Subject:
|
Re: Mathematical proof that you can't build anything with LEGO bricks
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.general
|
Date:
|
Tue, 28 Feb 2012 12:29:36 GMT
|
Highlighted:
|
(details)
|
Viewed:
|
20623 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.general, Don Rogerson wrote:
| |
Yes, the debate is the same one that has been going on forever, but when you
compare his research with his opening claim that “The sets kids receive as
gifts today are replete with made-to-order piece types special to each set,
useful in one particular spot, and often useless elsewhere” it’s clear that
even his own data do not support him.
To support this claim, one would have to look at the rate at which LEGO
introduces new elements, as well as how many sets a certain element appears
in. I pointed out to Dr. Changizi in an e-mail that the pieces in the set he
uses as an example (the Geonosian Starfighter) are all actually fairly common
pieces used in hundreds of other sets. He replied that this does not
undermine his argument, but it clearly does.
|
He’s got a (half baked) hypothesis. He wrote a paper 10 years ago and is still
milking it. Don’t confuse him with data.
OK, that was harsh, but that’s what I come away with, without detracting from
the agreement points we DID find here. Like Dave and Dave, maybe there are more
elements and from a purely network connectivity perspective it’s a less
connected system. But a network of 100 IBM XTs is LESS powerful than a network
that contains one Mac, one laser printer, one ‘droid, one Thinkpad and one
Redhat box. Despite being way more interconnected.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
34 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
