I'm for a person's right to work and everything, but don't you think it would be a bit irresponsible to not work on a way for dangerous jobs to be done without cost of human life? We're talking about people who could die. If they die, it won't matter if they spent generations mining. If they continue to live, they'll have plenty of stories to pass down.
Mankind was allowed to go on after that first sin for a purpose. It was to prove that some would choose to serve God out of love for him rather than fear. And it also answers the challenge made by the devil, because not everyone will turn away from God to do bad things.
If there really were perfect creation somewhere else in the universe, why would we be used in such a way? Couldn't God simply point to those other worlds and to the way that they serve him? And why, when there are worlds of people that are perfectly serving God, would he send his only begotten son to the planet full of sinners?
As far as the teachings in the Bible go, I don't think there is any room for other intelligent life in the universe. (Aside from angels, of course) If concrete evidence of life on other planets was found, I don't believe the Bible and the information in it would be the center of so many people's lives. But, that evidence does not exist.
OTOH, I think the someone needs to try to find that evidence. If they don't, there will always be an unanswered question.
Get a backup. Or at the very least, train someone who has *some* skill in IT to fix the things that normally go wrong. We have a few systems that can't be fixed without spending a horrible amount of time figuring them out. It's easier to teach someone "clear int bri0" than to volley messages with the phone company. Anyway, figure those situations out, and teach someone how to do them.
Ask for a laptop with wireless access. While this may be a big request, you would be able to take vacation and still fix things without coming into the office. Definitely get compensated though. And hopefully you're using an OS with true remote access.:)
But in the end.. what do you owe this company? Don't waste your life just so they won't wither. If they refuse to believe things will go to pot.. take some vacation. Then document how many calls you get while you aren't there. That will be very good evidence that they need to give you some backup.
Computer 1 - A P-III 600 with 128M of RAM and Windows 98
Computer 2 - A P-II 350 with 96M of RAM and Linux running kernel 2.4
I can start the Windows machine rebooting while at the CLI on the Linux machine. Once the Windows machine it through the BIOS messages, I start the Linux machine rebooting. By the time Windows is to the desktop and done loading, I have already booted into Linux and started X.
Most Americans don't realize that each PlayStation unit contains a 32-bit CPU -- every bit as powerful as the processor found in most desktop and laptop computers
and...
At just over 4 pounds, it contains a 300 MHz-driven, 128-bit CPU.
What's wrong here?
I say it's a hoax. While it seems like a plausible thing to do, I just don't think it has happened. And 15-20 clustered PS2s? How many DoD computers completely blow that computing power away?
Re:BEAM is the Cold Fusion of Robotics
on
The Robot Diaries
·
· Score: 1
I have seen the core circuit of many BEAM robots. How many of the BEAM hobbyists really understand the circuits versus how many copy and the tinker?
most. those that don't, don't stay around for long.
Re:BEAM is the Cold Fusion of Robotics
on
The Robot Diaries
·
· Score: 1
By the way if I said that the beacons could be seen anywhere within the building so you could just walk towards it...
um, that makes no sense. I think I know what you mean though. The problem with that argument is that the closer a BEAM robot gets to an obstruction, the more likely it will be to turn away. And it will eventually find it's target. I've never heard anyone in BEAM say that a BEAM robot had the ability to 'pathfind'. They simply aren't designed to do so. Why is that so hard for you to understand? For example...
Let's take your 'find the beacon in a building' robot. Can it lift off of the ground, land somewhere, retrieve a beacon, and then return to it's original location? Well, if it can't, it must not be a real robot. What a fool you are.
The point, obviously, is that one type of robot is not meant to perform the actions of another type. the end.
You keep jumping around with different arguments, none of which have an extremely solid basis. You keep saying that BEAM sucks (basically), and yet you backup to mention that reactive robotics works and is proven to work. You insist that a BEAM robot can't do anything useful, and refuse to recognize the usefulness that has already been mentioned. And then you compare two seperate robotic fields, expecting that the comparison will save your argument.
As I said in my first comment, you are close minded. Obviously, there will be no changing that.
goodbye.
Re:BEAM is the Cold Fusion of Robotics
on
The Robot Diaries
·
· Score: 3
You most certainly are close minded.
