perm filename W86.OUT[LET,JMC] blob
sn#814412 filedate 1986-04-03 generic text, type C, neo UTF8
COMMENT ⊗ VALID 00518 PAGES
C REC PAGE DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00049 00002 ∂01-Jan-86 0106 JMC
C00051 00003 ∂01-Jan-86 0106 JMC
C00052 00004 ∂01-Jan-86 1322 JMC re: Kripke
C00053 00005 ∂01-Jan-86 1439 JMC excess reports
C00054 00006 ∂01-Jan-86 1810 JMC
C00055 00007 ∂02-Jan-86 1108 JMC agenda item
C00057 00008 ∂02-Jan-86 1156 JMC re: agenda item
C00058 00009 ∂02-Jan-86 1402 JMC Bell dinner
C00059 00010 ∂02-Jan-86 1403 JMC Gordon Bell Visit
C00061 00011 ∂02-Jan-86 1404 JMC An Invitation
C00063 00012 ∂03-Jan-86 1117 JMC genesereth
C00065 00013 ∂03-Jan-86 1135 JMC
C00067 00014 ∂03-Jan-86 1138 JMC industrial lectureship
C00069 00015 ∂03-Jan-86 1152 JMC
C00070 00016 ∂03-Jan-86 1404 JMC VTS course
C00073 00017 ∂03-Jan-86 1412 JMC department plans and basic research in computer science
C00074 00018 ∂03-Jan-86 1526 JMC re: department plans and basic research in computer science
C00075 00019 ∂03-Jan-86 1534 JMC re: Does INFO-IBMPC@<somewhere> exist? (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00076 00020 ∂03-Jan-86 1635 JMC re: Workshop on the Foundations of AI
C00077 00021 ∂03-Jan-86 1818 JMC re: your VTS course
C00079 00022 ∂04-Jan-86 0023 JMC re: Party for Ed
C00080 00023 ∂04-Jan-86 1532 JMC re: invite
C00081 00024 ∂04-Jan-86 1814 JMC Dreyfuss and MAD
C00083 00025 ∂05-Jan-86 0018 JMC Journalists are losers
C00086 00026 ∂05-Jan-86 0030 JMC Systems concepts machine
C00087 00027 ∂06-Jan-86 1732 JMC re: Facilities Committee Meeting
C00088 00028 ∂06-Jan-86 1735 JMC
C00089 00029 ∂06-Jan-86 1736 JMC
C00090 00030 ∂06-Jan-86 2210 JMC re: Request regarding Symbolic Systems
C00091 00031 ∂06-Jan-86 2330 JMC re: [crash!victoro@sdcsvax.ARPA: A Bit of 'News']
C00092 00032 ∂07-Jan-86 0000 JMC references from Hintikka
C00093 00033 ∂07-Jan-86 1030 JMC Please print the following files:
C00094 00034 ∂07-Jan-86 1156 JMC
C00095 00035 ∂07-Jan-86 2222 JMC re: Planning workshop
C00096 00036 ∂08-Jan-86 2211 JMC (on TTY20 2211)
C00097 00037 ∂09-Jan-86 1318 JMC
C00098 00038 ∂09-Jan-86 1357 JMC message
C00099 00039 ∂09-Jan-86 1817 JMC re: Seat belt law - a violation of freedoms? (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00101 00040 ∂09-Jan-86 2207 JMC What do the anti-smokers think of this?
C00109 00041 ∂10-Jan-86 0007 JMC
C00110 00042 ∂10-Jan-86 0110 JMC
C00111 00043 ∂11-Jan-86 1650 JMC re: smoking and selt belts (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00113 00044 ∂11-Jan-86 2358 JMC your thesis
C00114 00045 ∂12-Jan-86 0100 JMC
C00115 00046 ∂12-Jan-86 1414 JMC re: Amarel visit
C00116 00047 ∂12-Jan-86 1720 JMC
C00117 00048 ∂12-Jan-86 1805 JMC
C00118 00049 ∂12-Jan-86 1929 JMC re: Course on Technology, Values, and Society
C00119 00050 ∂12-Jan-86 2123 JMC re: Hi, John!
C00123 00051 ∂12-Jan-86 2349 JMC JMC's VTSS course has moved
C00124 00052 ∂13-Jan-86 1120 JMC re: John Cocks
C00125 00053 ∂13-Jan-86 1453 JMC reply to Nagagawa letter
C00126 00054 ∂13-Jan-86 1523 JMC nsf.86[w86,jmc]
C00127 00055 ∂13-Jan-86 1525 JMC circumscription names
C00128 00056 ∂13-Jan-86 1529 JMC re: ucla logic conf
C00129 00057 ∂13-Jan-86 1806 JMC
C00130 00058 ∂14-Jan-86 1011 JMC re: Hopcroft
C00131 00059 ∂14-Jan-86 1021 JMC re: "Addresses"
C00132 00060 ∂14-Jan-86 1114 JMC re: Alliant
C00133 00061 ∂15-Jan-86 0005 JMC re: Does anyone know ...
C00134 00062 ∂15-Jan-86 0338 JMC
C00135 00063 ∂15-Jan-86 0957 JMC re: your NSF grant
C00136 00064 ∂15-Jan-86 0959 JMC smoking
C00138 00065 ∂15-Jan-86 1020 JMC
C00139 00066 ∂15-Jan-86 1148 JMC
C00140 00067 ∂15-Jan-86 1148 JMC
C00141 00068 ∂15-Jan-86 1635 JMC re: Current CV
C00142 00069 ∂15-Jan-86 1638 JMC re: Bicycle Racks (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00143 00070 ∂16-Jan-86 1203 JMC re: recommendation for Industrial CS Lectureship
C00144 00071 ∂16-Jan-86 1524 JMC re: Planning workshop
C00145 00072 ∂16-Jan-86 1525 JMC Geneserth Recommendations
C00147 00073 ∂16-Jan-86 1754 JMC IBM pc for demo
C00148 00074 ∂16-Jan-86 2049 JMC Please find out
C00149 00075 ∂17-Jan-86 0022 JMC generalization of pointwise c.
C00150 00076 ∂17-Jan-86 1207 JMC temporal reasoning and default logic
C00156 00077 ∂17-Jan-86 1451 JMC reply to message
C00157 00078 ∂17-Jan-86 1502 JMC re: Crossing the New West Campus (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00158 00079 ∂17-Jan-86 1515 JMC re: At least this isn't a police state... (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00160 00080 ∂17-Jan-86 2359 JMC re: Thesis area question (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00161 00081 ∂18-Jan-86 1150 JMC re: Talks on Feb 6
C00162 00082 ∂18-Jan-86 1158 JMC re: Talks on Feb 6
C00163 00083 ∂18-Jan-86 1627 JMC
C00164 00084 ∂19-Jan-86 1022 JMC doing it with ordinary circumscription
C00167 00085 ∂19-Jan-86 1517 JMC more on circumscription
C00169 00086 ∂19-Jan-86 1520 JMC Conference on Foundations
C00170 00087 ∂19-Jan-86 2138 JMC wics
C00171 00088 ∂20-Jan-86 0007 JMC re: genesereth
C00172 00089 ∂20-Jan-86 0134 JMC Please get me this book.
C00173 00090 ∂20-Jan-86 2332 JMC re: SHARE Lisp
C00174 00091 ∂21-Jan-86 0149 JMC re: VTSS assignment
C00179 00092 ∂21-Jan-86 1024 JMC re: Computer vs. Falwell (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00181 00093 ∂21-Jan-86 1036 JMC Share LISP
C00182 00094 ∂21-Jan-86 1037 JMC research interests
C00183 00095 ∂22-Jan-86 0934 JMC filtered circumscription → fibered circumscription
C00184 00096 ∂22-Jan-86 1221 JMC checking on email
C00185 00097 ∂22-Jan-86 1242 JMC email address
C00186 00098 ∂22-Jan-86 1332 JMC
C00187 00099 ∂22-Jan-86 1354 JMC info obtained by calling ibm
C00189 00100 ∂22-Jan-86 1450 JMC re: Event of the Month
C00190 00101 ∂22-Jan-86 1642 JMC course description
C00191 00102 ∂22-Jan-86 1657 JMC your phone
C00193 00103 ∂22-Jan-86 1706 JMC
C00194 00104 ∂22-Jan-86 1722 JMC re: Fallwell and why people give (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00197 00105 ∂23-Jan-86 0037 JMC request
C00198 00106 ∂23-Jan-86 1219 JMC re: Jennifer Ballantine
C00199 00107 ∂23-Jan-86 1241 JMC re: Minker's workshop
C00200 00108 ∂23-Jan-86 1405 JMC Joleen
C00201 00109 ∂23-Jan-86 2029 JMC re: IBM workstation briefings
C00202 00110 ∂24-Jan-86 0953 JMC probable change to mcc trip
C00203 00111 ∂26-Jan-86 1710 JMC re: DOE Announcement
C00204 00112 ∂26-Jan-86 1715 JMC dinner for Barbara Liskov
C00205 00113 ∂26-Jan-86 1746 JMC re: Dreyfus re McCarthy and AI (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00208 00114 ∂26-Jan-86 1822 JMC re: Liskov dinner Wednesday
C00209 00115 ∂26-Jan-86 2252 JMC remove
C00210 00116 ∂26-Jan-86 2320 JMC filtered → fibered
C00211 00117 ∂26-Jan-86 2325 JMC Two more ideas:
C00213 00118 ∂27-Jan-86 0948 JMC
C00214 00119 ∂27-Jan-86 1339 JMC archives
C00215 00120 ∂27-Jan-86 1524 JMC re: Exxon proposal
C00216 00121 ∂27-Jan-86 1627 JMC re: Dreyfus re McCarthy and AI (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00217 00122 ∂27-Jan-86 1638 JMC re: Two more ideas:
C00219 00123 ∂27-Jan-86 1746 JMC re: Dreyfus re McCarthy and AI (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00220 00124 ∂27-Jan-86 1756 Mailer failed mail returned
C00223 00125 ∂27-Jan-86 1758 JMC
C00225 00126 ∂27-Jan-86 1803 JMC re: Letters
C00226 00127 ∂27-Jan-86 1857 JMC
C00227 00128 ∂27-Jan-86 2329 JMC reply to message
C00228 00129 ∂28-Jan-86 1208 JMC re: your math fiction story
C00229 00130 ∂28-Jan-86 1615 JMC
C00230 00131 ∂28-Jan-86 1954 JMC re: Specail characters on LOTS
C00231 00132 ∂29-Jan-86 1012 JMC re: Genesereth Committee meeting
C00232 00133 ∂29-Jan-86 1037 JMC re: Genesereth Committee
C00233 00134 ∂29-Jan-86 1110 JMC re: Alex Bronstein's quals
C00234 00135 ∂29-Jan-86 1401 JMC test
C00235 00136 ∂29-Jan-86 1558 JMC visit to MCC
C00236 00137 ∂29-Jan-86 2223 JMC re: a time to see you
C00237 00138 ∂29-Jan-86 2227 JMC re: Collection Program / Archives
C00238 00139 ∂29-Jan-86 2239 JMC re: Workshop funding request
C00239 00140 ∂30-Jan-86 1015 JMC re: Silico Sapiens
C00240 00141 ∂30-Jan-86 1105 JMC re: VTSS160 assignment and comments
C00241 00142 ∂30-Jan-86 1303 JMC send article
C00242 00143 ∂30-Jan-86 1815 JMC
C00243 00144 ∂31-Jan-86 1438 JMC letter sponsoring conference
C00245 00145 ∂31-Jan-86 1531 JMC re: question
C00246 00146 ∂31-Jan-86 2227 JMC quiz question
C00247 00147 ∂31-Jan-86 2238 JMC re: Formal Reasoning???
C00248 00148 ∂31-Jan-86 2353 JMC re: Formal Reasoning???
C00249 00149 ∂01-Feb-86 0115 JMC re: A Modest Proposal
C00251 00150 ∂01-Feb-86 2027 JMC
C00252 00151 ∂02-Feb-86 0949 JMC re: I like the little character on the Sail terminals...
C00253 00152 ∂02-Feb-86 1154 JMC Here is more than you probably want to know.
C00260 00153 ∂02-Feb-86 1343 JMC re: quiz question
C00261 00154 ∂02-Feb-86 2359 JMC help
C00263 00155 ∂03-Feb-86 1117 JMC
C00264 00156 ∂03-Feb-86 1302 JMC re: circumscription (?) question
C00266 00157 ∂03-Feb-86 1321 JMC re: circumscription (?) question
C00268 00158 ∂03-Feb-86 1443 JMC
C00269 00159 ∂04-Feb-86 1034 JMC correction
C00271 00160 ∂04-Feb-86 1314 JMC
C00272 00161 ∂04-Feb-86 1649 JMC re: Are you going to use the Imagen printer at home or here?
C00273 00162 ∂04-Feb-86 1948 JMC
C00274 00163 ∂04-Feb-86 1957 JMC re: Why Jews? (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00276 00164 ∂04-Feb-86 2002 JMC re: sticker removal (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00277 00165 ∂04-Feb-86 2216 JMC re: Why Jews? (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00280 00166 ∂04-Feb-86 2224 JMC tell Sood
C00281 00167 ∂04-Feb-86 2233 JMC re: Vtss class
C00283 00168 ∂04-Feb-86 2235 JMC Sood
C00284 00169 ∂05-Feb-86 0934 JMC
C00285 00170 ∂05-Feb-86 1009 JMC schedule
C00286 00171 ∂05-Feb-86 1125 JMC
C00287 00172 ∂05-Feb-86 1137 JMC re: ian
C00288 00173 ∂05-Feb-86 1350 JMC recommendation for Ian Mason
C00289 00174 ∂08-Feb-86 2253 JMC reply to message
C00290 00175 ∂08-Feb-86 2300 JMC reply to message
C00292 00176 ∂09-Feb-86 0009 JMC re: Improving History (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00294 00177 ∂09-Feb-86 1438 JMC test
C00296 00178 ∂09-Feb-86 1528 JMC
C00297 00179 ∂09-Feb-86 2240 JMC re: Sequent Balance
C00298 00180 ∂09-Feb-86 2254 JMC re: Sequent Balance
C00299 00181 ∂10-Feb-86 0014 JMC
C00300 00182 ∂10-Feb-86 1116 JMC reply to message
C00301 00183 ∂10-Feb-86 1205 JMC
C00302 00184 ∂10-Feb-86 1305 JMC
C00304 00185 ∂10-Feb-86 1312 Mailer failed mail returned
C00306 00186 ∂10-Feb-86 1320 JMC reply to message
C00307 00187 ∂10-Feb-86 1323 JMC consider this memo
C00324 00188 ∂10-Feb-86 1457 JMC re: trip to Austin
C00325 00189 ∂10-Feb-86 1621 JMC re: Susans birthdate
C00326 00190 ∂10-Feb-86 2109 JMC re: Why Jews? (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00328 00191 ∂10-Feb-86 2128 JMC reply to message
C00329 00192 ∂11-Feb-86 0953 JMC
C00330 00193 ∂11-Feb-86 1114 JMC re: trip to Austin
C00331 00194 ∂11-Feb-86 1331 JMC re: Ralph Preiss, IEEE
C00332 00195 ∂11-Feb-86 1332 JMC re: Gerard Piel
C00333 00196 ∂11-Feb-86 1336 JMC the problem
C00334 00197 ∂11-Feb-86 1526 JMC
C00335 00198 ∂11-Feb-86 2344 JMC re: (on TTY63, at TV-120 2237)
C00336 00199 ∂12-Feb-86 1334 JMC re: PLANLUNCH seminar
C00337 00200 ∂12-Feb-86 1409 JMC bug
C00338 00201 ∂12-Feb-86 1413 JMC comp center hackers
C00339 00202 ∂12-Feb-86 1512 JMC
C00340 00203 ∂12-Feb-86 1522 JMC re: A quick question
C00342 00204 ∂12-Feb-86 1538 JMC (→17621 15-Feb-86)
C00343 00205 ∂13-Feb-86 0754 JMC
C00345 00206 ∂13-Feb-86 1331 JMC
C00346 00207 ∂13-Feb-86 1331 JMC rate and charge
C00347 00208 ∂14-Feb-86 0958 JMC
C00348 00209 ∂15-Feb-86 0001 JMC Expired plan
C00349 00210 ∂15-Feb-86 1126 JMC re: MRG's tenure
C00350 00211 ∂15-Feb-86 1126 JMC MRG's tenure
C00357 00212 ∂15-Feb-86 1201 JMC reply to message
C00358 00213 ∂15-Feb-86 1204 JMC re: DARPA equipment money
C00359 00214 ∂15-Feb-86 1238 JMC re: CPSR Annual Meeting: March 1
C00362 00215 ∂17-Feb-86 1152 JMC photo
C00363 00216 ∂17-Feb-86 1154 JMC Collection Program / Archives
C00366 00217 ∂17-Feb-86 1424 JMC Account for Susan McCarthy
C00367 00218 ∂17-Feb-86 1439 JMC re: lisp standardization
C00368 00219 ∂17-Feb-86 1541 JMC more of Situations, Actions and Causal Laws
C00369 00220 ∂17-Feb-86 1556 JMC
C00370 00221 ∂17-Feb-86 1605 JMC Erlbaum proposal
C00371 00222 ∂17-Feb-86 1724 JMC
C00372 00223 ∂17-Feb-86 1812 JMC letters
C00373 00224 ∂18-Feb-86 0012 JMC re: lisp standardization
C00377 00225 ∂18-Feb-86 0014 JMC
C00379 00226 ∂18-Feb-86 0230 JMC lathrop not working right
C00380 00227 ∂18-Feb-86 0859 JMC
C00382 00228 ∂18-Feb-86 0942 JMC We understand
C00383 00229 ∂18-Feb-86 1035 JMC
C00385 00230 ∂18-Feb-86 1227 JMC
C00386 00231 ∂18-Feb-86 1401 JMC re: talk?
C00387 00232 ∂19-Feb-86 1216 JMC
C00388 00233 ∂19-Feb-86 1225 JMC
C00389 00234 ∂19-Feb-86 1443 JMC
C00402 00235 ∂19-Feb-86 1543 JMC re: ANE@SU-CSLI.ARPA, LANRE@SU-CSLI.ARPA, LAUBSCH@SU-CSLI.ARPA, LEBEN@SU-CSLI.ARPA,
C00403 00236 ∂19-Feb-86 1548 JMC
C00404 00237 ∂20-Feb-86 1119 JMC re: industrial lectureship for next year
C00405 00238 ∂20-Feb-86 1229 JMC re: Credit for VTSS160?
C00406 00239 ∂20-Feb-86 1230 JMC re: Facilities Committee Meeting
C00407 00240 ∂20-Feb-86 1556 JMC re: Message from Ed Feigenbaum
C00408 00241 ∂20-Feb-86 1643 JMC re: Circumscription and autoepistemic logic
C00410 00242 ∂20-Feb-86 2318 JMC re: Message from Ed Feigenbaum
C00411 00243 ∂21-Feb-86 0156 JMC
C00412 00244 ∂21-Feb-86 0951 JMC re: trip to Washington
C00413 00245 ∂21-Feb-86 1347 JMC re: Rutie
C00414 00246 ∂21-Feb-86 1349 JMC re: John Pucci
C00415 00247 ∂21-Feb-86 1351 JMC re: Washington trip
C00416 00248 ∂21-Feb-86 1507 JMC More/Trustees' Dinner
C00418 00249 ∂21-Feb-86 1641 JMC
C00419 00250 ∂21-Feb-86 1645 JMC
C00420 00251 ∂21-Feb-86 1716 JMC
C00421 00252 ∂21-Feb-86 1732 JMC re: more from Tass (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00422 00253 ∂22-Feb-86 2308 JMC re: Marcos (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00423 00254 ∂22-Feb-86 2317 JMC
C00424 00255 ∂22-Feb-86 2318 JMC
C00425 00256 ∂24-Feb-86 2121 JMC re: Tues
C00426 00257 ∂24-Feb-86 2128 JMC re: Number of `facts' per brain.
C00427 00258 ∂24-Feb-86 2132 JMC re: Yuri Gastev
C00428 00259 ∂24-Feb-86 2155 JMC
C00429 00260 ∂24-Feb-86 2158 JMC re: Nakagawa's visit
C00430 00261 ∂24-Feb-86 2201 JMC re: John Pucci
C00431 00262 ∂24-Feb-86 2228 JMC re: Marcos (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00435 00263 ∂24-Feb-86 2231 JMC re: Good CS Book Club Offer (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00436 00264 ∂24-Feb-86 2238 JMC re: HAM radios
C00438 00265 ∂24-Feb-86 2249 JMC re: sail jingles.
C00439 00266 ∂24-Feb-86 2325 JMC re: VTSS HOMEWORK
C00440 00267 ∂24-Feb-86 2356 JMC
C00441 00268 ∂25-Feb-86 1135 JMC Dinner/Monday, 3/10
C00442 00269 ∂25-Feb-86 1639 JMC re: Symbolic Systems Program
C00443 00270 ∂25-Feb-86 1726 JMC re: Axioms for arrays - need a reference
C00444 00271 ∂25-Feb-86 1730 JMC re: Axioms for arrays - need a reference
C00445 00272 ∂25-Feb-86 2201 JMC re: Axioms for arrays - need a reference
C00447 00273 ∂25-Feb-86 2202 JMC photo
C00448 00274 ∂25-Feb-86 2247 JMC re: Passports and Montreal (Mirabel) airport (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00449 00275 ∂25-Feb-86 2336 JMC re: Revised rates
C00450 00276 ∂25-Feb-86 2340 JMC Industrial lecturer
C00451 00277 ∂26-Feb-86 0519 JMC comparison
C00452 00278 ∂26-Feb-86 0955 Mailer failed mail returned
C00453 00279 ∂26-Feb-86 1423 JMC
C00454 00280 ∂26-Feb-86 1620 JMC re: leaving early for course
C00455 00281 ∂26-Feb-86 1623 JMC Let's get a couple copies.
C00457 00282 ∂26-Feb-86 1627 JMC The manuals to be ordered are BSD4.2.
C00458 00283 ∂26-Feb-86 1637 JMC re: El Alamo (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00459 00284 ∂26-Feb-86 2051 JMC re: El Alamo (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00460 00285 ∂26-Feb-86 2302 JMC re: Save the Unborn Shuttles
C00461 00286 ∂26-Feb-86 2304 JMC
C00513 00287 ∂26-Feb-86 2337 JMC
C00514 00288 ∂27-Feb-86 1149 JMC re: Shankar
C00515 00289 ∂27-Feb-86 1613 JMC re: paper
C00516 00290 ∂27-Feb-86 2142 JMC re: CPSR Annual Meeting: March 1
C00517 00291 ∂27-Feb-86 2352 JMC re: circumscription reference(s) sought
C00518 00292 ∂27-Feb-86 2358 JMC re: a data point on servers
C00520 00293 ∂28-Feb-86 0011 JMC re: dump?
C00521 00294 ∂28-Feb-86 0813 JMC re: Dreyfus and AI. (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00523 00295 ∂28-Feb-86 1050 JMC
C00524 00296 ∂28-Feb-86 1057 JMC re: paper
C00525 00297 ∂28-Feb-86 1100 JMC files
C00526 00298 ∂28-Feb-86 1628 JMC
C00529 00299 ∂28-Feb-86 1752 JMC re: Personnel Survey of AI Salaries
C00530 00300 ∂28-Feb-86 1804 JMC re: [Matthew Ginsberg <SJG@SU-AI.ARPA>: potential AI roundtable ]
C00533 00301 ∂28-Feb-86 1812 JMC message to Dreyfus
C00534 00302 ∂28-Feb-86 2215 JMC Etherington
C00535 00303 ∂28-Feb-86 2248 JMC
C00536 00304 ∂28-Feb-86 2347 JMC
C00537 00305 ∂28-Feb-86 2353 JMC files copies to Bob Wolf
C00538 00306 ∂01-Mar-86 0014 JMC workshop
C00539 00307 ∂01-Mar-86 0250 JMC
C00540 00308 ∂01-Mar-86 1526 JMC re: a data point on servers
C00551 00309 ∂01-Mar-86 1824 JMC re: workshop
C00552 00310 ∂01-Mar-86 1917 JMC re: Michele/Imelda - Those Ever-Lovin' First Ladies. (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00553 00311 ∂01-Mar-86 2317 JMC
C00554 00312 ∂01-Mar-86 2338 JMC re: VTSS 160 writing assignment #5 from Todd Gates
C00555 00313 ∂02-Mar-86 1309 JMC re: bells of rhymneypartridge family (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00556 00314 ∂02-Mar-86 1346 JMC re: bells of rhymneypartridge family (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00557 00315 ∂02-Mar-86 1415 JMC
C00558 00316 ∂02-Mar-86 1422 JMC re: bells of rhymneypartridge family (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00560 00317 ∂02-Mar-86 1441 JMC reply to letter from Chen
C00562 00318 ∂02-Mar-86 1453 JMC re: workshop
C00564 00319 ∂02-Mar-86 1625 JMC
C00565 00320 ∂02-Mar-86 1813 JMC re: ONR Proposal
C00566 00321 ∂02-Mar-86 1821 JMC re: Mail forwarding from UNIX machines (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00567 00322 ∂02-Mar-86 1823 JMC re: songs and all (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00568 00323 ∂02-Mar-86 2243 JMC re: Congratulations!
C00569 00324 ∂03-Mar-86 0023 JMC
C00570 00325 ∂03-Mar-86 1430 JMC re: MAD tools
C00571 00326 ∂03-Mar-86 1436 JMC re: AI roundtable
C00572 00327 ∂03-Mar-86 1438 JMC re: AI roundtable
C00573 00328 ∂03-Mar-86 1711 JMC
C00574 00329 ∂03-Mar-86 1733 JMC re: why I think Minsky will come
C00575 00330 ∂03-Mar-86 1753 JMC assembler
C00576 00331 ∂03-Mar-86 2058 JMC re: topic for AI roundtable
C00577 00332 ∂03-Mar-86 2237 JMC
C00578 00333 ∂04-Mar-86 0025 JMC Italians
C00579 00334 ∂04-Mar-86 1121 JMC re: CS 309C
C00580 00335 ∂04-Mar-86 1355 JMC re: ONR Porposal, 3rd probe
C00581 00336 ∂04-Mar-86 1532 JMC
C00584 00337 ∂04-Mar-86 1532 JMC
C00585 00338 ∂04-Mar-86 1533 JMC
C00587 00339 ∂04-Mar-86 2052 JMC reply to message
C00588 00340 ∂05-Mar-86 0035 JMC re: Parallel Computer & Qlisp
C00589 00341 ∂05-Mar-86 0119 JMC re: JMC's letter to Stanford Daily (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00591 00342 ∂05-Mar-86 0123 JMC re: Parallel Computer & Qlisp
C00592 00343 ∂05-Mar-86 1013 JMC re: industrial lecturer
C00593 00344 ∂05-Mar-86 1031 JMC The third man
C00594 00345 ∂05-Mar-86 1048 JMC
C00595 00346 ∂05-Mar-86 1610 JMC re: planlunch abstract?
C00597 00347 ∂05-Mar-86 1808 JMC re: SHRDLU revealed (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00598 00348 ∂05-Mar-86 1812 JMC re: homophobia (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00599 00349 ∂06-Mar-86 1146 JMC re: VTSS class
C00600 00350 ∂06-Mar-86 1733 JMC re: Cuthbert Hurd
C00601 00351 ∂06-Mar-86 1744 JMC reply to message
C00602 00352 ∂07-Mar-86 0032 JMC re: JMC in Daily- again? (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00603 00353 ∂07-Mar-86 0039 JMC Subject: energy ex nihilo? (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00604 00354 ∂07-Mar-86 0947 JMC re: meeting this AM at 10.30?
C00605 00355 ∂07-Mar-86 1337 JMC re: positive responsibility of computer professionals
C00606 00356 ∂07-Mar-86 1342 JMC
C00609 00357 ∂07-Mar-86 1402 JMC Milan
C00610 00358 ∂07-Mar-86 1527 JMC aluminum air battery
C00611 00359 ∂07-Mar-86 1530 JMC computer controlled vehicles
C00612 00360 ∂07-Mar-86 1641 JMC re: computer controlled vehicles
C00613 00361 ∂07-Mar-86 1641 JMC Re: computer controlled vehicles
C00615 00362 ∂08-Mar-86 1500 JMC
C00616 00363 ∂08-Mar-86 1500 JMC
C00640 00364 ∂08-Mar-86 1501 JMC encomium
C00641 00365 ∂08-Mar-86 1512 JMC
C00642 00366 ∂08-Mar-86 1512 JMC Genesereth letters
C00643 00367 ∂09-Mar-86 1235 JMC re: cs 306 grade from Fall 85
C00644 00368 ∂09-Mar-86 1245 JMC cartoon
C00645 00369 ∂09-Mar-86 1337 JMC re: cartoon
C00646 00370 ∂09-Mar-86 1554 JMC re: Edward Zelenin
C00647 00371 ∂09-Mar-86 1556 JMC re: cartoon
C00648 00372 ∂09-Mar-86 1740 JMC re: Penguin cartoon
C00649 00373 ∂09-Mar-86 1839 JMC re: cartoon (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00650 00374 ∂09-Mar-86 2332 JMC Feigenbaum dinner
C00651 00375 ∂09-Mar-86 2359 JMC phone call
C00652 00376 ∂10-Mar-86 1037 JMC
C00653 00377 ∂10-Mar-86 2230 JMC meeting
C00654 00378 ∂10-Mar-86 2335 JMC
C00655 00379 ∂11-Mar-86 0950 JMC re: Situational Calculus
C00656 00380 ∂11-Mar-86 1127 JMC
C00657 00381 ∂11-Mar-86 1405 JMC re: Photo
C00658 00382 ∂11-Mar-86 1655 JMC your parallel Lisp
C00659 00383 ∂11-Mar-86 1720 JMC two things
C00660 00384 ∂11-Mar-86 2151 JMC re: AAAI sponsorship requested for Workshop
C00661 00385 ∂11-Mar-86 2157 JMC AAAI sponsorship requested for Workshop
C00662 00386 ∂11-Mar-86 2252 JMC
C00663 00387 ∂11-Mar-86 2255 JMC reply to message
C00664 00388 ∂12-Mar-86 1000 JMC re: lunch today cancelled
C00665 00389 ∂12-Mar-86 1356 JMC re: AAAI sponsorship requested for Workshop
C00666 00390 ∂12-Mar-86 1415 JMC re: Photo
C00667 00391 ∂12-Mar-86 1502 JMC re: Igor Maximovich Bobko
C00668 00392 ∂12-Mar-86 1601 JMC re: Can you recommend a body shop? (Or warn me off a bad one?)
C00669 00393 ∂12-Mar-86 1603 JMC re: How Do We Get Rid of Typewriters?
C00670 00394 ∂12-Mar-86 1608 JMC Subject: mysterious letter (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00671 00395 ∂12-Mar-86 1647 JMC Late CSD Application
C00678 00396 ∂12-Mar-86 1704 JMC
C00679 00397 ∂12-Mar-86 1729 JMC re: ISO steering committee
C00680 00398 ∂12-Mar-86 2035 JMC re: Speaker on Leibniz's logic
C00681 00399 ∂12-Mar-86 2221 JMC re: SCOTT SILFRAST (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00682 00400 ∂12-Mar-86 2223 JMC Scott Silfrast
C00683 00401 ∂13-Mar-86 1023 JMC re: How Do We Get Rid of Typewriters?
C00685 00402 ∂13-Mar-86 1108 JMC re: WARNING: coffee machine in MJH ! (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00686 00403 ∂13-Mar-86 1322 JMC re: You first conjecture
C00688 00404 ∂13-Mar-86 1834 JMC re: reports
C00689 00405 ∂13-Mar-86 1951 JMC reply to message
C00690 00406 ∂13-Mar-86 2148 JMC re: a partial answer
C00692 00407 ∂14-Mar-86 0003 JMC re: VTSS
C00693 00408 ∂14-Mar-86 0124 JMC visit to Edinburgh
C00694 00409 ∂14-Mar-86 0703 JMC Letter of reference
C00696 00410 ∂14-Mar-86 0706 JMC re: Letter of reference
C00697 00411 ∂14-Mar-86 2329 JMC re: letter to Zenon Pylyshyn
C00698 00412 ∂14-Mar-86 2332 JMC reply to message
C00699 00413 ∂14-Mar-86 2340 JMC re: You first conjecture
C00700 00414 ∂14-Mar-86 2343 JMC re: a partial answer
C00701 00415 ∂15-Mar-86 1458 JMC re: sabbatical work
C00702 00416 ∂15-Mar-86 1927 JMC
C00703 00417 ∂15-Mar-86 2021 JMC removal
C00704 00418 ∂15-Mar-86 2022 JMC
C00705 00419 ∂15-Mar-86 2023 JMC
C00706 00420 ∂15-Mar-86 2025 JMC
C00707 00421 ∂15-Mar-86 2209 JMC
C00708 00422 ∂15-Mar-86 2215 JMC re: visit to Edinburgh
C00709 00423 ∂16-Mar-86 1505 JMC re: Alliant versus Encore
C00710 00424 ∂17-Mar-86 0010 JMC trip to Germany
C00712 00425 ∂17-Mar-86 0106 JMC Subject: Bhagwan for mascot (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00713 00426 ∂17-Mar-86 1020 JMC re: Talk at Fermi Lab
C00714 00427 ∂17-Mar-86 1436 JMC
C00715 00428 ∂17-Mar-86 1520 JMC
C00716 00429 ∂17-Mar-86 1710 JMC reply to message
C00717 00430 ∂17-Mar-86 1736 JMC re: Responses to earlier comments and queries
C00721 00431 ∂17-Mar-86 1739 JMC tense logic < first order theory of time ?
C00778 00432 ∂17-Mar-86 1748 JMC re: Rutie and Szolovitz
C00780 00433 ∂17-Mar-86 1812 JMC re: Rutie
C00781 00434 ∂17-Mar-86 2236 JMC Request for lit.
C00783 00435 ∂17-Mar-86 2243 JMC re: death valley
C00784 00436 ∂18-Mar-86 0946 JMC re: connection
C00785 00437 ∂18-Mar-86 0951 JMC re: PC/RT
C00786 00438 ∂18-Mar-86 1003 JMC re: PC/RT
C00787 00439 ∂18-Mar-86 1057 JMC re: PC/RT
C00788 00440 ∂18-Mar-86 1326 JMC research associates
C00790 00441 ∂18-Mar-86 1336 JMC
C00791 00442 ∂18-Mar-86 1339 JMC re: uucp, my paper and the other class essays
C00792 00443 ∂18-Mar-86 1348 JMC sorry, we have them
C00793 00444 ∂18-Mar-86 1409 JMC need part of the book
C00794 00445 ∂18-Mar-86 1714 JMC re: Msg. from Frank at Dina Bolla
C00795 00446 ∂18-Mar-86 1715 JMC re: Trip to Monterey
C00796 00447 ∂18-Mar-86 1718 JMC
C00797 00448 ∂18-Mar-86 1733 JMC re: shopping
C00798 00449 ∂19-Mar-86 0946 Mailer failed mail returned
C00799 00450 ∂19-Mar-86 0947 Mailer failed mail returned
C00800 00451 ∂19-Mar-86 1249 JMC (→17664 22-Mar-86)
C00801 00452 ∂25-Mar-86 0302 JMC Expired plan
C00802 00453 ∂25-Mar-86 0430 JMC re: let.pub fixup
C00803 00454 ∂25-Mar-86 0438 JMC re: Old course notes
C00804 00455 ∂25-Mar-86 0444 JMC re: AI Search
C00805 00456 ∂25-Mar-86 0445 JMC re: uucp
C00806 00457 ∂25-Mar-86 0450 JMC re: Desk space
C00807 00458 ∂25-Mar-86 1026 JMC Subject: The (American) Criminal Justice System. (flame, I guess) (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00808 00459 ∂25-Mar-86 1030 JMC re: Bogus Bottle Bill (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00809 00460 ∂25-Mar-86 1033 JMC re: FLAME: New York City passes anti-discrimination bill (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00810 00461 ∂25-Mar-86 1043 JMC re: simplistic solution to criminal justice problems (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00811 00462 ∂25-Mar-86 1051 JMC re: AI Search Committee
C00812 00463 ∂25-Mar-86 2317 JMC re: meeting with Rabinov
C00813 00464 ∂25-Mar-86 2320 JMC re: question
C00814 00465 ∂26-Mar-86 0922 JMC re: JPL Issue on AI & Philosophical Logic
C00815 00466 ∂26-Mar-86 0926 JMC
C00816 00467 ∂26-Mar-86 0927 JMC expected call
C00817 00468 ∂26-Mar-86 1228 JMC
C00818 00469 ∂26-Mar-86 1313 JMC
C00819 00470 ∂26-Mar-86 1320 JMC
C00820 00471 ∂26-Mar-86 1320 JMC
C00821 00472 ∂26-Mar-86 1347 JMC terminal type
C00822 00473 ∂26-Mar-86 1443 JMC
C00823 00474 ∂26-Mar-86 1819 JMC re: Symbolics Maintenance
C00824 00475 ∂26-Mar-86 1824 JMC reply to message
C00825 00476 ∂26-Mar-86 2229 JMC
C00826 00477 ∂26-Mar-86 2238 JMC mail back from ibmpcrt1
C00827 00478 ∂26-Mar-86 2241 JMC re: terminal type
C00828 00479 ∂27-Mar-86 0917 JMC
C00832 00480 ∂27-Mar-86 0918 JMC
C00834 00481 ∂27-Mar-86 0918 JMC
C00846 00482 ∂27-Mar-86 0919 JMC
C00848 00483 ∂27-Mar-86 0919 JMC
C00850 00484 ∂27-Mar-86 1037 JMC Alliant rationalization
C00853 00485 ∂27-Mar-86 1052 JMC advocating postdoctoral fellowships
C00857 00486 ∂27-Mar-86 1115 JMC
C00859 00487 ∂27-Mar-86 1125 JMC re: advocating postdoctoral fellowships
C00860 00488 ∂27-Mar-86 1146 JMC re: Lisp Conference
C00861 00489 ∂27-Mar-86 1402 JMC INFORMATION ABOUT CAD/CAM AND AI AT YOUR SITE.
C00863 00490 ∂27-Mar-86 1402 JMC re: Dave Rodgers, Sequent
C00864 00491 ∂27-Mar-86 1422 JMC re: Dave Rodgers, Sequent
C00865 00492 ∂27-Mar-86 1518 JMC Re: mail back from ibmpcrt1
C00867 00493 ∂27-Mar-86 1519 JMC Re: mail back from ibmpcrt1
C00869 00494 ∂27-Mar-86 1733 JMC re: DAI'86
C00870 00495 ∂27-Mar-86 1735 JMC re: IBM proposal
C00871 00496 ∂27-Mar-86 1745 JMC
C00872 00497 ∂27-Mar-86 2102 JMC computer purchase plan
C00876 00498 ∂27-Mar-86 2111 JMC
C00877 00499 ∂28-Mar-86 1039 JMC re: Zabih, Ramin David
C00878 00500 ∂28-Mar-86 1435 JMC re: leave early
C00879 00501 ∂28-Mar-86 1526 JMC re: Computer Phone Messages (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00880 00502 ∂28-Mar-86 1558 JMC
C00881 00503 ∂28-Mar-86 1616 JMC
C00882 00504 ∂28-Mar-86 2157 JMC Japanese representative
C00883 00505 ∂28-Mar-86 2203 JMC
C00884 00506 ∂28-Mar-86 2204 JMC
C00885 00507 ∂29-Mar-86 1522 JMC re: Prospective Applicant Visit
C00886 00508 ∂29-Mar-86 1558 JMC re: Prospective Applicant Visit
C00887 00509 ∂30-Mar-86 1237 JMC reply to message
C00888 00510 ∂30-Mar-86 1501 JMC re: IBM RT
C00889 00511 ∂30-Mar-86 1547 JMC re: Politics: Why is this man lying? (from SAIL's BBOARD)
C00894 00512 ∂30-Mar-86 2024 JMC your message
C00895 00513 ∂30-Mar-86 2033 JMC re: I will send you a draft
C00896 00514 ∂31-Mar-86 0217 JMC re: Math problem
C00897 00515 ∂31-Mar-86 0904 JMC re: AI Search Committee
C00898 00516 ∂31-Mar-86 1256 JMC
C00899 00517 ∂31-Mar-86 1258 JMC letter about fellowships
C00900 00518
C00901 ENDMK
C⊗;
∂01-Jan-86 0106 JMC
To: rwg@SCRC-STONY-BROOK.ARPA
test1 mailed to scrc
∂01-Jan-86 0106 JMC
To: rwg@SCRC-YUKON.ARPA
test2 mailed to scrc-yukon
∂01-Jan-86 1322 JMC re: Kripke
To: Restivo@SU-SCORE.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Wed 1 Jan 86 10:04:45-PST.]
Princeton University is in Princeton, New Jersey, area code 609.
∂01-Jan-86 1439 JMC excess reports
To: library@SU-SCORE.ARPA
I receive a fair number of technical reports that are outside my field
of interest. Would you like me to send them over to you with the
understanding that you can discard any you don't want?
∂01-Jan-86 1810 JMC
To: CWR
You could ask one of the local philosophers, but I believe Kripke is notoriously unresponsive.
∂02-Jan-86 1108 JMC agenda item
To: nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
I am concerned that the long range plan, perhaps in response to the
ideas of Dean Gibbons, orients the Department too much around present
known application areas. This is always a danger in an engineering
environment, especially when a dean finds himself helping plan the
future of a field in which he is not an expert. I could talk about
this during the discussion of Gibbons's remarks, but that might be
more confrontational than is optimal. I plan to send approximately
this message to the faculty as a whole, but I wanted to get your
reactions first. In particular, to what extent has this issue already
been discussed?
∂02-Jan-86 1156 JMC re: agenda item
To: NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Thu 2 Jan 86 11:49:13-PST.]
It isn't the experimental-theoretical dimension that concerns me but
the basic-applied dimension.
