perm filename W90.OUT[LET,JMC] blob
sn#883545 filedate 1990-04-03 generic text, type C, neo UTF8
COMMENT ⊗ VALID 00443 PAGES
C REC PAGE DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00041 00002
C00042 00003 ∂01-Jan-90 1716 JMC letter to Scientific American
C00043 00004 ∂01-Jan-90 2006 Mailer Castro vs. Ceausescu
C00045 00005 ∂02-Jan-90 1221 JMC
C00046 00006 ∂03-Jan-90 0211 Mailer Soviet public opinion
C00047 00007 ∂03-Jan-90 1649 JMC Please send
C00048 00008 ∂04-Jan-90 1258 Mailer re: Soviet public opinion
C00050 00009 ∂04-Jan-90 1344 Mailer Here's the poll in question.
C00056 00010 ∂05-Jan-90 0940 Mailer re: Scandal
C00057 00011 ∂05-Jan-90 1744 Mailer re: strange rotor from Japan
C00058 00012 ∂05-Jan-90 1751 Mailer scandal
C00059 00013 ∂06-Jan-90 0031 Mailer re: scandal
C00060 00014 ∂06-Jan-90 0045 Mailer ethical question?
C00061 00015 ∂06-Jan-90 0137 JMC New building.
C00062 00016 ∂06-Jan-90 0139 Mailer scandal
C00063 00017 ∂06-Jan-90 1235 JMC
C00064 00018 ∂06-Jan-90 1531 JMC The electric heater
C00065 00019 ∂06-Jan-90 1907 JMC re: Bibl. reference
C00066 00020 ∂06-Jan-90 2040 Mailer re: ethical question?
C00067 00021 ∂07-Jan-90 0131 JMC re: Soviet public opinion
C00068 00022 ∂07-Jan-90 1601 JMC
C00069 00023 ∂07-Jan-90 1638 Mailer Catholic credibility on El Salvador
C00075 00024 ∂07-Jan-90 1802 Mailer re: The eighties by the numbers
C00077 00025 ∂07-Jan-90 2216 JMC re: The eighties by the numbers
C00078 00026 ∂07-Jan-90 2238 JMC re: Soviet public opinion
C00079 00027 ∂08-Jan-90 0107 JMC autism
C00081 00028 ∂08-Jan-90 1340 JMC
C00082 00029 ∂08-Jan-90 1413 JMC Imagen at 885 Allardice
C00083 00030 ∂09-Jan-90 0853 Mailer re: Irrelevant
C00085 00031 ∂09-Jan-90 1442 JMC re: Affirmative Action: A Worldwide Disaster
C00086 00032 ∂09-Jan-90 1442 Mailer Please return
C00087 00033 ∂09-Jan-90 1502 JMC
C00088 00034 ∂09-Jan-90 1507 JMC
C00089 00035 ∂09-Jan-90 1626 JMC reply to message
C00090 00036 ∂09-Jan-90 2159 JMC Please get
C00091 00037 ∂10-Jan-90 0024 JMC
C00092 00038 ∂10-Jan-90 1412 Mailer re: "Mac Typewriter" Software?
C00093 00039 ∂10-Jan-90 1505 JMC white papers
C00094 00040 ∂10-Jan-90 1602 JMC re: Elephant draft
C00095 00041 ∂10-Jan-90 1922 Mailer re: At war with peace
C00101 00042 ∂10-Jan-90 2231 Mailer re: At war with peace
C00102 00043 ∂11-Jan-90 1249 JMC reply to message
C00103 00044 ∂11-Jan-90 1535 JMC
C00104 00045 ∂11-Jan-90 1625 JMC re: Vote
C00105 00046 ∂11-Jan-90 1920 JMC re: Seminar time/room change
C00106 00047 ∂11-Jan-90 2005 Mailer re: At war with peace
C00110 00048 ∂12-Jan-90 0244 Mailer re: At war with peace
C00111 00049 ∂12-Jan-90 0250 Mailer re: At war with peace
C00112 00050 ∂12-Jan-90 1009 JMC re: lunch
C00113 00051 ∂12-Jan-90 1024 JMC
C00114 00052 ∂12-Jan-90 1340 JMC re: Combining Nonmonontonic Theories
C00115 00053 ∂12-Jan-90 1357 JMC re: triangle paper
C00116 00054 ∂12-Jan-90 1408 JMC re: mental models
C00119 00055 ∂12-Jan-90 1414 JMC re: Trip to Moscow
C00120 00056 ∂12-Jan-90 1422 JMC re: At war with peace
C00122 00057 ∂12-Jan-90 1501 JMC
C00123 00058 ∂12-Jan-90 1518 JMC
C00124 00059 ∂12-Jan-90 1528 JMC Beyers
C00125 00060 ∂12-Jan-90 2014 Mailer re: At war with peace
C00127 00061 ∂12-Jan-90 2105 JMC
C00128 00062 ∂13-Jan-90 0046 JMC
C00129 00063 ∂13-Jan-90 1306 JMC re: mental models
C00131 00064 ∂13-Jan-90 1308 JMC
C00132 00065 ∂15-Jan-90 0918 JMC AISB Quarterly Newsletter
C00138 00066 ∂15-Jan-90 1337 Mailer Intellectuals stunned
C00147 00067 ∂15-Jan-90 1427 JMC lunch with John Nafeh of MAD Intelligent Systems
C00148 00068 ∂15-Jan-90 1443 Mailer Revising theories about Eastern Europe
C00157 00069 ∂15-Jan-90 1558 Mailer re: Intellectuals stunned
C00160 00070 ∂15-Jan-90 1847 Mailer re: Revising theories about Eastern Europe
C00163 00071 ∂15-Jan-90 2203 Mailer re: Revising theories about Eastern Europe
C00174 00072 ∂16-Jan-90 0441 Mailer re: Intellectuals stunned
C00176 00073 ∂16-Jan-90 0442 JMC Parallel Computer Algebra Workshop
C00179 00074 ∂16-Jan-90 1033 Mailer revisionism again
C00181 00075 ∂16-Jan-90 1526 JMC Recruiting visit
C00184 00076 ∂16-Jan-90 1944 JMC re: your car
C00185 00077 ∂16-Jan-90 2342 JMC re: do you have some free time?
C00186 00078 ∂17-Jan-90 0936 JMC re: mcc
C00187 00079 ∂17-Jan-90 0943 Mailer source of arms
C00189 00080 ∂17-Jan-90 1242 JMC re: meeting time
C00190 00081 ∂17-Jan-90 1515 JMC reply to message
C00191 00082 ∂17-Jan-90 1639 JMC re: AI Division lunches
C00192 00083 ∂17-Jan-90 1745 Mailer AK-47s in the garden
C00194 00084 ∂17-Jan-90 2305 Mailer re: AK-47s in the garden
C00195 00085 ∂17-Jan-90 2331 Mailer liberal? quotes?
C00201 00086 ∂18-Jan-90 1449 Mailer re: liberal? quotes?
C00203 00087 ∂18-Jan-90 1451 JMC re: McCarthy's Grades
C00204 00088 ∂18-Jan-90 1454 JMC whois and lunch with Nafeh
C00205 00089 ∂18-Jan-90 1523 JMC re: McCarthy's Grades
C00206 00090 ∂18-Jan-90 1716 JMC reply to message
C00207 00091 ∂19-Jan-90 0934 JMC re: lunch meeting
C00208 00092 ∂19-Jan-90 1004 JMC re: Apt
C00209 00093 ∂19-Jan-90 1008 JMC re: lunch meeting
C00210 00094 ∂19-Jan-90 1012 JMC re: Apt
C00211 00095 ∂19-Jan-90 1359 JMC re: Corrigenda
C00212 00096 ∂19-Jan-90 1419 JMC re: lunch meeting
C00213 00097 ∂19-Jan-90 1422 JMC re: Visit to University of Minnesota
C00214 00098 ∂19-Jan-90 1427 JMC re: elephant draft
C00215 00099 ∂19-Jan-90 1911 JMC re: AI Division lunches
C00216 00100 ∂20-Jan-90 1105 JMC
C00219 00101 ∂20-Jan-90 1716 JMC
C00220 00102 ∂20-Jan-90 1717 JMC
C00221 00103 ∂20-Jan-90 1827 JMC re: Revising theories about Eastern Europe
C00225 00104 ∂20-Jan-90 1926 JMC "Monotonic combinations ..."
C00226 00105 ∂20-Jan-90 2102 JMC ns
C00227 00106 ∂21-Jan-90 0146 JMC re: NS
C00228 00107 ∂21-Jan-90 1404 JMC re: comparisons and the hunger example
C00230 00108 ∂22-Jan-90 1102 JMC re: Rich Korf
C00231 00109 ∂22-Jan-90 1238 JMC re: Rich Korf
C00232 00110 ∂22-Jan-90 1446 JMC re: San Jose job for computational linguist
C00233 00111 ∂23-Jan-90 1028 JMC re: achievement
C00234 00112 ∂23-Jan-90 1604 JMC re: Possible Orals date
C00235 00113 ∂24-Jan-90 0933 JMC re: Timothy
C00236 00114 ∂24-Jan-90 1144 JMC
C00237 00115 ∂24-Jan-90 1159 JMC
C00238 00116 ∂24-Jan-90 1641 JMC re: 1990 Forsythe Lectures
C00239 00117 ∂24-Jan-90 1643 JMC
C00240 00118 ∂24-Jan-90 1742 JMC re: Admissible sets and structures
C00241 00119 ∂24-Jan-90 1903 JMC re: Pre-Orals
C00242 00120 ∂24-Jan-90 1905 JMC re: Abstract for Prolog Technology Theorem Prover Paper
C00243 00121 ∂24-Jan-90 2327 JMC consulting
C00244 00122 ∂25-Jan-90 0950 JMC DARPA request for Qlisp info
C00245 00123 ∂25-Jan-90 1549 JMC re: China bill veto override
C00246 00124 ∂25-Jan-90 2306 JMC
C00247 00125 ∂26-Jan-90 1013 JMC re: consulting
C00248 00126 ∂26-Jan-90 1122 Mailer Bush and China
C00250 00127 ∂26-Jan-90 1304 JMC re: Bush and China
C00251 00128 ∂26-Jan-90 1357 JMC
C00252 00129 ∂26-Jan-90 1849 Mailer Peace Dividend
C00253 00130 ∂26-Jan-90 2235 JMC Did you get
C00254 00131 ∂26-Jan-90 2241 Mailer re: Residential Phone Service
C00255 00132 ∂27-Jan-90 1520 Mailer phone caller identification
C00256 00133 ∂27-Jan-90 2008 Mailer article
C00257 00134 ∂28-Jan-90 1719 Mailer re: phone caller identification
C00260 00135 ∂28-Jan-90 1819 JMC
C00261 00136 ∂28-Jan-90 2019 JMC
C00262 00137 ∂29-Jan-90 1056 Mailer re: phone caller identification
C00266 00138 ∂29-Jan-90 1131 JMC suggestion
C00267 00139 ∂29-Jan-90 2159 Mailer re: phone caller identification
C00270 00140 ∂30-Jan-90 1023 Mailer re: Pathetic Pat Buchanan
C00273 00141 ∂30-Jan-90 1705 Mailer re: Residential Phone Service
C00275 00142 ∂30-Jan-90 2058 Mailer re: Anonymity (was Re: Phone caller identification)
C00276 00143 ∂30-Jan-90 2118 JMC re: Anonymity (was Re: Phone caller identification)
C00277 00144 ∂30-Jan-90 2201 JMC emotions?
C00280 00145 ∂30-Jan-90 2301 JMC re: forging money
C00281 00146 ∂31-Jan-90 0027 JMC Ito
C00282 00147 ∂31-Jan-90 1507 Mailer re: TIME essay on education and Stanford
C00284 00148 ∂31-Jan-90 1524 Mailer opinion
C00286 00149 ∂31-Jan-90 1609 JMC
C00287 00150 ∂31-Jan-90 1753 JMC re: responsiveness of databases
C00289 00151 ∂01-Feb-90 0115 JMC
C00290 00152 ∂01-Feb-90 0116 JMC
C00291 00153 ∂01-Feb-90 1021 JMC renaming files
C00292 00154 ∂01-Feb-90 1606 Mailer re: TIME essay on education and Stanford
C00294 00155 ∂01-Feb-90 1837 Mailer re: TIME essay on education and Stanford
C00295 00156 ∂02-Feb-90 1228 JMC reply to message
C00296 00157 ∂02-Feb-90 1252 JMC re: reply to message
C00297 00158 ∂02-Feb-90 1737 JMC re: contexts
C00299 00159 ∂02-Feb-90 1802 JMC re: scheduling conflict on Oral exam
C00300 00160 ∂02-Feb-90 2108 JMC 9600-baud home terminal
C00303 00161 ∂02-Feb-90 2110 JMC re: 9600-baud home terminal
C00304 00162 ∂03-Feb-90 0002 JMC re: Paul Flaherty
C00305 00163 ∂03-Feb-90 1223 JMC re: Minsky's coffee-table book
C00306 00164 ∂03-Feb-90 1225 JMC re: 9600-baud home terminal
C00307 00165 ∂03-Feb-90 1633 JMC re: pattern recognition and logic in AI
C00308 00166 ∂03-Feb-90 1756 JMC re: Visit to University of Minnesota
C00309 00167 ∂05-Feb-90 1145 JMC re: stuff
C00310 00168 ∂05-Feb-90 1515 JMC diffie
C00311 00169 ∂05-Feb-90 1528 JMC email difficulties
C00315 00170 ∂05-Feb-90 1601 JMC
C00316 00171 ∂05-Feb-90 2109 JMC re: Universal Email
C00318 00172 ∂05-Feb-90 2319 JMC re: Symbol-Grounding Workshop & Searle Symposium
C00320 00173 ∂06-Feb-90 1249 JMC re: Universal Email
C00335 00174 ∂06-Feb-90 1652 JMC re: Votes
C00336 00175 ∂06-Feb-90 1959 JMC re: CS323 2/6 Assignment
C00337 00176 ∂07-Feb-90 1306 JMC re: your visit to cyc-west
C00338 00177 ∂07-Feb-90 1331 JMC Timothy
C00339 00178 ∂07-Feb-90 1604 JMC reply to message
C00340 00179 ∂07-Feb-90 1745 JMC Manchester AI Professorship
C00341 00180 ∂07-Feb-90 2155 Mailer Nicaraguan election
C00343 00181 ∂07-Feb-90 2211 Mailer re: burning Bush...
C00344 00182 ∂08-Feb-90 0908 JMC re: Bing payment
C00345 00183 ∂08-Feb-90 1017 JMC re: 9600-baud home terminal
C00346 00184 ∂08-Feb-90 1039 JMC
C00347 00185 ∂08-Feb-90 1043 JMC
C00348 00186 ∂08-Feb-90 1442 JMC re: SAIL tapes
C00349 00187 ∂08-Feb-90 1444 JMC reply to message
C00350 00188 ∂08-Feb-90 1446 JMC reply to message
C00351 00189 ∂08-Feb-90 1447 JMC re: my class
C00352 00190 ∂08-Feb-90 1449 JMC re: Berlekamp
C00353 00191 ∂08-Feb-90 1454 JMC re: prizes
C00354 00192 ∂08-Feb-90 1638 JMC re: Bud Frawley
C00355 00193 ∂08-Feb-90 1638 JMC
C00356 00194 ∂09-Feb-90 0007 JMC re: Bud Frawley
C00357 00195 ∂09-Feb-90 0009 JMC re: Important Date Correction for Searle Symposium...
C00358 00196 ∂09-Feb-90 0012 JMC re: On-line CS/AI Reports
C00359 00197 ∂09-Feb-90 0016 JMC re: On-line CS/AI Reports
C00360 00198 ∂09-Feb-90 1407 JMC re: parking ticket
C00361 00199 ∂10-Feb-90 1302 Mailer East Palo Alto
C00362 00200 ∂10-Feb-90 1734 JMC re: concepts as objects (cs323)
C00363 00201 ∂11-Feb-90 1004 JMC re: a philosophical question
C00365 00202 ∂11-Feb-90 1445 JMC reply to message
C00367 00203 ∂11-Feb-90 2058 JMC Smith
C00370 00204 ∂11-Feb-90 2107 JMC Some possibly useful prose
C00375 00205 ∂11-Feb-90 2232 JMC emotion
C00381 00206 ∂11-Feb-90 2244 JMC re: are we machines?
C00383 00207 ∂11-Feb-90 2246 JMC %penros[f89,jmc] Review of Penrose book
C00384 00208 ∂12-Feb-90 0133 JMC cs323
C00385 00209 ∂12-Feb-90 0946 JMC re: email address of Minsky?
C00386 00210 ∂12-Feb-90 1149 JMC re: Final Exam Scheduling
C00387 00211 ∂12-Feb-90 2234 JMC re: CS123 on Tuesday
C00388 00212 ∂12-Feb-90 2235 JMC reply to message
C00389 00213 ∂13-Feb-90 0043 Mailer re: Communism
C00392 00214 ∂13-Feb-90 2105 JMC re: Elephant 2000
C00393 00215 ∂13-Feb-90 2106 JMC Elephant 2000
C00396 00216 ∂14-Feb-90 0115 JMC re: Elephant 2000
C00397 00217 ∂14-Feb-90 0318 Mailer re: Making sense of Mandela
C00399 00218 ∂14-Feb-90 0339 Mailer re: Prospective faculty ideology
C00401 00219 ∂14-Feb-90 0832 Mailer re: Prospective faculty ideology
C00402 00220 ∂14-Feb-90 0932 JMC re: Tyugu
C00403 00221 ∂14-Feb-90 1252 JMC re: Tyugu
C00404 00222 ∂14-Feb-90 1356 JMC re: Program Verification Paper
C00405 00223 ∂14-Feb-90 2233 JMC re: Prospective faculty ideology
C00406 00224 ∂14-Feb-90 2313 Mailer re: Making sense of Mandela
C00411 00225 ∂15-Feb-90 0852 JMC re: Does AI need a defense or not?
C00413 00226 ∂15-Feb-90 1906 JMC re: parking
C00414 00227 ∂15-Feb-90 1924 Mailer re: Opinions of Potential Faculty
C00415 00228 ∂15-Feb-90 1956 Mailer re: Making sense of Mandela
C00421 00229 ∂16-Feb-90 1351 JMC re: contexts and lifting
C00422 00230 ∂16-Feb-90 1405 JMC re: new keyboard
C00423 00231 ∂16-Feb-90 1433 Mailer re: Prospective faculty ideology
C00427 00232 ∂16-Feb-90 1502 JMC IMPORTANT
C00446 00233 ∂16-Feb-90 1511 JMC reply to message
C00448 00234 ∂16-Feb-90 1513 JMC Reference for Przymusinski
C00449 00235 ∂16-Feb-90 1532 Mailer Solidarity and capitalism
C00453 00236 ∂16-Feb-90 1717 JMC re: draft
C00454 00237 ∂16-Feb-90 1724 JMC re: Did you get
C00455 00238 ∂17-Feb-90 1217 JMC re: draft
C00460 00239 ∂17-Feb-90 1227 JMC apology
C00465 00240 ∂17-Feb-90 1244 JMC re: draft
C00466 00241 ∂17-Feb-90 1322 JMC further remark
C00467 00242 ∂17-Feb-90 1731 JMC graduate school admission
C00468 00243 ∂17-Feb-90 1834 JMC some very preliminary comments on your ideas on lifting
C00470 00244 ∂17-Feb-90 1835 JMC re: some very preliminary ideas on emotions and lifting
C00471 00245 ∂17-Feb-90 1905 JMC re: remarks on your review of Penrose
C00475 00246 ∂17-Feb-90 1908 JMC re: Does AI need a defense or not?
C00476 00247 ∂18-Feb-90 0924 JMC re: FYI
C00477 00248 ∂18-Feb-90 0932 JMC
C00478 00249 ∂18-Feb-90 1857 JMC
C00479 00250 ∂18-Feb-90 1859 JMC
C00480 00251 ∂19-Feb-90 1346 JMC
C00481 00252 ∂19-Feb-90 1505 JMC
C00482 00253 ∂19-Feb-90 1508 JMC
C00483 00254 ∂19-Feb-90 1628 JMC re: what can be said concisely
C00484 00255 ∂19-Feb-90 1745 JMC
C00485 00256 ∂19-Feb-90 2334 JMC re: Making sense of Mandela
C00486 00257 ∂20-Feb-90 0817 JMC Elephant
C00487 00258 ∂20-Feb-90 0942 JMC
C00488 00259 ∂20-Feb-90 1353 JMC file
C00489 00260 ∂21-Feb-90 1559 JMC re: Publication
C00490 00261 ∂22-Feb-90 0402 JMC re: free will
C00491 00262 ∂22-Feb-90 1023 JMC Elephant 2000
C00494 00263 ∂22-Feb-90 1024 JMC re: Elephant 2000
C00495 00264 ∂22-Feb-90 1506 JMC
C00496 00265 ∂22-Feb-90 1513 JMC re: Sushi?
C00497 00266 ∂22-Feb-90 1909 JMC Manchester AI Professorship
C00499 00267 ∂23-Feb-90 2022 JMC I plan to attend the csli affiliates banquet.
C00500 00268 ∂23-Feb-90 2025 JMC
C00501 00269 ∂23-Feb-90 2135 JMC
C00502 00270 ∂24-Feb-90 1620 JMC
C00503 00271 ∂24-Feb-90 1713 JMC aaai video outline
C00509 00272 ∂24-Feb-90 2124 Mailer African socialism
C00521 00273 ∂24-Feb-90 2125 Mailer I suspect he's right about lawyers.
C00523 00274 ∂25-Feb-90 2311 JMC re: CSD history
C00525 00275 ∂26-Feb-90 0055 JMC re: CSD history
C00526 00276 ∂26-Feb-90 0105 JMC re: CSD history
C00527 00277 ∂26-Feb-90 0112 JMC re: thesis proposal
C00528 00278 ∂26-Feb-90 0950 JMC reply to message
C00529 00279 ∂26-Feb-90 1003 Mailer Nicaragua
C00530 00280 ∂26-Feb-90 1203 Mailer re: Nicaragua
C00533 00281 ∂26-Feb-90 1204 JMC one more address!
C00536 00282 ∂26-Feb-90 1212 JMC
C00537 00283 ∂26-Feb-90 1246 JMC
C00538 00284 ∂26-Feb-90 1346 JMC re: Referee Request
C00540 00285 ∂26-Feb-90 1720 JMC re: hello
C00541 00286 ∂26-Feb-90 1743 JMC
C00542 00287 ∂26-Feb-90 2108 Mailer Kick 'em when they're down.
C00549 00288 ∂27-Feb-90 0103 JMC
C00550 00289 ∂27-Feb-90 1732 JMC re: Change in Sunday Meeting Time
C00551 00290 ∂28-Feb-90 1219 Mailer Ortega telecast this coming Saturday
C00553 00291 ∂28-Feb-90 1441 JMC re: character reference
C00554 00292 ∂28-Feb-90 1446 JMC
C00555 00293 ∂28-Feb-90 2016 JMC re: Gelfond
C00556 00294 ∂28-Feb-90 2355 JMC
C00557 00295 ∂01-Mar-90 1429 JMC re: AI Division lunch
C00558 00296 ∂01-Mar-90 1511 JMC
C00559 00297 ∂01-Mar-90 1554 JMC Digital "Disclosure" Invitation
C00563 00298 ∂01-Mar-90 1618 JMC
C00564 00299 ∂01-Mar-90 1634 JMC parking
C00565 00300 ∂01-Mar-90 2138 JMC re: your trip to austin
C00566 00301 ∂02-Mar-90 0731 JMC re: The Hunt for Red October
C00567 00302 ∂04-Mar-90 1205 JMC Penrose review
C00568 00303 ∂07-Mar-90 0029 JMC re: Thesis committee
C00569 00304 ∂07-Mar-90 0035 JMC re: AI Day on Campus
C00570 00305 ∂07-Mar-90 0040 JMC re: Searle's chinese room
C00571 00306 ∂07-Mar-90 0056 JMC Can you think of anyone
C00574 00307 ∂07-Mar-90 0114 JMC re: character reference
C00575 00308 ∂07-Mar-90 1358 JMC pehous.re1[let,jmc]
C00576 00309 ∂07-Mar-90 1451 JMC Soviet, Japanese and DARPA interest in Elephant
C00577 00310 ∂07-Mar-90 1506 Mailer The abbreviation APC
C00578 00311 ∂07-Mar-90 1533 JMC Please
C00579 00312 ∂07-Mar-90 1542 JMC Please
C00581 00313 ∂07-Mar-90 1615 JMC recommendations for VAL
C00582 00314 ∂07-Mar-90 1946 JMC reply to message
C00583 00315 ∂07-Mar-90 2224 JMC re: SPP Symposium
C00584 00316 ∂07-Mar-90 2226 Mailer re: revised Grey free speech proposal
C00585 00317 ∂07-Mar-90 2235 JMC re: SPP Symposium
C00586 00318 ∂08-Mar-90 0154 JMC
C00587 00319 ∂08-Mar-90 1734 JMC
C00588 00320 ∂08-Mar-90 2102 JMC
C00589 00321 ∂09-Mar-90 1029 JMC re: Distinguished Visitor
C00590 00322 ∂09-Mar-90 1054 Mailer Preserving the gains of the revolution
C00593 00323 ∂09-Mar-90 1157 JMC re: Referee Request
C00594 00324 ∂10-Mar-90 0025 Mailer Ronald Reagan said
C00596 00325 ∂10-Mar-90 1039 JMC expenses for conference
C00597 00326 ∂10-Mar-90 1121 JMC WOLF
C00602 00327 ∂10-Mar-90 1149 JMC re: Referee Request
C00604 00328 ∂10-Mar-90 1337 JMC Davis tomorrow
C00605 00329 ∂11-Mar-90 1119 JMC re: whiteboards
C00606 00330 ∂11-Mar-90 2059 JMC re: CS221
C00607 00331 ∂12-Mar-90 1052 JMC re: contexts reference
C00608 00332 ∂12-Mar-90 1107 JMC single room and dinner
C00609 00333 ∂12-Mar-90 1109 JMC re: retreat
C00610 00334 ∂12-Mar-90 1121 JMC su-etc
C00612 00335 ∂12-Mar-90 1324 JMC re: single room and dinner
C00613 00336 ∂12-Mar-90 1333 JMC re: bing
C00614 00337 ∂12-Mar-90 1521 JMC
C00615 00338 ∂12-Mar-90 1723 JMC re: Austin Trip
C00616 00339 ∂12-Mar-90 1724 JMC Re: Preserving the gains of the revolution
C00623 00340 ∂12-Mar-90 1900 Mailer re: Preserving the gains of the revolution
C00626 00341 ∂13-Mar-90 0834 JMC
C00627 00342 ∂13-Mar-90 1453 JMC re: Calendar Advisory
C00628 00343 ∂13-Mar-90 1752 JMC re: cs323 term paper
C00629 00344 ∂13-Mar-90 1929 JMC re: Elephant 2000
C00630 00345 ∂14-Mar-90 0850 JMC
C00631 00346 ∂14-Mar-90 0912 JMC Tyugu phone
C00632 00347 ∂14-Mar-90 1227 JMC re: Rudy Rucker on "are we machines"
C00633 00348 ∂14-Mar-90 1354 JMC backs of stop signs
C00634 00349 ∂14-Mar-90 1357 JMC missing your seminar
C00635 00350 ∂14-Mar-90 1411 JMC re: missing your seminar
C00636 00351 ∂14-Mar-90 2040 JMC re: Title for AI Day on Campus
C00637 00352 ∂14-Mar-90 2259 JMC reply to message
C00638 00353 ∂14-Mar-90 2302 JMC re: lambada from Brazil
C00639 00354 ∂14-Mar-90 2307 Mailer re: lambada from Brazil
C00640 00355 ∂14-Mar-90 2331 Mailer a letter the New Republic must have loved to print
C00642 00356 ∂15-Mar-90 0958 JMC re: Title for AI Day on Campus
C00643 00357 ∂15-Mar-90 2104 JMC re: VTSS160
C00644 00358 ∂15-Mar-90 2336 Mailer Soviet commentary on Nicaraguan elections
C00653 00359 ∂16-Mar-90 0903 Mailer danger from environmentalism
C00654 00360 ∂16-Mar-90 1518 JMC re: VTSS160
C00655 00361 ∂16-Mar-90 1643 JMC re: Axiomatization of Mr. S and Mr. P
C00657 00362 ∂16-Mar-90 1719 JMC re: CS523
C00658 00363 ∂17-Mar-90 1934 JMC Please tex
C00659 00364 ∂17-Mar-90 2152 JMC Please tex
C00660 00365 ∂19-Mar-90 1145 JMC
C00661 00366 ∂19-Mar-90 1200 JMC
C00662 00367 ∂19-Mar-90 1638 Mailer Never again socialism
C00663 00368 ∂19-Mar-90 1645 JMC
C00664 00369 ∂20-Mar-90 0805 JMC re: interview
C00665 00370 ∂20-Mar-90 0806 JMC re: spp invitation
C00666 00371 ∂20-Mar-90 0853 JMC
C00667 00372 ∂20-Mar-90 1007 JMC previous conversation
C00669 00373 ∂20-Mar-90 1008 JMC (on TTY167 1008)
C00670 00374 ∂20-Mar-90 1108 JMC
C00671 00375 ∂20-Mar-90 1111 JMC re: interview
C00672 00376 ∂20-Mar-90 1428 JMC re: Library books
C00673 00377 ∂20-Mar-90 2355 JMC re: Library books
C00674 00378 ∂20-Mar-90 2356 JMC re: term paper
C00675 00379 ∂20-Mar-90 2357 JMC re: IR
C00676 00380 ∂21-Mar-90 1118 JMC re: IR
C00678 00381 ∂21-Mar-90 1546 JMC re: Undergraduate Colloquium
C00679 00382 ∂21-Mar-90 1556 JMC
C00690 00383 ∂21-Mar-90 1711 Mailer re: Taiwan imitation of China protest
C00695 00384 ∂21-Mar-90 1914 JMC
C00696 00385 ∂21-Mar-90 2006 JMC re: wrong reference
C00697 00386 ∂21-Mar-90 2154 Mailer re: Taiwan imitation of China protest
C00699 00387 ∂22-Mar-90 0024 JMC re: Puzzle
C00700 00388 ∂22-Mar-90 0911 Mailer re: Taiwan imitation of China protest
C00703 00389 ∂22-Mar-90 1705 JMC Titles and abstracts
C00709 00390 ∂22-Mar-90 1801 JMC re: Taiwan and the PRC
C00710 00391 ∂22-Mar-90 2004 JMC Abstract for Spain
C00712 00392 ∂22-Mar-90 2017 JMC Sunday and workshop
C00713 00393 ∂22-Mar-90 2107 JMC defending Taiwan
C00714 00394 ∂23-Mar-90 0954 JMC re: term paper
C00715 00395 ∂23-Mar-90 1012 JMC re: sail and spider
C00716 00396 ∂23-Mar-90 1208 JMC re: visit
C00717 00397 ∂23-Mar-90 1212 JMC 15-puzzle
C00718 00398 ∂23-Mar-90 1344 JMC re: CSLI Researchers Picture Board / Ventura Hall
C00719 00399 ∂23-Mar-90 1345 JMC re: CSLI Researchers Picture Board / Ventura Hall
C00720 00400 ∂23-Mar-90 1532 JMC Monday appointment
C00721 00401 ∂24-Mar-90 2233 JMC
C00722 00402 ∂24-Mar-90 2235 JMC
C00723 00403 ∂24-Mar-90 2242 JMC
C00724 00404 ∂25-Mar-90 0956 JMC
C00725 00405 ∂25-Mar-90 2333 JMC re: Question
C00726 00406 ∂25-Mar-90 2334 JMC
C00727 00407 ∂26-Mar-90 0921 JMC reply to message
C00728 00408 ∂26-Mar-90 1130 JMC re: IR
C00729 00409 ∂26-Mar-90 1141 JMC comments on Mid-Term draft
C00739 00410 ∂26-Mar-90 1400 JMC re: IR
C00740 00411 ∂26-Mar-90 1412 JMC re: Lithuania -- what *should* USSR do?
C00742 00412 ∂26-Mar-90 1447 JMC The rest of my comments
C00745 00413 ∂26-Mar-90 1641 JMC
C00746 00414 ∂26-Mar-90 1710 JMC re: contexts vs microtheories
C00747 00415 ∂26-Mar-90 2036 JMC
C00748 00416 ∂26-Mar-90 2054 JMC re: contexts vs microtheories
C00749 00417 ∂27-Mar-90 0924 JMC
C00750 00418 ∂27-Mar-90 0925 JMC reply to message
C00751 00419 ∂27-Mar-90 1106 JMC re: Lithuania -- what *should* USSR do?
C00753 00420 ∂27-Mar-90 1109 JMC
C00754 00421 ∂27-Mar-90 1203 JMC interloper
C00755 00422 ∂27-Mar-90 1208 JMC
C00756 00423 ∂27-Mar-90 1715 JMC Please get me from the library
C00757 00424 ∂27-Mar-90 2201 JMC
C00758 00425 ∂28-Mar-90 0342 JMC
C00759 00426 ∂28-Mar-90 1054 JMC
C00760 00427 ∂28-Mar-90 1230 Mailer Socialism on a small scale
C00772 00428 ∂28-Mar-90 1521 JMC Please send
C00773 00429 ∂28-Mar-90 1526 JMC not this I assume
C00774 00430 ∂28-Mar-90 1649 JMC lecture series
C00775 00431 ∂28-Mar-90 1846 JMC AI and strong AI
C00779 00432 ∂29-Mar-90 1630 JMC Summer RA list
C00782 00433 ∂30-Mar-90 0944 JMC re: AAAI
C00783 00434 ∂30-Mar-90 0946 JMC Will this address work
C00784 00435 ∂30-Mar-90 0948 JMC re: Pat....
C00785 00436 ∂30-Mar-90 0949 Mailer Kuomintang in China
C00787 00437 ∂30-Mar-90 1016 JMC AAAI Workshops
C00788 00438 ∂30-Mar-90 1034 JMC
C00789 00439 ∂30-Mar-90 2136 JMC re: "Never again socialism" may be a winning slogan in China....
C00792 00440 ∂31-Mar-90 1429 JMC reply to message
C00793 00441 ∂31-Mar-90 1722 JMC re: reply to message
C00794 00442 ∂31-Mar-90 1723 JMC re: gopher
C00795 00443 ∂31-Mar-90 1804 JMC Andreas Dorschel adresss
C00798 ENDMK
C⊗;
∂01-Jan-90 1716 JMC letter to Scientific American
To: MPS
scient.3 and scient.4 are different versions of a letter. Please
decorate both.
∂01-Jan-90 2006 Mailer Castro vs. Ceausescu
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
My opinion is that while there are differences of detail,
the two are similar. Both are corrupted by power
and created personality cults. Both have demoted or
killed people they feared.
Castro might last quite a bit longer. He's much younger
and more energetic. Moreover, there are quite a few other
Cuban officials who are also implicated in his crimes.
He's in his early 60s now, and I doubt he will last to be
78. On the other hand, the demise of communism elsewhere
may have a large psychological effect in Cuba.
At present I think the U.S. should do nothing but continue
Radio Marti.
This is a conservative view. Is there as substantially different
liberal view?
∂02-Jan-90 1221 JMC
To: MPS
Texing scient.4[let has the highest priority.
∂03-Jan-90 0211 Mailer Soviet public opinion
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
A recent poll asked Soviets for their favorite foreign nations.
The U.S. placed first with 32 percent and Japan second with
10.9 percent. The third had 10.3 percent. You get five
guesses as to which it was. I doubt I would have guessed it
with five guesses. MRC, who sometimes tells us about public
opinion in communist countries, should have no trouble with
this one. By the way, the communist country that scored
highest was China with 2 percent.
∂03-Jan-90 1649 JMC Please send
To: MPS
the page I left on your desk about Moscow New
to Prof. Seymour Martin Lipset.
∂04-Jan-90 1258 Mailer re: Soviet public opinion
To: mrc@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
CC: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from mrc@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU sent Wed, 3 Jan 1990 22:48:04 PST.]
I had hoped no-one would give the game away before others had had a
chance to guess. The interesting question is, Why Israel?.
Jews are only 2 percent of Soviet population, so that's not it
if the poll was properly stratified.
I suppose the Soviet people admire and independent policy, military
success and dislike the Arabs on whom they have been wasting money.
Maybe some of them admire the kibbutzim, but my understanding
is that very few immigrants to Israel from the Soviet Union join
Kibbutzim.
