Quote:
Originally Posted by Foster
They are "Human Dream and Inspiration Enablement Devices" but since that takes too long to say and explain I use the word "robot".
|
That's one way to put it. For those in FIRST, we tend to say "it's not all about the robot" because we know that the machines we build are mainly the catalyst for "Dream and Inspiration Enablement."
I argue that we do indeed use robots in our competition, but to spend too much time debating on whether or not these machines are robots is missing the point. I expect someone who is unaware of FIRST's model for inspiration to have more of a focus on the machines vs what they do for the students.
Even if FIRST was just an r/c car competition, you'd still be getting just the same out of the program. I too sometimes wonder about easier ways for someone outside FIRST to understand the "not all about robots" concept.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikell Taylor
FIRST robots definitely meet many commonly agreed upon definitions of robots. Some will disagree. Good for them. In my opinion, it's not worth arguing over.
|
I don't think it's worth arguing over and taking too much time with someone who disagrees either, but it's more of the tone of those that I've seen or heard that mention the "r/c car" idea that can bug me a bit. It's used in a way that devalues FRC and takes credit away from the hard work of the students. It's less of "those machines are mainly remote driven" and more of "because these machines are remotely driven, this competition is of less value to me as a viewer."
Those who think this are likely in a very small minority though, but for the sake of curiosity, I'm still interested in how others would react to or have reacted to those who don't see the automation side of the teleoperated period.