IP: More on the Dresden DE Symposium for Global Networks and Local Values

[Dave Farber <farber () cis upenn edu>]

Two points. The first and most important is that one of the key players in the Dresden meeting organization was the 
Computer Science and Telecommun ications Board of the National Research Council. I was privileged to have spent 10 
years on it and one of its predecessors -- the Board on Telecom ..

The work the CSTB does has been a keystone of the evolution of our field. Its reports on Cryptography, Trust, etc have 
been seminal reports. I am sure "Marjory Blumenthal" <MBlument () nas edu>  can aim any of you to the vast number of 
key pubs and studies the CSTB has done.

Second.,  in reference to a remark made below, I think I was there to meet George Gilder when he arrived at those ideas.

Dave


Date: Sat, 20 Feb 1999 13:26:49 -0500
To: farber () cis upenn edu
From: gaj () portman com (Gordon Jacobson)

Ah!  This is satisfaction indeed!

Dave -

Welcome to the world of prognostication.  It is a fine "art." :-)

In particular, I want to congratulate you on finally piercing the veil of 
hype surrounding the true value and viability of the "Intelligently 
Switched Services," (the Telco cash-cow) as promulgated by the Telcos, 
Carriers and their media cohorts.

> From 1988 (the earliest days I know of, during which the Telcos were being 
actively told that they better start focusing on the "Internet" and its 
potentially devastating impact on their "cash cow") it took the better part 
of eight years for them to shake themselves loose from their traditional 
Bellhead thinking.

Unfortunately for them, by the time they were ready to do something about 
it, the disruptive technopreneurs were so far ahead on the action curve 
(not to even give glance to the learning curve) that it was already far too 
late to avert the collective ultimate demise of their present form.

I am sure that you have by now read Bill St. Arnaud's Discussion paper 
http://www.canet2.net/frames/startarcheng.html , on the forthcoming high 
speed Canadian net, so you are clearly aware that he sees the cost of 
connecting the last mile with fiber as being cheaper than coax and only 
marginally more dear than upgrading existing Telco infrastructure to accept 
high speed levels of xDSL.  Perhaps his numbers relate more closely to the 
Canadian model, but I do believe that we are not far off from similar cost 
structures here in the US.  It is only a matter of time - a short time!

Your posting last week on Sandia Labs' Photonic Crystal, and recent 
announcements from Ball Semiconductor concerning their X-ray Lithography 
technology, from Cree Research and Sterling Semiconductor on their advances 
in Silicon Carbide technology
and from Commercial Technology Corp on their Optical CDMA and "True" 
Optical Cross Connect technologies all begin to address the "difficult 
technology issues" you reference.

I wonder if you are not being a tad pessimistic on the possibility that 
software will become the ultimate wall that blocks further computer advances.

I have an abiding belief that the ingenuity and drive of the 
entrepreneurial spirit will always find an alternative from "outside of the 
box" and wonder if it will not be the speed of light which proves to be the 
ultimate limitation.

I have passed your paper onto George Gilder.  I am sure he will be as 
please as I that you have "joined the fold." :-)

GAJ

At 09:16 PM 2/19/99 -0500, you wrote:

> Ultra high speed all optical networks

> With the steady progress in the technology that underlies optical networks
> it is now feasible to predict with some certainty the future directions.

> Multi-Gigabit speeds have raised a whole new set of very difficult technical
> issues.

> Perhaps the serious is the draining of the long distance income and even
> local service fees that will be lost by the removal of the business use.
> That will most likely force the telephone companies to raise their fees.
> Such raised fees will impact more strongly on the less advantaged segment of
> the population.

> The end of history in computers has often been predicted based on limits of
> line width etc on semiconductor devices. Each decade we predict the end of
> increased capability due to these effects and each decade it keeps growing.
> At least for the next 5 years we can expect increased speed and capability
> out of our microprocessors. Architectures that used to require rooms of
> equipment are now in a small chip. Further we see yet again the blending of
> software methodology with hardware architecture as computers that require
> complex and capable compilers are entering the marketplace. We can expect to
> see this sophistication increase and begin to see optical interconnects
> between components to overcome the limits of wire connections. Further we
> will see increased use of multi-processor architectures to gain increased
> performance from commodity components as well as increased capability to
> provide security on the chip. The limitations on computing, at least at the
> non-supercomputer end, will come from software.