Doubtless, Soviet public opionion has more surprises in store for
us.
∂04-Jan-90 1344 Mailer Here's the poll in question.
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
a292 1955 01 Jan 90
AM-Japan-US-Soviet,0484
Poll Says 51 Percent of Soviets Prefer Capitalism
TOKYO (AP) - A newspaper reported Monday that more than half the
Soviet citizens who responded to a recent Japanese poll said they
preferred capitalism to socialism, and America ranked first among
their favorite foreign nations.
The poll was conducted simultaneously in the Soviet Union, the
United States and Japan. It compared opinions in the three nations on
a range of issues, the newspaper Mainichi Shimbun said.
According to the poll, 72 percent of Americans, 60 percent of Soviet
citizens and 41 percent of Japanese said they supported their
government.
The government in Japan imposed a new sales tax last April and was
hit by bribery and sex scandals the past year.
Americans also expressed the most happiness with their present
lifestyles, with 92 percent saying they were satisfied, compared with
73 percent of Japanese and 26 percent of Soviets, the newspaper said.
The Soviets were asked if they believed capitalism or socialism was
superior. Fifty-one percent picked capitalism, 32 percent said
socialism and 17 percent said they didn't know, Mainichi Shimbun
reported.
People polled in each nation were asked their favorite and
least-favorite foreign countries. The most popular nation in Japan
was the United States, favored by 30 percent of respondents, followed
by Switzerland, with 10 percent, and Australia, with 8 percent. The
Soviet Union ranked 10th, with less than 1 percent of positive
replies.
Among Soviet respondents, the United States also placed first, with
32 percent, followed by Japan with 10.9 percent and Israel with 10.3
percent. The most popular communist nation, China, ranked 10th with 2
percent.
Eighteen percent of Americans picked Canada as their favorite
foreign country. Next was Britain with 15 percent, with Japan a
distant third at 2 percent.
The Soviet Union was the least-favorite nation of the Japanese
respondents, with 25 percent of the negative replies, while the
United States tied for third place with 4 percent.
Afghanistan, where the Soviet Union stationed troops for 10 years,
ranked as the Soviets' most disliked nation with 9.5 percent, while
the largest number of Americans - 16 percent - picked the Soviet
Union.
Would nuclear war occur in their lifetime? Ten percent of the
Japanese polled thought it would; 14 percent in the United States,
and 16 percent in the Soviet Union, the newspaper said.
The survey was conducted by telephone from Nov. 28 to Dec. 12 and
included 4,001 Japanese, 3,015 Americans and 2,970 Soviets selected
randomly, the newspaper said. NTT Telemarketing Co. conducted the
polls in the United States and Japan, and those questioned were 20
years or older. The Soviet Sociology Academy's survey center
conducted the survey in the Soviet Union, including both Communist
Party and non-party members who were at least 18 years old.
The newspaper provide no margin of error.
AP-NY-01-01-90 2245EST
***************
∂05-Jan-90 0940 Mailer re: Scandal
To: RIC@RML2.SRI.COM, comments@KL.SRI.COM,
su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from RIC@RML2.SRI.COM sent Fri 5 Jan 90 07:13:18-PST.]
This might be right, but who got the money, and how can the public
get some of it back? Galbraith's bombast tells nothing about that.
∂05-Jan-90 1744 Mailer re: strange rotor from Japan
To: dliu@SIERRA.Stanford.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from dliu@sierra.Stanford.EDU sent 6 Jan 90 01:31:37 GMT.]
Comments reserved till three other groups have repeated the experiment.
∂05-Jan-90 1751 Mailer scandal
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
According to today's NYT, the auctions of the real estate
taken over by the Gov't begin today. Some people are looking
for bargains. The Gov't is supposed not to settle for less
than 95 percent of the assessed value, but there is no indication
how that relates to what was loaned on the property. Also
there is some doubt that the Gov't will be able to get even
that much.
∂06-Jan-90 0031 Mailer re: scandal
To: karish@FOREL.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from karish@forel.stanford.edu sent 6 Jan 90 04:06:39 GMT.]
I'm not sure "assessed value" was the term used in the article.
∂06-Jan-90 0045 Mailer ethical question?
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
It is said that some Japanese organization paid ex-President
Reagan $2 million to visit Japan for a week and make a few
speeches. Assuming the amount is correct, is there anything
wrong with this? My opinion is that it's quite all right,
and, from the point of view of the organization the more than
$3 million expense might have been worth it.
∂06-Jan-90 0137 JMC New building.
To: faculty@SCORE.Stanford.EDU
Houses are built to live in and not to look on; therefore let use be
preferred before uniformity, except where both may be had.
- Francis Bacon.
∂06-Jan-90 0139 Mailer scandal
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
re: Galbraith
The speaking in a perpetual hyperbole is comely in nothing but love. - Bacon
∂06-Jan-90 1235 JMC
To: MPS
scient.5
∂06-Jan-90 1531 JMC The electric heater
To: emma@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
in room 226 no longer heats. Could it be replaced,
because it's always cold on weekends.
∂06-Jan-90 1907 JMC re: Bibl. reference
To: lederberg@ROCKY2.ROCKEFELLER.EDU
[In reply to message sent Sat, 06 Jan 90 21:27:51 -0500.]
QC16.W56.H54
AUTHOR: Hilts, Philip J.
TITLE: Scientific temperaments : three lives in contemporary science
Philip J. Hilts
IMPRINT: New York : Simon and Schuster, c1982
∂06-Jan-90 2040 Mailer re: ethical question?
To: mrc@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU,
hanauma!rick@BEAVER.CS.WASHINGTON.EDU
CC: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from mrc@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU sent Sat, 6 Jan 1990 16:01:08 PST.]
Whom do you have in mind MRC? All the important Reagan staff
positions were changed more than once. No sooner did commentators
decide someone was the power behind the throne when that
someone returned to private life. Only Nancy stayed the course.
∂07-Jan-90 0131 JMC re: Soviet public opinion
To: siegman@SIERRA.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Sat, 6 Jan 90 23:35:03 PST.]
So far, you are the only winner in one shot.
∂07-Jan-90 1601 JMC
To: CLT
Timothy, Whit's number is 968-5792.
∂07-Jan-90 1638 Mailer Catholic credibility on El Salvador
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Here's reason enough not to believe anything from Catholic (or
other religious) sources about El Salvador without corroboration.
This September the film Romero opened in New York amidst
good reviews ... . Purporting to be about the life of El
Salvador's assassinated Archbishop Oscar Romero, Romero
was produced by Paulist Father Ellwood Kieser. His interview
with the National Catholic Register contained the following
exchange about the factual authenticity of the film.
Register: The Salvadoran military is usually shown to be a
force for evil throughout the film. For example, a soldier
shoots up the Blessed Sacrament in front of Father Romero and
then shoots at the archbishop himself when he goes to gather
it up and take it out of the church. Did that incident
actually happen?
Fr. Kieser: Pieces of it happened. There was an occasion
where a soldier blasphemed the Blessed Sacrament and
shot it up. Romero was not there at the time. But the
church referred to in the film actually was closed by
the military and used as a barracks.
Register: Did the archbishop ever go back into a church
to rescue the Blessed Sacrament after the army had closed
it?
Fr. Kieser: Not that I know of. But to be honest with
you, I would just prefer that you not make a big thing
of it. I'm doing a drama based on the life of Archbishop
Romero. I'm not a journalist. You're a journalist. I'm
a dramatist. Your concerned with facts. I'm concerned with
feelings, the inside of a man, the truth of his experience,
and in order to get at that I'm allowed to arrange
facts ... .
Register: Another pivotal scene is the incident when
the army has surrounded a church where the guerrillas
are holding hostages. The archbishop is promised that
if he frees the hostages there will be no reprisals.
Then after the hostages are released, the army goes
back on its word and arrests the guerrillas and the
archbishop. Did that actually happen?
Fr. Kieser: Some of that is fictional. The army went
back on its word all the time.
Register: But in that particular incident where Romero
actually rescued some hostages, did the army go back
on its word?
Fr. Kieser: No.
Register: Was the archbishop ever taken into custody?
Fr. Kieser: Psychologically, yes. Factually, no.
But psychologically and emotionally he was imprisoned
and forced to listen to his people being tortured
and killed.
Register: But was he ever actually placed in a jail cell
by the army, and did he ever actually hear the screams
of priests being tortured in a jail cell next to him?
Fr. Kieser: No. But you're going to ruin the movie for
people if you put a lot of this stuff in. We're being
absolutely faithful to the truth. We're arranging the
facts to enable us to penetrate reality, to get to the
truth of the man. Where he actually was, physically,
isn't very important. The truth of the man is that
he was lied to and betrayed many times. And in that
way he was imprisoned and rendered impotent to prevent
his people from being killed and tortured. The cell
scene is the essence of Oscar Romero.
****
The source for this article is Second Thoughts for Fall 1989.
The second thoughts in question are those of Vietnam era radicals
Peter Collier and David Horowitz.
Question: Would it "ruin the movie" for you to know how much
the facts were "arranged"? How much "arrangement" would it
take?
Once lots of people, including priest dramatists, have decided
who the enemy is, details of the crimes don't matter. If the
enemy didn't do this crime, they probably did some other.
∂07-Jan-90 1802 Mailer re: The eighties by the numbers
To: jon@LINDY.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from jon@lindy.stanford.edu sent 7 Jan 90 21:51:17 GMT.]
Some of these statistics have delicately arranged cut off points
for rhetorical reasons. For example, the Reagan tax reform
eliminated large numbers of poor people from the income tax roles
entirely. Therefore, a different cutoff would change the
rhetorical effect. The other question is whether social security
is to be regarded as a tax or as a prepaid retirement. If the
former, working low income people are mistreated. If the latter
they are getting retirement income at bargain rates.
∂07-Jan-90 2216 JMC re: The eighties by the numbers
To: jon@LINDY.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Sun, 7 Jan 90 18:14:17 PST.]
Would you mind if I copied your message to me in a further comment
to su-etc on the statistics?
∂07-Jan-90 2238 JMC re: Soviet public opinion
To: siegman@SIERRA.Stanford.EDU
Since I was surprised, I would like to know your model of Soviet
public opinion in order to adjust mine. I hope it was a model of
Soviet public opionion and not just a model of what would
surprise me.
∂08-Jan-90 0107 JMC autism
To: beeson@UCSCD.UCSC.EDU
I just read the New Scientist article about autism. It seems
plausible that autism is the lack of some mental mechanism, but
I'm not convinced that the article precisely identifies what
is missing. If the theory is approximately correct, it seems
to me that the prognosis for treatment is better than the
article indicates. Namely, the built-in mechanism for
attributing beliefts, etc. to others can be approximated
by a learned mechanism, perhaps leaving only a speed deficit
and a deficit in interpreting more subtle cues. On the other
hand, the learned mechanism might avoid some common bugs of
the natural mechanism such as a person exaggerating the
extent to which other people are thinking about him and
trying to influence him.
∂08-Jan-90 1340 JMC
To: CLT
Timothy is duly registered.
∂08-Jan-90 1413 JMC Imagen at 885 Allardice
To: tom@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU
CC: CLT@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
What's the schedule on getting it fixed?
∂09-Jan-90 0853 Mailer re: Irrelevant
To: RIC@RML2.SRI.COM, comments@KL.SRI.COM,
su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from RIC@RML2.SRI.COM sent Tue 9 Jan 90 07:52:18-PST.]
This is the first time I can recall agreeing with the conclusion of
one of Admiral la Rocque's public statements. (He's our most
peacenik former high officer.) However, I wouldn't object if the
Bush Administration advocated waiting one or two more years
before making such large reductions in the armed forces. There's
a chance that even larger reductions will be safe.
Of course, this is all possible because of the collapse of
communism.
∂09-Jan-90 1442 JMC re: Affirmative Action: A Worldwide Disaster
To: RWF
[In reply to message rcvd 09-Jan-90 13:49-PT.]
I actually left the whole magazine, and it is indeed gone. I'll ask
on su-etc for its return.
∂09-Jan-90 1442 Mailer Please return
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
the issue of Commentary with Sowell's article "Affirmative Action-a
world-wide disaster" to the CS lounge. There's at least one more
would-be reader.
∂09-Jan-90 1502 JMC
To: ME
I got Ill mem ref at user 143005 from NS.
∂09-Jan-90 1507 JMC
To: MPS
lifsch.re5
∂09-Jan-90 1626 JMC reply to message
To: paek@Neon.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue, 9 Jan 1990 16:18:34 PST.]
I don't have definite office hours but am usually available in
the afternoon. If someone is coming from afar, I'll make an
appointment. As usual I haven't decided about homework and
exams yet, but there will be some homework.
∂09-Jan-90 2159 JMC Please get
To: MPS
application material for PhD program and fax it to David Chudnovsky
at 212 864-5320.
∂10-Jan-90 0024 JMC
To: nilsson@SCORE.Stanford.EDU
Did the Beyers resolution fall through the cracks?
∂10-Jan-90 1412 Mailer re: "Mac Typewriter" Software?
To: siegman@SIERRA.Stanford.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from siegman@sierra.STANFORD.EDU sent Wed, 10 Jan 90 13:48:33 PST.]
Consider the following new civil right. No organization should
be allowed to require anyone to supply information it already
possesses or information that person has already declared public
and put in the public database.
∂10-Jan-90 1505 JMC white papers
To: RPG
When I was last in Washington, I promised Scherlis and Squires a white
paper on Elephant. They asked for that rather than a proposal. I was
planning to include a cover letter saying that the draft I am sending
them will be the basis for a proposal. So far as you know, would this
jeopardize the informal character of the communication?
∂10-Jan-90 1602 JMC re: Elephant draft
To: VAL
[In reply to message rcvd 10-Jan-90 15:58-PT.]
Thanks. I don't know either, but I'm asking Dick Gabriel about that.
∂10-Jan-90 1922 Mailer re: At war with peace
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from AS.CEC@forsythe.stanford.edu sent 11 Jan 90 01:20:17 GMT.]
One of the advantages of cynicism as a form of rhetoric
is that cynical remarks are not considered to require
justification. If someone wants to say that crack and
other drugs are not very harmful to people in East Palo Alto
or wouldn't be if they were legal, let him offer arguments
to that effect. The one black resident of East Palo Alto
whom I know is of an entirely different opinion. Perhaps
she's wrong. Her personal solution was to move out of
East Palo Alto.
I don't know whether the invasion of Panama and the arrest of
Noriega will mitigate the drug problem. It seems to have
pleased the Panamanians. There's a full page ad attacking
it in todays NYT. Looking at the list of signers, it seems
that the leftists have taken Noriega to their hearts.
Maybe the armed forces can help reduce the flow of drugs. It's
worth a try. Before the relaxation of tension with the
Soviet Union, the Joint Chiefs always opposed getting
involved with the argument that their strength relative
to the Soviets was too little to justify any diversion
of effort. They cynical remark that they are now interested
in fighting drugs just in order to keep up their budget
requires some justification as inferences about people's
motives always does.
Finally, I notice that the liberals are weeping crocodile
tears for us conservatives being deprived of the red menace.
This again is a way of avoiding thought and analysis. Was
the pre-perestroika Soviet Union a menace to its neighbors
or not? Isn't there a difference between the Soviet Union
that invaded Hungary, Czechoslovakia and Afghanistan and
the Soviet Union that now says these invasions were wrong?
We conservatives see a very important difference, but many
liberals didn't think there was anything wrong with the
old Soviet Union, at least nothing to get excited about.
Mr. Cheney waited to see if the promised Soviet force reductions
would actually be carried out. When he saw that they were he
became willing to consider reductions in our defense budget.
Probably Congress will impose larger reductions than he wants;
that's normal.
The NYT has an Op-Ed today by someone making a comparison
between Ceausescu and Castro and predicting that with
the Soviet Union cutting its overseas commitments and
communist dictatorship going out of fashion, the Cubans
might treat Castro as the Romanians treated Ceausescu.
What say, liberals? What she advocated was a plebiscite
on the continuation of the Castro regime analogous to
the Chilean plebiscite on the continuation of the Pinochet
regime. My guess is that she's dreaming; there remains
a difference between authoritarians and totalitarians.
Incidentally, while American liberals don't consider
totalitarianism a coherent concept, the Soviet and Eastern
European press now uses it regularly in approximately the
same sense as Western conservatives and pre-Vietnam liberals
used it.
Anyway, how about some analysis backing up the cynical remarks?
∂10-Jan-90 2231 Mailer re: At war with peace
To: karish@FOREL.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from karish@forel.stanford.edu sent 11 Jan 90 05:15:34 GMT.]
If Karish is right that
"the street market for the drugs, which seems to be
composed mostly (~70%, last I heard) of people from
outside EPA."
then a few dozen well publicized middle class arrests might
reduce that considerably. We members of the middle class are
deterred by being arrested.
∂11-Jan-90 1249 JMC reply to message
To: HF.JFK@FORSYTHE.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 11 Jan 90 11:29:22 PST.]
Thanks. I guess the student who told me it wasn't in didn't look
in the right place.
∂11-Jan-90 1535 JMC
To: MPS
fuxon.1 with papers
∂11-Jan-90 1625 JMC re: Vote
To: chandler@SUNBURN.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 11 Jan 1990 15:28:17 PST.]
Mitchell and Goldberg abstain, Gupta yes
∂11-Jan-90 1920 JMC re: Seminar time/room change
To: ETCH@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu 11 Jan 90 16:34:08-PST.]
Please keep me on the list for notices about the seminar on logical theory.
∂11-Jan-90 2005 Mailer re: At war with peace
To: GA.JRG@FORSYTHE.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from GA.JRG@forsythe.stanford.edu sent 11 Jan 90 17:31:54 GMT.]
The remark about cynicism was not intended as a reply to Andy Freeman
but rather to Les Earnest.
I agree that crime in the drug industry is something that would be
greatly reduced if drugs are realized. However, the crack babies
wouldn't be reduced and neither would the aggressiveness of people
under its influence. Am I mistaken that it's worse than alcohol
in this respect.
With regard to Panama, I didn't mean to take a position on whether
Bush made the right decision, although I see that my statement
seems to definitely agree with it.
I think the U.S. could now take a position that it will act
militarily in Latin America only with the collaboration with
Latin American countries and the endorsement of O.A.S. This
is because of the decline of communism worldwide. I'm not
sure whether we should, however. We could again propose
that if the Soviets would cease their military supply
to Latin America we would do the same. Maybe they would
agree now; they didn't in the past.
June Genis is right that the leftist ad didn't endorse Noriega
but only condemned the U.S. I don't take their condemnation
as an argument in favor of the invasion. It was merely an
observation that Castro and Noriega seemed to have been
more allied than I previously thought.
I'm afraid that Chuck Karish is right that Castro won't go
the way of Ceausescu soon. Romania and Eastern Europe
were able to abandon communism, because the communist officials
lost their morale. Eastern European communism owes its
installation to the Red Army, and so few Eastern European
officials were themselves involved in killing people on its
behalf.
My theory is that killing on behalf of a cause makes a person
very reluctant to abandon it. Therefore, we could expect Castro's
and Ortega's officials to maintain their morale for another
20 years in the case of Cuba and 30 years in the case of
Nicaragua. Deng at his colleagues were involved in the Chinese
Civil War, so they aren't ready to give up either. However,
the European collapse of communism may have some effect in
Asia and Latin America.
∂12-Jan-90 0244 Mailer re: At war with peace
To: les@GANG-OF-FOUR.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from les@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU sent 12 Jan 90 08:21:13 GMT.]
No, Les, I believe it's you who should offer the first evidence.
∂12-Jan-90 0250 Mailer re: At war with peace
To: les@GANG-OF-FOUR.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from les@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU sent 12 Jan 90 08:41:15 GMT.]
In Romania, it was the army that was decisive, and from all appearances,
within the army it was the generals. It was they who refused to fire
on the demonstrations and who attacked and rooted out the Securitate.
∂12-Jan-90 1009 JMC re: lunch
To: VAL
[In reply to message rcvd 12-Jan-90 10:04-PT.]
Yes, I'll come for you (from home) about 1130, and I'll phone when
I get close.
∂12-Jan-90 1024 JMC
To: CLT
Science for pre-schoolers with parents begins Jan 24, Wed., 10-11.
∂12-Jan-90 1340 JMC re: Combining Nonmonontonic Theories
To: rathmann@ECLIPSE.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 12 Jan 90 12:36:40 PST.]
Sure, call some afternoon. Around 3 is most probable.
∂12-Jan-90 1357 JMC re: triangle paper
To: beeson@UCSCD.UCSC.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 12 Jan 90 13:32:20 -0800.]
The equilateral triangle problem is what set me off. I saw it in
D.J. Newman's problem book, and was surprised at how special the
solution he gave was. I think I saw a different but also special
solution in some book on number theory. I guess you'd better
look at the references, because Newman is rather well read, and I
don't think he'd have given the solution he did to the
equilateral triangle problem if he knew a general answer for
plane polygons.
∂12-Jan-90 1408 JMC re: mental models
To: beeson@UCSCD.UCSC.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 12 Jan 90 13:28:07 -0800.]
I don't think one person's knowledge of what another person believes
is like a belief model itself. I believe something about what some politician
believes, but I might say to myself, ``Either he thinks I'm stupid
or he thinks I don't remember how he voted on a certain issue.''
Such disjunctive propositions about what other people believe are
relatively common and don't correspond to ascription of belief models.
When we have third order models, even more complexity is possible, but
I wouldn't be surprised if the complex cases are rare.
I also think politicians are more often sincere than you seem to think.
However, what they are sincere about is peculiar, and they don't
dare try to explain to the electorate the deals they have to make
in order to be effective. For example, a politician interested
in raising the minimum wage (or in keeping it down) might find it
in his interest to vote for both an anti-smoking campaign and for
tobacco subsidies in order to achieve his goals on minimum wages.
However, his vote for (say) tobacco subsidies is worth more in
trade if it is not accompanied by an explanation that the vote
is part of a deal on some other matter.
∂12-Jan-90 1414 JMC re: Trip to Moscow
To: MPS
[In reply to message rcvd 12-Jan-90 13:40-PT.]
The data in public[1,jmc] may be given to anyone.
∂12-Jan-90 1422 JMC re: At war with peace
To: GA.JRG@FORSYTHE.Stanford.EDU, su-etc@SHELBY.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message from GA.JRG@forsythe.stanford.edu sent 12 Jan 90 19:53:24 GMT.]
If I didn't know anything about the previous causes the
signers of that ad endorsed, I could imagine their objections
to invading Panama were libertarian in motive. I can't remember
many of the names now, but they included an amazing fraction of
the prominent extreme leftists in the U.S. Remember that a full
page of the NYT costs maybe $40,000. Usually such ads are paid
for by one or two individuals. They ask for money of course, but
what they get doesn't usually pay a substantial fraction of the
cost of the ad.
∂12-Jan-90 1501 JMC
To: MPS
∂11-Jan-90 1535 JMC
To: MPS
fuxon.1 with papers
∂12-Jan-90 1518 JMC
To: ME
hot is working, but ns isn't.
∂12-Jan-90 1528 JMC Beyers
To: hk.ref@FORSYTHE.Stanford.EDU
The forced retirement of Bob Beyers is very unfortunate.
If you instigated it, you should be ashamed.
∂12-Jan-90 2014 Mailer re: At war with peace
To: karish@FOREL.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from karish@forel.stanford.edu sent 13 Jan 90 02:37:57 GMT.]
My comment on the NYT ad was'nt intended to justify the invasion
on the basis that leftists oppposed it. I also don't claim that
rich leftists have no right to buy newspaper space. I have no
objection to do that. The intent was to comment on the alliance
that seems to be developing between Castro and his supporters
and part of the drug industry. Any such alliance is going to
be covert, so clues have to be cited. Karish ascribes a different
motive to the U.S. invasion of Panama than that officially stated.
I don't see any evidence for that charge.
The Christic Institute invented a huge, CIA, right wing
conspiracy in their RICO suit and came up with no evidence
whatsoever.
∂12-Jan-90 2105 JMC
To: ME
"Sorry, failed to read in story."
∂13-Jan-90 0046 JMC
To: MPS
Have I sent MCC an invoice for the last trip to Austin?
∂13-Jan-90 1306 JMC re: mental models
To: beeson@UCSCD.UCSC.EDU
[In reply to message sent Sat, 13 Jan 90 08:35:53 -0800.]
My favorite example was ``Does Brezhnev know whether Reagan is
standing or sitting?'' Now it's ``Does Gorbachev know whether
Bush is standing or sitting?'' It seems to me that our reason
for inferring that Gorbachev doesn't know is based on the idea
that it is consistent with what he knows that Bush is
standing and also that Bush is sitting. Can you suggest
how to formulate what you believe about what Gorbachev
knows relative to Bush's posture? I haven't actually
tried to formulate this.
∂13-Jan-90 1308 JMC
To: ME
All done.
∂15-Jan-90 0918 JMC AISB Quarterly Newsletter
To: VAL
∂15-Jan-90 0820 @NSFnet-Relay.AC.UK,@syma.sussex.ac.uk:judithd@cogs.sussex.ac.uk AISB Quarterly Newsletter
Received: from NSFnet-Relay.AC.UK by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 15 Jan 90 08:20:49 PST
Received: from sun.nsfnet-relay.ac.uk by vax.NSFnet-Relay.AC.UK
via Janet with NIFTP id aa12523; 15 Jan 90 14:14 GMT
Received: from csunb by syma.sussex.ac.uk; Mon, 15 Jan 90 14:22:21 GMT
Message-Id: <20030.9001151425@csunb.cogs.susx.ac.uk>
From: Judith Dennison <judithd%cogs.sussex.ac.uk@NSFnet-Relay.AC.UK>
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 90 14:25:31 GMT
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: AISB Quarterly Newsletter
I have been asked to forward to you the following request for articles
for the AISB Quarterly. The AISBQ is the Newsletter of the Society for
the Study of Artificial Intelligence and Simulation of Behaviour (SSAISB)
which has circa. 1000 members. If you wish to receive further information
regarding the society and its aims please email me:
judithd@uk.ac.sussex.cogs
judith dennison
======================
From:
Steve Torrance, AISBQ editor (address at the end of this letter).
AISB QUARTERLY.
A. REVIEWS OF THE DECADE
The coming issue of AISB Quarterly is the first of the 90's. It seems
appropriate to invite longstanding members of the AI community to contribute
brief perspectives on how the field has evolved over the last ten years. I
would be extremely grateful if you could forward some reflections along these
lines. A suggested length would be around 1000 words - but less or more is
fine.
Here are a few questions that could be used as a framework for your remarks.
* What was your departmental environment like then as compared to now?
* What was the general AI/Cog Science environment like then as compared to now?
* What were the burning issues within the field?
* What were the most important EXTERNAL factors relevant to AI/Cog Science?
* What were the biggest successes/failures within the decade?
* What were the most accurate/inaccurate predictions, within the decade?
* Were the eighties more or less significant for AI than the seventies?
* What do you predict for the nineties?
I wonder if you would send this message on to other colleagues (both
within your institution and elsewhere) who might be in a position to provide
useful contributions. In particular it would be appreciated if you could
pass it on to relevant people abroad: especially in the U.S.
B. SITE REPORTS
I think many readers of AISBQ would welcome a series of descriptions of the
main developments at different AI sites around the country (or world). I would
like to include a series of these, over a number of issues. Would you be able
to contribute one, or persuade a colleague to do so? Again, 1000 words can be
taken as a guideline for length.
C. OTHER MATERIAL
The Quarterly is suffering from a general dearth of good feature articles and
other material. Can you persuade any of your colleagues, research students,
etc., to offer pieces?
The copy date for the next issue is February 1st, but we can probably delay by
a week or 10 days.
I look forward to hearing from you, and from people you have contacted.
Steve Torrance
Editor, AISB Quarterly
steve5@uk.ac.middlesex.cluster
∂15-Jan-90 1337 Mailer Intellectuals stunned
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
It appears that not only Panamanian intellectuals are
stunned but also American liberal intellectuals. They were also
stunned by the American welcome in Granada. The theory was
offered on su-etc that it was only English speaking people that
welcomed the U.S. The reporter of the following has a Spanish
surname. This doesn't prove he speaks Spanish, but does anyone
want to bet money that he doesn't. With $50 in bets, I'm willing
to call A.P. in NY.
Of course, we have no obligation to overthrow other
people's oppressive governments for them, just as we have no
obligation to provide any other form of foreign aid.
a223 1255 15 Jan 90
AM-Panama-Identity,0706
Intellectuals Stunned By Hearty Welcome For Gringo Invader
An AP Extra
By ELOY O. AGUILAR
Associated Press Writer
PANAMA CITY, Panama (AP) - The hearty Panamanian welcome for the
U.S. invaders surprised intellectuals and university students, who
are trying to figure out whether they belong to a nation or a
glorified American colony.
''Our generation does not believe in anything anymore,'' said Ivonne
Bruneau, a student at the University of Panama.
The intellectual and political community is also trying to figure
out where the nationalist spirit went wrong.
''Nationalism was identified with support for a government'' - the
regime of Gen. Manuel Antonio Noriega, said Raul Leis, an independent
sociologist and political scientist.
''It was like someone grabbing a clean flag with dirty hands. If you
were a nationalist, you had to support Noriega; if you were
democratic, it meant you opposed Noriega and were not nationalist.
''Eventually we tended to identify 'democratic' with the United
States, which opposed Noriega,'' Leis said.
The U.S. soldiers who invaded Dec. 20 to oust Noriega were cheered
and embraced by Panamanian civilians, some of whom offered them food
and invited them to their homes for New Year's Eve.
''Go ahead and touch him,'' one mother told her young son, pointing
to a U.S. soldier in battle gear. ''It's like your GI Joe (doll).''
''This is a honeymoon,'' said sociologist Marco Gandasegui, director
of the Center for Latin American Studies. ''But like all honeymoons,
it will end.''
Ms. Bruneau said, ''The Americans did something we could not do or
were not prepared to do. To my generation, it was a good change after
more than 20 years of military government.''
The United States is often referred to as Panama's midwife.
President Theodore Roosevelt engineered its separation from Colombia
in 1903, and in return obtained concessions that resulted in
construction of the Panama Canal.
Until 1977, the United States had sovereign control over the Canal
Zone, a 10-mile-wide strip of land along the canal that divided the
country in two.
Panama's national currency is the U.S. dollar. Nearly 35,000
Americans live here, and until July, more than 10,000 soldiers and
their dependents lived off base in Panama City.
''There has been a process of assimilation of Panama into U.S.
culture,'' said Cecilio Simmons, dean of the School of Public
Administration and member of the Democratic Revolutionary Party that
was created by Noriega's mentor, former dictator Omar Torrijos.
''There are sectors of the populations that would like to become a
protectorate of the United States. Our oligarchy is closely tied
economically to U.S. interests. Our professionals are attracted by
the so-called American way of life.''
''Then there are our own mistakes - the corruption of the previous
regime, that twisted the meaning of nationalism,'' he added.
Nationalists struggled for decades to rid the country of the Canal
Zone, where they were treated as foreigners in their own land. The
process culminated with the signing of the Panama Canal Treaties,
under which the canal becomes Panamanian on Dec. 31, 1999.
Noriega represented that strain of nationalism, but corrupted it and
grew weaker each day. In May elections, current President Guillermo
Endara beat Noriega's candidate by a 3-1 margin.
Those who oppose the invasion are almost embarrassed that Noriega's
Defense Forces - so vocal in their pledges to fight to the death -
surrendered so easily. There were no casualties among the higher
officers.
Leaders of many nationalist parties have gone into hiding and are
not making statements about the invasion.
''They are too concerned about their dollar accounts being frozen if
they say something,'' said one university professor bitterly.
Nevertheless, the first public sign of discontent came Jan. 9, a
holiday called Day of the Martyrs. It commemorates Panamanians who
died in anti-U.S. riots in 1964.
While 8,000 gathered at a Mass to celebrate the overthrow of Noriega
and his surrender to U.S. authorities to face drug charges, 150
people staged a protest march to a cemetery where some of the martyrs
are buried. They said they did not support Noriega, but they also did
not support intervention.
AP-NY-01-15-90 1541EST
***************
∂15-Jan-90 1427 JMC lunch with John Nafeh of MAD Intelligent Systems
To: ullman@SCORE.Stanford.EDU
Is Monday, Wednesday or Friday of next week feasible for
you? If so, choose one. He is interested in the possibility
of your doing some consulting for his company in the area
of databases.
I would come too.
∂15-Jan-90 1443 Mailer Revising theories about Eastern Europe
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Nobody predicted the collapse of communism in Eastern Europe
in 1989. Therefore, everyone, whether liberal or conservative
or something else, should revise his model. The question is
who should make what revisions.
Conservatives first:
No conservative (or liberal) predicted that the communists
would give up power so easily. Many anti-communists subscribed
in essence to Milovan Djilas's theory of "The New Class". This
theory identified the Nomenklatura, i.e. the communist
bureaucracy, as a new social class, in contrast to the
communist claim that they were the leading segment of the
working class. Andrei Ershov, the late Soviet computer
scientist, once replied to my mention of Djilas with, "Yes,
we hate him for that theory". This is at least a semi-Marxist
view wherein social classes are defined by their relation
to the means of production and are expected to have an
ideology derived from this.
There are three relevant facts.
1. The people of these countries hated communism
or at least came quickly to hate communism as soon as it
became possible to think that it was vulnerable. Whether
they will also turn out to hate socialism remains to be
seen. This hatred of communism is reasonably close to
previous conservative beliefs, although maybe conservatives
tended to overestimate the extent to which the hatred was
explicit in people's minds.
2. The communist bureaucracy proved unwilling to
kill large numbers of people in order to retain power.
As soon as the people realized this in each country,
the situation exploded. This realization was not
previously even within the bureaucracy.
This unwillingness to kill was completely unpredicted
by the conservatives. Since fewer liberals were
believed that the people really hated the communists,
the question didn't arise for them.
3. The unfolding of this unwillingness to kill to
retain power is mostly due to Gorbachev. As he tolerated
more and more expressions of anti-communism, anti-Soviet
imperialism and nationalism, people throughout the
communist world became bolder, and further toleration
became thinkable to the communists.
I can claim a small degree of prescience in this matter.
In winter 1988, I wrote an article ``First Signs of Solidarity in
the Soviet Union'', {\it Communist Economies}, v. 1, no. 1. It
was about whether a Solidarity movement like that in Poland could
arise in the Soviet Union. I said it could, in contrast to
almost everyone I talked to, but my expectations were for a
closer analogy to Polish events than actually developed.
Specificaly, I expected intellectuals and dissidents to play
large role in Soviet workers' movements. As far as we have,
heard, they have played no role at all.
The article was published in Britain at the instigation
of Vladimir Bukovsky, a prominent exiled Soviet dissident.
Anyway I said the following:
One relevant hopeful fact is that the
class-consciousness of the ``new class'' described by
Milovan Djilas is not so explicit as that of the noble
classes of feudalism. Feudal nobilities were often of
different ethnic background than the people they ruled
and considered themselves as ruling by ``right of
conquest''. They knew they were exploiting the other
classes and had every intention of keeping it that way.
The ``new class'' still pretends to itself as well as
to the rest of society that it isn't an exploiter.
I continued with the following:
Whether Gorbachev and the other high officials
will ever see that {\it perestroika} requires a genuine
labor movement remains to be seen. The dissident
movement of independent intellectuals is the best
prepared group in Soviet society to play a role in
creating it. This issue of {\it Glasnost} is an
important early step.
Otherwise, a slight revision of a Marxist
formula may turn out to describe the situation.
Socialism may turn out to be an intermediate stage
between feudalism and capitalism occurring only in
underdeveloped countries with underdeveloped democratic
ideology. Too bad Marx can't be asked his opinion of
this idea.
This doesn't suggest the spontaneous development of mass
anti-communist politics. Also the ``democratic ideology''
turned out to be sufficiently developed; it was only
repressed. The traditional conservatives who celebrated
Captive Nations Week turned out to be closer to correct
on this.
Need the liberals change anything at all in their
beliefs? I haven't seen much sign of any of them admitting it.
My guess is that most liberals will quietly adopt
opinions about communism similar to those held by liberals in the
1950s and 60s until Vietnam became important to them and matters
like "free elections" became unimportant.
What should trigger a change is the importance that
Eastern Europeans have given to the forms of Western Democracy.
I think they ought to affirm explicitly that no society
is legitimate that doesn't have free elections in the classical
sense. This means agreeing that the Castro regime is not
legitimate and that the Sandinistas have an obligation to
hold free elections. They should also express an explicit
attitude to the free elections that were held in El Salvador.
