 | | Re: Mathematical proof that you can't build anything with LEGO bricks
|
|
In lugnet.general, David Eaton wrote: (snip good analysis) For more musings on the build/rebuild vs. build/play dichotomy see (URL) second one really reinforces what Dave's talking about, in that if you plan to NEVER take something apart but just (...) (13 years ago, 28-Feb-12, to lugnet.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Mathematical proof that you can't build anything with LEGO bricks
|
|
(...) I think he's doing the same thing that virtually everyone does when they see modern LEGO-- trying to figure out why they don't like it as much. Everyone that grew up with LEGO seems to go through that same stage of curmudgeon-ity, where they (...) (13 years ago, 28-Feb-12, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Mathematical proof that you can't build anything with LEGO bricks
|
|
(...) 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 (...) (13 years ago, 28-Feb-12, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Mathematical proof that you can't build anything with LEGO bricks
|
|
(...) Good point, but there have always been LEGO sets sold as specific models with instructions for building them. And sets were not marketed directly to children in the 60s and 70s, they were marketed to their parents, and parents (at least my (...) (13 years ago, 28-Feb-12, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Mathematical proof that you can't build anything with LEGO bricks
|
|
(...) 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 (...) (13 years ago, 28-Feb-12, to lugnet.general, FTX)
|
