Bob Taylor (internet visionary) talks at UT Austin

Uploaded by utaustintexas on 03.03.2011

[ Silence ]
Victoria Rodriguez: Good evening and welcome to the first of several special events to commemorate the Centennial of the Graduate School.
I am Victoria Rodriguez, the Vice Provost and Dean of Graduate Studies,
and I am delighted that all of you have joined us today.
This event is a partnership of the Graduate School
with the Department of Computer Science, and the Dell Distinguished Lecture Series, as well as the LBJ School of Public Affairs
And I want to thank our co-host for helping make this event possible,
J Moore, former Chair of the Department of Computer Science
and Gary Chapman, my colleague at the LBJ School and Director of the 21st Century Project.
I also want to thank each and every one of you for coming this evening...
...especially members of the 1910 Society as well as our distinguished guests
including Steven Leslie, Executive Vice President and Provost, and the many faculty, deans, vice presidents,
and other members of the university's administration.
As graduate dean, I am responsible for overseeing all of the university's graduate programs
and for providing financial support to graduate students across all disciplines.
I also have the honor of recognizing those very exceptional individuals who earn their graduate degrees at UT.
At the University of Texas we say that what starts here changes the world.
And this evening, we have a superb example in our very special guest, Robert W. Taylor.
Mr. Taylor earned his Master's Degree in Psychology in 1964, and from there, he went on to literally change the world.
We are so pleased that Bob is here with us today.
On this special occasion and in recognition of his remarkable achievements, I am deeply honored to bestow upon him this year's Outstanding Graduate Alumnus Award.
This prestigious award was established by the Graduate School to recognize distinguished contributions of its alumni since graduation from the university.
Achievements may be in academic or professional careers, outstanding service in the public or private sector or other significant contributions.
As part of this award, the Graduate School will give two 5,000-dollar fellowships in Mr. Taylor's name,
one to a graduate student in psychology
and another to a graduate student in computer science.
Please join me in congratulating Mr. Taylor as I present him the Graduate School Outstanding Alumnus Award.
[ Applause ]
Before we begin the program, I would like to tell you a little more about the Graduate School Centennial Celebration and the 1910 Society.
The Graduate School has a long history of excellence at the university and we are rapidly approaching our 100th birthday.
Graduate work was included from the very beginning of the founding of the university in 1883,
although, the Graduate School was not officially established until 1910.
Today, the total number of graduate students in our university is nearly 12,000 and we confer about 3,000 master's degrees and 800 doctoral degrees annually.
You might be interested to know that UT and UC Berkeley are the two largest producers of PhDs in the United States.
But our Graduate School is not only one of the biggest in the country; we are also one of the very best.
Over 40 of our graduate programs are ranked in the top 10 nationally and another 53 are ranked in the top 25.
Graduate education plays a vital role in the success of the university and graduate students are integral to our core educational and research mission.
They work alongside the finest faculty, they inspire undergraduate students in the classroom,
and they design research projects and develop new ideas that will, in time, also go on to change the world.
The Graduate School has also become central to the goal that President Powers established for The University of Texas to become the top public institution in the country.
As you have undoubtedly heard the president say, this cannot happen without stellar graduate programs, and this means we must have not only the best faculty,
but also the best students in the nation and in the world.
The most promising graduate students are attracted by our top notched faculty as well as other things the university has to offer, of course.
We have great libraries, wonderful art collections,
state-of-the-art laboratories and computing facilities,
and even a pretty good football team.
We also make every effort to attract and support as many graduate students as we can by awarding them fellowships.
The Graduate School distributes about 10 and a half million dollars in fellowships each year.
And while this may sound like a comfortable sum of money, it is only a fraction of what is needed and pails in comparison to other highly-ranked universities in the country.
We need to do better and we will.
In fact, we have a plan.
When President Powers kicked off the university's capital campaign,
the Graduate School set a goal to raise 100 million dollars for graduate student support.
100 million for 100 years of graduate excellence is a fitting tribute to our centennial.
To help us reach that goal and to recognize a superb achievements of our graduate alumni such as Mr. Taylor, we created the 1910 Society.
Our quest is to energize alumni and friends to join the 1910 Society by making a pledge to give 1,910 dollars or any multiple thereof.
All of it exclusively, exclusively for graduate student support.
Many members of the 1910 Society are here with us this evening wearing their lovely 1910 lapel pins,
and I want to take this opportunity to thank them for their generosity.
Please join me in recognizing the members of the 1910 Society.
[ Applause ]
Now, on with the program.
It is my great pleasure to introduce my colleague, Gary Chapman.
Gary is a senior lecturer at the LBJ School where he teaches classes on Internet Technology and Information Policy.
He leads the 21st Century Project which is a program of research and education on civic engagement and science and technology policy.
He is Associate Director of the university's Telecommunications and Information Policy Institute,
and he serves as an adviser to the State of Texas and the City of Austin.
Gary has been a columnist for the Los Angeles Time, The Austin American Statesman,
and Texas Monthly magazine - writing about technology and society.
He has been awarded the Texas Excellence in Teaching Award and the City of Austin's Distinguished Service Award.
And in the year 2000, Texas Monthly named our very own, Gary Chapman, one of the 25 Most Powerful Texans in High Tech.
[ Applause ]
Gary Chapman: Thank you very much. It's a great pleasure to see this event happen after a long time planning and hoping that this would happen.
And it's wonderful to see so many friends here.Thank you so much for showing up including my friends here on the stage.
We're marking the 40th anniversary of the internet and the beginning, as Victoria said, of this observance of the Centennial of the Graduate School, and hosting Bob Taylor.
He is probably the best where I can think of to celebrate both these anniversaries at the same time.
I wany to thank very briefly all the people who have been involved in putting this event together including
Cathy White, Kathleen Mabley, John Dalton, Maria Ramirez-Romo de Vivar, Susan Binford, Kerri Battles, and Nancy Hatchett.
And particularly thanks to my friends and colleagues, Professor J Strother Moore and Dean Victoria Rodriguez.
I also want to thank Mitch Waldrop and Mike Hiltzik for coming out here to Austin to join us,
and my old friend, John Markoff, from the New York Times.
And of course, we wouldn't be here if Bob hadn't said yes, which was by no means a sure thing.
So I want to thank him for coming all the way out here from California to share his time and his life story with us.
I arrived in Silicon Valley in the late 1970s to attend graduate school at Stanford University
and Bob Taylor was already a legend in Silicon Valley when I got there.
He had co-written this famous paper with J.C.R. Licklider with the straightforward and historic title
called the Computer as a Communications Device,which I think all of us now recognize as one of the most significant and signature intellectual breakthroughs of the 20th century.
Bob had launched the ARPAnet when he was at the Pentagon
and he created and led the computer science lab at the famous Xerox PARC where most of the elements of the PC revolution were born.
One of the things that started the PARC was a national public interest organization of computer scientists,
Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility,
which we're pretty sure is the first public interest organization to have been built on the internet.
CPSR hired me as its first national executive director in 1984 to run a small and somewhat dingy national headquarters office on High Street in downtown Palo Alto.
As an organization, we needed internet access because that was our principal means of communicating with people and it wasn't easy to get back in those days.
And we didn't have very much money to spend and computers were really expensive then.
So, Bob lent us a Xerox Alto which looks like this.
Now, the Alto was never available to buy so the opportunity to use one of these every day when I went into the office, even in the mid 1980s, was a pretty rare experience.
It had a Word Processor on it called Bravo that would eventually turn into Microsoft Word
and it had an email program on it which was something new that most people had not yet discovered.
The Alto heated up my office when I turned it on but it fascinated me nevertheless.
It felt like I was seeing the origins and the creation of a new world.
Now Bob left Xerox about that same time but he started Digital Equipment Corporations Systems Research Center in a building that was just around the corner from my office.
And since many of CPSR's leaders went with him to DECSRC, I wound up hanging around DECSRC a lot listening to the
talks that were being given and pretty much just standing around in awe of the people who were there, most of whom were the smartest people on the planet.
And Bob was perhaps most famous for that, finding the most brilliant people and organizing them into world changing teams.
Out of DEC's Palo Alto labs came the first search engine, AltaVista, on top of which Yahoo was built.
So chronicling this really remarkable story were our three journalist guests this evening whose career has covered all of this period of time.
And they'll begin by reviewing some of Taylor's career highlights,
especially our two authors here who have each written books about different stages of Bob's career.
So, Dr. Mitchell Waldrop is the Editorial Editor of Nature Magazine which is one of the oldest scientific publications in the world. It started publishing in 1869.
Dr. Waldrop has a PhD in Elementary Particle Physics from the University of Wisconsin at Madison
and a master's degree in journalism from the same university.
From 1980 to 1991, he was senior writer at Science Magazine where he covered physics, space astronomy,
computer science, artificial intelligence, molecular biology, psychology and neuroscience, believe it or not.
He is the author of three books.
One called Manmade Minds about artificial intelligence.
A book called Complexity which is a book about the Santa Fe Institute and complexity theory.
And perhaps the most relevant book for this evening called the Dream Machine, a history of the early days of interactive computing.
Michael Hiltzik is the author of the book called Dealers of Lightning: Xerox PARC and the Dawn of the Computer Age
...which chronicled the invention of such pioneering technologies as the personal computer, the laser printer, Ethernet
and graphical displays at Xerox PARC, much of this under the personal direction of Bob Taylor.
Mike and I were once fellow writers at the Los Angeles Times
where he still has a column on business issues
and for his work in covering business technology and public policy he was awarded the Pulitzer Prize.
