From: Ben Goertzel (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Wed Aug 09 2006 - 11:17:05 MDT
Phil, this is really a matter of engineering primarily; not science...
And in this case, I think there was a strong pragmatic and financial
motivation for the engineering teams to do testing in their home sites
ratehr than testing requiring traveling to off-road areas... not very
On 8/9/06, Philip Goetz <email@example.com> wrote:
> On 6/23/06, Brian Atkins <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > I think the first DARPA event failed mainly due to lack of testing and
> > development by the teams involved on the kind of real world off-road course they
> > had to face. Some got thrown by mechanical problems, most got thrown by their
> > code not being able to deal with certain kinds of challenges that the off-road
> > course had. With more experience they were able to refine their code to handle
> > all the gotchas for the second event.
> Do scientists in general tend to spend too much time theorizing and
> building things, relative to testing them out?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:57 MDT