Here's something to think about if you really don't think a BEAM bot can do anything useful.
Now on to your accusations..
A BEAM robot can walk into a volcano, it can drive (or walk) on mars, it can navigate a hospital. That's the whole point of BEAM... to make a robot that doesn't have to be watched all the time. One that doesn't rely on it's CPU to do anything, one that doesn't need a satellite uplink, one that doesn't need stinking GPS. One that adapts to its environment.
I'd like to see a traditional CPU driven robot survive outside (pick a place) for a month. It should be mobile. It should not be tethered. It shouldn't be so large that it's presence is obtrusive. Can you deliver?
BEAM already has.
Now, as far as retrieving a book from a library goes... well, yes, you'll need some digital logic most likely. And the point is? BEAM has never been about performing mundane tasks such as this. BEAM is about analog circuits that are as closely connected to their environment as possible. They aren't meant to be preprogrammed for a certain action. And hence, you'll never see anyone in BEAM try, because it would be a waste of time.
BTW, you seem to assume that BEAM roboticists are anti-CPU. That's incorrect. We just understand the best place to use a CPU. Unfortunately, most roboticists think that every little detail has to be programmed... I personally feel that that is the wrong view to have.
hmm.. pray tell, how did they do more? I have trouble seeing how those could do more than the current BEAM bots. Of course, if you're just talking about solar speeders or photovores, then you might be right. But you probably don't realize that BEAM also has walking robots in it's ranks. Walkers, especially those with more than two motors, are extremely versatile and interesting.
Actually, this is kind of along the lines of what a lot of BEAM guys have been thinking.
The way you get these robots to do what you want them to do is by giving them sensors in the right places. Light, sound, heat, whatever.
So my idea is to have a few predators and a few prey on the field. Each predator has a beacon that the prey naturally runs from. Each prey has a beacon that the predators naturally run to. And each has certain mechanisms which, when employed, do harm to the others.
It would be interesting to see what happens. Does the predator or prey, assuming they have equal weapons, win?
I've been building BEAM bots for a few years now, and I was wondering when a BEAM article would get posted here. cool.
For anyone interested in this, especially if you have been discouraged by trying to build other forms of robots, please look into BEAM. While it isn't always as cheap as they like to make it seem, it's much more rewarding than typical CPU-driven robotics.
If you would really like to learn more, you could try Solarbotics and get a kit, or just build your own from scraps. (It's much cheaper that way.:) I have a few that I've built for under $10 US, and none have been more than $30.
But don't be fooled.. even though they are reasonably easy to build, they are worthy of the title "Research Platform". The analog loops that Nv neurons produce can form some strikingly natural paterns. And people tend to like BEAM bots a little more than CPU based versions because they move much more quickly and naturally.
I've never used ADA, but my favorite is Code Crusader. I don't know, maybe I don't know what I'm missing, but I think it's one of the easiest to use out there.
"They thought Galileo was wrong the first time, too," Levin said.
ok, he apparently has no supporters other than himself. Peer review seems to say that he is wrong. And he is comparing himself to Galileo.
I suppose that might be plausible, if NASA scientists were a bunch of religionists. They aren't though. Science seems to have combatted science, and one side fell.
As the article states (sigh), it has sensors so that it knows it's current posture and can walk up a slope.
If I put a Voltron sword in its' hands, will it tip over when it walks?
As the article states (sigh), it has sensors for balance. Just like with the human body, of course, if too much weight is added to the side it cannot stand. But it keeps it's posture by relying on sensor input, not pre-programming.
Slashdot Mirror
"Heh heh heh... ooh... yeah... right, Lisa. A wonderful... magical animal." -Homer
Oh please.
I'm for a person's right to work and everything, but don't you think it would be a bit irresponsible to not work on a way for dangerous jobs to be done without cost of human life? We're talking about people who could die. If they die, it won't matter if they spent generations mining. If they continue to live, they'll have plenty of stories to pass down.
Maybe the problem is with people assuming that some are not capable of learning more than just manual labor.
Mankind was allowed to go on after that first sin for a purpose. It was to prove that some would choose to serve God out of love for him rather than fear. And it also answers the challenge made by the devil, because not everyone will turn away from God to do bad things.
