[Allan from Fallbrook]

raptor: Stanford Research Institute in Menlo, right? As far as Bell Labs goes, my dad got his start with JPL in Pasadena, and his team did some collaborative work with Bell Labs. Talk about amazing places; Bell undoubtedly mirrors PARC for sheer cranial horsepower.

One of the projects my dad worked on was the avionics and telemetry for the F-4 Phantom, including the countermeasures package. This put him in contact with the “Skunk Works” boys out in the high desert. He said the 6 – 7 months he worked with them was the high point of his career. We got to travel out to Beale once to see the SR71 take off. Amazing aircraft, especially given the fact that the thing leaked like a sieve when it was on the ground.

That period between the late 1950s and the 1980s was a very fertile time for technological innovation. I don’t know if we will every see anything like that again.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

raptor: Stanford Research Institute in Menlo, right? As far as Bell Labs goes, my dad got his start with JPL in Pasadena, and his team did some collaborative work with Bell Labs. Talk about amazing places; Bell undoubtedly mirrors PARC for sheer cranial horsepower.

One of the projects my dad worked on was the avionics and telemetry for the F-4 Phantom, including the countermeasures package. This put him in contact with the “Skunk Works” boys out in the high desert. He said the 6 – 7 months he worked with them was the high point of his career. We got to travel out to Beale once to see the SR71 take off. Amazing aircraft, especially given the fact that the thing leaked like a sieve when it was on the ground.

That period between the late 1950s and the 1980s was a very fertile time for technological innovation. I don’t know if we will every see anything like that again.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

raptor: Stanford Research Institute in Menlo, right? As far as Bell Labs goes, my dad got his start with JPL in Pasadena, and his team did some collaborative work with Bell Labs. Talk about amazing places; Bell undoubtedly mirrors PARC for sheer cranial horsepower.

One of the projects my dad worked on was the avionics and telemetry for the F-4 Phantom, including the countermeasures package. This put him in contact with the “Skunk Works” boys out in the high desert. He said the 6 – 7 months he worked with them was the high point of his career. We got to travel out to Beale once to see the SR71 take off. Amazing aircraft, especially given the fact that the thing leaked like a sieve when it was on the ground.

That period between the late 1950s and the 1980s was a very fertile time for technological innovation. I don’t know if we will every see anything like that again.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

raptor: Stanford Research Institute in Menlo, right? As far as Bell Labs goes, my dad got his start with JPL in Pasadena, and his team did some collaborative work with Bell Labs. Talk about amazing places; Bell undoubtedly mirrors PARC for sheer cranial horsepower.

One of the projects my dad worked on was the avionics and telemetry for the F-4 Phantom, including the countermeasures package. This put him in contact with the “Skunk Works” boys out in the high desert. He said the 6 – 7 months he worked with them was the high point of his career. We got to travel out to Beale once to see the SR71 take off. Amazing aircraft, especially given the fact that the thing leaked like a sieve when it was on the ground.

That period between the late 1950s and the 1980s was a very fertile time for technological innovation. I don’t know if we will every see anything like that again.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Duke: Let me qualify what I said a little further, as I don’t want to create an incorrect perception. When I was younger, it wasn’t uncommon for Stanford academics to routinely protest against the military (and the ROTC program) and the government. At the same time, Stanford was raking in millions for DoD projects, as well as participating with local companies, including Lockheed and Ford Aerospace, on military and defense research.

I don’t subscribe to the notion that liberals are inherently anti-military or anti-government. As I have opined previously, I don’t find the word “liberal” a pejorative. I do, however, object to the left-wing and far left-wing. As a strongly conservative person (politically speaking), I also object to the Ann Coulters and Rush Limbaughs of the world, as I feel they stifle debate and discourse to the same or greater extent as their left-wing counterparts.

My dad was an aerospace engineer for Ford Aerospace and he worked on the Milsat and Intelsat programs during the ’60s, 70’s and 80’s. Because of the nature of those programs, Ford, Lockheed and the other companies were hush-hush about the work, but also because of the potential for negative press as well. Defense work was perceived in many parts of the Bay Area, and especially the campuses of Cal and Berkeley, as being evil. There were a lot of holdouts from the counterculture movement of the 1960s, and there were very left leaning academics at both institutions who loved demonizing the “military/industrial complex” and the defense industries. I always felt Stanford especially was very hypocritical in their desire to appease both sides.

