Alt-BEAM Archive
Message #02306
To: bshannon@tiac.net
From: JVernonM@aol.com
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 01:31:59 EDT
Subject: [alt-beam] Re: CPU again? (was Beam genome)
In a message dated 4/13/99 7:37:30 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
bshannon@tiac.net writes:
>
> I feel that the ability to 'transplant' sets of behaviors and directly
> compare them in a common body.
>
> The common body eliminates a lot of variables while permiting a direct
> evaluation of different sets of behaviors. This would greatly
> accelerate
> behavioral development and robot evolution.
>
That's exactly my point. The common body would give some kind of platform to
test and improve both the brain and the body. We all know what terms to use
to build and improve that brain. But, without a standardized method of
categorizing the separate components of the body and how it can be improved,
then there is no common point of reference to expedite and test that body.
Another thought. If those that contribute to the development of that body are
able to cause some kind of serious evolutionary advancements then who
benefits? I guess in this situation where the lawyers and patents have been
put in place, it would only be Mr. Tilden. How many people do you think
contributed to the development of the body mechanics of the Model T for use
by Henry Ford and did it for no monetary or historical credit? None I should
think. So, why are we discussing building a better mouse trap for the already
established hierarchy of BEAM? It would seem that the only legal forum for
presenting new, better mechanics that can benefit the creator is Solarbotics.
In other words, the only way for you to benefit from what you build is to get
an OK from Tilden and then start cutting the pie among those who called the
lawyers first. Actually, it's a little weirder than that. When the discussion
leaned toward copyright and patents on the list before I got a letter from
Mark Dalton informing me that if there was a patent or copyright question I
just needed to talk to one of "them" and "they" would talk to Tilden about
it. Who the hell is "them"? is there more than one name on those legal
documents? It really had the chilling effect of placing all of us who love
the building and would like to contribute into a situation of being not one
of "them". If we're not one of "them", then why are we so convinced we can
contribute in any meaningful way? I guess we can if we just lower our eyes
and hand over anything we sweat over. After all that is said, I'm beginning
to wonder why we care. When I told Wilf that I thought we had a unique
opportunity to collaborate like no other field before, I had forgotten about
the lawyers. I had forgotten how the joy and satisfaction is sucked out of
everything in pursuit of the all mighty buck. It really makes me wonder why
we try so hard. Maybe transferring our efforts to PIC based bots is the only
viable solution to this problem. Unless we come up with a suneater or some
other lawyer proof method. Or, I could just shut up, build a few more toys,
and watch the Japanese build the first automaton, as BEAM blossoms into a
members only hobby franchise. Which I fear, has already happened. It's a
shame really, imagine what we could do if we sent the lawyers packing.
Jim
------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/alt-beam
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com
Home