Alt-BEAM Archive

Message #02514



To: beam@corp.sgi.com
From: Terry Newton wtnewton@nc5.infi.net
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 09:13:41
Subject: [alt-beam] Re: BEAM and newbies, programmables & cliques...


At 09:20 AM 4/20/99 +0200, Steven Bolt wrote:
>On Mon, 19 Apr 1999, Bob Shannon wrote:
>> Ahhh, again, PICBOT II. Why is that 'less attractive', simply because
>> it has a programmable device?
>
>You mean Terry's work? He recently described a little PIC-based
>`bot which I find very sexy.

Thanks!

>But for every 1 BEAMer on the list who is interested in programmable
>devices, I'd estimate there are at least 10 who couldn't write five
>coherent lines of code in any relevant programming language, and
>what's more, they don't want to. We should be careful what we flood
>their mailboxes with, don't you think? Unless we want to treat this
>list as a plaything for some tiny group of `advanced' people. Which
>I hope Mark Dalton wouldn't allow.

Well put. Listen up people, The PICBOT is NOT BEAM! (most of you
already know:) It incorporates some beam ideas but unless discussing
the mechanics, charge parameters of the solar engine or some other
part that can be applied to beam, discussions of the PICBOT are
off-topic here. It is better to take these discussions to private
email, web links etc.

Let's have more "monocores" (thanks Wilf!) and stuff like that.
I'm not saying No Programmables at all but let's keep it in
context, like "where can I find stamp info". Simple and helpful.

Terry Newton


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

Home