Difference between revisions of "Alan Kay Interview by Dave Marvit (2013)"

Latest revision as of 22:50, 6 December 2017

are there important

problems for technology to solve you

within the scope of technology the ambit of technological solution and if

so what well

I think the you

know if you take the route of technology technique

it really means things that humans

make so it's a much

larger word than the way we use it today and

the Latin root was ours from which arts you

know the word the arts

didn't mean the Fine Arts back

then but they meant the art of building

this and that and the art of cooking and also

the art of dancing and the art of music and stuff but basically

the term the arts have gotten kind of co-opted

by the Fine Arts in our era

so if you take a look at the the

synergies between human beings and their creations

you know they're

more I think would be very difficult to define

a human being without looking at either

physical or ideational

artifacts

because we actually create language

out of a propensity towards

language as we're growing up and that language has a lot

of commitments and meanings

to what the meaning of the culture is so

so one way to

you could you could imagine a

degree in technology that was different than a degree in engineering

that just included engineering is one

part of it that

could actually deal much more with the

whole system so you

know I argued with the young kid there

the eye-tracking kid because he had started

off with this idea which i think is a

corporate mantra that

you know the future

is going to be humans

fitting - I mean machines fitting to humans

rather than humans fitting to machines and it I

don't think that that split actually

can exist there's no question

but that the machines we use change us

well they don't change us we

change us machines are just doing things and

it's it's our

interpretations of the things that change that

change jeans are just catalyst

they're that's because you know

we have these cause and effect things

it's like you insulted

me and

you know unless unless you actually poke

your fingers in my eye all you're doing is creating

vibrations in the air and every

other every part of the insult is something that I have

to interpret myself

and react to right

so if people were actually dealing with

actually going on you couldn't be insulted

unless you chose to be so

so what I asked you was it

was only response was reasonable and you broaden the

definition of technology has typically used to encompass

an enormous scope you're just which is cool and

we can sort of put that into question and say okay given the enormous scope and

then we're given the smaller scope but I

corporate hat a little bit here and trying

to think of okay we have

this muscle this techno developmental

muscle at a large corporation and it

would be good to put it to use to good

use if that's even possible so

the frame us a framework in which I was asking the question

I think the well let

me be elliptical again but if you go

back to this

interesting phenomenon that

if you look at

the daily use of

people with say computers of whatever

whatever kind

it's hard to find any actual new

any technology in there that is newer

than thirty years old as

far as the foundational ideas

so the whole idea of

graphical user interfaces is came

from the 60s and the one we happen to use

today was invented at Parc but it wasn't invented

in isolation of previous ones the mouth

both the mouse and the tablet were invented in

1964 most people don't realize that the

ARPANET started working in 1969

and it just morphed into

the Internet the ethernet was

invented at Xerox PARC around 1973

object-oriented

programming yeah so if you if you go down the line then

as I pointed out that if you take a

look at what people are doing on the

on the web what I see is mainly better-looking

graphics than we could do 50 years

ago but what

I don't see is angle Bart's ideas

so Engelbart routinely

shared screens

in real time for the entire work

and so you know it

was an in an integral part of the system

it wasn't an app that you use it was actually

and if you're gonna work with somebody and often

you could see the other person if they're

more than two people collaborating their

initials would show up on the cursor so you

they're pointing at and this is all in the 60s and

there's nothing about it is hidden so

what I see is something much more like a pop

culture today where people

are completely indifferent to

the past and it's

not that everything in the past was good but it's real

ose the stuff that was better than the idea

like Engelbart was smarter than most people today and

so they can have all the pleasures

they want inventing something and having

that egocentric satisfaction

that I did this but basically it's

just a form of pollution because

talking about something that's just for a single person's

pleasure we're talking about something that which everything is done

is Rama file to two billion

people now and that you just can't allow

people who you

know whether willfully or

unconsciously

are you know just polluting

the system because they don't know any better yeah

on the other hand we've

got this paradox that

a lot of the

solutions in the past that were better than the solutions today

are not the solutions that we need

because the problems are different well

no it's even for the same problems so

if you talk to the angle bard Ian's back

then they knew they were just doing a version of

the thing it happened their version is

was a better set of thoughts than the web thoughts

which were really crude and almost

nothing of vision in them but

the angle bargains would say well you know you know don't

build a religion about our stuff because we

have to do some more qualitative iterations

because there's

so much user interface burden in

doing this stuff so when we were doing

the you

know the small talk stuff with

the GUI and

children and desktop publishing and all that stuff

it's your ex part the

technologic technological stuff was

relatively easy partly because we had

some geniuses so he had this guy Chuck back

you know they're all in the wall over there so Chuck

Thacker Butler Lampson Metcalf did

the ethernet I don't know whether stark Starkweather

should be in there did the laser printer so these guys

are really incredible

and we we

had people besides me who

were very well-versed in

user interfaces but in fact user

interface design is this

because

it is a design and something that

fits it's really hundreds of experiments and

almost every experiment fails

in one way or another and so the people who do this

successfully are have

tools that allow them to to try ten

different kinds of things a day and of

course because the users learn you have

to get a new batch of users rather

often to in order

to see how users react to something like this the first time

out that's true in the generative side and also the

you do put out in the world change as a result of what

game theoretic moving target yeah and so

one of the ironies of the

park GUI which has been you know it's two billion

people and probably a

million applications now have been

done successfully in it it's

actually a bicycle with training wheels

nobody knows the training wheels are on it and

the reason is is that I designed that user interface for children

and

one of the things that was not a training wheel

on it was never accepted by

Apple and because it wasn't accepted by Apple

Microsoft never appropriated it and

because of that gnome didn't you

look at the way these things trickle through and

so that particular idea

which was

recognition of some of the overlap

between children and adults never is

not on any system today except

except small talk which it always was on

so what is that idea well the idea was just that

it's not really a desktop that

was Apple's misinterpretation

even after we explained to them

not a desktop it's or

if you want to think of it as a desktop there are

an unlimited number of them and they really didn't get

that in that those a couple of demos

we showed them and so if you think if have

you know what could I do with an unlimited number of desktops

answer is I can organize but I

don't want to be application centric because an application

is a stovepipe what I really want is something

where I can get every object of every

kind that I need for this project out

where I can do things with them and I

want that desktop to remember

their state over time because

most people including children have

three or four projects they're working on each day

and instead what Mac

Windows did is to give you a situation where you're kind of

and tearing things down and staying inside of

applications and not being able to integrate you

know in other words what Apple and and

Microsoft did was

was something that essentially

prevented what today would be called a mashup

but you actually want it so if you think in

object-oriented terms you don't have to have applications

didn't have them at Parc you don't have files

what you have is an unlimited number of areas

which today you could think of as web pages

and but you can do all developmental

things on and that's what I was giving my talk in

first so I can

run so the important thing is it's dynamic I get something

that's 10 times as powerful as PowerPoint for

free and there's a sorter so I can

show which ones are those things that I want and cool

and so forth so that was a one

of the strongest ideas that we evolved

at Parc probably around

76 or 77

onwards never made it still

would be useful so that so when I look at the

interfaces today what I see because

I know what it was and what

it could be I see first a

bicycle with training wheels on

but people can't see the training wheels because they don't know

it's supposed to be a bike and then the second

thing I see after 20 30 years of it is a

bicycle with training wheels on it completely

encrusted with jewels and rhinestones

because it's been decorated

in a thousand different ways features

have been put on it but it's still got the fucking training wheels on

it and so this is actually the way things

go because if people are not willing to actually

like Apple did not want to hear

what the theory of that user interface was even

after I was there for 12 years because

they had expropriated it it was now their thing

wasn't the

you know the history of it was completely irrelevant so

that was when I realized oh this is a pop culture this

is the way it doesn't matter how how good any

musician was of the past or anything else the point of a

pop culture is getting identity through your own

actions a feeling of participation it's not

the same as where's Park was anything but a pop

culture Park was all about banding together in

a pretty anonymous group of experts

to make something grand

so the part of the implication of this is

that the the intellectual

ownership which often brings with it resistance to

change is is

it fundamental to corporate models and if if

not then how do you shake it well I

mean everybody has an ego so

the real question any especially any research

manager ass is not does

this person have an ego or not that's it's like

that guy saying we're gonna have the

Machine fit to the person

so the real real question your ass you

always ask is what is the

general expression of ego that this person

exhibits and that the way they

express is what allows them

to be

team members and stars at the same

because you want to have stars dark sparkles

full of stars but the key to the

key to park and the arpa community it came from

was how it cooperative was how it was

able to cooperate was not was

competitive up to

a point that was just good enough to be

fun was mildly competitive

but the truth was is

that the 15 or 16 are per projects

cooperated they swapped graduate students

they're all working in on the same

vision but they had different goals and

this gave a lot of opportunity for

argument and this was a was a community

that had learned how to argue that's what I learned

when I went to graduate school was for the first time

in my life how to actually argue because

when I was a kid I

mistakenly thought that the

purpose of an argument was to win it

and but they you

know but argument in

the ARPA community was not that's sort of what you do with debate

you know it's sophistry learn

how to win a debate and they

were not interested in that at all and of course there were a couple of exceptions

