DPRG
DPRG List  



[DPRG] Contests at the Science Place

Subject: [DPRG] Contests at the Science Place
From: R. Bickle rbickle at swbell.net
Date: Thu Feb 7 14:52:41 CST 2002

Charlie,

Personally, I would find a competition in which everyone uses identical
hardware, extremely boring. That said, it might be interesting to have such
a competition for programming skill only in a completely separate category.

Rick


-----Original Message-----
>From: Charlie W Youngblood [mailto:chaz128 at juno.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2002 5:57 PM
To: rbickle at swbell.net
Cc: jcaldwel at jcpenney.com; slugmusk at linuxlegend.com; dprglist at dprg.org
Subject: Re: [DPRG] Contests at the Science Place



On Tue, 05 Feb 2002 11:44:03 -0600 "R. Bickle" <rbickle at swbell.net>
writes:
>John,
>
>Well, I wouldn't necessarily say 0 points for a hacked toy,
<snip>
I would say if the hacked toy was "engineered" well enough
to change, blend, incorporate the original hardware to do,act,
look significantly different (not a pile of wires on wheels), it
should get the points for being cleverly "engineered". The DPRG
already has awards for this kind of thing anyway, "best dressed",
most colorful, most original (unique) approach to solving a problem.
These are all separate from the basic three competitions. If the goal
is originality of design then what was all the hype over having a club
chasis (bot bones), power plant (Pitman motors), and archive of
commands ported in variouse languages (C, Assembly, Basic) for
use with multiple CU's. It looks like the goal is to have repeatability
so that there will be more involvement. After all in the real world of
sports, stock car racing has much duplication. It is then up to the
different teams to get the most out of what is prescribed. I'm not
suggesting that only one set of hardware be allowed, but if one
person, group can get more performance out of identical equipment
than someone else, more power to them. Some times that's how
we all learn! :-)
	From a very appreciative DPRG member
		Charlie Youngblood

>I think that the goal as I see it is to encourage originality of design
and
>programming by awarding more points to those who make something from
>scratch, or find a novel way to approach and solve a problem.

>
>Rick
>
>  -----Original Message-----
>  From: dprglist-admin at dprg.org [mailto:dprglist-admin at dprg.org]On
>Behalf Of
>John R Caldwell
>  Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 4:43 PM
>  To: R. Bickle
>  Cc: 'Sluggy!'; 'dprg'
>  Subject: Re: [DPRG] Contests at the Science Place
>
>
>  How about:
>  Built from scratch                       15 points
>  Hacked from store bought toy     0 points
>  In the middle                               5 points
>  Have the contestants declare their own points; we're honest.
>
>  John Caldwell
>  972.431.2040
>
>
>
>  "R. Bickle" wrote:
>
>    We wouldn't want to discourage competition by making "hacked" toys
>or
>kits
>    illegal in the competition, but I do think that there should be
>some
>extra
>    points somewhere for the person who has taken the time and effort
>to
>design
>    his own drive system, platform and controls etc. I mean, SR02 and
>a lego
>kit
>    shouldn't even be in the same category.
>    Suppose there was an extra judging category for x points depending
>on
>the
>    level of engineering in the robot? (By the hobbyist, not the toy
>company.)
>
>    Rick Bickle
>
>    -----Original Message-----
>    From: dprglist-admin at dprg.org [mailto:dprglist-admin at dprg.org]On
>Behalf
>    Of Sluggy!
>    Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 11:21 AM
>    To: dprg
>    Subject: Re: [DPRG] Contests at the Science Place
>
>    Ed Okerson wrote:
>
>    ? "Robots must be built from scratch or kit form"
>
>    ? That is an exact excerpt from the rules that have been posted on
>the
>DPRG
>    web
>    ? site for who knows how long.  Anyone care to comment on this?
>
>    Let me first say that I have not served on the rules committee