They needn't become pro-U.S.
∂15-Jan-90 1558 Mailer re: Intellectuals stunned
To: les@GANG-OF-FOUR.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from les@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU sent 15 Jan 90 22:24:01 GMT.]
There you go again, Les - substituting a cynical wisecrack for an
argument, or even for a statement of position.
I don't favor military intervention in any of Cuba, Nicaragua or
China. The cost would be too high, especially the political
cost. Besides, there's a good chance all of these countries
will free themselves from communism within ten years.
I see that Les, like others on su-etc, seems to believe that
Castro is more popular than other communist dictators. What's
the current evidence for this?
Maybe, it's true, but maybe it's something that liberals have
been repeating to themselves ever since Herbert Matthews of the
NYT reported on Castro's support in 1958 while he was still in
the mountains. Actually, he did a lot to create that support in
Cuba.
Walter Duranty of the NYT got a Pulitzer prize in the 1930s for
reporting that the Ukrainian famine was a myth. Just imagine
what would happen if somebody proposed to the current Pulitzer
jurors that they express their apologies to the Ukrainian people
and symbolically withdraw the prize. Duranty is long dead.
Also, someone, maybe Chuck Karish, made some claims recently on
su-etc for Cuban social accomplishments. Why do youall believe
them? Remember that such claims for the Soviet Union and other
communist countries were supported by enthusiastic American
visitors and turned out subsequently to be false.
∂15-Jan-90 1847 Mailer re: Revising theories about Eastern Europe
To: les@GANG-OF-FOUR.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from les@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU sent 16 Jan 90 00:16:02 GMT.]
My remark about socialism as an intermediate stage between feudalism
and capitalism was somewhat of a joke and was not meant to apply to
the Scandinavian countries in any case. They are not socialist in
the Marxist sense of having public ownership of the means of production,
distribution and exchange. The socialists in America who say that
the Eastern Europeans are not rejecting socialism (because they never
had it) apparently agree that the Scandinavian countries are not
socialist. They are usually ruled by socialist parties that draw
back from extensive nationalization. I don't believe even
their present platforms call for more nationalization.
The ideology of these socialist parties is extremely
equalitarian, and they support expensive welfare states, but they
haven't (yet) killed the capitalist goose that lays the golden
eggs. American conservatives used to, and I suppose may still
do, refer to these countries as socialist. Eisenhower made an
electoral rhetorical point about the high Swedish suicide rate.
Besides their anti-capitalist and anti-U.S. rhetoric Scandinavian
socialists have usually had a soft spot for communist countries
that bitter experience took a long time to modify. I believe
Sweden still subsidizes communist Vietnam.
∂15-Jan-90 2203 Mailer re: Revising theories about Eastern Europe
To: karish@FOREL.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from karish@forel.stanford.edu sent 16 Jan 90 03:31:15 GMT.]
The conservatives are grumbling that what with one thing or another,
the opposition hasn't actually gotten any of the money our Congress
voted. Some of them seem to be in the U.S. trying to raise some
money privately.
As for the recent Salvadoran elections, the most vocal opponents of
the Government threatened to shoot anyone who tried to vote - or
was that the previous election?
Anyway it seems Mr. Karish considers the liberals he knows have
nothing in their views to revise.
Let me explain about the views held by liberals in different
generations. After about 1947, there was a consensus in the U.S.
that communism was bad. Both liberals and conservatives held
this view. Both supported the U.S. position in the Korean war.
Kennedy said "Ich bin ein Berliner", and both supported the
initial stages of our attempt to prevent South Vietnam from
being conquered by Vietnam.
Along about 1967, the liberal position began to change. I was
still a leftist at the time and remember marching in one of
the first largest demonstrations against the Vietnam war in
San Francisco. I was surprised that the people at the front
of the demonstration carried Viet Cong flags and chanted
"Ho, Ho, Ho Chi Minh, NLF gonna win". Ho Chi Minh was the
leader of the North Vietnamese communists. I resolved not
to march in another such demonstration. By 1968, Bobby Kennedy
was campaigning against the U.S. part of the Vietnam war.
The mainstream liberal slogans were always ambiguous. By
1975, the U.S. troops had been withdrawn, and Congress refuse
to vote more arms for the South Vietnamese.
Accompanying the changes on concrete issues were general
changes of attitude towards electoral democracy. Most
liberals began to consider it unimportant whether the
people they supported observed electoral democracy.
At least they avoid expressing themselves on the subject
in concrete situations.
This holds true today. For example, Mr. Karish hasn't
told us whether he considers it desirable that the FMLN
should win the Civil War in El Salvador.
Here's a bit of documentation of the change in what I take
to be the liberal attitude. I own two editions of the
Encyclopedia Britannica, the 14th and 15th. The Britannica
revises articles from time to time, so there isn't a precise
date for either. I bought the 14th in the middle 1960s for
the benefit of my children, and received the 15th in the
middle 1970 as recompense for an article on robotics.
Consider Estonia. The 14th edition has an article entitled
"Estonia". That article's penultimate section is entitled
"Independence Lost". It begins
The fate of Estonia ws decided by the so-called
nonagresssion treaty of Aug. 1939 between Nazi Germany
and the USSR. A secret protocol to this treat assigned
Finland, Estonia, Latvia and Eastern Poland to the
Soviet orbit. After the defeat of Poland this
arrangement was revised on Sept. 28 and a secret
supplementary clause extended the Soviet sphere of
influence to Lithuania. On the same day the Soviet
government imposed on Estonia a treaty of mutual
assistance ... which ... conceded to the USSR several
military bases on Estonian territory which were manned
forthwith. .... On June 16, 1940, a Soviet ultimatum
demanded a new Estonian government "able and willing to
secure the honest application of the Soviet-Estonia
mutual assistance treaty.'' The follwing day Soviet
armed forces occupied the whole country. On June 19
Andrei Zhdanov a member of the Kremlin Politburo to
complete the designs ... On July 14-15 the "election"
of a new chamber of deputies took place ... Only the
single list of Soviet-sponsored candidates was allowed
to stand. On July 21 the new chamber was presented
with a resolution to join the USSR; it was unanimously
adopted the following day in spite of being contrary to
constitutional procedure.
etc.
The 15th edition of the Britannica has an article entitled
"Estonian Soviet Socialist Republic". It contains no such
sore-headed look at the past. Its penultimate section
begins as follows.
Administrative and social conditions. Constitutional
and political framework. Estonia has its own state
emblem, flag and national anthem. It is a socialist
republic, and its 1940 constitution declares it to be a
sovereign entity. The highest organs of state power in
Estonia are the Supreme Soviet, elected for a four-year
term, and the Presidium, elected by the Supreme Soviet.
The highest executive and administrative organ of
government is the Council of Ministers. In the
provinces government is effected through local soviets.
The most important political organization in the
republic is the Communist Party of Estonia. In 170 the
party numbered some 70,000 full and candidate members.
The party concerns itself with the political and
ideological education of the population, channels the
people's efforts to the development fot the natinal
economy, and directs the activities of the Young
Communist League of Estonia (created in 1921).
...
The final section begins
Prospects. Natural resources, investment funds, and a
qualified body of workers and specialists are the
foundation of the future development of the national
economy of the republic. Working within this
framework, the directives for the ninth Soviet
five-year plan, adopted in April 1971, laid down the
chief lines for future development. ...
I would guess that the next revision of the article on Estonia
will again have the title "Estonia" and will contain much of the
historical information present in the 14th edition and entirely
omitted from the 15th.
If you grew up in the late 1970s, much of the information you
received was probably in the ideological style of the 15th edition
rather than the 14th edition. Inconvenient history was omitted.
The 15th edition isn't all leftist propaganda. If I
remember correctly, there is a sharp disagreement between the article
on Stalin and the article on Stalingrad (renamed Volgograd). The
former describes Stalin as a dictator, the latter as a hero.
Does anyone have information on how the Soviet Union
and Eastern Europe are described in current high school texts?
What about "peace education"? Is it prominent locally, and
what do its texts say about the Soviet Union? The
conservative magazines I get have been grumbling about it
as leftist propaganda.
∂16-Jan-90 0441 Mailer re: Intellectuals stunned
To: les@GANG-OF-FOUR.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from les@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU sent 16 Jan 90 10:58:07 GMT.]
There are the Cuban boat people, the fact that Cuba prevents emigration,
and the fact that Cuba is like other communist countries, and one can
reasonably infer that like causes produce like effects. There is also
the exile community in Florida. There is the poet Armando Valladares,
one of Castro's original supporters, who was imprisoned for more than
20 years, and who has written a book about it.
∂16-Jan-90 0442 JMC Parallel Computer Algebra Workshop
To: CLT@SAIL.Stanford.EDU, JJW@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
∂16-Jan-90 0439 rz@cs.cornell.edu Parallel Computer Algebra Workshop
Received: from cu-arpa.cs.cornell.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 16 Jan 90 04:39:19 PST
Received: from LOKI.CS.CORNELL.EDU by cu-arpa.cs.cornell.edu (5.61+2/1.91d)
id AA26821; Tue, 16 Jan 90 07:09:18 -0500
Received: from bestla.cs.cornell.edu by loki.cs.cornell.edu (4.0/I-1.91f)
id AA02903; Mon, 15 Jan 90 17:44:21 EST
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 90 17:44:19 EST
From: rz@cs.cornell.edu (Richard Zippel)
Message-Id: <9001152244.AA04848@bestla.cs.cornell.edu>
Received: by bestla.cs.cornell.edu (4.0/N-0.08)
id AA04848; Mon, 15 Jan 90 17:44:19 EST
To: JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
In-Reply-To: John McCarthy's message of 20 Nov 89 1214 PST <otZ$q@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Parallel Computer Algebra Workshop
Date: 20 Nov 89 1214 PST
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message sent Mon, 20 Nov 89 00:48:21 EST.]
Thanks for the invitation. I'll get back to you. I might talk about
qlisp and its orientation towards algebraic computation, but our
project hasn't done much algebraic computation, and what it has done
I'm not the best person to discuss.
Hi.
I haven't heard from you in a while so I thought I'd reprime the pump.
Do you have any more thoughts about the workshop in May?
∂16-Jan-90 1033 Mailer revisionism again
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Another thing that has surprised everyone about the Soviet Union
and Bulgaria is the rise of old-fashioned murderous ethnic
antagonisms. Of course, conservatives didn't believe the Soviet
claim that socialism automatically abolished national antagonisms,
but no-one claimed that they would take violent form so quickly.
It is fashionable these days to consider the fact that the
Armenians are traditionally Christian and the Azerbaijanis
traditionally Shiite Moslem as an explanation. I would bet
that both religions were much attenuated during Soviet power,
and that religion today is an excuse for Azerbaijani pogroms
rather than a cause - assuming religion plays any actual role
at all.
Any theories?
∂16-Jan-90 1526 JMC Recruiting visit
To: VAL
∂16-Jan-90 1524 rz@cs.cornell.edu Recruiting visit
Received: from cu-arpa.cs.cornell.edu by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 16 Jan 90 15:23:58 PST
Received: from LOKI.CS.CORNELL.EDU by cu-arpa.cs.cornell.edu (5.61+2/1.91d)
id AA06854; Tue, 16 Jan 90 18:24:46 -0500
Received: from bestla.cs.cornell.edu by loki.cs.cornell.edu (4.0/I-1.91f)
id AA05651; Tue, 16 Jan 90 18:24:43 EST
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 90 18:24:40 EST
From: rz@cs.cornell.edu (Richard Zippel)
Message-Id: <9001162324.AA06676@bestla.cs.cornell.edu>
Received: by bestla.cs.cornell.edu (4.0/N-0.08)
id AA06676; Tue, 16 Jan 90 18:24:40 EST
To: flynn@sierra.stanford.edu, jlh@sierra.stanford.edu,
cheriton@pescadero.stanford.edu, jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: Recruiting visit
Cc: marzullo@cs.cornell.edu
We (Richard Zippel and Keith Marzullo) are planning on visiting
Stanford on February 8 and 9 to recruit for faculty and research
positions in Cornell's Computer Science Department. We have one or
two tenure--track slots this year, and should have the same number of
slots next year as well. Additionally, several faculty members are
looking for post-doctorial candidates.
We're interested in strengthening and broadening the research
directions of our department and are particularly interested in
candidates who create and build systems, both software and hardware.
We would like to speak to candidates in the areas of parallel systems
and scientific computation as well as strong candidates other areas of
Computer Science.
Could you please distibute this notice to the faculty of your department?
We'll call you later this week or early next to set up a schedule.
thank you,
Keith Marzullo marzullo@cs.cornell.edu, (607) 255-9188
Richard Zippel rz@cs.cornell.edu, (607) 255-9217
∂16-Jan-90 1944 JMC re: your car
To: danvy@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue, 16 Jan 90 18:10:42 -0800.]
It now looks like we'll keep it for Hazel, Timothy's nanny.
∂16-Jan-90 2342 JMC re: do you have some free time?
To: guha@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue, 16 Jan 1990 23:26:00 PST.]
How about Monday at 1pm?
∂17-Jan-90 0936 JMC re: mcc
To: MPS
[In reply to message rcvd 17-Jan-90 08:56-PT.]
The check arrived yesterday.
∂17-Jan-90 0943 Mailer source of arms
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
According to the A.P. the source of arms is police stations and
police armories. Apparently the police in the Soviet Union keep
much more substantial armaments than police in the U.S.; it's
what one might expect in a police state. When the police in a
locality are sympathetic with one side and the government has
lost authoriity, then armaments will end up in the hands of the
participants in the civil strife. No-one in the Soviet Union
has so far accused non-Soviets of participating, supplying or
encouraging.
∂17-Jan-90 1242 JMC re: meeting time
To: guha@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Wed, 17 Jan 1990 12:41:24 PST.]
That's ok. It gives us until Vladimir's seminar at 2:30 if necessary.
∂17-Jan-90 1515 JMC reply to message
To: MPS
[In reply to message rcvd 17-Jan-90 15:11-PT.]
Scherlis and Squires are at DARPA, 1400 Wilson blvd, etc. You must
have sent them much mail.
I think it's Koichi but will have to check. It's probably in my
ICOT magazine.
∂17-Jan-90 1639 JMC re: AI Division lunches
To: jutta@COYOTE.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent 17 Jan 1990 1631-PST.]
Some of us may be at the TARK conference on March 7.
∂17-Jan-90 1745 Mailer AK-47s in the garden
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Accuracy in Media in its issue of January-A 1990 grumbles that
the media have refused to show a videotape of Jennifer Casolo's
garden being dug up and the arms found. Remember that she is
the American who was arrested in El Salvador when a cache of
arms was found buried in her garden. She was released, and,
according to Accuracy in Media, the American media, treated
the situation as though she were innocent.
Is anyone interested in helping arrange a showing of the
videotape at Stanford?
Does anyone object to showing the videotape at Stanford?
∂17-Jan-90 2305 Mailer re: AK-47s in the garden
To: poser@CSLI.Stanford.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from poser@csli.stanford.edu sent 18 Jan 90 06:09:58 GMT.]
The film shows her in ghe garden when they were being dug up and
the article claims her manner indicates knowledge. Specifically,
it claims she didn't initially deny knowledge.
∂17-Jan-90 2331 Mailer liberal? quotes?
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
These are from AIM Report. They're not as checkable as
I'd like. AIM Report seems to be written for the convinced,
and it doesn't provide scholarly apparatus.
Jane Fonda, who in 1970 told the students at Michigan State
University, "I would think that if you understood what
communism was, you would hope, you would pray on your knees,
that we would someday become communists."
Walter Cronkite, who was quoted in the Moscow Literary Gazette
of May 1979, 7 months before the invasion of Afghanistan,
as saying that, " an honest person cannot believe that (the
USSR is preparing for war, that it might attack someone)."
Sydney Schanberg, the New York Times correspondent in Cambodia
in 1975, who four days before the Pol Pot communists captured
Phnom Penh and began the bloodbath that resulted in the death
of a quarter of the population of Cambodia wrote: "But these
concepts (of freedom) mean nothing to the ordinary people of
Indochina, and it is difficult to imagine how their lives could
be anything but better with the Americans gone."
John Kenneth Galbraith, the dovish Harvard economist,
who in an article in The New Yorker magazine in 1984
toasted the "great material progress" of the Soviet Union.
He explained it this way: "Partly, the Russian system
succeeds because, in contrast with the Western industrial
economies, it makes full use of its manpower."
Bernard Goldberg, CBS correspondent, in a 1986 broadcast
from Moscow: "As incredible as it may sound, Soviets not
only think they're free, they think they're freer than
we are."
I must admit I have some doubts about the complete accuracy these
quotes. Who wrote down what Fonda said, although admittedly
it sounds like her 1970 opinions?
Cronkite could escape, since Literaturnaya Gazeta
isn't a completely reliable source, and the reference to
"an honest person" is a Soviet literary style.
The Schanberg reference can presumably be checked, and
I'd bet a small sum that it will be found to be essentially
accurate. (Schanberg subsequently discovered his Cambodian
stringer in a refugee camp and parlayed his terrible experiences
into the movie "The Killing Fields". His first article about it
was in the New York Times Magazine. In that article he
described, with no sense of guilt, how he had bribed a Cambodian
lieutenant into ending a river patrol early so he (Schanberg)
could file a story on time. The NYT published my letter
grumbling that Schanberg should have showed some remorse for his
own contribution to the Khmer Rouge victory. What I didn't dare
put in my letter was my dream that if only the lieutenant had
arrested Schanberg and the Cambodians had shot him for attempting
to bribe an officer, the Cambodian officers might have taken
their war more seriously and survived. (They were all massacred
along with their families by the Khmer Rouge after they
surrendered).
The Galbraith quote is readily checkable. He delights in
outrageous statements, usually false.
The Goldberg quote might be checkable. It's plausible.
After all, President Ford said that Poland was a free
country in his 1976 TV debate with Carter.
∂18-Jan-90 1449 Mailer re: liberal? quotes?
To: A.Eric@GSB-HOW.STANFORD.EDU
CC: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from A.Eric@GSB-How.Stanford.EDU sent Thu 18 Jan 90 13:18:16-PST.]
I think your last conjecture is correct. They are claiming that
Goldberg misread Soviet opinion, e.g. by asking people in the
presence of other people or not continuing with more searching
questions. The first is the most common sin of travellers to
the Soviet Union - asking questions in circumstances in which
your interlocutor doesn't dare say something contrary to the
party line, either because there are present people responsible
for his political correctness, because there are unknown to him
people that might be informers or because he doesn't trust the
discretion of the interlocutor. It was always possible to
avoid these conditions and get somewhat straight answers.
AIM Report probably would also claim that the Leningrad voters voting
not on the Party leaders as soon as it was safe to do so meant
that they realized that they lacked freedom when it was impossible
to cross out their names inconspicuously.
Why don't you undertake to ask Goldberg about that 1986 statement?
∂18-Jan-90 1451 JMC re: McCarthy's Grades
To: hemenway@SUNBURN.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Wed, 17 Jan 1990 16:09:07 PST.]
I signed one set, but I don't remember whether it covered both Zabih
and Scales.
∂18-Jan-90 1454 JMC whois and lunch with Nafeh
To: ullman@NIMBIN.Stanford.EDU
whois ullman identifies you as a user of score, and mail to you
at score is returned after a while. So here's what I sent you.
------- Begin undelivered message: -------
15-Jan-90 1427 JMC lunch with John Nafeh of MAD Intelligent Systems
To: ullman@SCORE.Stanford.EDU
Is Monday, Wednesday or Friday of next week feasible for
you? If so, choose one. He is interested in the possibility
of your doing some consulting for his company in the area
of databases.
I would come too.
------- End undelivered message -------
∂18-Jan-90 1523 JMC re: McCarthy's Grades
To: hemenway@SUNBURN.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 18 Jan 1990 15:17:42 PST.]
ok, send a duplicate
∂18-Jan-90 1716 JMC reply to message
To: bthomas@NEON.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 18 Jan 90 16:34:21 -0800.]
Friday, March 16 is ok. I might have to leave a few minutes early.
∂19-Jan-90 0934 JMC re: lunch meeting
To: ullman@NIMBIN.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 19 Jan 90 09:19:23 -0800.]
I have both 11am and 1:15 classes on Tuesday and Thursday, so
how about an early MWF lunch, e.g. 1130, say at MacArthur
Park, say Monday?
∂19-Jan-90 1004 JMC re: Apt
To: VAL
[In reply to message rcvd 19-Jan-90 09:54-PT.]
OK, that would be fine. What time?
∂19-Jan-90 1008 JMC re: lunch meeting
To: ullman@NIMBIN.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 19 Jan 90 09:45:04 -0800.]
I have left a message for Nafeh proposing 1145 at Faculty Club
Monday. He'll get back to me presumably.
∂19-Jan-90 1012 JMC re: Apt
To: VAL
[In reply to message rcvd 19-Jan-90 10:09-PT.]
ok. How about my picking you up for lunch today at 1130.
∂19-Jan-90 1359 JMC re: Corrigenda
To: phil@UB.D.UMN.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 19 Jan 90 15:46:49 CDT.]
The new name is ok with me.
∂19-Jan-90 1419 JMC re: lunch meeting
To: ullman@NIMBIN.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 19 Jan 90 09:45:04 -0800.]
Nafeh phoned to confirm 1145 Monday at the Faculty Club.
∂19-Jan-90 1422 JMC re: Visit to University of Minnesota
To: slagle@UMN-CS.CS.UMN.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 19 Jan 90 13:00:54 CST.]
If we made it April 18-20, it would fit well with another trip,
although if connections are difficult, it might be April 19-20.
∂19-Jan-90 1427 JMC re: elephant draft
To: MPS
[In reply to message rcvd 19-Jan-90 14:26-PT.]
tex elepha[s89,jmc]
Don't forget the name; you'll have to do it again.
∂19-Jan-90 1911 JMC re: AI Division lunches
To: jutta@COYOTE.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent 19 Jan 1990 1548-PST.]
Yes, but I think several other AI people may be planning to attend
TARK on March 4-7.
∂20-Jan-90 1105 JMC
To: beeson@UCSCD.UCSC.EDU, VAL@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message from beeson@ucscd.UCSC.EDU sent Sat, 20 Jan 90 09:02:48 -0800.]
Let me defend VAL's axiom by distinguishing between the amount of
hunger and what a person can say about his amount of hunger.
The former can be taken as a real number - if you like. Indeed
one could imagine a physiologist proposing to define the quantity
of hunger by the amount of some substance in the blood or
cerebrospinal fluid. Now consider what can be said about one's
hunger. The terms you use are applicable, but also a person
might say, ``I'm hungrier than I was yesterday, but not as
hungry as I was five minutes ago before I ate that cookie''.
To this the physiologist might reply, ``Actually, you are
hungrier than you were five minutes ago. The cookie hasn't
had a chance to raise your blood sugar which is still going
down''. To which the person might reply, ``I guess you're
right, now that I introspect further. I presumed the cookie
would make me less hungry.'' On the other hand he might
reply, ``I don't agree. The cookie really made me feel better.
Why don't you change your formula for amount of hunger?''
The physiologist then says, ``Hmm, maybe I need to distinguish
more than one kind of hunger''.
These complications are all consistent with VAL's axioms.
∂20-Jan-90 1716 JMC
To: tom@POLYA.STANFORD.EDU, ME@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Will a machine that can read 9-track tape still exist?
∂20-Jan-90 1717 JMC
To: CLT
Does our beg include a 9-track drive? Maybe there won't be one elsewhere.
∂20-Jan-90 1827 JMC re: Revising theories about Eastern Europe
To: les@GANG-OF-FOUR.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SHELBY.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message from les@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU sent 21 Jan 90 01:28:51 GMT.]
It isn't my opinion that political history is a struggle between
good and evil.
There's a lot that is mere struggle for office. That doesn't interest
me, and I don't write about it. So far as I can tell, there is no
systematic difference between conservatives and liberals in that
respect.
I also don't much care about the abortion issue either way.
Freedom of speech is important to me, but the legal issues being
fought over today are on the fringes. The tendencies within
conservativism opposed to freedom of speech have been almost
entirely defeated. Within the universities there are minor
threats to freedom of speech from the left.
I agreed with conservatives on the harmfulness of communism and
the importance of defense against it. With the collapse of communism,
defense is becoming a less important issue.
I also agree with conservatives that socialism is harmful, but I don't
consider foreign socialism a threat to the U.S. Neither do almost
all American conservtives.
I consider protectionism a bad idea, but it can do only limited
harm to the U.S., because our economy is so large.
I consider environmentalism a minor threat to world prosperity at
present, but I think it has the potential to become a major
threat. This is because most of its present proposals are
ill-considered, because it mobilizes its power by generating
hostility, and because it is a world-wide movement with the
potential of becoming a world-wide vehicle for power-seekers.
There is some potential for some of its bad ideas to be adopted
world-wide, including in the former? communist countries, and
then we'll never be able to prove that they are bad, because the
power holders will be able to exaggerate the harm deviation from
their proposals will do. Still they aren't very harmful yet, and
maybe they won't get the power they seek.
Now that communism is collapsing, disarmament issues are mainly a
matter of money unless U.S. disarmament goes faster than is
likely.
With so many previous concerns becoming of less importance, I expect
to write more about the human (and not only scientific)
importance of the exploration of space and about the benefits from
increased support for science and reducing the obstacles to the
introduction of new technology.
∂20-Jan-90 1926 JMC "Monotonic combinations ..."
To: rathmann@POLYA.Stanford.EDU
In the second paragraph you might want to replace
"not valid in the overall theory" by "inconsistent with the
overall theory". That nonmonotonic conclusions are not valid
in the overall theory is not surprising; they aren't valid
in the subtheory with the usual notion of validity.
This is just a nit. I haven't got much farther with the paper.
∂20-Jan-90 2102 JMC ns
To: ME
Is there anything a civilian can do when it says, "Sorry,
failed to read in story."?
∂21-Jan-90 0146 JMC re: NS
To: ME
[In reply to message rcvd 21-Jan-90 01:16-PT.]
Indeed it did work later.
∂21-Jan-90 1404 JMC re: comparisons and the hunger example
To: beeson@UCSCD.UCSC.EDU, VAL@SAIL.Stanford.EDU,
beeson@UCSCD.UCSC.EDU
[In reply to message from beeson@ucscd.UCSC.EDU sent Sun, 21 Jan 90 08:45:38 -0800.]
The problem you now raise is different from the one you
raised before. In my previous message, I was emphasizing
the difference between the state of a phenomenon like
hunger and what can be said about it. Once the concept
HUNGER has been reified, we can introduce auxiliary
notions of comparative HUNGER. The comparative
concepts can be introduced without yet having any
way of making the comparisons.
∂22-Jan-90 1102 JMC re: Rich Korf
To: ag@PEPPER.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon, 22 Jan 90 10:07:32 PST.]
I teach on Tuesdays at 11 and at 1:15. Therefore, 2:45 would be best
for me. Is he committed for dinner?
∂22-Jan-90 1238 JMC re: Rich Korf
To: ag@PEPPER.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon, 22 Jan 90 11:45:44 PST.]
Good, I'll join you.
∂22-Jan-90 1446 JMC re: San Jose job for computational linguist
To: peters@RUSSELL.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon, 22 Jan 90 12:08:02 PST.]
Please ask Andras Kornai to telephone John Nafeh at 408 943-1711.
∂23-Jan-90 1028 JMC re: achievement
To: nilsson@TENAYA.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue, 23 Jan 90 09:24:58 PST.]
Situation calculus and formalization of nonmonotonic reasoning are the
two.
∂23-Jan-90 1604 JMC re: Possible Orals date
To: rathmann@ECLIPSE.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue, 23 Jan 90 15:52:54 PST.]
March 9 is ok for me.
∂24-Jan-90 0933 JMC re: Timothy
To: CLT
[In reply to message rcvd 24-Jan-90 09:32-PT.]
ok
∂24-Jan-90 1144 JMC
To: VAL
Marianna Rosenfeld is Mints's wife.
∂24-Jan-90 1159 JMC
To: CLT
The science class was a win. I'll take him to school.
∂24-Jan-90 1641 JMC re: 1990 Forsythe Lectures
To: chandler@SUNBURN.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Wed, 24 Jan 1990 14:01:57 PST.]
I received this message directed to JMC@SAIL via csdlist@sunburn.
Please change my address on csdlist@sunburn to JMC-LISTS@SAIL, because
I prefer to receive announcements and other junk mail at that address.
∂24-Jan-90 1643 JMC
To: ME
q/m has said "spooling host not responding" for some time.
∂24-Jan-90 1742 JMC re: Admissible sets and structures
To: barwise@RUSSELL.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue, 23 Jan 90 21:58:27 PST.]
I want one.
∂24-Jan-90 1903 JMC re: Pre-Orals
To: leslie%teleos.com@AI.SRI.COM, nilsson@TENAYA.STANFORD.EDU,
stan@TELEOS.COM
[In reply to message from leslie%teleos.com@ai.sri.com sent Wed, 24 Jan 90 17:48:59 PST.]
March 21 is ok with me. As for late April, it should be April 26 or 27
if possible.
∂24-Jan-90 1905 JMC re: Abstract for Prolog Technology Theorem Prover Paper
To: STICKEL@WARBUCKS.AI.SRI.COM
[In reply to message sent Mon 22 Jan 90 13:17:45-PST.]
Please send me technical note 464.
∂24-Jan-90 2327 JMC consulting
To: lenat@MCC.COM
Guha tells me you'll be in Palo Alto next week. If you want
I could consult Friday, Monday or Wednesday in that order
of preference. Except for Friday I would have to take out
about an hour and a half.
∂25-Jan-90 0950 JMC DARPA request for Qlisp info
To: JJW@SAIL.Stanford.EDU, CLT@SAIL.Stanford.EDU, RPG@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
I got a call from Nicole Jacobs on behalf of Brian Boesch asking for
3 sentences about technical status of qlisp for "request for funding".
It should be netmailed to
njacobs@vax.darpa.mil
and she needs it by tomorrow.
∂25-Jan-90 1549 JMC re: China bill veto override
To: MRC@CAC.WASHINGTON.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 25 Jan 1990 15:44:26 PST.]
The whole thing may be a charade, because there may be some secret deal
between Bush and the Chinese that is supposed to justify the veto.
If so, Bush only had to tell a sufficient number of Senators about
the deal. I can't immediately figure out what we might want from the
Chinese Government that would be worth it.
∂25-Jan-90 2306 JMC
To: MPS
norber.1
∂26-Jan-90 1013 JMC re: consulting
To: ai.shepherd@MCC.COM
[In reply to message sent Fri, 26 Jan 90 11:58 CST.]
OK, I'll be there at 9am.
∂26-Jan-90 1122 Mailer Bush and China
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU, MRC@CAC.WASHINGTON.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
It just occurred to me that from anti-communist point of view, it
is good to have the Democrats attacking the Republicans for being
insufficiently concerned with human rights in a communist
country. It might help support whatever action Bush might want
to take if the Sandinistas cancel or egregriously steal the
election in Nicaragua. Bush sacrifices a little popularity that
way, but he seems to have plenty at the moment. Could Bush be that
subtle? I suspect John Sununu is that subtle.
∂26-Jan-90 1304 JMC re: Bush and China
To: mrc@AKBAR.CAC.WASHINGTON.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 26 Jan 1990 11:30:13 PST.]
If they win a fair election, I think the U.S. will drop its
interest in Nicaragua. Of course, there may be disagreements
about whether it was fair, but I suppose we'll have to abide
by the opinion, if a definite opinion, is expressed of the
foreign observers.
∂26-Jan-90 1357 JMC
To: ME
hot is up, but ns hasn't got stories since 10am.
∂26-Jan-90 1849 Mailer Peace Dividend
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Whatever the Defense Department proposes for its budget,
OMB will cut. Whatever OMB comes out with, Congress
will cut further. If confidence continues to grow,
the cuts will get very large. It seems likely that
the proposals to close bases have some element of
stalking horse to them.
∂26-Jan-90 2235 JMC Did you get
To: rabin@HARVARD.HARVARD.EDU
my message of Dec 11? Any reaction?
∂26-Jan-90 2241 Mailer re: Residential Phone Service
To: vera@fanaraaken.UUCP, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from vera@fanaraaken.UUCP sent 26 Jan 90 22:53:13 GMT.]
Having Stanford operate a telephone system for students suggests
one more addition to the swollen administrative payroll.
∂27-Jan-90 1520 Mailer phone caller identification
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
The usual opponents of progress have succeeded in getting a
California law that phone companies offer an option that
prevents receivers of calls from knowing the calling number.
Let's have another law requiring the option of not receiving
calls from telephones that don't allow themselves to be
identified. By the way, I hope the original option isn't
available for business phones.
∂27-Jan-90 2008 Mailer article
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
The latest (Feb 15) issue of the New York Review of Books
has an excellent article by Timothy Garton Ash entitled
Eastern Europe: The Year of Truth.
Among other things it emphasizes, and attempts to explain,
the fact that the communist "politbureaucrats" did not
fight hard to retain their power, having lost confidence
in their own legitimacy. Ash's speculations concerning
the future also seem plausible to me.
∂28-Jan-90 1719 Mailer re: phone caller identification
To: gangolli@WOLVESDEN.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from gangolli@wolvesden.Stanford.EDU sent 28 Jan 90 19:29:23 GMT.]
Mr. Gangolli has some nice paranoid scenarios about caller
identification. Perhaps he would have supported the local
British regulation of around the turn of the century requiring
that a man on foot with a flag precede each automobile.
I have two substantive comments.
1. New services of any kind should be allowed unless
there is irrefutable evidence that uncorrectable damage will be
done. This is a matter of principle - perhaps some will call it
conservative principle, because it's supported by the
conservatives of today, but once it was the conservatives who
tended to deplore new inventions and look for disadvantages. I
believe the telephone company hasn't attempted to anticipate all
the uses people may find for caller id. They want to offer it,
and I think I'll buy it. It will be particularly useful when I
have an on-line phone book, so I'll see immediately whether the
caller is a tele-marketing outfit.
As for the telephone companies selling caller identification,
no-one has to buy it. I suspect Mr. Gangolli of wanting
to decide for me that it wouldn't be good for me.
2. Some of the particular practices he fears may already
be illegal. In particular, credit information may only
be used for the purpose of deciding on credit, and people
have a right to see their credit records and challenge
them.
How about my proposal that the phone company give me the
right to have an automatic busy signal given to anyone
who calls me denying caller id?
∂28-Jan-90 1819 JMC
To: ME
ns isn't getting stories coming in on hot.
∂28-Jan-90 2019 JMC
To: ME
Carolyn tells me my dd keyboard is again not working.
∂29-Jan-90 1056 Mailer re: phone caller identification
To: poser@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from poser@csli.stanford.edu sent 29 Jan 90 04:36:29 GMT.]
I regard the opposition to caller identification as on a par
with the opposition a few years ago to the use of bar code scanners in
supermarkets. I imagine many of the same people and organizations are
involved. Caller identification will prevent far more privacy
violations than it permits. The arguments against allowing people to
have this service strike me as far fetched, and this is one of the
reasons I infer other reasons - specifically a general tendency to
suspect innovation as motivated by evil corporations. This suspicion
would be harmless if it weren't accompanied by what I call the
``regulatory ethic'' - that the best way to benefit humanity is to
forbid something.
Another example is Ralph Nader's campaign against microwave
ovens; this campaign probably killed and injured quite a few children
by accidents with conventional cooking.
We have the following excerpt from a recent su-etc posting.
I would also like to note that the telephone companies
aren't really intrested in the benefit to individuals.
This sentence expresses quite a few of the attitudes I deplore.
My opinion is that companies shouldn't set themselves up as judges of
what will benefit individuals. They should offer services that they
think individuals will want and rely on the individuals to decide
whether they will be benefitted. Naturally, to the extent that the
companies regard individuals as good judges of what will benefit them,
they will think about benefits, because they will suppose that
individuals will buy what benefits them.
Individuals aren't always right about what will benefit them,
and some services should be forbidden, e.g. crack, but it requires
real experience of great harm, not just speculation, to justify
banning something.
Now that I've answered Mr. Poser, I hope he will tell us his
criteria for what services should be banned and will apply it to
caller identification.
∂29-Jan-90 1131 JMC suggestion
To: VAL
In the bibliography of your Circumscription, you should include
my 1977 paper Epistemological Problems of AI.
∂29-Jan-90 2159 Mailer re: phone caller identification
To: andy@NEON.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from andy@Neon.Stanford.EDU sent 30 Jan 90 04:36:18 GMT.]
