DLyon%SRI-KL@sri-unix.UUCP (12/21/83)
From: Richard F. Lyon <DLyon at SRI-KL>
In reply to <majka@ubc-vision.UUCP> on left/right brain research:
Most of the work on split brains and hemispheric specialization
has been done at Caltech by Dr. Roger Sperry and colleagues. The 1983
Caltech Biology annual report has 5 pages of summary results, and 11
recent references by Sperry's group. Previous year annual reports
have similar amounts. I will mail copies if given an address.
Dick Lyon
DLYON@SRI-KLANDY@SU-SCORE.ARPA (12/22/83)
From: Andy Freeman <ANDY@SU-SCORE.ARPA> "If the U.S. program is aimed at military applications, that's what it will produce. Any commercial or industrial spinoff will be incidental." It doesn't matter what DoD and the Japanese project aim for. We're not talking about a spending a million on designing bullets but something much more like the space program. The meat of that specification was "American on Moon with TV camera" but look what else happened. Also, the goal was very low volume, but many of the products aren't. Hardware, which is probably the majority of the specification, could be where the crossover will be greatest. Even if they fail to get "a lisp machine in every tank", they'll succeed in making one for an emergency room. (Camping gear is a recent example of something similar.) Yes, they'll be able to target software applications, but at least the tools, skills, and people move. What distinguishes a US Army database system anyway? I can understand the objection that the DoD shouldn't have "all those cycles", but that isn't one of the choices. (How they are to be used is, but not through the research.) The new machines are going to be built - if nothing else the Dod can use Japanese ones. Even if all other things were equal, I don't think the economic ones are, why should they have all the fun? -andy
fc%usc-cse%USC-ECL%SRI-NIC@sri-unix.UUCP (12/22/83)
Fred