His fourth book, a history of the building of Hoover Dam is entitled Colossus, which is coming out next year
and he is at work on his fifth book, a history of the New Deal.
So first, I want to turn it over to Mitch Waldrop.
Mitch Waldrop: Thank you.
[ Applause ]
Thank you very much and thank you all for coming.
Well, this as was mentioned is this year is the 40th anniversary of the ARPAnet, almost exactly 40 years ago this month.
But when I started thinking about this, I decided to cast my memories back a little bit further than that...
to the fall of 1966, and that's when I was starting my sophomore year at the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill.
As many sophomores, I was still floundering around trying to figure out what my major was going to be,
but I did need some elective courses so I decided on computer programming which was then taught in the mathematics department.
This was before many places had a computer science department.
Computer science almost didn't exist in those days.
So, I found the math building, found the room the class was being taught in and as was my want, I grabbed a seat right next to the prettiest girl in the class.
And one thing led to another and by and by she and I were going on study dates.
In the case of programming class, a study date consisted of going down to the basement of the math building where
there was a room full of tables and around the side of the room were these IBM punch-card machines,
and these are big gray machines, had all these blank punch-cards you could load in a typewriter
and having written out your program in paper that was marked off on a grid, one letter per grid square.
This was in PL1 which was then the cutting edge programming language of the day.
You would then take that and go over the machine and punch it out, one program statement per card and hope you didn't make a mistake 'cause you couldn't erase.
Okay. Once you were finally done with all this, you would take the deck of cards, hopefully not dropping it.
If you're smart you'd put it in a box.
You would then go down the hall to a window where there was a clerk who would take your deck of cards...
...and you could just in the background see the school's IBM 360 mainframe, back there.
And they would feed this thing, it lined it up and feed it through.
It was called batch processing. It does batches of these things at a time.
And hours or more likely days later, you would get results as fanfold printout
and it would invariably say error in line 46, which means you had to correct the card and do it all over again.
Now, this was incredibly tedious as you might imagine
but you know we accepted it because for me and for almost everybody else in the world including my girlfriend who was soon to become my fiancee, that's what computers were.
They were big. They were expensive. They were mysterious.
They were off somewhere else in a back room you could not get near it unless you had a special tour.
They did take us back once to look at it, not touch, just look.
And the computer got the air conditioning when we didn't.
And let me emphasize this. This was not just, you know, the kind of hardware we had.
This is not just how computers operate.
This is what computers were in some deep conceptual sense in our heads.
Now, what I didn't know in that fall of 1966 was that there were a fair number of people, not a huge number.
There were a fair number who were struggling to come to terms and understand a different concept of what a computer was, what a computer could be.
This was a radical minority view.
It had emerged in the MIT area, in the Cambridge area in the 1950s and for reasons I don't have time to go into here why it was MIT though that's a fascinating story in itself.
Suffice to say there were a lot of really smart people at MIT.
And it had become the official policy of the Information Processing Techniques Office in ARPA,
the vast research projects agency which operated in the bowels of Robert McNamara's Pentagon.
This was of course the Vietnam era, the start of the Vietnam era.
And that's another fascinating story of how that happened, but again, moving on.
The notion, this vision was that computers could interact with you,
that you could give it a command by keyboard or some other means and it would respond to you right then and there.
This was an incredibly radical idea.
And more than that, it wasn't simply that it would respond to you,
but because it could respond to you in real time, you could begin to start using it in fundamentally different ways.
Instead of just as a fancy calculator, a much faster version of the desktop calculators, mechanicalcalculators you had even then,
a computer could be a device to enhance human creativity.
It would do this by getting rid of all the mental drudgery of plotting data points or sorting lists of things or, whatever,
all these mundane mindless stuff - doing your arithmetic.
And it would leave the human being free to do what humans do best,
which is recognize patterns, you know, think of the next thing to do, imagine stuff. It would just offload all the drudgery.
The computer could also democratize access to information.
It would do this in two ways, one, by putting whole libraries of knowledge at your fingertips.
It would have access, you know, to all this knowledge. And just by with a few keywords, you could call it up and it would be right there.
And more than that-- and just as important, it would have a screen
and it would be able to display this information in humanly meaningful form,
not just as lists of numbers,
not just as fanfold printout but as, you know, graphics, as pictures, as text that would be meaningful to you, and with all these different thoughts.
I mean, all sorts of things that you could do.
You could even imagine having an image of something that would rotate in 3 dimensions.
And finally, this new concept of a computer was that it's something that can able whole new kinds of communication and collaboration.
People could communicate through the computer.
They could trade files back and forth.
They could meet each other, you know, through the computer and, you know, work together from a distance.
Okay. Now, again this all sounds so matter of fact
and of course that it's hard to remember now unless you're as old as I am, just how radical it is.
At the time, in those days, IBM and the other mainstream computer manufacturers -- CDC all those guys,
IBM in particular, which was the leader, was investing,
making a venture company investment in batch processing as the System/360.
That was the machine my school had.
And, you know, that was going to be its standard thing and that was the future for business
AT&T which handled communication, had a monopoly in communication,
was so totally oriented around voice it was hard for their engineers even to imagine sending data over those lines.
I mean they could do it but, you know, it's just a trick and it . . .
-- the whole architecture of the system --
was oriented towards putting through voice calls period.
But ARPA persevered as only a huge government boondoggle can; [laughter] and it kept pushing this vision.
Now, this was 1960s. This was before microchips, Intel was just getting started in the mid '60s,
actually hadn't even started at that point.
So, nobody was talking about personal computers.
That would have sounded like science fiction,
but they were certainly thinking in terms of personal computing, slightly different concept.
And they were-- the idea was to do it through something called time sharing where you would have some big massive computer sitting off somewhere in an air conditioned room.
just like it would look much like the standard batch processors except that people would be able to tap into it from remote terminals,
over telephone lines or whatever,
and send their signals back and forth and be able to interact with it that way.
It's not totally unlike how you interact with Facebook or Google right now though it's somewhat more primitive.
But the idea of timesharing-- in fact, there was this whole concept coming out of MIT again of something called a computer utility.
And the idea there very much in analogy to electrical utilities is, you know, computers are fantastic and one day every city would have one.
And people would tap in and they would buy computer power as needed and, you know, it would be great.
Today they call that cloud computing, but you know it was sort of-- they were thinking of it as one huge machine.
It was basic idea.
And ARPA implemented a fantastic experiment in this called Project MAC at MIT, which was a very pioneering thing to do large-scale timesharing.
ARPA also-- that office in ARPA also funded a research into graphics, displaying things and graphing them meaningful ways.
Even early on-- a little bit later than what I'm talking about, they were funding virtual reality,
artificial intelligence and, of course, early experiments in networking.
Now, this is the point in which I remind you that one of the most enthusiastic proponents of this vision was a fellow named Bob Taylor.
Now if I remember correctly, Bob, you first encountered this idea-- well actually in 1960 when you read Licklider's first article.
But you met in 1962 when you're at NASA as a program officer,
you had met a fellow named J.C.R. Licklider who was an MIT psychologist, a psychologist like Bob,
and Licklider had been asked through another series of historical flukes
to create this information processing techniques office at ARPA to study command and controls, what ARPA was interested in.
And it was in 1962 that he founded this office and started introducing himself
and forming a group of like-minded people in Washington -- and that's how Bob met him.
Licklider-- Lick, as he was known to his friends, had brought that MIT vision to ARPA and made it ARPA's official policy.
He was by far the strongest proponent of that vision and convinced lots of other people.
And while he was at ARPA, actually it was in 1963, he wrote a very famous memo to his PI's he was funding,
the personal investigators he was funding entitled To the members and affiliates of the intergalactic computer network,
the intergalactic network in which he laid out a vision for a network that would connect all the ARPA centers.
I think it's significant that if you look at in context by network,
he meant the people and not the wires, but the memo was mainly about the wires.
And the technology wasn't ready for it then, but the idea was around and certainly it resonated strongly in Bob Taylor.
He and Lick talked a lot about what you could do with such a network,
and it led to the famous paper which was already been mentioned, 1968, the computer's communication device.
We've seen-- not that. That's the world's ugliest book cover.
But we've seen illustrations from that paper, the introduction.
In 1966, Bob had come to ARPA by that point and then became one of Lick's successors as head of the information processing techniques office.
And there, about the time I started to romance that young lady in my programming class,
he went to the head of ARPA, Charlie Hertzfeld, and said, I need some money to get this network going. We really need to connect up all these centers.
The time has come.
And indeed it has -- Charlie, was it 20 minutes, a million dollars?
Yeah. Got a million dollars in 20 minutes, which was pretty good.
Charlie Hertzfeld is another guy who's worth knowing, by the way, but. . .
So the ARPAnet, that whole project got underway and, yeah, a long fascinating story about how that got architected the way it did.
But, it finally got going in the fall of 1969, which as it happens was a few months after that young lady and I got married.
Now that experiment as it happens was a temporary success.
But the ARPAnet was certainly not temporary. As we all know, it is still going today.
Once the bits started flowing, they haven't stopped since. It is now the internet.
What are the lessons we can take away from all this as well?
Government boondoggles are sometimes can do or can end up doing great things.
That-- well, the technology is a challenge but, you know, the hard part about what ARPA did in those days wasn't the technology per se.
That was a challenge.
It was coming up with pushing an entirely different conception,
an entirely different mental framework for thinking about what computers could be.
A computer wasn't one thing that everybody had assumed it was. It could be a very different thing.
Now I don't know exactly how we apply that to what's happened today.
