perm filename TMPJMC[1,BGB] blob
sn#085220 filedate 1974-02-03 generic text, type C, neo UTF8
COMMENT ā VALID 00002 PAGES
C REC PAGE DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00002 00002 Dear John, 4 February 1974
C00009 ENDMK
Cā;
Dear John, 4 February 1974
1. First, I think that your idea of an Independent Graduate
School for Computer Science (IGSCS) must have a better name. After
some consideration, I would like to recommend: "California Institute
of Computer Science". The acronym would be CALICS rather than CICS.
The word "institute" is better than the word "school" or phrase
"graduate school" because it connotes research as well as advanced
education. In fact, one of the (Random House) dictionery definitions
of an institute is that it is an organization or society for carrying
on advanced instruction and research in a relatively narrow field of
subject matter. The phrase "computer science" appears in both names
and is properly descriptive. The place name "California" or something
very much like it should be included so that the name of the
institute has more character than just a mere description. All
together, the phrase "California Institute of Computer Science" has
the same smell and weight as the names "California Institute of
Technology", "Massachusetts Institute of Technology" and "Princeton
Institute of Advanced Studies". Although the word "California" is
alittle too commonplace around here, it still has a certain magic for
people east of the Rockies; however alternate first names might be
"Arastradero", "Pacific", "Turing", "Babbage" or "Von Neumann".
2. Second, I think that your basic reason (motivation #1) for
creating an institute of computer science is sound: the demand for
computer technology will expand faster than Stanford. Furthermore, we
(the A.I. Lab) will stagnate (even have been stagnating) if we do not
expand. Also, nobody else including me and JAF and whoever, can
really get excited (and committed) until you make up your mind to
really try to go thru with it. Now I think that the risk to you
personally and to the Lab is not really very great, that you can
stick your neck out and still recover your status quo ante if you
fail; so I would encourage you to assume the appearance of having the
firm conviction that the California Institute of Computer Science is
going to hold its first class 9 A.M. Monday morning, 30 September
1974 and that there will be twenty students there. With this goal in
mind it seems clear what has to be done in the next two months:
(i.) You tell Licklider that you want to start an Institute and that
you assume that the current ARPA contract will NOT be terminated;
(ii.) You get the minimal legal structure of the institute
estabished: a letter head, a lawyer, a secretary, a post office
box, and an interim minmimal board of trustees (or officiers); using
your own money ($ 1K or 2K).
(iii.) We write a draft course catalog and a proposal.
(iv.) You ask Packard, DEC and IBM for $10K each seed money, with
expectations of one million dollars by the end of the year if all
goes well to acquire the building and to make the necessary
improvements: 1 library, 1 print shop and 2 classrooms; you show
them the draft catalog and draft proposal.
(v.) We publish the catalog with nice pictures and high quality
paper; and we send an interviewer to various schools: MIT, Stanford,
Berkeley, Podunk. To see if we can get students for this fall.
If we can not achieve these points, then you will have to retreat
suffering some loss of face, but no substantial loss of material
assets; that is I think we can take all of these steps without
formally breaking relations with Stanford; finally, I think that you
have to do steps i. & ii. by yourself in order to stimulate enough
public adrenaline to get the rest of us to do steps iii. and v.
B.G.B.