 14:33:34 -0500.]
Send it on. I'll be back from Japan in two weeks.
∂03-Nov-88 1756 Mailer re: Article on meat eating
To: singh@SIERRA.Stanford.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from singh@sierra.stanford.edu sent Thu, 3 Nov 1988 13:43:19 PST.]
My remarks on chimpanzees eating meat were based on Jane Goodall's
noticing, some years after she began observing chimpanzees, that they
occasionally caught and ate small monkeys. I don't believe she claimed
that eating meat was important for their health. My guess is that
animals sometimes subject to shortage of food or shortage of certain
components of food will survive better the wider their choice of diet.
The conclusion that Ramapithecus didn't eat meat when it could
get it still seems unsupported. The idea that humans began eating
meat only when they moved into cold climates is what biologists
call "a Just So Story". The trouble with Just So Stories is that
one can make up lots of them, and few are as entertaining as
Kipling's. Just So Stories are as source of conjectures, but theories
based only on them are not well regarded. Others believe, perhaps on
somewhat better evidence, that substantial human meat use depended on
fire and on tools for butchering carcasses.
I eat meat, because I like it and am not impressed by the alleged moral
arguments against it. By the way, I was taken to a vegetarian
restaurant in Peking. The imitations of meat were realistic in
appearance, but didn't taste very good to me.
Finally, I don't see that facts about Ramapithecus are relevant about
whether a person should become a vegetarian. If primitive humans
lived entirely on meat, you could still decide that humanity has
advanced morally to the point where eating meat should be stopped.
If they never ate meat, you could still regard eating meat as an
advance that should not be given up.
I decline a formal confrontation on the subject. I only debate about
AI and rarely SDI or nuclear power. These suffice to satisfy my
combative instincts and my desire to do good by influencing people's
opinions.
∂03-Nov-88 2347 JMC letters
To: MPS
You still aren't entering letter file names in letter[let,jmc].
If you alias to let,jmc and execute the command drd, you will
be in the program dired. You can then compare the files in
let with those you have entered in letter and then enter
the others.
Also please decorate shanka.re1,smolen.re1 and davis.re3.
∂04-Nov-88 1128 Mailer re: more Coverup
To: C.COSGROVE@LEAR.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from C.COSGROVE@lear.stanford.edu sent Thu 3 Nov 88 19:11:03-PST.]
"Media figures such as Bob Woodward have apparently
concluded that the "October surprise" theory doesn't merit
further investigation. Nevertheless, there are some unanswered
questions. In March 1981 ..."
Mr. Scott evidently accedes to the doctrine of throwing as much mud
as possible in the hopes that some will stick. The collapse of one
major part of a package of accusations should cause poeple to discount
the package as a whole. Perhaps this is what Woodward, et. al. did.
The Christic Institute was listed as one of the groups praising "Coverup".
In fact several of items in the charges formed the basis of the Christic
Institute racketeering suit against North, etc. which was thrown out
of court as having no basis in evidence.
∂04-Nov-88 1832 JMC re: CSLI Stanford Faculty Meeting
To: BETSY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri 4 Nov 88 16:58:06-PST.]
Unfortunately, I will still be in Dallas at the DARPA Principal
Investigator's meeting looking after the bird in the hand rather
than contemplating various birds in the bush.
∂04-Nov-88 1835 JMC re: Mud-slinging and JMC's heroes [was Re: more Coverup]
To: singh@GLACIER.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent 4 Nov 1988 1316-PST.]
What hero of mine do you have in mind?
∂05-Nov-88 0958 JMC re: You haven't sent me the number of the
To: CLT
[In reply to message rcvd 05-Nov-88 09:10-PT.]
>Inamori Foundation
tel: 011 81 75 255-2688,
∂05-Nov-88 0958 JMC re: You haven't sent me the number of the
To: CLT
[In reply to message rcvd 05-Nov-88 09:10-PT.]
I assume you got the hotel name and phone.
∂05-Nov-88 2114 JMC
To: CLT
Throwing things when annoyed is likely to be imitated by Timothy.
∂06-Nov-88 0131 JMC Meyer letter
To: MPS
Please put in expenses as I gave them to you, remembering to
get Boston round trip fare from Franklin. Send off the letter.
It is meyer.1[let,jmc].
∂06-Nov-88 0911 JMC
To: MPS
I will be in Japan till Nov 15 and Dallas until Nov. 17.
I will mostly be at the Miyako Hotel in Kyoto.
011 81 75 771-7111
∂06-Nov-88 0911 JMC (→21577 17-Nov-88)
To: "#___JMC.PLN[2,2]"
I will be in Japan till Nov 15 and Dallas until Nov. 17.
I will mostly be at the Miyako Hotel in Kyoto.
011 81 75 771-7111
∂06-Nov-88 0921 JMC
To: MPS
I've put the address on smolen.re1.
∂06-Nov-88 1007 JMC
To: MPS
davis.re3 now has its address. Please send it.
∂06-Nov-88 1033 JMC pens and meeting
To: CLT
My present train reservation would get me to the Miyako Hotel
about the same time as you. However, the visit to IBM Tokyo
may cause some delay. It turns out that Timothy hasn't swiped
the transparency pens from my office here, so I didn't swipe
yours.
∂17-Nov-88 0140 JMC Expired plan
To: JMC
Your plan has just expired. You might want to make a new one.
Here is the text of the old plan:
I will be in Japan till Nov 15 and Dallas until Nov. 17.
I will mostly be at the Miyako Hotel in Kyoto.
011 81 75 771-7111
∂17-Nov-88 2249 JMC re: AI as CS and the scientific epistemology of the common sense world
To: ghh@CONFIDENCE.PRINCETON.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon, 7 Nov 88 09:32:32 EST.]
{\bf McCarthy, John (1979)}:
``Ascribing Mental Qualities to Machines'' in {\it Philosophical Perspectives
in Artificial Intelligence}, Ringle, Martin (ed.), Harvester Press, July 1979.
If your library doesn't have it, I'll send you a copy. It will appear
in a volume of my papers to be published about next Spring.
∂17-Nov-88 2250 JMC re: CSLI Stanford Faculty Meeting
To: BETSY@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon 7 Nov 88 09:56:18-PST.]
I have used it, and it's fine. I've been in Japan for the last 10
days.
∂17-Nov-88 2251 JMC re: [davies@cascade.Stanford.EDU (Byron Davies) : Knowledge quantum ]
To: eaf@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon, 7 Nov 1988 10:00:26 PST.]
"proposition" isn't wedded to a technology, and has been used in
various senses, primarily by logicians and philosophers.
∂17-Nov-88 2252 JMC Re: AI as CS and the scientific epistemology of the common sense world
To: MPS
∂07-Nov-88 1429 honavar@cs.wisc.edu Re: AI as CS and the scientific epistemology of the common sense world
Received: from goat.cs.wisc.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 7 Nov 88 14:29:11 PST
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 88 16:27:59 CST
From: honavar@cs.wisc.edu (A Buggy AI Program)
Message-Id: <8811072227.AA02652@goat.cs.wisc.edu>
Received: by goat.cs.wisc.edu; Mon, 7 Nov 88 16:27:59 CST
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
Subject: Re: AI as CS and the scientific epistemology of the common sense world
Newsgroups: comp.ai.digest
In-Reply-To: <4pcvX@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Organization: U of Wisconsin CS Dept
Cc:
Dear Prof. McCarthy:
Could you please mail me a reprint of your paper titled
``Ascribing Mental Qualities to Machines'' that was
cited in your recent ai-digest article? Thanks in advance.
Vasant Honavar
Computer Sciences Department
University of Wisconsin-Madison
1210 W. Dayton St.
Madison, WI 53706.
honavar@ai.cs.wisc.edu
∂17-Nov-88 2302 JMC re: Re Soviets
To: weening@GANG-OF-FOUR.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 10 Nov 88 12:07:40 PST.]
I see this guy identifies the Soviet people's views and their
government's - a common error. If he gets them Internet access,
the nice guys he talked to may not be the only people
to use it.
∂17-Nov-88 2308 JMC reply to message
To: CN.MCS@FORSYTHE.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 11 Nov 88 09:52:01 PST.]
I have had both Dialog and Knowledge Index accounts.
I used the Knowledge Index account a fair amount, but I'm not sure
I ever used the Dialog account. I haven't used them in a year or
two and have forgotten the procedures, and the Knowledge Index
Account was on a credit card, and I'm not sure it survives
the nominal expiration dates. If there is a more convenient
way to use them, or even if not, I might get in the habit
again.
I believe that Les Earnest negotiated the agreement with Comtex,
and I have no idea of its provisions. He can be reached as
LES@SAIL.
∂17-Nov-88 2312 JMC re: post-docs in cs
To: GKMARH%IRISHMVS.BITNET@FORSYTHE.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 10 Nov 88 11:17 EST.]
I don't have any, but I suggest you contact Professor Jon Barwise
about possibilities at CSLI (Center for Studies in Language and
Information). He is BARWISE@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU.
∂17-Nov-88 2315 JMC reply to message
To: SLOAN@Score.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon 14 Nov 88 12:16:53-PST.]
OK about Pat.
∂17-Nov-88 2333 JMC re: History of AI and Time Sharing
To: JANLEE%VTVM1.BITNET@FORSYTHE.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue, 15 Nov 88 14:06:18 EST.]
Your message reads like you don't about Ithiel Pool's collection
of videotaped reminiscences covering the same material. He held
hearings at M.I.T. some time ago. I forget the name of his
associate who actually organized it. I remember that Corbato
took part and might remember. These videotapes are at M.I.T.
somewhere. I don't consider my review a history, because I
put in only what I imagine to be relevant to reviewing that
book. I wrote a reminiscence of my work in time-sharing
that I can send you by email if you want, and I wrote
a history of LISP that is included in the Wexelblatt volume.
You may also know about the 30th anniversary of Lisp conference to be
held at M.I.T. next December.
