X hits on this document

60 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

6 / 17

DATE 04/16/81

04/17/81

04/21/81

04/23/81

04/23/81

04/29/81*

04/??/81

TO CCS

Guthery

Lerner

Minker

Weinstein

Hirsch

Embassies

FROM Veklerov

Denning

Minker

Hirsch

Ralston

Hatch

Ralston

DESCRIPTION Letter re CACM March 1981 report. Worked at same Inst. as Lerners and Kimelfeld. Inst. bought large scale computer from British firm ICL (series 4) in early 70s on condition it be used only for unclassified work. “However, the high security-related refusal rate seems to suggest Institute is heavily involved in such applications. Suggest s inquiry to British government.Says Kimelfeld does not have Ph.D. Asks help for his sister, Larissa V. Kopchenova, who has an M.S. degree in econ. works as computer scientist in Moscow. she and her 16 year old son denied exit visas-her former husband refuses to acknowledge he has no claims aginst her (he fears reprisals if he does). Does not want his name mentioned re Inst since it may jeopradize his relatives. Responds to Guthery letter, 04/02/81, protesting publication of CACM March 1981 article and use for political purposes. Says “The membership has spoken on this topic and said “NO!” How does a self-righteous minority override this decision?” Dennig reviews 1969 vote of ACM members (4:1) against proposition ACM Const. be amended to take stands on social issues. Denning’s sense is that members are more sympathetic to human rights issues than to blatant political issues. Knows no way how to prevent ACM from publishing report, except by voting people into office. Current administration is interested in scientific strength, not political issues. Asks if Gutherey wants his letter published in Forum or how Gutherey might suggest settling the issue with a referendum. Gutherey letter attached. Ralston note to Minker attached. Sends CACM March 19181 report. Thanks him for his gift Tony Ralston broughtback from his visit to him. Forwarded Veklerov letter of 04/16/81. Suggests ACM follow up on suspicion that Moscow Inst. used British computer for classified work. Hirsch says claim might be inaccurate since Lerner refusal on security pertained to work prior to 1964. Attached Current Status of Prof. Alexander Lerner (8/79-listing 1964 date). Letter and Press Related to March CACM Committee Report. Attaches letter to be sent to Administration, and press release. Thanks for the ACM March 1981 HR Report. Distributing letter to Labor and Human Resources Comm. Letter sent to Embassies of German DemocraticRepublic; Czechoslovakian Mission to UN; Argentina; USSR informing them there was at least one individual on the list of computer scientists whose rights were violated. They were informed that if there were any inaccuracies in our report, we would make changes at the earliest date.

6

Document info
Document views60
Page views60
Page last viewedThu Jan 19 08:51:06 UTC 2017
Pages17
Paragraphs326
Words6253

Comments