Alt-BEAM Archive

Message #10738



To: "'beam@sgiblab.sgi.com'" beam@sgiblab.sgi.com
From: Wilf Rigter Wilf.Rigter@powertech.bc.ca
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2000 06:54:32 -0800
Subject: [alt-beam] Re: Robotic philosophy (Tendency toward miniaturization)


I believe it is called "Mostly Harmless"

wilf

> -----Original Message-----
> From: George Rix [SMTP:rix.g@bmts.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2000 11:50 PM
> To: beam@sgiblab.sgi.com
> Subject: Re: Robotic philosophy (Re: Tendency toward miniaturization)
>
> > And, yes, I've got the four books in the trilogy :)
> Hate to say it, but I have four too, and I've read five.
>
> Anybody else read the fifth?
>
> Can't remember what its called, though...
>
> Peace out!
>
> Rob Rix
>
> Don't take a walk, climb a tree < an ancient truism, invented last week.



10739 Wed, 23 Feb 2000 10:07:09 -0800 [alt-beam] Re: Bugs Bunny really CAN talk!(Robotic philosophy (Tendency beam@sgiblab.sgi.com Laura Malinowski Laura/Rob Malinowski
--------------BE2096C718651E0AF39B51AD
x-mac-type="54455854";
x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
content-transfer-encoding: 7bit

Richard,
Anthropomorphizing, gee I didn't get quite that far with BEAM, I am
still trying to emulate insects not human behavior. If you really think
about the definition of BEAM, the study of the four basic components -
biology, elect... may not make you a renaissance man but it certainly
pushes you along that path. About the Bugs Bunny comment - Thank you.
Bugs and Leonardo D. are two of my role models.

All in good fun
Rob M.

Richard Caudle wrote:

> Balderdash! Anthropomorphizing a few components does not make us
> Renaissance Men. I say it makes us fools.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Laura Malinowski Laura/Rob Malinowski
> Richard,
> Sorry I just can't let this slide without taking a shot.
>
> "Oxymoron" - I don't see that as much as I see people not
> afraid to think about the scope of what they are doing. I
> believe the term you may looking for is "Renaissance man".
>
> Rob M.
>
> Richard Caudle wrote:
>
> > Huh? Men of Science talking Philosophy? If that's not an
> > oxymoron, I don't know what is! Richard ;)
> > -----------------------------------------------------------
> > Chicks dig me because I rarely wear underwear and when I
> > do it's usually something exotic.
>


--------------BE2096C718651E0AF39B51AD
content-transfer-encoding: 7bit




Richard,

Anthropomorphizing, gee I didn't get quite that far with BEAM, I am
still trying to emulate insects not human behavior. If you really think
about the definition of BEAM, the study of the four basic components -
biology, elect... may not make you a renaissance man but it certainly pushes
you along that path. About the Bugs Bunny comment - Thank you. Bugs and
Leonardo D. are two of my role models.

All in good fun

Rob M.

Richard Caudle wrote:

 Balderdash! Anthropomorphizing
a few components does not make us Renaissance Men.  I say it makes
us fools.
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
----- Original Message -----


style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black">From:
Laura
Malinowski Laura/Rob Malinowski

 Richard,

 Sorry I just can't let this slide without taking a shot.

"Oxymoron" -  I don't see that as much as I see people not afraid
to think about the scope of what they are doing. I believe the term you
may looking for is "Renaissance man".

Rob M.

Richard Caudle wrote:


Huh?
Men of Science talking Philosophy? 
If that's not an oxymoron, I don't know what is! Richard 
;)
Chicks dig me because I rarely wear underwear and when I do it's
usually something exotic.








--------------BE2096C718651E0AF39B51AD--



10740 Wed, 23 Feb 2000 08:33:28 -0700 [alt-beam] Re: Aquabots beam@sgiblab.sgi.com Robert Stein At 07:27 AM 2/23/00 -0500, you wrote:
>In a message dated 2/23/00 4:02:19 AM Eastern Standard Time,
>HENDERSONGANG@bigpond.com writes:
>
> > I was just wondering if using a drive shaft type thing on an Aquabot would
> > work as i can never seem to get Jims tutorial right and water seeps in.
>Also
> > I don't have any spare walkman motors around (anymore) so I was wondering
> > are there any substitutes?
>Is there something I can do to improve the tutorial? Could be I'm not
>explaining it well enough. I've never had a failure due to water
>infiltration. Walkman motors seem to work the best. I'm not sure of a
>suitable replacement. There is a Walkman style jobbie that Walmart sells for
>5.00 bucks. I buy up a bunch and cannibalize them.
>
>See ya,
>Jim
>http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Exhibit/8281/beamart.html
>ICQ# 5565787

I too, have cannibalized these walkman motors. These are also the ones I
used for my walker. I am powering them with only 74act240 chips. More
than enough power to get it through sticky situations.
I have followed your tutorial and have had no problems. Keep in
mind that there are walkman motors with different shaft diameters. The
cheapest walkmans at "wally-world" worked for me though.

Robert

Home