I don’t think we necessarily need more political parties, I think we need to return to reasoned discourse and dialogue and turn our brains back on. This sound bite universe we now occupy, in conjunction with the witless stupidity of Political Correctness, has effectively hamstrung any attempts to have a meaningful discussion on any topic of worth.

The example of that government employee who was fired for using the term “niggardly” (in it’s proper context, and to describe a miserly program) is a prime example.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Duke: Let me qualify what I said a little further, as I don’t want to create an incorrect perception. When I was younger, it wasn’t uncommon for Stanford academics to routinely protest against the military (and the ROTC program) and the government. At the same time, Stanford was raking in millions for DoD projects, as well as participating with local companies, including Lockheed and Ford Aerospace, on military and defense research.

I don’t subscribe to the notion that liberals are inherently anti-military or anti-government. As I have opined previously, I don’t find the word “liberal” a pejorative. I do, however, object to the left-wing and far left-wing. As a strongly conservative person (politically speaking), I also object to the Ann Coulters and Rush Limbaughs of the world, as I feel they stifle debate and discourse to the same or greater extent as their left-wing counterparts.

My dad was an aerospace engineer for Ford Aerospace and he worked on the Milsat and Intelsat programs during the ’60s, 70’s and 80’s. Because of the nature of those programs, Ford, Lockheed and the other companies were hush-hush about the work, but also because of the potential for negative press as well. Defense work was perceived in many parts of the Bay Area, and especially the campuses of Cal and Berkeley, as being evil. There were a lot of holdouts from the counterculture movement of the 1960s, and there were very left leaning academics at both institutions who loved demonizing the “military/industrial complex” and the defense industries. I always felt Stanford especially was very hypocritical in their desire to appease both sides.

I don’t think we necessarily need more political parties, I think we need to return to reasoned discourse and dialogue and turn our brains back on. This sound bite universe we now occupy, in conjunction with the witless stupidity of Political Correctness, has effectively hamstrung any attempts to have a meaningful discussion on any topic of worth.

The example of that government employee who was fired for using the term “niggardly” (in it’s proper context, and to describe a miserly program) is a prime example.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Duke: Let me qualify what I said a little further, as I don’t want to create an incorrect perception. When I was younger, it wasn’t uncommon for Stanford academics to routinely protest against the military (and the ROTC program) and the government. At the same time, Stanford was raking in millions for DoD projects, as well as participating with local companies, including Lockheed and Ford Aerospace, on military and defense research.

I don’t subscribe to the notion that liberals are inherently anti-military or anti-government. As I have opined previously, I don’t find the word “liberal” a pejorative. I do, however, object to the left-wing and far left-wing. As a strongly conservative person (politically speaking), I also object to the Ann Coulters and Rush Limbaughs of the world, as I feel they stifle debate and discourse to the same or greater extent as their left-wing counterparts.

My dad was an aerospace engineer for Ford Aerospace and he worked on the Milsat and Intelsat programs during the ’60s, 70’s and 80’s. Because of the nature of those programs, Ford, Lockheed and the other companies were hush-hush about the work, but also because of the potential for negative press as well. Defense work was perceived in many parts of the Bay Area, and especially the campuses of Cal and Berkeley, as being evil. There were a lot of holdouts from the counterculture movement of the 1960s, and there were very left leaning academics at both institutions who loved demonizing the “military/industrial complex” and the defense industries. I always felt Stanford especially was very hypocritical in their desire to appease both sides.

I don’t think we necessarily need more political parties, I think we need to return to reasoned discourse and dialogue and turn our brains back on. This sound bite universe we now occupy, in conjunction with the witless stupidity of Political Correctness, has effectively hamstrung any attempts to have a meaningful discussion on any topic of worth.

The example of that government employee who was fired for using the term “niggardly” (in it’s proper context, and to describe a miserly program) is a prime example.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Duke: Let me qualify what I said a little further, as I don’t want to create an incorrect perception. When I was younger, it wasn’t uncommon for Stanford academics to routinely protest against the military (and the ROTC program) and the government. At the same time, Stanford was raking in millions for DoD projects, as well as participating with local companies, including Lockheed and Ford Aerospace, on military and defense research.

I don’t subscribe to the notion that liberals are inherently anti-military or anti-government. As I have opined previously, I don’t find the word “liberal” a pejorative. I do, however, object to the left-wing and far left-wing. As a strongly conservative person (politically speaking), I also object to the Ann Coulters and Rush Limbaughs of the world, as I feel they stifle debate and discourse to the same or greater extent as their left-wing counterparts.