∂02-Jan-86 1402 JMC Bell dinner
To: richardson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
I expect to come, but Carolyn probably won't.
∂02-Jan-86 1403 JMC Gordon Bell Visit
To: CLT
∂31-Dec-85 1631 NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA Gordon Bell Visit
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 31 Dec 85 16:29:42 PST
Date: Tue 31 Dec 85 12:58:42-PST
From: Nils Nilsson <NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Gordon Bell Visit
To: Feigenbaum@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, Ullman@SU-SCORE.ARPA, jmc@SU-AI.ARPA,
Meindl@SU-SIERRA.ARPA, Gibbons@SU-SIERRA.ARPA
cc: nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12171575060.18.NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
In connection with Gordon Bell's visit to Stanford, we think it would
be nice to invite Gordon and his wife, Gwen, to dinner on Tuesday
evening, Jan. 7. I'm checking into the possibility of cocktails and a
buffet type affair at the Chantilly on Ramona St. in Palo Alto. All
of you plus wives are invited. (Unfortunately John Hennessy will
be out of town, have I forgotten anyone else? Probably on the order
of a dozen or so people is about right.) Please let Anne Richardson
know (Richardson@score) about attendance. -Nils
-------
richardson@score
Bell dinner
I expect to come, but Carolyn probably won't.
∂02-Jan-86 1404 JMC An Invitation
To: CLT
∂30-Dec-85 1554 NII@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA An Invitation
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Dec 85 15:54:28 PST
Date: Mon 30 Dec 85 15:45:25-PST
From: Penny Nii <NII@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: An Invitation
To: GROUP-L: ;
Message-ID: <12171343265.58.NII@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
A SURPRISE BIRTHDAY PARTY FOR ED
--------------------------------
I would like to invite you and your favorite partner to a SURPRISE party
for Ed's 50th birthday. The party is on Friday, January 24th at the
Faculty Club starting at 7:00 p.m. Ted Shortliffe will get Ed there
around 7:15. There will be a buffet dinner and some entertainment.
Bob Engelmore is the entertainment chairman, and if you have any good
ideas please let him know. I would like to know how many of you can
come so that I can order the right amount of food. Within the next few
days please let me know if 0, 1, or 2 of you are coming. I hope you can
come, and DON'T TELL ED.
Have a happy New Year...penny
-------
∂03-Jan-86 1117 JMC genesereth
To: RA
∂03-Jan-86 1047 spar!hayes@decwrl.DEC.COM genesereth
Received: from DECWRL.DEC.COM by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 3 Jan 86 10:47:15 PST
Received: by decwrl.DEC.COM (4.22.01/4.7.34)
id AA15803; Fri, 3 Jan 86 10:49:07 pst
Received: By max.SPAR.CAS.SLB.COM (from krazykat.SPAR.CAS.SLB.COM (krazykat.ARPA))
id AA01360; Fri, 3 Jan 86 10:43:07 pst
Return-Path: <hayes@krazykat>
Received: By krazykat.SPAR.CAS.SLB.COM
id AA22375; Fri, 3 Jan 86 10:43:02 gmt
Message-Id: <8601031843.AA22375@krazykat.SPAR.CAS.SLB.COM>
Date: 3 Jan 1986 10:40-PST
From: Patrick Hayes <spar!hayes@decwrl.DEC.COM>
Subject: genesereth
To: Mccarthy@sail.ARPA
John, could you please send me another copy of Genesereths vita asap? I
cant
find the other one, and I need it in order to write a sensible letter
about him. If its online , electronics is faster...
Sorry about the delay, use excuse #23.
Pat
∂03-Jan-86 1135 JMC
To: RA
Here's the final version. I have added deadline, application details
and full address.
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 for the academic year 1986-87.
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 invites 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.
Applications should include a curriculum vita and a course description
suitable for inclusion in the 1986-87 Stanford catalog. The deadline is
Febrary 1, 1986.
Recommendations and applications should be addressed to Professor
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305,
(415)497-4430, electronic mail: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA.
∂03-Jan-86 1138 JMC industrial lectureship
To: gnelson@DECWRL.DEC.COM
Are you interested in applying for this for 1986-87? Here is the
announcement.
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 for the academic year 1986-87.
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 invites 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.
Applications should include a curriculum vita and a course description
suitable for inclusion in the 1986-87 Stanford catalog. The deadline is
Febrary 1, 1986.
Recommendations and applications should be addressed to Professor
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305,
(415)497-4430, electronic mail: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA.
∂03-Jan-86 1152 JMC
To: RA
The file is mental.abs[e85,jmc].
∂03-Jan-86 1404 JMC VTS course
To: su-bboards@SU-AI.ARPA
The following course will be given by John McCarthy in Winter 1986 in
the Values, Technology and Society program. As will be noticed from
the description, it will emphasize opportunities rather than problems.
It will meet 14:15-15:30 Tuesdays and Thursdays
in room 202 History corner (bldg 200).
Technological Possibilities for enhancing man
This course surveys the technological possibilities for increasing
human capability and real wealth. It is oriented toward what people will
want rather than around what we might think is good for them. Some of the
improvements discussed are in the direction of (1) making housework
trivial (2) making government responsive (3) increasing the ability of one
person to build an object like a car, airplane or house to suit him
without organizing others (4) allowing groups to live as they prefer less
hindered by general social laws and customs. We will emphasize computer
and information technology and ask what will be genuinely useful about
computers in the home and not just faddish or flashy. To what extent are
futurists and science fiction writers given to systematic error? Can we
envisage advances as important as electricity, telephones, running water,
inside toilets?
The second topic concerns the social factors that determine the
rate of scientific and technological progress. Why was scientific
advance a rare event until Galileo? Why didn't non-Western cultures
break through into the era of organized scientific and technological
progress and why did it take Western culture so long? Why isn't the
rate of progress faster today? As examples, we shall inquire into
the obstacles that made cellular telephone systems and electronic
funds transfer take so long.
∂03-Jan-86 1412 JMC department plans and basic research in computer science
To: faculty@SU-SCORE.ARPA
CC: gibbons@SU-SIERRA.ARPA
I am concerned that the Department's plans are being pushed in
the direction of orientation towards presently visible applications
of computer science rather than towards basic research. The issue
isn't theory vs. experiment, because there is experimental basic
research. I think we should discuss the issue at the retreat.
∂03-Jan-86 1526 JMC re: department plans and basic research in computer science
To: ullman@SU-AIMVAX.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Fri, 3 Jan 86 14:42:21 pst.]
That makes two of us. The AI slot issue is a specific one, but my worry
about a dean of engineering is triggered by this to the more general
issue.
∂03-Jan-86 1534 JMC re: Does INFO-IBMPC@<somewhere> exist? (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: OTHER-SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
The REQUEST convention is observed by all but the ignorant. Unfortunately,
there will always be lots of those. It would be better if the short name
would mail to the REQUEST and the long one labelled <topic>-TO-ALL would
go to all recipients. Perhaps it should be <topic>-BROADCAST to suggest
to even the meanest intelligence that something so directed would be broadcast.
∂03-Jan-86 1635 JMC re: Workshop on the Foundations of AI
To: KAELBLING@SRI-AI.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Fri 3 Jan 86 15:54:00-PST.]
I think so. You can call Wilks.
> Prof. Yorick Wilks, Director,(505)646-5466,"yorick%nmsu.csnet"@csnet-relay
* Rio Grande Research Corridor
* New Mexico State University
* Las Cruces, NM 88003
∂03-Jan-86 1818 JMC re: your VTS course
To: Crispin@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Fri 3 Jan 86 17:54:22-PST.]
1. The course is a small one and won't be videotaped.
2. With regard to cellular telephones, I think we ought to wait and see
what happens, but those with well-formulated complaints should make them
public now. I suppose the system will have to be revised. To my recollection
not all the companies are large. Because the serving companies are chosen
by lot - at least the non-telco server is - a number of incompetents are
getting into the act. In fact I think there was a recent fraud case
agaist some sharpie who was selling would-be millionaires wrong information
about how to get ahead of the competition for cellular telephone franchises.
I'm not adamantly opposed to some additional regulations when it becomes
clear what they should be. Some of the losing features you describe will
inhibit use even where there is a monopoly and hence will tend to be corrected.
∂04-Jan-86 0023 JMC re: Party for Ed
To: NII@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Thu 2 Jan 86 13:55:00-PST.]
Thanks for the invitation. Unfortunately, Carolyn and I will be in L.A.
that weekend. Have a good party and wish Ed a happy birthday for us.
∂04-Jan-86 1532 JMC re: invite
To: CLT
[In reply to message rcvd 04-Jan-86 10:02-PT.]
Will change appointment with Staggs, and I did reply to Penny.
∂04-Jan-86 1814 JMC Dreyfuss and MAD
To: SJG
I suppose you're getting flack if you are in charge of SIGLUNCH and
invited him. I don't know whether his title is determined, but I
would like to hear him talk about either (1) the easiest problems
he thinks programs can't be made to do or (2) making precise the
concepts of ambiguity tolerance, fringe consciousness and zeroing
in that are in his book. A new collection of exaggerated claims
about AI would be of less interest.
MAD has always paid me reasonably promptly after I submitted an
invoice. Nafeh has been away in Europe over Christmas, so if
someone there has a question it might have been postponed, but
he should be back now.
∂05-Jan-86 0018 JMC Journalists are losers
To: su-bboards@SU-AI.ARPA
This compared to 12 thousand school teachers confirms my
opinion that journalists are a poor-spirited lot. They probably
fear they wouldn't have anything to say but "Gee, whiz" either.
a005 2346 04 Jan 86
Only 20 Journalists Have Applied For Shuttle Flight
ATLANTA - NASA has received only 20 applications from people who
want to be the first journalist aboard the space shuttle, although
about 4,000 hopefuls have requested forms.
The deadline for the applications to be returned is Jan. 15.
The selected journalist will be expected to report from space ''on a
grass-roots level,'' said Gayle Sifford, secretary for the
Journalist-in-Space Project.
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration wants the
journalist to report on something ''other than an astronaut saying
'Gee whiz,''' she said. ''They are word people; the astronauts are
more technically oriented.''
The journalist picked for fall's shuttle flight will be selected by
the Association of Schools of Journalism and Mass Communications in
cooperation with NASA and 16 professional journalism organizations.
Selection officials are looking for applicants with ''a solid,
consistent record of professional productivity'' and ''evidence of
peer recognition,'' the application brochure says.
Eight journalists will be selected from each of five regions in the
country. Five finalists will be chosen from that field. From the
final five, two will be chosen as the primary and alternate
candidates.
The selected journalist and an alternate will receive 114 hours of
training at NASA's Johnson Space Center in Texas and at Kennedy Space
Center in Florida.
∂05-Jan-86 0030 JMC Systems concepts machine
To: q.queenie@LOTS-A
Would you remind Ralph to activate may account on it. Also I forget
what he told me its name is.
∂06-Jan-86 1732 JMC re: Facilities Committee Meeting
To: LES
[In reply to message rcvd 06-Jan-86 17:31-PT.]
Did we meet then?
∂06-Jan-86 1735 JMC
To: ME
How about 1986.xgp[up,doc]
∂06-Jan-86 1736 JMC
To: ME
It would even be nice to have 1987 as well.
∂06-Jan-86 2210 JMC re: Request regarding Symbolic Systems
To: WASOW@SU-CSLI.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Mon 6 Jan 86 21:49:12-PST.]
I will need to see a copy of the grant application first.
∂06-Jan-86 2330 JMC re: [crash!victoro@sdcsvax.ARPA: A Bit of 'News']
To: MRC@SIMTEL20.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Mon 6 Jan 86 23:38:12-MST.]
I have never heard of the publication or either of the people. My guess
is that the article is an attempt to enhance the value of the publication
to businessmen who are paying an excessive price for it.
I'll ask a friend of mine who might know about the publication.
∂07-Jan-86 0000 JMC references from Hintikka
To: JMC
Veiko Rantala - Aspects of Definability (Acta Philosophica Fennica)
Academic Boodstore Keskuskaatu
SF-00100 Helsinki 10
Finland
Hintikka
in Lucia Vanna, Editor
Matters of of Intelligence
Dreidel, 1985(?)
∂07-Jan-86 1030 JMC Please print the following files:
To: RA
vts[w83,jmc] VTS course description and notes
exerci.vts[s85,jmc] Exercises and assignments for vts course
gabor[s85,jmc] References for vtss
rich.ess[s85,jmc] Let's all be rich - for vts
vts[s85,jmc] Opportunities and obstacles in using technology
∂07-Jan-86 1156 JMC
To: RA
Just dover them.
∂07-Jan-86 2222 JMC re: Planning workshop
To: georgeff@SRI-AI.ARPA, aaai-office@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Tue 7 Jan 86 21:58:14-PST.]
Yes, and I agree to $10,000. Please arrange further matters with Claudia
Mazzetti.
∂08-Jan-86 2211 JMC (on TTY20 2211)
To: CLT
Still asleep
Not a peep
Shall I wake him,
A bottle take him?
∂09-Jan-86 1318 JMC
To: CLT
Exactly when is the logic meeting in L.A.?
∂09-Jan-86 1357 JMC message
To: CLT
∂09-Jan-86 1354 CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA message
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 9 Jan 86 11:35:40 PST
Date: Thu 9 Jan 86 10:30:21-PST
From: Tina Contreras <CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: message
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12173907350.15.CONTRERAS@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Elizabeth Barth phoned, regarding reservations for th Logic Conference. Please
call. 213 825-1148.
Tina
-------
∂09-Jan-86 1817 JMC re: Seat belt law - a violation of freedoms? (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: OTHER-SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
The argument that doing something that subjects ourselves to
possible injury harms society isn't completely lost on us folks. It's
just that we draw the line between what society can legitimately do
to minimize harm to itself and what constitutes a harm to society
because it infringes on the freedom of individuals in a different
place than where Craig Cornelius draws it - or perhaps he wouldn't
draw it all. From his message, one might imagine that he is just
as onesided as the "editorial in the Chronicle", which I suspect
were just letters to the editor. Would he assume that "society",
e.g. a legislative majority, may properly force anyone to do anything
that prevents any "harm to society"?
∂09-Jan-86 2207 JMC What do the anti-smokers think of this?
To: su-bboards@SU-AI.ARPA
a004 2157 09 Jan 86
PM-Smokeless Cops, Bjt,0714
TODAY'S TOPIC: Police Union Agrees, Town to Hire Only Non-Smoking
Cops
By BART ZIEGLER
Associated Press Writer
HOLDEN, Mass. (AP) - Defying the image of the flabby village cop
patrolling the doughnut shops, police here were already working out
and getting cholesterol checks. Now the force has sworn off smoking,
but not everyone is happy about the reason why.
A new police contract, which national police union officials call
unique and troubling, provides that only officers who promise not to
smoke, even off duty, will be hired for this central Massachusetts
town's 19-officer force.
The only two smokers on the force when the contract was signed have
since put away their cigarettes, voluntarily.
Holden's officers didn't realize they were setting a precedent when
they agreed last August to the contract's no-smoking clause, which
they had opposed in two previous years when town officials brought it
up, said Donald Ball, president of the patrolmen's union.
''There was a lot of discussion about them telling us what to do on
our off-duty time,'' he said. ''We were thinking about the
constitutional issues, and the town was thinking about (savings in)
pension costs.''
When the town agreed that only newly hired officers would be subject
to the smoking restriction, and that officers already on the force
were free to smoke or not, ''we more or less relented,'' Ball said.
Others, however, aren't satisfied.
''I was astonished that a labor organization would dictate to its
membership what it could do on an off-duty basis,'' said Raymond
McGrath, vice president of the International Brotherhood of Police
Officers, which says it represents 50,000 officers in 27 states.
''I would question the legality of that, whether one could
contractually mandate one's behavior patterns while they weren't
working,'' McGrath said. ''I couldn't see us as an organization
allowing or promoting such a contract.''
The Holden officers are represented by the American Federation of
State, County and Municipal Employees, whose Boston district office
recommended against the smoking clause.
Nonetheless, said Tom Brophy, spokesman for the district office, the
smoking agreement ''was obviously the will of the local.''
''Each local is there for negotiating its own contract. AFSCME is a
very independent union,'' he said.
Linda Lampkin, AFSCME's research director, said the smoking
prohibition was unique among police departments with union contracts,
although some non-union departments have made it a condition of
employment.
''We researched this. We found no other police department that was
organized (unionized) that has done this,'' agreed lawyer Demitrios
M. Moschos, Holden's labor negotiator.
Moschos said he understood why the officers may have had concerns
about the constitutionality of the smoking clause, but he believes
the contract is fair.
''I think because we grandfathered it in (exempting current
officers) ... new officers will know in advance it's a requirement
for the job,'' he said.
''Traditionally, police officers have been subjected to greater
discipline because of the privileges they have,'' such as the power
of arrest, he said.
The executive director of the Civil Liberties Union of
Massachusetts, John Roberts, has said the town could probably not be
sued for hiring only non-smokers, since smokers are not ''a class
protected by law'' from discrimination. But he left open the
possibility of a suit over the firing of an officer who smoked.
For officials of the town of 14,000, the contract was a way to
control a rise in pension costs for officers who retire early due to
heart ailments, which health experts have linked to smoking.
Under Massachusetts' so-called heart law, police officers who
develop heart conditions or high blood pressure are assumed to have
developed the ailments from the stresses of the job and can retire
under disability pensions that pay about 70 percent of their salary,
Moschos said.
The Legislature is considering a proposal that would shift the
burden to the police officer to prove the disability was caused by
working conditions and not by smoking.
Ball and Police Chief Charles Hicks said the agreement was a natural
extension of the officers' growing health consciousness, which
includes regular workouts in a gym in the police station's basement
and annual blood cholesterol checks at the town's expense.
''They feel good about themselves,'' said Hicks. ''None of them is
out of shape.''
''Almost all of us used to smoke,'' Ball noted.
AP-NY-01-10-86 0052EST
***************
∂10-Jan-86 0007 JMC
To: FY@SU-AI.ARPA
You will find a printout of takeuc[e78,jmc] in the ESP.
∂10-Jan-86 0110 JMC
To: CLT
How much will you pay for each remaining misprint in your thesis?
∂11-Jan-86 1650 JMC re: smoking and selt belts (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: OTHER-SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
The trial lawyers would object to any legal provision that limits
what can be obtained from a lawsuit, e.g. a provision that people not
wearing seat belts had a lower ability to collect. From their point of
view such a law would be a dangerous precedent. Their lobby is very
powerful, because a large number of judges and legislators are former
trial lawyers. They might even succeed in having such laws declared
unconstitutional. They are very self-righteous and see the large
verdicts they collect and share as the main force for higher standards
of safety.
∂11-Jan-86 2358 JMC your thesis
To: YM@SU-AI.ARPA
I am essentially ready to sign. My copy is missing page 81, and I've
found a couple misprints.
I skipped the parallel part completely.
∂12-Jan-86 0100 JMC
To: YM@SU-AI.ARPA
I want to read more so please make another page 81 for me.
∂12-Jan-86 1414 JMC re: Amarel visit
To: LES
[In reply to message rcvd 12-Jan-86 14:10-PT.]
I suppose I'll appear at the beginning which seems to be scheduled for 8:15,
and you should come too.
∂12-Jan-86 1720 JMC
To: VAL
I'd like a copy of Hanks and McDermott "Temporal reasoning in default logic"
∂12-Jan-86 1805 JMC
To: grosof@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Freudenthal's Lincos
∂12-Jan-86 1929 JMC re: Course on Technology, Values, and Society
To: Tenenbaum@SRI-KL.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Sun 12 Jan 86 17:25:32-PST.]
Thanks for your interest; you are certainly welcome. I plan to run it
somewhat as a seminar. For the next few times I will be discussing
the technological opportunities arising from computer science and
technology, but I don't (yet) have a schedule as it depends on the
audience. The meetings are now in a seminar room next to the VTSS
office. This will be room 371B or something like that. Anyway
its on the logical north side of the quad opposite physics.
∂12-Jan-86 2123 JMC re: Hi, John!
To: FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Sun 12 Jan 86 21:09:58-PST.]
I didn't know about the 9000 when I bought the 7000, so I didn't consider
whether its advantages might be worth the extra cost. Should you decide
to buy the 7000, I would like the opportunity to consider buying the 9000.
I don't know how much more it costs, and the only advantage I know about
is that the flash is synchronized for 1/250th second instead of the usual
1/60 th. This is advantageous, as Sarah explained to me, when taking
a flash picture of a running horse when there is a certain amount of
ambient light. The actual flash time is much less than even 1/250 th,
so the effect of the flash is the same in either case. However,
when there is 1/60th of a second for ambient light to blur the picture,
this is more likely than when the shutter is open only for 1/250th.
There may be other advantages. I bought the camera at Keeble and Shuchat
in Palo Alto. Sarah knows of a discount place in San Jose, but I decided
to buy this (and a Nikon FE2 for her) at Keeble and Shuchat in order to
get better service.
You are welcome to come to my course, which meets from 2:15 to 3:30
on Tu and Th in room 371, which in the same entry as the VTSS office
opposite Physics in the north part of the Quad. This is a change
from the room listed in the schedule. The course will be run as
a seminar with plenty of discussion and I'm starting out with
what I imagine are the less obvious potentialities of computers
in the home.
The amusing fact is that I started with an equal mix of VTSS majors
and engineering graduate students and there were more engineers
(including CS in that). By the end of the second class
the undergraduates were all gone, and I had made no demands on
technical knowledge. Either my informality and disorganization
doesn't sit well or regarding technology as opportunity rather
than problem doesn't fit the ethos of VTSS.
∂12-Jan-86 2349 JMC JMC's VTSS course has moved
To: su-bboards@SU-AI.ARPA
to room 371. This is on North side of Quad opposite Physics
and thru doorway labelled VTSS. Tu and Th at 2:15.
∂13-Jan-86 1120 JMC re: John Cocks
To: RA
[In reply to message rcvd 13-Jan-86 11:17-PT.]
His name is John Cocke.
∂13-Jan-86 1453 JMC reply to Nagagawa letter
To: RA
Dear Prof. N...
I will be glad to see you on February 26 as you propose to discuss
our work on non-monotonic reasoning and perhaps meta-inference.
∂13-Jan-86 1523 JMC nsf.86[w86,jmc]
To: LES
is the text of the micro proposal for the NSF renewal. There
remain a few missing data noted by xxx in the text.
∂13-Jan-86 1525 JMC circumscription names
To: VAL
Can you give me a short list of people who have published papers or reports
discussing circumscription. I want to put it in my NSF renewal proposal.
∂13-Jan-86 1529 JMC re: ucla logic conf
To: CLT
[In reply to message sent Mon, 13 Jan 86 15:01:28 pst.]
I don't know Ladkin, and I think it would be too much arranging anyway
and would make our travel plans inflexible. Also weather delays are
far more likely than with a commercial flight. I suggest saying no
thanks.
∂13-Jan-86 1806 JMC
To: JMC
Logan Robinson, A student in Leningrad
∂14-Jan-86 1011 JMC re: Hopcroft
To: RA
[In reply to message rcvd 14-Jan-86 09:43-PT.]
Please put Hopcroft in my calendar file.
∂14-Jan-86 1021 JMC re: "Addresses"
To: Murthy@DEWEY.UDEL.EDU
[In reply to message sent Sun, 29 Dec 85 15:25:08 EST.]
*MCC 512 343-0860, 9430 Research Blvd.,Echelon Bldg. #1,Austin,TX 78759-6509
∂14-Jan-86 1114 JMC re: Alliant
To: RPG, LES, JJW, CLT
[In reply to message from RPG rcvd 14-Jan-86 10:49-PT.]
Unless there is a strong reason to do otherwise, I still want to wait
until the contract at least clears DARPA.
∂15-Jan-86 0005 JMC re: Does anyone know ...
To: hal@SU-FUJI.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Tue, 14 Jan 86 20:12:24 pst.]
I once had my driver's license encased in plastic and then was told by
a policeman that this was illegal.
∂15-Jan-86 0338 JMC
To: radio
How about KKHI?
∂15-Jan-86 0957 JMC re: your NSF grant
To: RA
[In reply to message rcvd 15-Jan-86 09:03-PT.]
I sent Les the textual part of the proposal yesterday.
∂15-Jan-86 0959 JMC smoking
To: su-bboards@SU-AI.ARPA
The case of the police department that won't hire smokers even if they
only smoke at home has been fudged by the anti-smoking enthusiasts.
On the one hand, none of them has said that this police department has
gone too far but neither has any of them defended the action. The anti-smoking
crusade has achieved 90 percent of its objectives as regards avoiding
nuisance to others from smokers, but once enthusiasm has been aroused,
a crusade will cheerfully infringe the target sinners' rights in order
to achieve the last ten percent. For the benefit of newcomers I'll
reiterate that I have never been a smoker, but I think self-righteousness
is more dangerous to health than smoking.
∂15-Jan-86 1020 JMC
To: RA
I'll go to the meeting, but don't make the reservations yet.
∂15-Jan-86 1148 JMC
To: LES
The file NSF[w86,jmc] has been revised.
∂15-Jan-86 1148 JMC
To: LES
∂15-Jan-86 0903 RA your NSF grant
A reminder. You need to do your NSF proposal. Mr. Chien from NSF called
yesterday when I was out of my office and I have to return his call, but I'd
like to hear from you before I do that.
∂15-Jan-86 1635 JMC re: Current CV
To: RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA
CC: RA@SU-AI.ARPA
[In reply to message from RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA sent Wed 15 Jan 86 15:31:46-PST.]
Probably not.
∂15-Jan-86 1638 JMC re: Bicycle Racks (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: OTHER-SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
There is a fancy kind of bike rack with multiple teeth in
the lower level of the parking structure of the Stanford Shopping
Center opposite Neiman-Marcus. The teeth go through both wheels
as well as the frame, and you put your lock in a box protected on
three sides. Unfortunately, it takes me about 5 minutes to lock
up my bike, so I have given up using it as intended.
∂16-Jan-86 1203 JMC re: recommendation for Industrial CS Lectureship
To: ZAVEN@SU-SCORE.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Thu 16 Jan 86 10:39:56-PST.]
Thanks for the recommendations; they'll be considered.
∂16-Jan-86 1524 JMC re: Planning workshop
To: georgeff@SRI-AI.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Thu 16 Jan 86 15:02:32-PST.]
It would be ok with me if I considered it my business, but I don't
see that you even have to ask.
∂16-Jan-86 1525 JMC Geneserth Recommendations
To: RA
Which of these do we have?
∂16-Jan-86 1456 BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA Geneserth Recommendations
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 16 Jan 86 14:56:07 PST
Date: Thu 16 Jan 86 14:52:40-PST
From: Betty Scott <BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Geneserth Recommendations
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: BScott@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12175790109.29.BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
As of yesterday, recommendation responses have not been received from the
following persons:
Lesser, Davis, Hart, Szolovitz, Newell and Hayes
I though perhaps you might wish to call them.
Betty
-------
∂16-Jan-86 1754 JMC IBM pc for demo
To: su-bboards@SU-AI.ARPA
Does anyone know of an IBM PC (AT preferable) or compatible in or close
to Margaret Jacks that can be used for a class demo?
Michael Beeson, teaching a logic course in the Math. Dept. this
quarter would use it. His co-ordinates are:
(home: 408 688-1630) "beeson%ucscc.uucp"@berkeley.arpa
∂16-Jan-86 2049 JMC Please find out
To: RA
when is the International Congress on Information Processing this year
in Dublin. Golub's sec'y may have an announcement.
∂17-Jan-86 0022 JMC generalization of pointwise c.
To: VAL
Here's a generalization where instead of minimizing at points we minimize
on subsets of the domain. I don't yet know whether it's good for anything.
A(P) ∧ ∀z P'.¬[A(P') ∧ ∀x(f(x) ≠ z ⊃ (P'(x) ≡ P(x))) ∧ P' < P].
It reduces to pointwise c. when f is the identity function.
∂17-Jan-86 1207 JMC temporal reasoning and default logic
To: mcdermott@YALE.ARPA, hanks@YALE.ARPA
CC: VAL@SU-AI.ARPA, grosof@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
I've been reading your report with Hanks, and I think it presents
important problems for AI. I haven't understood all of it, and probably
I'll have a reaction to its main contentions later. As you know Vladimir
Lifschitz (and also Ben Grosof) has a treatment of your problem with his
new pointwise circumscription which was devised in connection with a
rather similar example from the blocks world. I don't know whether my
intuition will agree with his solution, and I haven't given up on ordinary
circumscription in connection with possible revised axiomatizations of the
phenomena.
I am surprised at the generality of your pessimistic conclusions
about logic on the small amount of evidence you have. I wouldn't exclude
the possibility that all of the threee non-monotonic formalisms can handle
the problem using revised axioms, e.g. by reifying causes. Even
if I couldn't see a way of doing it in logic, I would suppose that
others might. The only way of reaching a definite negative conclusion
would be to find a general property of the reasoning required that
logic-based systems don't have. Of course, this has already been
done once, when we discovered that non-monotonicity was required
and everything previously regarded as logic was monotonic.
There is, however, one definite technical point I can make
now wherein there is a technical difference between circumscription
and the other two systems. Namely, circumscription doesn't require
that a unique model exists. Here are my notes in connection with
the Nixon example.
p. 20 - I don't consider that the Nixon example ``screws up''
circumscription, because it isn't my goal to get a unique minimal
model in all cases. It is simply a mistake to say that for
circumscription ``we need a unique one (minimal model) in order to
guarantee that we can make coherent deductions from the theory''.
If we have the rules that Quakers are normally
pacifists and Republicans are normally non-pacifists in a general
common sense database and we minimize abnormality, then we will get
the right result for individuals only known to be exactly one or
the other and the right result for individuals not known to be
either or known to be both. It is important that minimizing
abnormality on a large collection of facts answer those questions
it can and pass on those it can't. Circumscription of abnormality
does just what it should in the Nixon case. However, there are
other cases where the present version of circumscription combined
with the present abnormality theories doesn't do what we want.
Whether we have to modify circumscription or the theories or both
isn't presently clear.
For example, if we have the additional facts that Republicans
are normally conservative and that Quakers normally affirm rather
than swear we will conclude that Nixon has these properties from
the same circumscription that offers no answer as to whether Nixon
is a pacifist.
Of course, this doesn't answer the main problem you have
posed, and I hope either to become satisfied with Lifschitz's
treatment or find one I like better.
∂17-Jan-86 1451 JMC reply to message
To: CLT
[In reply to message rcvd 17-Jan-86 12:49-PT.]
He's not there now, but I'll send him a message.
∂17-Jan-86 1502 JMC re: Crossing the New West Campus (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: OTHER-SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
There is an interesting nearby exception to the principle that
communism in bikes doesn't work. The Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory has free bikes. It is made to work in the usual way
communism is made to work. Namely, there is a fence and 24 hour
guards at the gates that, among their other duties, make sure the
bikes don't emigrate.
∂17-Jan-86 1515 JMC re: At least this isn't a police state... (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: OTHER-SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
It may indeed be that the police spend time doing things that you
or I would regard as less prioritous than keeping track of recovery of
stolen goods, but I doubt that "arresting and beating protesters" accounts
for more than 0.1% of police time - counting, of course, ordinary illegal
activities done in the name of protest. However, it would take a study
to prove it. On two occasions police recovered things stolen from my
house. Once it was money that I hadn't even reported stolen. Guess how
that happened. Well, they got a professor's son they had caught
in a burglary to confess his other burglaries. In neither case do I
have a complaint against the police, but I do have a complaint against
the court system. After the case against a fence in whose house my
stuff was found was postponed twice at the request of the defendant's
lawyer, they finally picked a court date at which I had to be out of
town. I called the San Mateo District Attorney's office and asked
to be excused from appearing that day. He said ok, and I never heard
of the case again.
∂17-Jan-86 2359 JMC re: Thesis area question (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: OTHER-SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
Now you graduate students know what you must do to become known - in
certain quarters - as one of Stanford's better PhDs.
∂18-Jan-86 1150 JMC re: Talks on Feb 6
To: NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Sat 18 Jan 86 11:11:22-PST.]
ok.
∂18-Jan-86 1158 JMC re: Talks on Feb 6
To: NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Sat 18 Jan 86 11:11:22-PST.]
On second thought, maybe not ok. The Workshop on the Foundations of AI
at the University of New Mexico is Feb 6-8. I will let you know Monday
whether I will be unable to speak to the engineers for that reason. I
have some problems with the agenda of the meeting that may be serious
enough to induce me not to attend. I'll let you know after I have been
through the preprints.
∂18-Jan-86 1627 JMC
To: SJG
I have mailed my astronaut recommendation form for you.
∂19-Jan-86 1022 JMC doing it with ordinary circumscription
To: VAL@SU-AI.ARPA
CC: grosof@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
blocks[w86,jmc] New blocks axioms fixing sneak
Here are five axioms that seem to solve the sneak disjunction problem
for the blocks world using ordinary circumscription. ab aspect0 s
is very like your non-existence of situations whose preconditions
aren't met. The solution is also similar to cancellation of
inheritance. I'm hopeful that the solution can be adapted to the
problem posed by Hanks and McDermott.
∀x l s.¬ab aspect1(x,l,s) ⊃ loc(x,result(move(x,l),s)) = l
∀x l s. ab aspect1(x,l,s) ⊃ ab aspect0 result(move(x,l),s)
∀x l s. ab aspect0 s ⊃ ab aspect1(x,l,s)
∀e s.ab aspect0 s ⊃ ab aspect0 result(e,s)
∀x y l s.loc(y,s) = top x ⊃ ab aspect1(x,l,s)
Suppose now that blocks A and B are on the table, and we move A
onto B and then try to move B. Without the second, third and fourth
axioms, we can minimize abnormality by having ab aspect1(A,top B,S0)
and A not movable on top of B, so that B is movable in
result(move(A,top B),S0). With these axioms, whenever ab aspect1(A,top B,S0)
is true, ab aspect1(B,y,result(move(A,top B),S0)) will also be true, so
the unwanted solution of the original circumscription no longer minimizes ab.
What do you think?
∂19-Jan-86 1517 JMC more on circumscription
To: VAL
Two remarks:
1. With regard to my generalization of pointwise; we might call it filtered
circumscription. I said that when f is the identity function we get
pointwise circumscription; also when f is 1-1. When f is constant
we get ordinary circumscription. I still don't have any applications.
2. With regard to your example of the robot in the two rooms. The
example is akin to my earlier remark about reasoning about the past
sometimes - in which case we want to give the present priority. I
fear we are getting to cases in which the mental situation itself
is involved in deciding on circumscription priorities. The same
physical rule determines the effect of a planned action and is
used to draw conclusions about the past from present information.
However, we want to give priority to the information antecedent
in our minds over possibilities that are deduced from it. This is
what led me to start think about mental situation calculus,
so far without reaching a definite formalization.
∂19-Jan-86 1520 JMC Conference on Foundations
To: VAL
They have sent me the preprints, and as I feared, I find them rather
disappointing. I'll leave them for you to look at, and if you still
want to go, (it may be worthwhile just for you to meet some of the
people), I'll phone Partridge, since my net message to Yorick Wilks
about you produced no reply.
∂19-Jan-86 2138 JMC wics
To: CLT
wics[w86,jmc]/5p is my revision of the course description, and page
6 includes a biographies of appropriate length for you, me and Ian.
∂20-Jan-86 0007 JMC re: genesereth
To: spar!hayes@DECWRL.DEC.COM
[In reply to message sent Sun, 19 Jan 86 23:57:47 gmt.]
Thanks for the message about Genesereth. When you send the
paper copy, perhaps you could replace the phrase about "keep on the
faculty" by something mentioning tenure, since that is the issue.
∂20-Jan-86 0134 JMC Please get me this book.
To: RA
1.1) Van Helden, Albert. MEASURING THE UNIVERSE (Chicago : 1985.)
LOCATION: QB15.V33 1985: Green Stacks
∂20-Jan-86 2332 JMC re: SHARE Lisp
To: RPG
[In reply to message rcvd 20-Jan-86 20:45-PT.]
I don't remember, but Stoyan might know, and if he doesn't know he'll
want to find out. He is HST@SAIL.
∂21-Jan-86 0149 JMC re: VTSS assignment
To: KAO@SU-SIERRA.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Tue 21 Jan 86 01:21:21-PST.]
Thanks for your VTSS assignment. You can get a quick answer from this
network professor as long as you are the only network student. My
off-hand opinion is that if your proposal were vigorously pursued
by a university of the reputation of Stanford it would have a profound
effect. However, the exact result isn't easy to predict for the
reason that even with resident students, the educational process is
somewhat anomalous. Here are some remarks that I imagine to be
relevant.
1. Why are classes as performances needed at all? Why haven't books
been good enough for the last few hundred years since they have been
economical to produce in quantity? People often get stuck in books
and need help, but this is perhaps mostly because the books haven't been
thoroughly debugged. One needs to monitor readers and when they
have trouble improve the explanation or send them to a note. An easy
technological way of getting to notes and back would help here.
The second problem is that many people need stimulus in maintaining
motivation.
2. Well, now suppose that for some psychological reason classes are
needed - take first lectures. The technology of movies has been
good enough since about 1935 when sound on 16 mm movies became
feasible. Again the movie needs to be debugged to obviate as much
student puzzlement as possible. Videotapes are newer, but it's
hard to see that they are qualitatively different from movies.
They're easier to use but the picture quality is lower. Again
maintaining motivation is the limiting factor. When a professor
gives the same lecture for many years, one wonders why the professor
as actor is important. When the lecture is before a large audience,
the interaction is with a few people, and one wonders why questions
from stooges mightn't be better for the non-questioners than
questions from students who may either be particularly backward
or showing off.
3. Professors are highly motivated by research opportunities. It isn't
exactly clear who would be the star professors to be paid millions.
The millions are presumably for performances for very large audiences
that would be repeated. Then it might be better for a whole team
to prepare the lectures and have them presented by professional
actors.
This is why I'm puzzled in trying to figure out what the effects of
your proposal would be, even though I think it would be substantial
if adopted by one of the top universities. If it were done in the name of a
minor university, no matter how well, it would be thought to lack
something important even if no-one could figure out what.
What if it were done internationally by the National Taiwan University
in English using professors from all over the world? What if it were
done by them in Chinese using actors or perhaps just voice-overs for
the Chinese-speaking part of the world?
∂21-Jan-86 1024 JMC re: Computer vs. Falwell (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: OTHER-SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
I think it's wrong, and it's good that it's illegal. It would also
be wrong and illegal to harass Jane Fonda or some other left wing flake.
Doing something repeatedly for the purpose of harassment that is legal
done once is illegal. However, it would be nice if MRC would state the
general principle to which he is appealing. When is harassment moral?
There is of course the possibility that MRC considers the harassment
immoral but merely believes that Falwell "deserves" to be the victim of
crime, e.g. MRC as a judge would sentence someone who mugged Falwell but,
as he did so, would express his pleasure that Falwell had been mugged.
This ill-wish would be unchristian surely, but my hope is that it would be
regarded as unatheist as well. Also what is the limit on MRC's pleasure
in Falwell misfortunes? Were Falwell boiled in oil by some sadist would
MRC also be pleased or does he "deserve" somewhat less?
∂21-Jan-86 1036 JMC Share LISP
To: RPG
All this doesn't seem right. The Lisp 1.5 manual precedes my arrival
at Stanford, and I don't know about appendices added later. If early
it would have to be for the 7090 for which the original IBM704 Lisp
was implemented. The version implemented at Stanford would have to
be for the 360, and I think such a version was done originally in
Norway and adapted for U.S. purposes at the Computation Center by
Jan Kent, who did the first version in Norway. This suggests that
you are conflating two versions, both of which may have been SHARE
distributed.
∂21-Jan-86 1037 JMC research interests
To: tajnai@SU-SCORE.ARPA
The version you have is very obsolete, but I don't have another right
now. Here is something brief.
McCarthy's 1986 research interests are mainly in artificial intelligence,
especially the formalization of common sense knowledge of how to achieve
goals. In the late 1970s McCarthy developed a method of non-monotonic
reasoning called circumscription and published papers on it in 1980 and
1986. He also has a project to develop a version of Lisp for parallel
processors called Qlisp.
∂22-Jan-86 0934 JMC filtered circumscription → fibered circumscription
To: VAL
Let's call it fibered circumscription, because some of the concepts used
are the same as those of fiber spaces. f is the projection map, the
base space is the domain of z's, and the fibers are the inverses of
points of the base space under f. All this even though I have no
reason to believe that any of the other concepts of fiber spaces are
usable here.
∂22-Jan-86 1221 JMC checking on email
To: hanks@YALE.ARPA
Did you receive a copy of a message from me addressed to McDermott? Is
he around? The message concerned an alleged misconception of circumscription
in your joint paper. I'm in no special rush for a reply, just checking
on whether it arrived.
∂22-Jan-86 1242 JMC email address
To: ME
Since we have new phone numbers, I'm planning to have new business cards
made, and I want to put the email address on it. I notice that there seems
to be a new system of addresses for many people. Will JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
remain stable or will it change in the next couple of years? Second
question: do we still have a problem in replying to certain addresses
apart from the need to quote when % is used?
∂22-Jan-86 1332 JMC
To: RA
13727 Ferguson, Magalia,CA 95954
∂22-Jan-86 1354 JMC info obtained by calling ibm
To: LES
Javed Khan,288-4178 info about pc-rt
Announcement seminar
Fri, Jan 24, 9am, 2077 Gateway Pl. 4th floor, across from Red Lion Inn
desktop model 10, 1 megabyte to 3, 40 meg disk;
2 model 20, 1 to 3, more disk to 180, model 25, 2 to 4 meg
70 to 210, model 6151 model 10, 6150 model 20 and 25
streaming tape drive, 55meg backup tape
3 types of graphic, 2 monochrome and one color, all are APA
12, 14 and 15, extended 1000 by 768, 720 byy 512 ordinary,
1.6 to 2.1 mips, models 10 and 20 march 28, model 25, 3rd quarter
only advanced monochrome is available now
unix, C compiler,
∂22-Jan-86 1450 JMC re: Event of the Month
To: Lerner@SU-SCORE.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Tue 21 Jan 86 19:39:50-PST.]
