Alt-BEAM Archive
Message #02423
To: Wilf Rigter Wilf.Rigter@powertech.bc.ca,
From: Dennison dennlill@buffnet.net
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1999 11:05:41 -0400
Subject: [alt-beam] Some thoughts on beam
I think what people are misunderstanding is that 'BEAM' _isn't really
anything_ . Supposidly it's a philosophy. Then it's like subsumption
architecture, but subsumption _really isn't anything_. It's more of a
description. I could build subsumption architecture with a few bicore, or
op-amps, or (like the example in the front of the mobile robots book) one
powered by timers and relays. It's all subsumption. And then of course, I
could slap a small solar panel onto a rugwarrior robot, and suddenly it's
BEAM. But, as some have pointed out, it's beam even WITHOUT the solarpannel.
Cybug is 'beam', and it's also ordinary analog robotics.
Right now we are all enthusiasts. Don't confuse that. There may be a few
people in high orders of academia here, but otherwise were no different from
the OWII robotics club, the one you sign up for and get a free t-shirt and
maybe a poster once a year. As dave said, We're the people who said 'COOL! I
want to build one'. And we do, and when we finish, we sit back and say wow.
And were happy. People do the same with the other robots "wow, thats cool. I
want one."
You know what happens when my friends look at my robots? They are impressed.
They don't understand how it's works. They are only impressed with the fact
that I did build something, my talent. they aren't so impressed with the
robots. They always have suggestiosn about what I could add or do different,
when they know nothing about it. And do you know what my friend Matt, who's
going to MIT next year, said to me? "What would be really cool, better than
these things, is if you could build like, a remote controlled car or
something."
A remote controlled car.
See, we are enthusisats. We build kits at home like others make clay pots or
doll houses. I like the fact that we are trying to build a science here. I
do. It's neat, I'm glad to be apart of it. And if one day, you can take a
BEAM 101 course at MIT, I would be proud as all hell if in that text book
one or two of us had our names mentioned. Small gods of BEAM. But you know
what? in thouse textbooks they just aren't going to call things, Fangovore.
Or Denni-o-bot. Or Rich-monkey. It just won't happen. All the robot's in
acedemia are called by their propper names. Mecahnical names. Infact, just
about all of them are 'Mobile Robot." And thats it.
Now, BEAM has a long way to come before it's a science. And trust me, it
won't be on this list where it does. Things just don't happen like that. It
will become a science at a university. When someone is somewhere where other
people look and listen _for real_. Thats were it makes a difference.
But! This list is WHERE we are building the people who will do that. Will
use beam as a theses project. Look at me, ian, ivar, chiu, richard, and
others. I'm going to college next year. The're going to college also, if not
next year, then soon. The young people on this list will be the people who
do take 'beam' to the real next level. Imagine what will happen then. Last
summer along, at Carnegie Mellon, I must have fascinated twenty kids to
become beamers. One or two that I belive still lurk on the list.
A genome sounds interesting, and it certianly wouldn't hurt anything. But in
terms of practicle-ness, I do agree with Dave. Right now, most people really
are -wow cool, I want to build one. Telling them it's a fangovore doesn't
change anything.
Dennison
------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/alt-beam
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com
Home