The committee which wrote the report includes prominent names like Alfred Aho, Richard Karp and Christos Papadimitriou. This ensures that the sweeping conclusions drawn by the committee will be considered very seriously by funding agencies, at least in the USA. While it is true that the modalities of science funding and administration are vastly different in the USA and most of the rest of the world, we cannot afford to be complacent about the issues raised by this report.
Since many people in India may not have actually had access to this report, we provide an (impartial!) summary of its contents, along with a reference to the source from which the full report is available. We also summarize a highly-publicized rejoinder by Oded Goldreich and Avi Wigderson which was circulated at the STOC conference this year.
The aim of this exercise is to generate a debate within the IARCS community on the issues raised by the Aho et al report. To start with, we present two responses in this issue of the Newsletter and look forward to hearing from others on this topic.
--Editor