I would just simply observe and end here by saying that right now, we have a thing, this
this online digital space, the clouds, the web, whatever you wanna call it,
this online information commons that we're struggling to understand.
It started out as one kind of thing, sort of like this global bulletin board you could post information on.
It's becoming something very different.
Jargon like Web 2.0 got augmented, reality coming on and there's some cloud computing.
Last week, there was a conference at Government 2.0, see ifwe can reform the government in radical ways -- who knows.
But the challenge is to come up with a different way of thinking about what this thing is.
So I'll end there. Thank you.
[ Applause ]
Michael Hiltzik: Well thanks, Mitch, for that great historical review of ARPA and its role in interactive computing.
And I'd like to also express my thanks to Gary Chapman and J Moore and the university and Dean Rodriguez for putting this event together
and to Bob Taylor for bringing us together, because obviously this could not have been done without him.
It's been probably 10 years since the last time I saw Bob.
And that occasion, if I remember correctly, I came up to Bob's house in Woodside in Silicon Valley
For one of the two or three very long interviews and very fascinating interviews we had for my book about PARC.
And over dinner that night, I remember he told me one of the most important secrets to how to manage a team of brilliant independent-minded engineers,
each one the smartest guy in the room.
And I'm gonna get to that in a couple of minutes,
we're just gonna leave that hanging out there
But I'll get back to it, I promise.
But in general, since Mitch has brought us to the ARPA years of Bob Taylor, I'm gonna take us very quickly through the PARC years,
and then Bob with John's help obviously will take us the rest of the way. But I'm gonna start with the first time I heard Bob's name,
It was when I was in the feasibility study stage of my book on PARC,
when I was calling around to people who had worked there in the '70s
to find out first of all if there was enough of a story for me to tell in a book,
and second of all, if there was a story -- as there was it turned out. Would they cooperate with me and help me tell it.
So I talked to Bob Metcalfe who invented Ethernet at PARC
and Butler Lampson and Chuck Thacker who were the architects of that Alto personal computer,
that pioneering machine that Gary showed you, and a number of other people.
And as you might expect, the name they uttered most often was Bob Taylor's.
It was clear that Taylor was their inspirer, their bulwark, their wall against the outside world.
The guy who would help them do their work despite what Xerox management might have wanted them to do. [ laughter ]
And the most succinct description of his role came from Chuck Thacker who told me, if you're looking for the magic of PARC, it was him.
As a leader of engineers and scientists, he had no equal.
So that was a pretty good testimony and one of the next calls I made was to Bob who was more than happy to help.
But what I want to tell you about was how at PARC Bob moved from the funder and conceptualizer of the network
to being the conceptualizer and the manager,
the manager of a distinct team that ended up building the first personal computer, the Alto, among so many other things.
And it's worth taking this moment to consider Bob as a research manager because he was an unusual type.
He wasn't the kind of manager who exercises his authority and control and influence
by knowing technically as much or more about his subject than the people who worked for him.
Let's call that the J Robert Oppenheimer-Bill Gates model of research management.
'Cause I don't think Bob ever claimed to really know that much about electrical engineering or double E as it's known,
certainly not on the scale of Chuck Thacker or Butler Lampson who are legends in the field.
But he had an incredible instinct for knowing what technology should be able to do
and how it should be formulated to reach that goal
and how far it could be pushed at whatever stage it was at at a given moment and maybe a few clicks into the future.
Butler and Lampson used to tell a great story, I'm sure he still tells it,
about what occurred when he and Thacker were building the first PARC computer,
which was known as MAXC, M-A-X-C, and was a clone of a digital PDP-10.
And now at PARC they had to clone this machine because the PDP was built by Digital Equipment Corporation,
which was a competitor of Xerox and Xerox-- there's no way Xerox was gonna give them the money to put a digital computer inside a Xerox facility.
So what they had to do, they had to build it themselves and they cloned it,
they emulated the system, and that was the first PARC computer. But while they were building it,
Bob kept telling them that they ought to be considering an alternative architecture,
without actually explaining in technical terms just what alternative he had in mind.
He had this habit of speaking in parables when he couldn't articulate his ideas in the precise language of engineering.
And the way Lampson put it to me was he said, "When we were building MAXC, Taylor told Chuck and me a bunch of stuff we couldn't understand at all at the time
and we dismissed it as the ravings of a technically illiterate manager."
But looking back on it, 2 years later, it was crystal clear what he was trying to tell us to do.
He was telling us, build the Alto.
So, that's the way Lampson put it.
The way Bob put it to me, and this is a clue to one of the things that made him such a great research manager,
was that the was talking functionally,
in the same way he got ARPAnet going by talking about how he wanted a network.
He had 3 computers in his office, he had one that would talk to Berkeley, one that would talk to MIT,
one that would talk to somebody -- but they couldn't talk to one another and he said, I don't want to have 3 terminals in my office --
I want one that will talk to all 3.
He got his engineer started on the Alto, particularly the visual display of the Alto,
by talking about the way he wanted to communicate with the machine.
He would say, which organ, in which organ of the human body has the greatest bandwidth in terms of its access to the human brain.
Well obviously the answer is - it's the eyeball.
So if you then contemplate how the computer could best communicate with its human operator,
the answer is through the display,
-- a high quality visual display. And what Bob told me was the designers I was working with said, The display - that's crazy.
The display is peripheral.
And I said, this is Bob talking: I said, No, the display is the entire point.
And of course, he was absolutely right about that and we have the results of that functional discussion before us all day long, he says.
So another point about Bob as a research manager and what that tells us about how he saw his role and the times.
And that's the importance of a free flow of ideas in an open marketplace
without allowing any idea to gain the status of orthodoxy just because its proponents might be pulling rank.
Bob's instrument for doing this was a weekly event called Dealer at PARC
where all the members of the lab would gather in a room,
and sitting on this collection they had of hideous bean bag chairs.
I think they were mustard colored
was the way they were described to me and they would toss their ideas around one to the other
and subject them to open challenge.
Now each Dealer meeting, and there was one a week and it was I think the only mandatory event at--in Bob's lab every week.
One person was designated that week's czar or Dealer
and it was up to him to set the subject and to a certain extent the rules of debate.
But the general idea was you had to place your idea in a marketplace
and subject it to an uncompromising give and take by all your fellows.
Now, occasionally one speaker at Dealer would complain that, you know he was being pounded onunfairly by the higher ranking members of the lab,
people like Butler Lampson or Chuck Thacker.
But Bob's fundamental idea was the important thing and that was that as manager, he was not going to set the lab's agenda.
The lab was going to set its own agenda via Dealer.
So that's --that is the way to make sure that talented researchers get an opportunity to follow their own interest and to follow their noses.
and it's something very important that Bob implemented at PARC
and that probably people who've work in research labs would say, We don't see that enough.
Now one other thing about Bob's management technique and this is what he described to me that night at the restaurant in Woodside.
So we're back to that now.
And it keeps coming back to me ever since he told it to me -- it has come back -- it comes back again and again for this remarkable wisdom.
It has to do with what he called class 1 and class 2 disagreements.
Now, if I remember correctly the subject at hand was the relationship between Bob Metcalfe, again the inventor of Ethernet and Chuck Thacker who-- his role was already discussed.
Bob and Chuck -- It's Bob Metcalfe and Chuck Thacker -- never got along from the first moment they met.
And that's because -- I mean there were lot of reasons and if you've met both them you would know personality had something to do with it
but as Bob put it, the two of them were locked in what he called a class 1 disagreement.
And what that meant is, what as he described it to me,
that's when two people disagree and neither can explain to the other's satisfaction the other's point of view.
Alright, we're not talking about I can't explain to your satisfaction my point of view
but I can't explain to your satisfaction your point of view.
And I'm gonna quote him here.
A class 2 disagreement, as he explained, is when both can explain to the other's satisfaction the other's point of view.
And as he put it, class 2 disagreements enable people to work together even when they disagree.
But class 1 disagreements are destructive.
Most international crises and most of the pain and suffering and difficulty in the world is based on class 1 disagreements.
Thacker and Metcalfe could never reach a class 2 disagreement and they've been enemies all their lives.
And you know, when you think of it, class 1 disagreements in fact,
the Middle East, the healthcare debate and lots of other seemingly intractable disputes that we might have in our offices
or even our families and Bob saw his role as moving class 1 disagreements to class 2.
And I think one reason PARC ended up with such a record of accomplishment is that he managed to do that not always
and I know there are plenty people in the world who have enduring class 1 disagreements with Bob Taylor [ laughter ]
but very, very often and that's really a key.
So I'm gonna close here by quickly placing PARC in the context of the research environment of its era
and to try to address some conclusions about research today.
As a corporate research center PARC wasn't unique but it was unusual.
It was a well funded facility deliberately placed far from corporate headquarters
so that it wouldn't feel constrained to work on incremental improvements to Xerox's product line
new formations of copiers and things like that.
It was research -- not development.
But Xerox didn't really expect it to work on technologies that Xerox couldn't exploit,
it was modeled after Bell Labs but it wasn't really pointed at basic science the way Bell Labs was. It wasn't going to be researching the big bang for example.
Xerox did hope to productize much of what PARC created.
George Pake, who was its first director, told me he had asked Xerox to hold him to a liberal standard of success but not an infinite one.
He told Xerox' recruiters you'll gonna get nothing of business value in 5 years,
but if you don't have something of value in 10 years then you're gonna know you hired the wrong guy.
