FIRST - Reason for existance

[Steve W]

Soezgg, I am sure glad that you don't say what you really mean. We here in Canada were glad to help that fragile flower (Red Tulip) grow into a beautiful thing. It must be the cool arctic air that stimulates the plants growth. I just hope that next year that it doesn't suffer from wind burn, shrival up and die.

BTW now that we know how you feel, we will be notifying the accomodations people and will be lowering your priority level to a lower mid quality igloo for next year. We will make sure that an outhouse is within 100 yards of your igloo to prevent any accidents.

Your Canadian Host,
Steve

[SilenceNoMore]

FIRST exists (or the stated mission) to provide inspiration to high school students to enter fields of science in their professional career. It is obvious to me that FIRST is supposed to be something that provides the United States with more engineers, which is noble.

However, I think FIRST right now is just serving to inflate Dean Kamen's inflated ego and to provide and outlet for him to spread his silly ideas.

[mtrawls]

Originally Posted by HHSJosh

At the risk of moving this thread a bit off topic, I would simply like to know which of his ideas are "silly"?

I'm not quite sure if it is the science or the technology ... but both seem to be sligthly amusing at best

Yet at the same time, it's the drive for increased profit margins of this Capitolist society which as at the heart of all this "outsourcing" debate.

Yes, and debate is healthy. And in this debate, it is often riddled with emotions. People look at one thing, that they are out of a job. Sure, that's not good for them, but they have to deal with it. Another side is that goods are produced cheaper. Most people, if they had a choice, would prefer cheaper goods to recovering lost American jobs -- well, actually most people want both and don't like to think about it too much. But I digress, and this has been discussed in another thread.

...
Once all the competition is wiped out, the king of the hill is awarded the satisfaction of a high investor payout, while the owners of the independant shops file for chapter 11.

Like I said, when people stop playing by the rules things go bad. If companies unfairly use their monopoly status, then this is surely not good. And if there is no competition for them, then they become complacent, which is not good (but also the problem of the utopian idea). Capitalism unguarded isn't perfect, sure ... even I admit that some control is needed (however slight). But it's the best we got.

I think FIRST is a step in the right direction in this sense- if enough students are touched by the conept of gracious professionalism, those students will take those ideas and fundamentals with them into the business world.

I agree with you here. Gracious professionalism is about the long run. Too many businesses are short sighted and look for increased profit margins in the short term, irrespective of what will eventually happen.

No one has the moral intellect to decide what's best for everyone. But as you yourself stated, the drive of a company is to cut costs to inrease profit, even if it means expending hard working employees in favor of cheaper labor. The facts show that outsourced labor is a fraction of the cost of local labor, and of very comperable quality. As everything in our capitolist society, the contract typically goes to the lowest bidder.

Are you assuming this is a bad thing?

I'd argue those organizations motivated around utopian goals have largely failed by being pushed around or bought out by the Big Guys through underhanded means.

Some, for sure. But let me give you an example of what I mean. Take the Red Cross; they train lifeguards as a non-profit organization and various swimming pools require red cross certification. Wonderful service; entierly necessary ... but the red cross was only motivated by utopian principles. (Which isn't a bad thing, i admit; but profit can sometimes be better.) There's a certain company in Florida that started training lifeguards as well, but they are a for-profit company. They follow up their training and do periodic suprise checks to make sure life-guards are paying attention, and also do many test drills of emergency situations. Also, they've innovated many techniques (which the red cross has duly copied). The moral? The red cross is great ... but many pools in Florida have started switching over to the for-profit company's lifeguards because they are better trained and stay on task, since they know they're going to be watched. Was the red cross doing a good thing? Yes -- but without competition, they were complacent to leave it at a good thing. Looking for a buck or two, this company managed to make it a better thing.

Remember, it's not just "the Big guys" that are capitalists ... most small businesses are motivated by profit too. And if they can innovate and provide a better service to the market for a better price, generally they will succeed. If not, what should we do? Help them out because their motives are pure? Even if it means more money out of our pocket -- money we probably have other uses for? A lot of people complain about the big guys and their buying power and what not ... but oddly enough, I haven't heard a single person complain about the lower prices they're paying! Oh, and all those "awful" "Robber barons" we learned about in history ... remember that they started out penniless.

But a debate about capitalism and monopolies probably isn't appropriate for this thread -- it would take many pages, I imagine. And I've procrastinated enough from my english paper (for now, anyways).

[Steve W]

Silly ideas are only seen as silly in the eyes of the beholder. All ideas come from thought processes. If Dean or any of the rest of us only think within the box, nothing will ever change or get accomplished. I am not saying that SilenceNoMore doesn't think outside of the box (actually I'm sure that he/she must), but that he/she does not always agree with others that think outside of the box.