By the way I don't consider Strachey's article as very relevant
to time-sharing in the sense of the routine use of computers by
many people at terminals for general purpose computing. When
I was preparing the article for the Greenberger book, I looked
at it too cursorily, since it has the word "time-sharing" in
the title and imagined that his article was about what I meant
by the word. Much of the time-sharing concepts he mentioned were
already in use, e.g. by IBM, the only thing he had they didn't
was a mention of debugging. My memory isn't great, and someone
would have to ask a lot of people a lot of questions and look
for a lot of documents to determine who proposed what and did
what and when. What about trying to get the M.I.T. proposal
to NSF on time-sharing - about 1959.
I can also send you a copy of my January 1, 1959 memo to
Philip Morse, Director of the M.I.T. Computation Center,
proposing time-sharing.
∂17-Nov-88 2340 JMC re: the history of the term "bag"
To: ramshaw@SRC.DEC.COM
[In reply to message sent 16 Nov 1988 1029-PST.]
I'm sure it wasn't me. I would imagine that I heard it from Knuth
or some of his students.
∂17-Nov-88 2344 JMC
To: CLT
The gold in the medal is worth $3409.15 today.
∂17-Nov-88 2352 JMC re: Next Week's Faculty Lunch
To: chandler@POLYA.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 10 Nov 1988 9:33:13 PST.]
Good idea. I much prefer hot food.
∂17-Nov-88 2357 JMC re: New building
To: GENESERETH@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU, faculty@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message from GENESERETH@Score.Stanford.EDU sent Fri 11 Nov 88 16:42:28-PST.]
Mike's message has stimulated me to make my own comment. I think we
should know how much larger a building we could have for the same
cost if the eternal glory of the architect were not a consideration.
I'll bet the biologists are getting a lot more square feet per dollar.
Maybe once the facts are known, the faculty will like the present plan.
Remember it's the last $50 million we'll get in some time, and our
activities tend to grow.
∂17-Nov-88 2358 JMC
To: csd-building@POLYA.STANFORD.EDU
∂17-Nov-88 2357 JMC re: New building
To: GENESERETH@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU, faculty@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message from GENESERETH@Score.Stanford.EDU sent Fri 11 Nov 88 16:42:28-PST.]
Mike's message has stimulated me to make my own comment. I think we
should know how much larger a building we could have for the same
cost if the eternal glory of the architect were not a consideration.
I'll bet the biologists are getting a lot more square feet per dollar.
Maybe once the facts are known, the faculty will like the present plan.
Remember it's the last $50 million we'll get in some time, and our
activities tend to grow.
∂18-Nov-88 0136 Mailer Dukakis postmortem
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Dukakis carried out the "The issue isn't ideology but competence"
strategy until somewhat after it was clear it wasn't working. Then
he revived liberal ideological slogans. It seems to me that he
was trying to deceive somebody with that strategy. It avoided taking
a position about just what part of (say) Jackson's program he agreed
with and what part he didn't. Bush succeeded in convincing a lot
of voters that Dukakis was evasive. Of course, he did it without
having to take positions himself on a lot of issues, but he stuck
his neck out quite a bit further on issues than Dukakis did.
∂18-Nov-88 1124 JMC reply to message
To: CN.MCS@FORSYTHE.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 18 Nov 88 08:12:22 PST.]
Well, I'll try, but since he's leaving at the end of December I don't
have much leverage. If Stanford can't withhold his paycheck, it can
sue him in Small Claims Court.
∂18-Nov-88 1151 JMC accept invitation
To: MPS
Please send the following note to Mikhail Bernstam at Hoover.
This is to accept your invitation to take part as a discussant
in the conference on
Human Demography and Natural Resources.
Also phone him to get the precise date and put it into CAL.
>Bernstam, Mikhail (o: 3-0527) (h: 323-8152)
∂18-Nov-88 1208 JMC nontransitivity
To: ilan@SCORE.Stanford.EDU
How large are the violations of transitivity in chess, e.g. A
beats B who beats C who beats A? Are there known examples
involving large differences in ratings, e.g. A beats regularly B
although B has a rating much higher than A's? Are there
non-transitivities at the grandmaster level?
∂18-Nov-88 1659 JMC
To: goldberg@POLYA.Stanford.EDU
indus[e82,jmc] Industrial Lectureship in Computer Science
ANNOUNCEMENT
INDUSTRIAL LECTURESHIP IN COMPUTER SCIENCE
The Computer Science Department of Stanford University
is pleased to announce the Industrial Lectureship in Computer
Science and Engineering starting in Spring Quarter 1983.
The purpose of the lectureship is to increase interaction between
Computer Science Department faculty and students and computer scientists in local
industry.
Each quarter the Computer Science Department will invite
one outstanding computer scientist from the local industry to give
a course in his specialty. Office space, computer use and salary
appropriate to the teaching of one course will be provided. It is
expected that the balance of the lecturer's salary will be paid by
his permanent employer.
Recommendations or applications
should be addressed to the Chairman of the Department, Professor
Gene Golub.
∂14-Jan-83 1501 Bob Moore <BMOORE at SRI-AI> visiting industrial lectureship
Date: 14 Jan 1983 1502-PST
From: Bob Moore <BMOORE at SRI-AI>
Subject: visiting industrial lectureship
To: jmc at SU-AI
cc: nilsson at SRI-AI, grosz at SRI-AI, bmoore at SRI-AI
John,
Here are the course descriptions for the SRI AI Center submissions.
Sandy Pentland and Steve Barnard are prepared to teach this spring. I
would prefer to wait until next fall, and of course, Stan will not be
back from Israel until then. I believe Barbara Grosz is also going to
give copies of these course descriptions to Gene Golub.
--Bob
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMPUTATIONAL APPROACHES TO VISION
Alex Pentland and Stephen Barnard
Artificial Intelligence Center
SRI International
Vision may be studied as a problem in physics, psychology, physiology
or as a computational problem. Recently, research in computational
vision has attempted to take greater advantage of these other
paradigms, and so has gone in directions which are somewhat separate
from ``mainstream'' artificial intelligence research. In particular,
more emphasis has been placed on data concerning biological vision and
on mathematical models of image formation. This seminar will examine
representative examples of these approachs and will explore how, and
to what extent, research in computer vision can take advantage of
these other paradigms. The initial portion of the seminar will
attempt to provide the student with a sophisticated, albiet
necessarily superficial, grasp of human visual psychophysics and
visual neurophysiology.
Qualifications:
Alex Pentland:
* Computer Scientist, in vision research, SRI AI Center.
* Phd Psychology, MIT (1982), in conjunction with MIT AI Lab (Marr's
vision group).
* Assisted in teaching computer vision seminar at MIT during 3 terms.
co-taught course entitled ``Psychophysics And Neurophysiology'' in
MIT psychology dept.
* 10 publications and papers in area of human perception. I have
fairly extensive knowledge of current neurophysiology through
association with the Schiller lab at MIT.
* 21 publications and papers in various types of computer vision
(primarily AI and remote sensing) over the last 10 years,
while at MIT, Arthur D. Little and Environmental Research
Institute of Michigan (ERIM).
Steven Barnard:
* Senior Computer Scientist, vision research, SRI AI Center
* PhD Computer Science, University of Minnesota (1979)
* Many quarters of teaching basic computer science courses
* Several publications in computer vision
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
THEORETICAL ASPECTS OF ROBOT COGNITION AND ACTION
Stan Rosenschein
Artificial Intelligence Center
SRI International
This course will review fundamental theoretical problems in the design
of artifacts which sense and affect complex environments. The focus of
the course will be on the use of concepts from symbolic logic and
theoretical computer science to rigorously characterize the notion of
a rational cognitive agent. In particular, the course will
investigate the role of knowledge, belief, desire, intention,
planning, and action from several points of view: (1) their formal
properties as studied in idealized models abstracted from common
sense, (2) their respective roles in allowing an organism to carry out
complex purposive behavior, and (3) various suggested computational
realizations. The course will attempt to unify these topics, suggest
directions for an integrated theory of robot action, and indicate how
such a theory might be applied to concrete problems in AI.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
REPRESENTATION, MEANING, AND INFERENCE
Robert C. Moore
Artificial Intelligence Center
SRI International
The problem of the formal representation of knowledge in intelligent
systems is subject to two important constraints. First, a general
knowledge-representation formalism must be sufficiently expressive to
represent a wide variety of information about the world. A long-term
goal here is the ability to represent anything that can be expressed
in natural language. Second, the system must be able to draw
inferences from the knowledge represented. In this course we will
examine the knowledge representation problem from the perspective of
these constraints. We will survey techniques for automatically
drawing inferences from formalizations of commonsense knowledge; we
will look at some of the aspects of the meaning of natural-language
expressions that seem difficult to formalize (e.g., tense and aspect,
collective reference, propositional attitudes); and we will consider
some ways of bridging the gap between formalisms for which the
inference problem is fairly well understood (first-order predicate
logic) and the richer formalisms that have been proposed as meaning
representations for natural language (higher-order logics, intentional
and modal logics).
-------
Was that Adrian Rich from IBM San Jose?
COMMENT ⊗ VALID 00002 PAGES
C REC PAGE DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00002 00002 Spring 1983 Industrial Lectureship
C00007 ENDMK
C⊗;
!Spring 1983 Industrial Lectureship
ANNOUNCEMENT
INDUSTRIAL LECTURESHIP IN COMPUTER SCIENCE
The Computer Science Department of Stanford University
is pleased to announce the Industrial Lectureship in Computer
Science and Engineering starting in Spring Quarter 1983.
The purpose of the lectureship is to increase interaction between
Computer Science Department faculty and students and computer scientists in local
industry.
Each quarter the Computer Science Department will invite
one outstanding computer scientist from the local industry to give
a course in his specialty. Office space, computer use and salary
appropriate to the teaching of one course will be provided. It is
expected that the balance of the lecturer's salary will be paid by
his permanent employer.
The Spring 1983 course is as follows. Watch for an announcement
of the first meeting. The 1983-84 courses have been determined, and they
will be in the regular Stanford Courses and Degrees.