Unfortunately, Carolyn and I will be in L.A. this weekend.
∂22-Jan-86 1642 JMC course description
To: gnelson@DECWRL.DEC.COM
You were a Stanford student and must remember something about how courses
are described in the catalog. This is the format required. Yours is too
long, and contains complete sentences in places where the catalog format
doesn't.
∂22-Jan-86 1657 JMC your phone
To: CLT
You don't have a new phone. I suppose the list of phones to be replaced
was based on a list predating your separate phone. I complained.
However, there remains a question.
1. A woman came around checking equipment, and I complained to
her, and she said she would fix it.
2. Later I talked to Ladonna Eppley about missing features on my
phone, and mentioned yours. She asked whether you wanted a separate
number, and I said you did. She then said she would order another phone,
but I forgot to ask when it would come. One can imagine that orders for
new phones will follow conversion of the existing phones. Anyway I
suggest you talk to her and make sure she knows what you want.
∂22-Jan-86 1706 JMC
To: RA
herken.1
∂22-Jan-86 1722 JMC re: Fallwell and why people give (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: OTHER-SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
"What Fallwell stands for" is an ambiguous phrase that often conceals
no very clear idea except that derivable from the fact that the writer
belongs to a different intellectual tribe and is uttering one of the
tribal war cries. As an atheist, I clearly don't belong to Fallwell's
tribe, but I understand my disagreements with the left wing tribe more
clearly than I understand my disagreements with Fallwell except on the
intellectual issue of religion itself. I suspect that "what Fallwell
stands for" is a mere slogan. I would appreciate being told more precisely
with the ascription backed up by recent (say within five years) citations
from Fallwell literature. I wouldn't accept such a challenge myself, because
it would be quite a lot of work, which is why I avoid stating "what X
stands for".
As for Judy Anderson's grandmother, she probably gets some propaganda
back from Fallwell in exchange for the $5 she occasionally sends him,
and this is most likely the basis for her idea of "what Fallwell stands
for". In so far as money she gives her local church goes to the
National Council of Churches, she will have a much less clear idea.
In one case it would have gone to people who were later arrested for
terrorist activities on behalf of Puerto Rican independence.
So perhaps Judy Anderson should be careful before undertaking "to teach
her grandmother how to suck eggs" as the saying goes. (I hope there's
no improper double meaning in that traditional saying).
∂23-Jan-86 0037 JMC request
To: METAPHILOSOPHERS-REQUEST%MIT-OZ@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
Please add JMC-LISTS@SU-AI.ARPA.
∂23-Jan-86 1219 JMC re: Jennifer Ballantine
To: RA
[In reply to message rcvd 23-Jan-86 11:37-PT.]
See if you can find the form on my desk. Otherwise ask her for another.
∂23-Jan-86 1241 JMC re: Minker's workshop
To: VAL
[In reply to message rcvd 23-Jan-86 12:06-PT.]
We can pay for your travel. I have no opinion on which topic would be
of most interest at Minker's workshop.
∂23-Jan-86 1405 JMC Joleen
To: CLT
got the copy and found it suitable without change. She will become
desperate about the pictures the week of February 14.
∂23-Jan-86 2029 JMC re: IBM workstation briefings
To: LES
[In reply to message rcvd 23-Jan-86 19:26-PT.]
Not if you can make the Page Mill Road demo, because this is from where
the machine will be passed on to us. I will be on the way to L.A. at
that time or I'd come too. Suggest you offer to take others in the group
also including Joe.
∂24-Jan-86 0953 JMC probable change to mcc trip
To: VAL
We may have to change it slightly, but I'll know more on Monday.
Some IBMers who may support the Editor Based Operating System work may
only be able to come on the 10th.
∂26-Jan-86 1710 JMC re: DOE Announcement
To: BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Fri 24 Jan 86 11:05:36-PST.]
Please send me a copy.
∂26-Jan-86 1715 JMC dinner for Barbara Liskov
To: CLT
There will be a dinner for her on Wednesday at a presently unstated
restaurant. Since she was my PhD student, I should go. Do you want
to go also? Her talk is at 4:15, then a 5:30 reception at the
Faculty Club. I'm not sure about the talk, and I would plan to skip
the reception.
∂26-Jan-86 1746 JMC re: Dreyfus re McCarthy and AI (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: OTHER-SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
The matter is substantially as Dreyfuss states it except for two
points that are probably unimportant to him. The first is that the
program was billed to me as a description of AI technology. I got the
impression that the program was a one shot - instead it was one of a
series. The second is that I was told about Dreyfuss on the afternoon
before the taping was to take place. It seemed to me that the proposed
program was analogous to a program on physics where a physicist is
suddenly told that Velikovsky or Jeremy Rifkin is a participant.
Perhaps a better analogy is suddenly telling a paleontologist
planning to explain the subject that a creationist is included.
Dreyfuss isn't as bad as Velikovsky, but to me he is damn near as
bad as Rifkin. My opinion is that a program about AI technology
should be descriptive and not an argument with Dreyfuss. When I
heard that the program was a series on AI, then I felt that there
was room for a program involving a disbeliever and offered to
appear with Dreyfuss, but the producers weren't interested.
Debates with Dreyfuss, Weizenbaum or Searle are perhaps worth
having if there is interest, but they cannot be the main content
of discussions of AI these days.
To summarize: Dreyfuss is precisely right that we wished to discuss
AI as a solid ongoing science. He is also right that the public
lost its chance to hear both sides of that issue. However, I am
more eager to discuss both sides of whether logic is an appropriate
vehicle for AI than whether AI is possible at all. So should be
the readers of Technology Review.
∂26-Jan-86 1822 JMC re: Liskov dinner Wednesday
To: coraki!pratt@SU-NAVAJO.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Sun, 26 Jan 86 15:57:30 pst.]
Thanks for the Liskov dinner invitation, which I assume supersedes
the shift to a restaurant mentioned in your Friday message. I will
come, perhaps only just in time for dinner itself, and Carolyn
may come - depending on whether her cousin will have departed
by then.
∂26-Jan-86 2252 JMC remove
To: METAPHILOSOPHERS-REQUEST%MIT-OZ@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
Please remove JMC-LISTS@SU-AI.ARPA.
∂26-Jan-86 2320 JMC filtered → fibered
To: VAL
If we call it fibered circumscription we have the analogy with
fiber spaces. The range of f is the base space, and the
inverse image of a point is a fiber.
∂26-Jan-86 2325 JMC Two more ideas:
To: VAL
1. The reason why we can't get what we want in the blocks world
by ordinary circumscription is that the ab's we have been using
involve only single situations. If our ab's or, more generally,
the ordering used involve a number of successive situations, I
think we'll be able to get what we want.
2. It seems to me that we should try to set up our axioms and
do our circumscriptions in such a way that we get a "definite
action system" in which all actions have definite preconditions
and effects by a single circumscription.
Neither of the above ideas is in a precise form yet.
∂27-Jan-86 0948 JMC
To: oaf@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
Please remove me from the reborn energy mailing list.
∂27-Jan-86 1339 JMC archives
To: cn.spc@SU-FORSYTHE.ARPA
They type of archive in greatest danger of being lost are old computer
files. For example, the SAIL computer has archives going back to 1968
and perhaps to 1966. There are only two tape drives that can read these
tapes now. Are you interested in helping convert these tapes to more
modern tapes and keeping copies?
∂27-Jan-86 1524 JMC re: Exxon proposal
To: NISSENBAUM@SU-CSLI.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Mon 27 Jan 86 15:12:57-PST.]
Thanks for the draft proposal to Exxon. I am glad to be included.
∂27-Jan-86 1627 JMC re: Dreyfus re McCarthy and AI (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: FOGELSONG@SU-CSLI.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Sun 26 Jan 86 23:18:44-PST.]
What I had in mind was the old declarative-procedural controversy, but
I didn't explicitly mention it, because the modern proceduralists
defend positions I can't easily characterize. Perhaps the "connectionists"
offer a candidate as a general vehicle for AI, but I haven't read
such a contention. There are also the anti-logic views of Hewitt
and Minsky (different from each other).
∂27-Jan-86 1638 JMC re: Two more ideas:
To: VAL
[In reply to message rcvd 27-Jan-86 09:50-PT.]
1. Making result a ternary predicate is one approach, although I haven't
yet figured out what the actual abs would have to be.
2. It seems to me that I have been thinking about piecemeal reasoning
rather than getting from the facts taken into account a collection
of axioms that would require no more non-monotonic reasoning. The
example I have in mind is "missionaries and cannibals". One would like
to go in one shot from the common sense database + the statement of the
problem → the 32 state model where the states (n c b) give numbers of
missionaries, cannibals and boats on the initial bank of the river.
∂27-Jan-86 1746 JMC re: Dreyfus re McCarthy and AI (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: FOGELSONG@SU-CSLI.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Mon 27 Jan 86 17:11:47-PST.]
I don't think there are any papers that summarize the controversy. Hewitt
has emitted various BBOARD blasts recently in Chuck Restivo's Prolog digest,
and I believe Minsky may have something about it in his new book, but
I haven't seen the book yet.
∂27-Jan-86 1756 Mailer failed mail returned
To: JMC
In processing the following command:
MAIL halpern@ibm.sj
The command was aborted because these Host Name(s) are Unknown:
IBM.SJ
------- Begin undelivered message: -------
∂27-Jan-86 1756 JMC
∂27-Jan-86 1752 HALPERN@IBM-SJ.ARPA
Received: from IBM-SJ.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Jan 86 17:51:52 PST
Date: 27 Jan 86 15:48:27 PST
From: HALPERN@IBM-SJ.ARPA
To: jmc@su-ai
John, I hope I'm right in assuming that you're planning to attend
the Conference on Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning About Knowledge.
Could you fill out the registration form below and ship it back to me?
Of course, for you there is no registration charge since you're an
invited speaker. -- Joe
------
Registration for Conference on Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning About Knowledge
Name: John McCarthy
I will attend the conference.
If you plan to attend the conference, could you please fill in the
following information.
Affiliation: Stanford
Address: Computer Science Dept., Stanford, CA 94305
Telephone: 415 723-4430
Net address (if available):JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
Vegetarian meals desired?: No.
Preferred roommate: none
Please enclose a check for $50 ($25 for full-time students, $0 for
invited speakers and program committee members), made payable
to "Conference on Reasoning About Knowledge % IBM". Do not
forget to add the "% IBM", as otherwise the check is much harder
to cash!
------- End undelivered message -------
∂27-Jan-86 1758 JMC
To: halpern@IBM-SJ.ARPA
∂27-Jan-86 1752 HALPERN@IBM-SJ.ARPA
Received: from IBM-SJ.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Jan 86 17:51:52 PST
Date: 27 Jan 86 15:48:27 PST
From: HALPERN@IBM-SJ.ARPA
To: jmc@su-ai
John, I hope I'm right in assuming that you're planning to attend
the Conference on Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning About Knowledge.
Could you fill out the registration form below and ship it back to me?
Of course, for you there is no registration charge since you're an
invited speaker. -- Joe
------
Registration for Conference on Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning About Knowledge
Name: John McCarthy
I will attend the conference.
If you plan to attend the conference, could you please fill in the
following information.
Affiliation: Stanford
Address: Computer Science Dept., Stanford, CA 94305
Telephone: 415 723-4430
Net address (if available):JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
Vegetarian meals desired?: No.
Preferred roommate: none
Please enclose a check for $50 ($25 for full-time students, $0 for
invited speakers and program committee members), made payable
to "Conference on Reasoning About Knowledge % IBM". Do not
forget to add the "% IBM", as otherwise the check is much harder
to cash!
∂27-Jan-86 1803 JMC re: Letters
To: JOCK@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Mon 27 Jan 86 17:54:44-PST.]
You can address the letter to me and it will be confidential. The
people who will see it are the senior faculty of the department,
the relevant deans, and the University's Appointments and Promotion
Committee, the latter two categories on the assumption that the
senior faculty vote is positive.
∂27-Jan-86 1857 JMC
To: radio
kkhi,kqed
∂27-Jan-86 2329 JMC reply to message
To: VAL
[In reply to message rcvd 27-Jan-86 19:26-PT.]
I do have to change it, so let's call Boyer together tomorrow.
∂28-Jan-86 1208 JMC re: your math fiction story
To: G.BEESON@SU-CSLI.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Tue 28 Jan 86 11:37:17-PST.]
I agree with the analogy, but not with the conclusion unless you
can claim that sqrt(2MG/r) is not a velocity. By the way, while
the story involving the poles is an old one of mine, the other story
was just made up, and I seem to have forgotten it. Can you remind me
what it was about?
∂28-Jan-86 1615 JMC
To: CLT
Cate recommends 1000 shares of Businessland at 9 1/8.
∂28-Jan-86 1954 JMC re: Specail characters on LOTS
To: SCHULZ@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Tue 28 Jan 86 19:48:15-PST.]
Alas, it rings no bell.
∂29-Jan-86 1012 JMC re: Genesereth Committee meeting
To: RA
[In reply to message rcvd 29-Jan-86 10:09-PT.]
That will be fine. Please put it in my calendar.
∂29-Jan-86 1037 JMC re: Genesereth Committee
To: RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA, RA@SU-AI.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Wed 29 Jan 86 10:04:48-PST.]
Date and time are ok; so is dinner.
∂29-Jan-86 1110 JMC re: Alex Bronstein's quals
To: coraki!pratt@SU-NAVAJO.ARPA, RA@SU-AI.ARPA
CC: ZM@SU-AI.ARPA
[In reply to message from coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa sent Wed, 29 Jan 86 10:48:32 pst.]
2:45 pm would also be ok if we could get done in 1 hr 45 min.
∂29-Jan-86 1401 JMC test
To: hx.hal@SU-FORSYTHE.ARPA
This is John McCarthy who is JMC@SU-AI.ARPA.
∂29-Jan-86 1558 JMC visit to MCC
To: VAL
∂29-Jan-86 1446 AI.ELLIE@MCC.ARPA visit to MCC
Received: from MCC.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Jan 86 14:46:06 PST
Date: Wed 29 Jan 86 16:45:33-CST
From: Ellie Huck <AI.ELLIE@MCC.ARPA>
Subject: visit to MCC
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: ai.ellie@MCC.ARPA
Have changed your hotel reservations to February 12-13 -- the
confirmation number remains the same R23H.
Ellie Huck
-------
∂29-Jan-86 2223 JMC re: a time to see you
To: CPE
[In reply to message rcvd 29-Jan-86 12:26-PT.]
Friday at 11 would be ok.
∂29-Jan-86 2227 JMC re: Collection Program / Archives
To: PHYSICSLIB@SU-SIERRA.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Wed 29 Jan 86 13:32:39-PST.]
I'd be glad to talk with you. How about Friday afternoon? You name the time.
∂29-Jan-86 2239 JMC re: Workshop funding request
To: cheeseman@AMES-PLUTO.ARPA, aaai-office@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
[In reply to message sent 29 Jan 86 15:27:00 PST.]
AAAI will support the second "uncertainty in AI" workshop with $5,000
as you requested. Please make the necessary arrangements with Claudia
Mazzetti.
∂30-Jan-86 1015 JMC re: Silico Sapiens
To: ICS.DEKEN@R20.UTEXAS.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu 30 Jan 86 08:55:51-CST.]
Thanks in advance for the book, and I look forward to our discussion of
reification and uncertainty.
∂30-Jan-86 1105 JMC re: VTSS160 assignment and comments
To: KWT
[In reply to message rcvd 30-Jan-86 10:58-PT.]
Sure.
∂30-Jan-86 1303 JMC send article
To: RA@SU-AI.ARPA
CC: churd@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Please mail a copy of my paper "Programs with Common Sense" to Gerard
Piel at Scientific American, with a note saying that I am sending
this 1958 paper at the suggestion of Cuthbert Hurd.
∂30-Jan-86 1815 JMC
To: LES
∂30-Jan-86 1604 HX.HAL@Lindy
Received: from SU-LINDY.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 30 Jan 86 15:52:48 PST
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 86 15:53:28 PST
From: Hal Gerrish <HX.HAL@Forsythe>
To: JMC@SAIL
John - I am planning to deliver an RT PC next ek to CS.
It is a large system, BSD 4.2A with 4 meg memory &
210 MB disk. Will probably be Wed/Thurs.
Regards,
Hal Gerrish (x-4296)
∂31-Jan-86 1438 JMC letter sponsoring conference
To: RA
This letter should go to Louise Fariello, from whom
you have taken messages, but please find out from her
to whom it should be addressed.
Dear...
I think the conference on computers and mathematics
that Richard Jenks of IBM is organizing for July 29 to Aug 3
is a good idea in connection with the International Congress
of Mathematicians being held shortly thereafter at U. C. Berkeley.
Therefore, I am happy to be the Stanford sponsor of the
conference. It is my understanding that Jenks and his colleagues,
with help from the American Association for Artificial Intelligence,
will make all the arrangements.
Sincerely,
John McCarthy
cc: Richard Jenks, IBM Yorktown (get full address)
bcc: David Chudnovsky
∂31-Jan-86 1531 JMC re: question
To: RA
[In reply to message rcvd 31-Jan-86 15:22-PT.]
Please check spelling of Farielo. Maybe there are two r's or l's.
bcc stands for blind copy. Only the receiver of the blind copy
knows that he is getting a copy. At least I think that's what it
means and that's what I meant. Probably some secretary's handbook
says what it really means.
∂31-Jan-86 2227 JMC quiz question
To: SJG
What one person, in the Challenger disaster, has done his job outstandingly
well, and has probably minimized damage to the space program.
∂31-Jan-86 2238 JMC re: Formal Reasoning???
To: coraki!pratt@SU-NAVAJO.ARPA, LES@SU-AI.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Fri, 31 Jan 86 22:02:19 pst.]
Formal Reasoning is the proper name of my group, just as Knowledge Systems
Laboratory is the proper name of that group. If you had spoken up when
the ARPA proposal was being made, you probably would have got some hardware
in the first batch. Nevertheless, depending on whether DARPA wants us to
put our remaining money in the parallel machine, we may be able to help
you.
∂31-Jan-86 2353 JMC re: Formal Reasoning???
To: coraki!pratt@SU-NAVAJO.ARPA, LES@SU-AI.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Fri, 31 Jan 86 23:39:23 pst.]
It's a long shot now. Before the Gramm-Rudman crunch, we might have
gotten away with saying that the money was allocated to other activities
of the Formal Reasoning Group, but now I believe they'll insist that
it be spent on the parallel computer. The long shot is that we will
have to spend the money before the parallel lisp project officially
exists.
∂01-Feb-86 0115 JMC re: A Modest Proposal
To: coraki!pratt@SU-NAVAJO.ARPA, LES@SU-AI.ARPA,
nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Fri, 31 Jan 86 23:30:07 pst.]
I think your proposal is reasonable provided there is no provision about
supporting only DARPA funded research. I frankly don't remember how the
contract was worded. However, I think I do remember that it was agreed
that some general facilities for the Department would benefit DARPA supported
research. If a flat division of the remaining money isn't appropriate,
perhaps approximately the same effect can be achieved.
I may be speaking out of turn in terms of general needs of the departmental
facilities.
∂01-Feb-86 2027 JMC
To: LES
Many thanks.
∂02-Feb-86 0949 JMC re: I like the little character on the Sail terminals...
To: ALI@SU-SCORE.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Sun 2 Feb 86 01:47:10-PST.]
It is a ground hog, a rodent somewhat larger than a Stanford ground squirrel
and inhabiting New England. February 2 is Ground Hog Day, when it is said,
the ground hog comes out of his burrow. If there is enough sun for him to
see his shadow, there will be six more weeks of winter.
∂02-Feb-86 1154 JMC Here is more than you probably want to know.
To: ali@SU-SCORE.ARPA
a209 1103 02 Feb 86
AM-Groundhog Day,0687
Groundhogs Predict Early Spring
Laserphoto PG1
By PETER MATTIACE
Associated Press Writer
PUNXSUTAWNEY, Pa. (AP) - A reluctant, sleepy groundhog named
Punxsutawney Phil was dragged from his Gobbler's Knob burrow at dawn
Sunday and failed to see his shadow, predicting an early spring for
only the seventh time in 99 years.
''In the cold light of the dawn ... he failed to see his shadow
behind him. Punxsutawney Phil declares spring is on its way,''
proclaimed James H. Means, president of the Punxsutawney Groundhog
Club.
Groundhogs, also called woodchucks, performed similar duties at
other places around the country, and some people admitted it was an
excuse to get out and have fun.
Phil, a 10-pound male shoved into an electrically heated and lighted
burrow hours before Sunday's ritual, last predicted an early spring
in 1983. Unlike other years, the annoyed woodchuck didn't bite Means'
fingers during the five-minute ceremony, although Means said he was
bitten Saturday.
If the groundhog had seen his shadow, folklore says six more weeks
of winter follow, which happens anyway. Spring begins March 20.
For the record, the National Weather Service, in a long-range
forecast issued last week, predicted colder and wetter-than-normal
weather for the East and Midwest through April.
About 1,500 spectators stood most of the night in the fallen snow
and a 45-degree drizzle to cheer Phil's pronouncement of an imminent
end to wintry weather.
''I came 400 miles just to see Phil. I enjoy coming to places like
this,'' said Roy Clark, 67, of Newport News, Va., a retired
government worker. ''Do you know about the flying chicken contest in
Ohio and the cow-chip fling in Oklahoma?''
''I always wanted to come here. When we were in college, we always
did stupid things like this,'' said David Rose, 36, who said he was a
psychologist from Minneapolis and wore a gorilla suit.
A similar ceremony took place at Sun Prairie, Wis., where Jimmy the
Groundhog couldn't see his shadow, either, and then was escorted
along a two-block parade before the community joined in a pancake
breakfast.
''Here in the Northland, we need something to break up the long
winter, especially this long winter, when it has been so cold and
with so much snow,'' said Carolyn Rusk, an executive of the Sun
Prairie Chamber of Commerce. ''This is our purpose in celebrating the
day; it also brings people out of hibernation.''
The observance is based on a Scottish tradition involving the
Christian feast of Candelmas on Feb. 2. ''If Candelmas be fair, there
be two winters in the year,'' according to one saying.
Punxsutawney's German-American farmers hunted groundhogs in the
summer and praised them at Candelmas as great winter weather
forecasters. The first prediction on Gobbler's Knob was Feb. 2, 1887.
But Means' straight-faced insistence of the groundhog's spontaneous
prediction was betrayed by fellow tuxedoed, top-hatted club members,
who whipped out preprinted placards proclaiming warmer weather to
come.
The club's 12-member Inner Circle decides the prediction days in
advance regardless of Groundhog Day weather on the flood-lit,
wired-for-sound knoll about three miles outside this factory town of
7,600.
A competing groundhog in Quarryville disputed Phil's prediction when
he saw his shadow at 7:04 a.m., 25 minutes before the Punxsutawney
ceremony. ''He predicted six more weeks of winter,'' James Pennington
said of his groundhog at the Slumbering Groundhog Lodge.
But at Lilburn, Ga., a groundhog dubbed General Lee concurred with
Phil, also failing to see his shadow.
The National Weather Service in Atlanta conjured up ''George,'' an
''unknown groundhog'' who lives in a secret burrow in northern
Georgia, to deliver its prediction of below-average February
temperatures in Georgia.
Concord Charlie emerged from his den at Concord College in Athens,
W.Va., and also did not see his shadow.
But across the state at the French Creek Game Farm, park
superintendent Bill Vanscoy allowed French Creek Freddie to sleep in.
''We have a lot of snow and ice around,'' Vanscoy said. ''Letting
him sleep seemed the humane thing to do.''
AP-NY-02-02-86 1400EST
***************
∂02-Feb-86 1343 JMC re: quiz question
To: SJG
[In reply to message rcvd 02-Feb-86 13:13-PT.]
That was what I had in mind, but I have had a second thought. We'll have
to see if he asks for money to replace Challenger.
∂02-Feb-86 2359 JMC help
To: genesereth@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
I'll need a lot of help in understanding the latest. I'm coming in for
your demo at 11 for Nils, and if I'm in earlier I'll drop by and see if
you're in. I have a doubt, however, about whether you are going about
it as it should be done - in particular about whether your method is
as good as Szeredi's. As I look at what you have done, it constitutes
and ad hoc variant of the MRS (or Locklisp) interpreter. He has a
general interpreter that goes into introspective mode at certain failures.
The goal should be a general-purpose interpreter that can accept
certain kinds of declarative specification of control. Perhaps I
misunderstand what you have done.
∂03-Feb-86 1117 JMC
To: RA
The stuff is on your desk. It looks like I will need a car.
∂03-Feb-86 1302 JMC re: circumscription (?) question
To: SJG, VAL
[In reply to message from SJG rcvd 03-Feb-86 12:09-PT.]
I didn't see VAL's reply to which you refer.
1. The easy question first. If there are only four species of birds
each with some special property, you still get something from circumscription,
because they may be abnormal in different aspects. In Vladimir's notation,
they may satisfy different ab's. Indeed one expects that in a substantial
common sense database, every species will be abnormal in many aspects. This
will not prevent conclusions about the aspects in which they are not asserted
to be abnormal.
2. In its present form circumscription is better suited to drawing conclusions
about individual birds than about birds as a whole. We are happier about
concluding that Tweety, not known to belong to one of the known classes
of non-flying birds, flies than we would be concluding that the known
classes of non-flying birds are all there are. I do not presently know
a formalism that will do the right thing about birds as a whole.
∂03-Feb-86 1321 JMC re: circumscription (?) question
To: VAL, SJG
[In reply to message from VAL rcvd 03-Feb-86 13:10-PT.]
No, Vladimir, I don't agree that circumscription "does the right thing
about birds as a whole". We need some way of expressing in the common
sense database that there are additional unspecified exceptions,
although it isn't presently clear how this information would be used.
Maybe it should be put the other way. Without some additional assurance,
a program should not be authorized to draw conclusions about all birds
by enumerating the species of birds it knows about. Maybe thinking
about mental situations will help with this problem also.
∂03-Feb-86 1443 JMC
To: CLT
Susie accepted for Sunday.
∂04-Feb-86 1034 JMC correction
bobrow@XEROX.COM
correction to correction
There's one more symbol in the previous message that I forgot to
replace by a word. Also please acknowledge this message.
Elma Kleikamp says that the best way to send the correction is by
electronic mail and that you have her electronic address. So please
transmit the following.
In the section of "Applications of circumscription to formalizing
common sense" by John McCarthy in the section entitled "Simple
abnormality theories" there is a displayed formula
that reads
canary x AND NOTab aspect3 x IMPLIES flies x,
It should be changed to
canary x AND NOTab aspect3 x IMPLIES bird x,
In the above AND, IMPLIES and NOT stand for the logical symbols which
cannnot be transmitted and should be left as they are. Thus the
change consists of replacing the word flies by the word bird.
I hope this change can be made before the paper is printed, because
no-one will figure out the problem the formulas refer to without it.
Otherwise, there should be a correction printed.
∂04-Feb-86 1314 JMC
To: RA
Please send the photos to
Joleen barnhill
WICS
PO Box 12238
Magalia, Ca 95954
∂04-Feb-86 1649 JMC re: Are you going to use the Imagen printer at home or here?
To: RA
[In reply to message rcvd 04-Feb-86 16:40-PT.]
home
∂04-Feb-86 1948 JMC
To: RA
See p.310 of bboard and CAL. Did I?
∂04-Feb-86 1957 JMC re: Why Jews? (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: OTHER-SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
There is not a total rationality in the Soviet emigration situation
and in the campaigns to liberalize it, but rationalizing the Soviet Union
is not as important as humanizing it. Bil Lewis's suggestion seems to be
that unless they let everyone out who wants to leave, they shouldn't let
anyone. Whereas, it seems better to say, since they let some Jews out
they should let the others out, and also Volga Germans, etc. and finally
allow free emigration as a basic human right. There is, however, as
special consideration that applies to Jews. The main trigger that decided
many Jews on trying to emigrate was the denial of university entrance to
their children. This is only one of the many recent (since early 1970s)
manifestations of Soviet anti-semitism. Anti-semitism in the Soviet Union
became prominent during Stalin's 1930s purge campaigns but has intensified
and relaxed many times since.
∂04-Feb-86 2002 JMC re: sticker removal (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: OTHER-SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
It may even contain acetone, but unlike acetone, you can sue
if it eats your plastic.
∂04-Feb-86 2216 JMC re: Why Jews? (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: OTHER-SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
There is talk about the persecution of other groups in the Soviet
Union. For example, Baptists are persecuted for insisting on carrying
on religious services apart from the officially sponsored "Baptist"
organization. You can read about that in conservative opinion magazines
and occasionally in the NY Times. You won't hear much about it at Stanford
for several reasons. Mainly, it's because the mainline religious organizations
in the U.S. aren't much interested in the persecution of their fellow
Christians elsewhere, because it doesn't mesh well with their American-guilt
ideology. There is also the persecution of Lithuanians, Latvians, Estonians
Volga Germans and Crimean Tatars. You only hear about that in certain
ethnic enclaves.
The Jews are fortunately in a position to make a fuss, they often include
the other persecuted groups in their fuss, and the others are sometimes
helped thereby.
As for the "Animosity towards the USSR is common in the US". The abnormal
situation is, in my opinion, in India, where apparently news about tyranny
in the USSR is even less reported than in the U.S. and where politicians
can divert attention from their own failures by blaming the more prosperous
industrial countries and accusing them of imperialism. The Russians take
advantage of Indian hostility to Pakistan by completely accepting the
Indian side of every dispute. They can be a much more loyal ally than
the U.S., because they have no free press or independent-minded congressmen
to raise the other side.
∂04-Feb-86 2224 JMC tell Sood
To: RA
I am cancelling my VTSS class Thursday. One student, I think his name
is Vineet Sood, anyway an Indian, was not in class today. Please try
to notify him of the cancellation.
∂04-Feb-86 2233 JMC re: Vtss class
To: S.SOOD@LOTS-A
[In reply to message sent Tue 4 Feb 86 22:19:56-PST.]
You have indeed used the mail system correctly and the message has
been forwarded. However, I cancelled the Thursday class because
of a trip. My secretary will have a handout for you. The assigment
for next Tuesday is to write about one of the topics mentioned in
the handout discussing how useful the innovation would be,
technical feasibility, and social difficulties that would have
to be overcome in introducing the innnovation. Unfortunately,
the handout is very sketchy, and I discussed the innovations
in class. See you next Tuesday.
∂04-Feb-86 2235 JMC Sood
To: RA
That's Vidur Sood. I just received a message from him, but he
had logged out before I had a chance to reply, and his message
said this was his first try at using LOTS. Therefore, I don't
know if he'll log in again before Thursday. You can try
finger s.sood@lots-a to see if he has logged in after this time.
A handout to give him is in opport.vts[w86,jmc].
∂05-Feb-86 0934 JMC
To: LES
The facilities plan looks good. We might want some fancy keyboards for RT project.
∂05-Feb-86 1009 JMC schedule
To: RA
Thanks about tickets. Please put the schedule in CAL (Carolyn expects
to find it there, and I need the record).
∂05-Feb-86 1125 JMC
To: VAL
I took back the New Mexico proceedings to read on the plane.
∂05-Feb-86 1137 JMC re: ian
To: CLT
[In reply to message rcvd 05-Feb-86 11:18-PT.]
That's because it somehow never got to me that one was needed.
To whom should it be addressed, and is it so urgent that I
should do it today.
∂05-Feb-86 1350 JMC recommendation for Ian Mason
To: GDP%ecsvax.edinburgh.ac.uk@CS.UCL.AC.UK
CC: CLT@SU-AI.ARPA
Ian Mason has done good work in proving the properties of destructive Lisp
programs, e.g. those involving rplacs. In my opinion this is the best
work I have seen in this area. I can recommend him highly for any
position at the new PhD level involving mathematical theory of
computation.
∂08-Feb-86 2253 JMC reply to message
To: STRONG@IBM-SJ.ARPA
[In reply to message sent 5 Feb 86 14:09:45 PST.]
I think we will want your course. However, I need a course description
suitable for inclusion in the Stanford Catalog. Yours is far too long
and hasn't the correct style. I think you could put it in suitable form
by using your first two paragraphs. The stylistic change involves getting
rid of the complete sentences, e.g. instead of "This course covers x and
y.", they prefer "x and y", since "this course covers" is implicit.
∂08-Feb-86 2300 JMC reply to message
To: vijay@ERNIE.BERKELEY.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 7 Feb 86 15:27:39 PST.]
Seems ok to me. Who are the other "traditional AI" participants?
For that matter, what is traditional AI? I guess I didn't get
a clear picture from Dreyfus's presentation at the New Mexico
conference, but I suppose it covers what the long term AI
researchers have been doing, and I'm willing to help defend
that general research program (barring many details) with
emphasis on the lines of research that I emphasize. If there
is to be a "neutral" introduction to the whole thing, I'd want
to agree to that.
∂09-Feb-86 0009 JMC re: Improving History (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: OTHER-SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
It is conceivable that Newton, if he met Peter the Great, could have
given him the approximate speed of light. Roemer, a Danish astronomer,
had already ascribed the difference in timing in eclipses of the moons
of Jupiter between times when the earth and Jupiter were on the same
side of the sun and times when they are on opposite sides of the sun
to the time taken for light to cross the diameter of the earth's orbit.
Moreover, the late 17th century guess at the solar parallax, from which
the size of the earth's orbit could be calculated, was approximately
correct, although a convincing measurement wasn't made until the
1761 transit of Venus across the sun's disk. However, if asked to
bet, I'd share your doubt that anything like that actually happened.
The first terrestrial measurement of the speed of light was in
the 1840s by Fizeau.
∂09-Feb-86 1438 JMC test
To: dreyfus@UCBVAX.BERKELEY.EDU
Please acknowledge if you get this. See you on the 28th.
∂09-Feb-86 1528 JMC
To: RA
Please esp robins.xgp[let,jmc] for my signature. If difficulty, see Les.
∂09-Feb-86 2240 JMC re: Sequent Balance
To: FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, LES@SU-AI.ARPA, jlh@SU-SONOMA.ARPA,
rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
[In reply to message from FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA sent Sun 9 Feb 86 21:00:05-PST.]
I think I'll stick to our policy of waiting until DARPA sends money before
trying to make computer decisions. We'll welcome your help then.
∂09-Feb-86 2254 JMC re: Sequent Balance
To: FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, LES@SU-AI.ARPA, jlh@SU-SONOMA.ARPA,
rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
[In reply to message from FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA sent Sun 9 Feb 86 22:51:13-PST.]
Oh, that money. I was thinking of Qlisp money. This is money left from the
old DARPA re-equipment contract. Whether that money might be spent on a
Sequent is a more complicated question. Probably DARPA would like that.
∂10-Feb-86 0014 JMC
To: tom@SU-SCORE.ARPA
What's with Carolyn's modem and terminal?
∂10-Feb-86 1116 JMC reply to message
To: CLT
[In reply to message rcvd 10-Feb-86 10:26-PT.]
I'll check with Rutie.
∂10-Feb-86 1205 JMC
To: RA
Please make reservations for this, go Sunday arr. night,return Monday night
02-24 Monday, Delphin consulting, Washington
Westpark Hotel, Fort Meyer Drive, Rosslyn, VA
∂10-Feb-86 1305 JMC
To: CLT
∂10-Feb-86 1215 RA telex for you
The school of Engineering, Linkoeping University invites you to accept
the degree of Doctor Honorors Causa. It will be awarded at the commencement
taking place on Monday, June 2nd. The only obligation is to give an
award lecture on Saturday May 31st. We would also like to have you and your
wife here as our guests during a week before and/or after the commencement.
We, of course, cover your travel costs and cost of stay and also for your wife.
We would need to know asap the appropriate size for the hat and the ring which
will be awarded to you as simbols of dignity. If any questions, please contact
Prof. Erik Sandelwall, tel. 46 13281 408 or Mr. Lars Alm, tel. 46 13 281 012
Jan Ove Palmberg Professor and dean of school of Engineering
John, a copy of the telex will be here tomorrow.
∂10-Feb-86 1312 Mailer failed mail returned
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In processing the following command:
MAIL
The command was aborted because these Host Name(s) are Unknown:
OZ.AI.MIT.EDU
------- Begin undelivered message: -------
∂10-Feb-86 1312 JMC reply to message
To: RICH@AI.AI.MIT.EDU
[In reply to message from RICH@AI.AI.MIT.EDU sent Mon, 10 Feb 86 15:03:21 EST.]
The date should be 1957 or 1958 rather than 1959. My memo to Morse on
the subject was dated Jan. 1, 1959, but I had proposed the idea and
some means of realizing it within the M.I.T. Computation Center as
early as the Fall of 1957 when I came to M.I.T. as a Sloan Fellow.
I'm also sending you as a separate message a copy of the Jan. 1959 memo
in case you want to include it.
------- End undelivered message -------
∂10-Feb-86 1320 JMC reply to message
To: RICH@AI.AI.MIT.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon, 10 Feb 86 15:03:21 EST.]
The date should be 1957 or 1958 rather than 1959. My memo to Morse on
the subject was dated Jan. 1, 1959, but I had proposed the idea and
some means of realizing it within the M.I.T. Computation Center as
early as the Fall of 1957 when I came to M.I.T. as a Sloan Fellow.
I'm also sending you as a separate message a copy of the Jan. 1959 memo
in case you want to include it.
∂10-Feb-86 1323 JMC consider this memo
To: rich@AI.AI.MIT.EDU
January l, 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.
∂10-Feb-86 1457 JMC re: trip to Austin
To: RA
[In reply to message rcvd 10-Feb-86 14:39-PT.]
That's fine, and I don't need a car.
∂10-Feb-86 1621 JMC re: Susans birthdate
To: HANRAHAN@SU-SCORE.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Mon 10 Feb 86 14:59:16-PST.]
That's May 10, 1955.
∂10-Feb-86 2109 JMC re: Why Jews? (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: OTHER-SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
Several concrete items about Soviet anti-semitism which began in the
thirties at the same time as the purges. Before that time Jews were very
prominent in the Communist Party. Since that time anti-semitism has waned
and waxed, but has never been absent. The problem mainly applies to people with
Jew on their internal passports, but sometimes people are asked for the
nationalities of all four grandparents.
1. In 1939 Jews were systematically purged from the apparatus of the Central
Committee of the Party.
2. The diplomatic academy and certain others have taken no Jews since World
War II.
3. The main mathematical institute of the Academy of Sciences, the Steklov
Institute, hire no Jews, because of the policy of its director, Academician
Vinogradov.
4. Since about 1970, hardly any Jews have been admitted to the major Soviet
Universities. This exclusion has been a major reason for the emigration
of Jewish intellectuals because of their children.
∂10-Feb-86 2128 JMC reply to message
To: LES
[In reply to message rcvd 10-Feb-86 21:06-PT.]
I suggest you pursue this with Calo. If you don't have his co-ordinates,
I do.
∂11-Feb-86 0953 JMC
To: CLT
Tom was successful this time. The wiring will be tomorrow.
∂11-Feb-86 1114 JMC re: trip to Austin
To: RA
[In reply to message rcvd 11-Feb-86 10:57-PT.]
I hope they didn't charge Vladimir's to my American Express.
∂11-Feb-86 1331 JMC re: Ralph Preiss, IEEE
To: RA
[In reply to message rcvd 11-Feb-86 12:38-PT.]
Ask Caddes or Ressmeyer about full face picture unless we have one.
I became full professor in 1962 when I came to Stanford.
∂11-Feb-86 1332 JMC re: Gerard Piel
To: RA
[In reply to message rcvd 11-Feb-86 13:02-PT.]
When Piel calls back ask for a number; also give him my home number.
∂11-Feb-86 1336 JMC the problem
To: LES
The IBMers claim that computers always work better when the CPU is installed.
∂11-Feb-86 1526 JMC
To: LES
Peled, Abraham 914 945-2341,
assistant=Seraphin B. Calo, 914 945-2710
∂11-Feb-86 2344 JMC re: (on TTY63, at TV-120 2237)
To: ME
[In reply to message rcvd 11-Feb-86 22:37-PT.]
That's fine. I'll think about a name - perhaps COVERT.
∂12-Feb-86 1334 JMC re: PLANLUNCH seminar
To: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Wed 12 Feb 86 12:31:21-PST.]
March 10 would be best for me. I'll send you a title and abstract next
week if that's soon enough.
∂12-Feb-86 1409 JMC bug
To: bjork@SU-SCORE.ARPA
According to Carolyn, control characters aren't working on my terminals,
and hers is completely dead. Please phone her 857-0672.
∂12-Feb-86 1413 JMC comp center hackers
To: LES
Eric Mathre, 7-1055
Randy Melen, 7-1055, can help with RT
∂12-Feb-86 1512 JMC
To: CLT
This is ME's message of last night. Can you think of any other considerations.
∂11-Feb-86 2237 ME (on TTY63, at TV-120 2237)
I'm working on a spooler for your new printer. I assume you'll want to be
able to spool things from E, as with the other spoolers. My plan is to
implement a normal type of spooler, but not to advertise its name in general.
∂12-Feb-86 1522 JMC re: A quick question
To: TLP%OZ.AI.MIT.EDU@XX.LCS.MIT.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue, 11 Feb 1986 16:21 EST.]
I answered this message yesterday, but there may have been MAIL trouble,
so I'll do it again.
There is no published reference, but the ideas are quite simple. They
were incorporated in a Lisp program. First when a block can be moved
to final position, i.e. on top of the tower stub on which it goes, this
may as well be done immediately or planned to be done immediately. Second
if a block must be moved to the table because it is not in final position
but is above blocks that will be below it in final position, then this
might as well be done or planned immediately. Third, doing such moves
may create other opportunities of the same kind, so one wants to do
such things as long as possible. While these heuristics lead to optimal
plans when they completely solve the problem, it isn't hard to construct
examples where they don't apply, although I think they do completely
solve the Sussman examples if I remember them correctly. My intention
is to try to express these heuristics as control of a logic program, but
I haven't got around to it yet.