but I'm talking about hundreds of people here

and the purpose of these arguments was

to illuminate to get out

different perspectives on something and

park was a an argument if you talk

to anybody who was there we argued

incessantly with each other and it frightened

Xerox actually because they misinterpreted

it yeah taya well

I'm as strife whereas

Taylor who was kind of the genius

who had been one of the

funders and then was the guy who set up Xerox

PARC he was a psychologist like

the guy who initiated ARPA funding Licklider

and Taylor never made

a technical decision he trusted his scientists

and his job as he saw

it was to protect us from Xerox and

to set up a climate

where these lone-wolf he he got

most of the people at park a lot of

people were what you would call lone wolves

he liked that because he didn't you

know he wanted people who were basically not amenable to being

managed we needed management he

have a management structure and he didn't

but then there's the question of can

he set up something so that these lone wolves will cooperate

when that's a good idea and to

give you an example of that there's no reason to cooperate on

a

programming language pretty much everybody

at park could invent and build

a programming language or an operating system

so the idea is anything goes there

but if you're gonna do an alto

where and

the the mantra there was that

everything that we do had to be engineered for 100 users

so we built a fake pdp-10 that

had to run a hundred users as a time sharing system

and when we did the Alto we knew we were gonna have to build

a hundred of it and building a hundred machines

that in today's terms would cost about eighty thousand

bucks apiece you need to have cooperation

and he got it and

he didn't have to organize the cooperation the

cooperation happened maybe

even in a better way than he ever dreamed although he had picked

us and and it happened

because

this that and the other well so one of the things

was Taylor set up was

every single person

who was at Park has to be totally

enthusiastic about the next person to come in

it was a single black ball

and the reason that this

took forever because

you know some people would know this person some

people would only know the reputation person

would have to come in and talk to everybody that would take

days and it was

incredibly unwieldy so

we grumbled however it worked perfectly because

there were never any rivalries

such as you would get when you just

plonk a new person who's really good that

was the only kind they wanted there so

there's no getting out to swords and testing

out any of this stuff everybody who's completely committed

to the new member of the marriage

before it ever happened and so so

by going through the this enormous overhead

in the beginning of the thing it

paid off many many times over the decade

that Park was most productive Taylor

had a lot of things like that so let me

too much your time you should interview him if I

would love to actually maybe the nice thing is that you

Licklider I think was a little bit more intuitive

but Taylor was a big fan of lick

lighters and so he went

to town on how Licklider did his thing and

applied this when he was the

ARPA funder and here's

a guy who funded the ARPANET

and when Taylor

came to park and was in

the position of setting up this lab of his own

he was determined to try

every single one of these things that he thought was a gem of a

principle to work and he was willing to talk

was trying to do it wasn't anything covert I

will make a point of that um so just sort

of a wrap now maybe you and I can continue some time down in LA

if you were going

to if I was going to edit this and tell the guys at Fujitsu

what we should do as an institution to innovate

more better different effect well I think first

the there in Silicon Valley now

they should use the Silicon Valley meanings

of the word innovate and invent which

are I think made up by Regis McKenna years

ago but so so innovation

is taking an idea into the marketplace

in Silicon Valley terms an

invention is what we did at Xerox PARC which

is dabbling getting

much closer to the word new than news and both

of them are real

art forms with real process

but they have to get that clear because you really

want to know whether you're a lot of problems and companies is

the confusion between those two things or and

then they have to decide what

is the cost of doing business for each of those

I'll leave out in an innovation

here just focus on invention so

so years ago

so Lickliter

had this idea that you couldn't think of a good goal

while you're behind the beltway in Washington

anybody had the vision and he could say

it in a sentence it was interactive

computers as intellectual amplifiers

everybody on the planet pervasively network worldwide

that was it and when everybody

asked him what he was doing he was just say that sentence and they'd

say well what about goes well we can't think about goals here

you gonna operate he says well I'm gonna I'm gonna fund people

rather than projects and

so find really smart people

who were interested in this vision and

so so the Warriors

said well

you

know this isn't that going to produce a lot

of failures I

think etc

etcetera he says well we're playing we're not playing

golf we're playing baseball some

ty Cobbs lifetime batting average is 367

so like lawyers say if we can bat if you look at what

we're funding if we can bat 350

on the whole portfolio

we will change the entire

world so that's what happened and

so the weary er said well what about the 650

what about the 65 percent of failure

he says why it's the cost of doing business and research

this is the number one thing that companies

today do not understand

they have to put in their turns because

the way they think about things generally they're not

romantics the bottom line people

they're willing to put a lot of money

into advertising which is rather ephemeral

as far as ROI but they think they

understand it and part of their problems they do not

understand research and invention and

