If so, I feel we have to back to square 1 in looking at procedures for the development of military applications.
I will also need help in teasing out what else is going on service-wise: every leaf of the onion peeled off seems to reveal
another one under it. But Uh. [?] Buffalano has already been very helpful in that direction.
My unease is about uncovering these circuits stochastically rather than by a more systematic procedure: but perhaps that's
what our task force is all about.
I admire your ambitious visions for the advancement of civil technology!: but I don't think corporate altruism is a sufficient
vehicle. Perhaps a mixed institution could work -- see enclosure --
[END PAGE ONE]
[BEGIN PAGE TWO]
[stamped, DEC 30 1983]
P.S. Ventures vs. mature companies
A further observation on corporate culture: mature companies are risk-averse but have the technical engines for development.
I am working with some of the financial tycoons in N.Y.C. to try to build structures to connect:
dollars -- from venture investor
technical engines -- established industry
smarts -- from univ's.
-- not that these are pure categories
This may work even without govt. (i.e. with tax-benefit rather than grant support.)