Now, I argued in my book that what prevented Xerox from exploiting so much of what developed at PARC wasn't that it didn't intend to
but that the new technologies required such a dramatic change in marketing and selling and pricing
that no organization Xerox's size, and they had 200,000 salesmen at the time all selling copiers.
No organization on that scale could have absorbed this new technology without tearing itself apart.
The Alto and its offspring were addressing a market that didn't even exist, remember?
So to exploit it, you had to be a small organization built specifically to exploit it,
an organization like Apple which did exploit it.
So, what are the lessons here?
Bob Metcalfe told me that he thought that corporate America had taken the wrong negative lesson from PARC
which is that when you invest in basic research you're gonna get a lot of stuff you can't use and that that's an expense.
Of course, everyone forgets that one of the things that PARC created was the laser printer which made billions for the company.
But in any event, one of the -- this is one of the reasons that we see fewer big companies expending as lavishly on independent research centers.
That reason and also that public companies today have become much more focused on short term financial results in PARC because of pressure from Wall Street.
And most in-house corporate research efforts are tied much more closely to a company's core business than PARC was or Bell Labs
and that includes Microsoft research and Google Labs which are working on a lot of basic things
but all with a focus on something that Microsoft or Google will be able to put into the marketplace at some point.
So we're gonna see a lot more speculative research being conducted in an entrepreneurial setting.
Helped somewhat by the venture capital sector which a relatively new development.
And of course, whether the venture industry can support this the way AT&T and Xerox did in the past,
...well this is still an open question and we're not really gonna have the answer to that for many years.
But I don't think they're doing too badly yet - especially when you consider that a lot of venture funding today is coming from big corporations that are investing through in-house venture funds
that enabled them to support R&D both privately and through academia
without making that old style commitment to a big R&D infrastructure.
Now, this new way of doing things raises a whole lot of questions
about things like intellectual property rights and the relationship between corporate America and the university.
But obviously, we don't have the time to go into that now - or at least I don't - but I'm gonna leave you with that as this is the future of research
and keep in mind how different today is from the way the world was when Xerox created PARC
and now I'm gonna turn the podium over to--?
Oh, I'm sorry, to Gary.
Gary Chapman: Thank you so much.
Michael Hiltzik: Thank you.
[ Applause ]
Gary Chapman: So it's now my pleasure to introduce Professor J Strother Moore who will introduce John Markoff and Bob Taylor.
Professor Moore holds the Admiral B. R. Inman Chair in the department of computer science which is named after my current boss who's sitting right here in the front row,
and after getting a BS from MIT in 1970 and a PhD from University of Edinboro.
In 1973, J was hired by Bob Taylor at Xerox PARC where he worked on office information systems
including Bravo, the word processing program that I mentioned earlier and on mechanized reasoning.
He's the co-author of a theorem prover used today by industry to verify hardware and software.
He's been serving as the chairman of the computer science department since 2001 until just about a week ago or 10 days ago, 17 days ago.
And he's a member of the national academy for his contributions to mechanize readings-- reasoning, Professor Moore.
[ Applause ]
J Strother Moore: So it's my pleasure to introduce both John and Bob -- a few words about John.
He joined the New York Times as a reporter over 20 years ago and he now writes in the science section for the Times.
He writes for the Times from San Francisco which is a-- just a demonstration of the wonderful properties of the net.
He's also an adjunct faculty member in the Stanford Journalism Department.
He's the co-author of a number of books - several of them on cyber crime and hackers and a really fascinating book called What the Dormouse Said: How the Sixties Counterculture Shaped the Personal Computer Industry.
My own personal story about John is a debt that we, the academic computer science community and universities in general
owe him for his exposure of a lie being told by DARPA back about 4 years ago -
when DARPA was maintaining that their support for university research was the same as it had always been.
John eventually obtained data that showed that DARPA was funneling a great deal of its research money into classified industrial projects
and university research had suffered greatly as a result
and the Times published that article and Tony Tether was forced to go back to Congress and reveal their real numbers.
And so, in addition to universities owing John something, I think that just the simple-- those of us who enjoyed truth [laughter] owe John something.
[ Laughter ]
[ Applause ]
Last year he shared the breaking news award of the society of American business editors and writers
and in 2007 he was named Fellow of the Society of Professional Journalist swhich is the highest honor of that organization.
As for Bob, so much has been said, I won't say too much more.
Let me just-- Mitch described what computing was like in the 60s
and let me just say that to suggest that there was a use for personal computers back in the 60s was akin to suggesting that there was a use for personal cyclotrons.
The issue of where you were gonna put it your house was less pressing than the issue of what you would do with it once it gotten there.
And Taylor understood that there was actually an incredible market, an incredible demand
and there could be a demand and need for personal computing if the proper infrastructure was provided and Bob set about to make that happen.
Some of the things you don't-- you haven't heard about Bob, I might mention having known him for good long time now,
is he loves BMWs and drives one with a license plate UDM which stands for Ultimate Driving Machine [laughter].
He's a real fan of sake.
He plays the guitar and does a great Hank Williams.
And if you ever put together a touch football team, Bob is your quarterback.
[Laughter] He's got this absolutely uncanny ability to know who everybody is on the field
and to get the ball to the open person without ever appearing to look.
And that's a metaphor for the way he managed PARC and I suspect, although I wasn't part of it, the way he manage DECSRC both on and off the touch football field.
So, in any case, I concur with everything that's been said about the remarkable talent of Bob Taylor and I'm delighted that he accepted our invitation.
Bob and John.
[ Applause ]
John Markoff: So, now we're gonna hear from Bob.
...but I just wanted to take a couple of seconds to review because as you've all seen,
this is significant but I don't think you fully get how breathtaking what happened and what Bob did is.
When I was a young reporter they told me that if you really want to understand something, what you do is you follow the money.
And so, let me just review here.
Bob as a young NASA program manager funded Douglas Engelbart, a researcher at SI International who had some big ideas but didn't have any money and Doug invented the mouse.
Then when Bob went to ARPA, he continued to fund Doug and Doug invented something called the online system.
The online system was one of those first, sort of prototypical personal computing systems.
Much of the ideas for the things that you use, all the things you use in the modern internet and the personal computer were contained first in that research.
And then as it's been described, Bob funded ARPAnet.
And ARPAnet was the seed of the internet.
But he didn't stop.
When Doug had completed his work in the late 1960s,
it was Bob's idea to show it to the world
and there was an event in San Francisco that is now referred to as the mother of all demos
where this technology was unveiled to basically the 1000 best computer scientists who were living in that world that Mitch talked about of punch card computing.
At one time, they saw the mouse, they saw hypertext, they saw networking, they saw it all.
It was Bob's idea to fund the demo and he picked up the tab.
At PARC, he took Lampson and Thacker and he funded their work on the Alto.
And then when he left PARC and he went to DECSRC, he funded the first search engine.
Now, one of the things I've found in 30 years of writing about technology is the visionaries are mostly wrong.
They're wrong more than half the time.
Bob has a record of consistent-- consistency which is breathtaking.
So, where did it come from?
Let's start at the beginning.
You didn't just go to UT and as an undergraduate and graduate, you grew up in Texas.
Tell us about growing up in Texas.
Bob Taylor: Okay. First, I want to thank everyone who's been involved in arranging all of this. . .
Dean Rodriguez, Gary Chapman, J Moore.
I want to congratulate the graduate school on 100th anniversary and thank them for their role in this.
Thank the Dell Corporation.
Encourage the Dell Corporation to help continue paying for the new computer science building [laughter].
[ Applause ]
It's nice to be here. Yes, I wanna tell you some things about Texas.
I was born in Dallas and adopted 28 days later in San Antonio.
I don't know how I got there but that's the way that happened by a Methodist minister and his wife who adopted me.
I then lived in Uvalde, Victoria, Ozona, San Antonio, Mercedes, Kingsville, Dallas, and Austin.
Or any of those -- Oh, you've heard of all those towns?
I'll bet there are some of you who haven't heard of some of those towns.
I know they -- those towns all exist.
Like Austin, they may be a lot bigger than they were when I lived there.
My father taught in a Methodist college in San Antonio from 1936 until World War II and we lived in San Antonio from 1936 to 1946.
In World War II, he became an army chaplain.
And in many summers, both before and during World War II, I spent time in Austin with my favorite aunt and uncle.
My uncle was a foreman for the Austin Electric Company that builds power lines
and fixes power lines when they go down in storms and sets up transformers, that sort of thing.
He helped build some of Austin's famous moonlight towers.
Do they still call it moonlight towers or...Yeah.
And so, when I would be visiting them and there wouldbe a storm,
some power lines would go down at night and my aunt would-- would drive my uncle out to where this damage was
and his gang of lineman that he was foreman of and himself would set about in the midst of the storm trying to get these wires back up and get power restored.
So I got to see a lot of Austin from time to time in the midst of a storm with people doing dangerous work on poles fixing power lines.
That's a view of Austin that very few people have seen.
I also learned how to swim at West Enfield, Deep Eddy and Barton Springs.
I wonder if West Enfield still exists. Does it? Yeah.
My mother and her family were all living in Austin as they grew up.
My mother and her brothers and sisters were graduates of Austin High School and later went to The University of Texas.
My father and mother met at The University of Texas and were married here.
So, I have some Austin roots that are as good as most of yours, I think.
[ Laughter ]
John Markoff: You studied psychoacoustics and I don't think I've really - until Mike just sort of described your insistence on the display fully understood the significance about that.
But there's a direct link, isn't there?
Uou weren't really a psychologist, you were a physicist in psychologist's clothing, perhaps?