∂12-Feb-86 1538 JMC (→17621 15-Feb-86)
To: "#___JMC.PLN[2,2]"
visiting mcc til Friday night
∂13-Feb-86 0754 JMC
To: CLT
∂12-Feb-86 1814 ME Lathrop spooler
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
CC: SB@SU-AI.ARPA
The Lathrop spooler now knows that the printer is on TTY43, so if the
printer and its line are working, you should be able to spool with just
LATHROP <filename><CR> and the usual spooler switches are available. The
file can be an Impress file output by TEX via DVIIMP with the /I switch.
And UNS/L and Q/L should work. It isn't supposed to generate title pages
ever (it ignores the /TITLE and /NOTITLE switches). Let me know if there
are any problems.
You can also spool text from E with the ⊗XLATHROP command now.
∂13-Feb-86 1331 JMC
To: RA
I need to be there by 10; actually make it to arrive L.A. by 9:30.
∂13-Feb-86 1331 JMC rate and charge
To: bscott@SU-SCORE.ARPA
The rate is ok, and the charge should be to my unrestricted account,
because she will be working on my Technological Opportunities book,
and that wouldn't be appropriate for DARPA in any case.
∂14-Feb-86 0958 JMC
To: RA
I won't need a car in Washington. Reservations ok.
∂15-Feb-86 0001 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:
visiting mcc til Friday night
∂15-Feb-86 1126 JMC re: MRG's tenure
To: RUSSELL@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Fri 14 Feb 86 19:02:37-PST.]
Thanks for the message about Genesereth.
∂15-Feb-86 1126 JMC MRG's tenure
To: nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
∂14-Feb-86 1906 RUSSELL@SU-SUSHI.ARPA MRG's tenure
Received: from SU-SUSHI.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Feb 86 19:05:57 PST
Date: Fri 14 Feb 86 19:02:37-PST
From: Stu Russell <RUSSELL@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Subject: MRG's tenure
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
Message-ID: <12183437787.7.RUSSELL@SU-SUSHI.ARPA>
Dear Professor McCarthy,
I understand that the faculty is still soliciting recommendations
regarding Mike Genesereth's tenure application. I hope the following
information is useful.
With Doug Lenat, Mike has been my co-advisor for 18 months and on my
reading committee for 2 years. Prior to that, I took cs223
and cs222 from him, and was one of the TAs for cs223.
Teaching
Mike is a technically excellent teacher, with a clear set of ideas
he wishes to convey and a clear determination to do so. He seems to
manage to convert most of his students to his way of thinking, giving
them a well-founded understanding of the principles of AI, which is
of much greater benefit than the merely factual or survey style favoured
by other AI instructors. I was impressed by the competence attained by
the students in his classes.
The problems he had in these first courses of lack of coverage due to
inadequate preparation and overambitious depth seem to have been solved.
If I have one quibble it is that his exclusive emphasis on logic
at the expense of other fruitful approaches to AI problems makes the
subject seem less than inspiring.
Advising
Mike's style of advising seems diametrically opposed to what I was
accustomed to with Doug Lenat; for this I am grateful in many ways.
He is accessible, punctual and helpful, if somewhat overworked. He
is extremely concerned for the progress of his students and encourages
interchange of ideas at all levels including his weekly group meetings.
His appraisal of research is excellent: he is very strict in insisting
that results be concrete and provable or empirically validated, which
is a rare and valuable trait in AI. I have found his prodding to be a
great help in arriving at new, useful ideas and exploring them fully.
Even though my work is not strongly connected with his own, he seems
committed to furthering it out of his strong dedication to progress
towards the general goals of AI.
He is very good at solving given problems; on the other hand, his
admitted (relative) weak point is in inventing constructive questions
and generating ideas on the fly. This impression may be due to my
previous exposure to Doug Lenat, since this area is his forte.
Research
In this area I have less to say because I have had little exposure to Mike
'at work' on his own research. Its most visible product, the MRS system
with the various extensions and applications added by his students, is an
excellent testbed for testing logical theories of intelligence and
ideas about control, as well as an extremely flexible framework for
building any kind of application. Interest in MRS in the AI community is
evidenced by the fact that we have received over 100 requests for the
manual since its appearance as a CS report three weeks ago.
His students are making definite, lasting contributions to the science
of AI as a result of his tutelage, and he seems to apply the same rigorous
standards of concreteness and provability to his own work as he does to
others', but unfortunately this seems to stifle his creativity somewhat. All
his results seem to be solid and to enable further work to be built on them,
but in some ways it seems he gives too much of his research energy and ideas to
his students, whilst struggling himself with the hard, general issues
of control of inference and reaching for an overarching framework for
the logical basis of intelligence. His published work may not reflect this
underlying, deep commitment to the general goal of understanding all forms of
inference, including learning, but this is probably due to the self-censorship
of a rigorous research methodology. I am convinced he could do still better
if he permitted himself to attempt more speculative projects, even at the
expense of occasionally having to wave his hands.
Stuart Russell
-------
∂15-Feb-86 1201 JMC reply to message
To: STRONG@IBM-SJ.ARPA
[In reply to message sent 13 Feb 86 10:00:19 PST.]
The abbreviated course description is entirely ok.
∂15-Feb-86 1204 JMC re: DARPA equipment money
To: FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, jlh@SU-SONOMA.ARPA
CC: rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
[In reply to message from FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA sent Sat 15 Feb 86 10:33:44-PST.]
Seems correct to me.
∂15-Feb-86 1238 JMC re: CPSR Annual Meeting: March 1
To: BrianSmith.pa@XEROX.COM
[In reply to message sent 12 Feb 86 10:24 PST.]
If there were interest, I would be glad to speak on the following topic -
as I have offered in the past.
The Positive Responsibilities of Computer Professionals
Abstract: It is part of the social responsibility of computer professionals
to advocate those ways of using computers that will advance social welfare.
The following examples will be discussed. (1) Many organizations dealing
with the public still use tape-to-tape systems or their equivalent transferred
to disks. It is a characteristic of these systems that it is often difficult
to correct errors that the public complains about, e.g. errors in bills.
The correction cannot be made till the next tape run, and if an error is
made in the syntax of the correction, it will be rejected. Truly on-line
systems permit immediate correction and immediate verification that the
correction has been made. There is no present excuse for tape-to-tape
systems, and computer professionals have the responsibility to inform
the public that this represents obsolete and harmful practice. There
need to be standards for this. (2) No organization dealing with the
public should require people to answer questions for which it already
has the answer. At most it should ask for verification. (3) Information
that is required to be available to the public should be kept on-line
in databases accessible to anyone with a terminal - or even a Touch-Tone
phone. Other examples will be given.
∂17-Feb-86 1152 JMC photo
To: engelmore@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
I'm sending you a picture of Roger Schank and Alan Bundy I took at the
Foundations of AI Conference in New Mexico for possible publication in AI
Magazine. It might be entitled "Are those the foundations of AI? When's
lunch?"
∂17-Feb-86 1154 JMC Collection Program / Archives
To: LES
∂29-Jan-86 1336 PHYSICSLIB@SU-SIERRA.ARPA Collection Program / Archives
Received: from SU-SIERRA.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 29 Jan 86 13:36:45 PST
Date: Wed 29 Jan 86 13:32:39-PST
From: Henry E. Lowood <PHYSICSLIB@SU-SIERRA.ARPA>
Subject: Collection Program / Archives
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: cn.spc@SU-FORSYTHE.ARPA, physicslib@SU-SIERRA.ARPA,
bm.sca%rlg@SU-FORSYTHE.ARPA
TO: John McCarthy
FR: Henry Lowood, History of Science and Technology Collections
Mike Ryan asked me to respond to your message regarding old computer files
on the SAIL computer. Actually, we are very interested in this topic,
though the appropriate repository (since you are a Stanford professor)
would be the University Archives. Roxanne Nilan, the Curator of University
Archives, and I have been mulling over just this problem. In fact, we
were about to contact you about your professional papers, and we
anticipated that the issue of computer files/tapes would come up, as they
have just come up in the case of Ed Feigenbaum's papers.
We are both very interested in working out a solution to the specific problem
of your computer files and a general approach to the problem that we could
apply to other collections. In both cases, we would like to benefit from
your advice.
It sounds like the best thing to do would be for Roxanne and I to talk with
you about your papers and the computer files, at your convenience. Please
let me know when you would be available for a visit from us, so that we can
start thinking about solutions to these matters as soon as possible.
Thanks for your quick reply, from Mike as well as me,
Henry Lowood
Bibliographer, History of Science & Technology Collections
-------
∂17-Feb-86 1424 JMC Account for Susan McCarthy
To: gotelli@SU-SCORE.ARPA
I created a directory on SAIL 1,sjm for Susan McCarthy. She'll be
around to fill out the form.
∂17-Feb-86 1439 JMC re: lisp standardization
To: HST
[In reply to message rcvd 11-Feb-86 04:11-PT.]
In general I have been a supporter of Common Lisp for standardization.
However, I don't think it is the last word scientifically, and therefore
also supprt efforts to make yet better Lisp-like languages. While I
haven't studied Scheme carefully, some of its ideas seem good to me,
but I don't think it is presently a candidate for extensive practical
use.
∂17-Feb-86 1541 JMC more of Situations, Actions and Causal Laws
To: RA
I need 15 more of that one, make 30 if you have to print it. The file
is CAUSAL.TEX[F84,JMC].
∂17-Feb-86 1556 JMC
To: givan@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
Nafeh, Dr. John (56) 943 1711
MAD Computer, 2950 Zanker Road, San Jose, CA 95134
(home address: 255 S. Rengstorff, Apt. 154)
Telex 171 827 MAD
Hal Krauter, President
Ab Kader consultant, also (56)727-1733
Robert R. Blackmer, V.P. Engineering
∂17-Feb-86 1605 JMC Erlbaum proposal
To: aaai-office@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
CC: nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA, engelmore@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA,
bobrow@XEROX.COM, ai.woody@MCC.ARPA
It seems to me that the usual mechanism for getting AI texts written
works well enough. Moreover, if we decide to support authors, then
there is no obvious reason to do it via a single publisher.
∂17-Feb-86 1724 JMC
To: gs@CU-ARPA.CS.CORNELL.EDU
This is to decline being on the AAAS section T nominating committee.
∂17-Feb-86 1812 JMC letters
To: RA
To: the references of Yue Jun Jiang
4 letters
Mr. Yue Jun Jiang has applied for a postdoctoral fellowship here and
given your name as a reference.
I would be grateful for any relevant information you can supply.
to: Mr. Jiang
Thanks for your letter of January 16. I have written to your references.
(see Jiang letter in my out box for addresses).
∂18-Feb-86 0012 JMC re: lisp standardization
To: HST, CLT
[In reply to message rcvd 17-Feb-86 23:24-PT.]
I haven't studied the specific issues very much and don't intend to, but I
know you are right that Common Lisp contains many anomalies. Moreover,
Guy Steele, a co-author of both Scheme and Common Lisp knows about them.
Common Lisp was an attempt to move the operational Lisps toward a common
standard, and it seems to be meeting with some success having been
implemented on a wide variety of machines. For this reason, it contains
many features owing their existence only to history, and perhaps some
features which simply represent mistakes by the Common Lisp Committee. If
a substantial Lisp community, e.g. Europe, wishes to build operational
Lisps for a wide variety of machines based on a more rational standard
than Common Lisp, in my opinion this will be good. I don't see a need for
uniformity except for the purpose of combining code in large projects.
Sharing subroutines should be an objective, but there doesn't seem to be
much of it even among the users of specific Lisps such as Zetalisp or
Interlisp.
What is the state of implementation of Lisps close to satisfying what is
likely to be the European proposal? Are any of them in use for large
programming projects?
I guess that an attempt to agree on a standard clean Lisp that could be
used for teaching would be worthwhile even apart from its use for big
programs. I use Common Lisp in class but am thinking of switching to
Scheme.
I guess I am interested in looking at proposals for rationalizing
Lisp, and my wife, Carolyn Talcott, is also interested. She has
just finished a thesis on intensional and extensional aspects of
functional programming and has also developed a more rational Lisp
dialect called Seus. She asks if you have seen the Revised Revised
Report on Scheme. She is CLT@SAIL.
Incidentally, our son Timothy is now three months old.
∂18-Feb-86 0014 JMC
To: RPG
Do you know about the European Lisp standardization effort mentioned in
Stoyan's message? What is the Common Lisp Committee's attitude? My own
view is that they might come up with something useful for teaching
purposes.
∂17-Feb-86 2324 HST lisp standardization
maybe you have heard of the european effort to prepare for a lisp standardizatio
n. we believe commonlisp is too big to be a standard (look to the lot of arithme
tic functions).and then...a symbol has 4 semantics: as normal variable (static
and dynoamic) and function name (static and dynamic).do you like this? your ai
memo (31 i believe) tried to abolish the coexistence of normal value and functio
nal value. do you still take this position? most commonlisp's do not correctley
implement the change from dynamic to static value (in different local scopes).
i argue strongly for a type function. commonlisp offers a mess there...
if you teach lisp in stanford, do you quote or FUNCTION lambda-expressions or
do you use LAMBDA as special form? (Do you know that j.Allen's tlc-LISP does
that - and SCHEME, too.) I would like to take some of your feelings (or position
s) in our european proposal.
∂18-Feb-86 0230 JMC lathrop not working right
To: ME, LES
wong.1[w86,jmc] is a pub file. I pubbed it and did
esp wong.xgp
and that worked. When I
lathrop wong.xgp
it says it does it, i.e. spooling started and spooling finished,
but nothing comes out.
lathrop wong.1
works fine.
∂18-Feb-86 0859 JMC
To: CLT
∂12-Feb-86 1814 ME Lathrop spooler
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
CC: SB@SU-AI.ARPA
The Lathrop spooler now knows that the printer is on TTY43, so if the
printer and its line are working, you should be able to spool with just
LATHROP <filename><CR> and the usual spooler switches are available. The
file can be an Impress file output by TEX via DVIIMP with the /I switch.
And UNS/L and Q/L should work. It isn't supposed to generate title pages
ever (it ignores the /TITLE and /NOTITLE switches). Let me know if there
are any problems.
You can also spool text from E with the ⊗XLATHROP command now.
∂18-Feb-86 0942 JMC We understand
To: ME
now about using dviesp with the /i switch to get the .imp file. I
still have the problem with .xgp files.
∂18-Feb-86 1035 JMC
To: CLT
∂17-Feb-86 2324 HST lisp standardization
maybe you have heard of the european effort to prepare for a lisp standardizatio
n. we believe commonlisp is too big to be a standard (look to the lot of arithme
tic functions).and then...a symbol has 4 semantics: as normal variable (static
and dynoamic) and function name (static and dynamic).do you like this? your ai
memo (31 i believe) tried to abolish the coexistence of normal value and functio
nal value. do you still take this position? most commonlisp's do not correctley
implement the change from dynamic to static value (in different local scopes).
i argue strongly for a type function. commonlisp offers a mess there...
if you teach lisp in stanford, do you quote or FUNCTION lambda-expressions or
do you use LAMBDA as special form? (Do you know that j.Allen's tlc-LISP does
that - and SCHEME, too.) I would like to take some of your feelings (or position
s) in our european proposal.
∂18-Feb-86 1227 JMC
To: LES
If I understand the sequence, Squires was not forthcoming with advice.
∂18-Feb-86 1401 JMC re: talk?
To: NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Tue 18 Feb 86 13:48:28-PST.]
Tuesdays 9-11 aren't good for me, because I normally baby sit so that
Carolyn can come in early and prepare her class. However, let me see
if another arrangement can be made. Of course, there would be no special
problem after the end of classes this quarter.
∂19-Feb-86 1216 JMC
To: RA
Proposed meeting times are ok; please put them in my calendar.
∂19-Feb-86 1225 JMC
To: SJM, RA
I didn't go to L.A., because my cold got worse. Please phone home.
∂19-Feb-86 1443 JMC
To: LES
.<< Feature summary
.
.Start with
.require "let.pub[let,jmc]" source;
.Letterheads: ∂<type> <to>$<from>$<subject>$<date>∞
. <type> may be:
. AIL - AI Lab Letter
. MEM - AI Lab Memo
. CSL - CS letter
. CSM - CS memo
. HOM - home address letter
. SE2 - SE2 letter
. LOT - LOTS letter
. MLOT - LOTS memo
. <from> defaults depend on <type>,
. <date> defaults to today.
. Use "↓" wherever you want a CRLF.
.Signatures:
. .sgn - sincerely yours, with signature according to letterhead
. .sgnp - sincerely yours, John McCarthy
. .reg - best regards, with signature according to letterhead
. .regp - best regards, with no titles
.
.Other handy macros:
. FAC means FILL ADJUST
. CB "<sub-heading>" means make a centered boldface subheading. If the
. subheading contains any commas, be sure to enclose it in quotes.
. BOLDIT may be called within a block to cause quoted text " ... " to
. turn into boldface (without quotes) and broketed text < ... > to
. be put in italics (without brokets).
. REF may be called within a block to print "References:", then go into
. BOLDIT mode with a format suitable for a list of references.
.
.Below is the list of addressee abbreviations. Use as, e.g. "Dave Russell↓IPT".
.The abbreviation identifier may be up to 4 letters long.
.>>
.ARPA←"Advanced Research Projects Agency↓"&
. "1700 Wilson Boulevard↓Arlington, Virginia 22209";
.
.IPT←"Information Processing Techniques Office↓"&
. "Advanced Research Projects Agency↓"&
. "1700 Wilson Boulevard↓Arlington, Virginia 22209";
.DEVICE XGP
.height←55;
.page frame height high 115 wide;
.title area heading lines 1 to 3;
.area text lines 4 to height;
.oddleftborder←evenleftborder←1500;
.
.COUNT ITEM
.AT "#" ⊂NEXT ITEM;(ITEM!);⊃;
.
.TURN ON "%{α"
.font 1 "basl30[300,sys]";
.font 2 "basi30[xgp,sys]";
.font 3 "basb30[xgp,sys]";
.FONT B "BAXM30[300,sys]";
.FONT C "zero30[300,sys]";
.AT "ffi" ⊂ IF 0<THISFONT≤3 THEN "≠" ELSE "fαfαi" ⊃;
.AT "ffl" ⊂ IF 0<THISFONT≤3 THEN "α∞" ELSE "fαfαl" ⊃;
.AT "ff" ⊂ IF 0<THISFONT≤3 THEN "≥" ELSE "fαf" ⊃;
.AT "fi" ⊂ IF 0<THISFONT≤3 THEN "α≡" ELSE "fαi" ⊃;
.AT "fl" ⊂ IF 0<THISFONT≤3 THEN "∨" ELSE "fαl" ⊃;
.AT "--" ⊂ IF 0<THISFONT≤3 THEN "¬" ELSE "-α-" ⊃;
.
.at "↓"; ⊂ }
.⊃;
.
.macro letter(data,aut); ⊂
.<< namad = toname↓addr1↓addr2↓...$author$subject$date$saluation>>
.before page ⊂ ⊃;
.if going=0 then going←1 else next page;
.nofill;
.count page from 2;
.salut←"data"; foo←scan(salut," ","","XR");
.xxx←namad←scan(salut,"$","","IS"); yyy←author←scan(salut,"$","","IS");
.subject←scan(salut,"$","","IS"); dat←scan(salut,"$","","IS");
.if length(dat)≤2 then dat←date;
.if length(author)≤2 then yyy←author←"aut";
.zzz←scan(yyy,",↓");
.zzz←scan(xxx,"↓","","IS"); ln←length(zzz);
.if length(namad)>ln+3 then start
. if length(namad)≤ln+7 then namad←zzz&"↓"&eval(xxx);
. end;
.name←scan(zzz,",");
.fill adjust;
. ⊃
.
.macro head; ⊂ nofill; SKIP 2; select 1;
.(namad)}
.subj;
.if length(salut)>1 then start
Dear {(salut);}:
.end
.⊃
.
.macro memo; ⊂ begin "memo"
.skip 3;
.fill; nojust; indent 0,8; crbreak; tabs 9; turn on "\%";
.xxx←namad; nam←scan(xxx,"↓");
To:\%1{nam}
%3From:\%1{author}
.end "memo";
.subj;
.⊃
.
.macro subj; ⊂
.fac;
.if length(subject)>2 then BEGIN "subject" turn on "%∂"; nojust; indent 0,8;crbreak;
%3Subject:∂9%1{subject}
.end "subject";
.before page ⊂ once turn on "%→←"; select 3;
.place heading;
.select 1;
.name}←{dat}→Page {page!}%*
.place text
. ⊃
.select 1;
. ⊃
.
.macro ref ⊂ select 3; nojust; boldit;
References:
.select 1; indent 0,8;
. ⊃
.
.macro sgn ⊂ BEGIN "signed" SKIP 2; NOFILL; group;
Sincerely,
.SKIP 3;
{author}
.END "signed"; ⊃
.
.macro sgnp ⊂ BEGIN "signedplain" SKIP 2; NOFILL; group;
Sincerely,
.SKIP 2;
John McCarthy
.END "signedplain"; ⊃
.
.macro reg ⊂BEGIN "regards" SKIP 2; NOFILL; group;
Best regards,
.SKIP 3;
{author}
.END "regards"; ⊃
.
.macro regp ⊂BEGIN "regardsplain" SKIP 2; NOFILL; group;
Best regards,
.SKIP 3;
John McCarthy
.END "regardsplain"; ⊃
.
.MACRO FAC ⊂ FILL ADJUST ⊃
.
.macro cb(head) ⊂ if lines<5 then next page else skip; once center; select 3
head
.⊃
.
.macro boldit ⊂ turn on "%";
. at """" ⊂ (if thisfont=1 then "%3" else "%1") ⊃;
. at "<" ⊂"%2"⊃; at ">" ⊂"%1"⊃;
.⊃
.at "∂AIL" data "∞"; ⊂
.letter(|data|,|John McCarthy↓Director↓Professor of Computer Science|);
.if on4=0 then start on4←1; FONT 4 "STA200[xgp,sys]"; end;
.if on5=0 then start on5←1; FONT 5 "NON44[xgp,sys]"; end;
%4S%5 Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, STANFORD UNIVERSITY, Stanford, California 94305
.once turn on "→"
Telephone 415 723-4430, ARPANET: JMC@SU-AI→{dat}
.head;
.rxgenlines←rxgenlines-8;
.⊃
.
.at "∂CSL" data "∞"; ⊂
.letter(|data|,|John McCarthy↓Professor of Computer Science|);
.if on4=0 then start on4←1; FONT 4 "STA200[xgp,sys]"; end;
.if on5=0 then start on5←1; FONT 5 "NON44[xgp,sys]"; end;
.place heading
%4S%5 Department of Computer Science, STANFORD UNIVERSITY, Stanford, CA 94305
.place text
.once turn on "→"
Telephone: 415 723-4430→{dat}
Electronic mail: JMC%1@%*SU-AI%B.%*ARPA
.head;
.⊃
.
.at "∂HOM" data "∞"; ⊂
.letter(|data|,|John McCarthy|);
.if on5=0 then start on5←1; FONT 5 "NON44[xgp,sys]"; end;
.begin select 5; center;
846 Lathrop Drive
Stanford, California 94305
.nofill; turn on "→"
Telephone 415 857-0672→{dat}
.head;
.end
.⊃
.
.AT "∂MEM" data "∞" ⊂
.letter("data",
."John McCarthy, Director, Artificial Intelligence Lab.");
.if on6=0 then start on6←1; font 6 "ngr40[xgp,sys]"; end;
.if on7=0 then start on7←1; font 7 "ngr30[300,sys]"; end;
.SELECT 6; CENTER;
OFFICE MEMORANDUM * STANFORD UNIVERSITY * OFFICE MEMORANDUM
.SKIP; SELECT 7;
STANFORD ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE LABORATORY
.SELECT 3; SKIP;
{DAT}
.memo;
.⊃
.
.AT "∂CSM" data "∞" ⊂
.letter("data",
."John McCarthy, Professor of Computer Science");
.if on6=0 then start on6←1; font 6 "ngr40[xgp,sys]"; end;
.if on7=0 then start on7←1; font 7 "ngr30[300,sys]"; end;
.SELECT 6; CENTER;
OFFICE MEMORANDUM * STANFORD UNIVERSITY * OFFICE MEMORANDUM
.SKIP; SELECT 7;
DEPARTMENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE
.SELECT 3; SKIP;
{DAT}
.memo;
.⊃
.
.at "∂SEN" data "∞"; ⊂
.letter(|data|,|John McCarthy↓Chairman, Stanford Chapter of SE2|);
.if on5=0 then start on5←1; FONT 5 "NGr40[xgp,sys]"; end;
.if on7=0 then start on7←1; font 7 "ngr30[300,sys]"; end;
.begin center;
%7 SE2
%5(Scientists and Engineers for Secure Energy)
.skip
846 Lathrop Drive, Stanford, California 94305
.end
.rxgenlines←-4;
.once turn on "→"
Telephone 415 723-4430→{dat}
.head;
.⊃
.
.at "∂LOT" data "∞"; ⊂
.letter(|data|,|John McCarthy↓Director↓Professor of Computer Science|);
.if on9=0 then start on9←1; font 9 "buck75[xgp,sys]"; end;
.if on5=0 then start on5←1; FONT 5 "NGr44[xgp,sys]"; end;
.begin center
%9 LOTS
%5(Stanford University Low Overhead Time-Sharing System)
.skip
.end
%5John McCarthy, Director
Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, STANFORD UNIVERSITY, Stanford, California 94305
.skip
.rxgenlines←-4;
.once turn on "→"
Telephone 415 723-4430→{dat}
.head;
.⊃
.
.AT "∂MLOT" data "∞" ⊂
.letter(|data|,"John McCarthy, Director");
.if on6=0 then start on6←1; font 6 "ngr44[xgp,sys]"; end;
.if on7=0 then start on7←1; font 7 "ngb30[300,sys]"; end;
.SELECT 6; CENTER;
OFFICE MEMORANDUM * STANFORD UNIVERSITY * OFFICE MEMORANDUM
.SKIP; SELECT 7;
STANFORD LOW OVERHEAD TIME-SHARING SYSTEM
.SELECT 3; SKIP;
{DAT}
.memo;
.⊃
.
.going←on4←on5←0; on6←on7←on8←on9←0;
.portion main; place text;
.next page
∂19-Feb-86 1543 JMC re: ANE@SU-CSLI.ARPA, LANRE@SU-CSLI.ARPA, LAUBSCH@SU-CSLI.ARPA, LEBEN@SU-CSLI.ARPA,
To: COWER@SU-CSLI.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Wed 19 Feb 86 14:53:52-PST.]
You really lose this time with 340 lines of header and no message.
∂19-Feb-86 1548 JMC
To: SJM
Here's another.
invent[w83,jmc] We have fewer inventions to get used to
∂20-Feb-86 1119 JMC re: industrial lectureship for next year
To: RA
[In reply to message rcvd 20-Feb-86 11:08-PT.]
At the moment I have lined up only one lecturer and am prodding
another two possibilities.
∂20-Feb-86 1229 JMC re: Credit for VTSS160?
To: KTRACY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Thu 20 Feb 86 11:49:27-PST.]
As far as I'm concerned, that would be fine, and I'll inquire.
∂20-Feb-86 1230 JMC re: Facilities Committee Meeting
To: LES
[In reply to message rcvd 20-Feb-86 11:04-PT.]
Blood and gore all over the floor and Nils without a spoon.
∂20-Feb-86 1556 JMC re: Message from Ed Feigenbaum
To: EENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, CLT@SU-AI.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Thu 20 Feb 86 15:31:32-PST.]
Unfortunately, I expect to be in Germany on March 10.
∂20-Feb-86 1643 JMC re: Circumscription and autoepistemic logic
To: VAL@SU-AI.ARPA, nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA, phayes@SRI-KL.ARPA,
grosof@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
[In reply to message from VAL rcvd 20-Feb-86 14:34-PT.]
I have thought of it more as an interpretation of belief (or rather
knowledge) in terms of circumscription. In particular, when I was
thinking about the Wise Men problem, doing it right required proving that
they didn't initially know the colors of their spots. This required some
way of saying that they only knew what followed from their knowledge, and
the obvious way do do this is to characterize the derivability predicate
by circumscription. Unfortunately, doing the full problem requires that
the second wise man be able to know that the first wise man doesn't know
the color of his spot initially, etc., and this seems to involve his
knowing the result of circumscription. I haven't thought about these
further complications recently, and it would be interesting if you or
Michael Gelfond could do something with them. If anyone who is interested
would like the above ideas elaborated, I would be glad to do so.
∂20-Feb-86 2318 JMC re: Message from Ed Feigenbaum
To: EENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Thu 20 Feb 86 15:31:32-PST.]
It turns out that it's April 10 that I have to be in Germany, and
Carolyn and I would like to accept Ed's invitation if the place
isn't already filled.
∂21-Feb-86 0156 JMC
To: RA
Washington reservations please. arr. late Sunday,return Monday via SFO
∂21-Feb-86 0951 JMC re: trip to Washington
To: RA
[In reply to message rcvd 21-Feb-86 08:38-PT.]
Yes, but the schedule is not in my CAL file. Actually, I would
like what might be a change. Namely, I would like to go on
the same flight and sit together with Mike Genesereth.
∂21-Feb-86 1347 JMC re: Rutie
To: BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Fri 21 Feb 86 10:21:12-PST.]
Yes, I said I intended to discuss it.
∂21-Feb-86 1349 JMC re: John Pucci
To: RA
[In reply to message rcvd 21-Feb-86 11:01-PT.]
Pucci is a money man. His discussions should primarily be with Les. I
will come in for a little while if it is in the afternoon after my class.
∂21-Feb-86 1351 JMC re: Washington trip
To: RA
[In reply to message rcvd 21-Feb-86 11:18-PT.]
Yes, change it if you can. That would have been a better flight anyway.
I don't like getting up early and there isn't anything to do in Washington
arriving at 4pm.
∂21-Feb-86 1507 JMC More/Trustees' Dinner
To: RA
∂21-Feb-86 1504 EENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA More/Trustees' Dinner
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 21 Feb 86 15:04:08 PST
Date: Fri 21 Feb 86 15:05:44-PST
From: Ellie Engelmore <EENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: More/Trustees' Dinner
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: EENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12185229672.49.EENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Bob Hamrdla (in Kennedy's Office) 723-3623 will soon be sending you some
more information about the Trustees who will be having dinner with
you at Ed and Penny's house. All that I know now is their names: John
("Jack") Ditz and Thomas W. Ford.
Do you have a short bio you would send to Hamrdla/Building 10 to be
given to those Trustees?
Ellie
-------
∂21-Feb-86 1641 JMC
To: RA
Please updat accoun[1,jmc].
∂21-Feb-86 1645 JMC
To: ME
Is there a chance that the mod to delete title page sometimes deletes the file?
∂21-Feb-86 1716 JMC
To: RA
ok
∂21-Feb-86 1527 RA Meeting: Nilsson, Reid, and you
Is Thursday, Feb. 27 11:00 - 12:00 ok with you for the meeting?
∂21-Feb-86 1732 JMC re: more from Tass (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: OTHER-SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
The Government of the USSR can, if it wants, simultaneously congratulate
Marcos on his "re-election" and supply the communist guerrillas. Perhaps
they hope that U.S. disapproval will take forms that will convince Marcos
he is better off co-operating with them. Maybe it will work.
∂22-Feb-86 2308 JMC re: Marcos (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: OTHER-SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
I offer Reagan an additional incentive for landing in the
Philippines. MRC will join the Marines.
∂22-Feb-86 2317 JMC
To: KWT@SU-AI.ARPA
r parry used to work, but doesn't any more. I suppose it lost to a file crunch.
∂22-Feb-86 2318 JMC
To: ktracy@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
You could try asking Martin Frost or Les Earnest.
∂24-Feb-86 2121 JMC re: Tues
To: NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Sun 23 Feb 86 12:42:20-PST.]
Yes, wait till next quarter.
∂24-Feb-86 2128 JMC re: Number of `facts' per brain.
To: norvig@USC-CSE.USC.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon, 24 Feb 86 21:08:37 pst.]
I suppose I'd still say between 3x10↑4 and 10↑6. There is
no reference. If you imagine that when a person is deliberately
studying, he is learning facts at close to maximal rate, and imagine
that a child works at 1/4 that speed when not specifically studying,
then I think you should still get an overestimate. If I get around
to doing some arithmetic, I'll let you know the answer. If you
get an estimate by any method, I'd be curious.
∂24-Feb-86 2132 JMC re: Yuri Gastev
To: BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Mon 24 Feb 86 10:43:05-PST.]
How about immediately or at the beginning of Winter Quarter if it's to
be by quarters.
∂24-Feb-86 2155 JMC
To: ME
lathrop wong.xgp works. Thanks.
∂24-Feb-86 2158 JMC re: Nakagawa's visit
To: VAL
[In reply to message rcvd 24-Feb-86 15:05-PT.]
That's cutting it a bit fine. If I can get in touch with him I'll suggest
9:30 and let you know. If you don't hear from me further, don't come.
∂24-Feb-86 2201 JMC re: John Pucci
To: RA
[In reply to message rcvd 24-Feb-86 17:00-PT.]
I called Pucci and got no answer. Call him first thing. Tell him that
I have to take care of Timothy on Tuesday mornings, because Carolyn
teaches, but I can bring him in if it's important. Mention that Les
handles all financial matters for my projects and is seeing him at
10:30.
∂24-Feb-86 2228 JMC re: Marcos (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: OTHER-SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
The Soviets are famous for plausible excuses. Secrecy happens to be
available in the Sakharov case. It may even be a reason, but remember
that any information Sakharov really wanted to transmit, he could have
done. Here's an example of an excuse. Someone in Novosibirsk once
invited me to go on a boat trip with him on the Yenesei River. Since the
Yenesei River is closed to foreigners in fact if not in principle, I was
curious to know what would be the consequences of accepting the
invitation. The excuse given was that I might get encephalitis from
mosquitoes. Quite plausible.
Bill rationalizes the Soviet denial of permission for Sakharov to
emigrate. There are thousands of other refuseniks many of whom have never
had secret information. If Bill wants to rationalize all those refusals,
he will have quite a lot of work, because there are many different kinds
of excuse have been given - or none at all. See an article by Joseph
Brodsky (the first he wrote in English) in the latest New York Review to
find out how his elderly parents (now dead) were treated.
In fact I once got all the way from the U.S. to Russia without
showing anyone a passport. It was not my intention particularly, and I
only noticed when I got there. Airlines check for a passport, because if
you arrive in a foreign country without one, they are stuck with flying
you back. Some suspicious people regard this as mere excuse to hide
Government controls. However, one can go to Canada without a passport.
Normally, you would still have to show a passport to the clerk at the
airline ticket counter on leaving Canada, but at that time the same
airport at Montreal from which one arrived from the U.S. was also used for
flying to Europe and the Canadians had a European style transit lounge.
Therefore, no-one asked to see a passport at any time. The last time I
told this story, someone told me that Montreal uses different airports for
European and U.S. travel, so maybe you can't do it any more. Most likely,
however, you still can - either through Canada or Mexico.
I doubt that this will shake Bill's faith in the villainy of
Reagan in particular and the U.S. in general or in the proposition that
communism is just a word used to frighten the innocents.
∂24-Feb-86 2231 JMC re: Good CS Book Club Offer (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: OTHER-SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
Book clubs are a good deal for those (not including me) who
always remember to send in the card telling them not to send the books
you don't want.
∂24-Feb-86 2238 JMC re: HAM radios
To: GHOSH@SU-SIERRA.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Mon 24 Feb 86 13:15:28-PST.]
You have to pass a test to get a license. The organization is the
ARRL (Amateur Radio Relay League), and there's a book called the
Amateur Radio Handbook that tells all about it. There is no
limit on range; you can call India. Radio Shack and Heath both
sell equipment. However, I believe
you have to be a U.S. citizen to get a license unless the law has
been changed; the law dates from the 1920s. Your question suggests
that you may have meant a Citizen's Band radio which has short range
and no examination. The same stores can sell you the equipment
and can tell you about licensing.
∂24-Feb-86 2249 JMC re: sail jingles.
To: WINSLETT@SU-SCORE.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Wed 11 Dec 85 10:18:28-PST.]
Yours were clearly the best. As you said, limericks are unsingable. Come
by for the $5 any time. Sorry for the delay, but there were several
postponed TGIFs, and I forgot. I fear such general interest as there was
is gone now, so I won't bother with a TGIF.
∂24-Feb-86 2325 JMC re: VTSS HOMEWORK
To: S.SOOD@LOTS-B
[In reply to message sent Mon 24 Feb 86 23:18:46-PST.]
No assignment for tomorrow.
∂24-Feb-86 2356 JMC
To: HST
I'll have to think before reacting to your 30 year proposal.
∂25-Feb-86 1135 JMC Dinner/Monday, 3/10
To: CLT
∂25-Feb-86 1131 @SU-SCORE.ARPA:EENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA Dinner/Monday, 3/10
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Feb 86 11:31:16 PST
Received: from SUMEX-AIM.ARPA by SU-SCORE.ARPA with TCP; Tue 25 Feb 86 11:12:17-PST
Date: Tue 25 Feb 86 08:57:21-PST
From: Ellie Engelmore <EENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Subject: Dinner/Monday, 3/10
To: JMC@SU-SCORE.ARPA
cc: EENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Message-ID: <12186211187.52.EENGELMORE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA>
Ed and Penny's dinner is set to begin (at their house) at 6:30pm.
-------
∂25-Feb-86 1639 JMC re: Symbolic Systems Program
To: NISSENBAUM@SU-CSLI.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Tue 25 Feb 86 15:13:39-PST.]
I'm afraid I haven't time for either A or B, although I might help advise
some majors who are interested in epistemological problems of AI.
∂25-Feb-86 1726 JMC re: Axioms for arrays - need a reference
To: jbn@FORD-WDL1.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Tue, 25 Feb 86 16:00:46 PST.]
You will find essentially these axioms in
%3McCarthy, John (1963)%1: "Towards a Mathematical Theory of Computation",
in Proc. IFIP Congress 62, North-Holland, Amsterdam.
∂25-Feb-86 1730 JMC re: Axioms for arrays - need a reference
To: jbn@FORD-WDL1.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Tue, 25 Feb 86 16:00:46 PST.]
I had them as axioms for assignment.
∂25-Feb-86 2201 JMC re: Axioms for arrays - need a reference
To: CLT
∂25-Feb-86 1845 jbn@Ford-wdl1.ARPA re: Axioms for arrays - need a reference
Received: from FORD-WDL1.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 25 Feb 86 18:44:55 PST
Received: by FORD-WDL1.ARPA (5.15/5.9)
id AA18831; Tue, 25 Feb 86 18:45:27 PST
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 86 18:45:27 PST
From: jbn@Ford-wdl1.ARPA (John B. Nagle)
Message-Id: <8602260245.AA18831@FORD-WDL1.ARPA>
To: JMC@su-ai.arpa, jbn@Ford-wdl1.ARPA
Subject: re: Axioms for arrays - need a reference
OK. I'm actually using Oppen's formulation from his "Simplification
by Cooperating Decision Procedures" paper, in which he is more concerned with
putting the axioms in a form that is suitable for mechanical theorem proving
than with the historical formulation.
I have a constructive form, and like most constructive mathematics,
it is very painful. But with the Boyer-Moore prover doing most of the work,
it works out quite nicely.
Having ported the Boyer-Moore prover from the Symbolics to the VAX
and thence to the SUNs, I have hope of in time moving it to something that
the typical student can afford. Perhaps next year.
John Nagle
∂25-Feb-86 2202 JMC photo
To: RA
Bob Engelmore still hasn't received the photo. Did you send it, and to
what addresss?
∂25-Feb-86 2247 JMC re: Passports and Montreal (Mirabel) airport (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: OTHER-SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
I didn't say could sneak into the USSR without a passport -
merely that you could sneak to the USSR without one. To get in
you need a passport and a visa. Also, to get out you need a
passport and a visa, and so does a Russian. Russians aren't
allowed to keep their foreign travel passports after returning
to the country. They also require exit visas for each departure -
except for a very few people who have permission to live abroad.
∂25-Feb-86 2336 JMC re: Revised rates
To: BOSACK@SU-SCORE.ARPA, facil@SU-AI.ARPA
[In reply to message from BOSACK@SU-SCORE.ARPA sent Tue 25 Feb 86 23:28:17-PST.]
It looks like I'd better find another place than SAIL to keep my disk files.
It's unfortunate to be driven off after so many years, and you'll have to
find another source of income to replace it.
∂25-Feb-86 2340 JMC Industrial lecturer
To: gnelson@DECWRL.DEC.COM
It is still not too late to apply for industrial lecture for next year,
but the deadline seems to be Friday. I need a Stanford style course
description by then.
Please let me know whether your are still interested. Phone if you
have questions (home: 857-0672) (office: 723-4430).
∂26-Feb-86 0519 JMC comparison
To: su-bboards@SU-AI.ARPA
It looks like the Reagan Administration persuading Marcos not to resist
Aquino taking power is going to work out a lot better than the Carter
Administration persuading the Shah and the Iranian military not to resist
Khomeini.
∂26-Feb-86 0955 Mailer failed mail returned
To: JMC
In processing the following command:
MAIL/clt
The following message was unsent because of a command error:
------- Begin undelivered message: -------
∂26-Feb-86 0955 JMC
fri 7-mar 10:10 Timothy to Dr. Ginter (3rd floor 1150 veterans blvd)
------- End undelivered message -------
∂26-Feb-86 1423 JMC
To: SJM
fly.ess[ess,jmc]
∂26-Feb-86 1620 JMC re: leaving early for course
To: RA
[In reply to message rcvd 26-Feb-86 13:56-PT.]
I have lost track of which days you now leave early. Please tell me
your complete present and proposed schedule. Also we need to discuss
the evaluation form that I recently filled out.
∂26-Feb-86 1623 JMC Let's get a couple copies.
