Alt-BEAM Archive
Message #05134
To: beam@sgiblab.sgi.com
From: Steven Bolt sbolt@xs4all.nl
Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 23:50:15 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: [alt-beam] Re: Something funny with the 1382 voltage triggers?
On Thu, 8 Jul 1999 JVernonM@aol.com wrote:
> > That wasn't what he said, Jim.
> Well, yes, that is what he said. He stated that even the "Elite"
> would not "parse" it. Now, I may be totally stupid, but I can make
> the inference that if the 5 or so Godlets that be don't have the
> stuff to understand, that pretty much puts the rest of us in the
> moron category.
You shouldn't interpret `elite' as people having a deep knowledge
of electronics, chaos theory or whatever you feel is needed to deal
with the Unicore BeamAnt. I'll happily admit that I don't quite
parse it - his statemant was to the point rather than insulting.
However, imho the jury is still out on whether there really is
somehting profound to parse :)
Mark T. occasionally shares brief glimpses of what he's doing, and
I sort of think I know what he's aiming for. He isn't there yet.
Present design method requires a static specification, and results
in a machine with fixed properties, which is suitable for a defined
task in a defined environment. Real `living machines' grow and
adapt to new tasks in new environments. We can't design anything
like that, even in principle, using present design methods. Mark T.
seems to aim at machinery which is at least partly chaotic, in the
hope that it will somehow be more in tune with the chaotic Real
World. He wants to go beyond the limits of what can now be designed.
It may not prove doable in the end. At this time it's beyond everyone.
> Take it as an attack if you must, but I know an insult when I
> read it! I think Mr. Tilden is lucky it was not raining that
> particular day, because his nose was so high in the air, he
> would have surely drowned.
It may seem like that. But I assure you he's a good guy. Easier to
misunderstand than most, perhaps.
On Thu, 8 Jul 1999 JVernonM@aol.com wrote:
[ So we see the same questions and frustrations
being repeated ad infinitum ]
> Perhaps this relates directly to NO new information being
> released in over 3 years. As far as Mark and Dave not objecting,
> I have to say a resounding, SO! The best we're getting is a
> quick, "shut up and go play with our hobby." This clamping of
> give and take is the real problem with seeing things move ahead.
> As Mark said, "I long for the days when BEAM was a cool hobby."
> How do you innovate from that view?
Mark T. doesn't want to deal with designable circuitry as we know
it. He wants to do something very new and strange, which isn't very
suitable as a hobby. As long as you and others require BEAM to
depend on what Mark T. does, it isn't going anywhere.
Best,
Steve
----------------------------------------------------------------------
# sbolt@xs4all.nl # Steven Bolt # popular science monthly KIJK #
----------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroups.com home: http://www.egroups.com/group/alt-beam
http://www.egroups.com
- Simplifying group communications
Home