The cost of tracing a call depends very much on the technology
used in the exchanges. In an old-fashioned cross-bar exchange,
a technician would have to trace the call through the cross-bar
switches by physically observing them. If the call originated
in a different exchange, it would have to be traced there too
after the technician in the receiving exchange told a technician
in the originating exchange which line it was on. This could
only be done while the call is active. In a computer
controlled exchange, it can presumably be done by a command
given at a terminal. My understanding is that the old-fashioned
exchanges are being replaced.
A call could be retrospectively traced if the called number and
the time were known. Namely, the calling party receives on his
bill the number he called and the time of the call. Therefore,
billing records exist that could be sorted by called number
and time of call. This would be expensive if done for a single
trace, but once sorted, looking up any particular call would
be cheap.
∂30-Jan-90 1023 Mailer re: Pathetic Pat Buchanan
To: RIC@RML2.SRI.COM, comments@KL.SRI.COM,
su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from RIC@RML2.SRI.COM sent Tue 30 Jan 90 08:03:40-PST.]
I agree with Steinberger that Federal aid to cities should not be based
on the politics of the city mayors, although it might have some relation
to their policies. It has become standard for mayors and governors, mainly
Democrats though sometimes Republican, to press for Federal aid and use
it to avoid politically expensive local decisions - for example on fares,
on wages and on construction contracts. It helps the mayor get re-elected
if he can
1. persuade the subway riders that he avoided or reduced a fare
increase by getting Federal aid or persuade them that the fares
are going up because the Feds are stingy and hate the cities.
2. persuade the transit unions that he got them a wage increase
from the Feds or that the lack of an increase is the Feds' fault.
3. persuade the contractors he has arranged for a system of rigged
bids to survive or that it's not his fault that it hasn't. Remark: his
relation to the contractors is likely to be somewhat covert. It isn't
explicitly said what he is doing for them, but if they do well under
his regime, they'll contribute to his campaign funds.
In order that these decisions be faced, it is desirable that local
transportation and other services be locally financed.
There is also the matter of Federal control.
Let me ask a simple question. Do you think the Federal Government should
say to Dinkins, ``OK, we'll subsidize your subways provided the fares
and wages are set by the Federal Government.''?
∂30-Jan-90 1705 Mailer re: Residential Phone Service
To: gscott@PORTIA.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from gscott@portia.Stanford.EDU sent 30 Jan 90 22:21:51 GMT.]
I would hope the Government auditors are smart enough to
deter an attempt to put any part of the cost of a student
residence phone system allowed as part of overhead.
Incidentally, I should make clear that the only
motivation I ascribe to the Stanford telecommunications people is
the desire to offer more services coupled with their usual
tendency to overestimate the value of what they plan to provide
and underestimate the number of people they will hire to provide
it.
∂30-Jan-90 2058 Mailer re: Anonymity (was Re: Phone caller identification)
To: jester@JESSICA.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from jester@jessica.Stanford.EDU sent 31 Jan 90 02:06:46 GMT.]
Webster's Collegiate says
forgery
2. Act of forging, fabricating or producing falsely; esp., the
crime of falsely and fraudulently making or altering a writing
or instrument which if genuine would, or on its face might,
be of some legal effect on the rights of other.
∂30-Jan-90 2118 JMC re: Anonymity (was Re: Phone caller identification)
To: jester@JESSICA.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue, 30 Jan 1990 21:08:37 PST.]
I usually use the reply macro in response to the most recent
message on a subject. Having looked up the dictionary
definition, I concluded that the dispute between you and
someone else was based on different usages, both allowed.
∂30-Jan-90 2201 JMC emotions?
To: beeson@UCSCD.UCSC.EDU
Was it you who sent me a paper by Oatley and Johnson-Laird entitled
"Towards a Cognitive Theory of Emotions". Assuming so, here is
my main comment. I think they have it backwards. Instead of
emotions having evolved as a device for debugging plans, emotions
are more primitive than any planning and maybe more primitive
than the nervous system itself. I see hormones as analogous
to neuro-transmitters but more primitive. The chemical
signals transmitted by hormones are broadcast through the
bloodstream. Therefore, they can have only limited
selectivity compared to signals confined to nerves.
My idea is that emotions are related to chemical signals
in the blood. Suppose someone hears a piece of very
bad news, e.g. the Challenger disaster. No action
is called for, yet one is disturbed for some time.
My theory is confirmable or refutable by looking
for changes in the blood following very good or
very bad news.
Here's a doable experiment. Tell some subjects that
some of them are going to get $1,000. Get them to
talk about what they will do with it. Randomly
choose which of them are to get the good news
and which are to be disappointed. They will have
agreed to have the blood samples taken. In principle,
the experiment can be fully explained in advance.
We expect both groups to undergo blood changes but
different ones.
Subjective evidence. Emotions have physical sensations
as correlates, because the signals have effects in
various parts of the body.
Also people train themselves to act according to plan
instead of emotionally and to think rather than
emote when faced with danger. They learn as Kipling
advocated "to treat those two impostors just the same".
∂30-Jan-90 2301 JMC re: forging money
To: U.UNDERDOG@Macbeth.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue 30 Jan 90 21:15:17-PST.]
I think the Secret Service, which handles counterfeiting as well
as protecting the President, would understand perfectly well -
but would confiscate it, warn you against doing it again, and
might even prosecute you. I believe the statute law on
counterfeiting is explicit that making or possession of
counterfeit money is a crime separate from any attempt or even
intent to spend it. Congress just had no sense of humor when
they passed that law.
∂31-Jan-90 0027 JMC Ito
To: CLT
I forgot about Timothy's science class when I told Ito
to come at 10. I'll phone you after the class is well
started and we'll decide what to do.
∂31-Jan-90 1507 Mailer re: TIME essay on education and Stanford
To: seligman@CS.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from seligman@CS.Stanford.EDU sent 31 Jan 90 19:37:21 GMT.]
> In California, for example, it is required by law that ...
> [in] texts on "history or current events, or
> achievements in art, science or any other field, the contributions of
> women and men should be represented in approximately equal numbers."
There is something in the works for state universities
called the Master Plan. It is embodied in a bill (perhaps passed with
the details to be worked out) introduced by Assemblyman Tom Hayden.
I have heard from fellow members of the National Association of Scholars
who teach at State Universities that it's really bad. Perhaps this
stuff is in it. I'll find out.
∂31-Jan-90 1524 Mailer opinion
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Some time ago I wrote on su-etc that it was not reasonable to talk
about opinion in a totalitarian ruled country, because people wouldn't
form opinions on many subjects under such conditions. Even after
totalitarian rule has been lifted, it takes some time for public
opinion to form. For example, it now seems that opinion in East Germany
is moving towards union with West Germany. Opinion on this subject
is not yet fully formed, i.e. many East Germans who will have definite
opinions when they have to decide among candidates with positions
on this issue still haven't made up their minds, and many haven't
yet even thought about the question.
Of course, there are many "undecided" about important issues even
in a democracy, but the scale is quite different in communist
countries.
∂31-Jan-90 1609 JMC
To: PKR
I have a problem about responsiveness of databases that might interest you.
∂31-Jan-90 1753 JMC re: responsiveness of databases
To: PKR
[In reply to message rcvd 31-Jan-90 17:42-PT.]
After 5pm will probably be possible. I'll send you a message
with some details. However, the general idea is this. Consider
a database of telephone numbers although the traditional employee
databases would do as well. Suppose when asked for Vladimir's
telephone number, the database replies,
telephone(Vladimir) = telephone(husband(wife(Vladimir)))
This is true, and follows from the database sentences as does
the even more trivial reply
telephone(Vladimir) = telephone(Vladimir).
However, neither is acceptable. The problem is to be able to
write a logical sentence expressing the assertion that the
answer is not merely true but responsive.
My current approach is through a formalization of knowledge. We
want the questioner to know the telephone number which he won't
if there is more that one telephone number that is possible for
him. My paper on the puzzle of Mr. S and Mr. P formalizes Kripke
structures enough for this semantic answer.
The syntactic alternate is to be able to specify that the answer
must be a string of explicitly given digits.
∂01-Feb-90 0115 JMC
To: golub@SCORE.Stanford.EDU
Are you done with the Pais book on Einstein?
∂01-Feb-90 0116 JMC
To: golub@PATIENCE.Stanford.EDU
Are you done with the Pais book on Einstein?
∂01-Feb-90 1021 JMC renaming files
To: MPS
I have renamed my library files. They are now home[1,jmc]
and office[1,jmc].
∂01-Feb-90 1606 Mailer re: TIME essay on education and Stanford
To: seligman@CS.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from JMC rcvd 31-Jan-90 15:07-PT.]
I asked Phil Sieglman who is one of the main opponents of this
kind of thing in California whether there was any such "equal
treatment of accomplishments of men and women" provision in
California law. He said he didn't know of it, and he teaches
political science at SF State. Therefore, I think it might be a
fantasy, although it might be something imposed at a lower level
in some part of the state.
He mentioned the Tom Hayden bill AB2462 that would require that
by 2000 there be proportional representation of ethnic groups in
student body faculty and administration at all levels of state
supported education. It passed the Assembly, and I think it's
getting or will get extensive Senate hearings are planned.
∂01-Feb-90 1837 Mailer re: TIME essay on education and Stanford
To: RWF@SAIL.Stanford.EDU, seligman@CS.STANFORD.EDU,
su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from RWF rcvd 01-Feb-90 18:31-PT.]
Every liberal fad that hits the U.S. hits New Zealand with a delay
of 5 to 10 years. However, there are, as far as I know, only
two ethnic groups in New Zealand, so the problem may be
simpler.
∂02-Feb-90 1228 JMC reply to message
To: VAL
[In reply to message rcvd 02-Feb-90 12:24-PT.]
I'm sorry I forgot to call you or send a message. I can't make it
today. I can't make it Monday either, so I guess we'll have to wait
till next Friday.
∂02-Feb-90 1252 JMC re: reply to message
To: VAL
[In reply to message rcvd 02-Feb-90 12:33-PT.]
Yes, I'll go. Should we take one car or two? We could have dinner
first if you like. The flight leaves JFK at 5:40pm, i.e. 2:40 our
time, so we can verify that the flight has left long before we
have to schedule our arrival at the airport.
∂02-Feb-90 1737 JMC re: contexts
To: perlis@CS.UMD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 2 Feb 90 19:17:11 -0500.]
In McDermott's original worries about Dudley and Nell, the
point was that after Dudley plans to save Nell he concludes
that Nell is in no danger and therefore he doesn't need
to do anything. This always struck me as something that
it ought to be straightforward to get around, although I
haven't written axioms.
I haven't thought much about time-limited planning and don't
have anything printable either about that or about contexts.
I look forward to the results of your efforts.
If you are willing to look at another draft of my paper
on Elephant, a language based on speech acts, I'll send it to
you.
∂02-Feb-90 1802 JMC re: scheduling conflict on Oral exam
To: rathmann@ECLIPSE.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 2 Feb 90 18:00:19 PST.]
That's ok with me.
∂02-Feb-90 2108 JMC 9600-baud home terminal
To: CLT
∂02-Feb-90 2104 reid@wrl.dec.com 9600-baud home terminal
Received: from decpa.pa.dec.com by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 2 Feb 90 21:04:46 PST
Received: by decpa.pa.dec.com; id AA12182; Fri, 2 Feb 90 21:04:48 -0800
Received: by jove.pa.dec.com; id AA11920; Thu, 1 Feb 90 14:04:13 -0800
Message-Id: <9002012204.AA11920@jove.pa.dec.com>
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Cc: reid@wrl.dec.com
Subject: 9600-baud home terminal
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 90 14:04:11 PST
From: Brian K. Reid <reid@wrl.dec.com>
I have sitting on my desk now a pair of 9600-baud modems that are
Stanford property, which I bought out of my unrestricted account while
I was in the EE department. I no longer need them (I have just
upgraded my home circuit to 56Kbit service).
Once, quite some time ago, you mentioned to me that you were
interested in upgrading the speed of your home circuit. If you have
not already done so, and if you would like to upgrade your circuit to
9600 baud, then all you need to do is to arrange with the telephone
company to have your circuit upgraded to work at the higher speed,
plug in these modems, and you'll be on the air.
I am happy to give them to you if you still want them.
Brian
∂02-Feb-90 2110 JMC re: 9600-baud home terminal
To: reid@WRL.DEC.COM
[In reply to message sent Thu, 01 Feb 90 14:04:11 PST.]
Thanks for the offer. I'll look into whether it is suitable. I'm
also dithering about 56KB, but I understand I would also have to
put an Ethernet at home for Carolyn's and my terminals and our
Imagen. Is this correct?
∂03-Feb-90 0002 JMC re: Paul Flaherty
To: oski@D31MF0.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 2 Feb 90 23:58:24 PST.]
While I don't know him well, I'll do what I can. How do I reach him
now?
∂03-Feb-90 1223 JMC re: Minsky's coffee-table book
To: beeson@UCSCD.UCSC.EDU
[In reply to message sent Sat, 3 Feb 90 06:48:11 -0800.]
Yes, we have quite different opinions. Specifically, he tends
to favor nerve nets, and I favor logic.
∂03-Feb-90 1225 JMC re: 9600-baud home terminal
To: reid@DECWRL.DEC.COM
[In reply to message sent Sat, 03 Feb 90 07:32:35 PST.]
No, we have a 9600 baud modem and a multiplexor, but we are
planning to go to X terminals when SAIL disappears, and they
are said to be far more baud-greedy than the Datamedias.
∂03-Feb-90 1633 JMC re: pattern recognition and logic in AI
To: beeson@UCSCD.UCSC.EDU
[In reply to message sent Sat, 3 Feb 90 15:59:49 -0800.]
Unification is only the first step in matching terms in logic.
Indeed unifications is, in my opinion, somewhat artificial in
having variables included in the expression being matched. I
have some old notes on the subject that I'll look through. On
the basis of that, I may have some examples to send you.
∂03-Feb-90 1756 JMC re: Visit to University of Minnesota
To: slagle@UMN-CS.CS.UMN.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 19 Jan 90 13:00:54 CST.]
Did you get my message mentioning dates in April?
∂05-Feb-90 1145 JMC re: stuff
To: PAF
[In reply to message rcvd 05-Feb-90 11:40-PT.]
Please come in this afternoon, say 2pm.
∂05-Feb-90 1515 JMC diffie
To: PAF
>Diffie, Whit (office: 940-2513) (home: (9)968-5792)
* 283 Hans Ave., Mountain View, CA 94040
* Mr. Whitfield Diffie
* Bell Northern Research,
* 685a East Middlefield Road
* Mountain View, CA 94043
∂05-Feb-90 1528 JMC email difficulties
To: "jc@0003921119"@MCIMAIL.COM
I would be astonished if your idea would work.
My intention is to involve the appropriate fanatic on
the subject from each major email provider, and work
together to foment the necessary action.
This is because the right thing to do is to eliminate Dialcom,
Peacenet/Econet, EIES, MCIMail, Compuserve's mail service,
Eurokom, MHS and the mail use of Internet. You are proposing
a suicide pact.
Wouldn't it be better to get some user agencies to agree on
a telephone protocol that eliminates using the special networks?
However, I would be glad to be helpful if I can.
∂05-Feb-90 1601 JMC
To: MPS
From: John Coonrod <"jc_._ATC_@_thpinyc_(John_Coonrod)%MHS:_7FACCD2501CD414A-7FACCD2502CD414A%THP_-_Global"@mcimail.com>
∂05-Feb-90 2109 JMC re: Universal Email
To: "JC_._ATC_@_thpinyc_(John_Coonrod)%THP_-_Global"@MCIMAIL.COM
[In reply to message sent Mon, 5 Feb 90 23:12 EST.]
I have to confess that I haven't followed any of the
discussions of interconnecting networks and improving
addresses. Certainly the problems can be mitigated
by such measures as you suggest. Also I'm not
suggesting that email will disappear, only that
it be accomplished by direct telephone. However,
not that I had complete confidence that my secretary
would reach you by fax, given just an ordinary
telephone number. I hope this new address works.
If not I'll have her send a fax tomorrow.
∂05-Feb-90 2319 JMC re: Symbol-Grounding Workshop & Searle Symposium
To: harnad@PRINCETON.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue, 6 Feb 90 00:41:09 EST.]
I nominate myself as a speaker or either workshop. While arguing
about the Chinese room might be more fun, the symbol grounding
workshop seems more serious - but I'll do either or both.
I shall demonstrate that the attachment of symbols to objects
is best be done rather lightly. I have a 1983 paper ``Ascribing
Mental Qualities to Machines'', which I unfortunately published
in the proceedings of an amazingly obscure symposium. If you
want to see it, I'll send you copy.
∂06-Feb-90 1249 JMC re: Universal Email
To: "JC_._ATC_@_thpinyc_(John_Coonrod)%THP_-_Global"@MCIMAIL.COM
[In reply to message sent Tue, 6 Feb 90 08:45 EST.]
NETWORKS CONSIDERED HARMFUL - FOR ELECTRONIC MAIL
Electronic mail (email), using ARPANET and other networks has
been in use for almost 20 years. The widespread use of telefax
is more recent. However, unless email is freed from
dependence on the networks, I predict it will be supplanted by
telefax for most uses in spite of its many advantages over
telefax. These advantages include the fact that
information is transmitted more cheaply as character streams than
as images. Multiple addressees are readily accommodated.
Moreover, messages transmitted as character streams can be readily
filed, searched, edited and used by computer programs.
The reason why telefax will supplant email unless email
is separated from special networks is that telefax works by using
the existing telephone network directly. To become a telefax
user, it is only necessary to buy a telefax machine for a price
between $1,000 and $5,000 (depending on features) and to
publicize one's fax number on stationery, on business cards and
in telephone directories. Once this is done anyone in the world
can communicate with you. No complicated network addresses and
no politics to determine who is eligible to be on what network.
Telefax is already much more widely used than email, and a
Japanese industry estimate is that 5 percent of homes will have
telefax by 1995 and 50 percent by 2010. This is with a $200
target price.
Email could work the same way at similar costs, but
because of a mistake by DARPA about 1970, i.e. making a
special-purpose, special-politics network the main vehicle for
electronic mail, it was combined with other network uses that
require higher bandwith and packet switching.
Another mistake was UUCP. It uses the telephone network,
but three features inherited from its use within Bell Telephone
Laboratories made its widespread adoption a blunder.
1. It assumes that both parties are using the UNIX
operating system rather than using a general mail protocol. This
is only moderately serious, because some other systems have been
able to pretend to be UNIX sufficiently well to implement the
protocols.
2. It requires that the message forwarding computer have
login privileges on the receiver. This has resulted in a system
of relaying messages that involves gateways, polling and
complicated addresses. This results in politics in getting
connected to the gateways and causes addresses often to fail.
3. Today forwarding is often a service provided free
and therefore of limited expandibility.
There has been a proliferation of networks and message
services on a variety of time-sharing utilities. Some of them
are commercial and some of them serve various scientific
disciplines and commercial activities. The connections between
these networks require politics and often fail. When both
commercial and noncommercial networks must interact there are
complications with charging. A whole industry is founded on the
technologically unsound ideas of competitive special purpose
networks and storage of mail on mail computers. It is as though
there were dozens of special purpose telephone networks and no
general network.
The solution is to go to a system that resembles fax in that
the ``net addresses'' are just telephone numbers. The simple form
of the command is just
MAIL <addressee>@<telephone number>,
after which the user engages in the usual dialog with the mail system.
The sending machine dials the receiving machine just as is
done with fax. When the receiving machine answers, the sender
announces that it has a message for <addressee>. Implementing
this can involve either implementation of protocols in a user machine or a
special machine that pretends to be a user of the receiving machine or
local area network. The former involves less hardware, but the latter
involves less modification to the operating system of the receiving
machine.
I have heard various arguments as to why integrating
electronic mail with other network services is the right idea. I
could argue the point theoretically, but it seems better to
simply point out that telefax, which originated more recently
than electronic mail is already far more widespread outside
the computer science community. Indeed it
is often used for communicating with someone who is thought to
have an email address when getting the forwarding connections
right seems too complicated.
The World of the Future
Eventually, there will be optical fiber to every home or
office supplied by the telephone companies. The same transmission
facilities will serve telephone, picturephone, telefax, electronic
mail, telnet, file transfer, computer utilities, access to the Library of
Congress, the ``National Jukebox'' and maybe even a national
video jukebox. In the meantime, different services require
different communication rates and can afford different costs
to get them. However, current telephone rates transmit substantial
messages coast-to-coast for less than the price of a stamp. Indeed
the success of telefax, not to speak of Federal Express, shows that
people are willing to pay even higher costs.
What about the next 20 years of email?
There are two kinds of problems, technical and political.
Guess which is easier.
The main technical requirement is the development of a
set of point-to-point telephone mail protocols. Any of several
existing network mail protocols could be adapted for the purpose.
Presumably the same kinds of modems and dialers that are used for fax would
be appropriate but would give better transmission speeds.
Perhaps the organizationally simplest solution would be
to get one or more of the various UNIX consortia to add a direct
mail telephone protocol to UUCP. Such a protocol would allow
mail to be addressed to a user-id at a telephone number. The
computer would require a dialer and a modem with whatever
characteristics were taken as standard and it would be well to
use the same standards as have been adopted for telefax. It
mustn't require pre-arrangement between the sending and receiving
computers, and therefore cannot involve any kind of login.
Non-UNIX systems would then imitate the protocol.
Fax has another advantage that needs to be matched and
can be overmatched. Since fax transmits images, fully formatted
documents can be transmitted. However, this loses the ability to
edit the document. This can be beaten by email, provided there
arises a widely used standard for representing documents that
preserves editability.
The political problem is more difficult, because
there are enormous vested interests in the present lack of system.
There are the rival electronic mail companies. There are the
organizers of the various non-profit networks. There are the
engineers developing protocols for the various networks.
I've talked to a few of them, and intellectual arguments have
remarkably little effect. The usual reply is, ``Don't bother
me, kid, I'm busy.''
It would be good if the ACM were to set up a committee
to adopt a telephone electronic mail standard. However, I fear
the vested interests would be too strong, and the idea would
die from being loaded with requirements for features that
would be too expensive to realize in the near future.
Fortunately, there is free enterprise.
Therefore, the most likely way of getting direct
electronic mail is for some company to offer a piece of hardware
as an electronic mail terminal including the facilities for
connecting to the current variety of local area networks (LANs).
The most likely way for this to be accomplished is for the makers
of fax machines to offer ASCII service as well. This will
obviate the growing practice of some users of fax of printing out
their messages in an OCR font, transmitting them by fax,
whereupon the receiver scans them with an OCR scanner to get them
back into computer form.
This is probably how the world will have to get rid of
the substantially useless and actually harmful mail network industry.
More generally, suppose the same need can be met either
by buying a product or subscribing to a service. If the costs
are at all close, the people who sell the product win out
over those selling the service. Why this is so I leave to psychologists,
and experts in marketing, but I suppose it has to do with
the fact that selling services requires continual selling to
keep the customers, and this keeps the prices high.
I hope my pessimism about institutions is unwarranted,
but I remember a quotation from John von Neumann to some effect
like expecting institutions to behave rationally is like
expecting heat to flow from a cold place to a hot place.
I must confess that I don't understand the relation
between this proposal and the various electronic communication
standards that have been adopted like X25 and X400. I only note
that the enormous effort put into these standards has not
resulted in direct telephone electronic mail or anything else as
widely usable as telefax.
I am grateful for comments from many people on a version
distributed by electronic mail to various BBOARDS.
∂06-Feb-90 1652 JMC re: Votes
To: chandler@Sunburn.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue, 6 Feb 1990 16:11:21 GMT.]
I vote yes on both.
∂06-Feb-90 1959 JMC re: CS323 2/6 Assignment
To: iverson@NEON.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue, 6 Feb 90 19:24:42 -0800.]
That's correct, and next Tuesday.
∂07-Feb-90 1306 JMC re: your visit to cyc-west
To: guha@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Wed, 7 Feb 1990 12:48:37 PST.]
How about this Friday, 9am?
∂07-Feb-90 1331 JMC Timothy
To: CLT
His car seat is as school. I assume you're picking him up, although
I can do it if you want.
∂07-Feb-90 1604 JMC reply to message
To: mazzetti@ED.AAAI.ORG
[In reply to message sent Wed, 7 Feb 90 13:57:35 PST.]
I plan to come to the March 29 meeting.
∂07-Feb-90 1745 JMC Manchester AI Professorship
To: cliff@computer-science.manchester.ac.uk
Who was appointed?
∂07-Feb-90 2155 Mailer Nicaraguan election
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
The February 19 New Republic has an article entitled ``Sandinista Fix?''
It describes various ways the Sandinistas have used their
power to take unfair advantage. For example, the money Congress
voted was to go to both sides. Guess what? The Sandinistas made
sure, through controlling customs, etc., that they got their share
and the opposition got very little of theirs. The polls are
uncertain, different polls give widely different predictions.
It should be interesting. I recommend the article, which I will
leave in the CSD Lounge.
∂07-Feb-90 2211 Mailer re: burning Bush...
To: H.HARPER@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU, bboard@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU
CC: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from H.HARPER@Macbeth.Stanford.EDU sent Wed 7 Feb 90 18:05:03-PST.]
Burning a President in effigy counts as mild criticism by
protest demonstration standards. Burning a policeman
in corporality constitutes vigorous criticism.
This one reads like it was organized by some aging radicals nostalgic
for the late 60s and early 70s. Of course it's in bad taste; that's
the point. Away with bourgeois morality.
∂08-Feb-90 0908 JMC re: Bing payment
To: CLT
[In reply to message rcvd 08-Feb-90 08:42-PT.]
Presumably you mean tomorrow. I'll do it.
∂08-Feb-90 1017 JMC re: 9600-baud home terminal
To: reid@WRL.DEC.COM
CC: CLT@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 01 Feb 90 14:04:11 PST.]
We'd very much like those modems. Carolyn has some questions about
them she will ask you.
∂08-Feb-90 1039 JMC
To: minsky@rice-chex.ai.mit.edu
Congratulations on Japan prize.
∂08-Feb-90 1043 JMC
To: faculty@CS.STANFORD.EDU
It has just been announced that Marvin Minsky is getting the Japan Prize.
∂08-Feb-90 1442 JMC re: SAIL tapes
To: CLT
[In reply to message rcvd 08-Feb-90 10:53-PT.]
I forgot that the cage I promised to rattle was one I had
already rattled. The result was formally ambiguous but
not very encouraging.
∂08-Feb-90 1444 JMC reply to message
To: shoham@HUDSON.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 8 Feb 1990 10:58:40 PST.]
No but similar. The Japan prize is given in Tokyo and financed
by Matsushita, and the Kyoto prize is given in Kyoto and financed
by Inamori of Kyocera.
∂08-Feb-90 1446 JMC reply to message
To: eaf@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 8 Feb 1990 11:19:46 PST.]
No but similar. The Japan prize is given in Tokyo and financed
by Matsushita, and the Kyoto prize is given in Kyoto and financed
by Inamori of Kyocera.
∂08-Feb-90 1447 JMC re: my class
To: eaf@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 8 Feb 1990 11:35:07 PST.]
I'll think about how much I want to say. Have you a preference?
∂08-Feb-90 1449 JMC re: Berlekamp
To: MPS
[In reply to message rcvd 08-Feb-90 14:11-PT.]
That will be ok, but make it 2:45 and put it in my calendar.
∂08-Feb-90 1454 JMC re: prizes
To: minsky@MEDIA-LAB.MEDIA.MIT.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 8 Feb 90 17:32:27 EST.]
It would be an honor to split an award with you, but come to
think of it, I'd rather have the cash.
∂08-Feb-90 1638 JMC re: Bud Frawley
To: tajnai@HUDSON.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 8 Feb 1990 16:31:42 PST.]
I forgot who Bud Frawley is.
∂08-Feb-90 1638 JMC
To: MPS
If they aren't done yet, please make the copies of phon 2-sided.
∂09-Feb-90 0007 JMC re: Bud Frawley
To: tajnai@HUDSON.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 8 Feb 1990 17:40:20 PST.]
The person from GTE I probably asked about was Oliver Selfridge.
Is he coming?
∂09-Feb-90 0009 JMC re: Important Date Correction for Searle Symposium...
To: harnad@PRINCETON.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 9 Feb 90 00:43:00 EST.]
June 8-11 is ok for me.
∂09-Feb-90 0012 JMC re: On-line CS/AI Reports
To: HK.RLS@FORSYTHE.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 8 Feb 90 21:59:23 PST.]
I have advocated such a thing from time to time, but so far
as I know, neither I nor anyone else at Stanford has done
anything. Something else I have advocated is that Stanford
require PhD theses to be have an electronically storable
and displayable form, starting with those departments
where appropriate facilities are available.
Anyway I think the project is a good one and that Stanford
should participate.
∂09-Feb-90 0016 JMC re: On-line CS/AI Reports
To: HK.RLS@FORSYTHE.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 8 Feb 90 21:59:23 PST.]
P.S. to previous message. I am unfamiliar with the specific
formats they propose and wouldn't want to suggest going
along with that without further discussion. AMSTEX, which
has been adopted for all its publications by the American
Mathematical Society might be a good basis for a standard.
∂09-Feb-90 1407 JMC re: parking ticket
To: poser@CSLI.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent 9 Feb 90 07:09:42 GMT.]
When there is a good enough explanation like yours, the Stanford Police
Department will sometimes recommend to the policeman (meterman) that
gave the ticket to cancel it.
Call the Stanford Police Department and ask.
∂10-Feb-90 1302 Mailer East Palo Alto
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Today's NYT has a story featuring Mrs. C.W. Roddy,
and East Palo Alto resident battling drug dealers
who keep shooting up her neighborhood and have
attacked her house. The burden of the story was
that East Palo Alto needs more police. It tells
that when Palo Alto, Menlo Park and Redwood City
lent East Palo Alto some police, the situation
improved. Santa Mateo County is now lending some
deputy sheriffs and sergeants, three on each shift.
∂10-Feb-90 1734 JMC re: concepts as objects (cs323)
To: sreerang@PORTIA.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Sat, 10 Feb 90 16:06:52 PDT.]
The intent of your remarks is correct, but in order to handle
Pat knowing that Mike's telephone number is the same as Mary's,
we need a version of
telephone Mike = telephone Mary
that can be the second argument of know. This is what the
machinery of the paper is intended to provide.
∂11-Feb-90 1004 JMC re: a philosophical question
To: beeson@UCSCD.UCSC.EDU
[In reply to message sent Sun, 11 Feb 90 02:07:35 -0800.]
I think we operate entirely according to the laws of chemistry and
physics. Secondly, I think our mental processes are sufficiently
well approximated by discrete processes that we can reasonably
expect to eventually get computer programs that equal our
mental capabilities. My bet that these programs will be
equivalent to programs that represent beliefs by logical
sentences and draw conclusions by reasoning, albeit with
some extensions of present logic including the present
nonmonotonic extensions but going beyond those.
I think that puts me on Minsky's side.
Was it you who sent me the reprint on emotion? If so
I have a bit more along that line.
∂11-Feb-90 1445 JMC reply to message
To: AI.LENAT@MCC.COM
[In reply to message sent Sun 11 Feb 90 16:21:04-CST.]
I have read the article and have some comments. I'm busy with
Timothy right now, but I'll send you something tonight.
Guha and I plan for me to come to CYC West on Wednesday
to do more with emotions, probably to finish off a draft.
My ideas about Smith will be along the following lines.
1. It is only possible to discuss a few of the points he
makes without being long.
2. I suggest that a rather soft answer will make his bombast
stand out.
3. There is actually some convergence between the logic, CYC
and situated approaches.
∂11-Feb-90 2058 JMC Smith
To: lenat@MCC.COM
CC: guha@MCC.COM
The next message is some commentary relevant to Brian Smith.
An earlier version had a more personal character, i.e.
was written entirely form a logicist point of view.
I modified it so you could incorporate some of its ideas if
you want.
Alternatively, perhaps Kirsh would let me in at this late
date. I was originally scheduled to comment on Carl Hewitt's
opus and had actually submitted a commentary on the early version
of his paper. However, when I was asked to revise it to refer to
a new version, I found that the new version had omitted the
technical parts on which my comment was based, and I found the
new version insufficiently technical to want to comment. Kirsh
said he wanted to get me in somehow, but I didn't see how, since
he hadn't invited me to be the protagonist of the logicist point
of view.
However, I would prefer not to get in Kirsh's book as
a commentator, because I'm up to my ears in controversial
writing and would prefer to concentrate on technical matters.
I tried to phone you at 512 328-2801. Either it's not
the right number or you were out. I suggest you phone me at home
tonight before midnight PST or tomorrow morning between 8 and 9am,
415 857-0672.
∂11-Feb-90 2107 JMC Some possibly useful prose
To: lenat@MCC.COM
CC: guha@MCC.COM
%concil[w90,jmc] Conciliating approaches to AI
In spite of the polemical character of Brian Smith's criticism of
the Lenat and Feigenbaum approach to AI and the logic approach,
his article leaves the impression, especially in the notes
mentioning changes in CYC, that the differences among the
approaches, including the situated approach are significantly
compatible.
The CYC approach has recently incorporated more logic.
Both the CYC approach and the logic approach are developing
ways of formalizing context dependence although in different
styles from the situated approach. Thus the logic approach
treats context as an additional parameter of a logical
sentence or, making sentences into objects,
writes holds(s,c) to say that the sentence
s holds in the context c. Perhaps the situated approach is
moving more towards studying the common sense world rather than
concentrating so much on studying the expression of assertions in
natural language. The description of the situated approach in
Situations and Attitudes was incomprehensible to people not
steeped in it, but Barwise's new book is much clearer, especially the
introduction.
Any merger is unlikely in the forseeable future, if
only because it would require more scholarship than any
of us has shown to fully understand all the trends within the
various approaches and explain their overlaps and differences.
The motive for suggesting some reconciliation isn't
pacifism; controversy is helpful to AI. Moreover,
it isn't unity in face of an external threat, even though
reconciliation with connectionism is unlikely in the
near future.
The reason is to advance AI. The comparison and contrast
of approaches should take the form of exponents of one approach
trying to find the easiest problem the criticized approach won't
solve. exponents of the criticized approach will then try to
solve it and also return the compliment.
The logic approach is the one best understood by
advocates of differet approaches---perhaps because it is clearer.
Therefore, it welcomes puzzles that others think it won't solve,
the simpler, the better. The challenge presented by the Yale
Shooting Problem has certainly advanced logical treatments of the
situation calculus. (Although Vladimir Lifschitz anticipated the
problem it presented in connection with the McCarthy treatment of
the frame problem, its presentation in the context of criticism
of the whole approach excited more activity among the logicians
than otherwise would have occurred.)
McCarthy's puzzle of Wellington hearing of Napoleon's
death was useful in advancing CYC.
It would be good if Brian Smith or some other exponent of
the situated approach would give as simple as possible a problem
that they think requires it. Both logic advocates and expert
system advocates would like to try methods that change the
way logic is used, i.e. new first order axiomatizations and
reifications, rather than radical transformations of mathematical
logic itself.
∂11-Feb-90 2232 JMC emotion
To: beeson@UCSCD.UCSC.EDU
Consider the following quotation from "The Bible as English
Literature" by H. Gardner, Scribner's 1906. I bought it
because of having read that biblical Hebrew lacked many of
the devices of more modern languages including ancient Greek.
Specifically, it lacked the variety of conjunctions used to
connect dependent clauses. My reason for being interested
in this phenomenon is that I think that the original basic linguistic
phenomenon is not the complete sentence. Language originally,
like the speech of a small child, supposes that the hearer
is familiar with the situation of the utterance, and only
needs a few words as a clue to determine what the speaker
has in mind. This makes language a communication between
states of mind, and understanding language requires
understanding states of mind, a phenomenon linguists
mostly ignore.
The citation about emotions is compatible with
what I said, that emotions are more primitive that
fully developed thought.
``This characteristic of the Hebrew language and one of the accepted
doctrines of modern psychology, - the theory commonly known as
the James-Lange theory of the emotions - fit together like the
two parts of a puzzle. According to this theory emotion is
inseparable from sensation, or rather, emotion consists of a
mass or complex of bodily sensations. Professor James sums
it up in the following questions: "What kind of an emotion of
fear would be left if the feeling neither of quickened heart-beats
nor of shallow breathing, neither of trembling lips nor of
weakened limbs, neither of goose-flesh nor of visceral
stirrings, were present, it is quite impossible for me to
think. Can one fancy the state of rage and picture no ebullition
in the chest, no flushing of the face, no dilation of
the nostrils, no clenching of the teeth, no impulse to
vigourous action, but in their stead limp muscles,
calm breathing and a placid face? The present writer
for one, certainly cannot. - In like manner of grief:
what would it be without its tears, its sobs, its
suffocation of the heart, its pangs in the breastbone?