I have said to students "what are you thinking about?" when they are trying to solve a problem and when I look back, I realize I was the one that hadn't opened my eyes. Look around, keep an open mind and see what new things that we can experience. This is FIRST.

[MikeDubreuil]

Originally Posted by Steve W

Silly ideas are only seen as silly in the eyes of the beholder.

Very true, how about the most useless invention of all time the slinky. It's a silly invention right? What was Richard James thinking in 1945? I'll tell you who doesn't think it's silly, Poof Products. They sell the slinky. Did you know approximately 300 million slinkys have been sold worldwide? That's a lot of "silly money."

[Marc P.]

I remember my first year in FIRST- Dean's speech at the 2000 UTC Regional. I remember it's focus was more on transforming culture in terms of social standards. What I remember is Dean comparing engineers and scientists to famous sports stars, actors, and singers, and where the spotlight of influence was/is in our culture. I remember thinking "Yeah, why do people get paid millions of dollars to swing a stick at a round object, while the people who design and build the things that affect our everyday lives make a small fraction of that."

To me, that's always been one of the main goals of FIRST. I've seen it (and it's happened to me) as transforming people's visions of what engineering is, and how much it really affects our everyday lives. Before my involvement with FIRST, I would look at things for what they are- I'd look at a computer monitor and think "hmm.. monitor," or a stoplight or bridge, and just think of them as random things. Now I look at everything and wonder who designed that, or what the inspiration behind it is, and try to figure out how everything works. Once you realize that literally everything around us has been designed and engineered, it's really an incredible feeling to know you can play a part in the design of things that will make life better in the long run.

When I was growing up, my heros were the typical sports stars of the day, Larry Bird, Michael Jordon, Don Mattingly, etc. etc. But now I think, "what did they really do to better humanity..." Now my heros are people like Dean Kamen, Dave Lavery, Ed Gilchrest, George Rhiem, and all the FIRST mentors and engineers out there. I think that's the main aspect of FIRST- to change our culture from superficial idle-worship of movie, sports, and music stars to a reality based respect for people with varying talents. I appreciate and respect the talent it takes to star in a movie, or produce a record, and even play sports, but on the same level I appreciate the engineers that designed a car I use to drive to work, or the architects that designed the house I live in, or the inventors of the computer so I can post in this thread.

To me, that goes beyond any political or geographic boundary. Inspiration is a human feeling, and as such all humans are capable and deserving of the same chances, regardless of where they live. I'm proud to be part of FIRST, and hope it does continue to expand around the world. When we can have an international championship, I'll be there cheering everyone on, as a global community of people dedicated to making a positive difference.

[sanddrag]

Originally Posted by mechman108

FIRST is the best thing ever happened in my life...

To expand on that, perhaps the question needs to be asked "Why shouldn't it be the best thing that has ever happened in a foreign student's life?" I honestly don't know exactly what FIRST claims their mission to be but whatever it is, it is working and it is working worldwide.

[Arefin Bari]

Originally Posted by sanddrag

To expand on that, perhaps the question needs to be asked "Why shouldn't it be the best thing that has ever happened in a foreign student's life?" I honestly don't know exactly what FIRST claims their mission to be but whatever it is, it is working and it is working worldwide.

i am not a foreign student....

[Elyse Holguin]

I'm sticking with what I've already said here.

[Rich Kressly]

To me FIRST is, and always has been, about working toward a societal change where the number of people who are positive contributors outnumber those who only take from society. Competing as a means to strengthen the entire society is what FIRST is about. American society, as the country with the most wealth and resources, has an obligation to take the lead in the endeavor to stregthen/bring together the global community.

[Jessica Boucher]

http://web.archive.org/web/199611250...ws/960905.html

Simple as that. The text of it is:
"Effective immediately, we have officially changed our name from "U.S. FIRST" to "FIRST". FIRST stands for "For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology". The name was changed in order to reflect our desire to expand access to our programs to all youth around the world."

I see it as an economy issue, though. FIRST's inception in the early 90's was built in an economy that desperately needed to pull itself up by the bootstraps. Jumpstarting the US economy helps all US companies out, including Dean's own.

As time marched on, with the popularity of the Internet gaining speed as well as the gradual re-consolidation of companies, globalization became a huge aspect of US business, more than it ever had been before. This may have been part of FIRST's desire to go global - to mirror the economy.

Or maybe the opportunity came up to take on an int'l team and the thing snowballed, I don't know. I find it interesting, Steve, that you brought this discussion up, being from 188. Were you FIRST's first int'l team? I'd love some insight into this.

PS - Don't you love when you hear people call it US FIRST? I grin every time

[Karthik]

Originally Posted by Jessica Boucher

As time marched on, with the popularity of the Internet gaining speed as well as the gradual re-consolidation of companies, globalization became a huge aspect of US business, more than it ever had been before. This may have been part of FIRST's desire to go global - to mirror the economy.