To: LES
∂26-Feb-86 1106 KOLKOWITZ@SU-SCORE.ARPA Ordering Unix manuals again
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Feb 86 11:05:58 PST
Date: Wed 26 Feb 86 11:04:59-PST
From: Dan Kolkowitz <KOLKOWITZ@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Ordering Unix manuals again
To: su-bboards@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12186496567.15.KOLKOWITZ@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
The last order of Unix manuals was a big hit so we'll do it one more
time. These are the small (5X7) bound volumes which break down in content
and price as follows:
User's and Programmer's manuals (2 bound vols., manuals 1-5) $18.50
User's and Programmer's supplementary docs (2 bound vols.) $17.00
System's Manager's manual (1 vol.) $9.50
Any number of each of the above can be ordered this time. There is also a
7% tax on the purchase price. Payment must be by cash, check, or Stanford
account on receipt of the manuals. Please respond by electronic mail.
-------
∂26-Feb-86 1627 JMC The manuals to be ordered are BSD4.2.
To: LES
∂26-Feb-86 1328 KOLKOWITZ@SU-SCORE.ARPA The manuals to be ordered are BSD4.2.
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Feb 86 13:28:16 PST
Date: Wed 26 Feb 86 13:24:52-PST
From: Dan Kolkowitz <KOLKOWITZ@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: The manuals to be ordered are BSD4.2.
To: su-bboards@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Message-ID: <12186522031.15.KOLKOWITZ@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
It should also be added that the Berkeley folks do not at this time plan
new manuals for 4.3. Changes will be noted in addenda.
-------
∂26-Feb-86 1637 JMC re: El Alamo (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: OTHER-SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
The U.S. expanded in the early nineteenth century, because
its population was growing rapidly and also developed the habit
of pioneering. Does anyone know the relative Spanish and English
speaking populations of Texas at the time Texas independence was
declared? Now it looks almost as though Mexicans are reclaiming
the Southwest by population expansion.
∂26-Feb-86 2051 JMC re: El Alamo (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: OTHER-SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
To answer my question, an article in the latest National
Geographic asserts there were 20,000 English speakers and 5,000
Spanish speakers when Texas declared its independence in 1836.
It retained this independence till 1845.
∂26-Feb-86 2302 JMC re: Save the Unborn Shuttles
To: HQM@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
[In reply to message sent Wed, 26 Feb 86 18:31:48 EST.]
Thanks for the copy of the discussion. On the whole the answers seemed
pretty good to me, although a few of them conceded premisses that seem
doubtful to me, such as the statement that inequality increased when
exploration began.
∂26-Feb-86 2304 JMC
To: su-bboards@SU-AI.ARPA
Here's an interesting long excerpt from the M.I.T. Space Digest.
∂26-Feb-86 1542 HQM%MC.LCS.MIT.EDU@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Feb 86 15:41:43 PST
Received: from MC.LCS.MIT.EDU by OZ.AI.MIT.EDU via Chaosnet; 26 Feb 86 18:33-EST
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 86 18:31:48 EST
From: Henry Minsky <HQM@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU>
To: JMC@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
cc: HQM@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU
Message-ID: <[MC.LCS.MIT.EDU].831750.860226.HQM>
I thought you might be interested by a few excerpts from a discussion
that was flaming around the SPACE-DIGEST mailing list last week. It
started when someone sent a message "asking a few questions" about the
value and purpose of space exploration. These are some of the replies
to those questions.
******************************************
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 86 22:26:05 EST
From: "Keith F. Lynch" <KFL@mc.lcs.mit.edu>
Subject: Save the Unborn Shuttles
To: unmvax!nmtvax!fine@ucbvax.berkeley.edu
Cc: KFL@mc.lcs.mit.edu, Space@s1-b.arpa
From: unmvax!nmtvax!fine@ucbvax.berkeley.edu (Andrew J Fine)
So what do we buy with $2 billion dollars? One shuttle, good for 100
missions (best case) with 7 people each. Or enough food, clean water, and
other necesssities to feed Ethiopia for the next ten decades, easily.
Assuming that food, clean water, and other necessities for one
person cost just one dollar a day, and that shipping them to Ethiopia
costs nothing at all, since Ethiopia has a population of 32 million, 2
billion dollars would last just about two months. Not 'ten decades'.
Ethipoia's problems stem from it's socialist economy. Why should WE
bail them out? Why not the USSR? When did the USA become the world's
nanny?
Any what makes you think that any money that doesn't go to space
will go to Ethiopia?
Note that the 2 billion dollars is not being shot into space. The
money is staying right here on Earth, where it is benefiting hundreds
of thousands of people directly. It is of course benefiting all
mankind in the long run, unlike two months of feeding Ethiopia.
If you feel bad about the fate of Ethiopians, feel free to send them
your own food and money. Just don't ask the government to use my
money to subsidize Ethiopia's bogus economic system. And keep in mind
the harm you are doing to Ethiopia's farmers. (What if whatever
product you made was to be shipped in from another country for free -
you would soon find another line of work, right? And if all Ethiopian
farmers did so ...)
Why have satellites and information systems at all, except to invade the
privacy and keep records on a captive populace?
With the low cost of computers and other high technology items, they
are available for the use of individuals like you and I. As you must
surely be aware. You didn't enter this message with a quill pen by
candlelight.
Why have land and weather satellites at all, except to take advantage of
another nation's resources and vulnerabilities?
Resource satellites are primarily used to explore the resources of
the country that launches them. Though many countries have made great
use of landsat pictures the US made at considerable expense and
provided for free.
When there is a storm in Texas or Florida, few people are hurt,
since plenty of warning is given by weather satellites. Contrast that
with the situation in Bangladesh, where a year in which only a
thousand people perish from typhoons is considered lucky. Or with the
situation in Texas and Florida before weather satellites.
Why explore the planets, interesting though they are, except to find
more virgin landscape to despoil and riches to plunder?
Is this what people do? Would you rather live in a nice warm
apartment, or naked in the wilderness?
Man is a product of nature and what we do and build is just as
natural as anything else on Earth. Just as birds find nests better
than bare branches, and groundhogs find holes better than the bare
ground, similarly has man transformed his environment to his benefit.
Do you think the first creatures to release oxygen into the Earth's
atmosphere were evil? Should the atmosphere have remained in its
'natural' state, free of oxygen?
Do you think the first creatures to live upon the land were
despoiling the natural barren moon-like wilderness? Should the great
forests have been left in their 'natural', life-free state?
Do you think that a barren moon is to anyone's benefit? Do you
think evil is done by introducing life to that previously lifeless
cinder of a world?
Would Venus be ruined by an attempt to convert its poisinous red hot
atmosphere into temperate oxygen and blue seas, where life like us
might live in comfort?
Would empty space be despoiled by large free floating manned
colonies? Seems to me that space is the best place for our large
populations and heavy industries. So we can leave Earth's ecosystems
unspoiled.
Or do you think that heavy industries and mechanized farms should be
dismantled? And large populations reduced? Well, the former would
certainly take care of the latter, and it wouldn't be much fun.
Why put a man, or a women for that matter, in space? What is so special
about anyone that we must exhalt that person above all others in such an
eletist fashion?
I would like to see the day when anyone who wants to move to space
may do so. That day isn't yet, it's still to expensive. The shuttle
is the best bet we have currently to get to the next step. Not
everyone can ride the shuttle. Not everyone in 1492 could sail with
Columbus, either.
Why shouldn't that person be put to a task that serves the world rather
than that person's ego?
Put to a task? Put by whom? Are we slaves now? To be put to
tasks, tasks that serve the world in some tyrant's estimation? Like
Pol Pot's recent regime in Cambodia, in which he had everyone leave
the cities to be put to a 'useful' task in the countryside. The
results were as awful as any sensible person would have imagined.
Nobody is going into space except volunteers. If you want to
volunteer for one of these worthy tasks, go right ahead. Join the
peace corps instead of sending ignorant flames to the net.
... ( the concept of having to work for one's bread is deadly when there
is not enough work to go around ), ...
You mean when there is not enough bread to go around. There is
always enough work to go around, if only baking bread! Unemployment
is a product of stupid government regulations.
If humanity can simply change from mere descendants of carnivorous apes to
something totally gentle, altrustic, and noble, then Earth will be enough.
We are descended from herbiverous apes.
If we were all dead, Earth would also be enough. Is this what you
want? Or only most of us dead?
...Keith
****************************************************************
Date: Thu 20 Feb 86 13:53:34-PST
From: Steve Dennett <DENNETT@sri-nic.arpa>
Subject: re: few questions [LONG]
To: space@mc.lcs.mit.edu
> Date: 9 Feb 86 04:10:48 GMT
> From: unmvax!nmtvax!fine@ucbvax.berkeley.edu (Andrew J Fine)
> Let's ask ourselves a few questions:
> ****************************************************************************
> Does humanity (men and women) really *need* to populate space? Do we
> really need to explore, in person or otherwise, other planets?
Only if we want to remain human beings, creatures who can look past their
immediate survival needs. Only if we want our race to survive when the
earth becomes uninhabitable due to climatic changes/cosmic accident/
or political stupidity.
> Historically, exploration and open boundaries only encouraged exploitation,
> slavery, and genocide of indigenous peoples such as African, American
> Natives, and East Asians.
We are the solar system's only indigenous race, as far as we know.
> It widened the gap between the rich and the poor
> at home, and the massive funds spent on ships and weapons in that previous
> era caused more people to starve.
Are you certain that >exploration< caused the gap to widen? Since a great
deal of wealth was returned from the New World, perhaps it was only the
inequitable distribution of that weath (caused by the political system)
that made this happen. And what about the poor who chose to become
colonists/explorers, and became wealthy because of it?
> It also increased the likelyhood of the
> lawless being able to escape justice, for example Botany Bay and the HMS
> Bounty.
There will always be places the lawless can run to escape justice,
for example Libya, South America, etc.
> So what do we buy with $2 billion dollars? One shuttle, good for 100
> missions (best case) with 7 people each. Or enough food, clean water, and
> other necesssities to feed Ethiopia for the next ten decades, easily.
The Ethiopian problems are political; throwing money at them would make
them >worse< by supporting the rulers who choose to export crops rather
than feed their own people.
> So what do space-faring nations prove when they invoke national prestige
> and the desire of humanity to expand, by consuming all that money and
> men-centuries? "I'm rich enough to do this and you're not, so there!". "My
> rocket is bigger than yours!". "We are leaving you behind to scratch the
> dust while we inherit the universe!"
I agree that national prestige is a poor reason for space exploration;
nationalism is pretty stupid in itself. Unfortuately, the people
who rule us work at just that level, so such arguments often succeed
where more "rational" reasons fail.
> One man's glory is another man's
> humiliation. One man's wealth is another man's poverty. One man's
> livelihood is another man's serfdom.
Only when wealth is a zero-sum game, as it will be if we stay on earth.
> Why have satellites and information systems at all, except to invade the
> privacy and keep records on a captive populace? Why have land and weather
> satellites at all, except to take advantage of another nation's resources
> and vulnerabilities?
Would you like to fly or across the state or country, knowing that the
pilot had no idea what weather conditions they might encounter during
the trip? Would you like to give up all the channels of information
that are now routed through satellites (telephone, television, data
networks)? Would it be better for farmers to be surprized by sudden
freezes, rather than warned so they can protect their crops?
Communication satellites have been a boon to the Third World, bringing
information and education into areas that could never be reached by
strictly land-based means.
> Why explore the planets, interesting though they are, except to find more
> virgin landscape to despoil and riches to plunder? Why put a man, or a
> women for that matter, in space? What is so special about anyone that we
> must exhalt that person above all others in such an eletist fashion? Why
> shouldn't that person be put to a task that serves the world rather than
> that person's ego?
Partly, we explore the planets because, to paraphrase Hilary, "They are
there." Curiousity led man from the savannah to the city; when man is
no longer curious, he will no longer be human.
More pragmatically, we must explore because the universe may hold solutions
to the problems we face here on earth. On the most basic level, our
physical resources are finite, and space can supplement them. More
speculatively, who knows what we may find out there? Cures for the many
diseases that still plague us. New insights into the nature of the universe,
which can be translated into technology to feed the hungry and shelter the
poor. For example, what if we found a cheap, nearly inexhaustible power
source; how about a method of predicting weather with >absolute certainty<.
Perhaps all the dangerous and environmentally destructive industries could
be moved off-planet, letting the earth become once again rustic and rural.
> The main problem with all of us is we are still essentially barbarians at
> heart. The Viking who was the explorer was also the Viking that also raped
> and pillaged. The Columbus who was the explorer was also the Columbus who
> converted people to his religion by force. The shuttle pilot who was the
> explorer was also the pilot who killed husbands, wives, and children in
> North Korea and North Vietnam.
The ad hominem fallacy, and an untrue generalization. None of the above
applies to Christa McAuliffe or any of the civilian scientists who have
gone into space. Nor does it necessarily apply to those who have
explored the arctic and the deep sea. "We" are many things, from
headhunter to philosopher.
> The wanderlust we all experience is just
> another word for the lust and coveting for the outside world that blinds us
> to the potentials of the inside world and the darkness of the soul that we
> need to correct. Do we really deserve to go "out there" when we have such
> a mess "down here"?
Will staying "down here" as we have since the beginning of human history
do anything to solve the mess "down here". Space exploration is no panacea
but it may provide a place for experiments in human growth that will
ultimately help man to reach ethical maturity. Just seeing the earth
from the moon, as a single planet lacking any borders has catalyzed
new ways of thinking.
> Earth is enough for us, if we have the will to cooperate, to transcend the
> bigotries that confound us, the borders that seperate us, to dare to have
> peace instead of waging war, to share what we have as far as we can give it
> without anyone having to pay for it ( the concept of having to work for
> one's bread is deadly when there is not enough work to go around ), to
> recognize that the most humble peasant in Mexico or India is worth more to
> us than the President of the US or the Queen of England.
Again, solving these problems is not mutually exclusive with space
exploration. However, I wonder who will make the bread that we needn't
work for, and who will hold the gun used to force the producers to
give up what they have created.
> If humanity can simply change from mere descendants of carnivorous apes to
> something totally gentle, altrustic, and noble, then Earth will be enough.
> We only try to escape the Earth because we try to escape our own natures.
No, trying to reach out beyond our current environment is the epitomy
of our curious ape-natures.
> **************************************************************************
> I, personally, am in full support of the Shuttle, the Space Program, and
> the exploration and exploition of space, and it's eventual population by
> humanity. BUT NOBODY HAS EVER ASKED US THESE QUESTIONS, NOBODY HAS EVER
> CHALLENGED US TO QUESTION OURSELVES! We need to be able to answer them,
> especially if those who have not, question the motives of us, those who
> have. Somehow, net.space would benefit from a really in-depth discussion
> of our justifications of our actions in space and thier consequences.
> Andrew Jonathan Fine.
These kinds of questions are asked every time NASA's budget is discussed
whether in Congress or over cocktails. How many times have you heard or
read the statement "Why spend money of space, when there's such a crying
need for social services here on earth."
I agree that anyone who supports space exploration must be able to answer
these kinds of questions, and that discussion of the multitude of answers
to them would be valuable.
Steve Dennett
dennett@sri-nic.arpa
****************************************************************
Date: 1986 February 21 00:53:02 PST (=GMT-8hr)
From: Robert Elton Maas <REM@mc.lcs.mit.edu>
To: unmvax!nmtvax!fine@ucbvax.berkeley.edu
Cc: SPACE@s1-b.arpa
Subject: answer to devil's advocate re space and destiny of humans
Sender: REM%IMSSS@su-score.arpa (for undeliverable-mail notifications)
Reply-To: REM%IMSSS@SU-SCORE.ARPA
F> Date: 9 Feb 86 04:10:48 GMT
F> From: unmvax!nmtvax!fine@ucbvax.berkeley.edu (Andrew J Fine)
F> Subject: Re: Scuttle the Space Program?
F> Does humanity (men and women) really *need* to populate space?
Yes, if we expect to survive we absolutely must either populate space
or move Earth away from the Sun to another star in about 5-10 billion
years.
F> Do we really need to explore, in person or otherwise, other planets?
No, not specifically, but generally if we explore everything we become
aware of then our science will advance further than if we omit some
categories of exploration.
F> Historically, exploration and open boundaries only encouraged
F> exploitation, slavery, and genocide of indigenous peoples such as
F> African, American Natives, and East Asians.
For the time being this point is totally moot. We are pretty certain
there is no intelligence life whatsoever anywhere except Earth in this
solar system, thus during the next two phases of exploration (local
Earth/Moon system, and Ringworld/DysonSphere) we won't be conquering
anyone already out there, and we will be relieving a lot of need to
conquer that has been going on on this overcrowded Earth.
F> It widened the gap between the rich and the poor at home, and the
F> massive funds spent on ships and weapons in that previous era caused
F> more people to starve.
We'll have to be careful to avoid repeating that. Massive collectors
of solar energy in space, feeding pure electricity via microwaves or
other means to Earth so that we can provide everyone on Earth with
nearly free energy instead of only the rich while avoiding the
inefficiency of traditional power plants on Earth that waste half
their energy in heat into the local environment, will shrink the gap
between rich and poor in my opinion. We'll have to make sure that
potential becomes actuality. Something between the "moon treaty" which
prevents anyone from getting a return on investment, and a totally free
enterprise where the rich get richer and the poor stay the same but
feel worse by comparison with the rich, needs to be adopted within the
next 30 years. With lots of cheap energy to desalinate water and pump
it into the deserts, there'll be more food to support more people.
With habitat in space there'll be hundreds of times as much living space
as there is on this tiny Earth, so that we can support 500 billion
people comfortably instead of having trouble supporting the 6 billion
we have now.
F> It also increased the likelyhood of the lawless being able to escape
F> justice, for example Botany Bay and the HMS Bounty.
I see nothing wrong with Botany Bay, especially compared to locking
them in jail and then supporting them until we parole them. I think on
this point I can't argue with you, just say I disagree on what is more
desirable.
F> So what do we buy with $2 billion dollars? One shuttle, good for
F> 100 missions (best case) with 7 people each. Or enough food, clean
F> water, and other necesssities to feed Ethiopia for the next ten
F> decades, easily.
Do we spend our last 100 years of industrial society squandering our
resources on feeding ourselves but not developing any long-range plan,
then the fossil fuel supply collapses and we have no alternative so we
revert to pre-industrial society and 90% of the world's population
dies within a few years due to starvation, and then before continental
drift can uncover new fossil fuels the Earth gets too warm to support
life and we all die (permanently; unlike Saturday-morning cartoon
shows when you are dead you stay dead)? Or do we spend our last 100
years of Earth-based industrial society developing industry in space
and then go on to survive to the end of the Universe?
F> So what do space-faring nations prove when they invoke national prestige and
F> the desire of humanity to expand, by consuming all that money and
F> men-centuries? "I'm rich enough to do this and you're not, so there!".
I don't like that argument for space either. I wish we didn't have to
appeal to "national prestige" and politics just to develop the
space-based resources we will need to survive the next two centuries.
F> "My rocket is bigger than yours!". "We are leaving you behind to scratch the
F> dust while we inherit the universe!" One man's glory is another man's
F> humiliation. One man's wealth is another man's poverty. One man's
F> livelihood is another man's serfdom.
Each individual person will die, within a hundred years from birth in
most cases although some live slightly longer and next century perhaps
many will. Thus the topic of "leaving you behind to scratch dust" must
be applied not to individual people, all of which will turn to dust
anyway, but to genetic lines, i.e. to descendents. Even somebody who
never goes to space can have children who do, if my plan is adopted. I
proposed (and repeat now) that once we have largescale space-based
habitat, that we encourage sperm and egg to be sent to space and
"test-tube" births to occur there. I figure within about 40 years the
technology for an artificial womb will be developed, about the same
time large-scale space-based habitat is developed. Then what we can do
is have each couple have one child on Earth (mandatory birth control)
but an unlimited number of children in space via artificial womb. It
is advantageous for the survival of our species that *all* people on
Earth partake in this, rather than just the rich, because it gives
more variety of genetic component and thus better chance of surviving
various new envirionments in space. Further, it is advantageous that
other species are brought with us into space. For one-celled life and
other microscopic life we can bring the life itself. For large
organisms we can use the same artificial-womb method we use for
humans. I would then advocate we actually do this, reproduce *all*
Earth-based life into space one way or another. Very few species will
go extinct after we do that. Among humans, the poor as well as the
rich will (via descendents) move into space. Telecommunications will
be such that parents on Earth can conference with their children in
space, so maybe they can't hug them but they can do just about
everything else in the way of raising their children. (With
teleoperators that have good tactile feedback they may even be able to hug!)
F> Why have satellites and information systems at all, except to invade the
F> privacy and keep records on a captive populace?
I think you're getting absurd on this point. How about these
electronic-mail discussions we're having? Don't you think they're
worthwhile? If you don't, why do you participate? Or did you take
electronic mail so much for granted you completely overlooked the fact
it is an information system? -- Yes, we have to be careful not to turn
the electronic revolution into 1984. We need concerned people such as
you and me to speak out against Orwellian use of our technology. But
so far I see more good than bad.
F> Why have land and weather satellites at all, except to take advantage
F> of another nation's resources and vulnerabilities?
Ridiculous again. Mostly we try to predict the weather so we can warn
people of bad weather and eventually be able to change the weather not
to be so bad sometimes. -- Of course we have to speak out against misuse.
F> Why explore the planets, interesting though they are, except to find
F> more virgin landscape to despoil and riches to plunder?
Do you eat plants or animals to stay alive? If plundering is immoral
you should stop eating and starve to death. I think you are wrong to
equate use of resources with loaded words such as "despoil" or
"plunder" so long as you are alive doing exactly that to stay alive.
F> Why put a man, or a women for that matter, in space? What is so
F> special about anyone that we must exhalt that person above all others
F> in such an eletist fashion?
Somebody has to be first, and naturally the first to do something gets
some special media attention. I've already argued that it's good to
move out into space, so I guess we just have to put up with the first
few people getting an inordinate amount of attention. I do wish there
was a program on TV that picked random hardworking normal people and
exhalted them a little, so we can appreciate the vast numbers of
hardworking busdrivers and stockroom clerks and grocery checkers and
street mainteners and computer programmers and typists etc. There are
already programs that exhalt doctors&nurses, police officers & private
detectives, and various kinds of very successful business
owners/managers, probably too many such programs. Maybe if more
ordinary people (but not like that stupid "ordinary people" program on
TV) were exhalted on TV routinely, the attention of astronauts wouldn't
upset you so much? I.e. I see your problem and I think the solution is
to exhalt lots of regular occupations rather than to demean astronauts.
F> Why shouldn't that person be put to a task that serves the world
F> rather than that person's ego?
It shouldn't be an either/or situation, and in case of astronauts it
is in fact both; as I argued above it's necessary for the survival of
the human race, and as you argue it is ego building.
F> The main problem with all of us is we are still essentially barbarians at
F> heart.
Yup, but we're also apes at heart, and most apes (chimpanzees being
the principal non-human exception) are rather peaceful. We have the
choice. For a few centuries we (our ancestors, not us personally)
acted mostly like barbarians, and now we are learning not to do that
so much. I think Captain Kirk (Startrek) said it best; my paraphrase:
yes we tended to kill in the recent past, but we can decide not to kill today.
F> The Viking who was the explorer was also the Viking that also raped
F> and pillaged. The Columbus who was the explorer was also the Columbus who
F> converted people to his religion by force.
Because (1) the lands explored were already inhabited, unlike space;
(2) he wasn't watched minute by minute by three major metworks, one
cable network, and lots of minor networks and individual stations, so
he could do whatever he wanted and then have months to figure out an
explanation before he got back to Scandanavia/Portugal, (3) global
responsibility hadn't yet become popular, theirs was an age of
glorious war and conquest, (4) the lands explored were small compared
to the lands already known whereas space is orders of magnitude larger
than Earth so there's lots of elbow room so even if we find some
planet around some distant star already inhabited we don't have to
conquer them or be conquered, we can simply keep our distance.
F> The shuttle pilot who was the explorer was also the pilot who killed
F> husbands, wives, and children in North Korea and North Vietnam.
Yup. Today he is not killing, he is doing something useful instead.
F> The wanderlust we all experience is just another word for the lust and
F> coveting for the outside world that blinds us to the potentials of the
F> inside world and the darkness of the soul that we need to correct.
I respect the desire to survive, to stay alive in terms of genetic
lines (descendents). Do you want Homo Sapiens and in fact all life on
Earth to go extinct? Or is it just you who wants to die? Regarding the
rest of your above remark, it may take centuries for us to completely
get rid of the bad parts of our culture, our "inner flaws". Unless we
survive (via descendents) the next several centuries we won't live
long enough to finish the self-purification task. I don't think one
person in one lifetime can go from where we are now to a correct inner
perfection. Some have tried, such as the monks of the middle ages and
the hippies of the 60's, but all of their plans were flawed in some
way. With further experiments in the future, and with general
cleansing of our overall culture, perhaps those lofty goals can be
reached someday, but only if we (our descendents) are alive then.
F> Do we really deserve to go "out there" when we have such a mess "down here"?
Fact of nature: Nobody deserves anything, period. We have no right to
be alive in the first place, but on the other hand there's no
immorality inherit in being alive. We just are alive, period. You no
more or less deserve to live on this planet than others deserve to
live in space. Those who are successful at living will live, the rest
will die out. -- Note, your remark and my answer are basically
statements of religious belief, not science or engineering. I think
you're grossly wrong in implying there's some global morality that
makes it inherently wrong to go to space, and you probably think I'm
grossly wrong in denying the global morality you believe in.
Fortunately in this country we have religious freedom, not only to
believe in recognized religions, but to believe in things that others
may not even accept as a religion much less a good religion. I trust
my debate with you on this matter won't be construed as opposing your
right to believe as you do, although I hope you don't hogtie the rest
of the world to your particular religious belief.
F> Earth is enough for us, ...
Definitely not in the long run, and these next hundred years (or less
if those military people have their long-planned thermonuclear war)
are crucial for getting our much-needed space.
F> (the concept of having to work for one's bread is deadly when there is
F> not enough work to go around)
There's plenty of work to go around, just not enough paying work in a
society where paying work is both the means of maintaining
self-respect and respect of society and the means of getting decent
food on the table and roof over head. I have lots of things I want
done, like cleaning up the broken glass in the street where I have to
bicicle, and I wish somebody would do that, I wish society would pay
somebody to get it done so the person who does it doesn't have to
starve because of doing it instead of something else, with the rest of
us chipping in our share of the pay. I'd be willing to clean up the
glass myself if somebody paid me to do it and provided me with tools
for doing it properly and transportation for moving tools around from
one site to another. -- This is getting far afield of development of
space, let's move this topic to a private distribution list??
F> to recognize that the most humble peasant in Mexico or India is worth
F> more to us than the President of the US or the Queen of England.
I think that's stupid. The peasant and president should be equal in
basic worth, just like our Constitution says for citizens of the USA,
I want that extended worldwide. -- Again, off topic of space.
F> If humanity can simply change from mere descendants of carnivorous apes to
F> something totally gentle, altrustic, and noble, then Earth will be enough.
I respectfully repeat my claim that Earth isn't enough in the long
run. Re altruism, read "The Selfish Gene" by Richard Dawkins.
So-called altruism is either really helping copies of genes to survive
(thus really selfish, but not evil) or truly stupid altruism that dies
out soon.
F> We only try to escape the Earth because we try to escape our own natures.
I disagree. Maybe some do that, but I want us to escape certain
extinction on Earth. Our nature is to try to survive, not to knowingly
suffer certain extinction.
((By the way, you have asked some good questions, and a few stupid
ones. That's better than par for the course lately.))
F> ***************************************************************************
F> I, personally, am in full support of the Shuttle, the Space Program, and
F> the exploration and exploition of space, and it's eventual population by
F> humanity. BUT NOBODY HAS EVER ASKED US THESE QUESTIONS, NOBODY HAS EVER
F> CHALLENGED US TO QUESTION OURSELVES!
S**t, I go to all that trouble rebutting your anti-space claims, and
then it turns out you are on our side anyway. Instead of playing
devil's advocate, why couldn't you have answered some of them yourself?
F> We need to be able to answer them, especially if those who have not,
F> question the motives of us, those who have. Somehow, net.space would
F> benefit from a really in-depth discussion of our justifications of our
F> actions in space and their consequences.
I agree. You should try answering them too. You may have good answers
a little different from mine.
****************************************************************
∂26-Feb-86 2337 JMC
To: SJM
Do I have anything on productivity?
∂27-Feb-86 1149 JMC re: Shankar
To: BARWISE@SU-CSLI.ARPA, SF@SU-CSLI.ARPA, Nils@SU-SCORE.ARPA,
stan@SRI-AI.ARPA
[In reply to message from BARWISE@SU-CSLI.ARPA sent Thu 27 Feb 86 09:12:13-PST.]
I have a high opinion of Shankar, although he doesn't fit any of my
present activities.
∂27-Feb-86 1613 JMC re: paper
To: Restivo@SU-SCORE.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Thu 27 Feb 86 15:04:33-PST.]
The paper is called "First Order Theories of Individual Concepts and
Propositions", and Rutie can give you a copy. It is also on-line.
∂27-Feb-86 2142 JMC re: CPSR Annual Meeting: March 1
To: BrianSmith.pa@XEROX.COM
[In reply to message sent 27 Feb 86 19:57 PST.]
Sure.
∂27-Feb-86 2352 JMC re: circumscription reference(s) sought
To: SJG
[In reply to message rcvd 27-Feb-86 17:26-PT.]
I have nothing beyond the latest revised version of my 1984
"Applications of circumscription ...". Vladimir has several
things you should ask him for.
∂27-Feb-86 2358 JMC re: a data point on servers
To: coraki!pratt@SU-NAVAJO.ARPA, facil@SU-AI.ARPA,
pratt@SU-NAVAJO.ARPA, NB@SU-AI.ARPA, kent@SU-NAVAJO.ARPA,
worley@SU-NAVAJO.ARPA
[In reply to message from coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa sent Thu, 27 Feb 86 10:13:21 pst.]
The data point would be more convincing if it could be argued that
a substantial amount of computer time is spent running TEX. It may
be that without the total amount of TEX done by CSD, including all
reruns to fix bugs in the source, is well within the present computational
resources of the Department. Otherwise, the argument is similar to
a hypothetical argument in favor of having three men's rooms on each
floor, so that less time would be spent in transit.
∂28-Feb-86 0011 JMC re: dump?
To: MDixon@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Thu 27 Feb 86 09:25:12-PST.]
The Palo Alto City Dump is on Embarcadero East of Bayshore. Better
phone for hours and be prepared to pay. Phone number in the phone
book - which you might have consulted.
∂28-Feb-86 0813 JMC re: Dreyfus and AI. (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: OTHER-SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
My opinion is somewhat the reverse. Dreyfus's earlier objections to
AI were more unsound, and more journalistic, than his present objections
to speicific approaches. I still don't agree with his present objections.
Moreover, his recent work, apparently together with his brother, amount
to reinventing AI, i.e. he is coming forth with his own notion of expertise,
which, however, is still to vague for programming. In another ten years
he may actually have to try to write a program - or, more likely, try to
get some Berkeley philosophy graduate student to do so.
This opinion is based on his talk at the "Foundations of AI" conference.
∂28-Feb-86 1050 JMC
To: SJM
Don't tell Lynn that I have ridden in a helicopter.
∂28-Feb-86 1057 JMC re: paper
To: Restivo@SU-SCORE.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Fri 28 Feb 86 09:11:48-PST.]
Rutie can give you a paper copy. The on-line file is CONCEP.TEX[E76,JMC].
∂28-Feb-86 1100 JMC files
To: RA
I see that the biojmc.tex still mentions (as comments that don't appear
in the printed version) the old pub versions of the file. The TEXed
versions usually have the same name with the extension .TEX in the
same area.
∂28-Feb-86 1628 JMC
To: berg@SU-SCORE.ARPA
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.
∂28-Feb-86 1752 JMC re: Personnel Survey of AI Salaries
To: Rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Fri 28 Feb 86 17:34:04-PST.]
Be sure and include
Inference Corp.
5300 Century Blvd.
Los Angeles, CA 90066
213 417-7997
Attention: Alexander Jacobson, President
I know they have started some people at rather large salaries.
∂28-Feb-86 1804 JMC re: [Matthew Ginsberg <SJG@SU-AI.ARPA>: potential AI roundtable ]
To: FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, shortliffe@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA,
rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, "@TABLE.DIS[1,SJG]"@SU-AI.ARPA
CC: mugs@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
[In reply to message from FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA sent Fri 28 Feb 86 16:36:58-PST.]
"Traditional AI" is a term introduced by Dreyfus in the abstract of this
particular lecture. It has no established meaning, and therefore it is
infeasible to argue about whether it will work. I am disinclined to take
part in any large round table, because I have found them unfruitful.
Better have a local meeting with no subsidies and only invited talks.
From my point of view the New Mexico foundations meeting was a loser,
because there was no debate among the different current approaches to AI,
e.g. logic based, rule-based, actor-based (if it really exists),
connectionism, etc. Deciding what the etc. is will require some thought
on the part of an organizer. Maybe it even includes situation-based and
situated automata based. Are there rival schools of rule-based? What are
the limitations of rule-based technology? Can it incorporate "deep
knowledge", and what does that mean, and are there specific performances
that need it? Is Bill Clancy right that rule-based systems are most
appropriate for systems that can be done by what he calls "heuristic
classification"? What if any form of non-monotonic reasoning is wanted?
Is Prolog or Lisp programming per se a paradigm? What are Newell and
Minsky currently advocating? Who represents the views that were expressed
by David Marr and can speak about it?
As for Dreyfus, he can be either a generalized opponent or he can try to
make something of his concept of expertise.
∂28-Feb-86 1812 JMC message to Dreyfus
To: SJG
The copy of my latest aimed at Dreyfus failed, and presumably yours
did too. When you figure out how to reach him, please transmit mine
also.
∂28-Feb-86 2215 JMC Etherington
To: VAL
I have been asked for a recommendation for David Etherington. If you
have also been asked, then I'll base mine on what I know. Otherwise,
I'd like to take your opinion into account also.
∂28-Feb-86 2248 JMC
To: RA
toledo.1
∂28-Feb-86 2347 JMC
To: RA
hopcro.1
∂28-Feb-86 2353 JMC files copies to Bob Wolf
To: RA
Please print the following files and mail them to Bob Wolf whose address
is on a letter from him in my out box.
SANDP2.AX[S78,JMC] 03-Jul-78 Axioms for Mr. S and Mr. P
SANDP.AX[S78,JMC] 26-Jun-78 Axioms for Mr. S and Mr. P
KK[S79,JMC] Ma's Mr. S and Mr. P
KK.PRF[S79,JMC] Ma's FOL proof of Mr. S and Mr. P
KNOW[E78,JMC] FORMALIZATION OF TWO PUZZLES INVOLVING KNOWLEDGE
∂01-Mar-86 0014 JMC workshop
To: aaai-office@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA, TOB@SU-AI.ARPA
I have a letter dated Jan 9 from Su-shing Chen of Purdue asking for
support for a workshop on computer vision to be held at the University of
Puerto Rico. Did I do anything about this request?
Tom, I think I didn't do anything. Do you know Chen? Should AAAI
support the workshop?
∂01-Mar-86 0250 JMC
To: RA
consum.1
∂01-Mar-86 1526 JMC re: a data point on servers
To: worley@SU-NAVAJO.ARPA
[In reply to message sent 1 Mar 1986 1311-PST.]
∂27-Feb-86 1213 coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa a data point on servers
Received: from SU-NAVAJO.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Feb 86 12:09:15 PST
Received: by su-navajo.arpa with Sendmail; Thu, 27 Feb 86 12:08:26 pst
Received: by coraki.uucp (1.1/SMI-1.2)
id AA05439; Thu, 27 Feb 86 10:13:21 pst
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 86 10:13:21 pst
From: coraki!pratt@su-navajo.arpa (Vaughan Pratt)
Message-Id: <8602271813.AA05439@coraki.uucp>
To: facil@su-ai.ARPA
Cc:
Subject: a data point on servers
The following is a message I just received from David Chase, who has
been bringing up various tex packages to run on servers. It should
give an additional data point on why workstations rather than graphics
terminals are the appropriate architecture of the future - look at the
wall times for a workstation (a slow Sun-2) vs. a timeshared system
(Navajo, in the evening), both running 4.2 BSD Unix. The gap would
widen yet more if Sun-3 class machines were use.
It also should give further insight into the need for servers, cf.
Chase's urgent plea for one.
-v
-------------- Forwarded Message
Unix-From: rbbb%sun-eos@SU-NAVAJO.ARPA Wed Feb 26 21:22:31 1986
Received: by coraki.uucp (1.1/SMI-1.2)
id AA04163; Wed, 26 Feb 86 21:22:27 pst
Received: from sun-eos by su-navajo.arpa with Sendmail; Wed, 26 Feb 86 21:12:37 pst
Received: by sun-eos with Sendmail; Wed, 26 Feb 86 21:10:44 pst
Return-Path: <rbbb%sun-eos@SU-NAVAJO.ARPA>
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 86 20:08:55 PST
From: David Chase <rbbb%sun-eos@SU-NAVAJO.ARPA>
Subject: Latex on Suns and use of texserver
To: pratt@su-navajo, nb@sail, kent@navajo, worley@su-navajo
Message-Id: <104.rbbb.sun-eos@Stanford>
I have latex, bibtex, and dviimp running on a Sun. There are some
cosmetic bugs (because of byte-order problems, the dviimp sometimes
grumbles about checksums, and existing bugs have not been removed).
latex:
A vanilla version. If there are any local modifications added after
loading lplain, they will be missing.
bibtex:
Exactly what runs on Navajo, compiled on a Sun
dviimp:
Exactly what runs on Navajo, except for changes to reflect differences
in Pascal compilers on Vaxen and Suns. Uses "gf" fonts, whatever those
are (a product of Metafont, I am told).
To run latex, you need:
latex 912 blocks
macros 1551 blocks (includes tex macros, .bst files)
font metric tables 271 blocks
TOTAL 2734 blocks
To run bibtex, you need
bibtex 200 blocks
.bst files charged to latex above
TOTAL 200 blocks
To run dviimp, you need
dviimp 172 blocks
gf font files 6688 blocks (metric files charged to latex)
TOTAL 6860 blocks
To run tex (in addition to latex), you need:
tex 920 blocks
Support binaries (not necessary to run tex or latex):
undump 38 blocks
tangle 89 blocks
virtex 336 blocks
initex 576 blocks
inimf 616 blocks
virmf 608 blocks
mf 904 blocks
TOTAL 3167 blocks
Configurations:
Latex and tex 4000 blocks
Latex, tex, and dviimp 11000 blocks
Latex, tex, dviimp, and support software (not including sources)
14000 blocks
Latex, tex, and support software (not including sources)
7000 blocks
I don't have any use for the support software, but other people might. I
don't have any use for it, other than to bring up latex and tex. So, I
think it is a choice between 4000 blocks on a server and 11000 blocks on a
server. To help with these choices, I ran latex, bibtex, and dviimp on a
sample 13 page file on sun-eos (a 2 megabyte Sun-2 with local disk) and
su-navajo (a 16 megabyte Vax 11/780 with interleaved memory, = 115% of a
unit Vax). The sun was very lightly loaded, the Vax beyond my control
(I did run these in the evening, so the load average was about 3). The
timings:
sun-eos su-navajo
latex
cpu 80 50
wall 1:30 4:30
bibtex
cpu 7 6
wall 7 36
dviimp
cpu 50 30
wall 53 1:11
The output of dviimp is, of course, suitable for printing on an imagen
printer using ipr. This was done, and the output did appear to be
formatted correctly.
Why I am telling you this?
Obviously, this is a pitch to place all these files on some server
machine. This machine would be a FILE server, not a TEX server, so that
it would not be loaded down with everybody's TeXing (I suppose that it
could process TeX's, as long as they did not interfere with the machine's
activities as a file server). Do you feel that the machine I know as
"texserver" is a suitable machine for this use, and if not, can you
suggest another? I am told that perhaps it is "too far" from this network
(the one which sun-eos and the various numerical sins share) for NFS
access, though I have had no difficulty while bringing up latex. (Note
that I am also proposing that whatever is on texserver be shared with the
numerical analysis group; I have no idea what is desirable along those
lines, either technically or socially, except that duplicating files fewer
times is good, and that it is nice to feel that distant meddlers will not
destroy software on which one depends.)
Scott Comer also has some opinions about how these files should be
arranged on the server, so that clients could use the files with a minimum
of hassle on their part. He proposes that all of the TeX software should
be gathered under one directory "/tex", to simplify the symbolic links
needed (it lacks taste to remotely mount the server's /usr partition only
to access /usr/local/lib/tex and /usr/local/lib/latex).
Please do reply. I would like to not run this software on Navajo (notice
the wall timings), but I would also like to have a little disk space on
this machine for day-to-day use. That means (if I am to live in a better
world) that we must find a server for this software.
Thanks,
David Chase (rbbb@sun-eos, chase@su-navajo)
------- End of Forwarded Message
∂01-Mar-86 1824 JMC re: workshop
To: binford@SU-WHITNEY.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Sat, 1 Mar 86 18:02:02 pst.]
I wondered whether it was that Chen. Indeed AAAI will handle it as it
routinely handles workshops. Unfortunately, I am the person who routinely
decides whether to finance a particular workshop. The question is whether
Chen can do it. Since I almost always say yes to these requests and he
only is asking for $5K, I'll do it unless you say he is entirely out of
touch with current vision work.
∂01-Mar-86 1917 JMC re: Michele/Imelda - Those Ever-Lovin' First Ladies. (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: OTHER-SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
Nevertheless, anyone who hopes that Pinochet or Chun can be persuaded
to leave without bloodshed should restrain his eagerness to kick Marcos
or Duvalier. I don't say the U.S. shouldn't let the Phillipine government
take away some of the excess property, but they should fundamentally be
left in peace.
∂01-Mar-86 2317 JMC
To: CLT
Eric Mathre, 7-1055
Randy Melen, 7-1055, can help with RT
∂01-Mar-86 2338 JMC re: VTSS 160 writing assignment #5 from Todd Gates
To: T.TALM@LOTS-B
[In reply to message sent Sat 1 Mar 86 23:06:09-PST.]
