Alt-BEAM Archive
Message #03626
To: "'JVernonM@aol.com'" JVernonM@aol.com
From: Wilf Rigter Wilf.Rigter@powertech.bc.ca
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 12:27:10 -0700
Subject: [alt-beam] Re: BEAM and machine evolution
Dear Jim,
Beam is a microcosm of the real world. Beam has stories to tell about
people problems money life the universe and everything.
Beam is an awakening to scientific and technical ideas. I don't mean
of the formal kind but as a shared learning experience of a community
of inquiring minds.
Beam is a pond to gaze into and discover a dream of living machines.
Beam is what you want it be.
well, back to the work bench!
enjoy
Wilf Rigter mailto:wilf.rigter@powertech.bc.ca
tel: (604)590-7493
fax: (604)590-3411
> -----Original Message-----
> From: JVernonM@aol.com [SMTP:JVernonM@aol.com]
> Sent: Monday, May 24, 1999 11:41 AM
> To: sbolt@xs4all.nl
> Cc: beam@corp.sgi.com
> Subject: Re: BEAM and machine evolution
>
> In a message dated 5/24/99 12:08:45 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> sbolt@xs4all.nl
> writes:
>
> > BEAMer knowledge has difficulty expanding, because of the curious
> > accent on tinkering as opposed to design. For instance, there is no
> > way to get the various 2-transistor SEs `right', because there are
> > fundamental problems with that design, which no amount of tinkering
> > can solve. Hence these supposedly simple devices will forever be
> > a source of much frustration.
>
> Actually Steven, I think there is another more important hindrance to BEAM
>
> knowledge expansion. In my opinion BEAM is a very tightly wrapped ball of
> biases. Your suneaters are an excellent example. Suneaters solve many of
> the
> problems with the S.E.'s, but almost no one builds them. You offer kits,
> but
> I would say you haven't sold many. You are not Mark T. or Dave H. so your
> not
> really BEAM. Even if you are, you aren't. The knee jerk reaction in the
> BEAM
> community to different, and even better ideas is to pounce with ferocity
> on
> the turf invader. Even if the ideas have merit, they are rejected as non
> BEAM, impossible, unimportant, or unnecessary. BEAM is a technology that
> revolves around the opinions of a small minority of people. They, through
> the
> use of certain bias, really control the flow of acceptance. Particularly
> on
> this list. Anything that deviates from the norm, even if sound and
> workable
> hasn't got a prayer if not accepted by that group. That's why people
> fiddle
> endlessly with FLED based poppers that barely work and completely ignore
> better options like the suneater. Evolution? I'm beginning to wonder. If,
> as
> Tilden suggests, robotics evolution is in us, then I'm beginning to wonder
>
> about it's viability. We don't accept better ideas unless they come from
> the
> perceived correct source. We shun better circuits and designs unless they
> are
> offered or accepted by the hierarchy. In truth, I'm beginning to think
> BEAM
> can't evolve. After all, BEAM seems to be simply a Tilden emulator. Most
> of
> us just want to copy Mark's designs, or Dave's designs, and pull them out
> every now and then to impress friends. I'm not so sure this is the way to
> robotic evolution. Perhaps Dave is right, BEAM is no more than a hobby
> meant
> to lead one to graduating to greater things. But, then there's that CPU
> bias.
> I'm really beginning to wonder if there is, or ever will be a high end to
> BEAM. I'm sorry guys, but when I saw Stryder shuffling across the screen
> on
> PBS last week, I couldn't help but remember what Tilden said about Cog at
> MIT. I mean, Cog is a very advanced system. It can recognize faces and
> expressions, and respond in kind. That sounds like serious research to me.
>
> But all Tilden could muster was that all it can do is barely keep from
> beating itself to death. And this bias filters down to the BEAM community
> as
> CPU's suck. Don't even look at them. As I watched Stryder stumble over one
>
> bot it didn't know was there and finally bump into another Symet that
> triggered it's leg tactile sensor, I thought, "This thing can barely
> walk."
> As far as I can tell, it only lifts it's legs a couple of millimeters off
> the
> table top. It's not even really walking. But, from Tilden's point of view,
> it
> has more merit as a precursor to robotic evolution than Cog. That inside
> out
> bias will forever limit BEAM to the hobby work bench. This attitude
> filters
> down until it becomes BEAM law. I know I rant on these things to much, and
>
> this is the last one. I am getting nowhere trying to explain what I
> perceive
> as destructive and limiting attitudes. If someone is hell bent on stifling
>
> their own creativity, there's nothing that will change it. I'm beginning
> to
> think BEAM will forever be the crystal radio. Fun to play with, easy to
> build, and a learning experience. But, it eventually has little to do with
>
> the radio industry as a whole. It's a shame really.
> Jim
------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/alt-beam
http://www.egroups.com
- Simplifying group communications
Home