A feelingless cognition that certain circumstances are
deplorable, and nothing more. Every passion in turn
tells the same story. A purely disembodied human
emotion is a nonentity."
[W. James, Psychology, vol. ii, p. 452]
The Hebrew language is an unfailing illustration
of this theory: it expressed emotion always by naming the
sensations of which the emotion consists. Here is an expression
from the Psalms of helpless despair.
Save me, O God; for the waters are come unto my
soul.
I sink in deep mire, where there is no
standing: I am come into deep waters, where the floods
overflow me.
I am weary of my crying: my throat is dried:
mine eyes fail while I wait for my God.''
With all that, my opinion is that emotions are a human and animal
characteristic (not intended as denigration) and we won't benefit by
putting them in AI programs. However, they will require more complex
goal structures than present programs have. Thus we're left with
only one of the three interactions (two of the six influences) you
mention. I haven't much systematic to say about this at present.
∂11-Feb-90 2244 JMC re: are we machines?
To: beeson@UCSCD.UCSC.EDU
[In reply to message sent Sun, 11 Feb 90 21:42:33 -0800.]
I'm almost done with a review of Penrose's book for the Bulletin
of the AMS. I'll send you a draft and would welcome comments.
Penrose doesn't say why his modified QM would admit systems
with different capabilities than ordinary QM.
The main part I am revising is the initial section about AI.
I hope to make it more obviously relevant to Penrose's
contentions.
Let me add a bit about how our emotions interact with our intellect.
I forgot to put it in the previous message, and it was triggered
by your
`perhaps there's more to us than our "mental processes".'
As I mentioned before, I think our emotions are mediated by
blood chemistry. In any case, they are relatively independent
causal mechanisms. They affect what ideas are taken into
account by causing the ones they trigger to crowd out others
from immediate consciousness. This gives our mental
processes additional characteristics of nonmonotonicity
beyond the purely intellectual nonmonotonicity.
Well I see there is more to be said than I can formulate for now.
∂11-Feb-90 2246 JMC %penros[f89,jmc] Review of Penrose book
To: beeson@UCSCD.UCSC.EDU
, PENROS[F89,JMC]/2P/1L
∂12-Feb-90 0133 JMC cs323
To: VAL
I hope you will be able to do it Tuesday. This will permit me
to tell Feigenbaum's class about the beliefs of thermostats, etc.
∂12-Feb-90 0946 JMC re: email address of Minsky?
To: beeson@UCSCD.UCSC.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon, 12 Feb 90 09:43:23 -0800.]
minsky@media-lab.media.mit.edu
∂12-Feb-90 1149 JMC re: Final Exam Scheduling
To: stager@SUNBURN.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon, 12 Feb 1990 10:00:44 GMT.]
No final in cs323.
∂12-Feb-90 2234 JMC re: CS123 on Tuesday
To: eaf@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon, 12 Feb 1990 14:32:07 PST.]
I'll be there.
∂12-Feb-90 2235 JMC reply to message
To: MPS
[In reply to message rcvd 12-Feb-90 15:11-PT.]
No, Vladimir will do it.
∂13-Feb-90 0043 Mailer re: Communism
To: poser@CSLI.Stanford.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message sent 13 Feb 90 07:38:11 GMT.]
I would imagine that the collapse of communism in the Soviet
Union and Eastern Europe will be disastrous to the Western
communist parties. They'll lose much of their membership and
voters. Nevertheless, their official publications will put a
good face on it. Kepler's usually has the People's Daily World
published by the U.S. Communist Party. Sometimes it has an
article by Gus Hall, the U.S. Party leader, explaining that
events in Eastern Europe will leave communism there stronger now
that distortions are being removed. However, I haven't seen
anything like that recently. Mostly the Daily People's World
ignores the collapse of communism and concentrates on U.S.
issues - strikes like the coal strike, race issues,
anti-corporate environmentalism, pro-choice. They like to get in
front of every leftist crowd and wave the flag for greater
militancy.
The Italian Communist Party is about to change its name. I
would be surprised if the U.S. Communist Party could manage
that without splitting.
The Japanese Communist Party looked somewhat moderate when I
was at Kyoto University in 1975. I remember seeing a clean-cut
communist student in suit and tie trying to make a speech in
front of a student cafeteria in connection with student elections
and being menaced by a bunch of Maoist thugs in helmets.
∂13-Feb-90 2105 JMC re: Elephant 2000
To: zeng@CS.UBC.CA
[In reply to message sent 13 Feb 90 20:50 -0800.]
It will or has been sent. I'll tell my secretary again.
∂13-Feb-90 2106 JMC Elephant 2000
To: MPS
∂13-Feb-90 2050 zeng@cs.ubc.ca Elephant 2000
Received: from relay.CDNnet.CA by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 13 Feb 90 20:50:46 PST
Received: by relay.CDNnet.CA (4.1/1.14)
id AA12619; Tue, 13 Feb 90 20:51:12 PST
Date: 13 Feb 90 20:50 -0800
From: <zeng@cs.ubc.ca>
To: <JMC@sail.stanford.edu>
Message-Id: <1629*zeng@cs.ubc.ca>
Subject: Elephant 2000
Return-Receipt-To: <zeng@cs.ubc.ca>
Dear Prof. McCarthy:
This is a msg which I sent about 2 weeks ago. Since I
didn't hear from you for a while, I hereby resend it
to you just in case the previous got lost...Tao
==================================
Dear Professor McCarthy:
From a poster on the bulletin board here at the Computer Science Department
at the University of British Columbia, I read that, last November at UCSD,
you delievered a speech
on the Speech Acts based programming language -- Elephant 2000.
I am very interested in that topic and my thesis work is also in that
direction (I am now a Master's candidate at UBC CompSci). I wonder if
you could send me some material regarding Elephant 2000 and your
research on Speech Acts based programming. My email address is:
zeng@cs.ubc.cdn
You may send your paper in Latex file or PostScript file format to me
by email, or you may use fax -- the department fax machine no. is:
(604)228-5485
Thank you very much for your help.
Sincerely yours,
Tao Zeng
Feb.7
∂14-Feb-90 0115 JMC re: Elephant 2000
To: zeng@CS.UBC.CA, MPS@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent 13 Feb 90 23:23 -0800.]
It's not in Latex, so we'll fax it.
∂14-Feb-90 0318 Mailer re: Making sense of Mandela
To: poser@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from poser@csli.stanford.edu sent 14 Feb 90 09:01:37 GMT.]
Bill Poser writes:
When Mandela talks about nationalization of these
industries, he isn't necessarily following a hard-core
socialist line - he is talking about taking over
private monopolies that control a huge percentage of
the national income.
Mandela also praised the South African Communist Party. I imagine him
to be like Lieutenant Onoda, the Japanese soldier who hid out for 30
years in the Philippines and believed all the radio broadcasts about
Japan losing the war to be fake. Mandela might believe that all he
has heard and read about the collapse of communism while a prisoner is
fake. That explains him, but what explains Bill Poser's continued
faith in the slogans of nationalizing industry?
Misprinting "Mandela" reminded me of Mandel, who used to broadcast
on KPFA telling how wonderful the Soviet Union was. Whatever
happened to him? Did he die, did KPFA give up on him, or have
I just missed him?
∂14-Feb-90 0339 Mailer re: Prospective faculty ideology
To: doug@PORTIA.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from doug@portia.Stanford.EDU sent 14 Feb 90 09:02:50 GMT.]
I would surmise that the more energetic advocates of a
professorship of Asian-American studies don't consider Professor
Chang's activity in the League of Revolutionary Struggle
irrelevant to his appointment. Rather they regard it as a
positive qualification, including especially the advocacy (as a
literary exercise at least) of the overthrow of the U.S.
Government. It will give Asian-American studies a properly
militant slant. What good would be an Asian-American studies
program to them that focussed on the fact that Asian-Americans
have a higher than average income? It wouldn't be sufficiently
analogous to black studies. I would imagine that Professor
Chang would be expected to foster a proper sense of grievance
among the Asian-Americans that took his courses.
∂14-Feb-90 0832 Mailer re: Prospective faculty ideology
To: rick@hanauma.UUCP, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from rick@hanauma.UUCP sent 14 Feb 90 14:49:40 GMT.]
Good point. Somehow I imagined the issue to be contemporary.
How old is Chang and till when did he belong to the League for
Revolutionary Struggle? Does the organization still exist?
∂14-Feb-90 0932 JMC re: Tyugu
To: VAL
[In reply to message rcvd 14-Feb-90 09:25-PT.]
Alas, I will be in L.A. next Wednesday, and I'm supposed to be in L.A.
the following Wednesday, although I may not make the second trip. It
would be good if you could find another time for the first Tyugu lecture
and leave the second as is. However, if you can't, it will be OK.
∂14-Feb-90 1252 JMC re: Tyugu
To: VAL
[In reply to message rcvd 14-Feb-90 10:06-PT.]
Friday will be fine.
∂14-Feb-90 1356 JMC re: Program Verification Paper
To: phil@UB.D.UMN.EDU
[In reply to message sent Wed, 14 Feb 90 15:55:24 CDT.]
I am not sure I will have a paper before another year. I would
suppose your time scale is faster than that.
∂14-Feb-90 2233 JMC re: Prospective faculty ideology
To: les@GANG-OF-FOUR.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent 14 Feb 90 23:34:22 GMT.]
Touch'e.
∂14-Feb-90 2313 Mailer re: Making sense of Mandela
To: poser@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from poser@csli.stanford.edu sent 15 Feb 90 01:21:28 GMT.]
Bill Poser writes:
So, for various reasons it is true that the
decline of the Eastern European dictatorships is taking
with it the Communist economic system, but it is naive
to interpret these events as demonstrating the error of
socialism as an economic system.
The collapse of communism does offer evidence against socialism as as
an economic system. Socialists divide themselves into democratic
socialists and revolutionary socialists. The former have often come
to power democratically, and there are many countries today where
democratic socialists have held power for a long time. If democratic
socialists push socialism too far, e.g. nationalize extensively, they
antagonize enough people to lose power, and this induces them to
moderate their programs. This moderation turns off a lot of
socialists and makes some of them turn to revolutionary socialism with
slogans denigrating ``bourgeois democracy''. Most people
find only a certain amount of socialism tolerable. The classical
examples are France and Britain. In both cases extensive
nationalization was enthusiastically embraced after electoral
victories with just such a program leading after a while to losing
elections and the reversal of the nationalizations.
There are also the Israeli kibbutzes that are very communist in
organization, prosperous and democratic. They also make good
soldiers. Their main problem is that too many of their children opt
out.
When revolutionary socialists have gotten power, either through
their own efforts or through Soviet occupation, their initial
intentions have never been to produce an oppressive, corrupt,
secretive, militarily aggressive and gerontocratic society.
However, in each of the 21 countries that have adopted
revolutionary socialism, this has been the result.
Socialism generates opposition sufficient to reverse the
socialism if democracy is maintained. Suppressing the
opposition has always led to the above-mentioned bad
effects.
Someone who wants socialism involving nationalization of the most
important means of production, distribution and exchange to be
taken seriously today has to present a plausible story about how
the above evils are to be avoided and power maintained. So
far as I know, no socialist has even tried recently enough
to take into account the evils of rule by communist parties.
The 21 revolutionary socialist countries are Burma, Vietnam, Laos,
Cambodia, China, North Korea, Outer Mongolia, Afghanistan, the Soviet
Union, Poland, the German Democratic Republic, Czechoslovakia,
Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, Albania, South Yemen,
Ethiopia, Cuba and Nicaragua. I have not counted various
dictatorships in Africa and Asia that have adopted some form of Arab
socialism or African socialism as a slogan. What are the 21 excuses
for the failure of revolutionary socialism?
∂15-Feb-90 0852 JMC re: Does AI need a defense or not?
To: beeson@UCSCD.UCSC.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 15 Feb 90 06:59:31 -0800.]
"Strong AI" is whatever John Searle says it is; it's his term.
My opinion is that AI that would permit a good Chinese room
requires a mind. Specifically, it requires explicitly
represented beliefs and goals, and some of these beliefs
will have to be about the belief and goal structure and
the current state of the efforts to achieve the goals.
These are the things that cause us to ascribe minds
to each other, and the lack of which makes animal minds
doubtful. Have you read Daniel Dennett's Brainstorms?
I haven't had time to take your previous message into
account. Both that and this suggest further revision
of the review is needed to make certain points clear.
∂15-Feb-90 1906 JMC re: parking
To: mrg@SUNBURN.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 15 Feb 1990 13:31:14 GMT.]
I usually go around Campus Drive to the North Campus area. If I
get there before 9:30 I usually succeed in parking in the physics
lot. After 10am I use what I call the latecomers' lot near the
biology building under construction. I haven't failed to find a
spot there this year at any time.
∂15-Feb-90 1924 Mailer re: Opinions of Potential Faculty
To: A.ABIE@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from A.ABIE@Macbeth.Stanford.EDU sent Thu 15 Feb 90 11:41:36-PST.]
People who support the civil liberties of persons with whom they
disagree sometimes misrepresent these views as part of mentioning
the disagreement. So far as I am aware Shockley never expressed
an opinion about racial purity, even implicitly.
∂15-Feb-90 1956 Mailer re: Making sense of Mandela
To: holstege@NEON.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from holstege@Neon.Stanford.EDU sent 15 Feb 90 15:49:56 GMT.]
Mary Holstege supports Bill Poser's view that the changes
in Eastern Europe represent a preference for capitalism
over "the goals of socialism". She also cites
Solidarity being a labor union. She writes:
On the other hand, none of this says anything about
accepting our rather extreme view of property, in which
those who work are nothing more than resources owned by
someone else, instead of, say, having 'sweat equity' in
the enterprise to which their labour contributes.
"our extreme view of property" is actually admitted by no-one,
although some leftists might say that it is what some rightists
really believe. Capitalism includes the idea
that the employee rents his labor power.
It also includes the idea that he is free to quit and get
another job or go into business for himself as many do.
The idea of "sweat equity" has the following problems.
1. Wages would be lower to support it.
2. It hinders business contraction and hence hinders
expansion if future contraction is considered a possibility.
3. Changing jobs is inhibited when a "sweat equity" has
to be abandoned. One example of a sweat equity that is common in
the U.S. is a retirement scheme in which rights to a pension vest
only after years. Most of the private academic world is covered by
TIAA in which retirement rights are independent of the institution, so
one can move freely. However, when I spent a semester at the
University of Texas at Austin, it turned out that their contribution
to my TIAA account was withdrawable if I stayed there for less than a
year. Thus my effective salary was lower than I had anticipated.
Solidarity is a labor movement, but the Solidarity led government
has moved toward American style free enterprise at a rate that
has made even Americans nervous. It has just quadrupled its
estimate of the amount of unemployment its measures will cause
in the short run. The rationale is that while people will suffer
in the short run, the change is necessary to avoid continued
economic decline and to achieve long term prosperity.
The libertarian view of capitalism says that whatever
pay a worker can bargain out of his employer should be paid to
him immediately. If he wants to use part of it to buy health
insurance or save some for his old age that is his business,
but the Government shouldn't invest part of it for him or
require his employer to take part of it. The idea is that
each person is the best judge of his own welfare. I don't subscribe
to this view, because it assumes too much knowledge of and attention
to what is a good bargain in medical insurance or a pension scheme.
The libertarian rational man thinks more about such things than
I want to. Maybe a libertarian scheme could be made to work.
Before the public buys a "sweat equity" scheme they should
look carefully at the precise scheme and not vote for "socialist
goals". Giving power to people whose only demonstrated competence is in
expressing indignation on behalf of the people has turned out to be
amazingly disastrous.
∂16-Feb-90 1351 JMC re: contexts and lifting
To: guha@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 15 Feb 1990 23:48:10 PST.]
Sure, send it.
∂16-Feb-90 1405 JMC re: new keyboard
To: ME
[In reply to message rcvd 16-Feb-90 14:02-PT.]
Thanks. Now I'll be able to hack the system.
∂16-Feb-90 1433 Mailer re: Prospective faculty ideology
To: vera@FANARAAKEN.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from vera@fanaraaken.Stanford.EDU sent 16 Feb 90 08:19:03 GMT.]
What makes Chang's views relevant is that Asian-American Studies is
not like physics or even Asian Studies. It is almost as bad as "feminist
studies" where the very name suggests a particular point of view on issues.
Victor Nee was right in saying that the whole thing is a bad idea.
I conjecture, and I would be pleased to read someone writing that it
isn't so, that Asian-American studies is being promoted as part of a
political agenda, and the professor of it is supposed to contribute
to this agenda. Naturally, the Stanford Administration likes to pretend
to itself and others that this isn't so. The agenda
seems to me to include the following ideas.
1. Certain ethnic minorities, including Asian-Americans, were and
are being treated unjustly. Other ethnic minorities don't count, according
to the present scheme.
2. These minorities should be politically organized and members
of them should take part in American political life as members of it.
A Chinese-American has just been appointed Chancellor of UC-Berkeley.
However, he wasn't appointed as a representative of Chinese-Americans,
and therefore, I'll bet his appointment just doesn't count in this
ideology.
3. Returning to Chang, I would suppose he has been asked
how he thinks Chinese-American studies should be carried out at
Stanford and what should be taught in the associated courses. He
might be inclined to soft-pedal any very radical ideas he might
have. If there is a discrepancy between this and what he wrote
for the League of Revolutionary Struggle, he can well be asked to
explain the relation between his present opinions and what he
wrote in 1979. Very likely, Peter Thiel has opinions about what
would be revealed, and expressed some of them with his
resolution.
A likely discrepancy concerns the meaning of democracy.
Maoists in 1979 didn't think much of electoral democracy in the
form it exists in America. The Chinese who put up the Goddess of
Liberty were advocating the American form. I suspect that
an Asian-American Studies program based on the idea that electoral
democracy is fraudulent would be inferior. In fact it is Maoism
that was fraudulent.
∂16-Feb-90 1502 JMC IMPORTANT
To: mrg@SUNBURN.Stanford.EDU, hemenway@SUNBURN.Stanford.EDU
Here's the message I mentioned to Mike. I suppose what he says about
his standings in China warrant looking into whether he is that good.
∂15-Feb-90 2207 CHEN@HUSC3.HARVARD.EDU IMPORTANT
Received: from HUSC3.HARVARD.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 15 Feb 90 22:07:51 PST
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 90 01:09 EST
From: CHEN@HUSC3.HARVARD.EDU
Subject: IMPORTANT
To: jmc@sail.stanford.EDU
X-VMS-To: MAILER%"jmc@sail.stanford.edu"
Dear Professor McCarthy:
I am currently making application to doctoral programs in computer science
for the coming fall semester. I have heard a great deal about your work and
am very interested in working with you. I would like to apply to your program.
Following is a brief file concerning my background and my career interests.
I would appreciate your careful review of this material and your careful
consideration of my entry into your program. I understand that the official
deadline has passed for applying to your university. However, I am hoping that
perhaps you might still consider my application because I am very keen to work
with you. I believe that doors are always open for exceptional students.
Please tell me how I might possibly handle a late application.
I am looking forward to hearing from you. Thank you very much.
Respectfully yours,
CHEN, Xianghui
Department of Statistics
Harvard University
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------- PERSONAL FILE -------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BIOGRAPHICAL Name: CHEN, Xianghui
INFORMATION: Sex: Male
Date of Birth: 02/12/68
Home Address: 222 Richards Hall
Cambridge, MA 02138
Telephone: Home: (617)-493-5013
Office: (617)-495-5325
E-Mail Address: chen@husc3.harvard.edu
or chen@hustat.harvard.edu
================================================================================
EDUCATION: B.E., Tsinghua University, P.R.China, 1984-89.
This degree is for my undergraduate major in
computer science.
B.S., Tsinghua University, P.R.China, 1985-89.
This degree is for my undergraduate major in
mathematics.
Ph.D., Harvard University, U.S.A., 1989-Present.
This degree is for my graduate major in statistics.
The expected date of award is June 1994. An A.M. degree
will be given by the end of this academic year.
================================================================================
AWARDS & * Beijing Computer Competition -- first prize.
ACADEMIC
WORK: Only a few months after starting learning computers in my
fifth year of high school, I took part in the first Beijing
Computer Competition and won first prize. From that time
forward computers have occupied a central place in my life.
Supporting my interests in computers was a strong background in
mathematics, which began in my childhood and brought me many
prizes, e.g., in 1983 I was selected as one of the top twenty
finalists in China in the 34th AHSMC (American High School
Mathematics Competition).
----------------------------------------------------------------
* College Entrance -- special standing.
In 1984, I was admitted to Tsinghua University, the
finest university in China in the science and technical fields.
In addition to entering one year early, because of my back-
ground I was also able to enter without taking the NCEE
(National College Entrance Examinations), normally required for
every prospective student. There were only four students
awarded such an honor in China that year. I chose to enter the
Computer Science Department and began work in Software Systems.
----------------------------------------------------------------
* Computer Science Concentrations -- only student studying in
two main subareas.
In 1987, after three years' study in Software Systems,
I entered Artificial Intelligence and thus became the only
student studying in these two subareas in the Computer Science
Department. In AI, in addition to required subjects I also
undertook studies in relevant topics such as Decision Support
System, Non-Deterministic Reasoning and Parallel Processing for
AI. I have a good command of software, have proficiency in
more than ten computer languages and three operating systems,
and possess a very good style of programming.
----------------------------------------------------------------
* Dual Majors in CS & Math -- one of the four students.
To strengthen my background in computer science, I also
began in my second year to major in mathematics in the double
-degree program, which is availible only to a few top students.
----------------------------------------------------------------
* Teaching & Research.
In addition to my coursework and research, I also had one
year of teaching experience (instructing classes, correcting
papers, holding tutorials and giving guidance in computer
operation). In conjunction with my department, I also worked
for two years as a research assistant in several government
projects such as The Highway Charge Management System (using
DBMS techniques) for the Beijing Highway Administrative Office,
which oversaw the entire transportation system of Beijing.
----------------------------------------------------------------
* Highest Class Standing.
I graduated in 1989 with two baccalaureate degrees, one
in computer science and the other in mathematics, and was
ranked highest in both of my dual fields.
----------------------------------------------------------------
* The only student from Tsinghua University last year who gained
admission to a Ph.D. program at Harvard Unversity and was
offered Harvard's fellowship.
----------------------------------------------------------------
* Good Work at Harvard.
I have been doing very well in statistics at Harvard.
Particularly, I got the highest grade (A) in the course
"Mathematical Statistics", though I had less background in
statistics than the other students at the enrollment.
================================================================================
RESEARCH & I believe my dual foundation in computer science and
CAREER GOALS: mathematics allows me greater insight and broader creativity
in my work with computers. I would like to use this background
in further study of more advanced and theoretical approaches in
the area of AI and Software Systems. For this reason, I am
seeking entrance into your graduate program. My study plans at
your university are to acquire more knowledge and methods in
order to put my ability to full use in future research. Besides
classroom experience and theoretical studies, I hope to assist
in research or teaching for some professors, engage in
practical work in laboratories, and solve theoretical and
practical problems with the aid of advanced facilities. Under
the department's guidance, I would like to conduct my doctoral
research in the area of AI or Software Systems.
I have selected your university because of the position it
leads in the world in its quality of education, its standard of
research, and its wealth of resources. I believe it would be
a good place for me to conduct research in new computer
theories. At the same time, I believe that I would be an
asset to the intellectual community of your university.
Hopefully, this will all aid in the fullfillment of my
ultimate goals, to make significant contributions in the area
of computer science in the world.
================================================================================
ADDITIONAL Last year, to get the best academic training and research
INFORMATION: experience, I declined my acceptance as a graduate student to
the Academia Sinica in China and applied to some top
universities in the USA. Due to my economic situation last
year, I was only able to apply to those universities which
could waive my application fee. Since most universities with
top computer science program were insisting on submission of
application fees, I was unable to apply computer science
programs and applied primarily to statistics and mathematics
programs instead. Of the offers I received for graduate study,
Harvard University was my best choice. So I accepted Harvard's
fellowship and entered the Ph.D. program in the Department of
Statistics last September. Each year Harvard University
accepts only about ten Chinese students directly from China.
I thought that perhaps I could be happy in the field of
statistics, but I am finding that my heart really is in
computers. Though I have been doing very well in statistics at
Harvard and I am confident that I could be a good expert in
statistics, I am more interested in computer science and must
go back to where my heart truly dwells. Since my financial
situation has improved from last year, I am now able to make
application to your department.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------- END OF THE FILE ------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
∂16-Feb-90 1511 JMC reply to message
To: barb@CS.UIUC.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 15 Feb 90 15:11:49 -0600.]
Dear
In consider Teodor Przymusinski one of the leading
researchers in nonmonotonic reasoning and well qualified for a
professorship. I have known him since his interests turned in
the direction of nonmonotonic reasoning in the middle 80s. He is
one of the authors and proponents of the methodology of research
based on relating nomonotonic reasoning to logic programming,
especially to the use of negation in logic programming.
I haven't followed his recent work, since it doesn't
seem related to my own interests in formalizing common sense
knowledge and reasoning in artificial intelligence.
Sincerely,
John McCarthy
Professor of Computer Science
Stanford University
∂16-Feb-90 1513 JMC Reference for Przymusinski
To: MPS@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
przymu.re2[let,jmc] contains the reference.
msg.msg[1,jmc]/332p contains the addressees.
Where an electronic address is given, send it
that way also.
∂16-Feb-90 1532 Mailer Solidarity and capitalism
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
The following is the beginning of an editorial in
today's New York Times.
Lessons in Capitalism - From Poland
You're unemployed. What kind of help do you
want from your Government? How about unemployment
insurance that starts high but falls over time? The
benefits would remain high if you enrolled in a
training program but drop to zero if you refused
legitimate job offers.
Perhaps that sounds too meager. Then how
about a government loan to help you start your own
business? Or a subsidized loan to a company that
offers you a job? That kind of help might sound
utopian, at least in the United States.
But it's not utopian for Poland. Poor, brave
Poland, which as just started the struggle to
capitalism, has adopted exactly such a program to deal
with the unemployment caused by its radical economic
reforms. Americans have presumed they have a lot
to teach the Poles about capitalism; perhaps it's
also the other way around.
As of Jan. 1, the Solidarity-led Polish
Government ended price controls and subsidies.
Forced to make it on their own, many businesses
are failing; others are laying off excess workers.
Bankruptcy and unemployment are becoming commonplace.
By the end of the year more than a million Poles
are likely to be jobless - In a country that had
not before known unemployment.
The January burst of inflation was sever;
prices went up 70 percent and real incomes went
down by more than one-third. But the recent news
is not so grim. Inflation is no longer soaring;
milk and meat prices have even fallen a bit. The
value of the zloty is stable and shortages are
disappearing. Yes, Polish workers are paying
higher prices for supplies. But at least there
are supplies to buy, and without waiting hours
in line.
Essential to the Polish plan is the ongoing
support of workers. Laid-off workers will eventually
be retrained and rehired. But that is small comfort
to families facing stiff inflation and no paycheck.
To earn labor's patience, the Government had to
establish a generous safety net.
Starting from scratch and listening to Western
advisers, the Poles adopted a remarkably smart program.
It provides ...
[The article goes on to advocate prompt Western help.
I agree].
∂16-Feb-90 1717 JMC re: draft
To: VAL
[In reply to message rcvd 16-Feb-90 16:35-PT.]
ok
∂16-Feb-90 1724 JMC re: Did you get
To: rabin@HARVARD.HARVARD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 15 Feb 90 14:50:26 EST.]
A named lecture series would suit me even better
than a course for getting reactions to my ideas
about AI, philosophy and logic. Please let me know
what you succeed in arranging. I'll come for the
Fall from whenever Harvard starts to Christmas in
any case. If the lecture series is in the Winter
and if it can support that I suppose I could stay
for Winter Quarter also. However, Fall would be
better.
∂17-Feb-90 1217 JMC re: draft
To: VAL
[In reply to message rcvd 16-Feb-90 16:35-PT.]
Here are some comments on the introduction. I think the classification
is useful and will help people do better work. However, the discussion
omits an important matter. This is the scope of the formalization.
An author should mention the limitation the scope of his
formalization, and you certainly have the opportunity with yours.
I didn't understand the point well enough to do it in my previous
papers.
Here are some examples.
1. You can't state that a goal can be attained, e.g. making a tower
of blocks A, B and C apart from exhibiting a construction.
2. You can't state that a goal cannot be attained, even that a tower
of four blocks can't be constructed when you have only three blocks
at your disposal.
3. Towers as objects aren't available.
Ideally there would be some notion of completeness of formalization
that could also be checked formally that would include at least the
first two mentioned above. At first, I thought this could be done
only informally, but now I see that it can be stated formally for
the situation calculus and maybe for other possible action formalisms.
The language allows the expression of certain predicates on situations.
It should allow a statement that a situation satisfying such a predicate
can or cannot be obtained from an initial situation. Better it should
allow proofs of the above.
Consider above(x,y). The strengthening that this gives to the language
should be mentioned.
I think that towers as objects and generalizations thereof
are capable of general discussion. Suppose you imagine formalizing
the metatheory of your blocks world in ZF. Maybe one would allow
sets of situations but maybe allow only the model theory of situations,
i.e. allow only properties of hereditary sets based on blocks.
This expanded language might allow sentences about individual
situations, e.g. the existence of configurations that couldn't
be stated in the base language. On the other hand, if the base
language had a certain completeness, adjoining the metatheory
would allow only exotic extensions. It seems to me that Peano
arithmetic has a certain completeness, that Kleene's hyperarithmetic
and analytic hierarchies go farther only in some exotic way.
I don't suppose you can make large extensions in the time available,
but I think you should mention at least informal notions of
completeness as a basis for evaluating formalizations.
Almost all I have said consists of new (to me) ideas stimulated by
your paper.
val
further remark
above(x,y) is circumscriptively definable in terms of on(x,y).
Some form of completeness would allow proving some things about
circumscriptively definable extensions. Here one has to be careful
to evade negative results coming from analogs to the incompleteness
of arithmetic.
∂17-Feb-90 1227 JMC apology
To: lrosenberg@NOTE.NSF.GOV
I forgot our appointment. My weak excuse is that, in the morning,
when I usually look at my calendar, the computer was down, and I
forgot to look later.
I wanted to discuss whether some work I have been doing and want to
extend is within the scope of your program. It concerns a language
with speech acts as input and output. Here's an abstract of a paper
in draft form. I would need support for finalizing the language
and writing an interpreter. If you are interested I can send you the
\noindent Abstract: Elephant 2000 is a vehicle for some ideas about
programming language features. We expect these features to be
valuable in writing and verifying programs that interact with
people (e.g. transaction processing) or interact with programs belonging
to other organizations (e.g. electronic data interchange)
\hfill\break 1. Communication inputs and outputs are in an I-O
language whose sentences are meaningful speech acts approximately
in the sense of philosophers and linguists. These include
questions, answers, offers, acceptances, declinations, requests,
permissions and promises.
\hfill\break 2. The correctness of programs is partially defined in
terms of proper performance of the speech acts. Answers should
be truthful, and promises should be kept. Sentences of logic expressing
these forms of correctness can be generated automatically
from the form of the program.
\hfill\break 3. Elephant source programs may not need data
structures, because they can refer directly to the past. Thus a
program can say that an airline passenger has a reservation if he
has made one and hasn't cancelled it.
\hfill\break 4. Elephant programs themselves will be represented as
sentences of logic. Their properties follow from this
representation without an intervening theory of programming or
anything like Hoare axioms.
\hfill\break 5. Elephant programs that interact non-trivially with
the outside world can have both {\it illocutionary} and {\it perlocutionary}
specifications, i.e. behavioral specifications relating inputs and outputs,
and specifications concerning what they accomplish in the world.
The present draft is very incomplete, and not all the above
features are presented or even worked out. However, most of the goals
are explained, and the author welcomes help and advice in achieving them.
Since the final version will probably be different in many ways, readers
with a casual interest should skip this draft.
\eject
full draft with the idea of later sending a proposal.
∂17-Feb-90 1244 JMC re: draft
To: VAL
[In reply to message rcvd 17-Feb-90 12:42-PT.]
OK, I'll be home. Sorry for breaking in.
∂17-Feb-90 1322 JMC further remark
To: VAL
above(x,y) is circumscriptively definable in terms of on(x,y).
Some form of completeness would allow proving some things about
circumscriptively definable extensions. Here one has to be careful
to evade negative results coming from analogs to the incompleteness
of arithmetic.
∂17-Feb-90 1731 JMC graduate school admission
To: pehoushek@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
I finally caught Mike Genesereth. It can be done. Please
show me your application.
∂17-Feb-90 1834 JMC some very preliminary comments on your ideas on lifting
To: guha@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 16 Feb 1990 15:52:32 PST.]
This seems to be on the right general track to me. I agree
that the examples are good to give us guidance.
Your (1) seems to have c1 and c2 interchanged.
If it's ok with you, I'll show this to Vladimir Lifschitz,
because he is now thinking general thoughts about the
formalization of common sense, and he is very good at figuring
out what axioms mean including finding unintended models of them.
Your use of mainEvent(x,c) can be replaced by a relation between
c1 and c2 of the form
c2 = focus(c1,FredsGraduation)
or else
focusses(c2,FredsGarduation,c1),
which is how I had been relating contexts. It doesn't seem
that one scheme is clearly better than the other, and we can have
both.
I'm doubtful about context types, and anyway the paragraph beginning
"Actually axioms..." isn't clear to me. I'd like to get by with
just contexts.
∂17-Feb-90 1835 JMC re: some very preliminary ideas on emotions and lifting
To: guha@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 16 Feb 1990 15:52:32 PST.]
More later, probably.
∂17-Feb-90 1905 JMC re: remarks on your review of Penrose
To: beeson@UCSCD.UCSC.EDU
[In reply to message sent Wed, 14 Feb 90 10:27:24 -0800.]
Delayed reaction.
1. The distinctions you make between intelligence, understanding and
having a mind are new to me. I don't think anyone else has formulated
them explicitly. Perhaps you find them implicit in what some people,
e.g. Penrose and Searle, say. Penrose denies or limits artificial intelligence
in his Goedel's theorem example. I don't believe in direct contact
with the Platonic world. I think many conjectures, e.g. Goedel's that
the continuum hypothesis is false, are ordinary informal inductions from
mathematical experience. Certainly, Freiling's axioms have this character
as he made explicit in his JSL article. Have you seen it?
2. To some extent I have to evade your question about whether intelligence
is possible without having a mind. Two reasons. First I treat mental
qualities separately rather than lumping them in a mind. Some systems
can be considered to have some mental qualities and others more. Second,
I regard mental qualities, taken retail or wholesale, as ascriptions.
Mental qualities can almost always be ascribed as the ancients ascribed
to material objects a desire to be at the center of the earth. The question
for a particular ascription is whether it accounts for a substantial part
of what the system does, both in external behavior and in its internal
processes. Because external behavior is more observable, people think
of this as a behavioristic attitude.
There is a substantive question, however. Could one design a Chinese
room without putting in information structures that correspond well
to those people use. My opinion is no.
3. I'll modify "if you supply the confidence ..." to "I have my
own ideas about what are good ordinal notations, but if you
supply the confidence ...". I didn't mean to say that the program
was dependent on Penrose to supply confidence or regarded his
intuitions as more reliable than its own.
4. I have checked my idea with several physicists about what quantum
mechanics predicts in my proposed experiment. It seems to me that
what Penrose says is too vague to get a definite opinion from anyone
else about whether it predicts a different result. I'm not even sure
that Penrose will have a definite opinion on that.
∂17-Feb-90 1908 JMC re: Does AI need a defense or not?
To: beeson@UCSCD.UCSC.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 15 Feb 90 06:59:31 -0800.]
Maybe this is obvious from my previous message. I think we
ascribe minds to each other, because it accounts for behavior.
I also think that what we ascribe to ourselves is greatly
influenced by observing others.
∂18-Feb-90 0924 JMC re: FYI
To: rdz@GANG-OF-FOUR.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Sun, 18 Feb 90 00:43:04 -0800.]
Denials of tenure are never actually public.
∂18-Feb-90 0932 JMC
To: MPS@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
protte.1[let,jmc] with penros[w90,jmc] texed
∂18-Feb-90 1857 JMC
To: RDZ@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Sorry, I'm just consuming the last of my Thai chicken.
∂18-Feb-90 1859 JMC
To: CLT
Zella won't be in tomorrow.
