Alt-BEAM Archive
Message #00397
To: dennlill@buffnet.net
From: JVernonM@aol.com
Date: Sun, 14 Feb 1999 19:56:40 EST
Subject: [alt-beam] Re: question
In a message dated 2/14/99 6:27:03 PM Eastern Standard Time,
dennlill@buffnet.net writes:
> If MIT funded BEAM research I'd bet serious money
> that they would churn out some serious quality items.
>
I'd have sworn LANL was funding BEAM tech. Hmmmmm...
> ITS A KIT. And, if
> you notice, THE ONLY KIT. If someone wants to prove how cheap the tech can
> get I'd invite them to start their own company.
I'm not talking about kits, but still competition does ultimately lead to
lower prices. I think the licensing agreements would still be hefty though.
> What do you mean by REAL WORLD?
I mean real robots. Autonomous, seemingly sentiant, and possessing the ability
to interact with humans on a level that produces meaningful relationships.
This can be construction, hazardous employment, servitude, entertainment,
pets, household maintenance, this is limited only by your imagination. Perhaps
this is my own interpratation. I basicly believe we (builders) are attracted
to the idea of human created artificial life. Being alive entails much more
than being able to walk over sand dunes.
> And are you saying that the CPU controlled Robotic assembly arm in car
> factories wasn't incorporated for the same reason?
Yes I it was. I was talking about the claims of being able to build the bot
mentioned above out of 3 transistors.
> So? There's a trillion ways to build a light seeking robot. And you know
> what? Because the meaning behind "BEAM" is so vague, we can call every
> single one of those techniquies "BEAM TEK"
That statement, in it's self, is the reason for much of this discent.
> There is no way that you can say a three
> transistor BEAM bot is more expensive to produce then a CPU based bot.
> Perhpas if you POP out CPU's by the millions, but the fact of the matter is,
> you pop out pre-made three transistor bot's like CPU's, and the BEAM stuff
> will still be cheaper.
Of course a three transistor machine is cheaper to build, if your goal is to
make a bot that only "jiggles" every few seconds.
> For a second play NASA, and build MAR's Pathfinder.
> Now who uses Cadillac of parts? You can buy parts or you can wreck your
> walkman for parts.
I don't see the comparison of pathfinder and a symet, sorry. I haven't been
able to build anything from parts pulled EXCLUSIVELY from an old walkman. I
still had to buy at least a couple of new parts from suppliers. Hype.
> Did someone make you buy a kit a gunpoint?
No, and again, I'm not talking about kits, or Solarbotics for that matter.
Dave can charge whatever the market will bear, and rightly so. I'm talking
about the mind set of said market.
> Mark T doesn't do that.
Yes, in some ways, he does.
> Serious? Please, every one of us knows that there isn't ANYTHING anyof us
> need a robot for. We don't explore mars or own a car factory. You're hive
> behaviors are about as use-less as any other BEAM behaviors. Us,
> 'individuals' keep forgeting, what we does means jack.
Sorry you feel that way. I see it differently. I think Mark Tilden is very
serious. I think Craig Maynard is also serious. I think the advances in Japan
by Sony are also serious.
Sincerely,
Jim
------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/alt-beam
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com
Home