COMPUTATIONAL APPROACHES TO VISION
Alex Pentland and Stephen Barnard
Artificial Intelligence Center
SRI International
Vision may be studied as a problem in physics, psychology, physiology
or as a computational problem. Recently, research in computational
vision has attempted to take greater advantage of these other
paradigms, and so has gone in directions which are somewhat separate
from ``mainstream'' artificial intelligence research. In particular,
more emphasis has been placed on data concerning biological vision and
on mathematical models of image formation. This seminar will examine
representative examples of these approachs and will explore how, and
to what extent, research in computer vision can take advantage of
these other paradigms. The initial portion of the seminar will
attempt to provide the student with a sophisticated, albiet
necessarily superficial, grasp of human visual psychophysics and
visual neurophysiology.
Qualifications:
Alex Pentland:
* Computer Scientist, in vision research, SRI AI Center.
* Phd Psychology, MIT (1982), in conjunction with MIT AI Lab (Marr's
vision group).
* Assisted in teaching computer vision seminar at MIT during 3 terms.
co-taught course entitled ``Psychophysics And Neurophysiology'' in
MIT psychology dept.
* 10 publications and papers in area of human perception. I have
fairly extensive knowledge of current neurophysiology through
association with the Schiller lab at MIT.
* 21 publications and papers in various types of computer vision
(primarily AI and remote sensing) over the last 10 years,
while at MIT, Arthur D. Little and Environmental Research
Institute of Michigan (ERIM).
Steven Barnard:
* Senior Computer Scientist, vision research, SRI AI Center
* PhD Computer Science, University of Minnesota (1979)
* Many quarters of teaching basic computer science courses
* Several publications in computer vision
COMMENT ⊗ VALID 00002 PAGES
C REC PAGE DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00002 00002 faculty%score,su-bboards
C00006 ENDMK
C⊗;
!faculty%score,su-bboards
industry lecturers
Here are the Industrial Lecture Courses for 1984-85.
They are numbered CS400A, B and C. Each course will be
given by the named computer scientist from industry.
Each year there is a new group of industrial lecturers,
and the courses are not expected to be repeated.
Clarence (Skip) Ellis (Xerox PARC)
Office Information Systems Design.
Technology, techniques, and design paradigms of electronic office
information systems. The objective is to present a coherent and cohesive
foundation for the understanding and analysis of office systems and
their implementation. Topics include: basic components and media such as
word processors, workstations, PBXs, and local area networks; office
firmware such as RasterOps, virtual keyboards, phone handlers, and
window managers; office system elements such as document editors, mail
systems, calendaring systems, and distributed servers. The course will
describe and discuss issues of user interfaces, user programming, office
modeling, and the social / organizational structures within which the
technology must exist. Prerequisites: computer organization (e.g.
cs111,cs112), computer software (e.g. cs142,cs146).
Fall 84 only.
Joe Halpern (IBM San Jose)
400B Reasoning about Knowledge. Formal Systems for modeling aspects
of reasoning about knowledge, such as modal logic, nonmonotonic logic and
relevance logic will be considered. Discussions will address to what
extent these approaches can be used to deal with such problems as
reasoning in the presence of inconsistency, belief revision, and
knowledge representation. Familiarity with mathematical reasoning and
first-order logic will be assumed.
Winter quarter (Halpern) by arrangement.
Richard Waldinger (SRI International)
Seminar in Program Synthesis:
Recent research on the systematic derivation of programs
to meet given specifications, with an emphasis on deductive
approaches. Related topics in theorem proving, logic prog-
gramming, planning, and program transformation. Individual
projects and some student presentations.
Prerequisites: CS157 A/B or equivalent.
Spring 85 only.
COMMENT ⊗ VALID 00002 PAGES
C REC PAGE DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00002 00002 indust[w85,jmc] 1985-86 Industrial Lecturers
C00008 ENDMK
C⊗;
!indust[w85,jmc] 1985-86 Industrial Lecturers
309. Industrial Lectureships in Computer Science ---
Each quarter the Computer Science Department invites one outstanding computer
scientist from the local industry to give a course in his or her
specialty. These courses (309A,B,C) are ordinarily given only once.
Lecturers and topics change from year to year, hence courses with this
number may be taken repeatedly.
The lecturers for 1985-86 are as follows:
Fall: Fernando Pereira of SRI International. His work in Portugal,
UK and now at SRI is well described by the course he is giving.
Winter: John Williams of the IBM Research Laboratory in San Jose.
He has collaborated with John Backus in developing ``functional
programming'' about which he will lecture.
Spring: Daniel Bobrow et. al. The Xerox Palo Alto Research Center
has been active in AI, and one of their major areas of activity
has been AI languages. The approach taken by this group is
distinct from that of the other PARC emphasis on object oriented
programming as in Smalltalk.
309A. Prolog and Natural Language Analysis ---
Introduces the logic programming language Prolog as a tool for
natural language analysis and related topics in artificial
intelligence, through a progression of natural language analysis
examples. No previous experience with logic programming or natural
language analysis is required. The following topics will be
discussed: representing context-free grammars in Prolog; definite
clause grammars; the logical variable; difference lists; top-down
parsing and the Prolog execution model; syntactic analysis of complex
constructions; semantic translation rules and logical form; general
computations in grammars; structure manipulation and multistage
analysis; operations on logical forms; deductive question-answering in
Prolog; metalevel computation and the embedding grammar formalisms in
Prolog; extralogical operations; implementation of alternative parsing
algorithms; the organization of a natural-language question-answering
system. Examples will be available as running Prolog programs and
will be used for exercises. Prerequisites: elementary notions of
logic, formal language theory, and symbolic computation.
3 units, Aut (Pereira)
309B. Functional Programming -- Current research topics in the design and
implementation of functional programming languages, including formal
semantic models, rewriting rules and the algebra of programs, abstract
data types, program transformations, infinite sequences, and the use of
stream-valued stream functions to accommodate persistent memory and
interactive input/output. The particular language FP will be studied in
depth, with examples drawn from other functional languages such as SASL,
ML, KRC, and Hope. Prerequisite: a graduate-level course in programming
languages.
3 units, Win (Williams)
390C. Programming Languages for AI Systems.---The
design of programming languages to provide computational
mechanisms for AI research and expert systems. Topics include
object-oriented and access-oriented programming; logic programming;
unification algorithms; representation of dependencies, contexts and
layers; representations of assumptions; algorithms for truth
maintenance; constraints; meta-circular interpreters; architectures
for reflection. Prerequisites: Working familiarity with LISP. Bobrow,
de Kleer, Kahn, Mittal, and Stefik. (Spring 1986.)
3 units, Spr (Bobrow, de Kleer, Kahn, Mittel, Stefik)
COMMENT ⊗ VALID 00002 PAGES
C REC PAGE DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00002 00002 indust[e86,jmc] Industrial lecturers 87-88
C00003 ENDMK
C⊗;
!indust[e86,jmc] Industrial lecturers 87-88
Brad Allen
John Sowa, IBM, pushed by Gio Wiederhold
Cynthia Dwork, IBM Almaden, distributed computation, I promised Ernst Mayr
Dan Green, xerox, theory student
!Here are the two course descriptions. I hope to have the other Monday.
If we can delay determining the quarters until I have the other lecturer,
it will be easier to accomodate the last guy, who may be harder to please.
Strong: (408) 927-1758
Nelson: phone him at Digital Equipment Corp. Western Research Laboratories
in Palo Alto.
∂13-Feb-86 1006 STRONG@IBM-SJ.ARPA
Received: from IBM-SJ.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Feb 86 10:06:07 PST
Date: 13 Feb 86 10:00:19 PST
From: STRONG@IBM-SJ.ARPA
To: jmc@su-ai
Dear Professor McCarthy,
Following is an abbreviated course description. I hope this fits
your requirments.
Sincerely,
Ray Strong
FAULT TOLERANT DISTRIBUTED SYSTEMS
Requirements and solutions to problems arising in the
context of distributed systems that must tolerate faults.
Special emphasis: atomic broadcast and clock
synchronization. Design decisions for a prototype
distributed system that reaches, maintains, and recovers
from failure to maintain agreement. Course organized around
a series of problems of varying difficulty that students are
challenged to solve, including some problems that are still
open.
From: gnelson@decwrl.DEC.COM (Greg Nelson)
Title: Methods for program verification
Description:
An introduction to practical methods for writing difficult programs
without errors. Starting with axiomatic semantics, the predicate
calculus, and E. W. Dijkstra's theory of predicate transformers, the
course will lead into a series of example programs that will be derived
using the methods. Additional topics, to be covered if time permits,
include mechanical theorem proving techniques, constraint languages,
and compiler correctness.
Nelson: Fall quarter
Strong: Winter quarter
Smith: Spring
!1987-88 Industrial lecturers
From: Sowa John <SOWA@ibm.com>
One-sentence bio: John Sowa is a member of the IBM Systems Research
Institute where he teaches courses on artificial intelligence and
does research in computational linguistics.
John Sowa
====================================================================
Course 309a: Conceptual Structures
John F. Sowa
Description: Problems and issues in knowledge representation and
the semantics of natural languages. Theory of conceptual graphs.
Structure of the lexicon, canonical graphs for English word classes,
logical forms for various features, including quantifiers,
relative clauses, anaphora, tenses, and contexts.
Schemata and their use in word sense determination, metaphor,
and definitions by family resemblances.
Relationships to Montague grammar, situation semantics, game
theoretical semantics, and discourse representation theory.
Conceptual analysis as a basis for knowledge engineering.
Prerequisites: Knowledge of first-order logic and natural language
syntax.
---------------------------
Weekly seminar, Spring 1988, Paul V. Haley
One-sentence bio: Paul Haley is a chief scientist for Inference Corp. He
is one of the designers of ART. He worked at Carnegie-Mellon University
on several of the DEC expert systems.
Rule-based System Architecture:
Data-driven and contol flow inference engines; the complexity of pattern
matching; the Rete Algorithm.
Subgoaling; reasoning with simultaneous goals; opportunistic backward chaining;
subsumption versus unification.
Propositions; semantic properties of relations; the propositional equivalence and
logic of frames.
Rule independence, evolution and maintenance.
Logical deduction; opportunistic and demand-driven implications; open versus closed
world assumptions; non-monotonicity, soundness and the asynchronous arrival of
information; logical dependencies and the closed-world assumption. Assumptive
truth maintenance; monotonic implementations of non-monotonic logic.