>as yet
>    :) ], but I think the spirit of this rule is for each robot to be
>    unique, as opposed to identical kits assembled identically.
>
>    I would think that even if two robots shared the same base chassis
>    (BOEbot or ARobot, for example) unless they were identically
>equiped and
>      configured (at the discretion of the contest judges), they will
>be
>    unique. Actually, I think that even if tasked with creating
>identical
>    robots from a list of requirements, any given pair of robot
>builders
>    would make unique robots, siblings perhaps, but not twins.
>
>     ? I think the intent of this rule is that you cannot enter a Sony
>Aibo,
>     ? or other commercially built complete robot solution.  I guess
>that
>     ? would mean that if you bought a Heathkit Hero in kit form and
>     ? assembled it yourself it would be legal to enter, but if you
>bought
>     ? one factory assembled it would not.
>
>    Hmmmm... I think the task of the judges would be to make a
>judgement
>    call on how "stock" a kit was. I think a completely unmodified
>Hero,
>    whether kit or preassembled, would not meet the spirit of the
>rule. It
>    could be argued that if it were the only Hero in the contest then
>it
>    would be unique. Tough call. Simply adding sensors or other
>hardware
>    would be enough to make it unique in my eyes.
>
>    Of course, then we get into the whole concept of whether software
>    differences constitute uniqueness :)
>
>    Sluggy!
>
>    --
>
>
>--Boundary_(ID_4AS5wVCzrkZ9rTHzkjhNqg)
>Content-type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII
>Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
>
><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
><HTML><HEAD>
><META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
>
>
><META content="MSHTML 5.00.2920.0" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
><BODY>
><DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
>class=246382915-05022002>John,</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
><DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
>class=246382915-05022002></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
><DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
>class=246382915-05022002>Well,
>I wouldn't necessarily say 0 points for a hacked toy, certainly 0
>points for one
>in which nothing was modified though. </SPAN></FONT></DIV>
><DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
>class=246382915-05022002></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
><DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
>class=246382915-05022002>To an
>earlier point: I know that there is originality in the programming of
>the robot,
>but everyone pretty much has to do that. Although programming a lego
>mindstorm
>controller with a few time values is still pretty different than
>writing your
>own control code in assembler or something. There are certainly levels
>of
>difficulty there too, but it's very hard to see or
>judge.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
><DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
>class=246382915-05022002></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
><DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
>class=246382915-05022002>I
>think that the goal as I see it is to encourage originality of design
>and
>programming by awarding more points to those who make something from
>scratch, or
>find a novel way to approach and solve a problem.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
><DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
>class=246382915-05022002></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
><DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
>class=246382915-05022002>Rick</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
><DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
>class=246382915-05022002></SPAN></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
><BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
>  <DIV align=left class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr><FONT face=Tahoma
>
>  size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B>
>dprglist-admin at dprg.org
>  [mailto:dprglist-admin at dprg.org]<B>On Behalf Of </B>John R
>  Caldwell<BR><B>Sent:</B> Monday, February 04, 2002 4:43
>PM<BR><B>To:</B> R.
>  Bickle<BR><B>Cc:</B> 'Sluggy!'; 'dprg'<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [DPRG]
>Contests
>  at the Science Place<BR><BR></DIV></FONT>How about: <BR>Built from
>
>scratch&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&n
bsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;

>
>  15 points <BR>Hacked from store bought toy&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; 0
>points
>  <BR>In the
>
>middle&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nb
sp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&
nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;

>
>  5 points
>  <P>Have the contestants declare their own points; we're honest.
>  <P><B><I>John Caldwell</I></B> <BR><B><I>972.431.2040&nbsp;</I></B>
><BR>&nbsp;
>  <BR>&nbsp;
>  <P>"R. Bickle" wrote:
>  <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE="CITE">We wouldn't want to discourage competition
>by making
>    "hacked" toys or kits <BR>illegal in the competition, but I do
>think that
>    there should be some extra <BR>points somewhere for the person who
>has taken
>    the time and effort to design <BR>his own drive system, platform
>and
>    controls etc. I mean, SR02 and a lego kit <BR>shouldn't even be in
>the same
>    category.
>    <P>Suppose there was an extra judging category for x points
>depending on the
>    <BR>level of engineering in the robot? (By the hobbyist, not the
>toy
>    company.)
>    <P>Rick Bickle
>    <P>-----Original Message----- <BR>From: dprglist-admin at dprg.org
>[<A
>
>href="mailto:dprglist-admin at dprg.org">mailto:dprglist-admin at dprg.org</A>]On

>
>    Behalf <BR>Of Sluggy! <BR>Sent: Monday, February 04, 2002 11:21 AM
><BR>To:
>    dprg <BR>Subject: Re: [DPRG] Contests at the Science Place
>    <P>Ed Okerson wrote:
>    <P>? "Robots must be built from scratch or kit form"
>    <P>? That is an exact excerpt from the rules that have been posted
>on the
>    DPRG <BR>web <BR>? site for who knows how long.&nbsp; Anyone care
>to comment
>    on this?
>    <P>Let me first say that I have not served on the rules committee
>[ as yet
>    <BR>:) ], but I think the spirit of this rule is for each robot to
>be
>    <BR>unique, as opposed to identical kits assembled identically.
>    <P>I would think that even if two robots shared the same base
>chassis
>    <BR>(BOEbot or ARobot, for example) unless they were identically
>equiped and
>    <BR>&nbsp; configured (at the discretion of the contest judges),
>they will
>    be <BR>unique. Actually, I think that even if tasked with creating
>identical
>    <BR>robots from a list of requirements, any given pair of robot
>builders
>    <BR>would make unique robots, siblings perhaps, but not twins.
>    <P>&nbsp;? I think the intent of this rule is that you cannot
>enter a Sony
>    Aibo, <BR>&nbsp;? or other commercially built complete robot
>solution.&nbsp;
>    I guess that <BR>&nbsp;? would mean that if you bought a Heathkit
>Hero in
>    kit form and <BR>&nbsp;? assembled it yourself it would be legal
>to enter,
>    but if you bought <BR>&nbsp;? one factory assembled it would not.
>    <P>Hmmmm... I think the task of the judges would be to make a
>judgement
>    <BR>call on how "stock" a kit was. I think a completely unmodified
>Hero,
>    <BR>whether kit or preassembled, would not meet the spirit of the
>rule. It
>    <BR>could be argued that if it were the only Hero in the contest
>then it
>    <BR>would be unique. Tough call. Simply adding sensors or other
>hardware
>    <BR>would be enough to make it unique in my eyes.
>    <P>Of course, then we get into the whole concept of whether
>software
>    <BR>differences constitute uniqueness :)
>    <P>Sluggy!
>    <P>--</P></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
>
>--Boundary_(ID_4AS5wVCzrkZ9rTHzkjhNqg)--
>_______________________________________________
>DPRGlist mailing list
>DPRGlist at dprg.org
>http://nimon.ncc.com/mailman/listinfo/dprglist

________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.


More information about the DPRG mailing list