I have received your paper and will react in due time.
∂02-Mar-86 1309 JMC re: bells of rhymney;partridge family (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: OTHER-SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
The original fragments of "The Bells of Rhymney" were appealing.
The Pete Seeger words seem somewhat sickening. Is this just my right
wing prejudice against Pete Seeger, or do others also feel that bragging
about "We spread a little love" somehow spreads a little disgust?
∂02-Mar-86 1346 JMC re: bells of rhymney;partridge family (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: GOLDBERG@SU-CSLI.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Sun 2 Mar 86 13:34:18-PST.]
Thanks for the support, but alas the SAIL users won't hear about it, because
you mailed to OTHER-SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI which omits the SAIL bboard itself.
It omits it, because at SAIL it is customary to append comments to the
BBOARD page being replied to and then MAIL them to the other bboards.
∂02-Mar-86 1415 JMC
To: RA
lipset.4
∂02-Mar-86 1422 JMC re: bells of rhymney;partridge family (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: OTHER-SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
SAIL again gets left out via the TOPS-20 reply macro and the
OTHER-SU-BBOARDS address.
Subject: re: bells of rhymney;partridge family (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: OTHER-SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA, GOLDBERG@SU-CSLI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Sun 2 Mar 86 13:09:00-PST
There is little doubt that the "we spread a little love" song is fairly
disgusting (as JMC pointed out). Furthermore, I don't think that this
is a result of a bias against Pete Seeger. It is merely some degree
of taste which has lead JMC to this conclusion in ignorance of the
song's creators. The piece of trash in question was, I suspect, the
Partridge Family theme song.
-Jeff Goldberg (GOLDBERG@SU-CSLI)
-------
∂02-Mar-86 1441 JMC reply to letter from Chen
To: RA
Include AAAI office address, phone and net address in all such letters,
and they should all cc: Claudia Mazzetti
Dear Professor Chen:
AAAI will support your proposed vision workshop at the University
of Puerto Rico with $5,000. I'm sorry for the delay in responding, but
somehow the letter got to the bottom of my mail stack. Please arrange
all further matters with Claudia Mazzetti at the AAAI office.
However, I'm curious about why the University of Puerto Rico
is the best place for the workshop. Are they active enough in vision
to make up for the increased travel costs and time?
Sincerely,
∂02-Mar-86 1453 JMC re: workshop
To: AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Sun 2 Mar 86 14:51:16-PST.]
That's what I thought. I'll send him a letter tomorrow telling him
that his workshop will be supported with $5K and asking him to contact
you. I suggest that the next time we announce the possibility of
workshop support, we suggest that the letter or message to me include
a copy to you. Then you can harass me for a decision. In this case
the delay wasn't too bad, especially considering that Chen was an
NSF bureaucrat and typically took very much longer. You'll shortly
get a copy of my letter to Chen.
∂02-Mar-86 1625 JMC
To: YOM@SU-AI.ARPA
I'm ready to sign.
∂02-Mar-86 1813 JMC re: ONR Proposal
To: NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Sun 2 Mar 86 18:10:00-PST.]
Sure.
∂02-Mar-86 1821 JMC re: Mail forwarding from UNIX machines (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: OTHER-SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
I request that jmc-lists@su-ai be the address used when I am on
a mailing list. This goes to msg.msg[jnk,jmc] instead of msg.msg[1,jmc].
Seems to work well enough.
∂02-Mar-86 1823 JMC re: songs and all (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: OTHER-SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
There's nothing disgusting about "spreadin' a li'l love" if
you can do it. I think it's the bragging about it that disgusts.
∂02-Mar-86 2243 JMC re: Congratulations!
To: FEIGENBAUM@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Sun 2 Mar 86 21:40:08-PST.]
Thanks, and congratulatons on National Academy of Engineering. Yes,
I do have to make a speech.
∂03-Mar-86 0023 JMC
To: CLT
While I remember, how about dinner with Miro Friday night?
∂03-Mar-86 1430 JMC re: MAD tools
To: Restivo@SU-SCORE.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Mon 3 Mar 86 10:29:21-PST.]
MAD is considering MRS, ART and KEE.
I don't understand what you are trying to do with Filman's problem and
computer chess in general. MAD is not at all interested in that.
∂03-Mar-86 1436 JMC re: AI roundtable
To: SJG
[In reply to message rcvd 03-Mar-86 12:39-PT.]
Assuming that you don't replace dropouts, I'm willing to take my chances
on the group. What makes you think there's a chance that Minsky would
come all the way to take part?
∂03-Mar-86 1438 JMC re: AI roundtable
To: SJG, VAL
[In reply to message rcvd 03-Mar-86 12:39-PT.]
How about 3:30 for a brief get together this Thursday? My class
ends at 3:15, and the seminar begins at 4.
∂03-Mar-86 1711 JMC
To: aaai-office@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Do we have a workshop on planning and scheduling planned.
∂03-Mar-86 1733 JMC re: why I think Minsky will come
To: SJG
[In reply to message rcvd 03-Mar-86 14:43-PT.]
In the past, Minsky has been rather passionate about Dreyfus.
∂03-Mar-86 1753 JMC assembler
To: HX.HAL@SU-FORSYTHE.ARPA
CC: LES@SU-AI.ARPA
What is the situation concerning a symbolic assembler for the RT and
also a description of the machine language of the RT?
Also I seem to lack Bob Semans's net mail address.
∂03-Mar-86 2058 JMC re: topic for AI roundtable
To: SJG@SU-AI.ARPA, "@TABLE.DIS[1,SJG]"@SU-AI.ARPA
[In reply to message from SJG rcvd 03-Mar-86 17:58-PT.]
Well that's better than "traditional AI", and I can go along with it.
I do have the reservation, both philosophical and practical, that
assertions about "what knowledge IS" assume the pre-existence of
categories within which it can be defined. I would prefer to discuss
the properties of knowledge and whether it can be represented in
logic, by rules, holistically, etc., but I'll accept the fuzzier
idea if others want it.
∂03-Mar-86 2237 JMC
To: genesereth@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Genesereth has served on the following departmental committees.
∂04-Mar-86 0025 JMC Italians
To: RA
Tell them that I will probably come, but they should phone me Wednesday
morning before 11 our time at home 857-0672.
∂04-Mar-86 1121 JMC re: CS 309C
To: BERG@SU-SCORE.ARPA, nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
CC: reges@SU-SCORE.ARPA
[In reply to message from BERG@SU-SCORE.ARPA sent Tue 4 Mar 86 11:06:21-PST.]
Oh, well. I don't propose that we try to find a replacement.
∂04-Mar-86 1355 JMC re: ONR Porposal, 3rd probe
To: LES
[In reply to message rcvd 04-Mar-86 13:31-PT.]
ok
∂04-Mar-86 1532 JMC
To: nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
IV. The Candidates Role
A. As a tenured associate professor, Genesereth is expected to
continue the role he has filled as an assistant professor. This has
included (a) his personal research (b) the supervision of graduate
students in his area of artificial intelligence (c) taking charge
of the main introductory artificial intelligence course. (c) is
worthy of special comment. Before Genesereth took charge of this
course, it was most often taught as a survey of important papers
in the field. Genesereth was the first to organize it as systematic
scientific course, treating the various problems and paradigms
of artificial intelligence via controlled logical reasoning. His
ability to organize the course and teach it to very large numbers
of students has been important to the Department and will continue
to be important. He is the best we have in artificial intelligence
at this work.
B. We expect him to be successful, because he has been successful.
C. His role has been and will be essentially within the
Computer Science Department.
D. Genesereth has filled an important role in developing the
master's program in artificial intelligence.
Genesereth has served on the following departmental committees.
∂04-Mar-86 1532 JMC
To: nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
[praise of referees]
∂04-Mar-86 1533 JMC
To: nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
This one is done, I think.
VII.
A. The most significant reservation was expressed by Prof. Allen Newell
of Carnegie-Mellon University. He considered Douglas Lenat more brilliant,
though less steady and able to lead students. The Computer Science
Department had previously recommended Lenat for tenure though not
unanimously, and the recommendation was turned down by Humanities
and Science. Newell also considered that Genesereth unlikely to
revolutionize computer science. Newell has quite high standards
as to what would constitute a revolution, and also he has a different
philosophy of artificial intelligence than the one Genesereth shares
with some other members of the Stanford department. In spite of
his reservations, Newell recommended that Genesereth be promoted
to tenure.
Newell and one or two others also considered Hector Levesque of the
University of Toronto to be better. We don't agree with this
opinion, because we regard Levesque's work as somewhat specialized
and not as fundamental to artificial intelligence as Genesereth's
work on the control of logical reasoning.
B. The tenured members of the Computer Science Department.
C. Yes.
D. Yes.
∂04-Mar-86 2052 JMC reply to message
To: GENESERETH@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Tue 4 Mar 86 20:20:07-PST.]
All but not necessarily itemized by year - and anything else we can claim
you did for the Department or the University.
∂05-Mar-86 0035 JMC re: Parallel Computer & Qlisp
To: LES
[In reply to message sent Tue 4 Mar 86 23:04:38-EST.]
Is MIPS John Hennessy's? I think you should investigate the questions
Squires asks. Besides having the purse strings, he's very smart.
∂05-Mar-86 0119 JMC re: JMC's letter to Stanford Daily (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: OTHER-SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
Glad to oblige about the reason for ``gay community'' in my letter
to the Daily. It was because I regard the term as dubious English.
In the first place referring to the X community is a neologism
that is used to give status to self-proclaimed spokesmen for the
``community'' in question. ``Spokesmen for the X community were angered
by ... ''. Usually no-one elected them spokesmen.
In the second place the appropriation of the word ``gay'' to
refer to homosexuals wipes out the ordinary English usage of a
word with many connotations in usage and history. The appropriation
of a word with positive connotations for a descriptive purpose is an
often used but nevertheless dishonest trick. Another example is
Intellicorp trademarking the phrase ``The AI Solutions Company''.
The use of the word ``homophobia'' which suggests fear of mankind
in general for opposition to homosexuality or perhaps to homosexuals
as people is another such appropriation.
But I'm just a reactionary. I haven't even been intimidated
into saying ``gender'' instead of ``sex''.
∂05-Mar-86 0123 JMC re: Parallel Computer & Qlisp
To: LES
[In reply to message rcvd 05-Mar-86 00:49-PT.]
Presumably RPG will say that Lucid has no objection to RISC
technology personal computers in general. Maybe I should try.
Remind me at some appropriate time. Am I right that you haven't
actually met him?
∂05-Mar-86 1013 JMC re: industrial lecturer
To: RA
[In reply to message rcvd 05-Mar-86 09:16-PT.]
Alas, I don't have a third industrial lecturer. Maybe I'll have one
by the end of today.
∂05-Mar-86 1031 JMC The third man
To: berg@SU-SCORE.ARPA
CC: RA@SU-AI.ARPA
is Robert Smith of Computer Curriculum Corporation. He just agreed this
morning, and won't have his catalog till 3pm. Please telephone him then
at 494-8450.
∂05-Mar-86 1048 JMC
To: VAL
Boyer, Robert S. (home: 512 467-0182) (office: 471-1901)
1 hit on key "boyer".
Exit
↑C
.
∂05-Mar-86 1610 JMC re: planlunch abstract?
To: LANSKY@SRI-AI.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Wed 5 Mar 86 15:32:34-PST.]
title: Situation calculus planning in blocks and related worlds
Abstract: This talk is mainly ideas rather than completed work.
Situation calculus is based on the equation s' = result(e,s),
where s and s' are situations and e is an event. Provided
one can control the deduction adequately, this is a more powerful
formalism than STRIPS. Planning a sequence of actions, or more
generally, a strategy of actions to achieve as situation with
specified properties admits a variety of heuristics which in
whittle away at the problem. In many practical situations, these
heuristics, which don't guarantee an full solution but leave a
reduced problem, are sufficient. Humans appear to use many of them
and so should computer programs. The talk therefore will concern both
epistemological and heuristic aspects of planning problems.
∂05-Mar-86 1808 JMC re: SHRDLU revealed (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: OTHER-SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
It represents one opinion as to the letter frequencies and
the one used by the people who arranged the boxes for hand
typesetting. When I took print shop in junior high school, we
did hand typesetting. The slugs for the different letters were
arranged in two cases, upper and lower. The box containing e's
was biggest. The various opinions about frequency, which differ
slightly according to the source of sampled text, are discussed
in Secret and Urgent by Fletcher Pratt, a prewar book on cryptography.
∂05-Mar-86 1812 JMC re: homophobia (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: OTHER-SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
Sorry about confusing Greek and Latin re homo and homo. But, alas,
I see no way of being completely sure of definitions before lambasting
things.
∂06-Mar-86 1146 JMC re: VTSS class
To: KAO@SU-SIERRA.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Wed 5 Mar 86 22:42:29-PST.]
Good luck with your oral.
∂06-Mar-86 1733 JMC re: Cuthbert Hurd
To: RA
[In reply to message rcvd 06-Mar-86 16:11-PT.]
I called Hurd and we agreed on the lunch.
∂06-Mar-86 1744 JMC reply to message
To: CLT
[In reply to message rcvd 06-Mar-86 17:30-PT.]
Will do. I presume you still want milk and teething rings.
∂07-Mar-86 0032 JMC re: JMC in Daily- again? (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: OTHER-SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
If I had known that the Daily would like my letter well enough to
print it twice, I'd have made it twice as long.
∂07-Mar-86 0039 JMC Subject: energy ex nihilo? (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: OTHER-SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
Clearly this is an improvement on the English of "The fluorescent bulb
gives as much light as a 60 watt bulb, yet uses only 18 watts of power". Any
English teacher could see that this is clearer.
∂07-Mar-86 0947 JMC re: meeting this AM at 10.30?
To: SJG, VAL
[In reply to message from SJG rcvd 07-Mar-86 09:31-PT.]
10:30 will be ok.
∂07-Mar-86 1337 JMC re: positive responsibility of computer professionals
To: Carnese@SRI-KL.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Fri, 7 Mar 1986 09:42 PST.]
Unfortunately, I will just be starting on a two week trip at that time.
Some date in May would be feasible.
∂07-Mar-86 1342 JMC
To: SJM
Here's a slightly tighter version.
∂07-Mar-86 1149 SJM
By all means, let's continue the totally irrelevant debate. I
write in answer to Jim Suhre's response (March 6) to my letter
of February 26 on whether agriculture is nature. Suhre says that cows
are nature, the vanishing of oak trees is nature, and the Dish itself is
nature. Sure, if you define nature as, say, "the system of all
phenomena of space and time; the physical universe" - one of the dictionary
definitions.
However, since the caption referred to technology and nature coexisting,
that's not what the Daily meant.
Suhre suggests that the caption could have simply read "Nature". By
his criterion, every picture could be thus captioned. It may seem
odd, but let's not reject it unthinkingly. All great innovations seem odd
at first. How about it, Daily? Why not caption all pictures "Nature"? Why
not headline all stories "Nature"? All editors would edit the "Nature"
section. The Daily could break new ground in journalism.
No, what was clearly meant by nature in this case is "Natural
scenery; as, wild nature". Or, "the objects and phenomena of nature, as
birds, flowers, weather, etc.". Not agriculture.
Suhre's just worried that I think humans are unnatural. Yes and
no. It's not always so bad to be unnatural.
Suhre's letter is disingenuous. Everybody knows what's meant
by nature here. If we just use the word to mean everything there is, why
go on nature walks? Why have nature preserves? Why denature alcohol?
S.J. McCarthy
Staff, Computer Science
∂07-Mar-86 1402 JMC Milan
To: CLT
I had to tell the Italians that I was coming alone, but if you change
your mind I should tell them right away.
∂07-Mar-86 1527 JMC aluminum air battery
To: llw@S1-A.ARPA, rah@S1-A.ARPA
Can you give me a reference - literary or personal - to its present
status.
∂07-Mar-86 1530 JMC computer controlled vehicles
To: HPM@SU-AI.ARPA
Can you tell me the current state of such efforts. I'm updating my
old essay on the wonders of computer-controlled cars.
∂07-Mar-86 1641 JMC re: computer controlled vehicles
To: Hans.Moravec@ROVER.RI.CMU.EDU
[In reply to message sent 7 Mar 1986 19:01-EST.]
Thanks, Hans.
∂07-Mar-86 1641 JMC Re: computer controlled vehicles
To: SJM
∂07-Mar-86 1639 hpm@rover.ri.cmu.edu Re: computer controlled vehicles
Received: from ROVER.RI.CMU.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Mar 86 16:39:37 PST
Date: 7 Mar 1986 19:01-EST
From: Hans.Moravec@ROVER.RI.CMU.EDU
To: John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>
Subject: Re: computer controlled vehicles
Message-Id: <510624097/hpm@ROVER.RI.CMU.EDU>
In-Reply-To: John McCarthy's mail message of 07 Mar 86 1530 PST
Still pitiful. A few recent road followers (Japanese and Darpa sponsered)
sort of work using 80% effective road locators with accomodating
and prediction helped stereo or (more often) edge and color region
segmenters. On top of the pixel crunchers are controllers not much
fancier than Rod Schmidt's line follower. We have one that can sometimes
turn properly at intersections. Kubota has some experimental
laser beacon guided earth movers. None of these big systems is going
to be let loose in human company for quite a while - they're much too
dumb and dangerous.
I wrote an article on smaller mobile robots for Salamander books -
it has a lot of good pictures - I'll send you a copy.
-- Hans
∂08-Mar-86 1500 JMC
To: nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
I have finished the encomium and will MAIL it.
∂08-Mar-86 1500 JMC
To: nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
I. Not applicable.
!II. Biographical information.
Biography is attached.
!III. Bibliographic information
1. Bibligraphy is attached.
!2. Statement by John McCarthy about important Genesereth publications.
DART, see message about why it's different msg.msg[1,jmc]/418p
An overview of meta-level architecture (82)
Conjunct ordering and controlling recursive inference
Papers on control of reasoning
An intellectual problem to be solved by a computer can be
regarded has having two parts. The first is to find the relevant
facts that determine the solution, and the second is to
reason with these facts and get the solution. One of the discoveries
of the early 1970s and built into the programming language Prolog
is that it is often possible to standardize the reasoning method
and work directly from the expression of the facts in the language
of predicate calculus. Given the goal of finding some objects (e.g.
x, y and z), satisfying certain ccnditions, a Prolog program will
work from the goal and the facts in the database in a standard
systematic way. Prolog embodies one way of doing this and the simple
way of using Genesereth's MRS system does it in another.
However, on more difficult problems the simple standard ways
of using the facts don't work. The search becomes enormous. Therefore,
it is necessary to reason about the structure of the
facts and the goal and decide on a strategy for using the facts. We
can think about this at two levels. On the first level, the programmer
decides on the strategy for using the facts, and it is important that
the programming language permit him to express this strategy in a
straightforward way. Genesereth's MRS (for Meta-level Reasoning System)
permits more complex strategies to be expressed straightforwardly than
does Prolog. On the second and higher level, the program itself must
reason about the structure of facts and goals.
Most of Genesereth's research concerns the problems of controlling
reasoning, i.e. the strategies for using facts to achieve goals. The
MRS system is intended both to permit the programmer to express his
strategy if he knows it and to permit him to make the computer itself
search for the best strategy again using controlled logical reasoning ---
this time from ``metafacts'' relevant to determining good strategies.
Genesereth's ideas on how to do this have been developing. An
ambitious approach to controlling programs at the meta-level
is contained in the first paper.
``An Overview of Meta-Level Architecture'' by Michael R. Genesereth and
David E. Smith. This is a revision of an earlier paper by Gensereth
only.
The main content of this paper is a collection of ways of partially
specifying computer programs by logical assertions. These assertions make
explicit information about the program that is ordinarily implicit in the
syntactic structure of the program. Making the information explicit and
piecemeal allows the metareasoning program to observe features of the
object program, to relate them to other facts and to the properties of
changed programs. Concerned that too much explicit meta-level reasoning
about the program while it is running may make it very slow led Genesereth
and his student Smith to discuss ``compiling'' the meta-level reasoning
into the object program itself. The future work on MRS seems to have
moved in somewhat different directions than those proposed in this paper,
but, in my opinion, the ideas of the paper and especially the way of giving
partial information about the program in logic are very important and
will be influential in the long run.
"Ordering Conjunctive Queries" by David E. Smith and Michael Genesereth
While proposals that meta-level reasoning are quite old (Genesereth
refers to my 1959 paper), actually doing it has often foundered on details.
Therefore, it is important to isolate cases in which one can give practical
ways of doing the meta-reasoning. The present paper is one of these.
A common problem is to find a collection (say x, y and z) of objects
satisfying a condition that is the conjunction of simpler conditions.
An example contained in the
paper is to find a file in the Scribe language larger than 100 pages
belonging to a member of a given user's directory group. The usual
way of doing this is to find objects (e.g. x, y and z) that satisfy
the first condition and then check to see if they satisfy the remaining
conditions. If all the conditions are satisfied, the program wins, but
typically some condition will fail and it is necessary to {\it backtrack}
to an earlier condition and find another collection of objects that
satisfies the earlier condition and again check the later conditions.
This backtracking search for objects satisfying a conjunction of conditions
is the basis of the Prolog language and Genesereth's MRS does it too.
The amount of work done in solving the problem depends on the order
in which the conditions are examined. In Prolog and other languages,
including MRS, the order is chosen by the programmer in advance. However,
in certain problems, there isn't an optimal order that can be chosen
independent of the data, and the program will have to choose an order
of the conjuncts before it starts the search.
The present paper discusses the criteria for ordering the
conjuncts in order to minimize work. It is the most thorough analysis
of this problem in the published literature, and it constitutes an
important step towards making computer programs do this ordering
themselves, i.e. to plan the structure of their searches.
``Controlling Recursive Inference'' by David E. Smith, Michael R. Genesereth
and Matthew L. Ginsberg.
This paper covers another important case of control of reasoning.
An important form of reasoning is one in which goals give rise to
subgoals and these to subsubgoals etc. The problem addressed by the
paper is the etc. Namely, it is necessary to avoid the infinite
generation of subgoals, and this can often be done by recognizing
that certain proposed subgoals cannot contribute to the solution
of the problem. A variety of ways of doing this are proposed in the
paper and some relevant theorems are proved. The theorems take
the form of assertions that under certain conditions, certain
subgoals cannot contribute to the solution of the problem and
hence can be ``pruned''.
``Use of Design Descriptions in Automated Diagnosis'' by Michael R. Genesereth
Automated diagnosis problems have been a staple of artificial
intelligence, especially the expert systems approach. Most of the
expert systems, e.g. the famous MYCIN of 1974, embody collections of
rules going from symptoms to diagnosis. For example, MYCIN has rules
like ``If the patient has fever and swollen cheeks and the laboratory
tests give a certain shape bacteria from a certain part of the body,
then the patient has mumps with certainty-factor 0.7''. Genesereth
explores a different approach to diagnosis. This involves having a
description of the normal structure and functioning of the object being
diagnosed. When a malfunction is observed an attempt is made to ascribe
it to a defect in one of the components of the system or one of
their interconnections. The parts of the system and their interconnections
are described in first order logic, and the possible defects that
a part or connection may have are similarly described. An MRS program
can then to the diagnosis.
Raymond Reiter of the University of Toronto says, ``Genesereth's
major cotnribution in this area was to show how various previous ad hoc
computational and representational schemes for diagnosis from first
principles have uniform logical and theorem proving foundations. Thii
insight not only provided a significant generalization, but it also led
to DART, a working system, based on a resolution style theorem prover.
I should also add that this paper, and DART as well, provided the first
means for automatic test generation of which I am aware. All things
considered, I think this is a very important paperwhich will have a
major impact on the future theory and design of diagnostic systems''.
!3. Statement by John McCarthy about the MRS language.
We include here a section on Genesereth's MRS system for writing
expert systems, because such things, like works of art or designs for a
computer that are actually built, can have an importance beyond the
publications that their designers may write about them. This is especially
important in this case, because a full description of MRS is not
included among Genesereth's papers, although there is a quite good
users' manual for the system written by one of Genesereth's students,
Stuart Russell. While there should be a major paper about MRS, it
is quite common in computer system building to make to with a manual,
and also for the system designer to delegate the task of writing it.
MRS is a system for writing expert systems.
There are several such systems including the commercial systems
KEE, ART and Knowledgecraft and university-produced systems such
as OPS-5. Indeed the subject goes back to the 1960s GPS (general
problem solver) of Newell and Simon.
The MRS language is distinguished from the other expert systems
partly by its use of metalogical statements and its use of logical
reasoning in reasoning about its domain level statements. Many
systems do logical reasoning at the domain level,
but the meta-level control provided, when there is any at all, is by
special kinds of statements rather than by logical reasoning.
This is true, for example, of the logic programming language Prolog,
and one of the important motives for MRS is the need to go beyond
Prolog in this respect.
The idea that meta-level reasoning should be done is quite old,
but its advocates have not previously been able to put it into actual
running systems. MRS is the first system to actually do meta-level
logical reasoning. The letter by Reiter discusses the place of MRS in
thinking about meta-level control.
As such it has excited widespread interest. Approximately
120 university and industrial organization have paid $200 (universities)
or $500 to have copies made.
!IV. The Candidates Role
A. As a tenured associate professor, Genesereth is expected to
continue the role he has filled as an assistant professor. This has
included (a) his personal research (b) the supervision of graduate
students in his area of artificial intelligence (c) taking charge
of the main introductory artificial intelligence course. (c) is
worthy of special comment. Before Genesereth took charge of this
course, it was most often taught as a survey of important papers
in the field. Genesereth was the first to organize it as systematic
scientific course, treating the various problems and paradigms
of artificial intelligence via controlled logical reasoning. His
ability to organize the course and teach it to very large numbers
of students has been important to the Department and will continue
to be important. He is the best we have in artificial intelligence
at this work.
B. We expect him to be successful, because he has been successful.
C. His role has been and will be essentially within the
Computer Science Department.
D. Genesereth has filled an important role in developing the
master's program in artificial intelligence. He was on the curriculum
committee that defined the computer science undergraduate program, and
we expect him to play an important role in the further development of
that program.
He has served on the following CSD Committees:
Curriculum
Comprehensive Examination
PhD Admissions
MS in Computer Science
MS in Artificial Intelligence
Facilities
He has also served on the interdepartmental committees
Mathematical and Computational Sciences
Medical Information Sciences
!V. Evaluation of teaching.
pass the buck to Nils
!VI.
B. (Only B is applicable).
1. An ad hoc committee was appointed by the Chairman of the Department.
The committee made a list of university and other researchers
in artificial intelligence at comparable stages in their careers.
It also made a list of prominent people in the field from whom
to solicit letters. These latter are about the same as we
have used on previous occasions. Our letter and all replies are
attached.
[praise of referees; Nils will do it].
2. The evaluation committee included Professors McCarthy (chairman),
Feigenbaum, Ullman and Nilsson.
!Report on Michael Genesereth's scholarship by John McCarthy
The problem on which Michael Genesereth has worked since
he came to Stanford is key to artificial intelligence. This is
the control of logical reasoning by statements in a metalanguage.
Genesereth has developed a programming language called MRS (for
Meta Reasoning System) with the aid of his students that is the
only such system in practical use, even though the need for
such a system has been known since the middle 1970s.
A non-technical (I hope) description of the problem
of control of reasoning was included in the introduction to the
section that describes Genesereth's publications.
Apart from the discussion of the papers and that of the MRS system
there are a few remarks worth making. The first, as attested by many of
the letters, is that Genesereth has an excellent scholarly knowledge of
previous work in the fields that interest him. This prevents him
from re-inventing previous methods and results. The second is that
he has very broad interests and generates many ideas, some of which
he hasn't found time to pursue. In my opinion, the ideas expressed
in his ``Overview of meta-level architecture'' present especially
many possibilities.
!VII.
A. The most significant reservation was expressed by Prof. Allen Newell
of Carnegie-Mellon University. He considered Douglas Lenat more brilliant,
though less steady and able to lead students. The Computer Science
Department had previously recommended Lenat for tenure though not
unanimously, and the recommendation was turned down by Humanities
and Science. Newell also considered that Genesereth unlikely to
revolutionize computer science. Newell has quite high standards
as to what would constitute a revolution, and also he has a different
philosophy of artificial intelligence than the one Genesereth shares
with some other members of the Stanford department. In spite of
his reservations, Newell recommended that Genesereth be promoted
to tenure.
Newell and one or two others also considered Hector Levesque of the
University of Toronto to be better. We don't agree with this
opinion, because we regard Levesque's work as somewhat specialized
and not as fundamental to artificial intelligence as Genesereth's
work on the control of logical reasoning.
B. The tenured members of the Computer Science Department.
C. Yes.
D. Yes.
∂08-Mar-86 1501 JMC encomium
To: nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
It requires your contributions and to be put into a form suitable for TEX.
∂08-Mar-86 1512 JMC
To: nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
I will also deliver the originals of the letters.
∂08-Mar-86 1512 JMC Genesereth letters
To: RA
Please make copies of those Genesereth letters of which I have the
originals for my file and deliver the originals to Nilsson's office.
They are in my Genesereth file.
∂09-Mar-86 1235 JMC re: cs 306 grade from Fall 85
To: BURY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Sun 9 Mar 86 12:00:40-PST.]
I think it's my fault, and I'll fix it.
∂09-Mar-86 1245 JMC cartoon
To: su-bboards@SU-AI.ARPA
Someone sent me a cartoon a few weeks ago of a penguin with a contraption
extending its wings and flying. I would like to know the source so
that I might ask for permission to include it in a publication.
∂09-Mar-86 1337 JMC re: cartoon
To: evan@SU-CSLI.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Sun 9 Mar 86 13:03:10-PST.]
Thanks.
∂09-Mar-86 1554 JMC re: Edward Zelenin
To: VAL
[In reply to message rcvd 09-Mar-86 15:33-PT.]
Don't be shy about sending a message to Nils and whoever else might
be interested - or even putting a message on the electronic bulletin
boards. MAIL SU-BBOARDS will do it.
∂09-Mar-86 1556 JMC re: cartoon
To: evan@SU-CSLI.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Sun 9 Mar 86 13:03:10-PST.]
It is indeed in the collection you mention published by Kaufman.
∂09-Mar-86 1740 JMC re: Penguin cartoon
To: Kaelbling@SRI-AI.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Sun, 9 Mar 86 17:41 PST.]
Thanks for the cartoon. I now have the reference.
∂09-Mar-86 1839 JMC re: cartoon (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: OTHER-SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
Thanks to those who replied to my request for the cartoon reference
and to those who will reply in the future. It is by S. Harris of
American Scientist and appeared in his book "What's so Funny about Science".
∂09-Mar-86 2332 JMC Feigenbaum dinner
To: CLT
It's at 6:30.
∂09-Mar-86 2359 JMC phone call
To: squires@USC-ISI.ARPA
I'd like to include my associates Lester Earnest and Carolyn
Talcott when you phone if it's ok.
∂10-Mar-86 1037 JMC
To: CLT
jlh@sonoma
∂10-Mar-86 2230 JMC meeting
To: jlh@SU-SONOMA.ARPA, LES@SU-AI.ARPA
Because of Timothy, the best time to meet would be 12:30 with
1pm possible. If we meet in late afternoon, she probably can't
come.
∂10-Mar-86 2335 JMC
To: jlh@SU-SONOMA.ARPA, LES@SU-AI.ARPA
How about Wed at 10 then?
∂11-Mar-86 0950 JMC re: Situational Calculus
To: rjk@MITRE-BEDFORD.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Tue, 11 Mar 86 09:42:58 -0500.]
There is nothing in writing now.
∂11-Mar-86 1127 JMC
To: CLT
Call Richard.
∂11-Mar-86 1405 JMC re: Photo
To: bundy%aiva.edinburgh.ac.uk@CS.UCL.AC.UK
[In reply to message sent Tue, 11 Mar 86 14:23:30 GMT.]
Your P.S. was cut short to "do you have a reference for the work
you did representing". Representing what?
∂11-Mar-86 1655 JMC your parallel Lisp
To: dimitrov@NYU-CSD2.ARPA
CC: LES@SU-AI.ARPA, CLT@SU-AI.ARPA
Please send information about it to
Professor John McCarthy
Computer Science Department
Stanford University
Stanford California 94305.
I assume you know about Gabriel's and my paper and also about Halstead's
paper, both of which appeared in the proceedings of the 1984 Lisp conference
(available from ACM).
∂11-Mar-86 1720 JMC two things
To: RA
1. I have quite a bit of travel to arrange. Remind me to call Hersch,
since I might as well talk with him directly.
2. As for Tulsa, my titles are:
What is artificial intelligence?
Some expert systems need common sense.
∂11-Mar-86 2151 JMC re: AAAI sponsorship requested for Workshop
To: Chandra%OSU-20@OHIO-STATE.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Tue 11 Mar 86 22:28:54-EST.]
Yes, you can have $5K, but I want to put the same condition on this
workshop that I put on a workshop on planning just proposed by Mark Maletz
of Inference. That is, that you make a special effort to treat all the
commercial vendors of expert systems tools equally. Fortunately, I
suppose they are still few enough so that this doesn't present problems.
∂11-Mar-86 2157 JMC AAAI sponsorship requested for Workshop
To: aaai@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
CC: Chandra%OSU-20@OHIO-STATE.ARPA
Claudia:
B. Chandrasekaran <Chandra%OSU-20@ohio-state.ARPA> proposes
a workshop on "High Level Tools for Knowledge-Based System Design."
I have agreed to $5K, and he will contact you directly. The condition
was that the workshop treat all commercial tool vendors similarly.
∂11-Mar-86 2252 JMC
To: LES, CLT
∂11-Mar-86 2251 HX.RLS@Lindy
Received: from SU-LINDY.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 11 Mar 86 22:51:43 PST
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 86 22:54:01 PST
From: Bob Semans <HX.RLS@SU-Forsythe.ARPA>
To: JMC@SAIL
The RT instructions set is detailed in the RT PC technical
Reference Manual, I have put one on order for you and,
in the interim, I will try to find one I can borrow for you.
The 4.2 Assembler is part of the ACIS 4.2A system installed
on your RT and should be referenced in the 4.2 documentation
binder.
1
∂11-Mar-86 2255 JMC reply to message
To: HX.RLS@SU-FORSYTHE.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Tue, 11 Mar 86 22:54:01 PST.]
Thanks for the RT information. I had tried the online information
facilities looking for the assembler. I'll go back to the tried
and true method; when all else fails read the instructions.
∂12-Mar-86 1000 JMC re: lunch today cancelled
To: RA
[In reply to message rcvd 12-Mar-86 09:50-PT.]
acknowledged
∂12-Mar-86 1356 JMC re: AAAI sponsorship requested for Workshop
To: Chandra%OSU-20@OHIO-STATE.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Wed 12 Mar 86 16:16:03-EST.]
I would like to be kept informed, but I don't to be in the interaction loop.
∂12-Mar-86 1415 JMC re: Photo
To: bundy%aiva.edinburgh.ac.uk@CS.UCL.AC.UK
[In reply to message sent Wed, 12 Mar 86 13:05:26 GMT.]
%3McCarthy, John (1982)%1: %2Coloring Maps and the Kowalski Doctrine%1,
Report No. STAN-CS-82-903, Computer Science Department, Stanford University,
Stanford, CA 94305.
∂12-Mar-86 1502 JMC re: Igor Maximovich Bobko
To: RA
[In reply to message rcvd 12-Mar-86 13:17-PT.]
Bobko is at the Stanford Terrace till Saturday AM and attending confrerence
at CERAS.
∂12-Mar-86 1601 JMC re: Can you recommend a body shop? (Or warn me off a bad one?)
To: ROBERTS@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Wed 12 Mar 86 10:21:58-PST.]
Akins did a good job for me on fixing a dent and changing a bumper.
They are well rated in Bay Area Checkbook, the local Consumer Reports.
∂12-Mar-86 1603 JMC re: How Do We Get Rid of Typewriters?
To: SIEGMAN@SU-SIERRA.ARPA, su-bboards@SU-SIERRA.ARPA
[In reply to message from SIEGMAN@SU-SIERRA.ARPA sent Wed 12 Mar 86 11:15:07-PST.]
Wait till IBM gets around to selling Stanford a general purpose system
that presumes terminals and provides an alternative to multi-part forms.
∂12-Mar-86 1608 JMC Subject: mysterious letter (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
I agree with Anil in this matter. There are few organizations
that object to using Departmental Stationery for personal letters
these days. Hardly any of the letters I send can be regarded as
official business of Stanford University, and I mix personal and
scientific matters in the same letter if the letter doesn't have
to go to other people.
∂12-Mar-86 1647 JMC Late CSD Application
To: nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Lowell Wood has good taste in smart people.
∂10-Mar-86 2205 LLW@S1-A.ARPA Late CSD Application
Received: from S1-A.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 10 Mar 86 22:05:05 PST
Date: 10 Mar 86 2159 PST
From: Lowell Wood <LLW@S1-A.ARPA>
Subject: Late CSD Application
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
CC: LLW@S1-A.ARPA
John, I'm writing to ask your intercession in the case of an untimely
application for admission to CSD from a really outstanding young man,
Ramin Zabih, currently a first-year graduate student in MIT's EE&CS Dept.
Ramin (whose father, a staff member of the Hoover Institution, you may
have met) has been more-or-less planning to do his dissertation research
at MIT, under the direction of either Tom Knight or Rich Zippel, probably
in the area of computer mathematics (as he is currently struggling fairly
earnestly to decide whether he's a mathematician or a computer scientist).
As the MIT Revolving Assistant Professorship roulette wheel spun down this
year, however, neither Knight or Zippel got tenure; Knight will be
spending the next two years (at least) at Symbolics CRC, and Zippel's
plans appear to be thoroughly up in the air (he seems to have a chance of
being reviewed for tenure next year, on some sort of ad hoc post-deadline
basis).
When Ramin got the word that neither of his intended advisors would be
around for the duration of his dissertation work, he asked my advice; I
suggested that he seriously consider moving the site of his graduate work
to the Bay Area, taking courses at both SU and UCB, and turning his
dissertation into someone appropriate at SU/CSD. He was startled that he
might have this option for the coming academic year, as the nominal
application deadline was past, but I encouraged him to do so anyway, in
the hope that you (and perhaps other like-minded faculty members) might be
willing to intercede with the bureaucracy in his (very unusual) case.
Ramin is one of the half-dozen brightest CS types I've run into during the
past two decades of Hertz Foundation interviewing, in a class with Guy
Steele and Lee Guibas in terms of sheer intellectual strength and depth.
He unquestionably was the best to graduate from the CS end of MIT EE&CS
Dept. last year, and is also the star of this year's graduate freshman
class (in my judgment, as well as that of people at MIT and in the S-1
Project--where he worked last summer). I will be flabbergasted if he
isn't awarded a Hertz Fellowship at the end of next week, when these
matters are decided for the coming year; he didn't apply for one last
year, as he was informed that these awards were based at least partly on
need.
I was surprised to see very recently that his MIT transcript didn't
contain straight As; this is to be understood, I believe, as an expression
of his being so confident of his ability to blaze his way out of any
academic hole with 48 hours of all-out effort that he's occasionally let
things slip so far that an outraged faculty member has punished him with a
B, no matter how strongly he may have finished on a final exam. It is
only because he is so extraordinary that I'm appealing to you to intervene
to get his untimely application for admission to CSD this coming September
considered.
I'm mailing you a copy of his application to CSD, for your review. I
understand that he'll be in the Bay Area next week (during MIT Spring
Break), and have suggested that he come by and meet you. (Jerry Sussman
appears to be leading the MIT Departmental effort to persuade Ramin that
he's doing the Wrong Thing by seriously considering moving to Stanford--
I've been surprised at the depth of partisan feeling back there about SU
CSD, in this case and in previous ones. I know that you and others will
be able to convince him that CSD is populated by reasonable folks!) If
you would care to discuss his case in any respect, please give me a call
at (415) 422-9058 anytime this evening, tomorrow, or next week (as I'll be
leaving on travel late tomorrow PM for the rest of the week).
Thanks for your consideration of this matter. If you get Ramin to come to
Stanford, you'll be doing very well by the Department, and you may even
land yourself an extraordinarily fine student!
Lowell
zippel, knight, sussman will praise him.
∂12-Mar-86 1704 JMC
To: LES, CLT
I assume we sent back or paid for that report of parallel arch's.
∂12-Mar-86 1729 JMC re: ISO steering committee
To: RPG
[In reply to message rcvd 12-Mar-86 17:27-PT.]
I forgot that I had agreed to do so, but ok.
∂12-Mar-86 2035 JMC re: Speaker on Leibniz's logic
To: CL.SHANKAR@R20.UTEXAS.EDU
[In reply to message sent Wed 12 Mar 86 21:10:09-CST.]
I had wanted to hear him, but I'll be in L.A. on Friday. Do you know if
he has it in writing.
∂12-Mar-86 2221 JMC re: SCOTT SILFRAST (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
clue: Spend 5 minutes with the Palo Alto telephone book.
∂12-Mar-86 2223 JMC Scott Silfrast
To: contreras@SU-SCORE.ARPA
The telephone book lists
Stanford Research Systems
460 California Ave.
Palo Alto
I have left that as a clue on BBOARD, but I figure he should get his
letter.
∂13-Mar-86 1023 JMC re: How Do We Get Rid of Typewriters?
To: BRONSTEIN@SU-SCORE.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Thu 13 Mar 86 09:24:17-PST.]
We need to go to a system in which bureaucratic requirements like filling
out purchase requests and travel expense forms will be done interactively.
However, I don't believe that the Stanford bureaucracy is capable of
carrying such a thing out on its own. It is extremely complacent about
its high costs and bad service. I also know of no interest in developing
such systems in CS or the Business School. Sooner or later some outside
vendor, IBM or some other, will offer on-line bureaucratic systems with a
great saving in costs. Because Stanford is not in any kind of direct
competition, it will not be an early customer. Start-up firms will be the
most eager to avoid setting up a bureaucracy.
I have one project aimed somewhat in that direction called CBCL -
for Common Business Communication Language.
