Alt-BEAM Archive
Message #02250
To: beam@corp.sgi.com
From: JVernonM@aol.com
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 1999 16:22:39 EDT
Subject: [alt-beam] Beam genome
Hello all,
I guess the BEAM genome idea wasn't very popular. I got 5 responses from the
list. One completely negative, two "interesting", and two corrections on the
Z-bridge credit. So, out of 400 or so people I got two "kinda interestings".
If this were one of Ian's polls, I'd say it went over like a lead balloon. I
guess the idea occurred to me because the terms, genome, robo-genetic stock,
and genetic algorithms are tossed around in Tilden's papers and this forum
quite often. But, as far as my humble researching has discovered, there is no
underlying structure to support those claims. I mean it's one thing to say
you are expanding the evolutionary adaptation of the automaton, but without
specific examples of how those changes are occurring and what characteristics
are being used to promote and document that change, then you can't really
speak in those terms. For instance, you can't point to a particular breed of
dog and declare it a new more advanced breed without any means of comparison
or agreed upon guidelines to support your claim of a new more advanced breed.
You are required to follow guidelines that prove the blood line of that breed
and how contributors have changed it into a better beast. I guess my point
was, that if you have no official terms for comparison, and you don't
incorporate a system by which you can show the evolutionary line that is
leading you to that living machine, then the terms are meaningless. They
simply are fluff added to more fluff to make what your doing sound cool
without any real documented approaches as are used to describe all other
genetic trees. Without those procedures you're just saying the words. (Don't
get me started on what robot parks have to do with the Jurassic period of
prehistory, except for a cool blockbuster movie tie in.) I think that's the
kernel at the heart of my musings. Tilden has presented his approaches as
being high science, and a practical method for evolving autonomous living
machines. But, there is no documented, scientific guidelines to promote and
compare the evolutionary history of said machines. It also completely ignores
those who have made some of those advances. I know I'll get flamed to death
over this. That's what happens when you look God in the eye. I also realize
that at this point our critters are usually elaborate toys, but I think many
of us consider the possibility that the techniques may one day lead to very
advanced living machines. If you believe that, I would think a more
scientific approach would be the logical way to document that hypothesis.
One more gripe here. I was leafing through the BEAM booklet the other day
(yeah, I kept it even though it is a waste of money) and on page 49 there is
a description of VBUG 1.5 WALKMAN next to a terrible Xerox looking photo of
same. The description is as follows: "Single battery 0.7Kg. metal/plastic
construction. Unibody frame. 5 tactile, 2 visual sensors. Control Core: 8
transistor Nv. 4 tran. Nu, 22tran. motor. Total: 32 transistors." It says
"motor" not 4 motors. I know the bot pictured has at least 4 motors. Is it
any wonder Guinness got it wrong? I guess you could call it a typo, but I
don't think so. And if it was why wasn't it corrected in subsequent
publications (mine is the 4th issue)? Particularly when being documented by
Guinness. You see, this kind of thing constantly crops up the more you look
and it's very disheartening. It also delegitimizes Tilden and BEAM tech in
the eyes of the robotic research community. I'm not a scientist or a
roboticist, but I know a scam when I see one. By the way, when you do flame
me and if you're a teenager, please be tactful. I'm a little weary of being
scolded by 15 year olds. I have children older than that and I would dress
them down severely for treating adults in that way. And I bet so would your
parents.
But fear not, God is still there, just don't look behind the curtain.
Jim
------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/alt-beam
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com
Home