Bob Taylor: Well, the psychology that we worked on was more like applied physics than it was what most people think of when they think of psychology.
I met just at the beginning of this session the fellow, Professor McFadden who heads the lab that I worked in when I was here.
We studied-- I did a thesis in sound localization trying to figure out the accuracy with which a human being can localize a sound that's out in space.
If you shut your eyes and someone snaps their fingers over here,
with what degree of accuracy can you point to that source?
That was what my thesis was about.
So, studying-- so we studied the auditory nervous system fundamentally and in experimental psychology in those days you also studied the visual system . . .
and you learn some things about the nervous, the human nervous system and physiological psychology.
So that played a role in your observation or some of the observation about thinking of the eye as a focal point for a pipeline from the computer to the brain.
John Markoff: That was pretty radical for that point in time, wasn't it?
Bob Taylor: Yeah.
John Markoff: There was not a lot -- there was a little bit of graphics work but there was not a lot going on in terms of visual computing.
So no wonder they didn't understand what you were talking about.
Bob Taylor: But you also-- we also invented a bit-- something called a bitmap display which made this much more attractive
in that every little pixel on the display was represented by a place in main memory.
So memory was more expensive than it is now. [laughter]
And so the Alto cost too much money to be commercially available mainly because of the memory.
But if you understood Moore's law as we did then, we knew that an Alto memory that might cost 7,000 dollars in 1974 would cost 30 dollars 10 years later.
Moore's law and integrated circuit technology in general is very predictable.
Every year or two prices are cut or performances increase just predictably.
Because it's so predictable this is why I find hardware less interesting than software.
Of course, hardware is required for a computer to work but I promise you it's software that makes it hum.
It's software that is the glue necessary to put systems together.
How many of you have programmed? Oh, wow!
[ Laughter ]
Bob Taylor: That's impressive. How many of you have punched cards?
[ Laughter ]
Bob Taylor: Oh my god!
[ Laughter ]
Bob Taylor: made this much more attractive Okay. So you understand what Mitch was telling you.
Audience: Yeah! [ Laughter ]
Bob Taylor: Well, the first time I had to -- I wanted to use a computer was to process the data for my thesis,
my graduate thesis that I just mentioned to you.
So I went over to the UT computer center which is of course in those days a batch processor
and this guy in a white coat behind the glass wall introduced me to the key punch machine and went through,
explained to me all the rigmarole that Mitch accurately and completely described to you a while ago.
It's just like Mitch said, exactly. [laughter] And I was appalled.
I mean, and after I thought about it for a while I was angry.
And back in my lab I had a Monroe calculator about like that that sat on a table
and I just went back to my lab and programmed up my data with this Monroe calculator.
I'm not gonna touch that key punch machine and go through that ridiculous card business, just unbelievable. [laughter]
But I didn't know what to do about it, you know. I was offended but I didn't know what to do.
I thought it was insulting. I mean, because I knew that the computer could manipulate symbols.
You know, it used high voltages and low voltages to represent 1's and 0's
and that 1's and 0's could be combined to represent letters
and letters could be combined to represent text, alright,
and text could be combined to represent knowledge.
Why can't computers do that? It's just so obvious, I think.
I do. So, but I didn't know what to do about it.
Two years or so later I read this article that Mitch also mentioned, written by J.C.R. Licklider known as Lick to his friends who later became my mentor, one of them.
And the title of this article was Man-Computer Symbiosis and he proposed a symbiotic relationship between computers and humans
and I read this article and it was a eureka experience for me.
That's what-- that's-- yes, that's what we do about computers.
So from then on my, the course of my life was pretty well set.
And not a year or two later I have found myself working as a program manager for NASA headquarters and this proposal came across my desk that John mentioned from Doug Englebart
and he wanted to work with computers like this so I funded him right away.
And then Lick came to set up this program in ARPA that Mitch told you about,
-- the research program -- and eventually convinced me to go join ARPA.
But it seems that from the time we had, Lick had started these time-sharing projects that I told you about, that Mitch told you about.
And that was the birth of interactive computing. Well that was part of the birth of interactive computing.
A fellow named Wes Clark who is an unsung hero, a huge hero,
had invented what I think of as the first personal computer.
Back in '61 or '62, it was called the LINC.
Now it was designed only-- primarily for medical laboratory use.
So it wasn't what you would call today a general purpose computer but it was personal and it was relatively small.
It has a small display and you could interact with its program
and it helped the medical researcher in monitoring and running medical experiments.
It seems to me that after the invention of the LINC, it's the name of that computer, and the invention of time-sharing,
we now had examples of interactive computing.
And after that, it seems to me everything just logically falls into place.
If you have interactive computing and you have to rely on a large single mainframe computer that is connected to a lot of terminals then you have a network of terminals.
Well, why not have a network of computers, so the ARPAnet was built, an obvious idea.
Once you, as I say, once you have interactive computing.
But if you're still-- if the technology moves on, the hardware technology,
and you're still restricted to single large mainframes with lots of terminals,
why not have a personal computer?
Again, obvious idea.
And so we built the Alto at Xerox PARC.
And so now you have a network of computers, Altos connected into a network.
We had the first internet, lower case i, at Xerox PARC about 1975, 1976 where we had invented the Ethernet.
We connected it to the ARPAnet and now you have an internet.
Lower case I internet is a connection of two or more interactive computer networks.
So we have the ARPAnet and the Ethernet -- that makes an internet.
Now we also had name servers, email systems, other features associated with this total Alto system -- that gave us the first internet.
We didn't have at that time search engines. We didn't have the World Wide Web.
There were several things we have today that we didn't have then,
but we had enough other facilities so that we could take the 5,000 or so users of the Altos that had been built and scattered around Xerox
and we gave some to Stanford, to MIT and to Carnegie Mellon and we had some in Carter's Whitehouse and in Congress,
laser printers, and Ethernets and Altos.
So that we had a small by today's standards internet user community but we didn't have the internet with a capital I.
Xerox lawyers would not let much of this technology into the public domain.
We, for example, we invented some modern programming languages,
very modern, very advanced programming languages and Xerox lawyers wouldn't let us tell people about them.
How are you gonna get people to use a programming language if you can't tell them about the programming language?
There are a lot of stories about this period of time that brings up the age-old question of why are there so many more horses' asses than there are horses?
[ Laughter ]
[ Applause ]
John Markoff: I'm still-- before you go on on horses' asses, I want to sort of get into that--
your formative, the things that helped form your thinking.
Where you out of school and in industry by the time of Sputnik?
Or was Sputnik influential on your career in anyway? I mean it created DARPA.
Bob Taylor: I was -- Sputnik happened in '57. I was here in '57.
John Markoff: Did it have an immediate impact in any way?
Bob Taylor: On me?
John Markoff: Yeah, indirectly or--
Bob Taylor: Well I was dumbfounded that the Russians could do something like that
and that the nation was dumbfounded and that's what motivated Eisenhower to tell the defense department to create ARPA.
ARPA was created to fund far out risky research so that we wouldn't get surprised again by anybody.
And so the first programs in ARPA were all space programs because Sputnik was a space program.
But then a few years later, two or three, NASA was created so all the space programs in ARPA were moved to NASA
and that left ARPA free to start new research programs and that's when they started computer research programming.
John Markoff: So it got brought up, but tell us about the moment that you came to sit down in your office and you were confronted by the three terminals.
Bob Taylor: Ah well. ARPA was -- I was in ARPA and we were supporting research efforts at universities
and a few research centers other than universities in interactive computing and we had terminals --
I had terminals in my offices, two, three of these systems that we were supporting
so that we could sit down and use these systems and sort of keep up with what's going on
and sometimes we would learn of some new program that someone had written at one of these places and . . .
and they would tell us how to log on to their system and we could use that program or examine that program.
So there were these three terminals there, each to three different systems. These systems were all geographically separate.
Two were in California, one was in Massachusetts -- and ones in California were 400 miles apart. Northern and Southern California.
So, again, an obvious idea. It's silly to have to move from one of these chairs to the other one.
John Markoff: Was the idea of the intergalactic network firmly embedded in your--
I mean was that a concept that you brought with you to ARPA? Was it on your to-do list when you came?
Bob Taylor: Oh yes.
When I went to ARPA I thought well, now what is it?
I'm only gonna be here a short time because no one should stay in a job like that for more than 4 or 5 years, I thought.
So, what is it that I wanted -- really want to make happen? And that was it.
You know, I wanted to interconnect these. I don't want geography to be in the way of people who have mutual interests.
So we used the ARPAnet which was not an internet, do you understand? It was a single network.
We used the ARPAnet to make it possible for researchers at one place to communicate in various ways through programs or data or email with other researchers in other places.
So you had a community of people who shared interests. They were all doing computer research. So it was natural.
John Markoff: So, one of the things that struck me the first time I visited PARC was it was not only different because of the kind of computing it was working out --
--it was different architecturally--particularly CSL--and I got a little bit of insight that you're something of a frustrated architect - or you were.
Bob Taylor: Yeah.
John Markoff: So they mentioned bean bag chairs but that was part of a much broader vision of the way people--
Bob Taylor: I think Michael said they were all mustard color. That's not true.
[ Laughter ]
Bob Taylor: And they were not ugly. I think he said they were ugly.
They were multi -- they were all different colors. I mean any one bean bag chair was a single color but they're-- all the different chairs were different colors.
I want to get that very important point.
[ Laughter ]
John Markoff: But it wasn't just bean bag chairs. That's what everybody has taken away. But it was a broader vision about people should collaborate.