∂19-Feb-90 1346 JMC
To: CLT
I got a message from Martin Abadi at DEC re Elephant in case begging from DEC is still alive.
∂19-Feb-90 1505 JMC
To: VAL
guha[w90,jmc] is an exchange of messages.
∂19-Feb-90 1508 JMC
To: MPS@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Make the MCC invoice for 4 days including Feb 19.
∂19-Feb-90 1628 JMC re: what can be said concisely
To: VAL
[In reply to message rcvd 19-Feb-90 15:26-PT.]
One more sentence to say how one says that a tower is present in a
situation would be worth including. More concisely, you could offer
that as an exercise for the reader. Sooner or later all this has
to be spelled out, even including questions about the computational
problem of determining whether a given tower is attainable from S0.
∂19-Feb-90 1745 JMC
To: lenat@MCC.COM
Friday morning is ok. Wednesday eve still on also.
∂19-Feb-90 2334 JMC re: Making sense of Mandela
To: karish@FOREL.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SHELBY.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message from karish@forel.stanford.edu sent 20 Feb 90 05:07:50 GMT.]
Chuck Karish writes about William Mandel's KPFA show about the Soviet Union:
His style's a bit too apologetic and self-conscious for
me, but the show does present a closer view of everyday
life in the Soviet Union than is available elsewhere in
the American media.
A closer view indeed, but was it a truthful view?
∂20-Feb-90 0817 JMC Elephant
To: scherlis@VAX.DARPA.MIL, squires@VAX.DARPA.MIL
You will recall that on my last visit I discussed the
programming language Elephant 2000 on which I was working
and promised a white paper. About a month ago, I sent a
draft of a paper. I would like to visit and discuss
proceeding further. Would this be convenient?
∂20-Feb-90 0942 JMC
To: ME
My terminal isn't working again. tty exist 140 doesn't help.
∂20-Feb-90 1353 JMC file
To: guha@MCC.COM
The file is and will be emotio[w90,jmc] at SAIL.
∂21-Feb-90 1559 JMC re: Publication
To: chandler@Sunburn.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue, 20 Feb 1990 16:16:00 GMT.]
Please send me the Coordination Theory, etc. brochure.
∂22-Feb-90 0402 JMC re: free will
To: beeson@UCSCD.UCSC.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 22 Feb 90 02:19:07 -0800.]
Q: What view should we program a computer to take of its
own free will? Should it say to itself: Should I do A
or should I do B, which is more likely to accomplish
the task I have been give? Oops, that's nonsense.
I'm a machine and determinate. I will do either, and
it is determined which I will do. No sense computing
which would be better.
A: See McCarthy and Hayes, Some Philosophical Problems
from the Standpoint of Artificial Intelligence, Machine
Intelligence 4, 1969.
∂22-Feb-90 1023 JMC Elephant 2000
To: CLT
∂19-Feb-90 1341 ma@src.dec.com Elephant 2000
Received: from decpa.pa.dec.com by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 19 Feb 90 13:41:16 PST
Received: by decpa.pa.dec.com; id AA21426; Mon, 19 Feb 90 13:42:11 -0800
Received: by jumbo; id AA14096; Mon, 19 Feb 90 13:41:47 PST
From: ma@src.dec.com (Martin Abadi)
Message-Id: <9002192141.AA14096@jumbo>
Date: 19 Feb 1990 1341-PST (Monday)
To: jmc@sail.stanford.edu
X-Folder-Carbon: authentic
Subject: Elephant 2000
Hello.
Although I certainly missed many of your points, I found interesting
your draft on Elephant 2000, at which I just had a look. It occurs
to me that perhaps you could find some nice examples in connection
with delegation and access control as they happen, or should happen,
in distributed systems.
Situations like this arise:
There are three principals A, B, and C (they may be users, nodes,
or services). After mutual authentication, A would like to have
B do something on his behalf. For this to work, B needs to get C
to do some things, but A could not be bothered to hear about the
details. So A gives a certificate to B, which shows that B acts
for A and gives some permissions to B; later B can present this
certificate to C, as appropriate.
(In reality, the details are a bit complex, because A with B may have
more or less power than A by himself.)
I don't have a precise idea what programs such as B's look like in
Elephant, or whether they are instructive, so I am mentioning this
just in case you find it useful.
Regards,
Martin
∂22-Feb-90 1024 JMC re: Elephant 2000
To: ma@SRC.DEC.COM
[In reply to message sent 19 Feb 1990 1341-PST.]
Thanks for the problems about delegation of authority. I haven't
thought about them, but I will.
∂22-Feb-90 1506 JMC
To: VAL
emotio[w90,jmc] and mcc[w90,jmc]
∂22-Feb-90 1513 JMC re: Sushi?
To: ATM%IUBACS.BITNET@FORSYTHE.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 22 Feb 90 13:52 EST.]
Unfortunately, I have another commitment for dinner Thursday night, but
Saturday is fine, however late.
∂22-Feb-90 1909 JMC Manchester AI Professorship
To: VAL
All right. I never heard of him.
∂21-Feb-90 0022 cliff%computer-science.manchester.ac.uk@NSFnet-Relay.AC.UK Manchester AI Professorship
Received: from NSFnet-Relay.AC.UK by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 21 Feb 90 00:22:50 PST
Received: from sun.nsfnet-relay.ac.uk by vax.NSFnet-Relay.AC.UK
via Janet with NIFTP id aa01243; 21 Feb 90 8:14 GMT
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 90 07:02:23 GMT
From: cliff%computer-science.manchester.ac.uk@NSFnet-Relay.AC.UK
Message-Id: <9002210702.AA04657@ipse2pt5.cs.man.ac.uk>
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu
In-Reply-To: John McCarthy's message of 07 Feb 90 1745 PST <Gf#WD@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Manchester AI Professorship
David Bree (actually Bre'{e})
cliff
∂23-Feb-90 2022 JMC I plan to attend the csli affiliates banquet.
To: debra@CSLI.Stanford.EDU
∂23-Feb-90 2025 JMC
To: peters@RUSSELL.STANFORD.EDU
I forget what I agreed about time of talk to affiliates.
∂23-Feb-90 2135 JMC
To: ME
hot is up but ns denies getting any stories.
∂24-Feb-90 1620 JMC
To: ME
ns came back to life, but I see you haven't been logged in.
∂24-Feb-90 1713 JMC aaai video outline
To: mazzetti@ED.AAAI.ORG, Feigenbaum@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU,
Hayes-Roth@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU,
Hinton@RI.CMU.EDU, Lehnert@CS.UMASS.EDU,
Nilsson@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU, RGSmith@SLCS.SLB.COM,
Rich@MCC.COM, bobrow@XEROX.COM,
buchanan@VAX.CS.PITT.EDU, clancey.pa@XEROX.COM,
duda%polya@SCORE.STANFORD.EDU, engelmore@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU,
forbus@A.CS.UIUC.EDU, hart@KL.SRI.COM,
hector%ai.toronto.edu@RELAY.CS.NET,
hes@scrc-vallecito.symbolics.com,
marty@CIS.STANFORD.EDU, mckeown@CS.COLUMBIA.EDU,
minsky@MC.LCS.MIT.EDU, reddy@FAS.RI.CMU.EDU,
swartout@VAXA.ISI.EDU
[In reply to message from mazzetti@ed.aaai.org sent Thu, 1 Feb 90 11:01:40 PST.]
General comments:
1. If AAAI puts out something on the history of AI, a lot of
people and organizations will be justifiably offended if AAAI
doesn't get it right. The corrections I have offered are nowhere
near what is required. Somebody has to do quite a lot of work;
it won't be me. It should involve a historian of science. The
history in Charniak and McDermott is somewhat better than this
outline but probably not good enough. I fear a good job will be
expensive and take a long time. Maybe it would be better to pick
one or two photogenic themes, e.g. robotics, chess. It might be
difficult to get something theoretical to be photogenic, but
otherwise it will give a wrong impression.
2. Theoretical developments are entirely neglected in spite of being
promised. For example, the use of logic in AI, Robinson's resolution
method, formalization of common sense, nonmonotonic reasoning are
all not mentioned. Oh well, I suppose will come in the missing mention
of logic.
Omissions:
Chess, theorem proving
Corrections:
Tarski, Manchester, McCulloch, Rosenblatt
I doubt that the Lister oration was given at Manchester. Check it.
As far as I can tell there was no debate triggered by Turing's
1950 paper. I checked Mind for the several years before and after
the paper and found no other discussion of artificial intelligence.
I also asked Donald Michie and Stuart Hampshire if they knew of anything
and got nothing.
I don't believe cybernetics and information theory were
influential. For example, Shannon's paper on chess doesn't refer
to information theory.
To call the Dartmouth conference the Birth of AI is vague and
hyperbolic. Who knows what that means? It was very likely the first
meeting announced as devoted to the subject under any name.
The use of English words in LISP is not prominent or important. CAR,
CDR and CONS were not English at the time, although CDR and CONS are
sometimes used metaphorically today.
The statement about Weizenbaum is misleading. His publication about
Eliza in 1964 took it seriously. It wasn't until the 1970s that he
retrospectively regarded it as just a hack. My opinion is that it was
just a hack. The others were more serious contributions, but didn't
get very far.
Larry Roberts was a graduate student at MIT and did his work at MIT
Lincoln Laboratory.
Feigenbaum was also involved in Dendral.
The Stanford AI Lab also did hand-eye research in 1964 to 1975.
Samuel's program reached expert level in the 1950s on IBM computers.
He redid it for the PDP-10.
If you mention A*, you should mention alpha-beta.
If you mention Yorick Wilks's language translation, you should mention
the 1950s and 1960s language translation work.
Headarch → Heterarchy
Hewitt
In discussing MYCIN, be careful about the phrase "was used". I believe
MYCIN wasn't used in the sense of being put into operational use.
Schlumberger
The anniversary of AAAI is not a historical event in its own right.
∂24-Feb-90 2124 Mailer African socialism
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Here's a story about the decline of Marxist economics in Africa
but much less decline of Marxist politics. I think the writer
is mistaken in ascribing African Marxism mainly to the influence
and example of the Soviet Union. A lot of it came from Western
leftists including American. I remember one Stanford educated
African who returned there a hard-line Marxist. I don't know
whether he alread was when he came to Stanford.
a281 2034 24 Feb 90
BC-APN--Marxism in Africa, ADV 11,1058
For Release Sunday, March 11
From AP Newsfeatures
EDITOR'S NOTE - While capitalism is slowly gaining ground in the
struggling Marxist nations of Africa, autocratic rulers are not
yielding to the kind of political reforms that brought down the Iron
Curtain in Eastern Europe. A sudden explosion of democracy on this
continent is not seen as likely.
By JOHN EDLIN
Associated Press Writer
HARARE, Zimbabwe (AP) - In the face of their own failures and the
success of the democracy movement in Eastern Europe, many African
leaders are turning away from the communist economic theories with
which they greeted independence.
But if they have accepted the need to embrace capitalism, fewer seem
willing to renounce the type of autocratic rule until recently
practiced by the Eastern European and Soviet heirs of Marx and Lenin.
Perestroika, or change, has come to Africa. The openness of glasnost
trails well behind.
Most African nations gained their independence from colonial rule
during the height of the Cold War, their struggles for freedom
against Western powers sometimes openly abetted and always cheered by
the Soviet Union and its allies.
Scarred by their colonial experience under Britain, France,
Portugal, Spain and, until the end of World War II, Italy and
Germany, Africa's new nations generally opted for the social and
economic models they found in Moscow, Warsaw and East Berlin.
Today, most of the sub-Saharan African nations - South Africa being
an exception, along with Senegal, Mauritius, Zimbabwe, Botswana and
newly free Namibia - are under military, dictatorial or one-party
rule marked by authoritarianism, a sharp intolerance of opposition
and presidential terms of office limited only by death or revolution.
Many are avowedly socialist.
But while showing little inclination to relax their grip on power,
even some of the most Marxist-oriented governments are moving toward
economic liberalization in a transformation encouraged by one simple
fact: Most aid, advice and investment in recent years has come not
from the crumbling Soviet empire, but from the West.
And that aid - totaling more than $11 billion in 1987 - is in many
cases all that has kept the wolf from the door in a region of 450
million people whose combined gross domestic product of $135 billion
barely equals that of Belgium, with a population of only 10 million.
In the past decade, some 30 African countries have adopted - to a
greater or lesser degree - economic reform programs under the
guidance of those twin pillars of capitalism, the World Bank and the
International Monetary Fund.
''We're seeing significant changes for the better throughout the
continent,'' says John Sangueme, chief executive of the Zimbabwe
National Chamber of Commerce. Recent events in Eastern Europe have
certainly helped bring them about, even though the process here in
Africa is not nearly as dramatic.''
Still, Africa's slowness to adopt democratic political reforms along
with economic changes has been widely lamented both from within and
without the continent.
The U.N. Economic Commission for Africa in a report last year said:
''The political context for promoting healthy human development has
been marred for more than two decades by instability, war,
intolerance, restrictions on the freedom of individuals and groups as
well as overconcentrations of power.''
More recently, Jacques Pelletier, the French development minister,
said Africa's nations would remain among the world's poorest unless
they followed Eastern Europe's lead in embracing democracy along with
free-market economies.
Added the Southern African Economist, a semi-monthly magazine
published by the seven-nation South Africa Development Coordination
Conference, in a January editorial:
''If the Cold War is really ending, that can only help to
concentrate African minds by exposing the irrelevance of much current
ideology.''
Some leaders are getting the hint.
-In the tiny, bankrupt West African nation of Benin, the ruling
People's Revolutionary Party renounced communism in December and
promised constitutional reforms this year.
-Sao Tome e Principe, a tiny island nation off the West Coast of
Africa, is permitting opposition parties to function for the first
time this year.
-On Feb. 18, the ruling party in Cape Verde, another former
Portuguese island off the West Coast, decided to give up its monopoly
on power and switch to multiparty democracy in elections slated for
November.
-The next day, President Mathieu Kerekou of Benin instructed a
conference of government, ruling party and opposition leaders to draw
up a plan for the democratization of the country, ruined by more than
a decade of Marxist-Leninist economics.
-In January, the ruling Worker's Party of the Congo said it was
creating a commission to consider democratic changes and would decide
on its future course in June. It has ruled as a Marxist, one-party
government since 1979.
-Mozambique, caught in a cruel civil war with right-wing rebels,
dumped Marxism as its official policy last July and announced plans
for multiparty elections this year.
They, however, are but a fraction of sub-Sahara Africa's 45
countries and the more dominant view is expressed by presidents such
as Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe and Gabon's Omar Bongo.
Bongo said in January he didn't think most African countries would
follow Eastern Europe's example and move toward multiparty
democracies.
Just days later, as if to prove Bongo right, Mugabe's ruling party
voted to move Zimbabwe toward a one-party Marxist state, further away
from the democracy it inherited when it gained independence from
Britain.
And in Kenya, when a Presbyterian minister suggested from the pulpit
that African leaders should take a cue from Eastern Europe, the
chairman of the country's single party termed his suggestion ''sheer
madness and folly'' and called on the church to defrock him.
Frederick Chiluba, the chairman-general of Zambia's Congress of
Trade Unions, mused about the changes in Africa in a recent
interview.
''It is unfortunate that Africa, which began its march to
independence in the 1950s, found the Stalinist regime in power,''
Chiluba said. ''Having been colonized by Western powers, Africans
found sympathy with the Stalinist regime and criticism became
taboo.''
But Chiluba found some hope:
''Developments in Eastern Europe particularly are bound to influence
man everywhere.''
END ADV
AP-NY-02-24-90 2314EST
***************
∂24-Feb-90 2125 Mailer I suspect he's right about lawyers.
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
a039 0923 24 Feb 90
PM-BRF--Lawyers Loot,0124
Economist: Lawyers a 'Black Hole' in Economy
AUSTIN, Texas (AP) - Each lawyer in the United States costs the
economy an average of $1 million per year, according to a finance
professor who believes the country's economy weakens as the number of
attorneys increases.
Steven Magee, a University of Texas-Austin professor who was an
economist in the Nixon administration, said Friday the country's
500,000 lawyers are dampening the gross national product by $500
billion, or about 10 percent.
Magee theorizes that the effect is caused by wealthy corporations
and individuals who hire lawyers to ''get their hands into each
others pockets.''
These findings are part of a book Magee co-authored titled ''Black
Hole Tariffs and Endogenous Policy Theory.''
∂25-Feb-90 2311 JMC re: CSD history
To: LES
[In reply to message from LES rcvd 25-Feb-90 23:00-PT.]
Miller's appointment if joint would have been with SLAC. He came as
head of SLAC computing.
There were two BBN time-sharing systems for the PDP-1. The first
was completed in 1962 just before I went to Stanford. The second
several years later.
I don't remember whether any of the ARPA money was spent on Zeus.
I suspect some was spent on beefing up the PDP-1, but I'm not sure
of that.
I heard from one source that my appointment was controversial. Computer
Science was a division of the math department at that time.
As far as I know Wirth's appointment was strictly CS. Someone
could have opposed it in the H&S Advisory Committee, but it
wouldn't have been a department per se.
∂26-Feb-90 0055 JMC re: CSD history
To: LES
[In reply to message rcvd 26-Feb-90 00:44-PT.]
Maybe there was a CTSS demo in 1961, but I don't remember any.
I'm pretty sure the machine was a 7090 and not a 7094, so Fano
might have been wrong. Tell him to ask Corbato. I think mine
came from NSF and maybe Suppes also. Why don't you see if there
are records of proposals and grants going back that far?
∂26-Feb-90 0105 JMC re: CSD history
To: LES
[In reply to message rcvd 26-Feb-90 00:51-PT.]
I have a feeling he was offered one, but you should ask another
senior faculty member. However, I suppose that such matters
are still considered confidential - at least not to be published.
∂26-Feb-90 0112 JMC re: thesis proposal
To: guha@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Sat, 24 Feb 1990 18:45:48 PST.]
I have now read your thesis proposal. Today is the best day
to talk about it.
∂26-Feb-90 0950 JMC reply to message
To: peters@RUSSELL.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon, 26 Feb 90 08:48:42 PST.]
Now it's in my calendar.
∂26-Feb-90 1003 Mailer Nicaragua
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU, PAF@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
It looks like our support of the Contras finally paid off with
an assist from Gorbachev and the people of Eastern Europe. Or
perhaps it was the other way around. The fact that the polls
showed Ortega winning indicates that people in Nicaragua were
indeed afraid to speak their minds, just as we reactionaries
always said. I hope revenge will be eschewed.
∂26-Feb-90 1203 Mailer re: Nicaragua
To: rick@hanauma.UUCP, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from rick@hanauma.UUCP sent 26 Feb 90 19:09:24 GMT.]
Rick Ottolini writes:
People tend to vote their wallets when there isn't a
significant national security threat. Much of the
socialist world doesn't take the US invasion threat as
seriously as it used to. And they see they aren't
doing as well economically.
This discounts democracy itself as an issue. To support it, one has
to discount the actual slogans of the demonstrators in communist
countries. For example, the demand that the Communist Party give
up its constitutional leading role was the subject of the first
large Moscow demonstration. One must also discount the slogans of the
Tienanmen Square demonstrations. If the issue had been economic they
would have chosen a fatter lady for their Goddess of Liberty.
Second thought on Nicaragua:
The Democratic Congress and the Reagan and Bush Administrations played
a good cop - bad cop role in getting Ortega to allow a free election.
His promise to be good was enough to get the Democrats to refuse
military supplies to the Contras. The threat that the Bush
Administration would be able to get the supplies if he prevented a
free election held him to the promise. I suppose he was also
influenced by the example of Eastern Europe towards the idea that
political respectability requires allowing free elections.
∂26-Feb-90 1204 JMC one more address!
To: MPS@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
∂26-Feb-90 1154 utep-vaxa!teodor@cs.utexas.edu one more address!
Received: from apple.com by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 26 Feb 90 11:51:19 PST
Received: from ames.arc.nasa.gov by apple.com (5.59/25-eef)
id AA03264; Mon, 26 Feb 90 11:50:48 PST
for jmc@sail.stanford.edu
Received: by ames.arc.nasa.gov (5.61/1.2); Mon, 26 Feb 90 11:50:45 -0800
Posted-Date: Mon, 26 Feb 90 11:18:47 MST
Received: by cs.utexas.edu (5.59/1.50)
id AA24860; Mon, 26 Feb 90 13:02:03 CST
Received: by utep-vaxa.UUCP (5.51/smail2.2/03-26-87)
id AA03268; Mon, 26 Feb 90 11:18:47 MST
Date: Mon, 26 Feb 90 11:18:47 MST
From: teodor@utep-vaxa.UUCP (Teodor C. Przymusinski <utep-vaxa!teodor@apple.com>)
Message-Id: <9002261818.AA03268@utep-vaxa.UUCP>
To: apt@cs.utexas.edu, mcvax.bitnet!apt@cs.utexas.edu,
hujics.bitnet!beeri@cs.utexas.edu, utep.bitnet!cv00@cs.utexas.edu,
ibm.com!jll@cs.utexas.edu, sail.stanford.edu!jmc@cs.utexas.edu,
cs.cornell.edu!marek@cs.utexas.edu,
jacksun.cs.umd.edu!minker@cs.utexas.edu,
doc.imperial.ac.uk!rak@cs.utexas.edu,
ai.toronto.edu!reiter@cs.utexas.edu,
sail.stanford.edu!val@cs.utexas.edu
Subject: one more address!
I appologize but I forgot to add one more university that urgently requested
a letter of recommendation for me. It is:
Professor G.A. Articolo
Search Committee
Department of Mathematics
Rutgers University
Camden, NJ 08102
I would greatly appreciate if you could send your letter as soon as
possible. Thank you!
Teodor.
∂26-Feb-90 1212 JMC
To: ME
Please get NS back. HOT works and we're curious about Nicaragua.
∂26-Feb-90 1246 JMC
To: ME
Does something dangerous to NS happen at 6am?
∂26-Feb-90 1346 JMC re: Referee Request
To: phil@ub.d.umn.edu
[In reply to message sent Mon, 26 Feb 90 14:53:46 CDT.]
I will referee the David Nelson paper. I don't agree that
deduction plays no more role in verifying programs that it does
in the empirical sciences. However, if his opinion is well
stated and well supported, I will propose accepting the paper
provided it refers adequately to the literature. If it doesn't,
I'll recommend literature whose contentions it should discuss,
and recommend resubmission. Of course, the paper may surprise me
in ways the abstract doesn't suggest.
All this assumes that the journal welcomes argumentation that
doesn't in itself present new technical material. Please let me
know the extent to which new technical material is a criterion.
∂26-Feb-90 1720 JMC re: hello
To: VAL
[In reply to message sent Mon, 26 Feb 90 19:36:24 EST.]
As far as our group is concerned, that's right. If think
he might fit some other group, you could introduce him.
∂26-Feb-90 1743 JMC
To: ango@HUDSON.Stanford.EDU, goldberg@CS.Stanford.EDU
Batch 2 is in the box outside Hemenway's door.
∂26-Feb-90 2108 Mailer Kick 'em when they're down.
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
I don't remember seeing any A.P. story making fun of the foreign
supporters of the Sandinistas before this. I also don't remember
the byline Doralisa Pilarte. Did I just miss it or has the A.P.
decided that journalism in Nicaragua is best advanced by being in
with the powers-to-be. Of course, the American Spectator has been
making fund of the Sandalistas all along. Perhaps the following
quotation is apropos.
Among wolves one must howl a little. - Voltaire
a264 1940 26 Feb 90
AM-Nicaragua-Sandalistas,0548
Sandinista Groupies Shout Down Carter, Richardson
With AM-Nicaragua, Bjt
By DORALISA PILARTE
Associated Press Writer
MANAGUA, Nicaragua (AP) - When President Daniel Ortega admitted his
defeat at the polls early Monday, most of those applauding him,
singing the Sandinista Front anthem and crying their eyes out were
Sandalistas.
Sandalistas are the battalions of idealistic foreigners, mainly
Americans and Western Europeans, who came to Nicaragua after the
Sandinista revolution of July 1979.
Nicaraguans gave them their nickname because of their fondness for
thick leather sandals, part of a sort of uniform by which Sandalistas
can be recognized at a distance.
It was these foreigners who shouted catcalls and obscenities a few
hours later in the same convention hall, when former U.S. President
Jimmy Carter, U.N. observer mission chief Elliot Richardson and
others held a news conference on the elections.
''The U.S. put the pressure on and the people had no choice'' but to
vote for opposition presidential candidate Violeta Barrios de
Chamorro, said Monika von Flotow.
Ms. von Flotow, 33, a physical therapist from Santa Rosa, Calif.,
has been working for the past year in Matiguas, a small town deep in
central Matagalpa province.
It is in the midst of Contra territory, where people often are
maimed by land mines or in skirmishes between rebels and soldiers.
''I don't think people were proud of how they voted,'' said Ms. von
Flotow, her eyes red from weeping after Ortega's moving speech.
Margo Malone, 29, of Bellingham, Wash., climbed atop a desk to see
Ortega as he spoke.
She hugged a friend and sobbed as the last strains of the Sandinista
National Liberation Front anthem, the one with a line calling ''the
Yankee, the enemy of humanity,'' filled the hall.
''The United States has shown that it can destroy a really important
process, a really important revolution,'' said Ms. Malone, who has
been in Nicaragua four months on her first visit.
Not all Sandalistas dress alike. Ms. von Flotow, for example, has a
conservative, unadorned look.
But by and large, Sandalista woman can be recognized by flowing
Indian print skirts and cotton tank tops; the men by often frayed
pants and ancient T-shirts.
For both sexes, however, it is cotton everything; a knapsack on
every back; a look of blissful wonder at the natives and, for many, a
feeling that the United States is ''the enemy of humanity.''
They often have little money for themselves, but have organized a
worldwide ''solidarity'' network that has raised millions of dollars
for the Sandinista government and organized pressure campaigns to
bear upon the U.S. Congress and other governments.
Nicaraguans have a low opinion of Sandalistas because of their
unquestioning idealization of the Sandinistas and because many of
them apparently have no little time to bath in Nicaragua's tropical
heat.
At a news conference by Carter, Richardson and other invited
election observers, ''internationalistas,'' as the Sandinistas are
also called, created a spectacle.
They hammered on desks and booed at Carter when he said, ''I don't
try to justify the actions of our government,'' answering a question
as to why Washington continues supporting the Contras.
Richardson, a former U.S. attorney general, was interrupted with
obscene catcalls when he said he thought the United States would have
normalized relations with the Sandinistas had Ortega won the
elections.
AP-NY-02-26-90 2228EST
***************
∂27-Feb-90 0103 JMC
To: guha@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU
How about my office Wednesday at 1:30?
∂27-Feb-90 1732 JMC re: Change in Sunday Meeting Time
To: hemenway@SUNBURN.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue, 27 Feb 1990 16:30:30 GMT.]
ok with me.
∂28-Feb-90 1219 Mailer Ortega telecast this coming Saturday
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
There was an ad in the NYT on the day after the Nicaraguan
elections announcing an Ortega telecast. The ad took a strong
anti-U.S. and pro-Sandinista position and obviously anticipated a
Sandinista victory. Anyway according to the Peninsula Peace Center
(415) 326-8837, apparently national headquarters for the
telecast, it will indeed occur this Saturday, March 3, at 6pm
PST. It will be on cable channel 70 in this area, another cable
channel (maybe 33 but I forgot) in Cupertino, and it will will be
broadcast on KPFA radio 94.1 fm. It will only be on cable TV in
this area.
I suppose that listening to the broadcast will give an indication
of how easy the transition to democracy and capitalism will be.
The ad also promised opposition speakers. It may also tell us something
about the American "peace movement" reaction to these events.
It would be especially interesting if they bring themselves to
include President-elect Violeta Chamorro.
The Peace Center answers its telephone promptly in case anyone has
any other questions about the telecast.
∂28-Feb-90 1441 JMC re: character reference
To: RWF
[In reply to message rcvd 28-Feb-90 12:57-PT.]
I never heard of Equifax services. However, I did mention you
as a "former supervisor" in connection with a low level
security clearance at Livermore. I listed the surviving
former chairmen of CSD. Maybe Livermore farms out checking
this kind of thing.
∂28-Feb-90 1446 JMC
To: CLT
Some modems and memory have arrived and are in my office.
∂28-Feb-90 2016 JMC re: Gelfond
To: VAL
[In reply to message rcvd 28-Feb-90 18:31-PT.]
Yes, sure.
∂28-Feb-90 2355 JMC
To: ango@HUDSON.Stanford.EDU, goldberg@CS.Stanford.EDU
Batch 4 is in the box outside Hemenway office.
∂01-Mar-90 1429 JMC re: AI Division lunch
To: jutta@COYOTE.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent 1 Mar 1990 1335-PST.]
If I return early from TARK, I'll come, otherwise not.
∂01-Mar-90 1511 JMC
To: ME
As per advice, I killed the doer.
∂01-Mar-90 1554 JMC Digital "Disclosure" Invitation
To: JJW@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
∂27-Feb-90 1743 couchli@wr1for.enet.dec.com Digital "Disclosure" Invitation
Received: from decwrl.dec.com by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 27 Feb 90 17:43:06 PST
Received: by decwrl.dec.com; id AA23271; Tue, 27 Feb 90 17:41:28 -0800
Message-Id: <9002280141.AA23271@decwrl.dec.com>
Received: from wr1for.enet; by decwrl.enet; Tue, 27 Feb 90 17:42:18 PST
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 90 17:42:18 PST
From: 27-Feb-1990 1731 <couchli@wr1for.enet.dec.com>
To: mail11:;@UNKNOWN@decwrl.dec.com (@pid.dist3)
Cc: couchli@decwrl.dec.com
Subject: Digital "Disclosure" Invitation
DIGITAL RISC WORKSTATION & SERVER
PROPRIETARY INFORMATION DISCLOSURE
MARCH 5,1990
2:30 TO 5:00
CERAS ROOM #112
You are invited to attend the Proprietary Information Disclosure on two of
Digital's soon to be announced, R3000 based, RISC systems. The new systems
will continue to grow the family of RISC products introduced last January and
July of 1989.
On March 5th, we will be presenting and demoing the new workstation which is
the successor to the DECstation 3100, as well as discussing the successor to
the DECserver 5400.
Additionally, we will have prototype "UNIX Keyboards" for your evaluation and
comments.
As with all Digital Disclosures, attendance is by approved invitation only.
However, if you are unable to attend, but wish to be represented by someone in
your organization, please contact Linda Couch (COUCH@JESSICA) with the
individual's name. To confirm your attendance, RSVP to the above.
Thank you for your interest in Digital! Your Account Team looks forward to
seeing you on March 5th.
Linda Couch
COUCH@JESSICA
(408)748-6468
Mary Tate
GTATE@WHEN
(408)748-4421
Mary Belinsky
MARYB@CS
(408)748-4314
∂01-Mar-90 1618 JMC
To: SJG@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Do you have Penrose's address.
∂01-Mar-90 1634 JMC parking
To: mrg@Sunburn.Stanford.EDU
Further introspection suggests that what one tries should be
sharply time-dependent. The physics lot is good up to 9:30
and should not be tried after 10am, except that it is again
good between noon and about 1:15. At other times I use the
latecomers' lot. More refined strategies are possible. Not
all week days are alike.
∂01-Mar-90 2138 JMC re: your trip to austin
To: guha@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 1 Mar 1990 21:17:27 PST.]
March 19 and 20, Mon. and Tues. would be good if it suits you
and Doug.
∂02-Mar-90 0731 JMC re: The Hunt for Red October
To: rdz@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU, jjw@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message from rdz@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU sent Fri, 2 Mar 90 01:13:48 -0800.]
The book sufficed for me.
∂04-Mar-90 1205 JMC Penrose review
To: MPS@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Please tex penros.1[w90,jmc] and send it to Protter with a note
saying that this is really the final version.
∂07-Mar-90 0029 JMC re: Thesis committee
To: leslie%teleos.com@AI.SRI.COM
[In reply to message sent Tue, 6 Mar 90 13:19:32 PST.]
That would be ok.
∂07-Mar-90 0035 JMC re: AI Day on Campus
To: rse@SUMEX-AIM.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue, 6 Mar 1990 15:00:29 PST.]
June 14 is ok, June 11 isn't.
∂07-Mar-90 0040 JMC re: Searle's chinese room
To: sohie@NEON.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue, 6 Mar 1990 21:34:00 PST.]
McCarthy doesn't agree. He thinks Searle confuses a the man's
personality with the personality of the Chinese speaker he is
imagined to be interpreting. It is the same error as confusing
the activities of different programs in the same machine.
∂07-Mar-90 0056 JMC Can you think of anyone
To: VAL
who might apply for a research associateship in our group?
∂05-Mar-90 0900 bergman@Sunburn.Stanford.EDU [AS.BTH@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU : SPO Campus Report column, Feb. 28,
Received: from Sunburn.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 5 Mar 90 09:00:38 PST
Received: by Sunburn.Stanford.EDU (5.61+IDA/25-eef) id AA15696; Mon, 5 Mar 90 09:00:22 -0800
Date: Mon, 5 Mar 1990 9:00:22 GMT
From: Sharon Bergman <bergman@Sunburn.Stanford.EDU>
To: faculty@sunburn.Stanford.EDU
Subject: [AS.BTH@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU : SPO Campus Report column, Feb. 28,
1990 ]
Message-Id: <CMM.0.88.636656422.bergman@Sunburn.Stanford.EDU>
FYI.
-Sharon Bergman
---------------
SPONSORED PROJECTS OFFICE
_____________________________________________________________________
These funding announcements have just been received in the Sponsored
Projects Office. Application information may be obtained by
contacting Bonnie Hale at 723-4237 or as.bth@Forsythe.
____________________________________________________________________
National Science Foundation Postdoctoral Research Associateships in
Computational Science
The New Technologies program in the Division of Advanced Scientific
Computing will provide support for Postdoctoral Research
Associateships in Computational Science. Normally, awards will
provide support through a standard grant for 24 months. Awards will
range from $32,000 to $40,000 over the 24-month period, to be
matched equally by the sponsoring institution. Deadline: April 1,
1990.
∂07-Mar-90 0114 JMC re: character reference
To: RWF
[In reply to message rcvd 07-Mar-90 00:27-PT.]
Do it.
∂07-Mar-90 1358 JMC pehous.re1[let,jmc]
To: MPS@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
is the recommendation. Print it and glue it to
a recommendation form.
∂07-Mar-90 1451 JMC Soviet, Japanese and DARPA interest in Elephant
To: scherlis@DARPA.MIL
At the TARK meeting, one Osupov of the Programming
Institute at Pereslavl-Zalessky expressed interest
in their implementing Elephant. I told him (the truth)
that Elephant is not yet ready for implementation.
I also have some less definite expressions of interest
from Japan. What's the state of interest at DARPA?
I haven't succeeded in reaching you by phone in ten tries.
∂07-Mar-90 1506 Mailer The abbreviation APC
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
has a more widespread use than Stanford's
Action Plans for Change. This is Armored
Personnel Carrier. The way things are going,
the latter is what it will actually turn out to
mean at Stanford.
∂07-Mar-90 1533 JMC Please
To: MPS@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Send a copy of "Networks considered harmful" and also
Elephant draft to Nafeh
∂07-Mar-90 1542 JMC Please
To: MPS@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
send a copy of Measures of the value of information to
Prof. John Geanakoplos
Dept. of Economics
Yale University
New Haven, CT 06520
with the following note
Dear John
Here's the paper I mentioned. My more general ideas on
contracts are not written up at present. The key idea is that
the ability to write contracts properly motivating each party
depends on each party knowing something about the other's
business and costs of doing his part.
As I remarked, some people might suffer the theological
disappointment of expecting infinite reward and getting only
a finite reward but with infinite expected value. It occurs to
me that if the successive recipients would co-operate and promise to share,
each could get infinite reward after all, assuming that the procession
of saints (or pardoned sinners) continued indefinitely and that
the reward was storable and transferable. It isn't
obvious how fast they could afford to increase their ccnsumption
of reward.
Sincerely,
∂07-Mar-90 1615 JMC recommendations for VAL
To: MPS@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
lifsch.re6 is for Dale at the University of Texas.
lifsch.re7 is for computer science departments.
∂07-Mar-90 1946 JMC reply to message
To: MPS@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message rcvd 07-Mar-90 16:32-PT.]
It is the physicists' habit not to give titles. The reference
should be adequate.
∂07-Mar-90 2224 JMC re: SPP Symposium
To: harnad@PRINCETON.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 8 Mar 90 00:18:12 EST.]
