 | | Re: An Idea for new Mindstorm —John Barnes
|
| | | (...) I have to agree. If you don't want to build programmable robots, why not just build a motorized model with a motor and battery box. The whole point of Mindstorms, as I see it, is that you "add" programming to a structure of Lego elements to (...) (19 years ago, 24-Jun-05, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: An Idea for new Mindstorm —Andrew G. Meyer
|
| | | | Isn't it a bit of a contradiction to have a person who wants to build robots, but doesn't want to program? A true robot, of the kind we see on this newsgroup, is a harmonious blend of decent programming and decent construction. If you take the (...) (19 years ago, 26-Jun-05, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | RE: An Idea for new Mindstorm —Millers
|
| | | | | When I read this Idea about no programming, I thought you guys must be crazy. The programming is the coolest part of this system. I'd like to see Lego do more with the programming capabilities not less. -----Original Message----- From: (...) (19 years ago, 27-Jun-05, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: An Idea for new Mindstorm —Alexander Horoshilov
|
| | | | | | (...) Never I said, that RCX must have less programming capaiblities. All current features (there are not too many of them now) must be kept. They may be expanded, it is also good, but it is slightly different topic. (19 years ago, 28-Jun-05, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: An Idea for new Mindstorm —Alexander Horoshilov
|
| | | | (...) Yes, exactly - some models have to be just small step behind Technic. It will allow people to easy shift from "just Technic" to robotics. Currently, there are too large gap between Technic and Mindstorm, I think. If filled, it will allow (...) (19 years ago, 28-Jun-05, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: An Idea for new Mindstorms - event potential? —Justin Fisher
|
| | | | While I think mindstorms needs to be computer-programmable out of the box (ie no corner cutting by making the PC interface a seperate acessory), I'm intrigued by the concept of fixed programs as a robotics challenge - for many kinds of robot, far (...) (19 years ago, 28-Jun-05, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: An Idea for new Mindstorms - event potential? —Steve Baker
|
| | | | Justin wrote: > A fly can land on the ceiling not (...) Don't be too hard on the fly's brain. A housefly has about a third of a million neurons. If you think of a neuron as being about the power of a transistor - then there is a computer that's more (...) (19 years ago, 29-Jun-05, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: An Idea for new Mindstorms - event potential? —
|
| | | | | Citando Steve Baker <sjbaker1@airmail.net>: Justin wrote: > A fly can land on the ceiling not > because it is smart (it isn't), but because it's body is built such that the > laws of physics themselves automate a process that would be prohibitively (...) (19 years ago, 28-Jun-05, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: An Idea for new Mindstorms - event potential? —dan miller
|
| | | | | | (...) I've been interested in estimates of insect (& arachnid) brain power for some time, with neuron counts, up-to-date analysis of cognitive abilities, etc. For some reason I've found this material hard to find online. Any references would be (...) (19 years ago, 3-Jul-05, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: An Idea for new Mindstorms - event potential? —Steve Baker
|
| | | | | | (...) Human brain: 100,000,000,000 neurons. Bee brain: 1,000,000 neurons. Housefly: 300,000 neurons. Fruitfly: 400 neurons. Nematode: 100 neurons. Sea slug 7 neurons. The housefly is actually suprisingly smart for the insect world. I found somewhere (...) (19 years ago, 3-Jul-05, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: An Idea for new Mindstorms - event potential? —Justin Fisher
|
| | | | (...) I'm not knocking the fly, I'm saying that landing on the ceiling is a very difficult problem to solve by realtime calculated piloting (even using a desktop PC). But it needs very little calculation at all if the problem is almost entirely (...) (19 years ago, 29-Jun-05, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| | | | |