Or maybe the opportunity came up to take on an int'l team and the thing snowballed, I don't know. I find it interesting, Steve, that you brought this discussion up, being from 188. Were you FIRST's first int'l team? I'd love some insight into this.

There was actually a team from Jamaica before 188, but Woburn is the first international team that stuck around. I was in my last year of High School at Woburn when 188 formed in 1998, so I can shed some light.

When Woburn first signed up for FIRST, we did it because looking for a new challenge. We had been in previous smaller robotics competitions, which no longer satisfied us. We knew very little about the mission of FIRST, rather we just saw it as a cool robotics competition. No special support or attention was given to us by FIRST for being an international team. (Nor did we seek it)

So, at the beginning Team 188 was a not project in getting FIRST to become an international competition. FIRST really began supporting the Canadian in movement in 2002, with the debut of the Canadian Regional.

I hope that answers some questions...

[Mr. Lim]

Originally Posted by Karthik

There was actually a team from Jamaica before 188, but Woburn is the first international team that stuck around. I was in my last year of High School at Woburn when 188 formed in 1998, so I can shed some light.

When Woburn first signed up for FIRST, we did it because looking for a new challenge. We had been in previous smaller robotics competitions, which no longer satisfied us. We knew very little about the mission of FIRST, rather we just saw it as a cool robotics competition. No special support or attention was given to us by FIRST for being an international team. (Nor did we seek it)

So, at the beginning Team 188 was a not project in getting FIRST to become an international competition. FIRST really began supporting the Canadian in movement in 2002, with the debut of the Canadian Regional.

I hope that answers some questions...

And for those who may be interested, the entire team 188 history is nicely chronicled here:

http://www.team188.com/web/index.php...urn +Robotics

It includes info on some interesting forays into failed copycat FIRST competitions held in Canada before the real-deal debuted in 2002. Also included is our short-lived stint as "Team Canada Robotics" which was officially recognized in an address on Parliament Hill in 1998. It was easy to call ourselves "Team Canada Robotics" when we were the only FIRST team from Canada. Needless to say, it didn't take long AT ALL for that to change!

Now, to keep this post on-topic:

Debating whether the goal of FIRST is to service the US, or the world at large, is a bit like arguing whether Civil Rights or Women's Suffrage should apply to just the US, or the world as a whole.

The creation of all these things are deeply rooted in the US, but once the concepts became well-developed and defined, they were exported and practiced all over the world, to the benefit of EVERYONE. If anyone were to claim that Civil Rights and Women's Suffrage were exclusively for the US because they were invented there, they would promptly be met with a firm smack to the back of the head by yours truly.

You wouldn't want us Canadians to keep Celine Dion just for ourselves would you? (please don't answer that!)

If you're thinking I'm a crackhead for paralleling Civil Rights and Women's Suffrage to a pithy robotics competition, then humour me for a second: To me, FIRST is "for inspiration and recognition of science and technology".

In a world where our heroes are recording artists, media celebrities, professional athletes, and the uber-wealthy, we glorify them for the fame and fortune they've received. We give little or no regard to whether that fame or fortune was gained by stealling millions from stockholders through bogus financial reporting, whether they simply stumbled upon the right people to sleep with in Hollywood, or if they're just freakishly good at throwing a ball through a hoop. We care even less if they are genuinely GOOD people - so what if he deals drugs, beats his wife, and neglects his kids... he's rich AND famous! I want to be rich and famous too, no matter what it takes... I can find lots of easy money too, just like these people did. The ends will justify the means.

It pains me to see such perversion of the American dream.

"for inspiration and recognition of science and technology" represents not just a robotics competition, but a change in our priorities as a society. The people in FIRST are the ones who should be recognized as "the rich and the famous." Wouldn't it be great if we paid our teachers and innovators the salaries of our professional athletes? What about our scientists and researchers? We envy someone for being able to run fast? But ridicule the "nerds" for being able to think fast? How wrong is that? And if you share those feelings, participating in FIRST is your way to speak up.

Too often, society's inspiration often comes from the wrong people, and recognition goes to the wrong people. FIRST is a great movement that aims to set things straight, to reward and recognize those people who society really depends on. The robotics competition is just a very successful mechanism in the FIRST movement as a whole.

So in short...

FIRST is for the world.

[Sean Schuff]

I think if you want to understand the reason for FIRST’s existence you need to look more at the big picture. All of the little things like keeping America on the cutting edge or inspiring our young people or filling jobs from within are all great goals but what is the ultimate goal? My view is that, whether we believe it or not, FIRST has the ability to impact entire societies, and even the whole world. Pie in the sky? Maybe – but we all need to dream and DREAM BIG!