What's the format of the Chinese room symposium; how many speakers,
how much time, etc.? What speakers if you know?
∂07-Mar-90 2226 Mailer re: revised Grey free speech proposal
To: doug@PORTIA.Stanford.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from doug@portia.Stanford.EDU sent 8 Mar 90 05:31:40 GMT.]
I'll bet the Grey proposal will be basically against free speech -
maybe in a more slick way than before.
∂07-Mar-90 2235 JMC re: SPP Symposium
To: harnad@PRINCETON.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 8 Mar 90 01:33:13 EST.]
In that case, I accept.
∂08-Mar-90 0154 JMC
To: RDZ@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Any results on 15-puzzle?
∂08-Mar-90 1734 JMC
To: VAL
Rathmann oral is at noon tomorrow. How about lunch Monday?
∂08-Mar-90 2102 JMC
To: MPS@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Please send Networks Considered Harmful to Cuthbert Hurd.
∂09-Mar-90 1029 JMC re: Distinguished Visitor
To: slagle@CS.UMN.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 9 Mar 90 12:11:22 CST.]
This is to accept the invitation to be a distinguished visitor with
pleasure.
∂09-Mar-90 1054 Mailer Preserving the gains of the revolution
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Today's New York Times tells us that the lame duck Sandinista
legislature is about to pass a law turning over to their people
as individuals large amounts of Government property. Does giving
Daniel Ortega the Government owned house he occupies resemble
what would have happened if the lame duck Democrats in 1980 had
given Jimmy Carter the White House as personal property? Well,
not quite.
They also seem to be saying that they will retain control of
the armed forces with the right to draft young men and will
retain a control of the secret police. There is some equivocation
about this so it may not actually happen.
Acton said that power corrupts, and it certainly seems to apply
in this case. I don't suppose that the original motivation of
the Sandinista leaders was to get rich. Maybe it wasn't Somoza's
original motivation either. The Sandinista corruption is likely
to turn out to be rather mild, because they have been in power
only 11 years. If Ortega had been able to keep power as long
as Honecker, he'd really have become rich.
Corruption is especially likely to develop in socialist regimes.
They tend to equalize nominal salaries and make up for it by
their leaders taking privileges for themselves by having the
Government employ servants for them and provide them with houses
and dachas. When that isn't enough, Swiss bank accounts seem to
proliferate.
∂09-Mar-90 1157 JMC re: Referee Request
To: phil@UB.D.UMN.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon, 26 Feb 90 14:53:46 CDT.]
I have read the Nelson paper, and I think it should be rejected.
Its contentions substantially duplicate yours, and it argues
by a series of unsupported statements and a long string of
quotations. I don't see any way of salvaging it by revision.
It has almost no positive content; i.e. it doesn't describe
how Nelson thinks programs should be verified except in the
most general way.
∂10-Mar-90 0025 Mailer Ronald Reagan said
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
in a June 1982 address to the British parliament,
"In an ironic sense, Karl Marx was right. We are witnessing
today a great revolutionary crisis - a crisis where the demands
of the economic order are colliding directly with those of the
political order. But the crisis is happening not in the free,
non-Marxist West, but in the home of Marxism-Leninism, the
Soviet Union. ... What we see here is a political structure
that no longer corresponds to its economic base, a society
where productive forces are hampered by political ones."
The remark is quoted by Richard Pipes in an article in
the March Commentary. Of course, it's possible that Pipes
wrote that Reagan speech, or part of it.
∂10-Mar-90 1039 JMC expenses for conference
To: MPS@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
1. March 4-7
2. Workshop on Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning about Knowledge
3. Round trip by car Stanford-Asilomar
4. $150 room and board
5. formal reasoning pays
∂10-Mar-90 1121 JMC WOLF
To: VAL@SAIL.Stanford.EDU, leora@IBM.COM
Here are my notes on what we discussed at TARK. Please consider all
ideas subject to change. It occurs to me that we might hold the
workshop at MCC in Austin. It would offer good meeting facilities,
and they might also subsidize the meeting. Lenat and the CYC
project are strong on common sense these years.
%wfcskr[w90,jmc] Workshop on formalizing common sense knowledge and reasoning
WORKSHOP ON FORMALIZING COMMON SENSE KNOWLEDGE AND REASONING
maybe Workshop on logical formalization [WOLF]
Time: Winter 1991
Place: New York area (maybe Austin)
Chairman of organizing committee: John McCarthy, Stanford
Program: Vladimir Lifschitz, Stanford
Arrangements: Leora Morgenstern, IBM [Watson]
Papers will be selected to optimize the following.
1. Extending logical formalization to new domains of common sense
knowledge.
2. Formalizations aimed at better solutions of known difficulties
or raising new ones.
3. Formalizations involving both knowledge and action.
4. Formalizations of goal achievement reasoning.
Date for submissions to program organizer: November 1, 1990
(extended abstracts)
Papers will be distributed at meeting, but there won't be a
formal proceedings [We might change this.]
Relevance to AI will be the primary consideration. New logics
advanced for their own sakes will be regarded with suspicion.
People considering submissions should contact one of the
above-mentioned organizers by telephone, email or mail
to discuss appropriateness of the topic....
******
Leora note [to be toned down]:
There have been a proliferation of new logics developed
in recent years ostensibly for the purpose of AI reasoning.
Often these logics seem to be developed more for their own
sakes than for the purpose of solving actual problems in
common sense reasoning. This workshop will focus on
the presentation of formalizations that are designed to tackle
specific problems of common sense reasoning. Logics are
considered useful for common sense reasoning if theorems can be
proved within the logics and not only about the logics.
******
Names of people to be encouraged to submit papers.
Pat Hayes
Ernie Davis
James Allen
Nils Nilsson
Matt Ginsberg
Don Perlis
Robert Kowalski
David Poole
Henry Kautz
David Etherington?
Yoav Shoham
Drew McDermott
Ken Forbus?
Benjamin Kuipers?
Johann deKleer?
Michael Gelfond
Arkady Rabinov
Judea Pearl?
Robert Moore
Kurt Konolige
Sarit Kraus
James Allen
Doug Lenat
R Guha
Andrew Baker
Fangzhen Lin
Eugene Charniak?
Rich Thomason
Possible foreign:
Japan [Arima},
USSR [Bondarenko?]
UK Edinburgh, Turing Institute
Germany [Reinfrank]
Israel?
China [Ma]
We should encourage some foreign attendance even without papers
from countries where some people might later do useful work.
∂10-Mar-90 1149 JMC re: Referee Request
To: phil@ub.d.umn.edu
[In reply to message sent Sat, 10 Mar 90 13:29:10 CDT.]
I'm not sure the author has definite views beyond an aversion
to mathematics and enlisting himself on one side of a
controversy. To be publishable, it seems to me that
the style would have to change drastically. It couldn't
rely on quotations.
That makes me curious about the author's background. What is it?
Aha, I have an idea. Why not invite him to review a book that
emphasizes logic in the development of programs? I have in mind
the two volume book by Manna and Waldinger, the second volume of
which has just come out. I'm sure he will be able to criticize
it for ignoring aspects of program development he considers
important, but he will then have to concern himself with actual
proposals for using logic.
∂10-Mar-90 1337 JMC Davis tomorrow
To: CLT
Sarah agreed, and I think Timothy did too, but when dinner was
mentioned we got into a discussion of Marie Callender's, and
also the fact that Timothy knows three Sarahs.
∂11-Mar-90 1119 JMC re: whiteboards
To: golub@PATIENCE.STANFORD.EDU, ac@SUNBURN.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message from golub@patience.Stanford.EDU sent Sun, 11 Mar 1990 10:14:38 PST.]
I dunno. I had a whiteboard in my office and later had it
replaced by a blackboard. Whiteboards are harder to erase and
it's never obvious when a marking pen is used up, so one usually
finds a lot of dead pens on the tray. However, I could live with
white boards. As to chairs, I noticed some very nice seminar
room chairs in 61G on the quad. They have a flexible joint in
the back which makes it possible to lean back.
∂11-Mar-90 2059 JMC re: CS221
To: VAL
[In reply to message rcvd 11-Mar-90 13:13-PT.]
I don't think there is any definite custom, and if there is, I'm
not the expert. I think 3 in class examinations is a reasonable
decision. Only one should be labelled a midterm, however.
∂12-Mar-90 1052 JMC re: contexts reference
To: AI.GUHA@MCC.COM
[In reply to message sent Sun 11 Mar 90 16:53:43-CST.]
There is nothing more recent.
\noindent {\bf McCarthy, John (1987)}:
``Generality in Artificial Intelligence'', {\it Communications of the ACM}.
Vol. 30, No. 12, pp. 1030-1035
% genera[w86,jmc]
∂12-Mar-90 1107 JMC single room and dinner
To: chandler@CS.Stanford.EDU
I plan to be there for dinner Friday and want a single room.
∂12-Mar-90 1109 JMC re: retreat
To: nilsson@TENAYA.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon, 12 Mar 90 09:57:45 PST.]
Let me recommend Vladimir for attendance and a talk.
∂12-Mar-90 1121 JMC su-etc
To: ME
I received a reply with the following header, but the message did no
show up in su-etc. Should he have copied su-etc or does the newsgroups
field handle this?
∂12-Mar-90 0901 ric@ace.SRI.COM Re: Preserving the gains of the revolution
Received: from ace.SRI.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 12 Mar 90 09:01:14 PST
Received: by ace.SRI.COM (5.0/5.14)
id AA24882; Mon, 12 Mar 90 05:55:59 EST
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 90 05:55:59 EST
From: ric@ace.SRI.COM (Richard Steinberger)
Message-Id: <9003121355.AA24882@ace.SRI.COM>
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: Re: Preserving the gains of the revolution
Newsgroups: su.etc
In-Reply-To: <T79UQ@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Organization: SRI International
Cc:
∂12-Mar-90 1324 JMC re: single room and dinner
To: chandler@SUNBURN.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon, 12 Mar 1990 11:16:16 PST.]
It should be charged to the Piggott professorship account.
∂12-Mar-90 1333 JMC re: bing
To: CLT
[In reply to message rcvd 12-Mar-90 13:30-PT.]
Alas, I have to listen to a boring seminar by my ex-student
Leslie Kaelbling. Hmm, maybe I can get out of it now that she
has switched to being Nils's student.
∂12-Mar-90 1521 JMC
To: PKR
\noindent {\bf McCarthy, John (1987)}:
``Generality in Artificial Intelligence'', {\it Communications of the ACM}.
Vol. 30, No. 12, pp. 1030-1035
% genera[w86,jmc]
∂12-Mar-90 1723 JMC re: Austin Trip
To: MPS@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message rcvd 12-Mar-90 16:42-PT.]
Take the first. It would take more than saving MCC some
money to get me to take a red eye.
∂12-Mar-90 1724 JMC Re: Preserving the gains of the revolution
To: ME
∂12-Mar-90 0901 ric@ace.SRI.COM Re: Preserving the gains of the revolution
Received: from ace.SRI.COM by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 12 Mar 90 09:01:14 PST
Received: by ace.SRI.COM (5.0/5.14)
id AA24882; Mon, 12 Mar 90 05:55:59 EST
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 90 05:55:59 EST
From: ric@ace.SRI.COM (Richard Steinberger)
Message-Id: <9003121355.AA24882@ace.SRI.COM>
To: JMC@sail.stanford.edu
Subject: Re: Preserving the gains of the revolution
Newsgroups: su.etc
In-Reply-To: <T79UQ@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Organization: SRI International
Cc:
In article <T79UQ@SAIL.Stanford.EDU> you write:
>Today's New York Times tells us that the lame duck Sandinista
>legislature is about to pass a law turning over to their people
>as individuals large amounts of Government property. Does giving
>Daniel Ortega the Government owned house he occupies resemble
>what would have happened if the lame duck Democrats in 1980 had
>given Jimmy Carter the White House as personal property? Well,
>not quite.
This is really serious. Maybe we should send in the Marines to put things
right and restore true democracy.
>
>They also seem to be saying that they will retain control of
>the armed forces with the right to draft young men and will
>retain a control of the secret police. There is some equivocation
>about this so it may not actually happen.
I think it is unlikely that the Sandanistas will be able to maintain control
over the armed forces unless the Contras refuse to disarm. It should
be remembered that Contra disarmament was an important condition, agreed
to by the United States, for the recent election in that country.
>
>Acton said that power corrupts, and it certainly seems to apply
>in this case. I don't suppose that the original motivation of
>the Sandinista leaders was to get rich. Maybe it wasn't Somoza's
>original motivation either. The Sandinista corruption is likely
>to turn out to be rather mild, because they have been in power
>only 11 years. If Ortega had been able to keep power as long
>as Honecker, he'd really have become rich.
This is really rich. I suppose no Western/Capitalist country has been
tainted by corruption. No. Unthinkable. The scandals in the last 25 years
of the US Presidency are flukes, mere statistical anomilies. No US
President, or other leader of a Western-style democracy, ever profited from
having held high office. Corruption in European democracies, in Japan, in
Australia, Mexico, Argentina was an invention of the US leftist-leaning
media moguls. It's only Socialist [hissssss!] countries where political
corruption can really take root and prosper.
To paraphrase, "I don't suppose that the original motivation of the
leaders of the [Democrats, Republicans, Tories, Social Democrats, Catholic
Church, American Medical Association, American Bar Association] was to get
rich." If JMC's reasoning is correct, Ronald Reagan must be a closet
Socialist; he certainly has been enriched for having been president,
even if he can't remember what actions he authorized while in office.
>
>Corruption is especially likely to develop in socialist regimes.
>They tend to equalize nominal salaries and make up for it by
>their leaders taking privileges for themselves by having the
>Government employ servants for them and provide them with houses
>and dachas. When that isn't enough, Swiss bank accounts seem to
>proliferate.
More of the same here. One might be led to conclude that the more
inequitable in distribution the wealth of a nation, the less likely that
political corruption will be.
And I suppose that Camp David isn't a dachas. Merely a few small rooms in
a state park! No servants in the White House either. And the junior
officers that attend to the needs of the nations top military officials
aren't servants. They're just 'a few good men.'
The only reason more corrupt US leaders don't have Swiss bank accounts is that
they are unnecessary. It's the foreign dictators like the Duvaliers in
Haiti, the Shah in Iran, Pinochet in Chile, Somoza in Nicuragua, all of
whom were supported for many years by US dollars and weapons, that have
the BIG Swiss accounts. And while we're on the subject of Swiss accounts,
let's remember where Ollie North and company did most of their banking.
Nothing corrupt there.
-ric steinberger
∂12-Mar-90 1900 Mailer re: Preserving the gains of the revolution
To: ric@ACE.SRI.COM, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from ric@ace.sri.com sent 12 Mar 90 21:35:39 GMT.]
Yes, corruption exists under both socialism and capitalism, but
I'll bet that it will turn out that it does much greater
relative damage to the economy under socialism. Whether this
is so will very likely become apparent in the next few years.
Corruption within a company is limited by the bankruptcy of
the company, and reading the business press shows that some
form of corruption causes a substantial fraction of
bankruptcies even when nothing actually illegal has been
done - only the appointment and maintenance in position
of incompetent cronies and relatives.
We can afford Camp David. Stanford can afford to provide
residences for the President and Provost. However, Moscow
has 14,000 chauffeured cars, almost as many as taxis. The
perks extend far down into the bureaucracy. The number
of people entitled to chauffeurs in Washington is less
that a few hundred, maybe less than 100.
As for Reagan, he didn't get rich in office, and I think
he is entitled to get whatever the market will bear -
now that he is out of office. Those who grumble the most
about the 2 million those Japanese paid him don't claim
that it bought them favors from the U.S. Government.
∂13-Mar-90 0834 JMC
To: CLT
OK. A check for $900 from III is on the kitchen shelf.
∂13-Mar-90 1453 JMC re: Calendar Advisory
To: chandler@Sunburn.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue, 13 Mar 1990 11:24:05 PST.]
Requiring standard format printable PhD theses.
∂13-Mar-90 1752 JMC re: cs323 term paper
To: sreerang@PORTIA.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue, 13 Mar 90 17:29:44 PDT.]
I don't fully understand what you are proposing. If we imagine designing
and object as a construction task, then it relaxes constraints that
normal construction would impose. For example, we can design a tower
starting at the top or even starting in the middle, but constructing
a tower requires that it be built from the bottom up. I will be in
tomorrow, but you could also phone me at home 857-0672 this evening
between 7pm and 11pm.
∂13-Mar-90 1929 JMC re: Elephant 2000
To: carlf@THINK.COM
[In reply to message sent Tue, 13 Mar 90 21:52:51 EST.]
email a request with a U.S. Mail address to my secretary who is
mps@sail.stanford.edu. You will get an incomplete draft, however,
so you might be better off waiting.
∂14-Mar-90 0850 JMC
To: VAL
Let's have Friday lunch at 1:15.
∂14-Mar-90 0912 JMC Tyugu phone
To: VAL
There's a full day conference on Soviet nationality problems
at Hoover on Friday. He might like to attend, and I believe
it would benefit the conference. I just heard about it and
don't plan to attend.
∂14-Mar-90 1227 JMC re: Rudy Rucker on "are we machines"
To: beeson@UCSCD.UCSC.EDU
[In reply to message sent Wed, 14 Mar 90 09:37:00 -0800.]
Just a stab in the dark.
∂14-Mar-90 1354 JMC backs of stop signs
To: hk.mlh@FORSYTHE.STANFORD.EDU
Some of the stop signs on Campus Drive now have other
signs on their backs. This makes it hard to tell whether
the other direction has a stop sign. Some day someone
will wrongly guess that the other direction has a stop
sign, and an accident will occur. The other signs, redundant
one way signs, I believe should be moved higher or lower
on the poles.
∂14-Mar-90 1357 JMC missing your seminar
To: leslie%teleos.com@AI.SRI.COM
I'll miss your seminar next week.
∂14-Mar-90 1411 JMC re: missing your seminar
To: leslie%teleos.com@AI.SRI.COM
[In reply to message sent Wed, 14 Mar 90 14:01:15 PST.]
I have just saved it. For your oral, I presume?
∂14-Mar-90 2040 JMC re: Title for AI Day on Campus
To: tajnai@HUDSON.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Wed, 14 Mar 1990 18:18:52 PST.]
Remind me about the audience, date and length and who else will
talk.
∂14-Mar-90 2259 JMC reply to message
To: REM@SUWATSON.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Wed, 14 Mar 90 22:33:14 PDT.]
Congratulations.
∂14-Mar-90 2302 JMC re: lambada from Brazil
To: ilan@GANG-OF-FOUR.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent 15 Mar 90 00:37:26 GMT.]
No, that was Churach.
∂14-Mar-90 2307 Mailer re: lambada from Brazil
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from ilan@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU sent 15 Mar 90 00:37:26 GMT.]
>JMC, didn't you invent the Lambada calculus?
No, that was Churach.
∂14-Mar-90 2331 Mailer a letter the New Republic must have loved to print
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
To the Editor:
As a Quaker and a journalist who has covered local,
national, and international stories for American newspapers and
magazines, I am appalled with what must be your ignorance,
irresponsibility, or plain outright propaganda regarding the
upcoming elections in Nicaragua (``Sandinista Fix?'' February 19).
Your thinking that anybody but Daniel Ortega will win
the election is like believing Americans would have voted for
a British candidate for the American presidency after George
Washington and his loyal band of courageous Americans had
won the American Revolution.
Everywhere in Nicaragua, in every town and every city,
if you care to visit, you will see signs, ``They shall not
pass!''
``There will be no surrender!''
I ask you for more journalistic responsibility,
investigation, and up-front honesty. You should be ashamed
of yourselves.
Jerry Copeland
Florence, Oregon
How much do you imagine of Friend Copeland's opinions have
changed? Very little, I'll bet.
∂15-Mar-90 0958 JMC re: Title for AI Day on Campus
To: tajnai@HUDSON.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 15 Mar 1990 8:18:36 PST.]
Artificial Intelligence and Electronic Data Interchange
∂15-Mar-90 2104 JMC re: VTSS160
To: gjohn@Neon.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 15 Mar 1990 20:53:29 PST.]
I'll look at your papers tomorrow and get back to you.
∂15-Mar-90 2336 Mailer Soviet commentary on Nicaraguan elections
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
from Moscow News weekly, no. 10, 1990
Moscow News, founded in 1931 by an American friend of Stalin,
used to consist of the dullest sort of propaganda. For the
last three years, it has taken Glasnost further than any other
Soviet paper. It is published in eight languages.
Commentary by Sergei Volovyets, Moscow News analyst
RETURNING TO THE NORM
The elections in Nicaragua started almost simultaneously with
elections in several Soviet Republics. It can be presumed that
one's own interests would come first and, such being the case,
the Nicaraguans' choice would be of secondary importance for us.
But the circumstances were unusual. And Nicaragua's elections
were in fact even more important for us than they were for the
Americans who, over the past ten years, had been drawn up to
their ears in Nicaraguan politics.
The confrontation of many years between the USSR and the
USA, which used to find an open outlet in Nicaragua, had caused
many of us to see that country's elections as a melee between
Soviet and American teams. It would be a tempting (but now
almost absurd) simplification to ask who won and to reply: the
Americans. Victory went to a definite position which, by the
Spring of 1990, had been adopted by the majority of Nicaraguans.
And therein lies the second reason of our interest: the problems
around which the struggle was waged were in many respects similar
to our own.
In politics, as also in the natural sciences, recurrent
results in an experiment point to the existence of a law. For
about a decade that country kind of confirmed the ``law''
discovered in the Soviet ideological laboratory: right before our
eyes a moribund social system---capitalism---was being replaced
with a new and progressive one, which was victoriously marching
across the planet and had reached out as far as the American
continent. The fact that the system in Nicaragua had not been
tsted by elections was declared to be immaterial. My generation
had to understand that the fetishism of the ballot box was simply
ridiculous, that there existed more perfect forms of democracy,
doing without it or allowing voting on the ``one person---one
seat'' principle. This was the order of things.
It is dishonest today to gloat over the Sandinistas'
defeat. It would be equally dishonest to try and explain it
solely by the actions over many years of the ``contras'', the
economic difficulties, the food shortages and the nine million
dollars received by the victorious opposition from the United
States. Although all this really happened and probably had some
effect.
On the day when the Nicaraguans went to the polls, V.
Golikov, a spokesman for the Kuzbas miners, said at a meeting in
Moscow: ``It is slander when they say that the workers on strike
demand sausage. What we are demanding is freedom!''
As I see it, this comes as an echo acress ten thousand
kilometres.
What kind of freedom did voters demand during the
elections in Nicaragua? After all, in contrast to East European
nations, the Stalinist totalitarian system was never introduced
there. In 1984 there were elections that not everyone recognized
as honest, but which, nevertheless, gave the opposition a voice
in parliament. But there was no forced collectivization, no
extreme excesses of nationalization, and not all private property
was taken over by the state.
But even in this model the state's intervention in the
lives of citizens reached a level unacceptable for the majority
of that country's society. It told them how long they ought to
work, how much they ought to get, where to buy and at what
prices. The results are now being described everywhere, and it's
not worth talking about them, for all of this is well familiar to
us.
In these conditions the people were given, at last, the
possibility to make their choice---and they made it. Possibly
not so much in favour of capitalism as in favor of the right to
decide---with reasonable regularity and with the help of the
ballot box---how they should live further on.
With the authenticity of electrolysis separating only
hydrogen and oxygen and nothing else out of water, it has been
confirmed in Nicaragua: there can be no democracy without free
elections. This conclusion is as obvious as two times two is
four for the majority, but still questionable for us.
The second conclusion is that everywhere, organized
political opposition ensures, as a rule, a smoooth transition to
changes, to a continuation of life without bloodshed. Something
the ``contras'' were unable to do over many years by resorting to
violence.
It can well be imagined that after some time, and for
some period, the Nicaraguans will again decide: the time has come
to put socialist ideals to the test in practice once again. Then
possibly the Sandinistas (and maybe Daniel Ortega who deserved
the respect of all democrats by his decision to hold elections
even though armed struggle was still going on in the country)
will again return to power---yet one received not ``out of the
barrel of a gun'', but from electors.
We may like or dislike the results of the elections in
Nicaragua. But, as with the results of our own electiions, we
can only recognize them and earnestly ponder their significance.
∂16-Mar-90 0903 Mailer danger from environmentalism
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
The April Scientific American has an article by Senator Al Gore
of Tennessee. It is full of irrational slogans that can lead
to policies of symbolic value that will harm humanity. There
is some chance that this ideology will dominate world politics
in the next 20 years.
∂16-Mar-90 1518 JMC re: VTSS160
To: gjohn@PORTIA.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 15 Mar 1990 20:53:29 PST.]
If you want an A, do a small essay comparing the Earth Day propaganda
with the anti-environmentalist propaganda from Consumer Alert and
the American Medical Association report on nuclear energy. Of course,
these don't speak exactly to the same issues, but do the best you
can. Compare style as well as substance. Keep it to 5 pages or less
and get it to me by Thursday of finals week.
∂16-Mar-90 1643 JMC re: Axiomatization of Mr. S and Mr. P
To: sreerang@PORTIA.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 16 Mar 90 16:04:11 PDT.]
I'm afraid your translation into a Prolog program could not express
what you actually wrote as first order axioms. The Prolog program
gives the right answer.
Consider axiom 2.
The right hand side of the iff is alway false since it asserts that
all m and n are betweeen 1 and 100. The axiom is reasonable
if forall is replaced by thereexists. Then the second axiom becomes
incorrect. The whole idea of it is wrong. Mr. P has a specific product
in mind, and there is more than one pair of numbers that agrees with
it. Since there is only one specific product, the axiom shouldn't start
forall p.
∂16-Mar-90 1719 JMC re: CS523
To: bthomas@RHEA.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 16 Mar 90 14:27:29 PST.]
No problem.
∂17-Mar-90 1934 JMC Please tex
To: MPS@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
moscow.rep[w90,jmc] and Campus Mail it to Angelo Codevilla
at Hoover.
∂17-Mar-90 2152 JMC Please tex
To: MPS@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
networ[e89,jmc] and give it to Mints or to Vladimir for
Mints. Actually two copies - one for Tyugu. They're
leaving Wednesday morning so make sure they get it.
∂19-Mar-90 1145 JMC
To: MPS@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
No final in vtss 160
∂19-Mar-90 1200 JMC
To: ai.lenat@MCC.COM
\noindent {\bf McCarthy, John (1979)}:
``First Order Theories of Individual Concepts and Propositions'',
in Michie, Donald (ed.) {\it Machine Intelligence 9}, (University of
Edinburgh Press, Edinburgh).
% .<<aim 325, concep.tex[e76,jmc]>>
\noindent {\bf McCarthy, John (1980)}:
``Circumscription - A Form of Non-Monotonic Reasoning'', {\it Artificial
Intelligence}, Volume 13, Numbers 1,2, April.
% .<<aim 334, circum.new[s79,jmc], cirnew.tex[s79,jmc]>>
% presid.1[f83,jmc]
∂19-Mar-90 1638 Mailer Never again socialism
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
seems to have been a successful slogan.
∂19-Mar-90 1645 JMC
To: CLT
I got Vance Sanders tax info and relayed it to Okner.
∂20-Mar-90 0805 JMC re: interview
To: HOFFMAN@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon 19 Mar 90 18:39:47-PST.]
Yes, yes and yes. I'll be back at Stanford tomorrow.
∂20-Mar-90 0806 JMC re: spp invitation
To: ANDREWSJ%VASSAR.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon, 19 Mar 90 23:37 EDT.]
I accept your invitation.
John McCarthy
Computer Science Department
Stanford University
Stanford, CA 94305
∂20-Mar-90 0853 JMC
To: ME
See today's New York Times for article on NASA's problems with 7 track tapes.
∂20-Mar-90 1007 JMC previous conversation
To: GEM
You asked me whether I would modify my qualification about not increasing
defense costs. On further thought, I would modify it considerably, because
I no longer consider defense a major problem. I believe the West generally,
and the U.S. in particular is coming around to a view that active aid to
reform in the Soviet Union is a good idea, and I agree with this. Question:
What would be most helpful in the computer field? As mentioned in my
article, I think use of computers in the Soviet Union is more backward
than the hardware and software technology themselves. For example, the
number of computer-produced commercial documents, e.g. checks or tickets,
is still very small; I haven't seen
any.
∂20-Mar-90 1008 JMC (on TTY167 1008)
To: GEM
I'll be back from Texas tonight.
∂20-Mar-90 1108 JMC
To: guha@MCC.COM
\noindent {\bf McCarthy, John (1983)}: ``Some Expert Systems Need Common Sense'',
in {\it Computer Culture: The Scientific, Intellectual and Social Impact
of the Computer}, Heinz Pagels, ed.
vol. 426, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.
%paper
%presented at New York Academy of Sciences Symposium.
% common[e83,jmc]
% common.tex[e83,jmc]
∂20-Mar-90 1111 JMC re: interview
To: HOFFMAN@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue 20 Mar 90 10:58:54-PST.]
I'll be there all week.. Phone me some afternoon.
∂20-Mar-90 1428 JMC re: Library books
To: MPS@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message rcvd 20-Mar-90 14:02-PT.]
I gave you the slip on which I had written the references. I'll
have to get them again from Conyers Herring.
∂20-Mar-90 2355 JMC re: Library books
To: mps@GANG-OF-FOUR.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue, 20 Mar 90 15:27:29 -0800.]
No, I'll do it.
∂20-Mar-90 2356 JMC re: term paper
To: paek@NEON.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue, 20 Mar 1990 17:00:01 PST.]
Yes.
∂20-Mar-90 2357 JMC re: IR
To: peters@RUSSELL.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue, 20 Mar 90 18:05:48 PST.]
Sorry, what is C-ACIS?
∂21-Mar-90 1118 JMC re: IR
To: peters@RUSSELL.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Wed, 21 Mar 90 10:08:36 PST.]
Did I give you a copy of the screed I handed out at Byers's meeting?
It contains most of what I have to say on the basis of present
knowledge. It would require some investigation to verify or refute
my opinion that that empire, like other computer empires worldwide,
is grossly overstaffed. Let me point out that your last sentence
This is the faculty committee which, in principle,
keeps watch to insure that academic needs are being
properly served by the university's official organs,
such as Information Resources.
is an invitation to overstaffing.
I'll be glad to meet at any mutually convenient time.
∂21-Mar-90 1546 JMC re: Undergraduate Colloquium
To: jones@Sunburn.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Wed, 21 Mar 1990 15:01:03 PST.]
4/12 will be best.
∂21-Mar-90 1556 JMC
To: peters@RUSSELL.Stanford.EDU
%prejud[f89,jmc] Prejudices about Stanford economization
\input memo.tex[let,jmc]
\title{Thoughts on Economizing at Stanford}
%, MSG.MSG[1,JMC]/67P/33L, w90.in[let,jmc]
% confirms some of the remarks about AIR and administrative computing
These opinions (or prejudices) are based only on having
spent 27 years as a faculty member, having founded and directed
the Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, and on having founded and
directed the LOTS low overhead time-sharing system. They are not
based on a study of Stanford's current administrative costs.
I'm willing to learn more. However, I share the opinion that
Stanford has allowed administrative costs to grow excessively over
the last 25 years.
1. People in service activities can always think of more services
they could perform with increased resources. The tendency is to
expand until stopped by external authority.
2. For this reason, when possible, services should be
decentralized to the point where the user of the service can
decide whether to expand his use of this service or put his
resources to some other use. This often results in greatly
reduced use of services. Under present institutional conditions,
this saving from decentralization almost always outweighs economies of
scale of centralized facilities.
This is the main advantage of small
computers, and the people who operate small computers typically
spend less on support than the larger centers.
3. Stanford should compare the number of people it employs to
perform each service - purchasing, personnel, computing, registration
and student records, maintenance - both with Stanford's historical
number of people involved in the activity and with the corresponding
activities in other institutions. The idea is to find which activities
have grown the most at Stanford and how economically the most
efficient other universities do them.
4. Caltech charges 56 percent overhead, Stanford 79 percent and
rising.
5. When stamps were three cents, Stanford put a 10 percent surcharge
on postage to do the weighing and put on the postage. Now that
stamps are 25 cents, Stanford needs 15 percent. This suggests
that Stanford has become inefficient 50 percent faster than the
U.S. Post Office. It's plausible, because there aren't any
continuously active vociferous groups at Stanford demanding economy,
and there isn't any competition.
6. Outside consultants should be employed to survey each activity
that has substantially expanded its personnel since the 1950s.
These consultants should report to a level of administration
committed to reduction of administrative costs---if necessary
to the Board of Trustees.
7. As in most organizations, computers and automation have been
used to make the organization more comfortable internally rather
than to serve its users better.
Here's one example of a possible additional service that
might save personnel. If a suitable system can be
purchased, Stanford should allow purchase requisitions to be
entered and their progress tracked from computer terminals and
personal computers. If this were done, the number of people
in the purchasing department might be reduced. A study might
establish this. On the other hand, a project to develop such
a system might waste money.
8. Appointment and promotion of research personnel should be
decentralized. The second guessing by personnel and by the
Provost's office is wasteful and harmful.
9. Committees should be replaced as much as possible by giving
their responsibility to single individuals. They are often
formed as a sop to group interest, but they are much too expensive.
10. Computers are an activity particularly prone to overgrowth of
personnel.
a. When LOTS was started 4 FTEs served 3,000 users.
Nevertheless, the personnel budget approximately equalled the
amortization of the computers. Now AIR has a budget of \$5
million of which only \$750,000 amortizes the computers.
b. I once investigated how many people it took to operate
a D.E.C. System 10 computer at various universities and research
institutions. The number varied between 1 and 15
depending on institutional traditions and practices.
c. Stanford has engaged in large scale pump priming in
getting faculty and students to use computers. This should be
phased out on a definite schedule---say three years. After that
proposals for help in using computers to develop courses, etc.
should compete with other proposals to use money to develop
courses.
d. The Computer Science Department recently examined its
computer facilities. The conclusion was that the most redundant
person was the Manager, even though he was doing a reasonable
job. He was laid off, and also the accounting group was
eliminated.
e. Stanford especially needs an outside consultant in
economizing on expenditure for computer personnel.
11. Economy will require the abandonment of many worthwhile
activities that aren't as worthwhile as saving the money.
12. The key to reducing expenses is reducing personnel. All other
economies are minor. However, an organization told to study
reducing costs will tend to concentrate on such questions as to whether it
could get by with one fewer Xerox machine.
13. I built a house with a Stanford loan in 1965 and sold it in 1989
and bought another. It seemed to me that the personnel of the
office concerned has greatly increased in the last 25 years.
Matters that one person dealt with then have been divided among
specialists. There was probably more work at that time, because
Stanford was developing subdivisions.
It seems to me that the only way to reduce personnel in this office
would be brute force. Tell its manager that he has to get by with
the same number of people the office employed in 1965 and let him
deal with combining functions. If he won't do it, get someone else.
14. The faculty meeting with the Provost left me quite unconvinced
that Stanford is serious about reducing administrative expenses.
There are no dollar targets or personnel reduction targets.
If the ideas advanced here are considered irrelevant, I'll
go away and not bother you any more. I have plenty else to do.
15. If I am asked to help, I propose to specialize in studying the
reduction of personnel costs associated with computing.
(Three months having elapsed since I made this offer leads me to
the conclusion that involving even one person with my views is
regarded as counterproductive.)
∂21-Mar-90 1711 Mailer re: Taiwan imitation of China protest
To: rick@HANAUMA.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from rick@hanauma.stanford.edu sent 22 Mar 90 00:24:47 GMT.]
The situation in Taiwan is quite complicated. Here are some relevant
facts.
1. In 1895 Japan took Taiwan from China and kept it until 1945.
2. In 1945 the Chinese Nationalists (Kuomintang Party, Chiang Kai-Shek leader)
got it from the Japanese in consequence of the Japanese defeat in World War II.
3. About 1947 there was a Taiwan revolt against the Nationalists which was
suppressed. I think its goal was independence; anyway it wasn't a communist
revolt.
4. In 1949 the Nationalists were defeated in Mainland China and retreated
with more than 2 million people to Taiwan. The native population, Chinese
speaking a dialect related to that of the nearby Fukien Province, was about
14 million at the time.
5. For a while the U.S. Seventh Fleet patrolled the Taiwan Straits
to prevent a communist invasion.
6. The Nationalists also held Quemoy and Matsu, small islands
near the coast of the mainland. The Communists attacked but were
unable to capture them, and the Nationalists still have them.
7. The economy of Taiwan under the Nationalists has grown to be
one of the strong Asian economies. Our aid stopped in 1966.
