I was the chief programmer on my team when I was in high school and every year I saw that programming became less and less important to the event and it was more engineering and marketing based. Its really disappointing and this year sounds like they just build a robot and drive it around, autonomous is becoming less and less important and its no longer 100% autonomous this year. Very True. As the chief programmer for my team, I see that programming has become increasingly less important in the FIRST Robotics Competition. As for the marketing aspect, I believe it is what contributes to its decline.
We are supplied with a custom "robot controller" made by Microchip especially for the FIRST competition. This controller costs $450 for what several cheap 8-bit Atmel microcontrollers to do. Locked in a black box complete with warranty stickers, this device, which we are forced to use, kills innovation, in my opinion. However, at the same time, it maintains a fair playing ground.
On top of the proprietary hardware, we have proprietary software- a C compiler for the PIC18F8722 PIC in the device, and an IDE, and a programmer for the robot controller. All three software packaes are extremely limiting. First, the compiler does not support long filenames in Windows! Second, in my tests, all three pieces of software do not seem to run under Linux.
We use special code prepared for the device written by a NASA engineer. The problem is that he opens an API/interface for us to use while leaving the rest of the implementation hidden in a nice *.lib. This in my opinion, oversimplifies the programming aspect of the microcontroller. Seeking any further implementation, such as use of interrupts requires going through the actual datasheet- this is the kind of programming I am seeing less of.
IIRC, the FIRST kit comes with a "drag and drop" programming software. I don't remember clearly, but as the programmer, I felt offended after reading the software description, and we promptly destroyed the CD in the Teacher Lounge's microwave.
One last word. FIRST has been strongly urging that teams seek mentors for help for the practical experience learned through the help. This is not the case however: I've seen teams that have been practically taken over by so-called "mentors" and parents. Mentors and parents are good things, and so are 100% student teams. However, mentors and parents must be passive teachers not members, and that student teams must seek to advance beyond the bare minimum.
FIRST stands for For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology. In order to innovate, I believe that FIRST must pursue more "Open" initiatives and return to its student run roots.
I believe the capability to traverse and colonize the universe is quite within our capability. As stated, it is "impossible" at this point, because, we don't have enough interest and resources dedicated to the cause, not to mention religious/social/political barriers impeding progress. The solution is simple: World War III. Seriously, consider the fact that Charles Lindbergh gave his autograph for one of Apollo 11's crew. Within a period of only about forty-two years, man had moved from having difficulty crossing the Atlantic ocean by a primitive airplane in 1927 to landing on the moon on sophisticated spacecraft in 1969. What lay between are these two events: WWII and the Cold War. These wars caused nations to practically transform overnight into industrial, scientific nations with one mindset: progress. Nations competed in science and technology, and as a result, devoted massive funds and national interest to progress in that respect. This competition resulted in many breakthroughs and wondrous achievements in science and technology.
Given this, many lament that mankind would lose morals and other basic human traits in the midst of such competition and progress. True, man has touched upon many new technologies which he has had difficulty to tame and to foresee of its consequences. But the evidence that rational thinking prevails through such times our forefathers went through, is the fact that our we are well and alive today, not in a nuclear shelter with fifty feet of snow above our heads.
With WWIII would come a second space and technological race, one which would see much progress through competition. When the period of euphoria comes after the conflict, hopefully the world's problems would have been resolved, and people would enjoy the new technologies developed through the conflict.
Is WWIII really necessary? Well, yes, considering the inefficient leadership, mismanagement, and the huge amount of bitching and inaction we see in the world today. War would mobilize everyone, solve problems, and put gears into action. Afterwards, people would come to appreciate the progress. Hopefully, any of us here would see the first rocket, or should I say utility to traverse the universe, take off. Due to time dilation, I don't think any of us would live to hear the news of arrival and colonization, but then again, progress may see the extenuation of the human life. Who knows? Anything is possible!