If there really were perfect creation somewhere else in the universe, why would we be used in such a way? Couldn't God simply point to those other worlds and to the way that they serve him? And why, when there are worlds of people that are perfectly serving God, would he send his only begotten son to the planet full of sinners?
As far as the teachings in the Bible go, I don't think there is any room for other intelligent life in the universe. (Aside from angels, of course) If concrete evidence of life on other planets was found, I don't believe the Bible and the information in it would be the center of so many people's lives. But, that evidence does not exist.
OTOH, I think the someone needs to try to find that evidence. If they don't, there will always be an unanswered question.
...with Cliff.
:)
Get a backup. Or at the very least, train someone who has *some* skill in IT to fix the things that normally go wrong. We have a few systems that can't be fixed without spending a horrible amount of time figuring them out. It's easier to teach someone "clear int bri0" than to volley messages with the phone company. Anyway, figure those situations out, and teach someone how to do them.
Ask for a laptop with wireless access. While this may be a big request, you would be able to take vacation and still fix things without coming into the office. Definitely get compensated though. And hopefully you're using an OS with true remote access.
But in the end.. what do you owe this company? Don't waste your life just so they won't wither. If they refuse to believe things will go to pot.. take some vacation. Then document how many calls you get while you aren't there. That will be very good evidence that they need to give you some backup.
But in San Francisco, as with other large metro cities, the population density is much higher.
Imagine that.
I've got nothing besides the basics running... scanreg, systray, etc.
The major portion of the time is taken before those even start anyway.
Computer 1 - A P-III 600 with 128M of RAM and Windows 98
Computer 2 - A P-II 350 with 96M of RAM and Linux running kernel 2.4
I can start the Windows machine rebooting while at the CLI on the Linux machine. Once the Windows machine it through the BIOS messages, I start the Linux machine rebooting. By the time Windows is to the desktop and done loading, I have already booted into Linux and started X.
Maybe you need to look at your rc.d directory?
Not that I'm anybody, but code crusader is wonderful.. It's just about all I use when I'm not at the CLI.
Very cool, but you have to have an amateur radio license. That stinks.
From the article:
Most Americans don't realize that each PlayStation unit contains a 32-bit CPU -- every bit as powerful as the processor found in most desktop and laptop computers
and...
At just over 4 pounds, it contains a 300 MHz-driven, 128-bit CPU.
What's wrong here?
I say it's a hoax. While it seems like a plausible thing to do, I just don't think it has happened. And 15-20 clustered PS2s? How many DoD computers completely blow that computing power away?
I have seen the core circuit of many BEAM robots. How many of the BEAM hobbyists really understand the circuits versus how many copy and the tinker?
most. those that don't, don't stay around for long.
By the way if I said that the beacons could be seen anywhere within the building so you could just walk towards it...
um, that makes no sense. I think I know what you mean though. The problem with that argument is that the closer a BEAM robot gets to an obstruction, the more likely it will be to turn away. And it will eventually find it's target. I've never heard anyone in BEAM say that a BEAM robot had the ability to 'pathfind'. They simply aren't designed to do so. Why is that so hard for you to understand? For example...
Let's take your 'find the beacon in a building' robot. Can it lift off of the ground, land somewhere, retrieve a beacon, and then return to it's original location? Well, if it can't, it must not be a real robot. What a fool you are.
The point, obviously, is that one type of robot is not meant to perform the actions of another type. the end.
You keep jumping around with different arguments, none of which have an extremely solid basis. You keep saying that BEAM sucks (basically), and yet you backup to mention that reactive robotics works and is proven to work. You insist that a BEAM robot can't do anything useful, and refuse to recognize the usefulness that has already been mentioned. And then you compare two seperate robotic fields, expecting that the comparison will save your argument.
As I said in my first comment, you are close minded. Obviously, there will be no changing that.
goodbye.
You most certainly are close minded.
Here's something to think about if you really don't think a BEAM bot can do anything useful.
Now on to your accusations..
A BEAM robot can walk into a volcano, it can drive (or walk) on mars, it can navigate a hospital. That's the whole point of BEAM... to make a robot that doesn't have to be watched all the time. One that doesn't rely on it's CPU to do anything, one that doesn't need a satellite uplink, one that doesn't need stinking GPS. One that adapts to its environment.