∂13-Mar-86 1108 JMC re: WARNING: coffee machine in MJH ! (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
No, you won't sleep unless you can sleep sitting on the toilet.
∂13-Mar-86 1322 JMC re: You first conjecture
To: rar@KESTREL.ARPA, ladkin@KESTREL.ARPA
CC: phayes@SRI-KL.ARPA
[In reply to message from rar@kestrel.ARPA sent Thu, 13 Mar 86 12:12:06 pst.]
You guys have snowed me completely with ultraproducts and extensions thereof.
It seemed to me that Shoham gave examples, showing how the first order
theory of time was more powerful than tense logic for the common sense
formalization of events occurring in time. However, examples don't make
a theorem. My understanding would be much improved, however, by a simple
example of some assertion, with a simple common sense translation if
possible, about time and events that was expressible in tense logic
but not in the first order theory of time.
∂13-Mar-86 1834 JMC re: reports
To: richardson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Thu 13 Mar 86 17:49:21-PST.]
please mail me the on line report form Nils referred to.
∂13-Mar-86 1951 JMC reply to message
To: vijay@ERNIE.BERKELEY.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 13 Mar 86 19:42:23 PST.]
This is to acknowledge receipt of the message and agree to the conditions.
I will have no problem with the first two rounds, but I will be away
from April 8 to April 20. However, I will attempt to read my mail
from Europe and take part during that time. Success cannot, however,
be guaranteed. I may ask that messages be sent to certain other addresses
during that period.
∂13-Mar-86 2148 JMC re: a partial answer
To: ladkin@KESTREL.ARPA
CC: israel@SU-CSLI.ARPA, phayes@SRI-KL.ARPA, rar@KESTREL.ARPA
[In reply to message from ladkin@kestrel.ARPA sent Thu, 13 Mar 86 20:57:20 pst.]
I suppose you are excluding something that I meant to allow in my remarks
about a first order theory of time being more powerful than temporal logic.
I would proceed as follows:
Let I be the interval {t| t1 <= t <= t2}, where I am not presupposing
set theoretic notation but merely saying what interval I mean. Then
true(A tand B,I) is written
(exists t3)(t1 < t3 < t2 & (all t)(true(A,t) iff t1 <= t <= t3)
& (all t)(true(B,t) iff t3 < t <= t2)).
One can write A(t) in place of true(A,t) if that is preferred.
Remark: It sure is a pain to write logical formulas for transmission
to inferior computer systems that can't display them.
∂14-Mar-86 0003 JMC re: VTSS
To: KAO@SU-SIERRA.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Thu 13 Mar 86 23:57:27-PST.]
Thank you for your suggestions. I'll see about cross-listing it.
∂14-Mar-86 0124 JMC visit to Edinburgh
To: bundy%aiva.edinburgh.ac.uk@CS.UCL.AC.UK
In connection with a visit to Germany and Italy this April, I have
some time in the middle and plan to visit Edinburgh arriving the
evening of Monday April 14 and leaving on the evening of April
16. I would be interested in visiting people with common interests
especially in the formalization of common sense knowledge and reasoning
and non-monotonic reasoning in particular.
∂14-Mar-86 0703 JMC Letter of reference
To: RA
∂14-Mar-86 0516 PYLYSHYN@C.CS.CMU.EDU Letter of reference
Received: from C.CS.CMU.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Mar 86 05:16:01 PST
Received: ID <PYLYSHYN@C.CS.CMU.EDU>; Fri 14 Mar 86 08:16:13-EST
Date: Fri 14 Mar 86 08:16:11-EST
From: Zenon <Zenon.Pylyshyn@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
Subject: Letter of reference
To: jmc@SU-AI.ARPA
cc: pylyshyn%deepthot.cdn.Ubc@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Message-ID: <12190627374.42.PYLYSHYN@C.CS.CMU.EDU>
The Canadian Institute for Advanced Research program in Artificial
Intelligence and Robotics (of which I am director) wrote you a week or more
ago asking for a letter of reference on behalf of David Etherington who
is being considered for a Fellowship. If you have not received the request
please let me know. If you have, would you write a few words about David?
We are trying to speed up the refereeing process to help Etherington's
career decisions.
Thanks.
-------
Replying-To: Zenon.Pylyshyn@C.CS.CMU.EDU
Reply-Subject: re: Letter of reference
Reply-Text:
[In reply to message sent Fri 14 Mar 86 08:16:11-EST.]
I believe I answered that, but I'll check.
∂14-Mar-86 0706 JMC re: Letter of reference
To: Zenon.Pylyshyn@C.CS.CMU.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri 14 Mar 86 08:16:11-EST.]
I'll check on whether I received it. I know I did one reference
for him.
∂14-Mar-86 2329 JMC re: letter to Zenon Pylyshyn
To: RA
[In reply to message rcvd 14-Mar-86 11:34-PT.]
Prepare the same letter for Pylyshyn.
∂14-Mar-86 2332 JMC reply to message
To: vijay@ERNIE.BERKELEY.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 14 Mar 86 15:10:10 PST.]
Acknowledged.
∂14-Mar-86 2340 JMC re: You first conjecture
To: PHayes@SRI-KL.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Fri 14 Mar 86 09:41:53-PST.]
ING(P,t) is taken to be an abbreviation of
(exist t1 t2)(t1 < t < t2 & (all t')(t1 < t' < t2 implies P(t')))
Don't you want to allow < ? Omitting it really seems to me like tying both
hands behind the back. Incidentally, I imagined it to be common knowledge
that temporal logic was weaker than the first order theory of time, and
took inequalities as a matter of course. I won't easily be convinced that
omitting inequality gives a theory of other than pedantic interest.
∂14-Mar-86 2343 JMC re: a partial answer
To: PHayes@SRI-KL.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Fri 14 Mar 86 11:48:57-PST.]
Well now, this seems like a clairvoyant (though misguided) answer to
the message I just sent you. In asserting that the first order theory
of time was more powerful than temporal logic, I was referring to
the ordinary temporal logics, not temporal logics with intervals -
whatever they may be. If you really need intervals, you might
as well go on to set theory, which still seems to me to be required
to write down the rules for paying wages.
∂15-Mar-86 1458 JMC re: sabbatical work
To: DEK
[In reply to message rcvd 15-Mar-86 13:32-PT.]
It's not an emergency, so you are excused.
∂15-Mar-86 1927 JMC
To: ME
Should xgpsyn still work? What display channel if so?
∂15-Mar-86 2021 JMC removal
To: parsym-request@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Please remove jmc-lists@su-ai for mailing list. I'll be using the
public PARSYM file at SAIL.
∂15-Mar-86 2022 JMC
To: AVG@SU-AI.ARPA
Thanks for the jump start. I had no further problem getting home.
∂15-Mar-86 2023 JMC
To: AVG@SU-AI.ARPA
Sorry, the last was to Allen van Gelder.
∂15-Mar-86 2025 JMC
To: avg@SU-AIMVAX.ARPA
Thanks. I had no further problem getting home.
∂15-Mar-86 2209 JMC
To: bosack@SU-SCORE.ARPA
Many are curious as to why yet another shutdown. Suggest bboard statement.
∂15-Mar-86 2215 JMC re: visit to Edinburgh
To: bundy%aiva.edinburgh.ac.uk@CS.UCL.AC.UK
[In reply to message sent Fri, 14 Mar 86 13:17:15 GMT.]
I'd be glad to give a seminar. By the way, is Donald Michie
in Edinburgh now? Do you have a phone number, or even better
a net address for him?
∂16-Mar-86 1505 JMC re: Alliant versus Encore
To: RPG, LES, CLT
[In reply to message rcvd 16-Mar-86 14:56-PT.]
Reasons for preferring Encore to Alliant.
1. Price of the presently proposed deal. I want one for Qlisp exclusively.
2. I regard the fact that Alliant is optimized for numerical work
as a portent of lower priority for users intending to do symbolic
work when it comes to operating systems or machine mods that may
be wanted or necessary.
3. Greater hunger on the part of Encore.
4. It fits better with Squires's plans for further development.
∂17-Mar-86 0010 JMC trip to Germany
To: HST
I shall lecture at the Hannover Fair on Friday, April 11 sponsored by
the German version of Scientific American. I will arrive in Frankfurt
on Wednesday evening and go to Hannover on Thursday and leave for
London Saturday morning. I will arrive in Munich again on the evening
of April 16 and leave for Milan on the evening of April 17. The latter
stop is to meet someone (whose name I forgot) in connection with a
database project of a company for which I am doing some consulting.
Unfortunately, I can't visit Erlangen this trip. I think my business
in Munich will not take the whole day, and therefore I will try to see
Wolfgang Bibel if he is there and not too busy. Do you have his telephone
number or even a net address? Of course, we can also talk if you have
some reason to be in either place.
∂17-Mar-86 0106 JMC Subject: Bhagwan for mascot (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
Most likely Greep is just a sunshine disciple. He'll lose
interest once he discovers the Rolls Royces have all been sold.
∂17-Mar-86 1020 JMC re: Talk at Fermi Lab
To: RA
[In reply to message rcvd 17-Mar-86 10:14-PT.]
Please call Claudia at Fermilab. I called Chapman last week (Thurs or
Fri) to say that I had to cancel the talk, because I hadn't time to
prepare a suitable talk. Someone took a message, but perhaps it didn't
get to Claudia.
∂17-Mar-86 1436 JMC
To: CLT
Turns out I don't go leave for Asilomar till Wed. AM.
∂17-Mar-86 1520 JMC
To: RA
Please send the address of Wolfgang Bibel (from recent correspondence)
and send it to prof. J. Slagle
∂17-Mar-86 1710 JMC reply to message
To: VAL
[In reply to message rcvd 17-Mar-86 16:22-PT.]
ok
∂17-Mar-86 1736 JMC re: Responses to earlier comments and queries
To: rar@KESTREL.ARPA, VAL@SU-AI.ARPA, ladkin@KESTREL.ARPA,
phayes@SRI-KL.ARPA
CC: rar@KESTREL.ARPA
[In reply to message from rar@kestrel.ARPA sent Mon, 17 Mar 86 17:02:42 pst.]
Please include VAL@su-ai (Vladimir Lifschitz) in further discussions of
these questions. I'll mail him such older messages as I have received.
I want to express a personal intuition that this high powered logic will
turn out to be irrelevant, and that an attempt should be made to modify
the logic or the axioms so that it is clearly irrelevant. I don't
understand the part about ultra-powers, and would have to be persuaded
by genuine-looking applications to common sense reasoning to acquire
the necessary background. However, I do more-or-less understand Loeb's
theorem and have the following comments. I have mostly thought about it
in connection with the modal operator being "provable" or "knows" and
will comment in that context. The assertion K(Kp imp p) imp Kp
is unexpected and counterintuitive as a universal result. One expects
to be able to have K(Kp imp p) as a universal result, even an axiom,
without having Kp holding for all p.
Loeb's theorem strikes me as a variant of Godel's theorem or at least
based on the same ideas.
The fact that this is a theorem
about provability in arithmetic suggests that arithmetic provablity
doesn't have the right properties.
I have thought of a way out (surely not new) that involves writing
K2(K1p imp p) as an axiom where K2 represents some kind of meta-level
reasoning and has some additional axioms. Not doubt these additional
axioms will be a nuisance and won't extend to yet higher levels unless
we axiomatize a sequence of Ki's. Nevertheless, they may establish
a system closer to intuition. I have thought of still more exotic
solutions involving circumscription, but I can't remember them now,
so you are spared.
The point of this stream-of-consciousness is that it is too easy to
go off a mathematical deep end when formalizing common sense concepts,
especially since doing so permits proving theorems without further
worry about what human common sense reasoning has been like or what
robot common sense reasoning should be like.
Perhaps I'm all wet, and ultrapowers are essential for understanding
common sense reasoning.
∂17-Mar-86 1739 JMC tense logic < first order theory of time ?
To: VAL
∂12-Mar-86 1449 rar@kestrel.ARPA tense logic < first order theory of time ?
Received: from KESTREL.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Mar 86 14:48:52 PST
Received: by kestrel.ARPA (4.12/4.9)
id AA08271; Wed, 12 Mar 86 14:34:37 pst
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 86 14:34:37 pst
From: rar@kestrel.ARPA (Bob Riemenschneider)
Message-Id: <8603122234.AA08271@kestrel.ARPA>
To: ladkin@kestrel.ARPA, phayes@sri-kl.arpa
Subject: tense logic < first order theory of time ?
Cc: jmc@sail, rar@kestrel.ARPA
Our hypothesis that van Benthem would discuss the matter was correct. I
reviewed the relevant 15 pages, and thought I'd distribute a short summary
of his main points (with the object of stimulating further discussion).
At this point, I'd say that, while there may be some sense in which tense
logic is inherently weaker than some first order theories of time, explication
is needed; prima facie, the two are just incomparable.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The translation of formulae of propositional tense logic into first order
axioms for the theory of the ordering relation on times is considered in
section II.2.2 of van Benthem's book. He makes a number of points relevant
to the "tense logic < first order theory of time?" discussion.
1) M = <T, <, V>, where V is a valuation of the propositional
parameters in the language, can viewed as a structure for
the first order language used for the translation (in which
the propositional parameters become monadic predicate
parameters on times) in a straightforward way. On these
structures, the translation ( trans(p) = p(n), where n "means"
now; trans(Gf) = (t)[n < t -> (trans(f)[n/t])], where f[n/t]
is the result of substituting t for n in f, and t doesn't
occur in trans(f); . . . ) is yields a first order formula.
But on point structures <T, < >, the p's must be considered
variables rather than parameters, and so trans(f) must be
universally closed--i.e., the result of the translation is
a pi-1-1 monadic second order formula. So the question arises:
when can a first order equivalent to trans(f) be found?
"One of the main charms of Kripke semantics" is that popular
tense axioms turn out to have *natural* first order
equivalents. E.g.,
<T, < >, t0 |= Fp -> Gp
iff
<T, < >, t0 |= (p)[(E t)[n < t & p(t)] -> (t)[n < t -> p(t)]]
(as that's its standard translation) iff
<T, < >, t0 |= (t)[n < t -> (t')[n < t' -> t = t']]
(i.e., t0 has at most one successor). Now, it turns out that
many tense logic axioms have no first order equivalents *in
this sense*--e.g. Dummett's axiom ( []([](p -> []p) -> p) ->
(<>[]p -> p) ), McKinsey's axiom ( GFp -> FGp ), and L"ob's
axiom ( H(Hp -> p) -> Hp ). There's even a nice (though,
unfortunately, nonsyntactic) characterization of when such
equivalents exist: a tense logic formula has a first order
equivalent in the above sense iff it is preserved under
ultrapowers (van Benthem). Partial effective methods for
finding first order equivalents exist, but van Benthem
conjectures that the class of formulae with first order
equivalents is not even arithmetical.
2) Conversely, many natural classes of structures are not tense
logically definable--the irreflexive structures, the linear
structures, . . .. The analogue of the nice characterization
above is: a first order sentence in the language { < } has
a tense logical equivalent iff it is preserved under
p-morphisms, disjoint unions, and generated substructures,
and is anti-preserved under ultrafilter extensions (Goldblatt
and Thomason). No effective syntactic criterion is known.
For a longer version of the story, the best reference is probably van
Benthem's article "Correspondence Theory" in volume II of the
←Handbook←of←Philosophical←Logic←.
I guess the moral of the story is that the relationship between tense logics
and first order theories of time is complicated enough that simply writing
"tense logic < first order theory of time" is misleading.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- rar
∂12-Mar-86 1639 ladkin@kestrel.ARPA more time comments
Received: from KESTREL.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 12 Mar 86 16:39:22 PST
Received: by kestrel.ARPA (4.12/4.9)
id AA11647; Wed, 12 Mar 86 16:40:05 pst
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 86 16:40:05 pst
From: ladkin@kestrel.ARPA (Peter Ladkin)
Message-Id: <8603130040.AA11647@kestrel.ARPA>
To: jmc@su-ai, phayes@sri-kl, rar@kestrel.ARPA
Subject: more time comments
I believe the closed-under-ultrapowers condition is
equivalent to axiomatisability by Horn sentences.
This seems plausible.
The standard translations of box and diamond involve
Hornish prefixes
box(p) translates to (forall z)(xRz implies p(z))
diamond(p) (exists z)(xRz and p(z))
Clearly, if p has a Horn translation, both of the
above do.
However, I don't see how to prove the result yet.
Secondly, the p-morphism etc constructions come from
translating Birhoff's Theorem (algebras equationally
defined iff closed under homomorphisms, subalgebras
and direct products) through the inverse of
Jonsson-Tarski's theorem (extending Stone's theorem
to Boolean Algebras with additive operators (i.e.
they commute with +)). Modal, and particularly tense,
logics may be phrased as boolean algebras with extra
unary operators, which are also conjugate in the
tense logical case (past and future operators).
Jonsson-Tarski says that n-ary operators on the
boolean algebra arise from taking images of sets
in the BA under n+1-ary relations e.g.
f(X) = {y: xRy for some x in X}.
The almost identity with the Kripke semantics
seems to be missed by most commentators. Diamond
is the additive operator in this case.
Goldblatt's thesis performed the translation of
Birkhoff to the Kripke semantics. He's visiting
Stanford this quarter.
The first proved examples of non-first-order modal formulae
were produced independently by V Benthem and Goldblatt,
in the JSL.
My apologies if you knew this stuff already.
On a different note, John, I believe it's mistaken to
claim that the only way domain experts can share information
is via the channel of the common sublanguage provided by
Craig's Theorem. For instance, it's quite plausible that
you could have a first-order theory (the domain expert)
of certain objects which are predicates or functions in
the other first-order theory, and use the domain expert
to perform what are essentially second-order calculations
in the other. This doesn't fall under the domain of Craig.
A specific example - let us assume time is to be
represented by timestamps, in our first-order planning theory.
With each task P, we might want to associate the set of times
over which P is happening. My favorite example is processor
scheduling; the class of times that P has control of the CPU.
This would be simulated by a predicate X(P,t) whose intended
meaning is that at timestamp t, P is executing.
If you wish to calculate time relations between the X(P,.)
for different P, you would pass to a first-order theory in
which the basic objects were int(P), the interval of time
over which P was taking place. The int(P) are the X(P,.)
in the other theory, in a strong sense. And information
gleaned from this first-order interval theory may be
reattached at the right places in the other via the parameter P.
I believe that not only can you factor out time knowledge in
this way, but that you *have* to, to accomodate different
and incompatible models of time in different domains.
For example, in the currently popular semantics for concurrency,
time is linearly ordered and discrete, with one end-point
i.e. the natural numbers. In planning theory, and
for real-time process control, we may want densely-ordered time.
We may have this by formulating a domain expert which allows
general calculation about time-thingies (intervals, in my
chosen form) without committing to specific structure.
This is vague, but I shall be talking on April 4 in Matt
Ginsburg's seminar on how to do this for the case where
intervals are unions of convex intervals (for which I
have a taxonomy of useful relations already).
Generally, it is probably better to have equational theories
than general first-order ones in AI, where you can. In the
case of convex time intervals, James Allen's calculus is
both equational and in a precise sense, adequately general.
(I still need to fix that proof). Craig's theorem can tell
nothing about how information is passed between algebraic
theories, since there are no relation symbols. Therefore,
if time information is stored in an equational calculus,
one can intuitively pass all of it along to the situation
calculus, provided that the situation calculus is phrased
in terms of intervals rather than timestamps. Thus the
situation calculus needs no time knowledge in this case,
either.
Finally, I wasn't sure what was meant by *first-order time
with sets of points*. My guess is, that to make such a
theory workable, you need most of set theory. Even so, there
are certain intervals which cannot be defined in a first-order
way without quantifying over sets of timestamps. For example,
an infinite union of convex intervals over a dense linear
order without endpoints. Since these are objects in my
interval calculus, it seems that first-order-time-with-sets-
of-points cannot be the most general first-order theory of
time. Mine, and the convex calculus, are equational
(so far - James and Pat, I understand, are investigating
the expressiveness of the full first-order extension of
the interval calculus).
I hope these comments were worth your patience in reading them.
I'd welcome continued discussion.
Cheers,
Peter
∂13-Mar-86 1212 rar@kestrel.ARPA You first conjecture
Received: from KESTREL.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Mar 86 12:11:28 PST
Received: by kestrel.ARPA (4.12/4.9)
id AA16082; Thu, 13 Mar 86 12:12:06 pst
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 86 12:12:06 pst
From: rar@kestrel.ARPA (Bob Riemenschneider)
Message-Id: <8603132012.AA16082@kestrel.ARPA>
To: ladkin@kestrel.ARPA
Subject: You first conjecture
Cc: jmc@sail, phayes@sri-kl
. . . seems implausible to me. Recall that (given CH) f is equivalent to a
Horn sentence iff Md(f) is closed under reduced products, not just
ultraproducts. On the other hand, a class K of structures that is closed
under isomorphism is Md(f) for a first order f iff K and ~K are closed
under ultraproducts. (This is the basis for the result on modalities, since
the translations are pi-1-1, and sigma-1-1 classes are obviously closed under
ultraproducts--just extend the language so that the predicate variables are
parameters, drop the predicate quantifiers, and observe that an ultraproduct
of extensions is the extension of the ultraproduct.) Maybe the non-ultra
reduced products don't add anything for the class of sentences we're
interested in--but is this *plausible*?
-- rar
∂13-Mar-86 2057 ladkin@kestrel.ARPA a partial answer
Received: from KESTREL.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Mar 86 20:57:51 PST
Received: by kestrel.ARPA (4.12/4.9)
id AA06760; Thu, 13 Mar 86 20:57:20 pst
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 86 20:57:20 pst
From: ladkin@kestrel.ARPA (Peter Ladkin)
Message-Id: <8603140457.AA06760@kestrel.ARPA>
To: jmc@sail
Subject: a partial answer
Cc: israel@su-csli, phayes@sri-kl, rar@kestrel.ARPA
For an example of how interval tense logic may be more
expressive than first-order time, I submit the following:
We want a connective *tand* to stand for temporal conjunction,
that is, A tand B means A immediately followed by B.
Von Wright gave an axiomatisation, which was shown to be
equivalent to (A and next B), if you have a *next* operator.
However, this has certain disadvantages.
(A and next B) entails A, but not B (so it is *biased*).
Similarly, *and next* is not associative:
(A and next B) and next C refers to two time points -
it is equivalent to (A and next(B and C)).
(A and next(B and next C)) refers to three -
it is equivalent to (A and (next B) and (next next C)).
So if we want an unbiased, associative operator here,
which intuition might lead us towards, we have to plump
for interval semantics. Here I will assume we can give
a reasonable semantics for (A is true over an interval I),
for standard tense-logical formulae.
We may now define the operator *tand* as follows:
(A tand B) true over I just in case I may be split into
left and right subintervals J and K such that
A is true over J and B over K.
Associativity is straightforward, and
(A tand B) implies neither A nor B (in the definition above,
neither A nor B have to be true over the whole interval I).
The semantic condition is more natural than it seems -
(J starts I and K ends I and J meets K) in Pat and James's
terminology.
I claim, without even a hint of proof, that this temporal
conjunction probably isn't expressible in a points-based
first-order time logic.
And I realise that you were asking for an example of a standard
tense-logical formula, rather than a new connective, and a
points-based example rather than an interval example. As they
say, we're working on that one.
My source is I.L. Humberstone: Interval Semantics for
Tense Logic, J. Philosophical Logic 8 (1979) pp171-196.
Peter Ladkin
∂14-Mar-86 1644 rar@kestrel.ARPA An example, and an assessment of the discussion so far
Received: from KESTREL.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Mar 86 16:44:20 PST
Received: by kestrel.ARPA (4.12/4.9)
id AA01622; Fri, 14 Mar 86 16:44:56 pst
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 86 16:44:56 pst
From: rar@kestrel.ARPA (Bob Riemenschneider)
Message-Id: <8603150044.AA01622@kestrel.ARPA>
To: jmc@sail, ladkin@kestrel.ARPA, phayes@sri-kl
Subject: An example, and an assessment of the discussion so far
Cc: rar@kestrel.ARPA
Recall that L"ob's axiom is
H(Hp -> p) -> Hp ,
where
<T, <, V>, t |= Hf iff for all t' < t, <T, <, V>, t' |= f .
I'm not especially inclined to defend this axiom, but other people (Thomason)
have. At any rate, it seems like a perfectly reasonable thing to want to
express. Nevertheless, I recognize that a more easily defended axiom would
make the case stronger, but I don't know of another that is so easily shown
to have no first order equivalent.
thm: <T, < > |= H(Hp -> p) -> Hp iff <T, < > is transitive and well-founded
pf: ( => ) Suppose t0 > t1 > t2 but not t0 > t2. Define a valuation V by
by V(p) = T - {t1, t2}. Then L"ob's axiom is false in <T, <, V>
at t0--clearly Hp is false at t0, since p is false at t1; Hp is
false at t1, because p is false at t2, so Hp -> p is true at t1;
Hp -> p is true at predecessors of t0 other than t1, since p is true
everywhere other than t1 and t2 and t2 is not a predecessor of t0;
therefore, Hp -> p is therefore true at every predecessor of t0
and H(Hp -> p) is true at t0; ergo H(Hp -> p) -> Hp is false at t0.
Suppose t0 > t1 > t2 > ... . Define valuation V by V(p) =
T - {t0, t1, t2, ... } . The L"ob's axiom is false in <T, <, V>
at t0--clearly Hp is false at t0, since p is false at t1; Hp -> p
is true at t1, t2, t3, ... , since Hp is false at t1, t2, t3, ... ,
since p is false at t2, t3, t4, ... ; Hp -> p is true at all other
predecessors of t0, since p is true in all other predecessors;
therefore, Hp -> p is true at every predecessors of t0 and
H(Hp -> p) -> p is true at t0; ergo H(Hp -> p) -> Hp is false at
t0.
( => ) Suppose that H(Hp -> p) -> Hp is false in <T, <, V> at t0, and that
<T, < > is transitive. Then H(Hp -> p) is true at t0 and Hp is false
at t0. Since Hp is false at t0, there is a t1 < t0 such that p is
false at t1. Since H(Hp -> p) is true at t0, Hp -> p is true at t1.
But p is false at t1, so Hp must be false as well. So, there is a
t2 < t1 such that p is false at t2. By transitivity, t2 < t0, so
since H(Hp -> p) is true at t0, Hp -> p is true at t2. But p is
false at t2, so Hp must be false as well. So there is a t3 < t2 ...
Ergo <T, < > is not well-founded.
(The reason for the *gory* detail of this proof is that too many people have
made mistakes in this field as a result of not carefully checking the details
of proofs. More comments on this subject will be found below.)
cor: There is no first order equivalent of L"ob's axiom.
pf: Well-foundedness is not first order definable, by compactness.
What I think has (and has not) been shown by the argument(s) to this point:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
About the only thing that has been conclusively demonstrated is that one
must do a little model theory to make the claim that tense logic is less
expressive that first order theories of time plausible. I don't think that
anyone has shown the claim to be false--after all, maybe we're only
*really* interested in a much narrower class of models (maybe even only
those of order type omega) and *for this class* tense logics are weaker.
But given the notorious unreliability of intuitions regarding the equivalence
of tense logical and first order formulae--consider, e.g., Hamblin's axiom,
((p & Hp) -> FHp)&((p & Gp) -> PGp)), which apparently defines discreteness,
though discreteness is not preserved under p-morphisms and hence is not
tense logically definable; non-discrete models of this axiom are complicated
enough that you just don't consider them in attempting to figure out what
the axiom is saying--only fairly careful equivalence or inequivalence proofs
should be given much credence, and no "proof by example" should be
taken very seriously.
Where should we go from here?
-----------------------------
jmc's request for an example of a "proper" tense logical axiom that we'd need
for, say, planning seems quite reasonable, given the present state of the
discussion. I'll certainly try to think of one. Maybe the "indefinability
of `and next'" will lead somewhere, but the tie between the model theoretic
result and it's application hasn't been made nearly explicit enough for me--
besides, handling intervals as sets of points is problematic in general
(e.g., the medieval puzzle of the "dividing instant" for Dedekind continuous
<T, < > ). I'd rather find an example of a strutural property of time that
holds in some, but only some, "possible worlds"--or perhaps some and only some
of the models of time used in various domains/disciplines--that we want to
assert holds in the actual world--or domain of interest (viz. planning). If
such a property were shown to be definable in tense logic, but not in the
first order theory of the temporal ordering relation, then we'd really have
something.
-- rar
∂17-Mar-86 1702 rar@kestrel.ARPA Responses to earlier comments and queries
Received: from KESTREL.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 17 Mar 86 17:02:07 PST
Received: by kestrel.ARPA (4.12/4.9)
id AA16896; Mon, 17 Mar 86 17:02:42 pst
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 86 17:02:42 pst
From: rar@kestrel.ARPA (Bob Riemenschneider)
Message-Id: <8603180102.AA16896@kestrel.ARPA>
To: jmc@sail, ladkin@kestrel.ARPA, phayes@sri-kl
Subject: Responses to earlier comments and queries
Cc: rar@kestrel.ARPA
I reread the discussion to this point over the weekend, and realized that there
were a couple of points that I wanted to comment on at the time, but didn't.
"Better late ... "
Re: Peter's argument that Craig's theorem couldn't provide an argument
against the possibility of factoring out temporal knowledge as
a "time expert"
------------------------------------------------------------------------
He wrote "Craig's theorem can tell nothing about how information is passed
between algebraic theories, since there are no relation symbols."
I don't get it. Craig's theorem says
Let \phi, \psi be sentences such that \phi |= \psi. Then there
exists a sentence \theta such that:
(i) \phi |= \theta and \theta |= \psi.
(ii) Every relation, function, or constant symbol (excluding
identity) which occurs in \theta occurs in both \phi and
\psi.
(I quote from everyone's favorite reference, Chang and Keisler.) Lyndon's
sharpened version ("... every relation symbol (excluding identity) which occurs
positively in \theta occurs positively in both \phi and \psi, and similarly
with `negatively' in place of `positively' ...") requires no relation symbols,
but not Craig's original. Was that a source of confusion, or am I missing
something? (If \phi and \psi are equations, then clearly \theta must be as
well, so that can't be it.)
Re: Ladkin's response to my comment that his first conjecture ("Horn = closed
under ultrapowers") was implausible.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your complaint that I said `ultraproducts' and that the modal result in
van Benthem said `ultrapowers' is, of course, correct. But my point was
that closure under reduced products is, prima facie, stronger than closure
under ultraproducts, and your conjecture is, therefore, implausible. Since
closure under ultrapowers is, prima facie, weaker still, that would seem to
provide an even stronger implausibility argument.
It's easy to show that, in this case, closure under ultraproducts is equivalent
to basic elementary--I sketched the argument in my note. The "closure under
ultrapowers" version seems to be harder. (Recall that a class of models
is elementary iff it is closed under ultraproducts and elementary equivalence.
But two structures are elementary equivalent iff they have isomorphic
ultrapowers. So, a class is elementary iff it is closed under ultraproducts
and isomorphism and its complement is closed under ultrapowers. However, a
class is basic elementary iff both it and its complement are elementary. So,
as I mentioned earlier, a class K is basic elementary iff both K and ~K
are closed under isomorphism and ultraproducts-the result I used earlier.
Looking at things the other way around gives K is basic elementary only if K
and ~K are closed under ultrapowers--K basic elementary => K elementary and
~K elementary => ~K closed under ultrapowers and ~~K=K closed under
ultrapowers. The converse doesn't seem to follow in general, but "pi-1-1"
gives it in a fairly direct way. Suppose K is pi-1-1 but not basic elementary.
Then ~K is sigma-1-1 but not elementary. Hence, either ~K is not closed under
ultraproducts or ~K is not closed under isomorphism or ~~K=K is not closed
under ultrapowers. But sigma-1-1 classes are closed under ultrapowers and
isomorphism--as I pointed out in my original argument--and so K must not be
closed under ultrapowers. Combining the two results, we have that a pi-1-1
K is basic elementary iff it is closed under ultrapowers--as desired.)
Re: Pat's "Why variables rather than parameters?" question
-----------------------------------------------------------
Actually, since point structures treat p's as variables "by definition", I
think the question that needs answering is: Why the emphasis on defining
classes of structures <T, < >--van Benthem's point structures--rather than
classos of structures <T, <, V>? Well, maybe the explanation should be in
terms of inertia rather than reasons, but I'll give it a try.
First, let's ask: What should tense logic formulae be thought of as
defining? The options are (1) f defines { <T, <, V> : <T, <, V> |= f }
and (2) f defines { <T, < > : for every V, <T, <, V> |= f }. Now, if
you're simply using tense logic as a way to talk about the structure of
time, the latter perspective is clearly right--you don't want to distinguish
structures that have the same time structure, but that differ in that p
happens to be true at some point t in one but not at that same point in the
other. This is exactly the sense in which S4 defines the class of reflexive
and transitive frames. Option (1) just doesn't seem too useful, since formulae
can wind up being true "for the wrong reason". (Does the modal axiom p -> <>p
"say" that what is true is possible? Not on definability option (1)--all sorts
of structures that violate this principle are admitted, all the ones in which
V(p) is false. Not even a schema will let you say the accessibility relation
is reflexive--consider the structure < {w1, w2}, { <w1, w2>, <w2, w1> },
lambda p. true >.) You really have to quantify either over valuations or
over propositions to be able to say anything interesting about the structure.
Next, how do you use first order theories to talk about time structures? Well,
this is pretty straightforward: you write axioms in the language { < }. If
you want other predicates or functors in your language, that's fine, as long
as you don't use them in the axioms--because then <T, <, P, Q, ..., f, g, ... >
will be a model of the axioms iff <T, < > is, and the problem of being able
to define "the structure of time" in the presence of non-logical axioms seen
in the propositional case won't arise.
Now, the translation trans from tense logic to quantificational logic can be
viewed as yielding a first order formula in a language { < , P0, P1, ... },
where the Pi are monadic predicate parameters corresponding to the
propositional letters occurring in the tense logic formula or as yielding a
second order formula in the language { < } where the monadic predicates are
universally quantified variables. Call the first translation `trans1' and the
second `trans2'. trans1 establishes a correspondence such that for any
structure <T, <, V> and any tense logic formula f, <T, <, V> |= f iff
<T, <, V> |= trans1(f). But this is rather unattractive for the reasons
given above--essentially, you can't define a class of structures based on
properties of <, and you *have* to be able to do this. On the other hand,
trans2 establishes a correspondence such that for any <T, < > and f,
<T, < > |= f iff <T, < > |= trans2(f)--you can define classes of structures
bases on properties of <, ... .
"tense logic > first order theories of time"?
---------------------------------------------
Here's a new topic for discussion. Everyone seems to be concerned with
whether there are classes definable in tense logic that aren't definable
in a first order theory of time. But how about the converse: Are there
classes definable in first order theories that aren't definable in tense
logics? Kamp's theorem is relevant: if you restrict yourself to, say,
Dedekind continuous strict linear orders (Kamp's original restriction, which
has since been loosened by Gabbay, among others), then for any first order
formula in the language { <, P0, P1, ... } mentioned above, one can
effectively find a tense logic formula (in the language with binary "tenses"
SINCE and UNTIL) that has the same class of models <T, <, V> . So, if you
can factor temporal knowledge in the right way (a "big if"), it looks like
one could argue that first order theories are no more expressive than tenses.
P.S.
----
An exercise in non-monotonic reasoning: "If he had the example he was looking
for, he would have given it, so ... "
-- rar
∂17-Mar-86 1702 rar@kestrel.ARPA Responses to earlier comments and queries
Received: from KESTREL.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 17 Mar 86 17:02:07 PST
Received: by kestrel.ARPA (4.12/4.9)
id AA16896; Mon, 17 Mar 86 17:02:42 pst
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 86 17:02:42 pst
From: rar@kestrel.ARPA (Bob Riemenschneider)
Message-Id: <8603180102.AA16896@kestrel.ARPA>
To: jmc@sail, ladkin@kestrel.ARPA, phayes@sri-kl
Subject: Responses to earlier comments and queries
Cc: rar@kestrel.ARPA
I reread the discussion to this point over the weekend, and realized that there
were a couple of points that I wanted to comment on at the time, but didn't.
"Better late ... "
Re: Peter's argument that Craig's theorem couldn't provide an argument
against the possibility of factoring out temporal knowledge as
a "time expert"
------------------------------------------------------------------------
He wrote "Craig's theorem can tell nothing about how information is passed
between algebraic theories, since there are no relation symbols."
I don't get it. Craig's theorem says
Let \phi, \psi be sentences such that \phi |= \psi. Then there
exists a sentence \theta such that:
(i) \phi |= \theta and \theta |= \psi.
(ii) Every relation, function, or constant symbol (excluding
identity) which occurs in \theta occurs in both \phi and
\psi.
(I quote from everyone's favorite reference, Chang and Keisler.) Lyndon's
sharpened version ("... every relation symbol (excluding identity) which occurs
positively in \theta occurs positively in both \phi and \psi, and similarly
with `negatively' in place of `positively' ...") requires no relation symbols,
but not Craig's original. Was that a source of confusion, or am I missing
something? (If \phi and \psi are equations, then clearly \theta must be as
well, so that can't be it.)
Re: Ladkin's response to my comment that his first conjecture ("Horn = closed
under ultrapowers") was implausible.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your complaint that I said `ultraproducts' and that the modal result in
van Benthem said `ultrapowers' is, of course, correct. But my point was
that closure under reduced products is, prima facie, stronger than closure
under ultraproducts, and your conjecture is, therefore, implausible. Since
closure under ultrapowers is, prima facie, weaker still, that would seem to
provide an even stronger implausibility argument.
It's easy to show that, in this case, closure under ultraproducts is equivalent
to basic elementary--I sketched the argument in my note. The "closure under
ultrapowers" version seems to be harder. (Recall that a class of models
is elementary iff it is closed under ultraproducts and elementary equivalence.
But two structures are elementary equivalent iff they have isomorphic
ultrapowers. So, a class is elementary iff it is closed under ultraproducts
and isomorphism and its complement is closed under ultrapowers. However, a
class is basic elementary iff both it and its complement are elementary. So,
as I mentioned earlier, a class K is basic elementary iff both K and ~K
are closed under isomorphism and ultraproducts-the result I used earlier.
Looking at things the other way around gives K is basic elementary only if K
and ~K are closed under ultrapowers--K basic elementary => K elementary and
~K elementary => ~K closed under ultrapowers and ~~K=K closed under
ultrapowers. The converse doesn't seem to follow in general, but "pi-1-1"
gives it in a fairly direct way. Suppose K is pi-1-1 but not basic elementary.
Then ~K is sigma-1-1 but not elementary. Hence, either ~K is not closed under
ultraproducts or ~K is not closed under isomorphism or ~~K=K is not closed
under ultrapowers. But sigma-1-1 classes are closed under ultrapowers and
isomorphism--as I pointed out in my original argument--and so K must not be
closed under ultrapowers. Combining the two results, we have that a pi-1-1
K is basic elementary iff it is closed under ultrapowers--as desired.)
Re: Pat's "Why variables rather than parameters?" question
-----------------------------------------------------------
Actually, since point structures treat p's as variables "by definition", I
think the question that needs answering is: Why the emphasis on defining
classes of structures <T, < >--van Benthem's point structures--rather than
classos of structures <T, <, V>? Well, maybe the explanation should be in
terms of inertia rather than reasons, but I'll give it a try.
First, let's ask: What should tense logic formulae be thought of as
defining? The options are (1) f defines { <T, <, V> : <T, <, V> |= f }
and (2) f defines { <T, < > : for every V, <T, <, V> |= f }. Now, if
you're simply using tense logic as a way to talk about the structure of
time, the latter perspective is clearly right--you don't want to distinguish
structures that have the same time structure, but that differ in that p
happens to be true at some point t in one but not at that same point in the
other. This is exactly the sense in which S4 defines the class of reflexive
and transitive frames. Option (1) just doesn't seem too useful, since formulae
can wind up being true "for the wrong reason". (Does the modal axiom p -> <>p
"say" that what is true is possible? Not on definability option (1)--all sorts
of structures that violate this principle are admitted, all the ones in which
V(p) is false. Not even a schema will let you say the accessibility relation
is reflexive--consider the structure < {w1, w2}, { <w1, w2>, <w2, w1> },
lambda p. true >.) You really have to quantify either over valuations or
over propositions to be able to say anything interesting about the structure.
Next, how do you use first order theories to talk about time structures? Well,
this is pretty straightforward: you write axioms in the language { < }. If
you want other predicates or functors in your language, that's fine, as long
as you don't use them in the axioms--because then <T, <, P, Q, ..., f, g, ... >
will be a model of the axioms iff <T, < > is, and the problem of being able
to define "the structure of time" in the presence of non-logical axioms seen
in the propositional case won't arise.
Now, the translation trans from tense logic to quantificational logic can be
viewed as yielding a first order formula in a language { < , P0, P1, ... },
where the Pi are monadic predicate parameters corresponding to the
propositional letters occurring in the tense logic formula or as yielding a
second order formula in the language { < } where the monadic predicates are
universally quantified variables. Call the first translation `trans1' and the
second `trans2'. trans1 establishes a correspondence such that for any
structure <T, <, V> and any tense logic formula f, <T, <, V> |= f iff
<T, <, V> |= trans1(f). But this is rather unattractive for the reasons
given above--essentially, you can't define a class of structures based on
properties of <, and you *have* to be able to do this. On the other hand,
trans2 establishes a correspondence such that for any <T, < > and f,
<T, < > |= f iff <T, < > |= trans2(f)--you can define classes of structures
bases on properties of <, ... .
"tense logic > first order theories of time"?
---------------------------------------------
Here's a new topic for discussion. Everyone seems to be concerned with
whether there are classes definable in tense logic that aren't definable
in a first order theory of time. But how about the converse: Are there
classes definable in first order theories that aren't definable in tense
logics? Kamp's theorem is relevant: if you restrict yourself to, say,
Dedekind continuous strict linear orders (Kamp's original restriction, which
has since been loosened by Gabbay, among others), then for any first order
formula in the language { <, P0, P1, ... } mentioned above, one can
effectively find a tense logic formula (in the language with binary "tenses"
SINCE and UNTIL) that has the same class of models <T, <, V> . So, if you
can factor temporal knowledge in the right way (a "big if"), it looks like
one could argue that first order theories are no more expressive than tenses.