Bob Taylor: Well, maybe you're talking about the way I conned the management of PARC to let us redesign the floor plan for our own spaces, yes.
Well, so when we started PARC we were in a rented building and plans were laid to build a much bigger permanent facility
and when and a few years later, those plans were ready and they-- the architects showed us the plans.
There were three or four different laboratories at PARC.
My lab was less than one third of PARC in terms of numbers, excuse me, numbers of people.
So they showed us these plans and they -- the building was built in to a hillside overlooking Silicon Valley.
By the way, Silicon Valley is misnamed. You see it should be called Software Valley but that's an aside.
And this building was built into a hillside.
What happened?
[Noise] Hello? Can you hear me?
Audience: Yes!
Bob Taylor: And the weather in that part of the world is very nice most of the year but the--
and the architects had made use of lots of glass but they had no atria
so you had this long building but the middle of it was dark in terms of getting sunlight.
And so we asked the architects to go back and redesign the building and put some atria in it which they did.
Then they came back and the hallway is like the previous -- the original design.
The building was long and it had two major hallways running down it.
This new design had the atria between the hallways.
But off of two major hallways was office, office, office, office, office, office . . . office, office, office, office, office, very boring.
it's not interesting at all and didn't really take advantage of some things that are important with regard to having people more accessible to one another
because if you wanted to talk someone at the other end of the building
or even at the other end of your lab,
you had to walk this long linear distance.
So, I thought well, we can redesign this and have, as he-- as John said I'm a frustrated architect.
We can have offices that are sort of around a central area.
Here and here and here and here and so the areas of the offices are also around another central area. You got the picture?
But the PARC management wouldn't allow this because we'd already sent the architects back for a redo the first time around.
Well, our lab had a contract, an open contract with an outfit across the bay called M&M Designs.
This was not an architecture outfit. This was an outfit that designed printed circuit boards.
And so I got -- I got my private -- my private architect who had done some work for me in my house.
And I told him what I wanted in the way of a new design for our lab.
And he took the drawings from the original -- the standard architect and he did them according to what I wanted, redid them.
And we sent a check to M&M Designs who sent the check to the-- my architect.
Audience: [Laughter]
Bob Taylor: It's called money laundering.
Audience: [Laughter]
Bob Taylor: Well, but now we have to convince. So now we have a completed design, alright, and it didn't cost Xerox management anything, they thought.
Audience: [Laughter]
Bob Taylor: And how do we convince them?
We take it to them and they say, well, but how much does this cost compared to what the original design was
and we show that it's cheaper than the original design to build.
And furthermore, it has two more offices in it than the original design.
Oh! They couldn't think of any reason to object.
This is sort of like the invitation I got from Gary and J. Moore.
When they first asked me to come here I said, I don't travel anymore, I don't want to do that.
I love Austin, but I'd rather stay home. And because when I leave my immediate neighborhood, my quality of life goes down.
Audience: [Laughter]
Bob Taylor: But then, Gary ticked off this -- the whole list of things. Well, we'll do this, and this, and this, and this, and he listed so many things, it was like--
it's was like our building plans for our lab.
I couldn't think of anything to object.
Audience: [Laughter]
Bob Taylor: So I finally said, No, I would just be hard to get along with, you know.
John Markoff: So you took about a half of decade or 6 years and you gave this Fortune 500 Company a product that basically changed the world and they weren't able to.
Bob Taylor: Well, they weren't willing to.
John Markoff: Well, I wanted to ask you why. What was the--
Bob Taylor: Why weren't they willing to?
John Markoff: Yeah, why weren't they willing to? What was the--
Bob Taylor: Well, that's complicated. Well, first of all, they were a copier company; they were not a computer company.
Copier's - Selenium is an important element in building copiers.
Silicon, as you know, is an important element in building computers.
Now we used to say about Xerox the selenium tail wags the silicon dog.
When I first visited the copier research center in Webster, New York, shortly after joining Xerox, the director of the center came to meet me in the lobby and he said,
the first thing he said to me is, You know, the computer will never be as important to society as the copier.
Audience: [ Laughter ]
John Markoff: End of discussion.
Bob Taylor: Well, they said there were certain cultural problems I guess....
Then when in the late '70s after we had our systems up and running at PARC for several years,
Xerox held a meeting in Boca Raton, Florida that they called future's day.
Well, it was a three-day meeting. The last day was called future's day.
And the chairman or the president of Xerox had 250 of the top Xerox managers come to this 3-day meeting to talk about planning for Xerox and so on.
And on the third day, he had asked us to put on a demonstration on stage of all of our stuff for this audience of 250 managers and their wives.
So we did that and it went very well.
And in the afternoon, we took down all this stuff from the stage and moved it into a big, a large room, and set up different demonstration booths, sort of,
areas across-- around this big room to allow the people to come and sit down
and use the Alto and use email and print on the laser printer and so on --
-- use all the properties that we had been using ourselves in our daily work for several years.
And a strange thing happened.
The men stood around the outside of all of these demonstration areas and didn't go--wouldn't go--sit down at an Alto and use it.
And the women all came, every one of them, and sat down at all of these different places and were thrilled and enchanted.
Men don't type.
Audience: [Laughter]
Bob Taylor: That was their ethic, you know. I don't type, my secretary types.
And the women, a lot of them, had been secretaries and they loved it. So--
John Markoff: They knew there was trouble.
Bob Taylor: So when you put these things together, right, you know there was trouble.
John Markoff: Yeah.
Bob Taylor: You know.
John Markoff: So 1978 in return for permitting Xerox to invest in Apple, Xerox let Steve Jobs visit your lab.
Bob Taylor: Right. I wasn't-- I was out of town at the time, otherwise I -
Audience: [laughter]
John Markoff: Well, it reduced--
Bob Taylor: Otherwise, I hate to think of what would have happened.
Audience: [ Laughter ]
John Markoff: It reduced one of your researchers to tears. She had to be forced to let the Apple guys visit.
Bob Taylor: That's right. Yeah. Well, there's one of them-- she didn't work in my lab but she was a computer researcher, yeah.
There's a story when I was mentioning software a while ago that I wanna be sure to tell you. It's a NASA story.
It may not be true but it's a good story. It could be true.
NASA for all of its launch -- in each of its launch vehicles, they were worried a lot about the weight of the vehicle naturally.
And so they had a set of guys who would come around to the various projects and weigh various components that were going to be in the spacecraft.
And so they came around once to one of these projects and they said, We're here to weigh your computer. Okay, here's the computer -- they weighed it.
And the weighers said, Okay, that's good, now we're here to weigh the software.
Audience: [Laughter]
Bob Taylor: And they were told that the software doesn't weigh anything.
Aah - they wouldn't believe it, but eventually they went away.
They came back and a few days later and they were very angry.
They said, You told us the software didn't weigh anything, but we found closet full of shoeboxes full of cards with holes punched in them, and that weighs a lot.
And we said, Well, the software is in the holes.
Audience: [ Laughter ]
[ Applause ]
John Markoff: So, I want to ask 2 more questions. If people-- if people have a couple of questions at the end,
if you want to line up at the microphones, but let me-- let me ask a couple more questions.
Bob Taylor: Did you understand if you want to ask questions, go to the mikes?
John Markoff: Yeah.
Bob Taylor: Okay.
John Markoff: So when you started PARC, at PARC when you set up your laboratory, you didn't start with Alto, you started with the system called POLOS.
Bob Taylor: No, no.
John Markoff: No?
Bob Taylor: No the other-- there was--
John Markoff: Oh, there's another lab.
Bob Taylor: There's another lab at PARC that was involved with computing related stuff. . .
. . .and it started with POLOS and we started with the Alto, well, sorry, we started with MACs, as Michael told you, but then we quickly moved to build the Alto.
John Markoff: That idea of POLOS was still a distributed computing idea.
Bob Taylor: Yes.
John Markoff: Were there hints of cloud computing at work that early on? Is that an analogy?
Bob Taylor: The first use of the term that I know of cloud computing was used in a set of slides
in a presentation given by Mike Schroeder of my lab in about 1978 or something like that.
But cloud computing is just a buzz word today, probably was then too.
It just means putting certain stuff that you want to use - not just on your own computer but locating it elsewhere on the net
in somebody else's computer or some computer that you rent time on or something like that.
It is not a very, I mean it's a distributed computing idea, but it's not as exciting as it once was, I mean it's sort of old hat.
John Markoff: It's plumbing.
Bob Taylor: But people are using it a lot now as though it were something new. It's just part of the advertising that goes on.
If you look at -- I remember laughing about IBM or AT&T advertisements back in the mid-'90s
when the internet was just becoming visible to people.
I mean we've been using it since 1970s but it didn't-- people by and large weren't -- didn't start using it till mid-'90s -- something like that.
And the advertisements, the Xerox advertisements, the AT&T and IBM advertisements of that time were advertisements that would have you believe that they invented it.
You know, well, when IBM-- when I invited IBM to join the ARPAnet, they declined.
This was in '60s -- last half of the 60s.
The ARPAnet was gonna come up in '69 and we wanted them to be a node so they can experience this development of this technology
because I wanted to get the technology out into the world
. . . and the way you do that is to get the commercial computer companies to push it and so that people can buy it.
IBM said, We're not interested. Our computers can already talk to each other.
Well, their computers were not interactive, so what the hell does that mean?
Okay. They missed -- they missed it completely.
AT&T, I made the same invitation to them and they said packet switching won't work.
Packetswitching is the switching technology that the ARPAnet uses --
-- used -- and that the internet uses today. And that we used in our internet at PARC. Packet switching works.