so they want to tighter rein on

it but in fact what the old-time funders

did was not to confuse responsibility

in control Lickliter said

I'm responsible but I can't be in control and

you know we have to run this

stochastic lis like like

baseball and

you know if we get the best players and

we bet reasonably over 300

we're just gonna nail it and this

reasonable thing because if you look at the return it's

astronomical like a good return

on investment is like what 15% 17% I

mean the return on investment from Xerox

from the

laser printer alone at Xerox PARC was 20,000

percent was zillions of

you know sharks didn't understand anything except the laser

printer and it paid for park hundreds of times

over and yet Xerox

is worried about all the things that weren't going

well they're forgetting because

they have confused making money

with making money safely

and so they

always say well we're in business to make money and

I would say no you're not you just want to make millions

you know research people want to make trillions

because we're creating new paradigms

here we're creating new industries

so that industry we create created only

took about 20 years to pass

the Ottoman worldwide automobile bid industry

and it didn't come from incrementalism

so there

so a lot of it is just not these

guys not being able to call a spade a spade they

have a nice view of themselves and they

think of themselves as you know hard-nosed business people but

in fact they're playing it safe and

because of their lack of try

anything that they don't think they understand

and because they don't really understand Science and Technology they

have no idea what the process actually

is and so they tend to want to be the third or fourth person on their

block to do something they're hoping somebody

else will do something and they have zillions

of words I'm not saying Fujitsu does this but I'm

saying it's typical of companies - it's

like the thing I said about change everybody talks

gonna change this we're gonna have a better process and all

the stuff but in the end when

it comes down to am I gonna change

am I am

I gonna go against something I'm a my going to risk my identity

my house mortgage

and so what we call

middle managers disease at Xerox PARC was people

who had gotten to the stage where they're wearing more about their house mortgage

than what their actual job was and

I was leaking into their job so

I mean Taylor had a million ways of getting around this

and part of it

was the got himself fired

even after our greatest successes and

couple years later he got the National Medal of Technology

so Xerox was just

and the irony was of course that Xerox

was that kind of company itself in the 50s

but by the time we got to the early

70s the original fireplugs

had died

Joe Wilson had died these

guys were just like us if you go back to look at

these guys when IBM wouldn't

accept the prototype of the 914

these guys were so and

there's a whole bunch of interesting funny stuff

with consulting companies in IBM not wanting to

dip in and delay of a year and a half

and something like this and these guys are just so pissed off that

they use their life insurance in

their house their own house mortgages to

get the loans to build the first

factories for the 914 of

course they became incredibly rich

because you

know they had a there were no really no VCS

that but these guys have risked every

damn thing they have because they knew they had and they invented

geography twice the

first first time around they invented offset printing that

was done in the early 50s so

these guys were just fantastic guys

but you know a decade later Xerox is the fastest

growing company in the US and etc etc all of

sudden things were very different there was a more of a caretaker

management in there and they had a lot of words

but one of the secrets to Xerox

PARC were was a certain agreement

a hard agreement

that Taylor had made with Xerox

before agreeing to set up this lab that

prevented

Xerox from actually permuting any

of the research there for the first five years and

that is when we got most of our stuff done and they

signed that agreement thinking Taylor would never

use it he had to use it several times in that first

five you sit permuting you mean messing

with basically in any way

zero and

that was part of Taylor's sales pitch too because

none of us wanted to work for a company yeah we're all by

the way I was the oldest person there

as an actual researcher I was 30

Taylor the older people

who were our mentors Taylor hired as advisors there's

an advisory board Butler Lampson was

27 Chuck

was probably 26 Peter deutsches 25 or 24

I'm gonna suck it out cuz you're making me feel

bad well but I mean this is Taylor's theory

right Taylor I paid for all of our PhDs and

and he knew the ones

who had really drunk the kool-aid you

know that that group of people just

burned and

we know we didn't get paid that much but we

burned to do this and the problems the ARPA funding

was going away and so Taylor convinced

us that Xerox was the place

we could finish up the grand dream

there and he had

this insulation and

you know as an

he was lucky hugely lucky that there

was a downturn in business and the

berkeley computer company corporation that butler

and chuck another two guys on the wall

there had

set up to do a system that failed because

of the financial thing and taylor got the entire company which

is about nine incredible people that's

when I decided to stay cuz I was consulting for

the Taylor at that time and I

going to go to Carnegie to try and do a personal computer

with Gordon Bell and man when those guys came in

I realized oh now we can do anything these

guys can do anything and so

I just called up Carnegie and you know got out

of my agreement there and thankfully

they forgave me after a while

but I knew it was just going to be

super special even when we had

we only had about 12 people here starting off but we

had 12 really really good people

Difference between revisions of "Alan Kay Interview by Dave Marvit (2013)"

