Alt-BEAM Archive

Message #00637



To: Steven Bolt sbolt@xs4all.nl, beam@corp.sgi.com
From: "George Rix" rix.g@bmts.com
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 08:21:27 -0500
Subject: [alt-beam] Re: BEAM `claims' and misdemeanors, WAS: question



'If anything can possibly go wrong, it probably already has'-Murphy's law

----------
>From: Steven Bolt
>To: beam@corp.sgi.com
>Subject: Re: BEAM `claims' and misdemeanors, WAS: question
>Date: Wed, Feb 17, 1999, 10:47 AM
>

>> Well I, for one, am pretty darn confused. I assume you're talking about a
>> microcore, as in the circuit that I first read about as being a BEAM
>> circuit? Now I'm even more confused. Are you being sarcastic, or serious?
>> I'm not really sure.
>
> I meant, there are no commercially sold BEAM-labeled `bots
> containing a uC. At least I don't know of any.
Solarbotics Scoutwalker, for one. Or is that not labeled BEAM?
>> Is cybug a BEAM bot?
>
> That question has been answered by its designer.
It was a rhetorical question. I guess I'm not as much of a newbie as I let
on.
>> As Ian Bernstein asked, what is a BEAM bot? It is a robot which
>> makes use of the BEAM philosophy,
>
> `Philosophy': The search for the nature and meaning of existence,
> according to my dictionary. It seems a pretty grandiose word for
> having maximum fun with minimal electronics and one or more
> electromotors. But sure, outside the commercial aspect - I
> erroneously believed BEAM to actually be a trademark - BEAM `bots
> are any and all `bots you care to call BEAM.
>
> Nervous Nets and so on are part of a subset, so to speak, one with
> patents and lawyers attached.
>
> Best,
>
> Steve
Again, it was rhetorical. Sorry.
Signing off,
Rob Rix

------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/alt-beam
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com

Home