perm filename SAVED.MSG[ESS,JMC]10 blob
sn#179028 filedate 1975-10-02 generic text, type T, neo UTF8
∂30-SEP-75 2157 BPM,BPM
John: Lee Erman was wondering whether you had any "short piece on anything
at all" that could be included in the next SIGART Newsletter. He mentioned
your collection of essays and that maybe you could pick one that is already
in fair shape and that would be appropriate to the SIGART readership.
∂30-SEP-75 2257 BPM,BPM
To: JMC, LES, CCG
Pat Suppes and Bob Smith have OKed use of INTERLISP at IMSSS except for
9 am to 9 pm weekdays. For FREE!
∂29-SEP-75 1637 network site AI
Date: 29 SEP 1975 1937-EST
From: RWG at MIT-AI
To: jmc at SU-AI
moses says ok if at most two consoles at once, and after 7pm pdt.
jeff golden (jpg%ml) has teaching material and intimate knowledge of how
novices confuse it. i will speak to him when he returns on 1 oct. ellen lewis
has written some introductory stuff which, on very brief inspection, looked
excellent. i will purloin a few copies. see you 6oct.
-------
∂23-SEP-75 2004 1,RWG @ AI
do you want me to ask moses about macsyma time? if so, just what?
∂23-SEP-75 1157 network site SRI
Date: 23 SEP 1975 1154-PDT
From: BOYER at SRI-AI
Subject: TOPOR'S VISIT
To: PROGRAM REASONING GROUP:
RODNEY HAS ARRIVED AND WILL BE IN THE AREA FROM TODAY THROUGH FRIDAY.
HIS TALK IS STILL SCHEDULED FOR 4:00 ON FRIDAY.
-------
∂22-SEP-75 1241 1,PAW
there is a faculty meeting scheduled for Friday, Sept 26 at 9 am in polya 204 to
discuss Luckham
∂22-SEP-75 1231 network site AI
Date: 22 SEP 1975 1531-EST
From: CARL at MIT-AI
To: CARL at MIT-AI, jmc at SU-AI
Dear John,
I have read your report and in general like it very much.
However, I do have a couple of small quibbles.
First it is not clear that it is fair to report that the Soviet scientists
personally object to the presence of Lerner as chairman of the panel.
These conversations took place in private where the Russians thought that they
could speak privately and frankly. Your report may be a breach of this confidence
even though Lerner somehow got wind of it and put it in one of his reports.
Your report would be official confirmation.
Dr. Chavchanidze is singled out to play a prominent role in your report.
Your seem to give him personal responsibility for the immediate decision to
admit Lerner and to do so with great courtesy. The meeting the morning before
the conference opened was private and may have been considered private by some
of the participants. In any case singling out Chavchanidze in this way could
have unfavorable repercussions for him. Perhaps some reference to the "local organizers"
would be more appropriate. I assume that you have checked your comments about the
Goldstein brothers carefully. Your account differs somewhat with one other
fragmentary report that I received. Again you single out Chavchanidze for special
responsibility. Do you think that he might consider his remarks on this matter to
have been private? This concludes my list of quibbles.
Carl
-------
∂22-SEP-75 1144 network site SRI
Date: 22 SEP 1975 1140-PDT
From: BOYER at SRI-AI
To: PROGRAM-REASONING-GROUP:
SEMINAR
BY
RODNEY TOPOR
PROGRAM VERIFICATION BY CONTINUATION INDUCTION
FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 26
4:00 P.M.
S.R.I.
INTERNATIONAL BUILDING
ROOM S103 (UEMURA ROOM)
RODNEY TOPOR RECENTLY OBTAINED A PH.D FROM THE UNIVERSITY
OF EDINBURGH WORKING UNDER ROD BURSTALL. HE WILL BE VISITING
THIS AREA FROM SEPTEMBER 25 UNTIL SEPTEMBER 30. HE THEN LEAVES
TO TAKE UP AN ACADEMIC POST IN HIS NATIVE LAND, AUSTRALIA.