Latest revision as of 22:50, 6 December 2017

Navigation menu

Personal tools

Namespaces

Variants

Views

More

Search

Tool box

Tools

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 |id=NY6XqmMm4YA
 |alignment=left
-|autoresize=false
+|autoresize=true
 }}
+<subtitle id="0:0:12">are there important</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:0:15"> problems for  technology to solve you</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:0:18">within the scope of technology the ambit  of technological solution and if</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:0:21"> so what  well</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:0:24"> I think the you</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:0:27"> know if you take  the route of technology technique</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:0:30"> it  really means things that humans</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:0:33"> make so  it's a much</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:0:36"> larger word than the way we  use it today and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:0:39"> the Latin root was ours  from which arts you</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:0:42"> know the word the  arts</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:0:45"> didn't mean the Fine Arts back</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:0:48"> then  but they meant the art of building</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:0:51"> this  and that and the art of cooking and also</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:0:54">the art of dancing and the art of music  and stuff but basically</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:0:57"> the term the  arts have gotten kind of co-opted</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:1:0"> by the  Fine Arts in our era</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:1:3"> so if you take a  look at the the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:1:6"> synergies between human  beings and their creations</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:1:9"> you know  they're</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:1:12"> more I think would be very  difficult to define</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:1:15"> a human being  without looking at either</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:1:18"> physical or  ideational</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:1:21"> artifacts</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:1:24"> because we actually  create language</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:1:27"> out of a propensity  towards</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:1:30"> language as we're growing up and  that language has a lot</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:1:33"> of commitments  and meanings</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:1:36"> to what the meaning of the  culture is so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:1:39"> so one way to</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:1:42"> you could  you could imagine a</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:1:45"> degree in technology  that was different than a degree in  engineering</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:1:48"> that just included  engineering is one</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:1:51"> part of it  that</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:1:54"> could actually deal much more with  the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:1:57"> whole system so you</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:2:0"> know I argued  with the young kid there</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:2:3"> the  eye-tracking kid because he had started</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:2:6">  off with this idea which i think is a</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:2:9">  corporate mantra that</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:2:12"> you know the  future</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:2:15"> is going to be humans</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:2:18"> fitting - I  mean machines fitting to humans</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:2:21"> rather  than humans fitting to machines and it I</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:2:24">  don't think that that split actually</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:2:27"> can  exist there's no question</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:2:30"> but that the  machines we use change us</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:2:33"> well they  don't change us we</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:2:36"> change us machines  are just doing things and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:2:39"> it's it's our</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:2:42">interpretations of the things that  change that</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:2:45"> change jeans are just  catalyst</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:2:48"> they're that's because you know</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:2:51">  we have these cause and effect things</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:2:54">  it's like you insulted</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:2:57"> me and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:3:0"> you know  unless unless you actually poke</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:3:3"> your  fingers in my eye all you're doing is  creating</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:3:6"> vibrations in the air and every</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:3:9">other every part of the insult is  something that I have</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:3:12"> to interpret  myself</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:3:15"> and react to right</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:3:18"> so if people  were actually dealing with</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:3:21">actually going on you couldn't be  insulted</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:3:24"> unless you chose to be so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:3:27"> so  what I asked you was it</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:3:30"> was only  response was reasonable and you broaden  the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:3:33"> definition of technology has  typically used to encompass</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:3:36"> an enormous  scope you're just which is cool and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:3:39">we can sort of put that into question  and say okay given the enormous scope  and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:3:42"> then we're given the smaller scope  but I</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:3:45">corporate hat a little bit here and  trying</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:3:48"> to think of okay we have</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:3:51"> this  muscle this techno developmental</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:3:54"> muscle  at a large corporation and it</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:3:57"> would be  good to put it to use to good</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:4:0"> use if  that's even possible so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:4:3">the frame us a framework in which I was  asking the question</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:4:6">  I think the well let</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:4:9"> me be elliptical  again but if you go</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:4:12"> back to this</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:4:15">  interesting phenomenon that</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:4:18"> if you look  at</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:4:21"> the daily use of</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:4:24"> people with say  computers of whatever</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:4:27"> whatever kind</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:4:30"> it's  hard to find any actual new</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:4:33"> any  technology in there that is newer</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:4:36"> than  thirty years old as</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:4:39"> far as the  foundational ideas</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:4:42"> so the whole idea of</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:4:45">  graphical user interfaces is came</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:4:48"> from  the 60s and the one we happen to use</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:4:51">  today was invented at Parc but it wasn't  invented</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:4:54"> in isolation of previous ones  the mouth</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:4:57"> both the mouse and the tablet  were invented in</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:5:0"> 1964 most people don't  realize that the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:5:3"> ARPANET started working  in 1969</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:5:6"> and it just morphed into</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:5:9"> the  Internet the ethernet was</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:5:12"> invented at  Xerox PARC around 1973</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:5:15"> object-oriented</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:5:18">programming yeah so if you if you go  down the line then</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:5:21"> as I pointed out that  if you take a</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:5:24"> look at what people are  doing on the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:5:27"> on the web what I see is  mainly better-looking</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:5:30"> graphics than we  could do 50 years</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:5:33"> ago but what</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:5:36"> I don't  see is angle Bart's ideas</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:5:39"> so Engelbart  routinely</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:5:42"> shared screens</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:5:45"> in real time  for the entire work</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:5:48"> and so  you know it</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:5:51"> was an in an integral part  of the system</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:5:54"> it wasn't an app that you  use it was actually</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:5:57">and if you're gonna work with somebody  and often</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:6:0"> you could see the other person  if they're</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:6:3"> more than two people  collaborating their</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:6:6"> initials would show  up on the cursor so you</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:6:9">they're pointing at and this is all in  the 60s and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:6:12"> there's nothing about it is  hidden so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:6:15"> what I see is something much  more like a pop</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:6:18"> culture today where  people</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:6:21"> are completely indifferent to</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:6:24"> the  past and it's</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:6:27"> not that everything in the  past was good but it's real</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:6:30">ose the stuff that was better than the  idea</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:6:33"> like Engelbart was smarter than  most people today and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:6:36"> so they can have  all the pleasures</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:6:39"> they want inventing  something and having</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:6:42"> that egocentric  satisfaction</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:6:45"> that I did this but  basically it's</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:6:48"> just a