Battlebots is NOT violence

[archiver]

Posted by Joe Johnson at 04/12/2001 9:25 AM EST


Engineer on team #47, Chief Delphi, from Pontiac Central High School and Delphi Automotive Systems.


In Reply to: It's the low-brow presentation
Posted by James Jones on 04/12/2001 8:50 AM EST:



My kids (and I, truth be told) were watching WAY too much TV. My wife, clever sheep that she is, decided to limit our TV hours by limiting our choices: She called the cable company and busted us down to "Antenna replacement" level.

As a result, I have missed all the Robotica shows as well as the latest round of Junkyard Wars.

I may ask someone to make me a tape.

I will let you know.

Joe J.

[archiver]

Posted by ChrisH at 04/12/2001 3:23 PM EST


Engineer on team #330, Beach 'Bots, from Hope Chapel Academy and NASA JPL, J & F Machine, Raytheon, et al.


In Reply to: DrJoe Unplugged...
Posted by Joe Johnson on 04/12/2001 9:25 AM EST:



When we got married, almost 19 years ago, my wife and I decided not to get a TV. We still don't have one and about the only time we regret it is during the Olympics and Nationals (if she's not there).

Not that I'd object to watching Junkyard Wars either if I didn't have to put up with everything that goes with it.

Chris Husmann,PE
Team 330 the Beach'Bots
Who probably reads too much Shakespear among other things

[archiver]

Posted by s_alaniz at 04/11/2001 6:02 PM EST


Other on team #57 from Houston Regional co-ordinator.


In Reply to: Battlebots is NOT violence
Posted by James Jones on 04/11/2001 1:53 PM EST:



YIKES!
When did this discussion start??? Hey agreed there's great entertainment value for the masses if we destroy each other's robot... We can always build weapons, but we can also build other things that are a lot more useful on a daily basis.
Robotic warfare is already a reality... and I am grateful for the people who do it to keep us safe and free, but one of the missions of FIRST is to foster co-operation. That doesn't happen in Battlebots..... (and...as was pointed out... bashing some of these robots would be like tearing up the Mona Lisa...) (Ok so I exaggerate...) Don't forget, our robotic warplanes, tanks and other necessary military hardware were built by engineers who co-operated in the process.
As for that dictionary definition of violence... a definition is by nature broad but can't cover every situation. As long as it's impersonal.. robot bashing is probably not violent... but how many teams at FIRST took no personal pride in their work? It wouldn't take much to start up some really hard (and nasty) feelings between FIRST teams in a combat style competition and I'm sure there are hard feelings fostered in battlebots.
I think the FIRST teams could take over battlebots and dominate... but we're trying to promote engineering ... not warrior sports events.
There is an issue here and it's a tough one, but my real objection is that programs like battlebots (robotica) have sold out to the entertainment business and do little to promote engineering and teamwork. Some pro sports have gone this direction and it's not a pretty sight...
For anyone doing Battlebots... (sigh) as Yoda said, "strong is the dark side in that place..." (WHY does he always talk backwards?)
Still there is a temptation to go into battlebots and show them what REAL robots can do.... think they would care for a robot that simply renders the other ineffective but not destroy it?

[archiver]

Posted by Nola Garcia at 04/11/2001 11:47 PM EST


Other on team #59, RAMTECH, from Miami Coral Park and Environmental Aeroscience.


In Reply to: Re: Battlebots is NOT violence
Posted by s_alaniz on 04/11/2001 6:02 PM EST:



: YIKES!
: When did this discussion start??? Hey agreed there's great entertainment value for the masses if we destroy each other's robot... We can always build weapons, but we can also build other things that are a lot more useful on a daily basis.
: Robotic warfare is already a reality... and I am grateful for the people who do it to keep us safe and free, but one of the missions of FIRST is to foster co-operation. That doesn't happen in Battlebots..... (and...as was pointed out... bashing some of these robots would be like tearing up the Mona Lisa...) (Ok so I exaggerate...) Don't forget, our robotic warplanes, tanks and other necessary military hardware were built by engineers who co-operated in the process.
: As for that dictionary definition of violence... a definition is by nature broad but can't cover every situation. As long as it's impersonal.. robot bashing is probably not violent... but how many teams at FIRST took no personal pride in their work? It wouldn't take much to start up some really hard (and nasty) feelings between FIRST teams in a combat style competition and I'm sure there are hard feelings fostered in battlebots.
: I think the FIRST teams could take over battlebots and dominate... but we're trying to promote engineering ... not warrior sports events.
: There is an issue here and it's a tough one, but my real objection is that programs like battlebots (robotica) have sold out to the entertainment business and do little to promote engineering and teamwork. Some pro sports have gone this direction and it's not a pretty sight...
: For anyone doing Battlebots... (sigh) as Yoda said, "strong is the dark side in that place..." (WHY does he always talk backwards?)
: Still there is a temptation to go into battlebots and show them what REAL robots can do.... think they would care for a robot that simply renders the other ineffective but not destroy it?
As a Battlebot builder and driver I feel like I have to respond to what you said about there being no cooperation in Battlebots. Being in the pits at Battlebots is like being in the pits at a FIRST competition. What you see are all kinds of people who have built robots. Guys who built them in their garage, and people who have built them in professional machine shops. People who are eningeers and people who are aspiring engineers, as well as people who just love to build these things. At the last competition in Las Vegas Nightmare and Surgeon General were in the Battlebox - Surgeon General took a hunk out of Nightmare and Nightmare ended up beating Surgeon General and messing up his blade pretty badly. Nightmare had to go on pretty quickly but his gear box gave out and the builder of Surgeon General gave him a new motor to help him on his way. This was not an unusual thing, believe it or not it happens all the time. In fact it is a tradition to give your opponent a small piece of your machine after the competition.
As far as promoting engineering - you would not believe the amount of people who come up and talk about engineering and how to improve my robot Buddy Lee Don't Play in the Street. From my son's neurologist to the manager at the bank to a limo driver in Boston who recognized me. They all have their ideas for a winning robot. When Battlebots goes to commercial break most people talk about the last match and what they would have done differently. People who would never think about engineering are actually THINKING. They actually envision themselves as robot bilders.
There are many ways to inspire people, and FIRST is a true leader. In the Olympics there is more than one event. Shows like Robotica and Battlebots are another. Their viewing audience reaches over 6 million people, many of whom have never heard of FIRST. When I talk to people I tell them about FIRST as well as Battlebots. In my mind they are BOTH good. There are good things to be gotten out of both.
Battlebots is also putting major funding from their entertainment profits into Battlebots IQ - a high school competition. So the entertainment industry is making a positive effect on kids, education and engineering and technology.
As far as Battlebots liking a robot that simply renders another ineffective and doesn't destroy it - they would love it - they welcome all. And by the way if you watch the show you will see that very rarely do the robots get totally destroyed. The builders and drivers know that the other guy put in a lot of time and more often than not want to compete again. There is always the rumble at the end of the competition.

I will end by saying that I LOVE FIRST and Dean has created a wonderful thing and has started many people on a great road, me included. I also LOVE Battlebots, the creators Trey Roski and Greg Munson have inspired quite a few people and are working to do even more - they think Dean is AWESOME!!
Long live robotic events!!

[archiver]

Posted by s_alaniz at 04/12/2001 12:25 AM EST


Other on team #57 from Houston Regional co-ordinator.


In Reply to: Re: Battlebots is NOT violence
Posted by Nola Garcia on 04/11/2001 11:47 PM EST:



Sorry if I stepped on your toes, but in all you've said, what exactly are you demonstrating to the people who watch this spectacle? It's interesting, but unnecessary and I think it appeals to a very low mentality in human nature. As I said.. there is a temptation, even for me, but I think it sends the wrong message especially to impressionable youth. You've told me I'm wrong, that there is a real comeradery in battlebots... but it still looks too much like a gladiator spectacle and I suppose you and I will just have to agree to disagree.