Audience: [ Laughter ]
John Markoff: So if you want to really know, I commend you to go take a look at Bob and Licklider's paper, The Computer as a Communications Device
particularly the last two pages which sketches out the future, and it really is - it's so striking.
You got it-- this was when-- '60--
Bob Taylor: We wrote it in '67, it's published in '68.
John Markoff: So it's all there, but there's one thing that you predicted that still isn't here and that was this notion of an intelligent agent.
You know, we've had this vision.
I mean there have been people banging on this vision for 30 years, and I still am not using one on a day-to-day basis.
Bob Taylor: Nor you won't either. It's not gonna come anytime soon
John Markoff: What's the deal? Why is it such a hard problem?
Bob Taylor: Hmm. Because to make computers behave like people, it's not likely to happen anytime soon.
I mean it's -- I knew more about the human nervous -- -- the people that I recruited knew a lot more about computing than I did,
but I knew more about the human nervous system than most of them.
And they didn't have sufficient regard for the complexity and ability of the human nervous system.
So some of them thought they could really build a computer program that could out perform a human being.
Well, if the task is well bounded, like a game of chess or checkers or something like that, then,
yes, sure, I mean not right away, but eventually a computer program did beat a chess master in that game.
But if you want a computer to play ping pong with a ping pong champion, or you want a computer to write a bestselling novel, fat chance, not anytime soon.
So, this was all part of that genre.
John Markoff: Now did you fund John McCarthy's lab on the other side of the Stanford campus in addition to Englebart's lab or--
Bob Taylor: Yes.
John Markoff: You did. You funded both--
Bob Taylor: Actually, Lick had started funding him before McCarthy's lab, yeah.
John Markoff: Because John McCarthy represented this position in computer science that we could create a human brain, we could replace the human brain.
Bob Taylor: That's right. And I funded the Artificial Intelligence Research, but I didn't fund it because I believed that they could emulate the human nervous system.
I funded it because they worked on problems that challenged systems research,
the ability to build new kinds of systems to do different new things.
They -- one of their challenges was to build a hand -- what they called a hand-eye system.
Build a computer-generated eye and a computer-generated hand that such as the eye would look at a scene on a tabletop with blocks on it
and the hand could move and pick up a block and stack the blocks in a certain way.
That's the hand-eye problem or one of versions of the hand-eye problem.
Well, that forced the investigation of how to make different subsystems
like those that control the hand work with other subsystems like those that control the eye.
That's an important problem.
So I funded Artificial Intelligence when I was in ARPA because they were on the lunatic fringe of looking at what was possible
not because I thought they could create a nervous system.
John Markoff: Yeah. Any idea where the lunatic fringe is today?
Bob Taylor: They're still lunatics, but I don't-- [laughter]. No, I'm retired. I don't -- I've lost track of them.
John Markoff: Fair enough. Well, thank you. Let's give Bob a warm applause.
[ Applause ]
John Markoff: Do we actually -- we may have some questions.
Bob Taylor: I want to thank Victoria for this. [he holds up his Outstanding Alumnus award] It's very nice. I never expected one of these.
Audience: [Laughter]
Bob Taylor: I'm a life member of UT's Alumni Association, so I read the Alcalde every time it comes and I always see people in the Alcalde who get this.
Audience: [ Laughter ]
John Markoff: Let's take on the right-hand side first.
Clive Dawson: Sure.I'm Clive Dawson. I work at AMD here in Austin, and I have a comment and a question.
Back in the '70s, I was working for The University of Texas Computation Center and we were the proud recipients of one of those Xerox Altos.
Bob Taylor: Were you?
Clive Dawson: We were. We had one right here and we were using it to prepare some -- the word processor to do large documentation systems.
Bob Taylor: Wow.
Clive Dawson: The gal that was basically operating it, I think this Alto must have come to us with the shortage of that very, very expensive memory
because she measured response time on that system by the number of lines of knitting she could do on her afghan.
Audience: [Laughter]
Bob Taylor: Yes some Altos did have less memory than others.
Clive Dawson: The question I had was dealing with your comment about how hardware was less interesting to you than software.
And I was wondering if you could comment on the notion that the Moore's Law reduction in price and increase in power of hardware has been the single most important factor
in the decrease of the skill and ingenuity of the software developers who did fascinating work in squeezing, you know,
incredible amount of productivity out of a one nips machine like a PDP-10 who could support, that could support 100 users.
And that we're not gonna see that stuff ever again until we hit the hardware wall.
Bob Taylor: Well, I understand your question, but the answer is
-- that as the hardware increases in capability, and decreases in cost, the thing that changes is not the ability of software people but their ambition increases.
So as they get more ambitious, they try to build larger and more complicated programs and you have what you describe.
Now if you could keep -- if you could keep their ambitions down at the level that the hardware that they had 5 years ago,
forced them to stay at, then you're right, we would have improvements.
But how can you control somebody's ambition when-- if the hardware allows more stuff then by God, I'm gonna give it more stuff, right?
John Markoff: Over on this side.
Huan Kim: Hello, my name is Huan Kim. I'm a PhD student in Computer Science here.
Bob Taylor: Well, done. Good choice.
Audience: [ Laughter ]
Huan Kim: Thank you. First of all it seems like all your ideas have been so obvious to you and I just find that fascinating.
And now we're hearing about this thing called the future, the internet of things.
And I don't know if you -- if you've ever thought that we were going be going to that or what is your opinion on --
Bob Taylor: I have no idea what that is.
Huan Kim: Well, it's actually from -- I mean --
John Markoff: Yeah. PARC came up with this notion of ubiquitous computing.
Bob Taylor: Yes.
John Markoff: That's the general--
Bob Taylor: I know about that.
John Markoff: Yeah, that's what he is . . .
Bob Taylor: We had ubiquitous computing before PARC started publizing it.
Huan Kim: If I'm wrong, you tell me, it come up on 1989--
Bob Taylor: But I'm retired so you're asking me a question about what's gonna happen in the future?
Huan Kim: Well, I mean, I mean -- what I've been hearing is that your ideas -- oh, this is so obvious, and well, it means obvious for you and not obvious for everybody else.
I'm just wondering whether you have all these everything on the internet and everything be connected.
What is -- I mean what is your opinion--
Bob Taylor: What's the next -- you wanna know what the next obvious thing is?
Audience: [ Laughter ]
Bob Taylor: Is that what you're asking?
Huan Kim: I'm just wondering what your opinion can be--
Bob Taylor: About what?
Huan Kim: Your opinion on the next things.
John Markoff: Your thoughts on the next level, I guess.
Bob Taylor: Okay, well. There are a lot of problems that call out for solutions.
But. . . including the fact that we're up against bandwidth limitations these days,
our nation has fallen way behind other nations in terms of how much bandwidth is available to people.
It's worth noting that our telecommunications industry has promised us for years and years and years
that if we will just let them increase these rates over here and let these mergers occur over here,
that they will make investments that will give us increased bandwidth, et cetera, et cetera.
It didn't -- hasn't happened. You know they have not kept their word.
So we have lots of -- lots of problems. But because I've been retired for 13 years, I no longer know the solutions to these problems.
I mean, you know, I don't keep up. I don't even know how to twitter.
Audience: [ Laughter ]
John Markoff: You're lucky. Let's jump to the back and then to you.
John Woods: Hey, my name is John Woods. I'm a PhD student in molecular biology. First of all, thank you so much for coming in.
Bob Taylor: Did you say microbiology?
John Woods: Molecular.
Bob Taylor: Molecular biology.
Well, biology and computing are going to come closer and closer together.
John Woods: Yeah, I was a computer science major in undergrad. So...
Bob Taylor: Ah, well good. Good combination.
John Woods: So, I'm sure you get this all the time, but I'm really curious to hear what was your reaction when you heard that Al Gore had said that he had in fact invented internet.
Audience: [ Laughter ]
Bob Taylor: Well, I'm glad you asked that question because I'm gonna tell you, Al Gore never said that.
John Markoff: Yeah, that's right.
Bob Taylor: A New York Times, pardon me.
Audience: [ Laughter ]
[ Applause ]
Bob Taylor: A New York Times reporter claimed that he said that - in print - and it was an out and out lie. He never said anything like that.
He was a supporter, an early supporter in Congress of computing technology,
and he deserves credit for that, but he never said he invented the internet.
John Markoff: I have to -- I have to stand up for Al Gore here.
Audience: [ Laughter ]
John Markoff: And for the New York Times. Al Gore was instrumental in calling for the creation of a national data highway, in which the Times reported in the 1980s,
and I think it was sort of bollock stuff. But you're right, he never...
Bob Taylor: Right, that's quite . . .
John Markoff: . . . says that he invented the internet. Let's jump--
Unidentified woman: Hi, Mr. Taylor. Thank you very much for coming here tonight.
Bob Taylor: Thank you.
Unidentified woman: And I know you're retired and everything and my question was--
Bob Taylor: Wait a minute, wait a minute. Slow down your speech. I can't understand what you're saying.
Unidentified woman Oh, I'm sorry. I know you're retired and everything, and my question is a little--
Bob Taylor: I'm not dead, but I --
Unidentified woman: No, no, no --
Audience: [ Laughter ]
Unidentified woman: But it is like a little on the future side of the internet.
My question is what your thought -- what your thoughts are on the possibility of internet being free one day for everyone just like we get radio signals for free and TV for free.
Bob Taylor: Good, good question.
I want very much and always have from the time I first imagined such a thing to be free to everyone, everyone around the world.
Many things that we use are free, even things that are built by us.