form of pollution  because</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:6:51">talking about something that's just for  a single person's</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:6:54"> pleasure we're talking  about something that which everything is  done</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:6:57"> is Rama file to two billion</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:7:0"> people  now and that you just can't allow</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:7:3"> people  who you</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:7:6"> know whether willfully or</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:7:9">unconsciously</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:7:12"> are you know just  polluting</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:7:15"> the system because they don't  know any better  yeah</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:7:21">on the other hand we've</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:7:24"> got this paradox  that</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:7:27"> a lot of the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:7:30"> solutions in the past  that were better than the solutions  today</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:7:33"> are not the solutions that we need</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:7:36">  because the problems are different  well</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:7:39"> no it's even for the same problems  so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:7:42"> if you talk to the angle bard Ian's  back</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:7:45"> then they knew they were just doing  a version of</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:7:48"> the thing it happened their  version is</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:7:51"> was a better set of thoughts  than the web thoughts</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:7:54"> which were really  crude and almost</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:7:57"> nothing of vision in  them but</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:8:0"> the angle bargains would say  well you know you know don't</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:8:3"> build a  religion about our stuff because we</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:8:6"> have  to do some more qualitative iterations</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:8:9">  because there's</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:8:12"> so much user interface  burden in</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:8:15"> doing this stuff so when we  were doing</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:8:18"> the you</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:8:21"> know the small talk  stuff with</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:8:24"> the GUI and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:8:27"> children and  desktop publishing and all that stuff</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:8:30">  it's your ex part the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:8:33"> technologic  technological stuff was</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:8:36"> relatively easy  partly because we had</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:8:39"> some geniuses so  he had this guy Chuck back</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:8:42"> you know  they're all in the wall over there so  Chuck</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:8:45"> Thacker Butler Lampson Metcalf did</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:8:48">  the ethernet I don't know whether stark  Starkweather</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:8:51"> should be in there did the  laser printer so these guys</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:8:54"> are really  incredible</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:8:57"> and we we</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:9:0"> had people besides  me who</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:9:3"> were very well-versed in</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:9:6"> user  interfaces but in fact user</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:9:9"> interface  design is this</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:9:12">because</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:9:15"> it is a design and something  that</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:9:18"> fits it's really hundreds of  experiments and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:9:21"> almost every experiment  fails</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:9:24"> in one way or another and so the  people who do this</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:9:27"> successfully are have</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:9:30">  tools that allow them to to try ten</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:9:33">  different kinds of things a day and of</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:9:36">  course because the users learn you have</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:9:39">  to get a new batch of users rather</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:9:42"> often  to in order</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:9:45"> to see how users react to  something like this the first time</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:9:48"> out  that's true in the generative side and  also the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:9:51">you do put out in the world change as a  result of what</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:9:54">game theoretic moving target  yeah and so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:9:57"> one of the ironies of the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:10:0">park GUI which has been you know it's  two billion</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:10:3"> people and probably a</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:10:6">  million applications now have been</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:10:9"> done  successfully in it it's</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:10:12"> actually a  bicycle with training wheels</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:10:15">nobody knows the training wheels are on  it and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:10:18"> the reason is is that I designed  that user interface for children</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:10:21"> and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:10:24"> one  of the things that was not a training  wheel</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:10:27"> on it was never accepted by</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:10:30"> Apple  and because it wasn't accepted by Apple</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:10:33">  Microsoft never appropriated it and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:10:36">  because of that gnome didn't you</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:10:39"> look at the way these things trickle  through and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:10:42"> so that particular idea</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:10:45">  which was</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:10:48"> recognition of some of the  overlap</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:10:51"> between children and adults  never is</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:10:54"> not on any system today except</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:10:57">  except small talk which it always was on</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:11:0">  so what is that idea well the idea was  just that</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:11:3"> it's not really a desktop that</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:11:6">  was Apple's misinterpretation</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:11:9">  even after we explained to them</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:11:12"> not a  desktop it's or</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:11:15"> if you want to think of  it as a desktop there are</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:11:18"> an unlimited  number of them and they really didn't  get</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:11:21"> that in that those a couple of demos</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:11:24">  we showed them and so if you think if  have</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:11:27"> you know what could I do with an  unlimited number of desktops</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:11:30">answer is I can organize  but I</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:11:33"> don't want to be application  centric because an application</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:11:36"> is a  stovepipe what I really want is  something</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:11:39"> where I can get every object  of every</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:11:42"> kind that I need for this  project out</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:11:45"> where I can do things with  them and I</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:11:48"> want that desktop to remember</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:11:51">  their state over time because</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:11:54"> most  people including children have</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:11:57"> three or  four projects they're working on each  day</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:12:0"> and instead what Mac</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:12:3">Windows did is to give you a situation  where you're kind of</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:12:6">and tearing things down and staying  inside of</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:12:9"> applications and not being  able to integrate you</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:12:12"> know in other  words what Apple and and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:12:15"> Microsoft did  was</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:12:18"> was something that essentially</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:12:21">prevented what today would be called a  mashup</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:12:24"> but you actually want it so if  you think in</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:12:27"> object-oriented terms you  don't have to have applications</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:12:30">didn't have them at Parc you don't have  files</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:12:33"> what you have is an unlimited  number of areas</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:12:36"> which today you could  think of as web pages</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:12:39"> and but you can do  all developmental</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:12:42"> things on and that's  what I was giving my talk in</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:12:45"> first so I  can</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:12:48"> run so the important thing is it's  dynamic I get something</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:12:51"> that's 10 times  as powerful as PowerPoint for</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:12:54"> free and  there's a sorter so I can</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:12:57"> show which  ones are those things that I want and  cool</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:13:0"> and so forth so that was a one</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:13:3"> of  the strongest ideas that we evolved</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:13:6"> at  Parc probably around</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:13:9"> 76 or 77</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:13:12">  onwards never made it still</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:13:15"> would be  useful so that so when I look at the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:13:18">  interfaces today what I see because</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:13:21"> I  know what it was and what</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:13:24"> it could be I  see first a</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:13:27"> bicycle with