In fact, it looks like the "top down head" image was ripped of an old dti brochure. We've had one of these things in the lab for 10 or 12 years (it's attached to a x286 luggable). I'm not sure how it's 'revolutionary' or even 'new'.
I'm surprised no one has pointed out the main fault in the argument the Creationists (especially ones using 'complexity' arguments) - they fail to understand time. They're claiming "thousands" of generations is not enough time for 'random' mutations (with selection) to create this mechanism. First, thousands is a number that is entirely incomprehensible to the human mind and second, if beetles have been around *at least* since the dinosaurs, then the number is more like tens or hundreds of millions of generations. I think it points to natural selection as a strong argument for the paucity of differentiation of species rather than, as they argue, the incredible 'abundance'.
I knew the team lead, about 5-6 years ago. I can't remember for sure but some of the answers are this: (1) it's humanoid because humans and robonauts are designed to be "hot-swappable" - what and where a human can do or go, the robot can and vise-versa, also, it allows for direct human control of the robot without requiring 4 humans (in the case of 8 arms). (2) He liked Star Wars and Boba Fett =)
This seems more like a NASA troll. First any 'vehicle' that can make a round trip to Mars is *not* going to be landing on the the surface. What will go down are land & retrieval vehicles (e.g. the Moon), and Astronauts in spacesuits. What will have to be screened is the retrieval vehicle (which will probably be left there), the spacesuits and the Astronauts themselves. Note that the Mars vehicle won't need an 'Earth return vehicles' as we'll have the ISS and the Space Shuttle. In fact, by using a 'disposable', airtight, pressurised tube between the Mars land&retrieve vehicle all that would be needed would be to leave the space suits and decontam the astronauts!
As far as I know energy is neither substance nor material. It is a convenient designation for any of a number of physical interactions. It cannot be emmitted, transmitted or reflected. The concept of 'energy' as a substance to be used, transferred etc. is just as pseudoscientific as UFO's.
Replace it with a... 15.1" LCD (try the NEC LCV?-1530 -- they're at fry's et al). They're about $400. You can afford it because debt is free till the men with the baseball bats come by!
Making science mandatory will not solve the problem. Even when science has been 'brought to the masses' the 'masses' (whomever) ignored it. Most people are uninterested in science. Remember ol' Arthur C Clarke's quote about sufficiently advanced science being magic? Well this is true NOW for more and more US citizens, which is why, I think, we're seeing more and more 'mysticism' cropping up (think New Agers). Scientist's have managed to garner the position of 'wizard' in our society, and as such must learn to respect, use and hopefully not abuse it!
Slashdot Mirror
I find it odd that his "acquisition" was management from other aerospace companies. One would have hoped he'd hire engineers. Or something.
http://www.dti3d.com/
In fact, it looks like the "top down head" image was ripped of an old dti brochure. We've had one of these things in the lab for 10 or 12 years (it's attached to a x286 luggable). I'm not sure how it's 'revolutionary' or even 'new'.
I'm surprised no one has pointed out the main fault in the argument the Creationists (especially ones using 'complexity' arguments) - they fail to understand time. They're claiming "thousands" of generations is not enough time for 'random' mutations (with selection) to create this mechanism. First, thousands is a number that is entirely incomprehensible to the human mind and second, if beetles have been around *at least* since the dinosaurs, then the number is more like tens or hundreds of millions of generations. I think it points to natural selection as a strong argument for the paucity of differentiation of species rather than, as they argue, the incredible 'abundance'.
I knew the team lead, about 5-6 years ago. I can't remember for sure but some of the answers are this:
(1) it's humanoid because humans and robonauts are designed to be "hot-swappable" - what and where a human can do or go, the robot can and vise-versa, also, it allows for direct human control of the robot without requiring 4 humans (in the case of 8 arms).
(2) He liked Star Wars and Boba Fett =)
This seems more like a NASA troll. First any 'vehicle' that can make a round trip to Mars is *not* going to be landing on the the surface. What will go down are land & retrieval vehicles (e.g. the Moon), and Astronauts in spacesuits. What will have to be screened is the retrieval vehicle (which will probably be left there), the spacesuits and the Astronauts themselves. Note that the Mars vehicle won't need an 'Earth return vehicles' as we'll have the ISS and the Space Shuttle. In fact, by using a 'disposable', airtight, pressurised tube between the Mars land&retrieve vehicle all that would be needed would be to leave the space suits and decontam the astronauts!
As far as I know energy is neither substance nor material. It is a convenient designation for any of a number of physical interactions. It cannot be emmitted, transmitted or reflected. The concept of 'energy' as a substance to be used, transferred etc. is just as pseudoscientific as UFO's.
of course there'd always be *some* geek who'd insist on programming "to the bare iron(s)".
Battlechess is better because the little people hit each other, and in the end, isn't that what we all want?
Replace it with a ... 15.1" LCD (try the NEC LCV?-1530 -- they're at fry's et al). They're about $400. You can afford it because debt is free till the men with the baseball bats come by!
Making science mandatory will not solve the problem. Even when science has been 'brought to the masses' the 'masses' (whomever) ignored it. Most people are uninterested in science. Remember ol' Arthur C Clarke's quote about sufficiently advanced science being magic? Well this is true NOW for more and more US citizens, which is why, I think, we're seeing more and more 'mysticism' cropping up (think New Agers). Scientist's have managed to garner the position of 'wizard' in our society, and as such must learn to respect, use and hopefully not abuse it!