Steve Alaniz

[archiver]

Posted by Dan at 04/12/2001 2:59 AM EST


Other on team - from Carnegie Mellon sponsored by -.


In Reply to: Re: Battlebots is NOT violence
Posted by s_alaniz on 04/12/2001 12:25 AM EST:



BattleBots demonstrates exactly what FIRST sets out to demonstrate; that science and engineering are fun and not comprised solely of boring engineers in white lab coats. And I do believe that BattleBots does a hell of a job at doing this. It reaches a lot of people and has some hugely positive effects on competitors and fans alike. No matter how vulgar and base you think it is you cannot deny this.
As far as the violence issue goes, I really do not see how this projects onto the actions of humans. Like the father of robotic combat, Marc Thorpe, once said "even chess is violent if you think about it." I mean exactly what is so wrong that happpens in that arena? Is it the destruction of carefully designed creations that concerns you?
First of all there isn't much destruction--most is superficial--second of all destruction fosters creation and improvement. All engineers test their products until failure to see what they're worth. And besides--you FIRST people should know this--the robot isn't the point, it's the process that precedes and creates it that matters.
It's not really a gladiator spectacle either since no humans are involved--it's hard to have "mortal combat" when "immortals" are competing. And speaking of a gladiator spectacle, aren't all sports really just gladiator spectacles? I mean Dale Earnhardt as well as many other sports stars risk(ed) their lives to entertain and compete for fame and fortune.
I'm sorry, I just don't see where everyone get's this "bad influence" thing. Do you actually know any people who have been negatively influenced by BattleBots? I mean if it influences them to build a robot--whether it has a hammer or a goal-balancing arm--then it's great in my opinion.
Dan

[archiver]

Posted by Will Garcia at 04/12/2001 12:41 PM EST


College Student on team #59, Ramtech, from Miami Coral Park Sr. High and EAC, FIU.


In Reply to: Re: Battlebots is NOT violence
Posted by s_alaniz on 04/12/2001 12:25 AM EST:



Steve and all,
Hi, I'm an MIT student who used to be involved with the FIRST team #59 (Miami, FL). I loved FIRST. It's what got me interested in robotics and probably helped me to get into MIT.

Since I've been here I have NOT participated in FIRST mainly because of the huge time sink that it is. But, this year I started a small Battlebots team here at MIT and we are entering in this year's competition. So far it has been a blast. Everyone that I talk to about it has an opinion on how we should design our robot (even if they've never seen the show before!). It is also amazing how so many professors here at MIT (obviously not W. Flowers) are super excited about us doing Battlebots. They think that it is an incredible way to test out the engineering design process, which it is. I have yet to see anyone up here (besides Flowers) complain that what we are doing is violent. I think that there is a part of human nature that loves to see two entities (robots, people, etc.) compete against each other. It is simply a comparison of the two opponents abilities against each other and it is extremelely exciting to watch.

One thing that really bothers me is that there is a camp of people who believe that these two (or more) robotic sporting events CANNOT coexist. There is certainly enough room in this world for many robotic events, especially if they are different in some way. Also, there is definitely a need for a competition that goes beyond FIRST and I think Battlebots is probably it. I say this because I've noticed that my friends, who are college students helping out Team 59, like doing FIRST, but it is still a HIGH SCHOOL event. They need/want some way of demonstrating/honing their engineering skills in a way that is not available through FIRST. And Battlebots does this 100%.

Lastly, I want to comment on your comment about the lack of cooperation in Battlebots. I have not been to a BB competition, so I can't describe the feel of the pits as others can, BUT, while we've been building our machine we've been in communication with several other teams. We share ideas, tell each other where to get the good deal on a super-awesome motor, give suggestions to each other's bots, etc. From experience I think that there is more cooperation before the actual event than is demostrated in FIRST. And from what Nola and others can tell you, the pits at both competitions are about equally cooperative. So please, at least try to experience an event like Battlebots before you claim that it's not cooperative.

-Will Garcia
will@mit.edu