CONTINUATION INDUCTION IS BASED ON THE IDEAS OF SYMBOLIC EXECUTION,
THE DESCRIPTION OF A GIVEN PROGRAM BY A VIRTUAL PROGRAM, AND THE
DEMONSTRATION THAT THESE TWO PROGRAMS ARE EQUIVALENT WHENEVER THE
GIVEN PROGRAM TERMINATES. THE MAIN ADVANTAGE OF CONTINUATION INDUCTION
OVER OTHER METHODS IS THAT IT ENABLES PROGRAMS USING A WIDE
VARIETY OF PROGRAMMING CONSTRUCTS SUCH AS RECURSION, INTERATION,
NON-DETERMINISM, PROCEDURES WITH SIDE-EFFECTS AND JUMPS OUT OF
BLOCKS TO BE HANDLED IN A NATURAL AND UNIFORM WAY.
-------
∂22-SEP-75 0859 network site SRI
Date: 22 SEP 1975 0855-PDT
From: BOYER at SRI-AI
Subject: A TALK TO BE GIVEN BY RONEY TOPOR AT SRI
To: WEYHRAUCH at SU-AI, MCCARTHY at SU-AI
WOULD YOU PLEASE ALERT EVERYONE AT SU-AI WHO MIGHT BE INTERESTED
TO THE FOLLOWING:
SEMINAR
BY
RODNEY TOPOR
PROGRAM VERIFICATION BY CONTINUATION INDUCTION
FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 26
4:00 P.M.
S.R.I.
INTERNATIONAL BUILDING
ROOM S103 (UEMURA ROOM)
RODNEY TOPOR RECENTLY OBTAINED A PH.D FROM THE UNIVERSITY
OF EDINBURGH WORKING UNDER ROD BURSTALL. HE WILL BE VISITING
THIS AREA FROM SEPTEMBER 25 UNTIL SEPTEMBER 30. HE THEN LEAVES
TO TAKE UP AN ACADEMIC POST IN HIS NATIVE LAND, AUSTRALIA.
CONTINUATION INDUCTION IS BASED ON THE IDEAS OF SYMBOLIC EXECUTION,
THE DESCRIPTION OF A GIVEN PROGRAM BY A VIRTUAL PROGRAM, AND THE
DEMONSTRATION THAT THESE TWO PROGRAMS ARE EQUIVALENT WHENEVER THE
GIVEN PROGRAM TERMINATES. THE MAIN ADVANTAGE OF CONTINUATION INDUCTION
OVER OTHER METHODS IS THAT IT ENABLES PROGRAMS USING A WIDE
VARIETY OF PROGRAMMING CONSTRUCTS SUCH AS RECURSION, INTERATION,
NON-DETERMINISM, PROCEDURES WITH SIDE-EFFECTS AND JUMPS OUT OF
BLOCKS TO BE HANDLED IN A NATURAL AND UNIFORM WAY.
THANKS.
-------
∂21-SEP-75 1914 1,RWG @ AI
anyway, i am having a good time out here, but will come back
before my excursion fare expires if you need me.
∂19-SEP-75 1347 PAP,REF @ CMUA
You're welcome. How was russia?
∂17-SEP-75 1218 BPM,BPM
John: You might be interested in a report at the CS Library entitled "An Overview
of the LBL Socio Economic Environmental Demographic Information System
(SEEDIS)" by D. M. Austin, S. G. Kranz, and C. Quong. Is this the system you
were using the other day?
∂09-SEP-75 1555 100,100: patte wood @ SAIL
a meeting at MIT Study of Future of Computing has been set up for
Monday, Sept 22 from 9-1
∂15-SEP-75 1656 FOL,RWW
the version of FOL on the system now contains the printing routines you
requested. if there are any problems let me know.
rwww
∂12-SEP-75 1633 S,LES
Just received a call from a fellow at the Hoover Inst. named Starr, I believe.