Take a look at what motivates Dean. Money? No. Power? No. Influence? No. It seems to me that what motivates Dean the most is the ability to give the world what it NEEDS, and not what it WANTS. Case in point – the Segway. Some can look at it as a rich man’s toy. Others can see it as the latest tech gadget. I see it as a first step toward real change in transportation. The first step toward a solution to the problems of metropolitan congestion, noxious emissions, and a necessary radical revamping of the way we look at transportation. Or how about the Slingshot, Dean’s generator and water purifier? Do we need generators in this country? Do we have a pressing need for potable water in the U.S.? No. This invention is for third world countries that don’t have access to those things like we do. Dean is making the world a better place on some of the most fundamental levels. And he is doing it through FIRST as well.

FIRST is a means to an end. It has the ability to inspire young people to take charge of their world and be the ones to solve the problems that really matter. It is the “classroom” where we all can learn so many valuable life lessons. But the lessons are no good to anyone if we just leave them in the classroom. We need to take them out to the rest of the world and make real changes to our society. While FIRST is huge in our minds, it is really just a small but extremely vital part of the bigger picture. And we need to keep our eyes open to that picture.

Just my 2 soapbox cents.

Sean

[Madison]

Is it only obvious to me that FIRST and Dean Kamen are not inextricably attached at the hip? They are autonomous, independent entities that can and will function without one another. Sometimes, though, it seems that Kamen forgets the same things that people around here forget -- when you open your mouth, you're not only representing yourself, but also the organizations that you are associated with. Like it or not.

FIRST's stated purpose has been unchanged for eight years, as Jessica has already pointed out in this thread. The name change announcement and subsequent descriptions of the purpose behind FIRST and its Robotics Competition are conspicuously lacking any sort of the America-centric sentiment and, undoubtedly, will continue to do so. If that were to change in any official capacity, I'd quickly figure out what constitutes a resignation and hand it in along with my nameplate, my reputation points and my stapler. That is not the organization I entered into six years ago and not an organization I wish to support in any capacity.

FIRST and its supporters are not, by any indication, against outsourcing of jobs to foreign countries -- whether they be Canada, Mexico, India or elsewhere. Companies like Microsoft, General Motors, Daimler-Chrysler and Boston Scientific have each outsourced jobs to international plants and production facilities.

I didn't have the benefit of being able to attend the Championship this season, so I did not hear Kamen's speech and cannot write about it with any accuracy. Given its topic, however, I can surmise that two things might have been happening.

First, Kamen may just be immensely hypocritical and playing the role of propagandist and recruiter for the corporations who back FIRST. It's all too easy to forget that, while the engineers, scientists and technology professionals we work with through the build season are often talented, engaging, inspiring people, the corporations and companies they work for are often engaged in some unsavory business practices, questionable political lobbying efforts and manufacturing processes that damage the environment -- among other things. It's important that Ford is inspiring students to pursue engineering, but do we really want those students to go on engineering sport-utility vehicles that travel only ten miles for each gallon of gas burned? Is that what we're inspiring students to do with this program?

The other possibility is that Kamen sought to apply pressure to these corporations to change their business practices; to become environmentally conscious, to end outsourcing of jobs, and to research and develop technologies that will benefit the entire world -- not just the United States. That is a goal I can stand behind and am hopeful that someone with a little less fervor about their American nationalism can assure me that this was the case.

The foreigners who are taking these outsourced jobs are doing so at a fraction of the salary that an American expects -- and they can do so often because they're simply grateful that their family can eat. Those people deserve such jobs far more than someone who wants ten times as much so their kids can wear Nike shoes and get driven to school in the family's Ford Excursion.

If Dean Kamen or any of the other CEO's represented through sponsorship of FIRST want to send a real message to this program's participants that says, unequivocally, their focus is on preserving jobs for Americans, the best thing they can do is to take a pay cut. When they can prove that they're motivated by something other than increased profit margins and shareholders returns, that sentiment will shift the paradigm of what it means to operate a business in this country.

Until I see that happen, I'm content in believing the stated purpose of the FIRST organization, not the remarks of Dean Kamen, and will continue to believe that FIRST is about inspiring the next generation to conduct business, value achievement, and support each other differently than the generations before it. Should it happen, I believe that it will also set an admirable example worthy of emulation and will be happy to remain involved in the program.

FIRST isn't about trying to end outsourcing -- it's about trying to inspire within the youth that participate an admiration and respect for the benefit of the work being done by engineers, scientists and technology professionals. It's about teaching them that the benefit in inventing the portable insulin pump isn't in the gobs of cash you can squeeze from the deal, but in the lives you save. It's not about harboring resentment towards people who do the same or better work for lower wages, it's about reawakening their spirit of accomplishment and pride in Americans. It's about rekindling a fire of discovery that illuminates how clearly the things we give to others are far greater than the things we earn for ourselves.