Alt-BEAM Archive
Message #13477
To: "'beam@sgiblab.sgi.com'" beam@sgiblab.sgi.com
From: Wilf Rigter wilf.rigter@powertech.bc.ca
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2000 09:19:55 -0700
Subject: RE: You guys disappoint me
"Old pond... a frog leaps in water's sound." - Matsuo Basho
.
Just can't stand people for calling a few words poetry, eh?
wilf
> -----Original Message-----
> From: sebastiaan van Vliet [SMTP:sebastiaan_van_v@hotmail.com]
> Sent: Sunday, April 16, 2000 8:35 AM
> To: beam@sgiblab.sgi.com
> Subject: You guys disappoint me
>
>
> I am a little disappointed in Beam community. I just cant stand people are
>
> calling a few blinking LED's a bot. Even a solaroller doesn't seem very
> "bot" to me.
>
> Maybe we should make some rules what is a bot and what not or even make
> categories ranging from blinking LED's to 134562 motor walkers with
> 76437tons of electronics and are superior to humans.
>
> I don't want to be a pain in the ass, but just want some quality in the
> community.
>
> I hope you all agree with me and forgive me if I made a fool out of you
> because you just finished your garden blinking LED's
> ______________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
13478 Sun, 16 Apr 2000 12:47:16 EDT Re: You guys disappoint me beam@sgiblab.sgi.com JVernonM@aol.com In a message dated 4/16/00 11:37:22 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
sebastiaan_van_v@hotmail.com writes:
Man, what side of the bed did you get up on this morning?
> I am a little disappointed in Beam community. I just cant stand people are
> calling a few blinking LED's a bot. Even a solaroller doesn't seem very
> "bot" to me.
Get used to it. Hype is the cornerstone of BEAM. Exaggeration is commonplace.
But, there is some good stuff as well. I, like you, am beginning to wonder
which way the balance tips at times. Of course, both of us admitting this
fact openly, automatically means we have no point and should be ignored.
> Maybe we should make some rules what is a bot and what not or even make
> categories
First mistake, and a common one for newbies. I thought much the same when I
first discovered BEAM. But, very quickly, you will learn who makes the rules
and that your opinion is worth squat. This holds true even if you are right.
Maybe, especially so.
> I don't want to be a pain in the ass, but just want some quality in the
> community.
Second mistake. If you look around, you will quickly find that quality,
accuracy, and consistency are very rare. If you hold to your convictions, you
will be completely alienated. The trick seems to be to agree totally and be
silent when you don't. Sound weird for a robotic discipline? Maybe, just
don't say so out loud.
> I hope you all agree with me and forgive me if I made a fool out of you
> because you just finished your garden blinking LED's
Well, experience tells me that the opposite has just occurred. You just
stated what you feel is true, and it conflicts with acceptable BEAM behavior.
I'm sorry to say, that makes you the fool here. The powers that be don't want
to hear the truth, they want to talk about building bipeds with only one
motor and a single 240 chip. Ludicrous you say? Just don't say so out loud.
If you wish to survive, squelch your opinions, say yes to anything the
hierarchy has to say, and start talking about yet another popper clone. After
all, poppers are the most agile, wonderful, amazing, better than Robby the
robot, unbelievably functional, and only true robot ever conceived by man.
You don't believe me? Just don't say so out loud.
See ya,
Jim
http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Exhibit/8281/beamart.html
ICQ# 55657870
13479 Sun, 16 Apr 2000 12:06:07 -0500 Re: You guys disappoint me "Richard Caudle" Baas,
Lighten up!
One thing that you seem to be missing is that the 'BEAM Community' is
by-and-large made up of high school students and others not associated with
electronics in general.
Criticize, don't deride!
Richard
----------
> From: sebastiaan van Vliet
> To: beam@sgiblab.sgi.com
> Subject: You guys disappoint me
> Date: Sunday, April 16, 2000 10:34 AM
>
>
> I am a little disappointed in Beam community. I just cant stand people
are
> calling a few blinking LED's a bot. Even a solaroller doesn't seem very
> "bot" to me.
>
> Maybe we should make some rules what is a bot and what not or even make
> categories ranging from blinking LED's to 134562 motor walkers with
> 76437tons of electronics and are superior to humans.
>
> I don't want to be a pain in the ass, but just want some quality in the
> community.
>
> I hope you all agree with me and forgive me if I made a fool out of you
> because you just finished your garden blinking LED's
> ______________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>
13480 Sun, 16 Apr 2000 12:17:52 -0500 Re: Monitor Salvage beam@sgiblab.sgi.com Richard Piotter I've never had problems with it. I've sorta been conditioned over many
years to use one arm, only bringing the other in when necessary. If you
want, you could probably use thick gloves too.
Probably be wise to pull or clip all the wires so nothing can transfer a
charge to another section. Un screw/bolt all boards and remove them from
the case and do not mess with the CRT. just pop the back cover back on
and ignore the rest. Capacitors can be discharged with a screwdriver or
a resistor i you want to be more "gentle".
Richard Weait wrote:
>
> At 01:43 PM 4/16/00 +0800, Tan wrote:
> >Hi, i got a old monitor that is spoilt and i want to salvage it. Yeah, i
> >know it's dangerous, but it seems such a waste, so anybody have any tips?
> >Thanks in advance.
>
> Yup. Stay out! Monitors, TV's, Oscilloscopes, etc. can hold
> a dangerous charge for a long time after being unplugged. Even
> if they 'zap' you once, you aren't safe because they can still
> have enough juice to do it again!