Highways, except for toll roads, are free.
I mean we pay for them in taxes, but fine, we should be able to pay for internet access through taxes too, as far as that goes.
So, I want them very much to be free. I mean . . .
From the beginning, I thought of the internet not as something that had specific applications that would do X, Y, and Z, but rather would be a medium that people could take in whatever direction they wanted to.
In whatever direction they're interests said that they might take the internet.
And that's what's happened.
That there's no central organization, no central single authority has taken the internet in such a direction as to say,
Well, you can do this, but you're forbidden to do that even though you could do so on the internet.
So freedom of use is critical.
Now, there's a counter problem, and that is that on the internet, an irresponsible individual can do a great deal of damage.
Now our highway system is as good an analogy as I can come up with even though it's not perfect.
If there's an irresponsible driver on the highway system, you take their driver's license away.
So if I could think of a way to make people -- to give people licenses to use the internet,
such as if they were irresponsible, they could no longer use the internet,
I would be advocating that. But I haven't been able to think of that solution.
So there is this tug between wanting it to be free and easily accessible to everyone,
and yet wanting to figure out some way of making people who use it do it -- do so responsibly.
A malicious internet user can do a lot more damage than an irresponsible driver of a car. Enormous amount of damage.
They can bring down hospitals which are on life support systems... -- you don't wanna hear it, it's terrible.
But people are working on these problems today and they will for until they're solved.
The internet is here now, you know, I'm not worried about it going away.
John Markoff: Let's jump to the back right corner.
Bob Taylor: Thanks.
Unidentified man: My question relates to the culture you spoke of where you mentioned that--
Bob Taylor: Where is it? Back there?
John Markoff: Yeah.
Unidentified man: Can you hear me okay?
Bob Taylor: Yeah.
John Markoff: Yeah.
Unidentified man: The culture you mentioned at PARC and how there's all this innovation but the company let the tail wag the dog and didn't capitalize on some of these fundamental things.
And if you -- if you have a premise that there's lots of growth and advancement coming out of innovation like that, and then probability of exploitation based on the culture.
My question is if you extract -- if you apply the culture at Xerox for that principle to society at large,
do you have a comment on kind of our probability of exploiting such innovations.
You know, and in terms of where our culture stands today versus at different times over your career.
Bob Taylor: I don't understand the question. Try again.
Unidentified man: Okay. There's a culture at Xerox that didn't enable the exploitation --
Bob Taylor: Right. They were accustomed to the copier cut the world. Yes.
Unidentified man: Right. So now step back the culture of our society --
Bob Taylor: Oh, yeah.
Unidentified man: If you say, okay, no--
Bob Taylor: I don't think of our society as having a single culture.
Unidentified man: Okay. So my question is what are -- are we headed in the right direction or the wrong direction in terms of probability of exploiting potential for innovation?
Bob Taylor: Potential of innovation?
Unidentified man: Yeah, like you-- like that stuff you're doing, like that stuff.
Bob Taylor: I can't say that -- I can't say that we're headed in either the right or wrong direction.
I mean, I think that we'll take advantage of innovation eventually.
Sometimes it's very slow, like in this case. But if the innovation is strong enough, it will usually obtain.
So I guess I don't have any thing worth listening to to say about that.
Unidentified man: Thank you.
John Markoff: Fair enough. A couple more quick questions. This gentleman here in the front right.
Unidentified man 2: Hi, Bob. Thanks again for making it out to Austin. I took a vacation to California and it's a very comfortable place to be
Audience: [ Laughter ]
Unidentified man 2: Especially when you have had summers like we've had here.
Bob Taylor: Yeah, I understand it's rather warm.
Unidentified man 2: Yeah, hopefully [voice trails off]
Bob Taylor: But when I grew up, we had no air conditioning in Texas. So you guys have it easy.
Unidentified man 2: True enough. I'm a graduate of the LBJ School here and also the IC Squared Institute.
And my question is kind of related to that background a little bit.
Given your background in working for both public and private organizations in a research capacity,
I'm wondering what you think the role of government should be in terms of developing new technologies
especially with the kind of a shift in focus of the current administration.
Bob Taylor: That's a great question. I -- if I had had the opportunity, I would have planted that question in you.
Audience: [ Laughter ]
Bob Taylor: Okay, it reminds me, you should know that people -- a lot of people elsewhere in the country think of Austin as the blue oasis in an isle of knowledge.
And it's in the midst of a red desert --
Audience: [ Laughter ]
Bob Taylor: Of ignorance.
Audience: [ Laughter ]
Unidentified man 2: A blueberry in the tomato soup.
Bob Taylor: The people who are worried about government taking over things like to say, Well, you don't--
you want the government to run things, you ought to go to the DMV and see what kind of a job they do.
But the government had a huge impact on creating the internet,
and if you go to the DMV over the internet, you'll find you won't have to stand in line.
Audience: [ Laughter ]
[ Applause ]
Bob Taylor: So furthermore, it's my private opinion that private companies, I guess starting with the health insurance industry, deliberately harm individuals for profit.
And the government does not deliberately harm individuals.
They harm individuals through incompetence, sometimes, okay, but they don't do it deliberately.
And there are certain private industries that do.
So, I hope that the government has a strong role in innovation,
but there's a strong role for the private sector as well,
we just have to be careful about how we give them latitude.
Nobody is interested in creating private armies or private navies - we are willing to have the government do that, okay?
We are willing to have the local government support fire departments and police departments and parks.
No one's arguing that private industry ought to take that over.
So private enterprise, private industry is very important for our nation.
But this dichotomy between private industry can always do this better than government or vice versa, is false and sad and divisive.
And these people ought to know better.
[ Applause ]
John Markoff: Two more quick questions. The first and then next.
Phillip Verheyden: So my name is Phillip Verheyden. I'm a senior undergraduate student in Computer Science.
Bob Taylor: Good.
Phillip Verheyden: And my first question you actually answered earlier with the -- is about the licensing issue on the internet.
Bob Taylor: The what issue?
Phillip Verheyden: The licensing --
Bob Taylor: Oh right, right, right, right, right.
Phillip Verheyden: And the licensing of users which you answered earlier.
My next question was about your thesis, and about what you actually found when how good humans are at directing-- [ Laughter ] -- where do sounds come from?
Bob Taylor: People can, on an azimuth plane, can localize sound within 3 degrees.
The Navy sponsored this research.
I was working for DRL, there used to be a lab here called the Defense Research Lab, I don't know, I think it's now out at Balcones reconstituted as something else.
Member of audience: Applied Research Labs
Bob Taylor: Huh?
Member of audience: Applied Research Labs
Bob Taylor: How are you, Bobby?
Audience: [ Laughter ]
Bob Taylor: Nice to see you.
So, sonar operators are trained to try to localize sound, and they have earphones to pick up the sound,
so the Navy was interested in accuracy to the extent to which they needed to be augmented for greater accuracy. That's why they sponsored the work.
The thesis was published in the Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, not in a psych journal.
So it's another instance where being labeled a psychologist is a bit of a misnomer.
John Markoff: A final question, from the back.
Douglas Hackney: Thank you, Mr. Taylor. My name is Douglas Hackney. I'm an author and entrepreneur, a recent transplant from San Diego to the beautiful area of Austin.
Audience: [ Laughter ]
Bob Taylor: Good.
Douglas Hackney: I finally saw the light [chuckles]. My question relates to your overview of modern computing versus your vision.
What elements of modern computing do not encompass your vision, or maybe to flip that's a better way to ask that.
When you were all sitting around on the beanbag chairs, thinking about what it was gonna be like when everybody caught on to what you were thinking about, what didn't make it?
What's not included now that was a part of your vision?
Bob Taylor: The first that comes to mind is increased bandwidth.
That is we would have believed that we would have much greater bandwidth today than we have.
So, such that for example, we could imagine sitting in a chair and having a display or maybe eyeglasses that would give us an idea of what we call today virtual reality,
that is you could move -- you could navigate any place in the world.
Suppose you wanted to be on the Finger Lakes in Northern Italy, around Lake Como, you could go there in a virtual reality sense.
Things like that were imaginable, but we still can't quite do that.
We can do some pretty interesting things in that regard, and the movie industry has done some really interesting things with regard to that kind of thing.
But we can't sort of online immediately go sit in some magical chair and go to Lake Como.
That would be nice. Have you ever been to Lake Como? It's pretty expensive. It's pretty nice.
John Markoff: Once again, let's thank Bob for this evening.
Audience: [ Applause ]
Victoria Rodriguez: Well, thank you. Thank you so much, Bob.
The university is just enormously grateful and we are just so proud to claim you as one of our own.
So thank you, Bob, for coming. Thank you for sharing your amazing journey and your amazing story with us.
And thank you also, Mike and Mitch and John for traveling such a long distance to come in and be with us this evening.
I want to also just say the story Bob was saying about how Gary Chapman, one by one, knocked down the obstacles that brought Bob here.
I just want to say how enormously grateful the Graduate School is to the Department of Computer Science and to the LBJ School.
Personally, to J Moore and to Gary Chapman, because I don't think the Graduate School could have come up with a more wonderful way to kick off our centennial celebration.
So thank you, really, Gary, J, Mike, Mitch, John, all of you for making this possible. So thank you, thank you for coming all of you.
And once again, I invite you to think about joining the 1910 Society and to stay in touch with us.
We're going to have a wonderful 18 months coming up of celebrations for the Centennial of the Graduate School.
So please stay in touch and we hope to see you again. So thank you for coming. Good night.
Audience: [ Applause ]
[ Music ]