training wheels  on</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:13:30"> but people can't see the training  wheels because they don't know</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:13:33"> it's  supposed to be a bike and then the  second</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:13:36"> thing I see after 20 30 years of  it is a</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:13:39"> bicycle with training wheels on  it completely</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:13:42"> encrusted with jewels and  rhinestones</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:13:45"> because it's been decorated</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:13:48">  in a thousand different ways features</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:13:51">have been put on it but it's still got  the fucking training wheels on</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:13:54"> it and so  this is actually the way things</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:13:57"> go  because if people are not willing to  actually</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:14:0"> like Apple did not want to hear</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:14:3">what the theory of that user interface  was even</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:14:6"> after I was there for 12 years  because</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:14:9"> they had expropriated it it was  now their thing</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:14:12"> wasn't the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:14:15"> you know the  history of it was completely irrelevant  so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:14:18"> that was when I realized oh this is a  pop culture this</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:14:21"> is the way it doesn't  matter how how good any</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:14:24"> musician was of  the past or anything else the point of a</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:14:27">  pop culture is getting identity through  your own</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:14:30"> actions a feeling of  participation it's not</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:14:33"> the same as  where's Park was anything but a pop</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:14:36">culture Park was all about banding  together in</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:14:39"> a pretty anonymous group of  experts</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:14:42"> to make something grand</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:14:45"> so the  part of the implication of this is</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:14:48"> that  the the intellectual</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:14:51"> ownership which  often brings with it resistance to</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:14:54">  change is is</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:14:57"> it fundamental to corporate  models and if if</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:15:0"> not then how do you  shake it well I</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:15:3"> mean everybody has an  ego so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:15:6"> the real question any especially  any research</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:15:9"> manager  ass is not does</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:15:12"> this person have an ego  or not that's it's like</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:15:15"> that guy saying  we're gonna have the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:15:18"> Machine fit to the  person</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:15:21"> so the real real question your  ass you</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:15:24"> always ask is what is the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:15:27">  general expression of ego that this  person</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:15:29"> exhibits and that the way they</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:15:32">  express is what allows them</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:15:36"> to be</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:15:39"> team  members and stars at the same</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:15:41">because you want to have stars dark  sparkles</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:15:44"> full of stars but the key to  the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:15:47"> key to park and the arpa community  it came from</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:15:50"> was how it cooperative was  how it was</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:15:53"> able to cooperate was not was</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:15:56">  competitive up to</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:15:59"> a point that was just  good enough to be</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:16:2"> fun was mildly  competitive</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:16:5"> but the truth was is</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:16:8"> that  the 15 or 16 are per projects</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:16:11"> cooperated  they swapped graduate students</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:16:14"> they're  all working in on the same</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:16:17"> vision but  they had different goals and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:16:20"> this gave a  lot of opportunity for</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:16:23"> argument and this  was a was a community</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:16:26"> that had learned  how to argue that's what I learned</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:16:29"> when  I went to graduate school was for the  first time</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:16:32"> in my life how to actually  argue because</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:16:35"> when I was a kid I</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:16:38">  mistakenly thought that the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:16:41"> purpose of  an argument was to win it</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:16:44">  and but they you</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:16:47"> know but argument in</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:16:50">the ARPA community was not that's sort  of what you do with debate</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:16:53"> you know it's  sophistry learn</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:16:56"> how to win a debate and  they</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:16:59"> were not interested in that at all  and of course there were a couple of  exceptions</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:17:2"> but I'm talking about  hundreds of people here</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:17:5"> and the purpose  of these arguments was</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:17:8"> to illuminate to  get out</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:17:11"> different perspectives on  something and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:17:14"> park was a an argument if  you talk</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:17:17"> to anybody who was there we  argued</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:17:20"> incessantly with each other and  it frightened</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:17:23"> Xerox actually because  they misinterpreted</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:17:26"> it yeah taya well</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:17:29">I'm as strife  whereas</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:17:32"> Taylor who was kind of the  genius</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:17:35"> who had been one of the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:17:38">funders and then was the guy who set up  Xerox</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:17:41"> PARC he was a psychologist like</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:17:44">  the guy who initiated ARPA funding  Licklider</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:17:47"> and Taylor never made</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:17:50"> a  technical decision he trusted his  scientists</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:17:53"> and his job as he saw</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:17:56"> it was  to protect us from Xerox and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:17:59"> to set up a  climate</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:18:2"> where these lone-wolf he he got</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:18:5">  most of the people at park a lot of</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:18:8">people were what you would call lone  wolves</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:18:11"> he liked that because he didn't  you</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:18:14"> know he wanted people who were  basically not amenable to being</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:18:17"> managed  we needed management he</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:18:20">have a management structure and he  didn't</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:18:23"> but then there's the question of  can</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:18:26"> he set up something so that these  lone wolves will cooperate</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:18:29"> when that's a  good idea and to</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:18:32"> give you an example of  that there's no reason to cooperate on</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:18:35"> a</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:18:38">programming language  pretty much everybody</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:18:41"> at park could  invent and build</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:18:44"> a programming language  or an operating system</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:18:47"> so the idea is  anything goes there</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:18:50"> but if you're gonna  do an alto</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:18:53"> where and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:18:56"> the the mantra  there was that</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:18:59"> everything that we do had  to be engineered for 100 users</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:19:2"> so we  built a fake pdp-10 that</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:19:5"> had to run a  hundred users as a time sharing system</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:19:8">and when we did the Alto we knew we were  gonna have to build</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:19:11"> a hundred of it and  building a hundred machines</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:19:14"> that in  today's terms would cost about eighty  thousand</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:19:17"> bucks apiece  you need to have cooperation</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:19:20"> and he got  it and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:19:23"> he didn't have to organize the  cooperation the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:19:26"> cooperation happened  maybe</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:19:29"> even in a better way than he ever  dreamed although he had picked</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:19:32"> us and  and it happened</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:19:35"> because</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:19:38"> this that and  the other well so one of the things</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:19:41"> was  Taylor set up was</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:19:44"> every single person</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:19:47">  who was at Park has to be totally</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:19:50">enthusiastic about the next person to  come in</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:19:53"> it was a single black ball</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:19:56">and the reason that this</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:19:59"> took