>
> If you think that you must play with stuff that can hurt you at
> least get some advice from those that have gone before you. Look
> at the general safety notes and monitor repair FAQ below as a
> start.
>
> Be careful!
>
> http://fribble.cie.rpi.edu/~repairfaq/REPAIR/F_safety.html
>
> http://fribble.cie.rpi.edu/~repairfaq/REPAIR/F_monfaq.html
--
Richard Piotter The Richfiles Robotics & TI web page:
richfile@rconnect.com http://richfiles.calc.org
-- Make Money by Simply Surfing the Net or responding to E-Mail!!!
-- Click below!!!
http://www.alladvantage.com/go.asp?refid=ATL147
http://www.spedia.net/cgi-bin/dir/tz.cgi?run=show_svc&fl=8&vid=329630
13481 Sun, 16 Apr 2000 11:43:42 -0600 Re: [alt-beam] You guys disappoint me "Hyndman" >I am a little disappointed in Beam community. I just cant stand >people
are
>calling a few blinking LED's a bot. Even a solaroller doesn't >seem very
>"bot" to me.
First off, Who are you to judge what other people are building? It's not up
for you to be a critic to people who are just happy for accomplishing
something. BEAM isn't largely about building to create cutting edge
robotics, it's creating for the pleasure of it.
>Maybe we should make some rules what is a bot and what not >or even make
>categories ranging from blinking LED's to 134562 motor walkers >with
>76437tons of electronics and are superior to humans.
Who is "we"? We currently don't have any robots superior to humans btw...
>I don't want to be a pain in the ass, but just want some quality in >the
community.
You sure accomplished that
>I hope you all agree with me and forgive me if I made a fool out >of you
because you just finished your garden blinking LED's
The only person you have made a fool of is yourself, I've been into BEAM
for over 4 years, and I have never read an email as ignorant as yours.
In the words of a Prophet "Less talking, More Building"
Devin
13482 Sun, 16 Apr 2000 12:33:37 -0500 Re: You guys disappoint me beam@sgiblab.sgi.com Richard Piotter I agree to. Technicaly, even solarrollers are autonomous vehicles, but
when I show off my robots, I never _call_ it a robot. I sometimes keep
my photovore down to "light tracker". My walking robots though, I'm more
comfortable with. I think, techniacly, if it has some form of motion to
perform work or move itself, autonomously controlled by electronics,
then you can _technicaly_ call it a robot, but there are limitations.
The word robot has gained a sort of "understood" meaning, and if it's
too simple, people tend to not view it as a robot, even if it technicaly
falls under the more vague definition.
JVernonM@aol.com wrote:
>
> In a message dated 4/16/00 11:37:22 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
> sebastiaan_van_v@hotmail.com writes:
>
> Man, what side of the bed did you get up on this morning?
> > I am a little disappointed in Beam community. I just cant stand people are
> > calling a few blinking LED's a bot. Even a solaroller doesn't seem very
> > "bot" to me.
> Get used to it. Hype is the cornerstone of BEAM. Exaggeration is commonplace.
> But, there is some good stuff as well. I, like you, am beginning to wonder
> which way the balance tips at times. Of course, both of us admitting this
> fact openly, automatically means we have no point and should be ignored.
>
> > Maybe we should make some rules what is a bot and what not or even make
> > categories
> First mistake, and a common one for newbies. I thought much the same when I
> first discovered BEAM. But, very quickly, you will learn who makes the rules
> and that your opinion is worth squat. This holds true even if you are right.
> Maybe, especially so.
>
> > I don't want to be a pain in the ass, but just want some quality in the
> > community.
> Second mistake. If you look around, you will quickly find that quality,
> accuracy, and consistency are very rare. If you hold to your convictions, you
> will be completely alienated. The trick seems to be to agree totally and be
> silent when you don't. Sound weird for a robotic discipline? Maybe, just
> don't say so out loud.
>
> > I hope you all agree with me and forgive me if I made a fool out of you
> > because you just finished your garden blinking LED's
> Well, experience tells me that the opposite has just occurred. You just
> stated what you feel is true, and it conflicts with acceptable BEAM behavior.
> I'm sorry to say, that makes you the fool here. The powers that be don't want
> to hear the truth, they want to talk about building bipeds with only one
> motor and a single 240 chip. Ludicrous you say? Just don't say so out loud.
> If you wish to survive, squelch your opinions, say yes to anything the
> hierarchy has to say, and start talking about yet another popper clone. After
> all, poppers are the most agile, wonderful, amazing, better than Robby the
> robot, unbelievably functional, and only true robot ever conceived by man.
> You don't believe me? Just don't say so out loud.
>
> See ya,
> Jim
> http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Exhibit/8281/beamart.html
> ICQ# 55657870
--
Richard Piotter The Richfiles Robotics & TI web page:
richfile@rconnect.com http://richfiles.calc.org
-- Make Money by Simply Surfing the Net or responding to E-Mail!!!
-- Click below!!!
http://www.alladvantage.com/go.asp?refid=ATL147
http://www.spedia.net/cgi-bin/dir/tz.cgi?run=show_svc&fl=8&vid=329630
13483 Sun, 16 Apr 2000 10:34:13 PDT Re: windbeam beam@sgiblab.sgi.com "Timothy Flytch" >From: "sebastiaan van Vliet"
>This beam is solely powered by the wind. No electronics, no motors, no
>propellors and just yellow PVC tubing.
>
>look at www.geocities.com/beamnet
She looks real cute... The bots not bad either ;)
Timothy...
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
Home