  |
|
|
  | |
. | |
A L S O__T O D A Y
T A B L E__T A L K How have you gotten the most out of your PalmPilot? Exchange tips and ideas in the Digital Culture area of Table Talk - - - - - - - - - - R E C E N T L Y Play money Let's Get This Straight Talk to our agent The president as lab rat 21st Log - - - - - - - - - - BROWSE THE - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - -
|
|
I, ROBOT? MY ROBOT! | PAGE 1, 2
11:30 a.m.: I blithely disregard the easy-to-follow instruction guide provided only to reviewers -- I want the real experience -- and load up the CD-ROM setup program. Piece of cake. I put batteries in the RCX, and get the motors to run. "You are amazing," the computer tells me. 12:00 p.m.: I am rummaging through the box, trying to find a tiny piece with two holes and four bumps, to build the basic Pathfinder robot necessary for the training program. I cannot find the piece amid the 726 other blocks. Tiny chunks of plastic go flying and disappear into the crevices of my desk as I paw through the box. This, I suddenly recall, is what I hated about Lego when I was growing up. 12:30 p.m.: I have assembled the Pathfinder, and walked through the first programming demo: Make a robot that moves forward in a straight line. My Pathfinder goes in circles. I start swearing. 12:35 p.m.: I figure out that I haven't rigged the motors to the RCX properly, causing one motor to rotate in the wrong direction. I fix it, and the Pathfinder goes forward. I cheer. 1 p.m.: Having finished the demo and completed a rudimentary robot that goes forward and beeps, I decide to tackle one of the provided challenges. Feeling confident, I skip over the level one challenge and pick level three. "Build a robot that sees a light, beeps, and flips over" (an Acroscanner) sounds far more interesting than "build a robot that can complete an obstacle course" (the Outback Tracker). 1:45 p.m.: After careful study of several prototype diagrams (consistent with the Lego goal of stimulating thinking, the "Constructopedia" tells you how to start, but not finish, robot designs), I have a rather flimsy-looking robot and a program, cobbled together from sample code and my own ingenuity, that ought to make my wheeled creation flip over, beep and keep driving when it encounters a wall. I am almost sweating in anticipation as I press the "Run" button. The robot immediately thrashes in a circle and then disintegrates. I tear my hair in frustration. 3 p.m.: I've given up on the challenge. Instead, I've built a robot that looks somewhat like a dune buggy, and I've managed to get it to go forward, hit a wall and stop without breaking. I can't figure out, however, why it won't then turn in a circle. 3:30 p.m.: Welcome to Mechanics 101 -- I realize that wheeled machines need axles to turn. My robot works. I'm brilliant. 4:30 p.m.: I am entertaining (or irritating) everyone in the office with Oscar. He runs forward until he hits a wall, reverses direction, beeps, moves back and forth four times, turns around in a circle and continues until he hits another wall. My construction methods are flimsy -- clearly, I'm out of touch with my old Lego skills -- so I have to repair Oscar every few minutes. I am enthralled. I am a genius. I am exhausted. The system is not without its flaws. The main RCX component, for example, doesn't easily interlock with other Legos, and the weight from the batteries sometimes causes the RCX to detach. And, as I discovered, Lego robots aren't always sturdy, and violent motion (say, smashing into a wall at top speed) can cause shabbily built robots to self-destruct. I also found myself wishing that the Constructopedia guidebook, which offers building tips, offered more details about constructing gears and triggers. But these are relatively minor gripes. Mindstorms has been nearly 15 years in the making, since Dr. Seymour Papert of the MIT Media Lab began working with Lego to put the Logo programming language into Lego bricks. The Mindstorms box is emblazoned with a company mantra, a quote from Papert, who is also Lego Professor of Learning Research: "Knowledge is only part of understanding. Genuine understanding comes from hands-on experience." So, is Lego Mindstorms appropriate for kids? I'd venture to say that it's not for all kids, but the system is simple enough for bright and inventive pubescents. There is probably more education to be had in Mindstorms than any Lego product on the market; there is no better way to teach kids about mechanics than to let them build an actual working machine. But judging by the members of the Lego Mindstorms Web site, where Mindstorms owners can read tips and upload their creations for the world to see, there are more adults using the product than kids. A random sample of users turned up an architect, a computer researcher, an aeronautical engineer, a computer science student and one child who is "really good at math." According to a recent Wired News story, Mindstorms is also proving quite popular with hackers. It's a testament to the product's success that Mindstorms is challenging enough to stimulate an aeronautical engineer, yet simple enough to engage a technical neophyte like myself. The only real flaw of Mindstorms is that there is only one RCX controller, which means that only one robot can exist at a time. I had visions of fleets of robots, perhaps playing soccer or dutifully sweeping the floor of my kitchen. Alas, that is not to be. Oscar will have to be exterminated if I want to build something bigger and better. That, my friends, is the life of a Lego. E-mail Janelle Brown. |
Arts & Entertainment | Books | Comics | Life | News | People
Politics | Sex | Tech & Business | Audio
The Free Software Project | The Movie Page
Letters | Columnists | Salon Plus
Copyright © 2000 Salon.com All rights reserved.