forever  because</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:20:2"> you know some people would know  this person  some</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:20:5"> people would only know the  reputation person</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:20:8"> would have to come in  and talk to everybody that would take</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:20:11">  days and it was</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:20:14"> incredibly unwieldy so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:20:17">  we grumbled however it worked perfectly  because</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:20:20"> there were never any rivalries</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:20:23">  such as you would get when you just</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:20:26">plonk a new person who's really good  that</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:20:29"> was the only kind they wanted there  so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:20:32"> there's no getting out to swords and  testing</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:20:35"> out any of this stuff everybody  who's completely committed</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:20:38"> to the new  member of the marriage</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:20:41"> before it ever  happened and so so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:20:44"> by going through the  this enormous overhead</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:20:47"> in the beginning  of the thing it</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:20:50"> paid off many many times  over the decade</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:20:53"> that Park was most  productive Taylor</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:20:56"> had a lot of things  like that so let me</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:20:59">too much your time you should interview  him if I</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:21:2"> would love to actually maybe  the nice thing is that you</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:21:5">Licklider I think was a little bit more  intuitive</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:21:8"> but Taylor was a big fan of  lick</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:21:11"> lighters and so he went</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:21:14"> to town on  how Licklider did his thing and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:21:17"> applied  this when he was the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:21:20"> ARPA funder and  here's</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:21:23"> a guy who funded the ARPANET</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:21:26"> and  when Taylor</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:21:29"> came to park and was in</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:21:32"> the  position of setting up this lab of his  own</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:21:35"> he was determined to try</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:21:38">every single one of these things that he  thought was a gem of a</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:21:41"> principle to work  and he was willing to talk</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:21:44">was trying to do it wasn't anything  covert I</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:21:47"> will make a point of that um so  just sort</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:21:50"> of a wrap now maybe you and I  can continue some time down in LA</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:21:53"> if you  were going</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:21:56"> to if I was going to edit  this and tell the guys at Fujitsu</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:21:59"> what  we should do as an institution to  innovate</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:22:2"> more better different effect  well I think first</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:22:5"> the there in Silicon  Valley now</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:22:8">  they should use the Silicon Valley  meanings</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:22:11"> of the word innovate and invent  which</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:22:14"> are I think made up by Regis  McKenna years</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:22:17"> ago but so so innovation</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:22:20">  is taking an idea into the marketplace</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:22:23">  in Silicon Valley terms an</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:22:26"> invention is  what we did at Xerox PARC which</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:22:29"> is  dabbling getting</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:22:32"> much closer to the word  new than news and both</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:22:35"> of them are real</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:22:38">  art forms with real process</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:22:41"> but they  have to get that clear because you  really</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:22:44"> want to know whether you're a lot  of problems and companies is</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:22:47"> the  confusion between those two things or  and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:22:50"> then they have to decide what</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:22:53"> is the  cost of doing business for each of those</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:22:56">  I'll leave out in an innovation</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:22:59"> here  just focus on invention so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:23:2"> so years ago</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:23:5">so Lickliter</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:23:8"> had this idea that you  couldn't think of a good goal</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:23:11"> while  you're behind the beltway in Washington</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:23:14">  anybody had the vision and he could say</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:23:17">  it in a sentence it was interactive</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:23:20">  computers as intellectual amplifiers</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:23:23">everybody on the planet pervasively  network worldwide</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:23:26"> that was it and when  everybody</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:23:29"> asked him what he was doing he  was just say that sentence and they'd</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:23:32">say well what about goes well we can't  think about goals here</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:23:35">you gonna operate he says well I'm gonna  I'm gonna fund people</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:23:38"> rather than  projects and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:23:41"> so find really smart people</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:23:44">  who were interested in this vision and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:23:47">  so so the Warriors</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:23:50"> said well</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:23:53"> you</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:23:56"> know  this isn't that going to produce a lot</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:23:59">  of failures  I</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:24:2"> think etc</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:24:5"> etcetera he says well we're  playing we're not playing</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:24:8"> golf we're  playing baseball some</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:24:11"> ty Cobbs lifetime  batting average is 367</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:24:14"> so like lawyers  say if we can bat if you look at what</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:24:17">  we're funding if we can bat 350</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:24:20"> on the  whole portfolio</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:24:23"> we will change the  entire</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:24:26"> world so that's what happened and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:24:29">so the weary er said well what about the  650</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:24:32"> what about the 65 percent of failure</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:24:35">he says why it's the cost of doing  business and research</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:24:38"> this is the number  one thing that companies</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:24:41"> today do not  understand</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:24:44"> they have to put in their  turns because</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:24:47"> the way they think about  things generally they're not</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:24:50"> romantics  the bottom line people</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:24:53"> they're willing  to put a lot of money</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:24:56"> into advertising  which is rather ephemeral</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:24:59"> as far as ROI  but they think they</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:25:2"> understand it and  part of their problems they do not</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:25:5">  understand research and invention and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:25:8"> so  they want to tighter rein on</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:25:11"> it but in  fact what the old-time funders</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:25:14"> did was  not to confuse responsibility</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:25:17"> in control  Lickliter said</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:25:20"> I'm responsible but I  can't be in control and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:25:23"> you know we have  to run this</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:25:26"> stochastic lis  like like</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:25:29"> baseball and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:25:32"> you know if we  get the best players and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:25:35"> we bet  reasonably over 300</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:25:38"> we're just gonna  nail it and this</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:25:41">reasonable thing because if you look at  the return it's</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:25:44"> astronomical like a good  return</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:25:47"> on investment is like what 15%  17% I</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:25:50"> mean the return on investment from  Xerox</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:25:53"> from the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:25:56"> laser printer alone at  Xerox PARC was 20,000</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:25:59"> percent was  zillions of</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:26:2"> you know sharks didn't  understand anything except the laser</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:26:5">  printer and it paid for park hundreds of  times</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:26:8"> over and yet Xerox</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:26:11"> is worried  about all the things that weren't going</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:26:14">  well they're forgetting because</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:26:17"> they  have confused making money</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:26:20"> with making  money safely</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:26:23"> and so they</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:26:26">always say well we're in business to  make money and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:26:29"> I would say no you're not  you just want to make millions</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:26:32"> you