I believe the capability to traverse and colonize the universe is quite within our capability. As stated, it is "impossible" at this point, because, we don't have enough interest and resources dedicated to the cause, not to mention religious/social/political barriers impeding progress. The solution is simple: World War III. Seriously, consider the fact that Charles Lindbergh gave his autograph for one of Apollo 11's crew. Within a period of only about forty-two years, man had moved from having difficulty crossing the Atlantic ocean by a primitive airplane in 1927 to landing on the moon on sophisticated spacecraft in 1969. What lay between are these two events: WWII and the Cold War. These wars caused nations to practically transform overnight into industrial, scientific nations with one mindset: progress. Nations competed in science and technology, and as a result, devoted massive funds and national interest to progress in that respect. This competition resulted in many breakthroughs and wondrous achievements in science and technology.
Given this, many lament that mankind would lose morals and other basic human traits in the midst of such competition and progress. True, man has touched upon many new technologies which he has had difficulty to tame and to foresee of its consequences. But the evidence that rational thinking prevails through such times our forefathers went through, is the fact that our we are well and alive today, not in a nuclear shelter with fifty feet of snow above our heads.
With WWIII would come a second space and technological race, one which would see much progress through competition. When the period of euphoria comes after the conflict, hopefully the world's problems would have been resolved, and people would enjoy the new technologies developed through the conflict.
Is WWIII really necessary? Well, yes, considering the inefficient leadership, mismanagement, and the huge amount of bitching and inaction we see in the world today. War would mobilize everyone, solve problems, and put gears into action. Afterwards, people would come to appreciate the progress. Hopefully, any of us here would see the first rocket, or should I say utility to traverse the universe, take off. Due to time dilation, I don't think any of us would live to hear the news of arrival and colonization, but then again, progress may see the extenuation of the human life. Who knows? Anything is possible.
Slashdot Mirror
From the video here: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/10/081023-new-lunar-rover.html The suits are attached the outside, and astronauts simply slip into the suits from the cabin. This quite ingenious design avoids introducing any speck dust into the cabin.
There is evidence that both populations in Southern Asia and the Americas are genetically related. One is the fact that both are susceptible to alcoholism.
When Han Chinese settlers first arrived in Taiwan, they used alcohol against the aboriginal population there as means of control:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiwan#History
and now we know why:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?db=pubmed&uid=9066994&cmd=showdetailview&indexed=google
In the United States, pioneers and frontiersmen always brought whiskey with them on meetings with Native American chiefs to sign "treaties".
now we know why:
http://www.essortment.com/all/nativeamerican_ragq.htm
Possible link or coincidence?: http://www.indiana.edu/~rcapub/v17n3/p18.html
We are supplied with a custom "robot controller" made by Microchip especially for the FIRST competition. This controller costs $450 for what several cheap 8-bit Atmel microcontrollers to do. Locked in a black box complete with warranty stickers, this device, which we are forced to use, kills innovation, in my opinion. However, at the same time, it maintains a fair playing ground.
On top of the proprietary hardware, we have proprietary software- a C compiler for the PIC18F8722 PIC in the device, and an IDE, and a programmer for the robot controller. All three software packaes are extremely limiting. First, the compiler does not support long filenames in Windows! Second, in my tests, all three pieces of software do not seem to run under Linux.
We use special code prepared for the device written by a NASA engineer. The problem is that he opens an API/interface for us to use while leaving the rest of the implementation hidden in a nice *.lib. This in my opinion, oversimplifies the programming aspect of the microcontroller. Seeking any further implementation, such as use of interrupts requires going through the actual datasheet- this is the kind of programming I am seeing less of.
IIRC, the FIRST kit comes with a "drag and drop" programming software. I don't remember clearly, but as the programmer, I felt offended after reading the software description, and we promptly destroyed the CD in the Teacher Lounge's microwave.