Efficiency of rule-based systems; data driven "query" optimization; real-time
knowledge-based systems; cooperating knowledge-based systems; parallel
inference machines.
---------------------------
Cynthia Dwork
Title for my course: New Directions in Distributed Computing
Cryptographic protocols; interactive proof systems;
zero knowledge and minimum knowledge proofs;
applications of cryptographic and minimimum knowledge techniques
to distributed computing.
Cynthia Dwork, of IBM Almaden Research Center, works in the theory of
parallel and distributed computation.
Paul Haley
412 931-7600, Intelligent technology
215 947-4455, Huntington Valley
307 Hill st. Swickley, PA
!Suggestions for industrial lecturers made at 1987 Jan 16 ai faculty meeting
Dick Duda, Gary Hendrix, Reid Smith
!∂05-Jan-88 1817 jcm@navajo.stanford.edu Industrial Lectureship
Received: from NAVAJO.STANFORD.EDU by SAIL.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; 5 Jan 88 18:17:35 PST
Received: by navajo.stanford.edu; Tue, 5 Jan 88 18:13:25 PST
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 88 18:13:25 PST
From: John Mitchell <jcm@navajo.stanford.edu>
Subject: Industrial Lectureship
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu
I think Luca Cardelli from DEC SRC would be a worthwhile
person for one of these lectureships. His area of expertise
is in design and implementation of functional programming
languages, and I suspect a course on pragmatic issues
would have a fairly wide interest.
I don't know yet whether he would be interested. What is involved
in nominating someone?
John
*I asked him, and he declined.
!∂22-Jan-88 1031 @Score.Stanford.EDU:ZM@SAIL.Stanford.EDU Re: industrial lecturers
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 22 Jan 88 10:31:15 PST
Received: from SAIL.Stanford.EDU by SCORE.STANFORD.EDU with TCP; Fri 22 Jan 88 10:26:50-PST
Date: 22 Jan 88 1030 PST
From: Zohar Manna <ZM@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: industrial lecturers
To: JMC%SAIL.Stanford.EDU@Score.Stanford.EDU
[Reply to message sent: 21 Jan 88 2220 PST]
John,
As the chairman of the Curriculum Comm.this year, I would like to make sure
that any industrial course is "approved" by the committee.
(This year we had a major disaster with Lamport's course...)
Thanks Zohar
***
∂22-Jan-88 0936 ULLMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU Re: industrial lecturers
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 22 Jan 88 09:36:23 PST
Date: Fri 22 Jan 88 09:32:04-PST
From: Jeffrey D. Ullman <ULLMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: industrial lecturers
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>" of Thu 21 Jan 88 22:20:00-PST
Message-ID: <12368669730.16.ULLMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
I have discussed a visit with Jim Gray. He would like to teach a
course for us this Spring, and he thinks Tandem will give him the
time to do so gratis. He is also looking for a closer relationship
with us, perhaps being on campus 2 days a week indefinitely.
---jdu
-------
Jim Gray
Tandem Computers
19333 Vallco Parkway
Cupertino, CA 98014
408-725-6212
(home)425-968-2098
***
∂22-Jan-88 1010 WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU Re: industrial lecturers
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 22 Jan 88 10:10:30 PST
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 88 10:10:16 PST
From: Gio Wiederhold <WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Re: industrial lecturers
To: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
cc: CBarsalou@Score.Stanford.EDU, ark@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU,
mcvax!margaux.inria.fr!litwin@uunet.uu.net,
"*PS:<WIEDERHOLD>LITWIN.PEOPLE.1"@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>" of Thu, 21 Jan 88 22:20:00 PST
Message-ID: <12368676686.57.WIEDERHOLD@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU>
I am making arrangements for a possible sabbatical stay at SRI mainly
for Witold Litwin, from INRIA. He is mainly a researcher (file access,
distribute databases) and has co-managed a major French project.
If things work out (p=60%) he could do an industrial lectureship in
any of the quarters. I will get his vitae to you, and a course
description as soon as I can get one.
Gio
-------
***
∂22-Jan-88 1027 ULLMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU re: industrial lecturers
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 22 Jan 88 10:27:35 PST
Date: Fri 22 Jan 88 10:23:11-PST
From: Jeffrey D. Ullman <ULLMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: re: industrial lecturers
To: JMC@Sail.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>" of Fri 22 Jan 88 10:06:00-PST
Message-ID: <12368679036.42.ULLMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
He has no email. Try 408-943-6919, or TAndem at 19333 Vallco Pkwy,
Cupertino 95104
---jeff
PS: What is your opinion of Phokion Kolaitis?
-------
***
∂22-Jan-88 1252 FLAVIU@IBM.COM
Received: from IBM.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 22 Jan 88 12:51:46 PST
Date: 22 Jan 88 12:03:13 PST
From: Flaviu Cristian <FLAVIU@ibm.com>
To: JMC@SAIL.stanford.EDU, Hennessy@sierra.stanford.EDU
Dear Professors McCarthy and Hennessy,
My colleague Joe Halpern passed me a message from John McCarthy
to CS faculty concerning a search for industrial lecturers. I also
saw an add in the January issue of IEEE Computer for similar positions,
so I am writting to both of you.
I would be interested in teaching a course on
distributed fault-tolerant computing in 1988. The lenght
of the course can be adapted to your needs. A course description
is appended. I would prefer fall/winter 88, since untill June 88
I have to travel a week or two each month to Washington DC, were
I am technical leader for an IBM project to design a new (highly
available) air traffic control system for the FAA. Thus,
if you need somebody before summer, I could probably come
only once or twice a month.
Hope to hear from you soon.
Flaviu Cristian
--------------------------------------------------------------
COURSE ON DISTRIBUTED FAULT-TOLERANT COMPUTING
Dr. Flaviu Cristian
IBM Almaden Research Center
650 Harry Road
San Jose, Ca 95120-6099
tel. (408) 927-1757
OVERVIEW:
With the ever increasing dependence on computing services, the
availability of computing systems in the presence of component
failures becomes of paramount importance. This course, designed for
MS and PhD students in Computer Science and Electrical Engineering,
surveys the state of the art in commercial single-fault tolerant
systems design, presents new research results concerning the design of
systems capable of tolerating arbitrary numbers of failures, and
disscusses a number of open problems.
Fault-tolerant systems differ from ordinary systems in that they
undergo specified state transitions not only in response to standard
events triggered by human users or changes in a monitored physical
environment, but also in response to failure events caused by adverse
mechanical, chemical, electro-magnetic and human processes. Although
the architecture of such systems can be quite diverse, the goal of the
course is to present in a coherent pedagogical manner the fundamental
concepts and techniques which underlie their design. These are
illustrated with examples from commercially available systems and
research prototypes - primarily drawn from DEC, IBM, Stratus, and
Tandem.
COURSE CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
Basic concepts and terminology: specification, semantics, correctness,
robustness, exception, failure, error, fault, atomicity.
Fault-avoidance and fault-tolerance: two complementary approaches for
ensuring high system dependability.
Exception handling: detection, recovery, masking, and propagation;
existing language mechanisms are described and contrasted.
Specifying and proving the correctness of robust programs
Specification and correctness proofs for programs tolerant of
hardware failures and crashes
Software-fault tolerance: state of the art and recent experiments
CONCEPTS THAT HELP UNDERSTAND EXISTING COMMERCIAL SINGLE-FAULT
TOLERANT SYSTEMS
Basic hardware units of failure/error confinement/replacement
Fail-stop, fail-fast and TMR processors, reliable storage and disks
Hardware failure detection and masking
Basic ideas in error detecting/correcting codes, their use and their
effectiveness.
Redundant data structures: design principles and examples.
The replicated client/server software model
Process pairs, reliable communication protocols among process pairs.
Software module failure detection and masking
Location transparent naming
Transactions, the atomic commit problem, the two phase commit
protocol and variants.
EXAMPLES OF COMERCIAL SINGLE-FAULT TOLERANT SYSTEMS
The Tandem NonStop System.
The Stratus Continuous Processing System.
The DEC VAX-cluster system.
CONCEPTS THAT HELP
UNDERSTAND AND BUILD MULTIPLE-FAULT TOLERANT SYSTEMS
Asynchronous and synchronous communication environments
Diffusion based synchronous atomic broadcast: specification and design
of a family of protocols tolerant of increasingly complex failure
classes.
Acknowledgement based asynchronous atomic broadcast tolerant of
partition failures
Fault-tolerant clock synchronization: existing approaches are described
and contrasted. External clock synchronization.
The processor group membership problem: reaching agreement on the
identity of all correctly functioning processors in the presence
of any number of failures and joins
Synchronous protocols for solving the processor membership problem
Asynchronous protocols for solving the processor membership problem
in the presence of partition failures
Process groups, process group membership, group atomic broadcast and
join protocols
Tight synchrony versus lose synchrony of process groups
Network partition detection and recovery. The problems to be solved and
the existing optimistic and pessimistic approaches are presented and
contrasted
Using synchronous and asynchronous distributed storage to achieve high
availability of computing services
EXAMPLES OF SYSTEMS TOLERANT OF MULTIPLE-FAILURES
The IBM highly available system prototype.
THE LECTURER
Dr. Flaviu Cristian is a computer scientist at the IBM Almaden
Research Laboratory in San Jose, California. After carrying out
research on the specification, design, and verification of
fault-tolerant software in France in England, he joined the IBM San
Jose Research Laboratory in 198. Since then he has worked on the
design of several fault-tolerant distributed systems and algorithms.
He is now involved with the design of a new Air Traffic Control System
for the FAA which must satisfy very stringent availability
requirements. Dr. Cristian has written numerous articles. He has
extensively lectured in the USA, in Europe, in Japan, and Latin
America. He has reviewed and consulted for several fault-tolerant
distributed system designs, both in Europe and in the American
divisions of IBM. Dr. Cristian was chairman of the First IBM
Symposium on High Availability/Horizontal Growth, was program co-chair
of the 17th International Symposium on Fault-Tolerant Computing, and
has served on the program committees of other American and
International symposia.
