I'm picturing something like:
"Yo, so, like, than my half-orc like hack this guys hedd of, an like dude was serrusly killt! I gots majer bling of da b, to!"
PLAYER REJECTED> GAME OVER.
"Yo! Like waddup wid dat?!?"
PLAYER REJECTED> PLEASE SUBMIT HIGH SCHOOL ENGLISH GRADES TO CONTINUE.
I dunno, team 66 won it's regional on a great design well handled. At one point, in the final round, the opposing team thought it had the weakness down, hitting it just as it reached up, and the driver was able to drive the quad-bot on two wheels the length of the field to knock it back into play, rather than flipping over. Designing competition to destroy competitive advantage and instead rely on the skills of the participants seems like a good thing, to me. But then, I support team 66.
Well, then . . .
Seems to me this could be an opportunity. There was some discussion on this about Lego spinning off the mindstorms. And while I agree that they would never sell anything relating to their core products, the only element that would need to be "spun" is the RCX itself. The "firmware" needs an update, the inputs and outputs could stand some tinkering (at least), and there are many alternatives to Lego's programming language.
The thing is this: I'm a middle school teacher and coach of a Lego Mindstorms team. There are over 3000 such teams in the US alone, most of whom have corporate or community support such as cost is not really a problem -- but if the things just are not made, then this whole growing educational program will come crashing to a halt. And let me say that it is one of, if not the, best things in American education today, teaching far more than some basic engineering and robotics principles. It works, and to have it die becasue of a marketing decision at Lego would be a great injustice. So I'm throwing this out into the universe. Run with it.
If you happen to be dripping with cash but to lazy to do anything about this, contact me. We'll talk.
I actually had a psych prof admit that this may, in fact, invalidate all psychological experimentation in the US, as it is not a truly random sample!
I'm picturing something like: "Yo, so, like, than my half-orc like hack this guys hedd of, an like dude was serrusly killt! I gots majer bling of da b, to!" PLAYER REJECTED> GAME OVER. "Yo! Like waddup wid dat?!?" PLAYER REJECTED> PLEASE SUBMIT HIGH SCHOOL ENGLISH GRADES TO CONTINUE.
I dunno, team 66 won it's regional on a great design well handled. At one point, in the final round, the opposing team thought it had the weakness down, hitting it just as it reached up, and the driver was able to drive the quad-bot on two wheels the length of the field to knock it back into play, rather than flipping over. Designing competition to destroy competitive advantage and instead rely on the skills of the participants seems like a good thing, to me. But then, I support team 66.
Well, then . . . Seems to me this could be an opportunity. There was some discussion on this about Lego spinning off the mindstorms. And while I agree that they would never sell anything relating to their core products, the only element that would need to be "spun" is the RCX itself. The "firmware" needs an update, the inputs and outputs could stand some tinkering (at least), and there are many alternatives to Lego's programming language. The thing is this: I'm a middle school teacher and coach of a Lego Mindstorms team. There are over 3000 such teams in the US alone, most of whom have corporate or community support such as cost is not really a problem -- but if the things just are not made, then this whole growing educational program will come crashing to a halt. And let me say that it is one of, if not the, best things in American education today, teaching far more than some basic engineering and robotics principles. It works, and to have it die becasue of a marketing decision at Lego would be a great injustice. So I'm throwing this out into the universe. Run with it. If you happen to be dripping with cash but to lazy to do anything about this, contact me. We'll talk.