The economic leadership was and is mostly in the hands of native Taiwanese.
8. The Nationalists ran a rather authoritarian government. Also
they maintained their claim to be the legitimate government of
China, and maintained that the legislature elected in China in
1947 was the legitimate authority. (It may have lost a lot of
its mandate in 43 years, but it still has legitimate claim in
China than the Chinese Communists, who have never bothered with
an election, not even a fake communist style election).
9. There is a Taiwan independence movement.
10. The Chinese Communists threaten to invade if Taiwan declares
its independence. Taiwan maintains rather strong military forces,
but Communist China has 50 times the population.
11. The current President is the first native Taiwanese to hold
that position. The level of democracy has increased, but the
mainland seats in the old legislature are kept filled.
12. We summarize with the following relevant forces.
a. The Chinese Communists who claim Taiwan and don't rule
out conquering it forcibly. They haven't tried since the failure
of their attempt to get Quemoy and Matsu.
b. The Taiwanese independence movement.
c. The Nationalists who claim to be the legitimate government
of all China.
d. A movement for more democracy in Taiwan, not necessarily
related to an independence claim.
Does anyone have a good suggestion as to what should happen?
∂21-Mar-90 1914 JMC
To: MPS@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
sato.re1
∂21-Mar-90 2006 JMC re: wrong reference
To: guha@SUMEX-AIM.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Wed, 21 Mar 1990 19:44:10 PST.]
Thanks. I reread most of the Cyc paper on the airplane, and I will
have quite a few comments. I hope to finish this evening, but I'll
email you and Doug what I've got tomorrow in any case. I still think
it's a very good paper.
∂21-Mar-90 2154 Mailer re: Taiwan imitation of China protest
To: poser@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from poser@csli.stanford.edu sent 22 Mar 90 01:44:46 GMT.]
1. If Taiwan does what you suggest and Communist China seems about to attack
it, what should the U.S. do?
2. While there is a Taiwanese independence movement, I assume you would
agree that Taiwan should declare its independence only if a majority
on Taiwan want to do so.
3. It isn't that the British or anyone else thinks Hong Kong shouldn't
be free. It's just that no-one sees the chance of success as high
enough to be be worth resisting the Chinese communists. Unlike
the Lithuanians, who now consider that there's a good chance that
the Soviet Government won't use force against them, the people of
Hong Kong have no doubt that the Chinese communists would. Are they
mistaken?
Don't forget the principle that it is immoral to resist by force
the forcible expansion of communism.
∂22-Mar-90 0024 JMC re: Puzzle
To: rdz@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu, 22 Mar 90 00:17:25 -0800.]
Not quite. Manhattan distance remains as is. However, the outer
level of the better heuristic which uses the sequence of strings
in final position should simply use the sequence you gave
above. It can refer to a list in that order. Thus after
9 is in placed a position is better than another, the closer
tile 13 is to position 13.
∂22-Mar-90 0911 Mailer re: Taiwan imitation of China protest
To: poser@CSLI.Stanford.EDU, su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
[In reply to message from poser@csli.stanford.edu sent 22 Mar 90 09:09:42 GMT.]
We are now in substantial agreement except for the following two points.
1. The U.S. is not presently committed to the defense of Taiwan and
hasn't been for a very long time - maybe not since the 1960s.
2. I substantially exonerate the British re Hong Kong. Every
move they make to introduce some democracy in Hong Kong has been
vigorously protested by communist China as an interference in the
internal affairs of China. In spite of this, they have taken
some steps. If the defense of Hong Kong were a problem of the
same size as the recapture and defense of the Falklands was, they
would do it.
The one thing they could do that would defend both Hong Kong and
the Falklands would be to allow and encourage migration from Hong
Kong to the Falklands. Five million Chinese would make the
capture of the Falklands by Argentina completely impractical, and
the prospect of getting an empty shell when they take over Hong
Kong might bring the Chinese communists to reason. The Falklands
are much bigger in area than Hong Kong, have plenty of water,
and would be an equally good site for manufacturing, Hong Kong's
main business. The climate's not so nice.
∂22-Mar-90 1705 JMC Titles and abstracts
To: slagle@UMN-CS.CS.UMN.EDU
Here they are. The lectures are independent and can be given
in whatever order seems most suitable to the audiences.
NON-MONOTONIC REASONING
Logical deduction is monotonic in the set of premises. Thus if a
sentence $p$ is deducible from a set $A$ of sentences and $B$ includes
$A$, then $p$ is deducible from $B$. Ordinary human reasoning does
not always have this property, and artificially intelligent systems
also need to supplement deduction by non-monotonic reasoning.
This involves drawing a conclusion from a set of premisses that would
not necessarily be drawn from a larger set. Since the late 1970s
there have been both expert systems that use non-monotonic reasoning
and mathematical theories of it. This lecture treats the circumscription
mode of non-monotonic reasoning and some applications to formalizing
common sense knowledge and reasoning. The basic idea of circumscription
is to assume that certain predicates have minimal extensions compatible
with the premisses. It is therefore a form of Ockham's razor.
\vfill\eject\end
ELEPHANT 2000 - A PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE WITH SPEECH ACTS
\noindent Abstract: Elephant 2000 is a vehicle for some ideas about
programming language features. We expect these features to be
valuable in writing and verifying programs that interact with
people (e.g. transaction processing) or interact with programs belonging
to other organizations (e.g. electronic data interchange)
\hfill\break 1. Communication inputs and outputs are in an I-O
language whose sentences are meaningful speech acts approximately
in the sense of philosophers and linguists. These include
questions, answers, offers, acceptances, declinations, requests,
permissions and promises.
\hfill\break 2. The correctness of programs is partially defined in
terms of proper performance of the speech acts. Answers should
be truthful, and promises should be kept. Sentences of logic expressing
these forms of correctness can be generated automatically
from the form of the program.
\hfill\break 3. Elephant source programs may not need data
structures, because they can refer directly to the past. Thus a
program can say that an airline passenger has a reservation if he
has made one and hasn't cancelled it.
\hfill\break 4. Elephant programs themselves will be represented as
sentences of logic. Their properties follow from this
representation without an intervening theory of programming or
anything like Hoare axioms.
\hfill\break 5. Elephant programs that interact non-trivially with
the outside world can have both {\it illocutionary} and {\it perlocutionary}
specifications, i.e. behavioral specifications relating inputs and outputs,
and specifications concerning what they accomplish in the world.
Some Expert Systems Need Common Sense
An {\it expert system} is a computer program intended to embody the
knowledge and ability of an expert in a certain domain. The ideas behind
them and several examples have been described in other lectures in this
symposium. Their performance in their specialized domains are often
very impressive. Nevertheless, hardly any of them have certain
{\it common sense} knowledge and ability possessed by any non-feeble-minded
human. This lack makes them ``brittle''. By this is meant that they are
difficult to extend beyond the scope originally contemplated by their
designers, and they usually don't recognize their own limitations.
Many important applications will require common sense abilities. The object
of this lecture is to describe common sense
abilities and the problems that require them.
∂22-Mar-90 1801 JMC re: Taiwan and the PRC
To: U.UNDERDOG@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Thu 22 Mar 90 16:19:44-PST.]
1. Fictions are sometimes useful, especially when they
reduce the probability that people will be killed.
2. If the Peking reformists had won, there might have been
a merger with Taiwan on terms that both would approve.
When Deng dies, there still may be.
∂22-Mar-90 2004 JMC Abstract for Spain
To: MPS@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Please make it look nice.
``Some Expert Systems Need Common Sense'',
An {\it expert system} is a computer program intended to embody the
knowledge and ability of an expert in a certain domain. The ideas behind
them and several examples have been described in other lectures in this
symposium. Their performance in their specialized domains are often
very impressive. Nevertheless, hardly any of them have certain
{\it common sense} knowledge and ability possessed by any non-feeble-minded
human. This lack makes them ``brittle''. By this is meant that they are
difficult to extend beyond the scope originally contemplated by their
designers, and they usually don't recognize their own limitations.
Many important applications will require common sense abilities. The object
of this lecture is to describe common sense
abilities and the problems that require them.
∂22-Mar-90 2017 JMC Sunday and workshop
To: leora@IBM.COM
Please give me a call 415 723-4430 or 857-0672.
∂22-Mar-90 2107 JMC defending Taiwan
To: u.underdog@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU
It occurs to me that it isn't obvious that defending Taiwan
would be very expensive. We defended it before simply by
keeping the 7th Fleet around. It would have to be invaded,
and naval superiority, supplemented if necessary by air
superiority sufficed then, and, as far as I can see, would
suffice now.
∂23-Mar-90 0954 JMC re: term paper
To: sreerang@PORTIA.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 23 Mar 90 09:52:00 PDT.]
I'll get back to you after I have read it.
∂23-Mar-90 1012 JMC re: sail and spider
To: PHY
[In reply to message rcvd 23-Mar-90 08:32-PT.]
I also regret losing some of SAIL's features, but I will be glad
to be no longer able to indulge my SPIDER vice. Should it be
re-established, I hope it will be on a computer I don't use.
Actually, the only person who could do that is Don Woods,
who wrote the SPIDER program. He's at Xerox PARC now.
It is written in SAIL, a language that hasn't, as far as
I know, been updated for UNIX computers and uses the SAIL
display packages. Unless he is also addicted, your chances
are small.
∂23-Mar-90 1208 JMC re: visit
To: korf@CS.UCLA.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 23 Mar 90 12:17:57 pst.]
How about 3pm Monday? Tomorrow is also possible or even this evening.
∂23-Mar-90 1212 JMC 15-puzzle
To: RDZ@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
How about a big push this weekend? Richard Korf is
coming tonight and will be here at least through Monday,
and I'd like to show him something.
∂23-Mar-90 1344 JMC re: CSLI Researchers Picture Board / Ventura Hall
To: TRIP@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri 23 Mar 90 13:43:46-PST.]
I will be in my office this afternoon and also Monday afternoon - guaranteed
after 3pm. I come to Cordura but not on a regular schedule. Best would be
to phone now.
∂23-Mar-90 1345 JMC re: CSLI Researchers Picture Board / Ventura Hall
To: TRIP@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri 23 Mar 90 13:43:46-PST.]
That would be 3-4430.
∂23-Mar-90 1532 JMC Monday appointment
To: CLT
930am Nixon School, visit Kindergarten, then mk appt with principal
∂24-Mar-90 2233 JMC
To: MPS@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
You are forgetting to name the letters foo.1, foo.2, etc.
∂24-Mar-90 2235 JMC
To: MPS@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
You are also forgetting to make it jmclet[let,jmc].
∂24-Mar-90 2242 JMC
To: MPS@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
I apologize for the last complaint.
∂25-Mar-90 0956 JMC
To: CLT
I probably won't be here for dinner tonight.
∂25-Mar-90 2333 JMC re: Question
To: rdz@GANG-OF-FOUR.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Sun, 25 Mar 90 23:30:35 -0800.]
I don't have it, but I'm sure it's not confidential, because
help is wanted in persuading the admitted to come. Ask
Sharon Hemenway.
∂25-Mar-90 2334 JMC
To: ME
I got FATAL ERROR #520 from ns. I'll kill it and see what happens.
∂26-Mar-90 0921 JMC reply to message
To: mps@GANG-OF-FOUR.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon, 26 Mar 90 09:17:06 -0800.]
No. The first should start with .1. I have sometimes made the
mistake of forgetting the .1. The reason is that there are some
systematic ways of handling files with .<number> in their names.
∂26-Mar-90 1130 JMC re: IR
To: peters@RUSSELL.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon, 26 Mar 90 11:24:04 PST.]
3pm tomorrow will be fine. Would you like to come here? If that's
inconvenient I can come there.
∂26-Mar-90 1141 JMC comments on Mid-Term draft
To: lenat@MCC.COM, guha@MCC.COM
I have notes on the paper to the end, but I have an appointment
now, so I'll type in the rest later. These only go to p. 27,
and I may have some overall comments. I think it's a good paper.
%cyc[w90,jmc] Comments on Cyc: A Mid-Term Report by Guha and Lenat
Notes for comments:
p1
contrast context and microtheory
What are the disadvantages of identifying an object and the event
of its existence?
a. predicates that apply to one and not the other.
I took actor to mean performer. Didn't learn otherwise till p. 27.
On p. 28 we have agent. What is its relation to performer.
p3
I suggest a one sentence explanation of the phrase ``ontological
category''. Many in AI are vague about what ontology means.
There should be a few more examples of pre-scientific knowledge here.
re: machine learning. From what experience would the machine learn?
p4
omit qualifier `more healthy'. It looks like unsupported
bragging.
I think the formalisms used by philosophers are still too weak for
common sense.
p5
A useful domain to test Cyc's ability to understand are the
short biographies in the Micropedia.
p6
How about some positive remarks about frames? What is it that
frames do well? My present opinion is that much information can
be handled with frames. They just need to be used in a framework
of more powerful expressions.
p7
I'm pleased by the abandonment of numerical certainty factors and
the reasoning given for it.
The phrase "inferential capabilities" is somewhat vague. It should
be explicit that it isn't mere verifying conjectures but includes
finding x and y such that P(x,y).
p8
It might be worthwhile to use ZF and not merely first order logic.
In particular the ability to form the set of entities having a
property is useful.
I don't know that clean and simple semantics and computational
efficiency are fundamentally at odds.
p9
Whether there is a penalty for interacting at EL depends on what the
user says.
p10
Say problem solver and not just theorem prover.
It seems to me that you aren't using "valid arguments" in accordance
with the usage of mathematical logic.
Assuming all abs false might produce many contradictions.
p11
A little detail about how arguments are formed and identified
would be nice. Actually you might get by with a promise here referring to
section 4.8.1.
You might mention Tarski in connection with leaving out
True('p) iff p.
Is the quantifier inside or outside the scope of ist in
ist((not supported (x) implies falls(x)), NTP)?
What about balloons?
p12
In
sigma x KB → KB
it would be more standard mathematically to use a symbol for the set
of sentences, e.g. capital sigma.
Does the KB remember enough so that an immediate unassert would
restore the previous KB?
p13
Can sigma contain free variables?
If so we get an analogy to Prolog that should be discussed.
→ previous five FI function, not six
I didn't understand n/40 vs. 2n at all.
p15
Here we have second order sentences.
p17
4.3.3 It looks like the control info is associated with rules not mere
assertions.
Does the KB or some definite part of it consist of ground literals?
p18
The nature of deny might be mentioned earlier.
p19
Some of the occurrences of "ontology" really refer to Cyc's EL
language.
Section 5.1 should be rewritten to describe first the kinds of things
there are before getting into detailed discussions and motivations.
p20
[11] is a whole book, so the reference should be to a page.
"folds into itself" isn't clear.
The last two paragraphs are rather futuristic.
p21
replace "english" by "linguistics and philosophy".
should be.
"So, rather surprisingly, the two properties are extensionally equivalent"
From the middle of the page it seems argumentative rather than expository.
p22
I'm somewhat skeptical about the dividing up of events, but I have
no specific conundrums yet.
p23
It seems to me that Roger at the restaurant should be regarded as a
rich entity so that we don't want to mention all its components.
Here's a new idea. Regard it not only as a rich entity but one
with indefinitely expandable boundaries. The idea is that the name
of a concept like ``Roger at the restaurant'' is a pointer into
a memory structure. Suppose we regard this structure as not having
explicit atoms or else regard the structure as continuing into the
property lists of the atoms and from the list structures on the
property lists into the whole of memory. It seems to me that human
memory is like that. Moreover, the world is like that. How far
into the structure relevance extends is conditional. We can make
up a scenario in which the price of tea in China is part of the
story of Roger at the restaurant. I want to think further about
how to regard such indefinite entities.
Anyway it seems to me that the example given of the slots of Roger
at the restaurant is rather arbitrary. Some of the slots given
might be omitted and others included depending on what actually
occurred at the restaurant.
p24
``concave'' has no obvous meaning here.
p25
I don't think associating nominal intervals with events will
help much with the frame problem. If something happens they end
early, and that has to be provided for. The usual methods of
handling the frame problem correspond to taking the nominal
interval as infinite.
p26
LogCause seems to be a form of "strict implication" as proposed
by Lewis. Mostly (p strictimp q) can be replaced by N(p → q)
but not always. A remark about the relation of LogCause
to modal logic would be appropriate here.
p27
I agree with the idea of not having primitive actions.
It isn't clear that the solution offered to concurrent actions
is epistemologically adequate, i.e. that it permits using the
information that will actually be available. I don't have
time to elaborate this point now, but I'll return to it.
p28
∂26-Mar-90 1400 JMC re: IR
To: peters@RUSSELL.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Mon, 26 Mar 90 11:49:08 PST.]
Yes, here is mjh 356.
∂26-Mar-90 1412 JMC re: Lithuania -- what *should* USSR do?
To: byrd@PORTIA.STANFORD.EDU, su-etc@SHELBY.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message from byrd@portia.Stanford.EDU sent 26 Mar 90 21:38:46 GMT.]
The USSR should let Lithuania secede. When Ronald Reagan characterized
the USSR as an evil empire, he was accurate. Indeed the accuracy of his
characterization wasn't actually questioned by the people who criticized
it for lack of tact. At present the U.S. should do nothing to inject
ourselves into the issue beyond deprecating the use of force.
1. The Lithuanians want to be an independent nation again as they were
from 1918, when Lenin granted them independence, until 1940 when they were
conquered by Stalin in accordance with his secret agreement with
Hitler dividing up Eastern Europe.
2. South Carolina wasn't conquered in the first place and Lithuania was.
3. The Lithuanians aren't declaring independence in order to preserve
slavery.
∂26-Mar-90 1447 JMC The rest of my comments
To: lenat@MCC.COM, guha@MCC.COM
p28
Is "agent" the same as "performer"?
p29
should be
One of our recent reports [5] ...
I think it's a mistake to define all attitudes in terms of three
primitive ones. Cyc shouldn't have primitive attitudes any more
than it has primitive actions (p.27).
p30 The reasoning mentioned at the top of the page doesn't normally
go through reasoning about a desire to sleep at home. It short-circuits
that, because it's common sense knowledge that people normally
sleep at home, e.g while the desire to do so may be a cause, we
normally don't need to refer to the desire.
Maybe "The formalisms presented" should be weakened to "The formalisms
discussed".
These considerations have LED us (typo that a spelling checker won't catch)
p31
I think we can do better with space than just a collection of
non-interacting specialized microtheories.
I don't think contexts and microtheories are the same.
p32
I'm not convinced that the distinction between Substance and
IndividualObject is unnecessary.
p35
I still dream that dream, i.e. think a substantial part of both
technical and common sense knowledge is use-neutral.
That's all I have noted in my copy of the article. I may have
some general comments later.
∂26-Mar-90 1641 JMC
To: MPS@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Please get me Richard Korf's 1980 paper in Artificial Intelligence.
∂26-Mar-90 1710 JMC re: contexts vs microtheories
To: ai.guha@MCC.COM
[In reply to message sent Mon, 26 Mar 90 18:58 CST.]
That looks fine.
∂26-Mar-90 2036 JMC
To: CLT
856-1622 for Nixon school
∂26-Mar-90 2054 JMC re: contexts vs microtheories
To: ai.guha@MCC.COM
[In reply to message sent Mon, 26 Mar 90 22:52 CST.]
Please send me a new copy of the paper.
∂27-Mar-90 0924 JMC
To: VAL
We need to get together with Leora today or tomorrow.
∂27-Mar-90 0925 JMC reply to message
To: mps@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU
[In reply to message sent Tue, 27 Mar 90 09:22:45 -0800.]
He had only one article in Artificial Intelligence that year, so
that must be it.
∂27-Mar-90 1106 JMC re: Lithuania -- what *should* USSR do?
To: rick@hanauma.UUCP, su-etc@SHELBY.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message from rick@hanauma.UUCP sent 27 Mar 90 16:07:12 GMT.]
When the Russians expanded into Siberian, their country called
itself the Russian Empire, not SSR (Soviet Socialist Republic).
The U.S. did recognize American Indian political entities and
made territorial treaties with them. Unfortunately for the
Indians, these entities never attained the levels of population,
technology and organization required to withstand the expanding
white populations. The Cherokees came closest, first in the Georgia
and then in Oklahoma. They were driven out of the East illegally
after they won their Supreme Court case. In Oklahoma their society
was disrupted by the Civil War, which they fought among themselves
in parallel with the white civil war.
∂27-Mar-90 1109 JMC
To: MPS@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
Please call Virginia Mann.
∂27-Mar-90 1203 JMC interloper
To: ME
Someone is logged in as me, nominally from tv-127 in room 353, but there
is no SAIL terminal in 353.
∂27-Mar-90 1208 JMC
To: ME
OK, I understand.
∂27-Mar-90 1715 JMC Please get me from the library
To: MPS@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
1.2) Ortony, Andrew. THE COGNITIVE STRUCTURE OF EMOTIONS (Cambridge ; Cambridge
University Press, 1988)
LOCATION: Green Library Stacks BF531.O75 1988
∂27-Mar-90 2201 JMC
To: VAL
Tentatively, Leora will come to my office at 10:30. Is this ok?
∂28-Mar-90 0342 JMC
To: CLT
pearl.ns[w90,jmc] is a news story about Hazel's home town.
∂28-Mar-90 1054 JMC
To: ME
We need a 1991 calendar even if SAIL won't be here.
∂28-Mar-90 1230 Mailer Socialism on a small scale
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
I have some comments at the end.
AM-One-Time Ferry, Adv 03,1097
For Release Tuesday AMs, April 3 and Thereafter
Awaiting the Revolution in a Tropical Backwater
By CANDICE HUGHES
Associated Press Writer
PEARL LAGOON, Nicaragua (AP) - Along the grassy streets of Pearl
Lagoon, on the edge of its lonely dock, in hammocks swaying in the
shade, people are waiting for the Revolution, a ferry boat as elusive
as a campaign promise.
It sailed into the lagoon on the Sunday after Nicaragua's election,
spent an hour or so, then sailed away.
A few people rode on the ferry, many just heard of it, but everyone
seems to have an opinion about it.
''Some people think it is progress,'' said Irma de Sosa, a
schoolteacher who has become an authority on the subject by virtue of
being one of those who rode.
''Some feel like the government is just fooling the people, that the
boat won't come back,'' she said, spreading her hands and smiling.
''We'll just have to wait and see.''
The Sandinista government, far away in Managua, had long promised
Pearl Lagoon a ferry for the 30-mile run to Bluefields port, the link
to the rest of the world for Nicaragua's thinly populated Atlantic
coast.
That single visit by the Revolution, a 150-passenger vessel, is the
only evidence residents have seen.
In many ways, the ferry symbolizes the region's long fight for
autonomy, for some control of its own fate.
Places like this town of 1,900 are the essence of the Atlantic
coast, an English-speaking area so isolated from the rest of
Nicaragua that it seems like another country.
Not a shot was fired here when the Sandinistas overthrew the late
President Anastasio Somoza in 1979, and the Atlantic coast was
largely untouched. More than a decade later, there still is no road
between it and the Spanish-speaking Pacific side of Nicaragua.
It was not the first time revolution passed the region by.
When the rest of Central America was fighting for independence from
Spain, the coast was a British protectorate with Miskito Indian
royalty. British buccaneers raided the Spanish fleet with ships built
in Pearl Lagoon.
The Atlantic coast region is home to one-tenth of Nicaragua's 3.3
million people, a rich mixture of Creoles, Latinos and Sumo, Rama,
Garifona and Miskito Indians. It includes half the national territory
of about 50,000 square miles.
Pearl Lagoon has a couple of Toyota trucks, but the green streets
look more like the fairways of a golf course. It doesn't receive
television from Managua, 200 miles to the west.
As with most hamlets dotting the coves, inlets and rivers, water is
Pearl Lagoon's only link to the world.
A regular ferry, a boat of its own, would mean a measure of
independence and an end to the balmy isolation that envelops the
lagoon like a daydream.
The Atlantic coast is the poorest region of one of the hemisphere's
poorest nations, but Pearl Lagoon is a fortune in the raw.
It rests on the banks of one of the richest breeding grounds of the
succulent white shrimp, on the edge of rich lobster beds. It is the
kind of place that feeds the dreams of entrepreneurs.
A businessman remembered simply as The Chinaman, the lagoon's last
success story, dried and exported shrimp. The Sandinistas confiscated
his shrimp plant, fishing boats and rice mill, and drove The Chinaman
into exile.
''The boats went to Bluefields,'' said Leslie Hunsack, a 60-year-old
fisherman. ''It did us no good here in Pearl Lagoon.''
After the Sandinistas nationalized the fishing industry, Pearl
Lagoon was left with a single customer that set its own price: the
government.
Fishermen say months sometimes pass between the visits by boats from
outside to pick up the catch. ''We have our nets out and we catch
this fish and we can't do anything with it,'' said Linton Fox, a
community leader.
At least two young fishermen have died trying to make an extra
dollar a pound on their lobster. They were shot by government agents
while on smuggling runs to the Colombian island of San Andreas, 110
miles southeast of Pearl Lagoon.
''We have always felt like a colony inside a country,'' said labor
leader Alvin Guthrie, a Creole from the coast elected to the new
National Assembly. ''Under the Sandinistas, it was like having
Spanish viceroys around.''
In the northern Atlantic coast region, the Managua government's
attempts to enforce its policies provoked a bloody uprising of
Miskito Indians.
Finally, the Sandinistas admitted they had made mistakes and passed
a regional autonomy law that, at least in theory, was the most
sweeping in Latin America.
Autonomy remains a promise, however, not a reality.
Members of the first autonomous councils, one for the north coast
and one for the south, where Pearl Lagoon and Bluefields are located,
were chosen in the Feb. 25 general elections.
Still to be negotiated is the relationship between the regional and
central governments, at heart a question of control over gold, lumber
and fishing resources.
''We don't know much about autonomy,'' said Fox, a member of the
regional assembly. ''But we'd have the rights to our property. Our
lumber, our fish, our shrimps would go to build up our little town,
not to build up Managua or Bluefields.''
The Sandinistas failed to overcome the suspicions and hostilities of
the coast with the autonomy project. Like the rest of Nicaragua, the
coast voted against them in the February election.
Sandinista leaders predict autonomy would die under the government
of President Violeta Barrios de Chamorro, which takes office April
25.
Her conservative alliance's platform does not mention autonomy and
Sandinista leaders say its goal of privatization is incompatible with
local control of the region's riches.
''The backbone for autonomy is the natural resources, what is in the
sea and what is in the forest,'' said Johnny Hodgson, a Sandinista
leader in Bluefields.
British and American companies that exploited the coast, the Somoza
dictatorship, the Sandinistas - none brought prosperity or gave the
coast a real say in its affairs.
Hunsack, the fisherman, picked up his saw and prepared to cut
another board.
He is tired of waiting for the Revolution, and is building his own
boat.
''This autonomy the Sandinistas had, they were using people as a
tool,'' Hunsack said. ''We expect better. We couldn't get worse.''
End Adv for Tuesday AMs, April 3
Note:
The "Chinaman" is in the U.S., probably in the Bay Area, and is
in the process of being deported back to Nicaragua. He's broke.
Comments:
Here on a small scale is the story of real socialism. The socialists
get power and decide to end exploitation. They take over and, through
arrogance and inexperience, ruin the enterprises they take over. Their
arrogance lets them believe that it is somebody else's fault, and they
shoot people who try to evade their authority. Thanks in large measure
to Ronald Reagan, they've had their chance in Nicaragua, but remember
that in 70 years in the Soviet Union, the socialists didn't learn to
do any better. The article doesn't mention accusations of corruption,
of living high on the hog. That would come later.
This story should not be retransmitted until after April 3.
∂28-Mar-90 1521 JMC Please send
To: kuder@CSLI.STANFORD.EDU
a copy of ASAS to
John McCarthy
Computer Science Department.
∂28-Mar-90 1526 JMC not this I assume
To: VAL
Heading 1) Author: Bonevac, Daniel A, 1955- (1 citation)
1.1) Bonevac, Daniel A. REDUCTION IN THE ABSTRACT SCIENCES (Indianapolis, Ind.
: Hackett, c1982)
LOCATION: Green Library Stacks Q175.B715 1982
-End of citations in this heading; no more headings in result
COMMAND:
∂28-Mar-90 1649 JMC lecture series
To: rabin@HARVARD.HARVARD.EDU
Is that proceeding, and if so how? It's not essential,
but I would want to co-ordinate it with other plans.
∂28-Mar-90 1846 JMC AI and strong AI
To: pjd@RIACS.EDU
Dear Peter,
I found your piece in the March-April American Scientist
quite misleading.
1. The term "strong AI" is an invention of John Searle.
No-one can be fairly called an advocate of a position
invented only to be attacked. Perhaps people in AI
believe something similar to what he says, but remember,
it's his term, and he's the expert on what it means.
2. Searle and the Churchlands do not represent the two
sides. At least I don't think the Churchlands represent
me or the rest of the AI community in any way.
It's just another Scientific American editorial in the
guise of a controversy.
3. If Scientific American wanted a philosopher to speak
for AI they should have chosen Daniel Dennett instead
of the Churchlands.
4. Neither Searle nor Penrose considers the actual research
in AI to be relevant. Both are ignorant of it and include
no references to 40 years of research in their writings.
As to actual arguments, I have written a review
of Penrose for the Bulletin of the American Mathematical
Society to appear in a forthcoming issue. I will also
write a review aimed at a nonscientific audience for
Reason, and I have sent a letter to Scientific American
about Searle's article. It occurs to me that if Scientific
American doesn't decide to publish it I could adapt it
for American Scientist.
Searle accidentally sticks his neck out farther than
he has before in the Scientific American article. He casually
remarks that if the man in the Chinese Room were bored, he
could interpret the characters as the score of a chess game
and an observer could interpret them as stock market
predictions. This is false, and I challenge Searle or anyone
else to take a transcript of a Chinese conversation and
by changing the meanings assigned to the characters come
up with a discourse on a quite different subject. Both
experience with cryptography and the Solomonoff-Chaitin-
Kolmogorov theory of algorithmic complexity explain why
he can't do it.
If you like, I'll send you copies of the Penrose
review and the letter sent to Scientific American.
John
∂29-Mar-90 1630 JMC Summer RA list
To: CLT
∂29-Mar-90 1339 littell@Sunburn.Stanford.EDU Summer RA list
Received: from Sunburn.Stanford.EDU by SAIL.Stanford.EDU with TCP; 29 Mar 90 13:38:50 PST
Received: by Sunburn.Stanford.EDU (5.61+IDA/25-eef) id AA18734; Thu, 29 Mar 90 13:40:05 -0800
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 90 13:40:05 -0800
From: Angelina M. Littell <littell@Sunburn.Stanford.EDU>
Message-Id: <9003292140.AA18734@Sunburn.Stanford.EDU>
To: bigelow@cs.Stanford.EDU, cheriton@cs.Stanford.EDU, dill@cs.Stanford.EDU,
floyd@cs.Stanford.EDU, mrg@cs.Stanford.EDU, goldberg@cs.Stanford.EDU,
golub@cs.Stanford.EDU, guibas@cs.Stanford.EDU, gupta@cs.Stanford.EDU,
herriot@cs.Stanford.EDU, lam@cs.Stanford.EDU, zm@cs.Stanford.EDU,
mccarthy@cs.Stanford.EDU, jcm@cs.Stanford.EDU, nilsson@cs.Stanford.EDU,
oliger@cs.Stanford.EDU, pratt@cs.Stanford.EDU, ullman@cs.Stanford.EDU,
gio@cs.Stanford.EDU, winograd@cs.Stanford.EDU
Cc: littell@Sunburn.Stanford.EDU
Subject: Summer RA list
Please send me a list of students you plan to support during the
summer quarter, along with their source of support and percentage of
time. I need this information as soon as possible. The RA appointment
forms need to be processed in the Graduate Awards Office by April 27th
so that the students receive their bills with the correct tuition applied.
Thank you.
--Angie
∂30-Mar-90 0944 JMC re: AAAI
To: GERRY%epvax.sussex.ac.uk@NSFNET-RELAY.AC.UK
[In reply to message sent Fri, 30 MAR 90 17:50:12 GMT.]
I haven't been in charge of the workshops for several years.
You should contact Peter Hart who is hart@kl.sri.com.
∂30-Mar-90 0946 JMC Will this address work
To: ME
gerrya@uk.ac.sussex.syma
or do I have to reverse part of it?
∂30-Mar-90 0948 JMC re: Pat....
To: chandler@SUNBURN.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri, 30 Mar 1990 8:32:28 PST.]
Mail to McCarthy gets in my junk mail file and is read when I
get around to it. Urgent mail should still be sent to
jmc@sail.
∂30-Mar-90 0949 Mailer Kuomintang in China
To: su-etc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
From: John McCarthy <JMC@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
Maybe the Kuomintang in Taiwan will win out in China after all.
The April 9 New Republic has an article entitled "The muffled
revolt on China's campuses". It describes how the authorities
are forcing the students to make gestures of repentance for
taking part in the Democracy Movement, and are showing old
communist propaganda movies as part of the campaign. However,
when Chiang Kai-Shek, the long deceased Kuomintang leader,
appears on the screen, the students applaud. They also
applaud when Kuomintang police are shown beating a communist.
As it turned out in East Germany, it may turn out in China
that 45 years of communism leaves no ideological residue
but a stink. "Never again socialism" may be a winning
slogan in China, as soon as free elections return.
∂30-Mar-90 1016 JMC AAAI Workshops
To: gerrya@syma.sussex.ac.uk
I haven't been in charge of the workshop program for a few years.
Peter Hart, hart@kl.sri.com, is the person you want.
I think a reply to a previous message of yours was lost in
the network.
∂30-Mar-90 1034 JMC
To: VAL
I'll come by at 1130.
∂30-Mar-90 2136 JMC re: "Never again socialism" may be a winning slogan in China....
To: U.UNDERDOG@MACBETH.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Fri 30 Mar 90 17:07:46-PST.]
Here's why I think you are unduly pessimistic about the peasants.
They have their own dissatisfactions with the communists bureaucracy.
1. They resent the privileges.
2. They resent being bossed.
3. They resent the suppression of their complaints.
4. They resent being forced to echo slogans.
None of these resentments require higher education, or any
education at all, to formulate. Most of these are in fact
resentments about lack of democracy. Note the article I posted
about Pearl Lagoon in Nicaragua. Those people are also peasants,
and were quite able to express their resentment of incompetence,
corruption and oppression when an election became possible.
Items:
1. Deng had difficulty in getting the soldiers to attack the
students, although he eventually succeeded.
2. The Party leaders themselves were undecided about what to
do.
3. If the Party had any confidence in solid support from any
major segment of the population, they would have been able
to get it expressed. Workers and peasants could have been
gotten to overwhelm the students with much larger demonstrations.
Instead the workers began to support the students.
My opinion is that the next attempt to achieve some democracy
will occur when Deng dies. I don't know whether it will succeed,
but beating it will require a leader with his determination
to prevent democracy, and there might not be one. There is
no more reason to believe that the Chinese communist big
shots have ideological self-confidence than there would
have been to expect this of the Soviet or East European
communist bosses.
∂31-Mar-90 1429 JMC reply to message
To: rdz@GANG-OF-FOUR.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Sat, 31 Mar 90 13:32:16 -0800.]
Yes. Name a time after 5:30.
∂31-Mar-90 1722 JMC re: reply to message
To: rdz@GANG-OF-FOUR.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Sat, 31 Mar 90 15:29:00 -0800.]
6:30 it is. I'll come by the office - assuming that's where you'll
be. Since it's Saturday night, a reservation somewhere might be
a good idea. I don't much care where.
∂31-Mar-90 1723 JMC re: gopher
To: underdog@PORTIA.STANFORD.EDU
[In reply to message sent Sat, 31 Mar 90 17:10:41 PDT.]
Let me thing about whether I'll be around enough this quarter
to justify it. I'll be back to you next week.
∂31-Mar-90 1804 JMC Andreas Dorschel adresss
To: searle@COGSCI.BERKELEY.EDU
His paper "What is it to understand a directive speech act?"
gives only a West German private address of 1987. Do you
have a more recent address.
Incidentally, my reaction to the paper, probably not relevant to
the considerations in his mind when he wrote it, is that in
designing computer speech acts we want some of the properties he
ascribes to them and not others. For example, when the
programmer verifies that his program fulfills its promises, he
needn't show that it does the promised act because of the
promise. On the other hand, when a computer makes a purchase,
which we can regard as a declarative, he must show that the
computer will have been authorized to make the purchase.
I guess we can consolidate these to refer only to promises.
The program must show that the program is authorized to make
such promises.