***
∂21-Jan-88 2258 paulf@umunhum.stanford.edu Re: industrial lecturers
Received: from umunhum.stanford.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 21 Jan 88 22:58:14 PST
Received: by umunhum.stanford.edu; Thu, 21 Jan 88 22:55:40 PST
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 88 22:55:40 PST
From: Paul Flaherty <paulf@umunhum.stanford.edu>
Subject: Re: industrial lecturers
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu
Charlie Bass, of Ungermann - Bass. A great lecturer, who has a lot to say
about networking philosopy.
-=paulf
Subject: Charlie Bass
To: jmc@sail.Stanford.EDU
Home: 408.353.2277
Work: 415.496.0111
Voice mail: 415.562.7995 x 1060
-=paulf
***
∂22-Jan-88 0923 paulf@umunhum.stanford.edu re: industrial lecturers
Received: from umunhum.stanford.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 22 Jan 88 09:22:55 PST
Received: by umunhum.stanford.edu; Fri, 22 Jan 88 09:20:22 PST
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 88 09:20:22 PST
From: Paul Flaherty <paulf@umunhum.stanford.edu>
Subject: re: industrial lecturers
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu
He taught EE384 with John Gill last year. At the time, he said that he enjoyed
lecturing at Stanford because he was able to recruit people for Ungermann -
Bass more effectively that way. I have the number for his receptionist around
here somewhere...
-=paulf
***
∂22-Jan-88 1412 ULLMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU Jim Gray
Received: from Score.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 22 Jan 88 14:11:55 PST
Date: Fri 22 Jan 88 14:07:35-PST
From: Jeffrey D. Ullman <ULLMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Jim Gray
To: nilsson@Score.Stanford.EDU, reges@Score.Stanford.EDU,
jmc@Sail.Stanford.EDU, jlh@VSOP.Stanford.EDU
Message-ID: <12368719888.45.ULLMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU>
There has been a further development. Jim tells me he is taking
a leave of absence from Tandem for next quarter. He wants to
have an office here and teach a course on transaction management,
working on notes for a book.
He is willing to teach on TV.
I suggest we:
1. Agree to this.
2. Find a TV slot for the spring, preferably TuTh.
3. Find him an office, preferably in MJH.
4. Offer to pay him a reasonable salary for the quarter.
I think we have a real shot at getting him here permanently.
From what I have seen in written recommendations, that should
be an easy case to make.
---jeff
-------
!faculty@score
industrial lecturers
Here are the industrial lectureships for next year. I don't have one for
Spring. If we could get one today, it could be included. Several
leads evaporated.
Fall 1988
Topics in Computational Geometry
Discussion of selected topics in computational geometry. Emphasis on topics of
current research interest. Subjects that will be covered include range search
problems, geometric optimization problems, and finite-precision geometry.
Familiarity with analysis of algorithms is assumed.
- Frances Yao
COMMUNICATIONS SECURITY
Winter Quarter 1989
Whitfield Diffie
Bell-Northern Research
685A East Middlefield Road
Mt. View, CA 94043
(415) 968-5792
Communications Security -- Concepts of privacy and authentication in communication
systems, vulnerability to interception and modification. Basic notions of
cryptography: general system, specific key, plain text, cipher text, cryptanalysis,
illustrated by examples of cryptosystems in historical context. Certification:
known and chosen plaintext attacks, design criteria. Study of a modern conventional
cryptosystem, the U.S. Data Encryption Standard. Key Management and public key
cryptography. Examination of the RSA system, arithmetic, factoring, and prime-
finding. Cryptographic modes of operation. Security protocols for data
communication networks. Technologies for building security equipment. Pre-
requisite: general familiarity with discrete mathematics, programming and
communication systems.
Frances Yao, a former member of the Stanford Computer Science faculty, is a
research scientist with Xerox Palo Alto Research Center where her current
field of interest is computational geometry; Whitfield Diffie is manager
of secure systems research for Bell-Northern Research, and inventor of
public key cryptography.
309C. Federated Databases---Study of multiple autonomous databases,
usually distributed, including implementation. Top-down distributed
database design, bottom-up integration, local autonomy, interoperability,
federated databases, and of a multidatabase system. Heterogeneous and
autonomous data management: new capabilities for database languages for
cooperative data definition and manipulation, multidatabase views, static
and dynamic homogenization of data values and models, query decomposition,
transaction processing. Survey of research prototypes. Future directions
including use of high-speed networks and personal workstations, Open
System Architecture, European public videotex systems, especially the
French Teletel system.
3 units, Spring (Litwin)
Dr. Witold Litwin is a senior researcher at the French INRIA Institute,
and has contributed to the design and management of their distributed
database systems. He also has developed novel hashing techniques for
file access.
∂19-Nov-88 1112 JMC Please find out
To: MPS
from the Government Bookstore in San Francisco when the next
Statistical Abstract of the U.S. will be available.
∂19-Nov-88 1446 JMC
To: ME
Is SAIL or SU-AI the preferred name to give people?
∂20-Nov-88 0337 JMC Defense Data Network
To: ME
Is this something I should be interested in?
∂20-Nov-88 1719 JMC re: about meeting
To: HOFFMAN@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Sun 20 Nov 88 15:14:53-PST.]
I will have time next week and will be glad to discuss these matters with you.
∂20-Nov-88 2046 JMC
To: ME
FULL NAME: McCarthy, John
U.S. MAIL ADDRESS: Stanford University
Computer Science Department
Stanford, CA 94305-2140
PHONE: (415) 723-4430
PRIMARY NETWORK MAILBOX: JMC@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
MILNET TAC ACCESS? (y/n): Y
∂20-Nov-88 2352 JMC
To: BXR
Thanks for the good words.
∂21-Nov-88 1006 JMC Knuth dinner party
To: CLT
for faculty is on December 8. Shall we go. He can't take the
whole faculty so he made it FIFO.
∂21-Nov-88 1146 JMC
To: PHY
There will be two of us for Don's dinner December 8.
∂21-Nov-88 1356 JMC re: Knuth dinner party
To: CLT
[In reply to message rcvd 21-Nov-88 10:35-PT.]
ok about Wednesdays.
∂21-Nov-88 1401 JMC
To: janlee%vtvm1.bitnet@FORSYTHE.STANFORD.EDU
January 1, l959
To: Professor P.M. Morse
From: John McCarthy
Subject: A Time Sharing Operator Program for our Projected IBM 709
l. INTRODUCTION
This memorandum is based on the assumption that MIT will be
given a transistorized IBM 709 about July l960. I want to propose
an operating system for it that will substantially reduce the time
required to get a problem solved on the machine. Any guess as to
how much of a reduction would be achieved is just a guess, but a
factor of five seems conservative. A smaller factor of improvement
in the amount of machine time used would also be achieved.
The proposal requires a complete revision in the way the machine
is used, will require a long period of preparation, the development
of some new equipment, and a great deal of cooperation and even
collaboration from IBM. Therefore, if the proposal is to be con-
sidered seriously, it should be considered immediately. I think
the proposal points to the way all computers will be operated in
the future, and we have a chance to pioneer a big step forward in
the way computers are used. The ideas expressed in the following
sections are not especially new, but they have formerly been con-
sidered impractical with the computers previously available. They
are not easy for computer designers to develop independently since
they involve programming system design much more than machine design.
2. A QUICK SERVICE COMPUTER
Computers were originally developed with the idea that
programs would be written to solve general classes of problems and
that after an initial period most of the computer time would be
spent in running these standard programs with new sets of data.
This view completely underestimated the variety of uses to which
computers would be put. The actual situation is much closer to the
opposite extreme, wherein each user of the machine has to write
his own program and that once this program is debugged, one run
solves the problem. This means that the time required to solve
the problem consists mainly of time required to debug the program.
This time is substantially reduced by the use of better programming
languages such as Fortran, LISP (the language the Artificial
Intelligence Group is developing for symbolic manipulations) and
COMIT (Yngve's language). However, a further large reduction can
be achieved by reducing the response time of the computation center.
The response time of the MIT Computation Center to a performance
request presently varies from 3 hours to 36 hours depending on the
state of the machine, the efficiency of the operator, and the
backlog of work. We propose by time sharing, to reduce this
response time to the order of 1 second for certain purposes. Let
us first consider how the proposed system looks to the user before
we consider how it is to be achieved.
Suppose the average program to be debugged consists of 500
instructions plus standard subroutines and that the time required
under the present system for an average debugging run is 3 minutes.
This is time enough to execute 7,000,000 704 instructions or to
execute each instruction in the program l4,000 times.
Most of the errors in programs could be found by single-
stepping or multiple-stepping the program as used to be done.
If the program is debugged in this way, the program will usually
execute each instruction not more than 10 times, 1/1400 as many
executions as at present. Of course, because of slow human re-
actions the old system was even more wasteful of computer time
than the present one. Where, however, does all the computer time
go?
At present most of the computer time is spent in conversion
(SAP-binary, decimal-binary, binary-decimal, binary-octal) and in
writing tape and reading tape and cards.
Why is so much time spent in conversion and input output.
1. Every trial run requires a fresh set of conversions.
2. Because of the slow response time of the system it is
necessary to take large dumps for fear of not being able to find
the error. The large dumps are mainly unread, but nevertheless,
they are necessary. To see why this is so, consider the behavior
of a programmer reading his dump. He looks at where the program stopped.
Then he looks at the registers containing the partial results so far
computed. This suggests looking at a certain point in the program. The
programmer may find his mistake after looking at not more than 20
registers out of say 1000 dumped, but to have predicted which 20 would
have been impossible in advance and to have reduced the 1000
substantially would have required cleverness as subject to error as his
program. The programmer could have taken a run to get the first register
looked at, then another run for the second, etc., but this would have
required 60 hours at least of elapsed time to find the bug according to
our assumptions and a large amount of computer time for repeated loading
and re-runnings. The response time of the sheet paper containing the dump
for any register is only a few seconds which is OK except that one dump
does not usually contain information enough to get the entire program
correct.
Suppose that the programmer has a keyboard at the computer
and is equipped with a substantial improvement on the TXO interro-
gation and intervention program (UT3). (The improvements are in
the direction of expressing input and output in a good programming
language.) Then he can try his program, interrogate individual pieces
of data or program to find an error, make a change in the source
language and try again.