P.S.
----
An exercise in non-monotonic reasoning: "If he had the example he was looking
for, he would have given it, so ... "
-- rar
∂17-Mar-86 1748 JMC re: Rutie and Szolovitz
To: BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Mon 17 Mar 86 16:27:56-PST.]
I now vaguely recall that I found the Szolovitz letter in my mail box
during one of my recesses from a meeting about Genesereth, and I brought
it to the meeting. I have had a tendency to abandon documents at meetings
and I may have done that. Therefore, Nils or you might have picked it
up. If we can't find the original, we can perhaps certify a copy if you
have one or if that isn't acceptable, get him to certify a copy or send
us another. I'll talk to Rutie. I see the Engineering School is more
bureaucratic about reports than H&S was. Perhaps I will have to see
what the ultimate consequences of not complying with there demands are.
∂17-Mar-86 1812 JMC re: Rutie
To: BSCOTT@SU-SCORE.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Mon 17 Mar 86 16:27:56-PST.]
I spoke to Rutie.
∂17-Mar-86 2236 JMC Request for lit.
To: RA
∂17-Mar-86 2023 veach%ukans.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA Request for lit.
Received: from CSNET-RELAY.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 17 Mar 86 20:22:50 PST
Received: from ukans by csnet-relay.csnet id aj08333; 17 Mar 86 23:08 EST
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 86 16:28:47 CST
From: Glenn Veach <veach%ukans.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA>
To: JMC%SU-AI.ARPA@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA
Subject: Request for lit.
Dr. McCarthy:
I am working with Dr. Frank M. Brown, conducting research
in the extension of his modal logic as a logic for epistemic
reasoning. I have reference to a paper of yours titled
"On the model theory of knowledge" a tech. report STAN-CS-78-657.
Could you provide me with information as to how I might obtain
this paper?
Thanks for your time.
Glenn O. Veach
Artificial Intelligence Laboratory
Department of Computer Science
University of Kansas
Lawrence, KS 66045-2192
(913) 864-4482
veach%ukans.csnet@csnet-relay
∂17-Mar-86 2243 JMC re: death valley
To: COWER@SU-CSLI.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Mon 17 Mar 86 09:57:11-PST.]
I remember an enjoyable visit during Easter vacation of 1954. All you
now have to do is look up when Easter was in 1954 or apply your
algorithm.
∂18-Mar-86 0946 JMC re: connection
To: uma.zurlvm1@IBM-SJ.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Tue, 18 Mar 86 12:08:53 SET.]
Your message reached me twice. JMC@SU-AI.ARPA is correct. SAIL
is a nickname for SU-AI, and not all mail relays know it.
We are all fine. Timothy can roll over now - some of the time.
I have been in Leningrad, but not in the Baltic countries. I know a few
people both in Leningrad and Tallin, and one of my present colleagues is
from Leningrad. For how long will you be reachable at this net address?
I can perhaps send you some addresses and telephone numbers.
∂18-Mar-86 0951 JMC re: PC/RT
To: ullman@SU-AIMVAX.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Tue, 18 Mar 86 09:48:20 pst.]
We bought the board from Ungerman-Bass. If it is connected now,
the deed was done this morning, since the board arrived Friday.
Les arranged the purchase.
∂18-Mar-86 1003 JMC re: PC/RT
To: ullman@SU-AIMVAX.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Tue, 18 Mar 86 09:59:46 pst.]
I just checked with Les, and as I suspected, the money came from a $25K
grant that IBM gave the Department. I had plans to spend it on building
some software, but I think that most likely the intention was that it be
shared. Therefore, I think you can use some of it to acquire ethernet
boards. Again talk to Les.
∂18-Mar-86 1057 JMC re: PC/RT
To: ullman@SU-AIMVAX.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Tue, 18 Mar 86 10:42:31 pst.]
Maybe, but I think they're the owners of mine as well.
With whom do you deal - Semans and Gerrish?
∂18-Mar-86 1326 JMC research associates
To: bscott@SU-SCORE.ARPA
1. Les Earnest
Les has been entirely satisfactory in dealing with DARPA and
in other executive officer functions. The direct work on QLISP, which
was a substantial part of what he was hired for hasn't happened, because
DARPA has not yet awarded the contract. This isn't Les's fault.
2. Vladimir Lifschitz
Vladimir has done excellent work. He has published several papers,
and has invented a new form of the circumscription method of non-monotonic
reasoning. Soon we should consider him for a regular faculty position.
3. Carolyn Talcott
Carolyn has been working as a research associate since August.
Since she had a baby in November and taught a course, which seems to
have gone quite well, in Winter Quarter, it is too soon for a full
evaluation. She also is scheduled to work on the DARPA QLISP project
and the EBOS project for which we are submitting a proposal to IBM.
I recommend normal raises for Earnest and Talcott and a high raise for
Lifschitz.
∂18-Mar-86 1336 JMC
To: genesereth@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
∂17-Mar-86 1518 CLT call
Rick Becker at Delfin Systems re invoice. 408-295-1818
∂18-Mar-86 1339 JMC re: uucp, my paper and the other class essays
To: KTRACY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Thu 13 Mar 86 22:25:22-PST.]
In a recent issue of Science the article on networking referred to UUCP
sites relaying mail. Is this used except to relay mail to other networks.
That is, is all Unix-to-Unix UUCP communication direct?
∂18-Mar-86 1348 JMC sorry, we have them
To: hx.rls@SU-FORSYTHE.ARPA
I mistakenly thought the MAN command would find the documentation
on the assembler. We indeed have that in the 4.2 system book. It
also turns out that we have the instruction set in the Technical
Reference Manual.
∂18-Mar-86 1409 JMC need part of the book
To: greep@CAMELOT
Fausto needs some info from the 4.2 book. We also need the installation
information for the Ingerman-Bass board now that the cable has
been installed. Fausto will come by. The board installation info is
on a page 5 of "Installing and operating". Unfortunately, there are
many such page 5s.
∂18-Mar-86 1714 JMC re: Msg. from Frank at Dina Bolla
To: RA
[In reply to message rcvd 18-Mar-86 16:03-PT.]
I prefer the 4/12.
∂18-Mar-86 1715 JMC re: Trip to Monterey
To: VAL
[In reply to message rcvd 18-Mar-86 15:46-PT.]
No thanks, I'll drive down myself, because I want to be free to return early.
∂18-Mar-86 1718 JMC
To: RA
Ask him how much 1st class rt Edinburgh Milan.
∂18-Mar-86 1733 JMC re: shopping
To: CLT
[In reply to message rcvd 18-Mar-86 17:27-PT.]
I'll do it. I forget whether either is fortified with iron.
∂19-Mar-86 0946 Mailer failed mail returned
To: JMC
In processing the following command:
MAIL
The command was aborted because these Host Name(s) are Unknown:
KUEE.KYOTO-U.JUNET
------- Begin undelivered message: -------
∂19-Mar-86 0946 JMC reply to message
[In reply to message sent Tue, 18 Mar 86 19:09:47 JST.]
I am still trying to make up my mind whether this is something
I can do.
------- End undelivered message -------
∂19-Mar-86 0947 Mailer failed mail returned
To: JMC
In processing the following command:
MAIL
The command was aborted because these Host Name(s) are Unknown:
KUEE.KYOTO-U.JUNET
------- Begin undelivered message: -------
∂19-Mar-86 0947 JMC reply to message
[In reply to message sent Tue, 18 Mar 86 19:09:47 JST.]
I am still trying to make up my mind whether this is something I can do.
------- End undelivered message -------
∂19-Mar-86 1249 JMC (→17664 22-Mar-86)
To: "#___JMC.PLN[2,2]"
I will be at a workshop on Knowledge from Wednesday afternoon till
Friday night and possibly Saturday.
∂25-Mar-86 0302 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 at a workshop on Knowledge from Wednesday afternoon till
Friday night and possibly Saturday.
∂25-Mar-86 0430 JMC re: let.pub fixup
To: LES
[In reply to message rcvd 19-Mar-86 13:11-PT.]
Thanks for the let.pub fix.
∂25-Mar-86 0438 JMC re: Old course notes
To: RTC
[In reply to message rcvd 20-Mar-86 10:58-PT.]
I'd like one each of the handouts.
∂25-Mar-86 0444 JMC re: AI Search
To: RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Fri 21 Mar 86 10:21:39-PST.]
I will be available only April 3 and 4 in that period.
∂25-Mar-86 0445 JMC re: uucp
To: KTRACY@SU-SUSHI.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Fri 21 Mar 86 11:50:54-PST.]
In view of what you said, I still don't understand why anyone ever
sends messages other than directly to the final destination.
∂25-Mar-86 0450 JMC re: Desk space
To: RTC
[In reply to message rcvd 21-Mar-86 17:02-PT.]
No problem till next Monday.
∂25-Mar-86 1026 JMC Subject: The (American) Criminal Justice System. (flame, I guess) (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
I have had better luck in confrontations with the police than
is reported here, but I also had a negative experience with the
criminal justice system. I appeared in court twice as complaining
witness and each time the trial was postponed. When I couldn't appear
the third time, the case was dropped. I wasn't informed that this
would happen or that it had happened.
∂25-Mar-86 1030 JMC re: Bogus Bottle Bill (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
The sooner you busybodies can make up your minds about how coercive
you want to try to be, the sooner I can know what to vote against. It
isn't honest to imply that the only opposition to bottle bills is from
beverage companies.
∂25-Mar-86 1033 JMC re: FLAME: New York City passes anti-discrimination bill (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
Looks like we'll soon need a bill against discrimination against
religious fanatics.
∂25-Mar-86 1043 JMC re: simplistic solution to criminal justice problems (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
In both the cases where someone got of on technicalities of which I have
some acquaintance a guilty person got off. In the more serious case
an inexperienced policeman searched the car of a man suspected
of murder without a warrant. The murder weapon was found, and ballistics
identified it as such. The District Attorney refused to prosecute,
but (to drastically shorten the story) two psychiatrists got the
killer committed. They didn't have to prove anything - just their judgment.
∂25-Mar-86 1051 JMC re: AI Search Committee
To: RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Mon 24 Mar 86 09:29:30-PST.]
no.
∂25-Mar-86 2317 JMC re: meeting with Rabinov
To: VAL
[In reply to message rcvd 25-Mar-86 11:22-PT.]
2 will be ok.
∂25-Mar-86 2320 JMC re: question
To: VAL
[In reply to message rcvd 25-Mar-86 11:54-PT.]
I'll be here on April 3.
∂26-Mar-86 0922 JMC re: JPL Issue on AI & Philosophical Logic
To: Rich.Thomason@C.CS.CMU.EDU
[In reply to message sent Wed 26 Mar 86 09:16:25-EST.]
This is to confirm my intention to contribute a paper. I think a position
paper would be best.
∂26-Mar-86 0926 JMC
To: RA
If Nafeh calls, tell him I'll be in by 10:30.
∂26-Mar-86 0927 JMC expected call
To: contreras@SU-SCORE.ARPA
If John Nafeh calls, and Rutie doesn't intercept it, please tell him
that I will be in by 10:30 and can see him then.
∂26-Mar-86 1228 JMC
To: greep@CAMELOT
∂26-Mar-86 1124 JJW PC-RT is in the host table
To: JMC, LES
IBMPCRT1 is now in the Stanford host table with Internet address
36.8.0.111. We probably need to make it aware of its own Internet
address, and the addresses of gateways, and give it an up-to-date
host table, and then it can talk to the rest of the world.
∂26-Mar-86 1313 JMC
To: jmc@IBMPCRT1
test
∂26-Mar-86 1320 JMC
To: hx.rls@SU-FORSYTHE.ARPA
IBMPCRT1 is now available for login.
∂26-Mar-86 1320 JMC
To: jmc@IBMPCRT1
test
∂26-Mar-86 1347 JMC terminal type
To: greep@CAMELOT
I telnetted to SCORE from the RT, logged in and then tried to use EMACS.
To be able to do this would be convenient when SAIL is down. It asked
me for Terminal Type: , and I was struck dumb. Is there something
I can tell it?
∂26-Mar-86 1443 JMC
To: CLT
David C. sends his thanks for calling Dantzig and his best wishes.
∂26-Mar-86 1819 JMC re: Symbolics Maintenance
To: Rindfleisch@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Wed 26 Mar 86 18:14:01-PST.]
I haven't thought about maintenance much so I have only a syntactic comment.
Noftsker isn't Dr.
∂26-Mar-86 1824 JMC reply to message
To: vijay@ERNIE.BERKELEY.EDU
[In reply to message sent Wed, 26 Mar 86 18:17:11 PST.]
Received, but if there are delays much beyond 3/31 my reply may be delayed
by a two week trip.
∂26-Mar-86 2229 JMC
To: jmc@IBMPCRT1
test
∂26-Mar-86 2238 JMC mail back from ibmpcrt1
To: DAN@SU-AI.ARPA
CC: greep@CAMELOT
As you know, mailing to jmc@sail from the rt causes sail to complain that
m.jmc is unknown. However, using the reply subcommand of the unix mail
works as follows. Note that some parts that one might expect are
missing. Perhaps this will help find what's wrong.
∂26-Mar-86 2231 jmc@
Received: from IBMPCRT1 by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Mar 86 22:31:04 PST
Received: by with Sendmail; Wed, 26 Mar 86 22:31:22 pst
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 86 22:31:22 pst
From: John McCarthy <jmc@@>
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
foo
∂26-Mar-86 2241 JMC re: terminal type
To: greep@CAMELOT
[In reply to message sent 26 Mar 1986 2241-PST.]
Thanks for trying.
∂27-Mar-86 0917 JMC
To: SJG
∂07-Feb-86 1529 vijay@ernie.berkeley.edu
Received: from ERNIE.BERKELEY.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 7 Feb 86 15:29:14 PST
Received: by ernie.berkeley.edu (5.44/1.8)
id AA11470; Fri, 7 Feb 86 15:27:39 PST
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 86 15:27:39 PST
From: vijay@ernie.berkeley.edu (Vijay Ramamoorthy)
Message-Id: <8602072327.AA11470@ernie.berkeley.edu>
To: jmc@su-ai.arpa
Hello Dr. McCarthy,
I, Rajeev Aggarwal, and John Searle are doing a study which
is quite similar to the survey published by Daniel Bobrow in the
AI Journal this year. He will be helping us to make a publishable
version of this study for the AI Journal.
Basically, the whole study can be described/outlined in three stages.
In the first, we have three participants: Hubert/Stuart Dreyfus,
John Searle, and David Rumelhart. They have agreed to provide
approximate 2 page specific criticisms of traditional AI.
(Terry Winograd may also be participating, but this is not certain yet).
In the second stage, four computer scientists actively doing
work in the field will be providing responses to any parts
of the criticisms that they feel need to be refuted, based
on their work, other AI work, or their own philosophies. We
would very much like you to be one of the four participants
in this stage.
All the participants sincerely believe that your presence and views
are very important to such a discussion - for their own benefit and
the various readerships (publications) that we hope will see various
versions of this discussion.
In the last, third stage, we intend to get one last brief
response/comments from the critical side and then a final
statement from the AI researchers.
The exchange of communications will be organized in a manner
so that each participant will have a reasonable amount of time
to respond to other participants, one at a time.
If it is okay with you, we would like to conduct all communication
over the network since this will make the entire study go more
rapidly. We hope you will be able to participate and let
us know soon of your decision. We believe this will be
quite an interesting discussion!
Sincerely,
Vijay Ramamoorthy
∂27-Mar-86 0918 JMC
To: SJG
∂13-Feb-86 1501 vijay@ernie.berkeley.edu
Received: from ERNIE.BERKELEY.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Feb 86 15:00:49 PST
Received: by ernie.berkeley.edu (5.44/1.8)
id AA03983; Thu, 13 Feb 86 14:59:05 PST
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 86 14:59:05 PST
From: vijay@ernie.berkeley.edu (Vijay Ramamoorthy)
Message-Id: <8602132259.AA03983@ernie.berkeley.edu>
To: jmc@su-ai.arpa
Hello Dr. McCarthy,
Thank you for responding so promptly; The complete list of
participants are John Searle, Hubert and Stuart Dreyfus, David Rumelhart,
Seymour Pappert, Joseph Weizenbaum, Eugene Charniak,
Douglas Hofstadter (in a "middle" position), Terry Winograd,
and yourself.
Next week we will be sending out complete information on
the discussion.
Sincerely,
Vijay Ramamoorthy
∂27-Mar-86 0918 JMC
To: SJG
∂13-Mar-86 1941 vijay@ernie.berkeley.edu
Received: from ERNIE.BERKELEY.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 13 Mar 86 19:41:18 PST
Received: by ernie.berkeley.edu (5.45/1.9)
id AA13465; Thu, 13 Mar 86 19:42:23 PST
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 86 19:42:23 PST
From: vijay@ernie.berkeley.edu (Vijay Ramamoorthy)
Message-Id: <8603140342.AA13465@ernie.berkeley.edu>
To: jmc@su-ai.arpa
***************************************************************
FINALLY --- IT'S HERE!!!
OUR AI DISCUSSION WILL BEGIN NEXT WEEK!!
***************************************************************
Thank you again for your participation, we hope that everyone
will benefit from having the advantage of putting forth their
ideas and receiving responses from such a diverse and dis-
tinguished group of people.
Following is some general information about the written dis-
cussion this study entails:
PURPOSES: We would like this discussion to be a free expression
of ideas about artificial intelligence. It will start with a
series of `critiques' on the traditional approaches that many AI
researchers have, and currently are taking. This will probably be
enough to provoke many responses against the criticisms, and then
responses to those responses. But it needn't always; agreement
is perhaps one of the best things to come out of any discussion,
and we hope that it will emerge in some form from this one. Par-
ticipants will have the consequence of sharpening their positions
and ideologies, and since this is a written discussion, everyone
will have the chance to get at the heart of the beliefs of others
- both by allowing time to think about certain ideas, and by be-
ing able to formulate responses without having to publish them
each time.
We also hope that "this meeting of the minds" will be a testing
grounds for new ideas/hypothesis to gain feedback from others.
There really isn't one sharp line that divides everyone, for al-
most no one agrees completely with anybody else anyway.
FRAMEWORK: There are 3 general stages to this discussion. The
first two will be somewhat formal, with the third being a general
"anything goes" informal exchange. They are outlined as follows:
Stage 1: This stage will consist of some criticisms on
current/traditional AI research; this is basically
to start the discussion; it will be given from group
one of the participants (as we have divided them)
to the other; the each of the criticisms will be
approximately 2 pages.
Stage 2: This stage will be the first response to these criti-
cisms; Each participant from group 2 will have the
opportunity to respond (support/agree or criticize)
anything in each of the critical papers - based on
their research, philosophies, or beliefs. These
responses will then be passed on to the group 1 par-
ticipants.
Stage 3: This last stage will partly build on the first two,
and be supplemented by whatever else comes up. Here
there will be rapid exchanges amongst the various
participants. Everyone will be able to monitor the
the discussion as it progresses.
PARTICIPANTS: This grouping really only applies to the first
2 stages; in the last, it is not important.
Group 1 Group 2
John Searle John McCarthy
Stuart/Hubert Dreyfus Daniel Bobrow
Terry Winograd Seymour Papert
Joseph Weizenbaum Eugene Charniak
In The middle:
Douglas Hofstadter
David Rumelhart
The division was not meant to be a major classification of any
type. It was arrived at based on past stances to traditional
information-processing oriented research. It's only purpose is
to provide part of a knowledge base/foundation for Stage 3.
One note about "In the Middle": for purposes of the first and
second stages, we decided to have Douglas Hofstatder and David
Rumelhart in a position where they will converse with both sides.
TIMETABLE: At the outset, we told everyone that there would be
"a reasonable amount of time to respond." This really applies
to the first two stages, where we would like to keep it to 2
weeks for the production of the first stage, and 2 weeks later
for the responses in the second stage. The third stage will
probably last several weeks, but this is generally open.
The time we have in mind for obtaining the criticisms of stage 1
is... FRIDAY, MARCH 21. At that time, we will pass all of the
papers on to all the group 2 participants. Two weeks from then,
we request all the group 2 responses to be in by FRIDAY, APRIL 4.
These responses will be forwarded to the group 1 members, and the
informal (stage 3) discussion will then begin (probably the most
interesting part). At that point, responses to specific people
will be forwarded immediately to the individuals involved. At
the end of each week, a transcript of the entire week's discus-
sion will be distributed to everyone.
COMMUNICATIONS: The entire discussion, as we have mentioned, will
take place entirely by electronic mail -- the fastest form of
written communication of this sort available to everyone. The
account that will be dedicated to handling all the communications
will be the following:
vijay@ernie.berkeley.edu
Once we start, all information will be processed immediately
after it is received. All messages received will be ack-
nowledged immediately and we hope that everyone will do the same
also. E-mail is reliable, but not "that" reliable.
PUBLICATION: Daniel Bobrow has been kind enough to offer his
help for collating multitudes of responses for publication in the
AI Journal. Furthermore, there will be a neutral introduction
and analysis to the entire discussion.
However, we will also be offering various editions of this dis-
cussion to various prominent national science publications. Our
philosophy here is that noting the quality of articles on AI, it
is clearly better that the current ideas driving AI research be
discussed by those directly involved with it, not by journalists
left to interpret it.
Furthermore, it almost goes without saying that everyone partici-
pating will receive a final copy of the sum total of all com-
munications that go on between the various participants in this
discussion.
Any further questions/problems, please forward them to this
account: vijay@ernie.berkeley.edu
Sincerely,
Vijay Ramamoorthy, U.C. Berkeley (Computer Science)
Rajeev Aggarwal, Bell Laboratories
John Searle, Dept of Philosophy, U.C. Berkeley
Daniel Bobrow, Xerox
(Project Organizers)
P.S. Remember, please acknowledge receipt of this message
through the account you would like us to send all your
responses/coments/information to.
∂27-Mar-86 0919 JMC
To: SJG
∂14-Mar-86 1512 vijay@ernie.berkeley.edu
Received: from ERNIE.BERKELEY.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 14 Mar 86 15:11:52 PST
Received: by ernie.berkeley.edu (5.45/1.9)
id AA03540; Fri, 14 Mar 86 15:10:10 PST
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 86 15:10:10 PST
From: vijay@ernie.berkeley.edu (Vijay Ramamoorthy)
Message-Id: <8603142310.AA03540@ernie.berkeley.edu>
To: SPapert@mit-multics, bobrow@xerox.com, ec%brown.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa,
jmc@su-ai.arpa
Hi,
As a member of Group 2, you will have to do nothing until we
pass you the papers from Group 1. Then you can comment/respond
where you see fit. We should have them for you by March 24.
-VR, RA, JS, DB.
P.S. Please acknowledge receipt of this message -- Thanks.
∂27-Mar-86 0919 JMC
To: SJG
∂26-Mar-86 1819 vijay@ernie.berkeley.edu
Received: from ERNIE.BERKELEY.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 26 Mar 86 18:16:32 PST
Received: by ernie.berkeley.edu (5.45/1.9)
id AA08426; Wed, 26 Mar 86 18:17:11 PST
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 86 18:17:11 PST
From: vijay@ernie.berkeley.edu (Vijay Ramamoorthy)
Message-Id: <8603270217.AA08426@ernie.berkeley.edu>
To: jmc@su-ai.arpa
Message originally sent 3/24/86- not acknowledged, thus resending 3/26/86.
Hello,
We have given Group1 and the Middle members one more week - due
to the necessity of a few members to get changed versions of their
original position papers in.
We will therefore send the Group1 papers out on 3/31/86.
Comments/Problems to vijay@ernie.berkeley.edu
- VR, RA, JS, DB
P.S. Please acknowledge receipt of this message.
∂27-Mar-86 1037 JMC Alliant rationalization
To: CLT, LES, RPG
Please comment on the following draft which has not yet been sent
to Steve Squires.
Steve:
We are tending in the direction of buying the computer for
QLISP from Alliant for the following reasons:
1. It is M68000 compatible, and Dick Gabriel thinks that
Lucid can make Qlisp faster for it than for other machines.
2. Jack Test, their systems person, knows Lisp well and is
strongly motivated to make whatever system modifications are required
so that Qlisp will run well. I want to tie this down in any contract
we might sign with them.
3. The recent reorganization of Encore left us with
doubts about their capablilities in the operating system area.
Mr. Pompa did not give the impression of being in charge technically.
4. Going towards MIPS or some other RISC configuration seems
like a good idea, but this seems not to be immediately feasible.
It is relevant to make a few remarks on how I see the Qlisp
project in relation to longer term goals. I view the first implementation
of Qlisp as a proof-of-concept and development tool. The history
of computer science does not make it seem likely that we will get
a parallel Lisp implementation with a 20 year life on the first try.
Therefore, I put getting experience quickly at a higher priority than
moving quickly towards what will be a long term hardware-software
solution. I hope that the Qlisp project can develop a system that
others will be encouraged to use.
The hardware decision problem would be much less problematical
if there were more time to make decisions. Stanford got a one year
extension of the DARPA hardware contract, and it's up in May. Could
you look into the possibility of another extension at least for the
parallel machine decision.
John McCarthy
∂27-Mar-86 1052 JMC advocating postdoctoral fellowships
To: nilsson@SU-SCORE.ARPA
What do you think of the following draft letter?
.require "let.pub[let,jmc]" source;
∂CSL ∞
Dear Colleagues:
Here are some contentions aimed at showing that the single most
important relatively inexpensive improvement in supporting the science of
artificial intelligence would be the creation of some (up to 20)
postdoctoral fellowships in AI. These fellowships would be open to
national and perhaps international competition. The fellows could take
them at any hospitable institution, they would have no specific duties;
they would have a duration of three to five years, and would not be
renewale.
1. Progress in AI is idea-limited.
2. Achieving human-level AI requires new concepts.
3. Historically, conceptual scientific breakthroughs have most often come from
well-prepared, strongly-motivated young men free to follow their own ideas.
One example is the Crick-Watson discovery of the structure of DNA.
Comparisons: 100 fellowship years is more likely to produce new concepts than the
next 300 Lisp Machines--at about the same cost.
The best presently available positions are assistant professorships in major
universities. However, these carry many other duties, and often involve
obtaining external research support, and this encouages adopting short term
research goals already well understood by granting agencies.
Researh Associate positions are sometimes good, but they usually involve helping
an already established principal investigator achieve his goals.
Who should do it?
1. DARPA is the largest single supporter of AI research, but it may be
institutionally difficult for it to support fellowships.
2. NSF should surely do it.
3. AAAI can afford to support a few and this would encourage others.
4. Corporations and private donors should be solicited - perhaps by AAAI to
supplement AAAI's own support.
5. We should proceed on a modest scale. I don't advocate creating enough
fellowships to support even a quarter of the new PhDs in AI.
Assistant professorships, research associateships and industrial research
positions also play an important role.
.sgn
cc: Saul Amarel, DARPA
Kent Curtis, NSF
Executive Council AAAI
Officers AAAI
Officers SIGART
Past Presidents, AAAI
∂27-Mar-86 1115 JMC
To: CLT
∂26-Mar-86 1903 LES Revised Alliant Proposal
I put a copy of the 3rd version of the Alliant proposal in your mailbox.
It would provide a system with 4 CE's, 3 IP's and 16 MBytes for $173k,
which is what we have. I had rejected the 2nd proposal on the grounds
that it had too many conditions (that we sign a contract with Lucid and
install a microwave link). It also neglected to mention the prospective
loan of four additional processors.
The new one calls for a "best effort" to sign a contract with Lucid and
install a link. It also specifies that we will provide "sufficient
computer access to Lucid, Inc. for them to
a.) complete a port of Common LISP to the Alliant System,
b.) conduct the Q-Lambda development work if associated grant is approved,
and
c.) support Lucid products on Alliant for a period of two (2) years."
Instead of a straight offer to lend us an additional four processors
as needed for testing, which I had asked for, they offer to provide them
on a "Low Cost Rental or Short Term Loaner basis."
I figure there is no point in dotting all the "i"s until we sort things
out with Squires.
∂27-Mar-86 1125 JMC re: advocating postdoctoral fellowships
To: NILSSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Thu 27 Mar 86 11:21:20-PST.]
Which conceptual scientific breakthroughs by young women do you have
in mind?
∂27-Mar-86 1146 JMC re: Lisp Conference
To: RPG
[In reply to message rcvd 27-Mar-86 11:20-PT.]
What are the dates?
∂27-Mar-86 1402 JMC INFORMATION ABOUT CAD/CAM AND AI AT YOUR SITE.
To: TOB@SU-AI.ARPA
∂27-Mar-86 1354 ME forwarded inquiry about AI
∂27-Mar-86 0931 DAAR100%BGUNOS.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU INFORMATION ABOUT CAD/CAM AND AI AT YOUR SITE.
Received: from WISCVM.WISC.EDU by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Mar 86 09:31:08 PST
Received: from (DAAR100)BGUNOS.BITNET by WISCVM.WISC.EDU on 03/27/86 at
11:30:05 CST
Received: by BGUNOS (Mailer); Thu, 27 Mar 86 19:30:59 +0200
Date: Thu, 27 Mar 86 19:30:25 +0200
From: <DAAR100%BGUNOS.BITNET@WISCVM.WISC.EDU>
To: POSTMASTER@MIT-AI.ARPA ,
POSTMASTER@SU-AI.ARPA
Subject: INFORMATION ABOUT CAD/CAM AND AI AT YOUR SITE.
HELLO,
MY NAME IS EUGENE BERMAN,HEAD OF CAD/CAM/A.I GROUP
OF COMPUTATIONAL CENTER AT BEN-GURION UNIVERSITY,
BEER-SHEVA,ISRAEL .
I AM INTERESTED IN THE FIELDS OF CAD/CAM AND A.I.
I BE GREATFULL IF YOU WILL SEND ME THE NAME AND
USER-ID OF THE PERSONS WHO DEALS WITH THOSE FIELDS,
TO CONNECT WITH THEM .
THANKS,
EUGENE BERMAN
∂27-Mar-86 1402 JMC re: Dave Rodgers, Sequent
To: RA
[In reply to message rcvd 27-Mar-86 13:51-PT.]
Did you refer Rodgers to Les?
∂27-Mar-86 1422 JMC re: Dave Rodgers, Sequent
To: RA
[In reply to message rcvd 27-Mar-86 14:21-PT.]
Yes, please. He's a computer vendor.
∂27-Mar-86 1518 JMC Re: mail back from ibmpcrt1
To: greep@IBMPCRT1
∂27-Mar-86 0017 KOLKOWITZ@SU-SCORE.ARPA Re: mail back from ibmpcrt1
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Mar 86 00:17:22 PST
Date: Wed 26 Mar 86 23:18:42-PST
From: Dan Kolkowitz <KOLKOWITZ@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Re: mail back from ibmpcrt1
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Wed 26 Mar 86 22:38:00-PST
Message-ID: <12193970167.13.KOLKOWITZ@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
What I did this afternoon was to copy the mail configuration file (sendmail.cf)
from Carmel to ibmpcrt1. This allowed mail to get out of the system, in fact
succeeding in transmitting mail to the remote system but with the user name
garbled. The reason is the rules in sendmail.cf for generating the "To:"
field is undoubtedly wrong. Other rules, as your example demonstrates, are
also wrong. What this would seem to say is that the grammar for IBM's
sendmail differs from UCB's. Hopefully the IBM manuals will reveal this.
I think we'll be able to crack this with a little work.
Dan
-------
∂27-Mar-86 1519 JMC Re: mail back from ibmpcrt1
To: greep@CAMELOT
∂27-Mar-86 0017 KOLKOWITZ@SU-SCORE.ARPA Re: mail back from ibmpcrt1
Received: from SU-SCORE.ARPA by SU-AI.ARPA with TCP; 27 Mar 86 00:17:22 PST
Date: Wed 26 Mar 86 23:18:42-PST
From: Dan Kolkowitz <KOLKOWITZ@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
Subject: Re: mail back from ibmpcrt1
To: JMC@SU-AI.ARPA
In-Reply-To: Message from "John McCarthy <JMC@SU-AI.ARPA>" of Wed 26 Mar 86 22:38:00-PST
Message-ID: <12193970167.13.KOLKOWITZ@SU-SCORE.ARPA>
What I did this afternoon was to copy the mail configuration file (sendmail.cf)
from Carmel to ibmpcrt1. This allowed mail to get out of the system, in fact
succeeding in transmitting mail to the remote system but with the user name
garbled. The reason is the rules in sendmail.cf for generating the "To:"
field is undoubtedly wrong. Other rules, as your example demonstrates, are
also wrong. What this would seem to say is that the grammar for IBM's
sendmail differs from UCB's. Hopefully the IBM manuals will reveal this.
I think we'll be able to crack this with a little work.
Dan
-------
∂27-Mar-86 1733 JMC re: DAI'86
To: SRIDHARAN@BBNG.ARPA, AAAI-OFFICE@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Thu 27 Mar 86 17:10:36-EST.]
I got your note. AAAI will sponsor the event. Please work out details
with Claudia Mazzetti at AAAI.
∂27-Mar-86 1735 JMC re: IBM proposal
To: greep@CAMELOT
CC: LES@SU-AI.ARPA
[In reply to message from greep@camelot sent 27 Mar 1986 1426-PST.]
Thanks for your draft. It corresponds with my EBOS document. However,
I'm not sure the document as is requires that much introduction. Les
is drawing up the proposal and may take some good sentences from your
draft if he thinks it will make it read more smoothly.
∂27-Mar-86 1745 JMC
To: jmc@IBMPCRT1
another test
∂27-Mar-86 2102 JMC computer purchase plan
To: squires@USC-ISI.ARPA
Steve:
We are tending in the direction of buying the computer for
QLISP from Alliant for the following reasons:
1. It is M68000 compatible, and Dick Gabriel thinks that
Lucid can make Qlisp faster for it than for other machines.
2. Jack Test, their systems person, knows Lisp well and is
strongly motivated to make whatever system modifications are required
so that Qlisp will run well. I want to tie this down in any contract
we might sign with them.
3. The recent reorganization of Encore left us with
doubts about their capablilities in the operating system area.
Mr. Pompa did not give the impression of being in charge technically.
4. Going towards MIPS or some other RISC configuration seems
like a good idea, but this seems not to be immediately feasible.
It will, however, be just as easy to go to RISC from the 68020
architecture of Alliant as from the 32032 of Sequent and Encore.
5. MIPS and the other available RISC machine (the IBM RT) both
have been designed as sequential architectures. The Alliant has some
features oriented towards concurrency, and it will be important to
determine whether they are adequate and what improvements are needed.
Because the Alliant is a micro-coded machine, this may be more feasible
than with some of the others.
It is relevant to make a few remarks on how I see the Qlisp
project in relation to longer term goals. I view the first implementation
of Qlisp as a proof-of-concept and development tool. The history
of computer science does not make it seem likely that we will get
a parallel Lisp implementation with a 20 year life on the first try.
Therefore, I put getting experience quickly at a higher priority than
moving quickly towards what will be a long term hardware-software
solution. I hope that the Qlisp project can develop a system that
others will be encouraged to use.
The hardware decision problem would be much less problematical
if there were more time to make decisions. Stanford got a one year
extension of the DARPA hardware contract, and it's up in May. Could
you look into the possibility of another extension at least for the
parallel machine decision.
John McCarthy
∂27-Mar-86 2111 JMC
To: CLT, LES
allian[w86,jmc] sent to Squires differs but little from first draft.
∂28-Mar-86 1039 JMC re: Zabih, Ramin David
To: RA
[In reply to message rcvd 28-Mar-86 10:07-PT.]
Lowell Wood finally answered Carolyn's inquiry, and now Zabih is
nine minutes late for our appointment.
∂28-Mar-86 1435 JMC re: leave early
To: RA
[In reply to message rcvd 28-Mar-86 12:36-PT.]
Your leaving today at 1:30 was a substantial inconvenience because
of the need to send the abstract to Germany.
∂28-Mar-86 1526 JMC re: Computer Phone Messages (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
Had Tony Siegman thought to misspell his name in answering, he
would later have found out who was responsible for calling him when
the next step occurred.
∂28-Mar-86 1558 JMC
To: RA
fellow[w86,jmc] needs to become a letter.
∂28-Mar-86 1616 JMC
To: feigenbaum@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
Can you give me Gordon Bell's present phone co-ordinates?
∂28-Mar-86 2157 JMC Japanese representative
To: cl-steering@SU-AI.ARPA
Japanese support for a Common Lisp standard would be valuable. My
suggestion is that members of the committee discuss with some senior
Japanese, who is himself not a candidate, what kind of person is
desirable and be substantially influenced by the advice obtained.
∂28-Mar-86 2203 JMC
To: greep@CAMELOT
In using RT over net, what kind of display options are likely to exist.
∂28-Mar-86 2204 JMC
To: DAN@SU-AI.ARPA
In using RT over net, what kind of display options are likely to exist?
∂29-Mar-86 1522 JMC re: Prospective Applicant Visit
To: yossi@SU-SHASTA.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Sat, 29 Mar 86 12:54:47 pst.]
Do you mean prospective applicant or someone to whom we have offered
admission? I will be here on Thursday and will have time in either
case. What is her name? 1:30 would be ok.
∂29-Mar-86 1558 JMC re: Prospective Applicant Visit
To: yossi@SU-SHASTA.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Sat, 29 Mar 86 15:28:19 pst.]
OK, make it 2pm.
∂30-Mar-86 1237 JMC reply to message
To: KOLKOWITZ@SU-SCORE.ARPA, CLT@SU-AI.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Sun 30 Mar 86 12:30:36-PST.]
Carolyn will be in tomorrow with the documentation and can tell you
the results of our efforts so far.
∂30-Mar-86 1501 JMC re: IBM RT
To: JJW, CLT
[In reply to message rcvd 30-Mar-86 13:20-PT.]
That would be worthwhile, but our more immediate problem is to arrange to
be able to use the RT by telnet. We would like to be able to use it both
from Datadiscs and from Datamedias working through SAIL. Glass TTY usage
offers no problem, but we would like to be able to use the vi editor.
Carolyn had the impression that SAIL had some problem that makes it
difficult. Is this correct, and if so, can something be done about it?
∂30-Mar-86 1547 JMC re: Politics: Why is this man lying? (from SAIL's BBOARD)
To: SU-BBOARDS@SU-AI.ARPA
In answer to Jeff Mogul's of March 19. Alas, none of us BBOARD
readers appears to be in the "documented evidence" business.
1. As for who the Contras are, there's an article by Fred Barnes called
"Camping with the Contras" that I'll bring in and leave in the lounge.
They're a mixed bag. Like all armies, they have a large component
of teen-agers with hardly any ability to articulate why they are
fighting. Barnes remarks that many said they were fleeing the
Sandanista draft but couldn't give any intelligible answer about
why this made them join the Contra forces.
2. As to Reagan. As you may know I like precision of statement and I
would prefer a President, other things being equal, who shared that
preference. However, I doubt that Jeff would like Jeane Kirkpatrick
or my favorite Margaret Thatcher any better, although either would
be more precise. However, Reagan has other virtues, which I don't
fully understand, but which have turned out to be very important, and
which, for all I know, may be positively correlated with his imprecision.
Namely, he gets along with Congressmen of both parties and has reduced
the temperature of Congressional discussion of issues. He has some
important compromises to his credit and he may pull through on Contra
aid - a matter of considerable importance.
I will remark on one substantive argument that has been given against
it. Let's give diplomacy another chance, many opponents say. That
would be more plausible if (say) our anticommunist action were done
with our own navy, and our ships could just sail away for a while
(assuming there were none of our people prisoner or we were willing
to let them wait it out). But if our inactivity gets our friends
wiped out, we will soon have no friends.
3. I should remark that there are a some areas in which he manages
considerable precision of statement. His description of the Soviet
Union as an "evil empire" strikes me as correct in both words. Critics
of the statement have attacked its tact but have disdained to attack
its accuracy. His description of the Soviet Union as "the focus of
evil in the world" strikes me as mistaken. There are many evils in
the world, and communism exists as an evil independently of the Soviet
Union. His description of our part in the Vietnam war as a "noble effort"
strikes me again as accurate.
4. The rabbi who found no evidence of anti-semitism in Nicaragua may
be right (for all I independently remember of what I have read), but
I'm not convinced, because I remember the religious leaders, rabbis
included, who said that the Soviet Union didn't persecute Jews and
had religious freedom. I have rather direct knowledge that these
statments are false.
∂30-Mar-86 2024 JMC your message
To: elliott%slacvm.bitnet@SU-FORSYTHE.ARPA
didn't get here yet.
∂30-Mar-86 2033 JMC re: I will send you a draft
To: ELLIOTT%SLACVM.BITNET@SU-FORSYTHE.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Sun, 30 Mar 86 20:32:58 PST.]
reply
∂31-Mar-86 0217 JMC re: Math problem
To: ALTENBERG@SUMEX-AIM.ARPA
[In reply to message sent Mon 31 Mar 86 01:32:23-PST.]
I believe the matrices A =((2.01 0 0)(0 1 1) (0 1 1)) and
B = ((0 0 0) (0 0 1) (0 0 -1)) will provide a counterexample.
The spectral radius will be 2.01 for m very near 0 but will
be larger when m reaches about 0.1.
∂31-Mar-86 0904 JMC re: AI Search Committee
To: RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA
CC: RA@SU-AI.ARPA
[In reply to message from RICHARDSON@SU-SCORE.ARPA sent Mon 31 Mar 86 08:27:08-PST.]
yes.
∂31-Mar-86 1256 JMC
To: RA
Did I ask you to send out paper advocating fellowships?
∂31-Mar-86 1258 JMC letter about fellowships
To: RA
Evidently I didn't ask you to do it. Please pub and print fellow[w86,jmc]
and prepare copies for me to sign addressed to the distribution list
at the bottom. Claudia Mazzetti can supply most of the addresses.