know  research people want to make trillions</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:26:35">  because we're creating new paradigms</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:26:38">  here we're creating new industries</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:26:41"> so  that industry we create created only</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:26:44">  took about 20 years to pass</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:26:47"> the Ottoman  worldwide automobile bid industry</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:26:50"> and it  didn't come from incrementalism</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:26:53"> so there</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:26:56">  so a lot of it is just not these</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:26:59"> guys  not being able to call a spade a spade  they</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:27:2"> have a nice view of themselves and  they</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:27:5"> think of themselves as you know  hard-nosed business people but</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:27:8"> in fact  they're playing it safe and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:27:11"> because of  their lack of try</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:27:14">anything that they don't think they  understand</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:27:17"> and because they don't really  understand Science and Technology they</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:27:20">  have no idea what the process actually</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:27:23">is and so they tend to want to be the  third or fourth person on their</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:27:26"> block to  do something they're hoping somebody</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:27:29">  else will do something and they have  zillions</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:27:32"> of words  I'm not saying Fujitsu does this but I'm</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:27:35">  saying it's typical of companies - it's</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:27:38">like the thing I said about change  everybody talks</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:27:41">gonna change this we're gonna have a  better process and all</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:27:44"> the stuff but in  the end when</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:27:47"> it comes down to am I gonna  change</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:27:50"> am I am</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:27:53"> I gonna go against  something I'm a my going to risk my  identity</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:27:56"> my house mortgage</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:27:59"> and so what  we call</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:28:2"> middle managers disease at Xerox  PARC was people</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:28:5"> who had gotten to the  stage where they're wearing more about  their house mortgage</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:28:8"> than what their  actual job was and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:28:11"> I was leaking into  their job so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:28:14"> I mean Taylor had a million  ways of getting around this</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:28:17"> and part of  it</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:28:20"> was the got himself fired</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:28:23"> even after  our greatest successes and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:28:26">couple years later he got the National  Medal of Technology</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:28:29">  so Xerox was just</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:28:32">  and the irony was of course that Xerox</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:28:35">was that kind of company itself in the  50s</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:28:38"> but by the time we got to the early</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:28:41">  70s the original fireplugs</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:28:44"> had died</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:28:47"> Joe  Wilson had died these</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:28:50"> guys were just  like us if you go back to look at</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:28:53"> these  guys when IBM wouldn't</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:28:56"> accept the  prototype of the 914</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:28:59"> these guys were so  and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:29:2"> there's a whole bunch of interesting  funny stuff</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:29:5"> with consulting companies in  IBM not wanting to</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:29:8"> dip in and delay of a  year and a half</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:29:11"> and something like this  and these guys are just so pissed off  that</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:29:14"> they use their life insurance in</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:29:17">  their house their own house mortgages to</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:29:20">  get the loans to build the first</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:29:23">  factories for the 914 of</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:29:26"> course they  became incredibly rich</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:29:29"> because you</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:29:32"> know  they had a there were no really no VCS</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:29:35">  that but these guys have risked every</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:29:38">damn thing they have because they knew  they had and they invented</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:29:41"> geography  twice the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:29:44"> first first time around they  invented offset printing that</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:29:47"> was done  in the early 50s so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:29:50"> these guys were just  fantastic guys</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:29:53"> but you know a decade  later Xerox is the fastest</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:29:56"> growing  company in the US and etc etc all of</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:29:59">sudden things were very different there  was a more of a caretaker</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:30:2"> management in  there and they had a lot of words</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:30:5"> but  one of the secrets to Xerox</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:30:8"> PARC were  was a certain agreement</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:30:11"> a hard agreement</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:30:14">  that Taylor had made with Xerox</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:30:17"> before  agreeing to set up this lab that</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:30:20">prevented</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:30:23"> Xerox from actually permuting  any</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:30:26"> of the research there for the first  five years and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:30:29"> that is when we got most  of our stuff done and they</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:30:32"> signed that  agreement thinking Taylor would never</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:30:35">  use it he had to use it several times in  that first</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:30:38"> five you sit permuting you  mean messing</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:30:41"> with basically in any way</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:30:44">  zero and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:30:47"> that was part of Taylor's sales  pitch too because</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:30:50"> none of us wanted to  work for a company yeah we're all by</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:30:53"> the  way I was the oldest person there</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:30:56"> as an  actual researcher I was 30</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:30:59">  Taylor the older people</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:31:2"> who were our  mentors Taylor hired as advisors there's</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:31:5">  an advisory board Butler Lampson was</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:31:8"> 27  Chuck</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:31:11"> was probably 26 Peter deutsches 25  or 24</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:31:14"> I'm gonna suck it out cuz you're  making me feel</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:31:17"> bad well but I mean this  is Taylor's theory</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:31:20"> right Taylor I paid  for all of our PhDs and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:31:23"> and he knew the  ones</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:31:26"> who had really drunk the kool-aid  you</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:31:29"> know that that group of people just</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:31:32">  burned and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:31:35"> we know we didn't get paid  that much but we</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:31:38"> burned to do this and  the problems the ARPA funding</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:31:41"> was going  away and so Taylor convinced</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:31:44"> us that  Xerox was the place</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:31:47"> we could finish up  the grand dream</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:31:50"> there and he had</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:31:53"> this  insulation and</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:31:56">you know as an</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:31:59"> he was lucky hugely lucky  that there</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:32:2"> was a downturn in business  and the</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:32:5"> berkeley computer company  corporation that butler</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:32:8"> and chuck  another two guys on the wall</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:32:11"> there had</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:32:14">  set up to do a system that failed  because</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:32:17"> of the financial thing and  taylor got the entire company which</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:32:20"> is  about nine incredible people that's</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:32:23"> when  I decided to stay cuz I was consulting  for</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:32:26"> the Taylor at that time and I</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:32:29">going to go to Carnegie to try and do a  personal computer</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:32:32"> with Gordon Bell and  man when those guys came in</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:32:35"> I realized  oh now we can do anything these</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:32:38"> guys can  do anything and so</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:32:41"> I just called up  Carnegie and you know got out</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:32:44"> of my  agreement there and thankfully</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:32:47"> they  forgave me after a while</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:32:50"> but I knew it  was just going to be</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:32:53"> super special even  when we had</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:32:56"> we only had about 12 people  here starting off but we</subtitle>
+<subtitle id="0:32:59"> had 12 really  really good people</subtitle>