If he can write program in source language directly into the
computer and have it checked as he writes it, he can save additional
time. The ability to check out a program immediately after writing
it saves still more time by using the fresh memory of the programmer.
I think a factor of 5 can be gained in the speed of getting pro-
grams written and working over present practice if the above-
mentioned facilities are provided. There is another way of using
these facilities which was discussed by S. Ulam a couple of years
ago. This is to use the computer for trial and error procedures
where the error correction is performed by a human adjusting
parameter.
The only way quick response can be provided at a bearable
cost is by time-sharing. That is, the computer must attend to
other customers while one customer is reacting to some output.
3. THE PROBLEM OF A TIME-SHARING OPERATOR SYSTEM
I have not seen any comprehensive written treatment of the
time-sharing problem and have not discussed the problem with
anyone who had a complete idea of the problem. This treatment is
certainly incomplete and is somewhat off the cuff. The
equipment required for time-sharing is the following:
a. Interrogation and display devices (flexowriters are possible
but there may be better and cheaper).
b. An interrupt feature on the computer -- we'll have it.
c. An exchange to mediate between the computer and the
external devices. This is the most substantial engineering problem,
but IBM may have solved it.
In general the equipment required for time-sharing is well
understood, is being developed for various advanced computers, e.g.,
Stretch TX2, Metrovich 1010, Edsac 3. I would not be surprised if
almost all of it is available with the transistorized 709. However,
the time-sharing has been worked out mainly in connection with
real-time devices. The programs sharing the computer during any
run are assumed to occupy prescribed areas of storage, to be
debugged already, and to have been written together as a system.
We shall have to deal with a continuously changing population of
programs, most of which are erroneous.
The major problems connected with time-sharing during pro-
gram development seem to be as follows:
l. Allocating memory automatically between the programs.
This requires that programs be assembled in a relocatable form
and have a preface that enables the operator program to organize the
program, its data, and its use of common subroutines.
2. Recovery from stops and loops. The best solutions to these
problems require
a. Changing the stop instructions to trap instructions.
This is a minor modification to the machine. (At least it will
be minor for the 704.)
b. Providing a real time alarm clock as an external device.
3. Preventing a bad program from destroying other programs.
This could be solved fairly readily with a memory range trap which
might not be a feasible modification. Without it, there are pro-
gramming solutions which are less satisfactory but should be good
enough. These include:
l. Translations can be written so that the programs
they produce cannot get outside their assigned storage areas. A
very minor modification would do this to Fortran.
2. Checksums can be used for machine language programs.
3. Programming techniques can be encouraged which make destruction
of other programs unlikely.
4. There is an excessive tendency to worry about this
point. The risk can be brought down to the present risk of having
a program ruined by operator or machine error.
4. SUMMARY
l. We may be able to make a major advance in the art of
using a computer by adopting a time-sharing operator program for
our hoped-for 709.
2. Such a system will require a lot of advance preparation
starting right away.
3. Experiments with using the flexo connection to the
real-time package on the 704 will help but we cannot wait for the
results if we want a time-sharing operator program in July l960.
4. The cooperation of IBM is very important but it should
be to their advantage to develop this new way of using a computer.
5. I think other people at MIT than the Computation Center
staff can be interested in the systems and other engineering
problems involved.
!
OXFORD UNIVERSITY COMPUTING LABORATORY 45 Banbury Road
PROGRAMMING RESEARCH GROUP Oxford OX2 6PE
1st May 1974
Professor D. E. Knuth
Stanford University
Computer Science Department
Stanford, California 94305
U.S.A.
Dear Don:
The paper I wrote called `Time Sharing in Large Fast
Computers' was read at the first (pre IFIP) conference at
Paris in l960. It was mainly about multi--programming (to
avoid waiting for peripherals) although it did envisage this
going on at the same time as a programmer was debugging his program
at a console. I did not envisage the sort of console system which
is now so confusingly called time sharing. I still think my use
of the term is the more natural.
I am afraid I am so rushed at the moment, being virtually
alone in the PRG and having just moved house, that I have no
time to look up any old notes I may have. I hope to be able to
do so while settling in and if I find anything of interest I
will let you know.
Don't place too much reliance on Halsbury's accuracy. He
tends to rely on memory and get the details wrong. But he was
certainly right to say that in l960 `time sharing' as a phrase
was much in the air. It was, however, generally used in my sense
rather than in John McCarthy's sense of a CTSS-like object.
Best wishes,
Yours sincerely,
C. Strachey
Professor of Computation
University of Oxford
∂21-Nov-88 1403 JMC
To: janlee%vtvm1.bitnet@FORSYTHE.STANFORD.EDU
timesh[w83,jmc] Reminiscences on the history of time sharing
I remember thinking about time-sharing about the time of
my first contact with computers and being surprised that this wasn't
the goal of IBM and all the other manufacturers and users of computers.
This might have been around 1955.
By time-sharing, I meant an operating system that permits each
user of a computer to behave as though he were in sole control of a
computer, not necessarily identical with the machine on which the
operating system is running. Christopher Strachey may well have been
correct in saying in his letter to Donald Knuth that the term was already
in use for time-sharing among programs written to run together. This idea
had already been used in the SAGE system. I don't know how this kind of
time-sharing was implemented in SAGE. Did each program have to be sure to
return to an input polling program or were there interrupts? Who invented
interrupts anyway? I thought of them, but I don't believe I mentioned the
idea to anyone before I heard of them from other sources.
My first attempts to do something about time-sharing was in the
Fall of 1957 when I came to the M.I.T. Computation Center on a Sloan
Foundation fellowship from Dartmouth College. It was immediately clear to
me that the time-sharing the IBM 704 would require some kind of interrupt
system. I was very shy of proposing hardware modifications, especially as
I didn't understand electronics well enough to read the logic diagrams.
Therefore, I proposed the minimal hardware modification I could think of.
This involved installing a relay so that the 704 could be put into
trapping mode by an external signal. It was also proposed to connect the
sense switches on the ccnsole in parallel with relays that could be
operated by a Flexowriter (a kind of teletype based on an IBM typewriter).
When the machine went into trapping mode,
an interrupt to a fixed location would occur the next time the
machine attempted to execute a jump instruction (then called a
transfer). The interrupt would occur when the Flexowriter had
set up a character in a relay buffer. The interrupt program would
then read the character from the sense switches into a buffer,
test whether the buffer was full, and if not return to the
interrupted program. If the buffer was full, the program would
store the current program on the drum and read in a program to
deal with the buffer.
It was agreed (I think I talked to Dean Arden only.) to install the
equipment, and I believe that permission was obtained from IBM
to modify the computer. The connector to be installed in the
computer was obtained.
However, at this time we heard about
the "real time package" for the IBM 704. This RPQ (request
for price quotation was IBM jargon for a modification to
the computer whose price wasn't guaranteed),
which rented for $2,500 per month had been
developed at the request of Boeing for the purpose of allowing
the 704 to accept information from a wind tunnel. Some element
of ordinary time-sharing would have been involved, but we did not seek
contact with Boeing. Anyway it was agreed that the real time
package, which involved the possibility of interrupting after
any instruction, would be much better than merely putting
the machine in trapping mode. Therefore we undertook to beg
IBM for the real time package. IBM's initial reaction was
favorable, but nevertheless it took a long time to get the
real time package - perhaps a year, perhaps two.
It was then agreed that someone, perhaps Arnold Siegel,
would design the hardware to connect one Flexowriter to the
computer, and later an installation with three would be designed.
Siegel designed and build the equipment, the operating system
was suitably modified (I don't remember by whom), and demonstration
of on-line LISP was held for a meeting of the M.I.T. Industrial
Affiliates. This demonstration, which I planned and carried out,
had the audience in a fourth floor lecture room and me in the
computer room and a rented closed circuit TV system. Steve
Russell, who worked for me, organized the practical details including
a rehearsal. This demonstration was called time-stealing,
and was regarded as a mere prelude to proper time-sharing.
It involved a fixed program in the bottom of memory that collected
characters from the Flexowriter in a buffer while an ordinary batch
job was running. It was only after each job was run that a job
that would deal with the characters typed in would be read in
from the drum. This job would do what it could until more
input was wanted and would then let the operating system go
back to the batch stream. This worked for the demonstration,
because at certain hours, the M.I.T. Computation Center operated
at certain hours a batch stream with a time limit of one minute on any job.
Around the time of this demonstration, Herbert
Teager came to M.I.T. as an assistant professor of Electrical Engineering
and expressed interest in the time-sharing
project. Some of the ideas of time-sharing overlapped some ideas
he had had while on his previous job, but I don't remember what
they were. Philip Morse, the Director of the Computation Center,
asked me if I was agreeable to turning over the time-sharing project
to Teager, since artificial intelligence was my main interest.
I agreed to this, and Teager undertook to design the three Flexowriter
system. I'm not sure it was ever completed.
There was a proposal for support for time-sharing submitted to
NSF and money was obtained. I don't remember whether this preceded
Teager, and I don't remember what part I had in preparing it or
whether he did it after he came.
This should be an important document, because it will contain that
year's conception of and rationale for time-sharing.
Besides that, IBM was persuaded to make substantial modifications
to the IBM 7090 to be installed at the M.I.T. Computation Center.
These included memory protection and relocation and an additional
32,768 words of memory for the time-sharing system. Teager was the
main specifier of these modifications. I remember my surprise when
IBM agreed to his proposals. I had supposed that relocation
and memory protection would greatly slow the addressing of the computer,
but this turned out not to be the case.
Teager's plans for time-sharing were ambitious and, it
seemed to many of us, vague. Therefore, Corbato undertook an
"interim" solution using some of the support that had been obtained
from NSF for time-sharing work. This system was demonstrated some
time in 1962, but it wasn't put into regular operation. That wasn't
really possible until ARPA support for Project MAC permitted
buying a separate IBM 7090.
