Re: DARPA Grand Challenge


"Randy M. Dumse" <rmd@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:PS03f.40$Su.152@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> "Brent S." <bseeley@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:digrkl$ugn$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > I think you are ignoring more than half of the picture. I see it as
> > the
> > great success it is. I'm sure you will benefit from this research in
> > ways only a non-pessimist can envision.
>
> Funny you choose to summarize that way, that I am ignoring more than
> half the picture. On the contrary, I think I'm the only one posting here
> giving balance to the whole picture.
>
> Wonderful book by Henry Hazzlitt, "Economics in One Lesson"
>
> Henry goes on in Chapter 2 to apply his lesson in Chapter 1, and talks
> about a baker who has a window broken out by a vandal with a brick. Good
> or bad? The baker replaces the window, so some glasier makes $250, and
> we see that money going round and round the community making business
> for everyone.
>
> The problem is, that is ignoring more than half the picture. The
> transaction with the window is visible to all. What is invisible, is
> that the baker was going to spend that $250 on a suit. He didn't. So a
> tailor went without business that day. And the baker, rather than having
> a window and a suit, has only a window, so he is poorer too.
>
One of Walter Williams favorite stories. I've read it a number of times,
and I understand your point.

> Stanford and CMU spent $20M collectively on their two entries. That's
> visible. That dozens or even hundreds of other research projects, for
> who knows what, at those universities, got shelved, is the invisible
> part. Maybe one of those students would have made a nano bot that could
> clear arteries.
I can't believe that the professors/researchers involved didn't weigh the
cost vs. the benefit of several projects. I'm sure that their decision was
based partly on the increased visibility of this event. One of my main
points was that this visibility is worth something. The exposure will only
bring more research opportunities to these Universities.

> Many university programs are working on such
> technologies right now. Maybe we'd have a cure for strokes and heart
> attacks by that. But we'll never know. The half that is visible, the
> half that is the "great success", is we now have demonstrated a few
> vehicles which can raise a lot of dust in the desert, follow a very
> carefully plowed out course, and many carefully provided waypoints, but
> have to be followed by chase vehicles lest they become a threat to
> public safety, and have no other immediate use.
>

I don't think all of the spin off projects will involve chasing vehicles
through the desert. It may even mean, indirectly, that more funding will be
available for an artery cleaning robot due to the increased interest in
robotics following such a successful and visible project. The possibilities
in this case are as hard to pin down as the rules of economics. The one
thing we do know about both though, is more activity is better.

> Maybe there will come an industry from this. Wonderful. That too will be
> visible. I will reinforce the idea this was a great success.
> But we will
> never know that part that is invisible, that was lost, because it never
> happened.

I think the money eventually came back to the baker, and he then bought a
new suit, because he still needed it.

> Because $20M from two Univ. alone, and hundreds of other
> groups in like manner was drained out of the robotics industry to chase
> a $2M prize.

The $2M prize couldn't have been their primary motive then. They each
wanted to be the recognized experts in the field so that they could attract
more funding, get more research opportunities, and develop even greater
technologies.

> The issue is not if something good might come from it. The
> issue is what was sacrificed for it, and it is a truth and an expense we
> will never know.
>
They'll get around to it. It is impossible to determine whether they missed
the next breakthrough opportunity, or just created it. I suspect you
weren't impressed with autonomous navigation, and really wish they would
have just done something else that didn't involve SUVs, or so much existing
technology.

Brent S.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: DARPA Grand Challenge
    ... >> I think you are ignoring more than half of the picture. ... >> great success it is. ... > about a baker who has a window broken out by a vandal with a brick. ...
    (comp.robotics.misc)
  • Re: DARPA Grand Challenge
    ... > I think you are ignoring more than half of the picture. ... > great success it is. ... Funny you choose to summarize that way, that I am ignoring more than ... about a baker who has a window broken out by a vandal with a brick. ...
    (comp.robotics.misc)
  • Re: Page layout for tubie pages on the net Re: Deep Space 845 55WSET amps.
    ... picture on the right ... Just to add a bit of explanation, the viewing browser might have ... browser will then word wrap to the viewer's window. ... in one cell and the text in another. ...
    (rec.audio.tubes)
  • Re: Photos wont open in new browser window
    ... You would have to create a subfolder on your site called "images" and move ... arrows or text with hyperlinks to the next picture, ... page but when I click on the thumbnail the picture opens in the same ... IE browser window. ...
    (microsoft.public.publisher.webdesign)
  • Re: Enlarge Picture from thumbnail in to a new window
    ... Also another question can i insert a close window message, ... resize the picture in the window, do i have to just make the picture ... and put all the pdf photo files in it. ... On the webpage, the thumbnail ...
    (microsoft.public.publisher.webdesign)