My dad was an aerospace engineer for Ford Aerospace and he worked on the Milsat and Intelsat programs during the ’60s, 70’s and 80’s. Because of the nature of those programs, Ford, Lockheed and the other companies were hush-hush about the work, but also because of the potential for negative press as well. Defense work was perceived in many parts of the Bay Area, and especially the campuses of Cal and Berkeley, as being evil. There were a lot of holdouts from the counterculture movement of the 1960s, and there were very left leaning academics at both institutions who loved demonizing the “military/industrial complex” and the defense industries. I always felt Stanford especially was very hypocritical in their desire to appease both sides.

I don’t think we necessarily need more political parties, I think we need to return to reasoned discourse and dialogue and turn our brains back on. This sound bite universe we now occupy, in conjunction with the witless stupidity of Political Correctness, has effectively hamstrung any attempts to have a meaningful discussion on any topic of worth.

The example of that government employee who was fired for using the term “niggardly” (in it’s proper context, and to describe a miserly program) is a prime example.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Duke: Let me qualify what I said a little further, as I don’t want to create an incorrect perception. When I was younger, it wasn’t uncommon for Stanford academics to routinely protest against the military (and the ROTC program) and the government. At the same time, Stanford was raking in millions for DoD projects, as well as participating with local companies, including Lockheed and Ford Aerospace, on military and defense research.

I don’t subscribe to the notion that liberals are inherently anti-military or anti-government. As I have opined previously, I don’t find the word “liberal” a pejorative. I do, however, object to the left-wing and far left-wing. As a strongly conservative person (politically speaking), I also object to the Ann Coulters and Rush Limbaughs of the world, as I feel they stifle debate and discourse to the same or greater extent as their left-wing counterparts.

My dad was an aerospace engineer for Ford Aerospace and he worked on the Milsat and Intelsat programs during the ’60s, 70’s and 80’s. Because of the nature of those programs, Ford, Lockheed and the other companies were hush-hush about the work, but also because of the potential for negative press as well. Defense work was perceived in many parts of the Bay Area, and especially the campuses of Cal and Berkeley, as being evil. There were a lot of holdouts from the counterculture movement of the 1960s, and there were very left leaning academics at both institutions who loved demonizing the “military/industrial complex” and the defense industries. I always felt Stanford especially was very hypocritical in their desire to appease both sides.

I don’t think we necessarily need more political parties, I think we need to return to reasoned discourse and dialogue and turn our brains back on. This sound bite universe we now occupy, in conjunction with the witless stupidity of Political Correctness, has effectively hamstrung any attempts to have a meaningful discussion on any topic of worth.

The example of that government employee who was fired for using the term “niggardly” (in it’s proper context, and to describe a miserly program) is a prime example.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Duke: My dad used to say that the Silicon Valley’s dirty little secret was that all entrepreneurial vision was underwritten by Defense Dept dollars.

The model you mention was in existence from the beginning, and it started with companies like Xerox, IBM, HP and Fairchild. Stanford University also threw off a tremendous number of entrepeneurs and innovators (few folks know that SUN Microsystems stands for Stanford University Network).

The New New Thing has always been the raison d’etre of Silicon Valley and the adage there has always been Innovate or Die (or be acquired, which is where Yahoo is right now). Funny that the more things change, the more they stay the same.

I still get a laugh whenever someone quotes Al Gore and his “inventing the internet” nonsense. My dad had a DARPANet connection to Lawrence Berkeley and Lawrence Livermore Labs starting back in the 1970s. DARPANet was the forerunner to the internet, and a major interconnection point between the defense contractors, the universities and the testing facilities. As liberal as Stanford and Cal might have been (and continue to be), they didn’t hesitate to take Uncle Sam’s money for defense work.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Duke: My dad used to say that the Silicon Valley’s dirty little secret was that all entrepreneurial vision was underwritten by Defense Dept dollars.

The model you mention was in existence from the beginning, and it started with companies like Xerox, IBM, HP and Fairchild. Stanford University also threw off a tremendous number of entrepeneurs and innovators (few folks know that SUN Microsystems stands for Stanford University Network).

The New New Thing has always been the raison d’etre of Silicon Valley and the adage there has always been Innovate or Die (or be acquired, which is where Yahoo is right now). Funny that the more things change, the more they stay the same.