Around 1960 I began to consult at BBN on artificial intelligence
and explained my ideas about time-sharing to Ed Fredkin and
J. C. R. Licklider. Fredkin, to my surprise, proposed that time-sharing
was feasible on the PDP-1 computer. This was D.E.C.'s first computer,
and BBN had the prototype. Fredkin designed the architecture of
an interrupt system and designed a control system for the drum to
permit it to be used in a very efficient swapping mode. He convinced
Ben Gurley, the chief engineer for D.E.C. to build this equipment.
It was planned to ask NIH for support, because of potential medical
applications of time-sharing computers, but before the proposal could
even be written, Fredkin left BBN. I took technical charge of the
project as a one-day-a-week consultant, and Sheldon Boilen was hired
to do the programming. I redesigned the memory extension system
proposed by D.E.C. and persuaded them to build the modified system
instead of the two systems they were offering, but fortunately
hadn't built. I also supervised Boilen.
Shortly after this project was undertaken, D.E.C. decided
to give a PDP-1 to the M.I.T. Electrical Engineering Department.
Under the leadership of Jack Dennis, this computer was installed
in the same room as the TX-0 experimental transistorized computer
that had been retired from Lincoln Laboratory when TX-2 was built.
Dennis and his students undertook to make a time-sharing system
for it. The equipment was similar, but they were given less memory
than the BBN project had. There wasn't much collaboration.
My recollection is that the BBN project was finished first
in the summer of 1962, but perhaps Corbato remembers earlier
demonstrations of CTSS. I left for Stanford in the Fall of 1962,
and I hadn't seen CTSS, and I believe I hadn't seen Dennis's system
operate either. BBN didn't operate the first system and didn't
even fix the bugs. They had few computer users and were content
to continue the system whereby users signed up for the whole
computer. They did undertake a much larger follow-on project
involving a time-shared PDP-1 that was installed in Massachusetts
General Hospital, where it was not a success. The computer was
inadequate, there were hardware and software bugs, and
there was a lack of application programs, but mainly the project
was premature.
At the same time that CTSS, the BBN system, and the EE Department
systems were being developed, M.I.T. had started to plan for
a next generation computer system. The management of M.I.T. evidently
started this as an ordinary university planning exercise and
appointed a high level committee consisting of Philip Morse, Albert
Hill and Robert Fano to supervise the effort. However, the actual
computer scientists were persuaded that a revolution in the
way computers were used - to time-sharing - was called for.
The lower level committee was chaired by Teager, but after his
ideas clashed with those of everyone else, the committee was
reconstituted with me as chairman. The disagreement centered around
how ambitious to be and whether to go for an interim solution.
Teager wanted to be very ambitious, but the rest of us thought
his ideas were vague, and he wanted M.I.T. to acquire an IBM 7030
(Stretch) computer as an interim solution. As it turned out, acquiring a
Stretch would have been a good idea.
Our second report to M.I.T. proposed that M.I.T. send out
a request for proposals to computer manufacturers. On the basis
of the responses, we would then ask the Government for the money.
The RFP was written, but M.I.T. stalled perhaps for two reasons.
The first reason was that our initial cost estimates were very
large for reasons of conservatism. Secondly, IBM asked M.I.T. to
wait saying that they would make a proposal to meet M.I.T.'s needs
at little or no cost. Unfortunately, the 360 design took longer
than IBM management expected, and along about that time, relations
between M.I.T. and IBM became very strained because of the patent
lawsuit about the invention of magnetic core memory.
As part of the stall, President Stratton proposed a new
study with a more thorough market survey to establish the demand
for time-sharing among M.I.T. computer users. I regarded this
as analogous to trying to establish the need for steam shovels
by market surveys among ditch diggers and didn't want to do it.
About this time George Forsythe invited me to come back to
Stanford with the intention of building a Computer Science
Department, and I was happy to return to California.
In all this, there wasn't much publication. I wrote a
memo to Morse dated January 1, 1959 proposing that we time-share
our expected "transistorized IBM 709". It has been suggested
that the date was in error and should have been 1960. I don't
remember now, but I believe that if the memo had been written
at the end of 1959, it would have referred to the 7090, because
that name was by then current. In that memo I said the idea of
time-sharing wasn't especially new. I don't know why I said that,
except that I didn't want to bother to distinguish it from what
was done in the SAGE system with which I wasn't very familiar.
Most of my argumentation for time-sharing was oral, and when
I complained about Fano and Corbato crediting Strachey with time-sharing
in their 1966 Scientific American article, Corbato was surprised to
find my 1959 memo in the files. Their correction in Scientific
American was incorrect, because they supposed that Strachey and I
had developed the idea independently, whereas giving each user
continuous access to the machine wasn't Strachey's idea at all.
In fact, he didn't even like the idea when he heard about it.
Teager and I prepared a joint abstract for an ACM meeting shortly
after he arrived, and I gave a lecture in an M.I.T series called
Management and the Computer of the Future. In this lecture I referred to
Strachey's paper "Time-sharing of large fast computers" given at the 1959
IFIP Congress in Paris. I had read the paper carelessly, and supposed he
meant the same thing as I did. As he subsequently pointed out, he meant
something quite different that did not involve a large number of users,
each behaving as though he had a machine to himself. As I recall, he
mainly referred to fixed programs, some of which were compute bound and
some input-output bound. He did mention debugging as one of the
time-shared activities, but I believe his concept involved one person
debugging while the other jobs were of the conventional sort.
My 1959 memo advertised that users generally would get the
advantage of on-line debugging. However, it said nothing about how
many terminals would be required and where they would be located.
I believe I imagined them to be numerous and in the users' offices, but
I cannot be sure. Referring to an "exchange" suggests that I had
in mind many terminals. I cannot now imagine what the effect was on
the reader of my failure to be explicit about this point. I'm afraid
I was trying to minimize the difficulty of the project.
The major technical error of my 1959 ideas was an underestimation
of the computer capacity required for time-sharing. I still don't
understand where all the computer time goes in time-sharing installations,
and neither does anyone else.
Besides M.I.T.'s NSF proposal, there ought to be some letters
to IBM and perhaps some IBM internal documents about the proposal,
since they put more than a million dollars worth of equipment into
it. Gordon Bell discusses D.E.C.'s taking up time-sharing in Bell
and Newell book, but I don't recall that they discuss Ben Gurley's
role. Fredkin and perhaps Alan Kotok would know about that.
After I came to Stanford, I organized another PDP-1 time-sharing
project. This was the first time-sharing system based on display
terminals. It was used until 1969 or 1970 for Suppes's work on
computer aided instruction.
∂21-Nov-88 1406 JMC re: History of Time Sharing
To: JANLEE%VTVM1.BITNET@FORSYTHE.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon, 21 Nov 88 13:29:41 EST.]
I have emailed you two files. One is my 1959 memo to Philip Morse,
which I had put into the computer for safekeeping. The other is
my notes on the history of timesharing. If you don't get both of
them let me know. In fact, please acknowledge this, since I'm a
bit doubtful about bitnet.
∂21-Nov-88 1407 JMC re: History of Time Sharing
To: JANLEE%VTVM1.BITNET@FORSYTHE.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon, 21 Nov 88 13:29:41 EST.]
The other thing you should look for is the M.I.T. proposal to NSF
on timesharing. I suppose it would have Morse as Principal
Investigator.
∂22-Nov-88 1404 JMC re: computer chess
To: MPS
[In reply to message rcvd 22-Nov-88 13:51-PT.]
Only the first 6 characters of a file name you time go into the
actual file name. Therefore, the file is really aldrid.1. I'm
not sure what harm it does to try to use the full name, but I
don't do it.
∂22-Nov-88 1408 JMC Please U.S. mail
To: MPS
a copy of Ascribing Mental Qualities to Machines to
Professor Gilbert Harman
Princeton University Cognitive Science Laboratory
221 Nassau Street, Princeton, NJ 08542
∂22-Nov-88 1412 JMC reply to message
To: GLB
[In reply to message rcvd 22-Nov-88 13:21-PT.]
It looks like Nov 30 is not possible for me. The other times are
possible.
∂22-Nov-88 1435 JMC NSF report
To: VAL, CLT
report[w88,jmc] is probably ok for both purposes, although it
could use a couple paragraphs of expository material. If
Vladimir could provide them at the beginning it might improve it,
but it would be better to send it without the improvement, if the
improvement takes more than a couple days. I would like to get
it out Wednesday if we can, so NSF will receive it next Monday.
I suppose the report on the previous grant and the section on the
results of previous NSF supported work need to be separate
documents, but I think their content can be identical.
∂22-Nov-88 1947 JMC re: Dover
To: tom@Polya.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue, 22 Nov 88 07:33:16 PDT.]
Szego I hope.
∂22-Nov-88 2017 JMC reply to message
To: GLB
[In reply to message rcvd 22-Nov-88 20:08-PT.]
Thursday dec 1 at 4 pm it is, I hope.
∂22-Nov-88 2210 JMC re: i have printed out
To: HOFFMAN@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue 22 Nov 88 21:30:51-PST.]
Thanks. I choose option 2.
∂22-Nov-88 2305 JMC re: new mailing list mtc@polya now exists
To: mtc-request@POLYA.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue, 22 Nov 88 22:25:22 -0800.]
Please remove me from mtc@polya.
∂22-Nov-88 2326 JMC reply to message
To: drb@CSCADM.NCSU.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue, 22 Nov 88 17:41:28 est.]
It sounds interesting, and I have no commitments for that range of
dates. I can't commit a written paper at this time, however.
∂22-Nov-88 2331 JMC re: BBBS Call for Neuroscience Nominations
To: harnad@PRINCETON.EDU
[In reply to message sent Wed, 23 Nov 88 01:32:42 EST.]
If it's not too far afield for BBS, I could do one
on "What light can AI shed on NI?".
∂23-Nov-88 1509 JMC re: TAing your class on NonMonotonic Logic Winter Quarter
To: alex@JESSICA.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Wed, 23 Nov 1988 14:38:52 PST.]
Sounds plausible. Please come and see me about it.
∂24-Nov-88 0011 JMC
To: MPS
Please tex networ[f88,jmc] and send a copy to Dave Cheriton.
∂24-Nov-88 0229 Mailer re: Beyond Language
To: csli!rustcat@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from csli!rustcat@csli.stanford.edu sent Wed, 23 Nov 88 23:39:55 PST.]