He said that they have a prospective donation of 9 bookshelves full of Soviet
literature on computers, cybernetics, etc. and said that you had talked about
storing it here somewhere. I said that we do indeed have space, but no
bookshelves. He plans to call back next Wednesday (Sept. 17) for confirmation
of space availability.
∂12-SEP-75 1624 100,100: patte @ SAIL
Dr. Hileman called and cancelled Sept 24 at 4:00, he will call again after Oct 8
and reschedule.
∂09-SEP-75 0942 network site DMS
DATE: 9 SEP 75 1053-EDT
FROM: LICK at MIT-DMS
ACTION-TO: McCarthy at SU-AI
CC: Lick at MIT-DMS, Carlstrom at USC-ISI
MESSAGE-ID: <[MIT-DMS]9 SEP 75 12:24:24-EDT.20432>
Very sorry, John, that I got away from ARPA without
communicating adequately with you about your revised
proposal. Yesterday I talked with Dave Carlstrom about it,
offering to do anything I could to facilitate matters. He
said that Dave Russell was working (on) it, correlating the
several parts (related to different program managers in
IPTO), but that Dave was on leave this week. You will
probably hear from one of the Daves next week. If you do
not, I suggest you call Carlstrom, who has the largest parts
of the action. I'll keep in touch with him and Russell, but
the matter is in their hands, now, and I do not want to
meddle much in the new management of the office, however
much interested I remain.
Hope the AI Conference came off all right.
Regards
Lick
∂27-AUG-75 0517 network site ISI
Date: 27 AUG 1975 0517-PDT
From: LICKLIDER at USC-ISI
Subject: Reaction Cubed
To: McCarthy at SU-AI
cc: Licklider
By all means let's talk on the phone.
The problem is not whether DoD-supported AI should have a
basic research core. It is whether some of the support of basic AI
research (all the support was for basic research, in the
view of Lukasik and Heilmeier) should be diverted to make room for
efforts in application and technology transfer. Your putting it
as you did (defending the retention of SOME basic research) just
underscores the fact that the administrators and the researchers see
things in such different ways that they are extremely difficult to
mediate.
As for the importance of formal reasoning: There is no question
that it is important for the development of AI broadly. The question
is whether a large amount of it is what is needed to solve the
DoD problems that AI has some chance of solving in the near term. The
whole situation is to be understood in terms of DoD's wanting to
assess the capability oo the field to solve some of DoD's problems now.
Almost everyone who has thought about the matter understands that it
is penny-wise but pound-foolish to go overboard on
pressing for immediate or near-term applications, that the real
importance of AI to DoD lies in the longer term possibility that ther
may in due course be an advance in thinking to match the
a weapons delivery and in explosive power. But the pressure for
near term applications is nevertheless a fact. Not for 100 percent shift to
applications, but for 30-40 percent.
Finally (for this note), this is a bad time for you to be
thinking (or talking) about ceasing to administer the lab. The
reaction would be, indeed, something like "if the leaders of the field
don't have any more committment to it than that, it is too risky for
DoD to put so much money into".
My own assessment of the situation is that now is a time in
hry that needs the best contributions of a lot of people, including
you, and that the situation might be a lot stronger in a couple of
years. The main chance is to bring NSF into the support of AI in a
good way. Please do not mess up the ARPA community just as we get
started on fashioning some kind of arrangement with NSF. But let us
talk on the phone.
Regards
Lick
-------
∂26-AUG-75 2300 PAP,SUZ
I AM SORRY THAT I COULD NOT SEE YOU AT THE LAB SO THAT I CAN
SAY GOOD BY TO YOU. I WILL LEAVE FOR CARNEGIE TOMORROW. I APPRECIATE
YOUR SUPPORT AND HELP DURING THREE YEARS OF STAY AT STANFORD. I WILL
COME BACK HERE TIME TO TIME, BUT BEST WISHES. NORI