One last word. FIRST has been strongly urging that teams seek mentors for help for the practical experience learned through the help. This is not the case however: I've seen teams that have been practically taken over by so-called "mentors" and parents. Mentors and parents are good things, and so are 100% student teams. However, mentors and parents must be passive teachers not members, and that student teams must seek to advance beyond the bare minimum.
FIRST stands for For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology. In order to innovate, I believe that FIRST must pursue more "Open" initiatives and return to its student run roots.
I believe the capability to traverse and colonize the universe is quite within our capability. As stated, it is "impossible" at this point, because, we don't have enough interest and resources dedicated to the cause, not to mention religious/social/political barriers impeding progress. The solution is simple: World War III. Seriously, consider the fact that Charles Lindbergh gave his autograph for one of Apollo 11's crew. Within a period of only about forty-two years, man had moved from having difficulty crossing the Atlantic ocean by a primitive airplane in 1927 to landing on the moon on sophisticated spacecraft in 1969. What lay between are these two events: WWII and the Cold War. These wars caused nations to practically transform overnight into industrial, scientific nations with one mindset: progress. Nations competed in science and technology, and as a result, devoted massive funds and national interest to progress in that respect. This competition resulted in many breakthroughs and wondrous achievements in science and technology.
Given this, many lament that mankind would lose morals and other basic human traits in the midst of such competition and progress. True, man has touched upon many new technologies which he has had difficulty to tame and to foresee of its consequences. But the evidence that rational thinking prevails through such times our forefathers went through, is the fact that our we are well and alive today, not in a nuclear shelter with fifty feet of snow above our heads.
With WWIII would come a second space and technological race, one which would see much progress through competition. When the period of euphoria comes after the conflict, hopefully the world's problems would have been resolved, and people would enjoy the new technologies developed through the conflict.
Is WWIII really necessary? Well, yes, considering the inefficient leadership, mismanagement, and the huge amount of bitching and inaction we see in the world today. War would mobilize everyone, solve problems, and put gears into action. Afterwards, people would come to appreciate the progress. Hopefully, any of us here would see the first rocket, or should I say utility to traverse the universe, take off. Due to time dilation, I don't think any of us would live to hear the news of arrival and colonization, but then again, progress may see the extenuation of the human life. Who knows? Anything is possible!
I believe the capability to traverse and colonize the universe is quite within our capability. As stated, it is "impossible" at this point, because, we don't have enough interest and resources dedicated to the cause, not to mention religious/social/political barriers impeding progress. The solution is simple: World War III. Seriously, consider the fact that Charles Lindbergh gave his autograph for one of Apollo 11's crew. Within a period of only about forty-two years, man had moved from having difficulty crossing the Atlantic ocean by a primitive airplane in 1927 to landing on the moon on sophisticated spacecraft in 1969. What lay between are these two events: WWII and the Cold War. These wars caused nations to practically transform overnight into industrial, scientific nations with one mindset: progress. Nations competed in science and technology, and as a result, devoted massive funds and national interest to progress in that respect. This competition resulted in many breakthroughs and wondrous achievements in science and technology. Given this, many lament that mankind would lose morals and other basic human traits in the midst of such competition and progress. True, man has touched upon many new technologies which he has had difficulty to tame and to foresee of its consequences. But the evidence that rational thinking prevails through such times our forefathers went through, is the fact that our we are well and alive today, not in a nuclear shelter with fifty feet of snow above our heads. With WWIII would come a second space and technological race, one which would see much progress through competition. When the period of euphoria comes after the conflict, hopefully the world's problems would have been resolved, and people would enjoy the new technologies developed through the conflict. Is WWIII really necessary? Well, yes, considering the inefficient leadership, mismanagement, and the huge amount of bitching and inaction we see in the world today. War would mobilize everyone, solve problems, and put gears into action. Afterwards, people would come to appreciate the progress. Hopefully, any of us here would see the first rocket, or should I say utility to traverse the universe, take off. Due to time dilation, I don't think any of us would live to hear the news of arrival and colonization, but then again, progress may see the extenuation of the human life. Who knows? Anything is possible.