I still get a laugh whenever someone quotes Al Gore and his “inventing the internet” nonsense. My dad had a DARPANet connection to Lawrence Berkeley and Lawrence Livermore Labs starting back in the 1970s. DARPANet was the forerunner to the internet, and a major interconnection point between the defense contractors, the universities and the testing facilities. As liberal as Stanford and Cal might have been (and continue to be), they didn’t hesitate to take Uncle Sam’s money for defense work.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Duke: My dad used to say that the Silicon Valley’s dirty little secret was that all entrepreneurial vision was underwritten by Defense Dept dollars.

The model you mention was in existence from the beginning, and it started with companies like Xerox, IBM, HP and Fairchild. Stanford University also threw off a tremendous number of entrepeneurs and innovators (few folks know that SUN Microsystems stands for Stanford University Network).

The New New Thing has always been the raison d’etre of Silicon Valley and the adage there has always been Innovate or Die (or be acquired, which is where Yahoo is right now). Funny that the more things change, the more they stay the same.

I still get a laugh whenever someone quotes Al Gore and his “inventing the internet” nonsense. My dad had a DARPANet connection to Lawrence Berkeley and Lawrence Livermore Labs starting back in the 1970s. DARPANet was the forerunner to the internet, and a major interconnection point between the defense contractors, the universities and the testing facilities. As liberal as Stanford and Cal might have been (and continue to be), they didn’t hesitate to take Uncle Sam’s money for defense work.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Duke: My dad used to say that the Silicon Valley’s dirty little secret was that all entrepreneurial vision was underwritten by Defense Dept dollars.

The model you mention was in existence from the beginning, and it started with companies like Xerox, IBM, HP and Fairchild. Stanford University also threw off a tremendous number of entrepeneurs and innovators (few folks know that SUN Microsystems stands for Stanford University Network).

The New New Thing has always been the raison d’etre of Silicon Valley and the adage there has always been Innovate or Die (or be acquired, which is where Yahoo is right now). Funny that the more things change, the more they stay the same.

I still get a laugh whenever someone quotes Al Gore and his “inventing the internet” nonsense. My dad had a DARPANet connection to Lawrence Berkeley and Lawrence Livermore Labs starting back in the 1970s. DARPANet was the forerunner to the internet, and a major interconnection point between the defense contractors, the universities and the testing facilities. As liberal as Stanford and Cal might have been (and continue to be), they didn’t hesitate to take Uncle Sam’s money for defense work.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Duke: My dad used to say that the Silicon Valley’s dirty little secret was that all entrepreneurial vision was underwritten by Defense Dept dollars.

The model you mention was in existence from the beginning, and it started with companies like Xerox, IBM, HP and Fairchild. Stanford University also threw off a tremendous number of entrepeneurs and innovators (few folks know that SUN Microsystems stands for Stanford University Network).

The New New Thing has always been the raison d’etre of Silicon Valley and the adage there has always been Innovate or Die (or be acquired, which is where Yahoo is right now). Funny that the more things change, the more they stay the same.

I still get a laugh whenever someone quotes Al Gore and his “inventing the internet” nonsense. My dad had a DARPANet connection to Lawrence Berkeley and Lawrence Livermore Labs starting back in the 1970s. DARPANet was the forerunner to the internet, and a major interconnection point between the defense contractors, the universities and the testing facilities. As liberal as Stanford and Cal might have been (and continue to be), they didn’t hesitate to take Uncle Sam’s money for defense work.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

raptor: My dad took me to Palo Alto Research Center a couple of times, back in the mid-1970s. It was an amazing place, and what is even more amazing is the sheer amount of genius that Xerox threw away. I’m sure you know this, but the mouse, ethernet networking, and dozens of other innovations were either discarded, or sold cheap to competitors, because Xerox couldn’t use them in their xerographic business. Stunning when you think about it.

Speaking of ancient history, and the old guard “dinosaur” mentality: A good friend of my dad’s was an engineer with Amdahl, the mainframe maker. He opined at a BBQ (circa 1981) that the PC would never take off, and true computing power would always be held by the “big iron” (mainframes). Whoops.

My dad offered to cut me a deal on the Los Altos place, but my wife at the time didn’t want to move to the Bay Area, and didn’t really get along with my parents. So, I hear ya. Woulda, coulda, shoulda.

[Author]

Posts