I'd like to see a traditional CPU driven robot survive outside (pick a place) for a month. It should be mobile. It should not be tethered. It shouldn't be so large that it's presence is obtrusive. Can you deliver?
BEAM already has.
Now, as far as retrieving a book from a library goes... well, yes, you'll need some digital logic most likely. And the point is? BEAM has never been about performing mundane tasks such as this. BEAM is about analog circuits that are as closely connected to their environment as possible. They aren't meant to be preprogrammed for a certain action. And hence, you'll never see anyone in BEAM try, because it would be a waste of time.
BTW, you seem to assume that BEAM roboticists are anti-CPU. That's incorrect. We just understand the best place to use a CPU. Unfortunately, most roboticists think that every little detail has to be programmed... I personally feel that that is the wrong view to have.
These did more than the BEAM robots.
hmm.. pray tell, how did they do more? I have trouble seeing how those could do more than the current BEAM bots. Of course, if you're just talking about solar speeders or photovores, then you might be right. But you probably don't realize that BEAM also has walking robots in it's ranks. Walkers, especially those with more than two motors, are extremely versatile and interesting.
Please post more info, if you don't mind.
Actually, this is kind of along the lines of what a lot of BEAM guys have been thinking.
The way you get these robots to do what you want them to do is by giving them sensors in the right places. Light, sound, heat, whatever.
So my idea is to have a few predators and a few prey on the field. Each predator has a beacon that the prey naturally runs from. Each prey has a beacon that the predators naturally run to. And each has certain mechanisms which, when employed, do harm to the others.
It would be interesting to see what happens. Does the predator or prey, assuming they have equal weapons, win?
ahhh, not enough time in the day...
I've been building BEAM bots for a few years now, and I was wondering when a BEAM article would get posted here. cool.
:) I have a few that I've built for under $10 US, and none have been more than $30.
For anyone interested in this, especially if you have been discouraged by trying to build other forms of robots, please look into BEAM. While it isn't always as cheap as they like to make it seem, it's much more rewarding than typical CPU-driven robotics.
If you would really like to learn more, you could try Solarbotics and get a kit, or just build your own from scraps. (It's much cheaper that way.
But don't be fooled.. even though they are reasonably easy to build, they are worthy of the title "Research Platform". The analog loops that Nv neurons produce can form some strikingly natural paterns. And people tend to like BEAM bots a little more than CPU based versions because they move much more quickly and naturally.
Above all, of course, have fun.
I've never used ADA, but my favorite is Code Crusader. I don't know, maybe I don't know what I'm missing, but I think it's one of the easiest to use out there.
"They thought Galileo was wrong the first time, too," Levin said.
ok, he apparently has no supporters other than himself. Peer review seems to say that he is wrong. And he is comparing himself to Galileo.
I suppose that might be plausible, if NASA scientists were a bunch of religionists. They aren't though. Science seems to have combatted science, and one side fell.
So we should believe him... why?
I don't want to carry around a phone/pda/camera/mp3...
um.. why?
You'd rather pay $100-$200 each than have them bundled into one device at a savings? Pretty silly view, IMO.
yup, you showed 'em.
Typically, it's the less intelligent person who resorts to name-calling.
____
Good point. I was just quoting, so I didn't really look at the mistakes.
Sorry 'bout that.
____
When are the people who post before they know what they're talking about going to stop and read?
Now that would be sweet.
____
int posttroll(string articlesubject){
if articlesubject="transmeta" return true;
if articlesubject="Linux" || "Linus" return true;
if article="Microsoft" && "conspiracy" return true;
return 0;
}
Let's go over this again. If you don't want to read it, don't read it. If you don't want to see an article on a subject, adjust your preferences!
Have a nice day.
____
without tipping over (at least on a level plane)
As the article states (sigh), it has sensors so that it knows it's current posture and can walk up a slope.
If I put a Voltron sword in its' hands, will it tip over when it walks?
As the article states (sigh), it has sensors for balance. Just like with the human body, of course, if too much weight is added to the side it cannot stand. But it keeps it's posture by relying on sensor input, not pre-programming.
____