Modern physics is indeed hard to understand. However, there is
no evidence that anyone understands anything about it that is
uncommunicable in language. Modern physics and other modern
sciences have no Zen-type riddles that the student eventually
understands although they cannot be expressed in words. There
is nothing like "the sound of one hand clapping".
This is one reason why an oriental attitude towards science has
always been unsuccessful, whether adopted by orientals or by
Westerners. Those orientals who have succeeded in science have
had the same explicit attitudes as anyone else.
In summary, "the Tao of physics" is just wishful nonsense.
∂24-Nov-88 2021 JMC circus
To: CLT
Susie and Dan also want to go to Moscow circus. Kitty Rose is
going separately with Gerry.
∂25-Nov-88 1700 JMC philooλsophy
To: JMC
J. Phil. Phenom. REsearch vol. xlix, no. 1 sept 88
Lawrence Foster, Strong Relativism revisited
"...Chris Swoyer argues against a strong relativist thesis
according to which somehting can be true nx in one framework
but false in another. He defends as opxx possible, however,
a weaker relativism according towhich something could be true
in one framework but inexpressible and hence neither true nor
false in another."
All this seems to assume that truth in a framework is a
natural kind about whose properties we can dispute. It
seems more lilexx likely to me that we can have it however
we wish,and choosing one or the other will be subject
only to criteria of utility.
This is to start a collection of citations of philosophical
views taht wrongly assume certain entitites to be natural
kins. Ed Zalta expressed this attitude to blxx beliefs.
∂25-Nov-88 1712 JMC
To: CLT
They're not in. I'll try later.
∂26-Nov-88 1301 Mailer recriminations on the election
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
The New Republic "Quadrennial Recriminations issue", which I will
leave in the CSD lounge is rather good. The cover has 19 balloons
beginning "He should have ... ".
∂26-Nov-88 1414 JMC filing
To: MPS
I can't give you stuff to file if you keep so far behind on filing.
I'm thinking of going to a system where I file it myself.
∂27-Nov-88 1031 JMC
To: MPS
engelb.1
∂28-Nov-88 0046 JMC
To: MPS
inamor.4
∂28-Nov-88 1455 JMC library book
To: MPS
Please get me Cryptology: yesterday, today and tomorrow, by Deavours and Kahn
∂28-Nov-88 1502 JMC also
To: MPS
Pans and situated actions - by Lucy Suchman
∂28-Nov-88 1723 JMC wrong phone number
To: MPS
Please call Virginia Mann in VTSS and tell her that they have
a completely wrong home phone number for me in their directory.
It's 857-0672 and that number will remain when we move.
∂28-Nov-88 1728 JMC calling card
To: MPS
Please get me a Stanford telephone calling card. Call
Client Services Account Center 3-1532.
∂28-Nov-88 1843 Mailer
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
a236 1520 28 Nov 88
AM-Cuba-Rights,0171
Cuban Says Witnesses Arrested for Testifying Before U.N. Group
WASHINGTON (AP) - A Cuban human rights activist said Monday that
Cuban authorities have arrested about 30 people who testified before
a United Nations delegation which reviewed the rights situation on
the island two months ago.
Ricardo Bofill, who heads an independent human rights group in Cuba,
told reporters the arrests violated a government promise not to
punish anyone who provided information to the delegation from the
U.N. Human Rights Commission.
The six-member delegation will issue a report on its findings when
the full commission reconvenes for its next session in February.
Bofill, who said he has been to prison many times, acknowledged that
Cuban authorities may take action against him on his return to the
island for speaking about the alleged abuses.
''All these things have a price but we have to keep on fighting,''
he said.
Efforts to obtain comment by telephone from Cuban diplomatic
officials in Washington were not immediately successful.
∂29-Nov-88 1424 JMC
To: AIR@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
I'll talk to Nafeh when he returns from Europe next week.
∂29-Nov-88 1509 JMC mailing list for article
To: MPS
(Jacob Schwartz, William Scherlis, Steve Squires at DARPA)
(Vladimir Bukovsky, Sy Goodman (see phon for address))
(Sidney Hook, Mikhail Bernstam, Anneliese Anderson, Arnold Beichman
Richard Starr at Hoover).
Use the new version of soviet[f88,jmc].
∂29-Nov-88 1540 JMC
To: MPS
Use new version of soviet[f88,jmc].
∂29-Nov-88 1550 JMC
To: MPS
∂29-Nov-88 1509 JMC mailing list for article
To: MPS
(Jacob Schwartz, William Scherlis, Steve Squires at DARPA)
(Vladimir Bukovsky, Sy Goodman (see phon for address))
(Sidney Hook, Mikhail Bernstam, Anneliese Anderson, Arnold Beichman
Richard Starr at Hoover).
Use the new version of soviet[f88,jmc].
∂29-Nov-88 1619 JMC re: US/Japan Workshop on Parallel Lisp
To: weening@GANG-OF-FOUR.STANFORD.EDU, rpg@LUCID.COM
CC: CLT@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message from weening@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU sent Tue, 29 Nov 88 16:16:30 PST.]
I think Joe should definitely go, and probably I should go too.
∂29-Nov-88 2041 JMC English trip
To: MPS
I really need to find the dates of my English and Scottish engagements
so I can decide whether to squeeze the Russian trip in between.
∂29-Nov-88 2246 JMC re: Do you want TAs for your winter quarter class???
To: JONES@SCORE.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue 29 Nov 88 20:24:47-PST.]
I have already talked to Alex Bronstein and want him as TA for CS323.
I don't know how many students there will be, but since it will be
on TV for the first time, there should be quite a few TV students.
∂29-Nov-88 2312 JMC
To: MPS
Please tex and send to Prof. Sidney Hook at Hoover glasno[w88,jmc].
∂29-Nov-88 2344 JMC
To: MPS
Please send mints.3 to Mints as a telegram.
∂30-Nov-88 0932 JMC
To: MPS
I need to know the date on which I speak in England.
∂01-Dec-88 1314 JMC faculty club reservations
To: MPS
Please book 3-4325 Tuesday noon for 8 people, private room if possible.
∂01-Dec-88 1754 JMC re: Spring CS309C
To: STAGER@Score.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu 1 Dec 88 16:38:23-PST.]
Ask Gio Wiederhold who recommended him for industrial lecturer.
∂01-Dec-88 1756 JMC re: NSF salary cap
To: BERGMAN@Score.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu 1 Dec 88 16:41:37-PST.]
I have Byer's memo. I merely wanted to know what CS is doing about
the particular case of the new NSF grant in question.
∂01-Dec-88 2100 JMC reply to message
To: gurevich@POLYA.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 1 Dec 88 18:53:26 PDT.]
No, you haven't offended me. However, I sometimes wrongly give that
impression, because when I am distracted, I sometimes fail to respond
to greetings. How about lunch Friday, if you get this message on time
or Wednesday to Friday next week otherwise.
∂01-Dec-88 2114 Mailer re: Justifying Schultz's decision about Arafat
To: P.EPSTEIN@GSB-WHY.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from P.EPSTEIN@GSB-WHY.Stanford.EDU sent Thu 1 Dec 88 19:57:10-PST.]
Arafat is not the representative of a government that is a member
of the U.N. Unless, the U.N. headquarters treaty with the U.S.
specifically provides that any person who claims to have business
with the U.N. can come or at least that any person invited by
some U.N. body can come, the State Department has a case.
Someone claiming the U.S. is violating a treaty doesn't make it
so.
On the other hand, the General Assembly has every right to hold
meetings in Geneva or anywhere it pleases.
Very likely the U.S. action is a reaction to so many governments
choosing to recognize Arafat's Palestinian government. It is
exceptional to recognize a government that controls no territory
de novo, although it is not so rare to continue to recognize
a government that has lost control of its territory.
∂02-Dec-88 0033 Mailer International Law
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Neither the U.S. nor any other country has undertaken to adhere to
``international law'' in the same sense that a person adheres to
the law of his own country. In the first place, there is no
international law in the same sense as national law, because
there is no recognized international legal authority. No
country has agreed to obey the U.N. Security Council, the
U.N. General Assembly or the World Court, nor do these organizations
have any way of enforcing their decisions.
This doesn't mean that ``international law'' is a total joke;
the above authorities have some presumption in their favor
in world opinion, which is sometimes important and sometimes
not.
Many people believe that there should be international law
as enforceable as national law, but I think this would be
a disaster for the world for two reasons.
1. The politics of the U.N. General Assembly is a fair sample
of what would result. It is corrupt as well as inclined to
try to tax the productive for the benefit of politicians in
the most unproductive countries.
2. It might lead to a world government - the only possibility
worse than a general nuclear war. A world government, under
present political conditions would be likely to lead to a static society
like that of ancient China or ancient Egypt. Even the U.S.,
which has the best government in the world, occasionally
goes in for policy fads that only the example of other
countries gets us out of.
∂02-Dec-88 1059 JMC solar heat
To: CLT
John McCracken, Service Manager of Stanford Energy Systems, 1901
Old Middlefield Way, Suite 6, Mountain View 94040, 967-2007 took
apart the pump and put it back together and said it still leaks.
He said the pump needed replacement, because the gasket was
unavailable. He said the pump was from a good company and the
system was professionally put together. He said the valve that
drains the system at night was inoperative. Said the check valve
in that loop was installed backwards so the water came from the
cold side. Said heater in Timothy room was inoperative, since
fan didn't go on. Said that pump only serviced that heater.
Said it would cost $150 for a new pump and $500 to fix
everything.
I called the Better Business Bureau 408 978-8700, and after some
inferior Muzak, they told me that Stanford Energy Systems had
not been reported on since 1985 but had a good reputation.
They said I could also check the State contractors license bureau
in San Jose 408 277-1244.
I called Steven Foung 3-6481 and we agreed that he would call
another solar contractor and get a second opinion. We should
send him a copy of these notes. He will cover the cost of
putting the system right.
∂02-Dec-88 1351 JMC
To: tony@alberta.cdn
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.
∂02-Dec-88 1359 JMC
To: tana%ualtamts.bitnet@FORSYTHE.STANFORD.EDU
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.