General Mission Possible

[Fester]

Stealing ideas? Hardly.

Less than 10 posts? I'll be nice, and post this as a tutorial. Read and learn.

I have easily a thousand photos of Mission devices taken over the years, possibly two thousand, all taken back when I used to photograph every device (and Mission crew) I judged. Most recently coaching the past six years, I have never once looked back at my massive collection for ideas or techniques. There's no need to-- the moment a Mission device runs, it's open to scrutiny over almost anything, whether it be design, fabrication, quality, reliability or construction methods. Anyone sharp enough to notice details in the typical short run-time enough to reproduce them is too sharp to need photography. It's no different than singing a song in public at the top of your lungs and when others listen and repeat it, accuse them of stealing the song.

Dark Sabre and others who have done phenomenally well at States as well as Nationals have openly posted pictures, plans and answered technical questions-- and still couldn't be beat. Why? Because you can't teach (or photograph) quality, dependability or reliability, and those are traits that kill MOST Mission devices. You have to learn it yourself. They're pros (DS's average score at Nationals is PERFECT), and knew that they can't be beat by mere INFORMATION.

Your coach had no legal standing in demanding the pics be deleted. You might want to Google "The Photographer's Right", which is the best legal review of all this.

Your coach also (most likely) accomplished nothing, as RECUVA free software (which I use, one of hundreds) can un-delete the images quite easily. I'll bet the photographer involved has already spent time un-deleting and reviewing the pictures, as well as laughing at them-- and your coach.

At Nationals in 1999, Mission devices had no laser pointers. Why? Because they were illegal in Chicago! There's a nifty clause in the general rules where illegal activities are also banned in SO. As an event sup, I've stopped confrontations exactly like these in mere seconds just by threatening to file a TEAM DISQUALIFICATION over anti-photography threats.

The fear of photography in Mission started not because of "secrets", but because of camera flashes (there were no digital cameras then and 200-speed film was the fastest cheap film) inappropriately triggering photocell circuits. Enforcement was nothing less than extreme, until rules were changed to make shielding the builder's responsibility.

Every so often I'll run into a builder that's so certain that they have something new that they don't even want to show me. Two things: No view equals no points-- it's in the rules. I also go out of my way to find the earliest possible reference to whatever it is that they claimed was new. I have a pretty good reference library & collection of my own; the earliest in-print was 1840 and the earliest by recollection involved Ben Franklin.

I could go further into motivations behind both photographing as well as preventing photography, and systematic photographing by adults, but it's almost 2 AM, and I also promised I'd be nice. Seriously, instead of getting angry, take it as a compliment of the highest sort.

[Balsa Man]

Right on!
For Mission-P, and other buliding events, part of the process to be successful is gathering ideas. Seeing how others do something is an inherent part of a competition that's open to spectators; recognizing a better idea - and coming up with your implementation for the next round of competition is simply smart. What these forums (and the wikis and the gallery) are all about is sharing ideas- expanding the body of knowledge we all have to work from/to improve on.

As Uncle Fester says, the winning edge is in the quality, reliability, dependability. A single example, from a couple years ago whem M-P was a C-Div event. Our guys used a block of wood being pulled up a ramp, by a string winding around a motor shaft, as the timing step; a microswitch mounted on a screw so it was adjustable provided the basis for setting the duration of the block pulling. What allowed them to get the timing perfect at State (within a tenth of a second) was hours and hours of test runs that quantified how the batteries behaved over time- how after about 5 minutes of use they went into flat zone where the winding rate was consistent.

[Kid Cobain]

Stealing ideas? Hardly.

Less than 10 posts? I'll be nice, and post this as a tutorial. Read and learn.

I have easily a thousand photos of Mission devices taken over the years, possibly two thousand, all taken back when I used to photograph every device (and Mission crew) I judged. Most recently coaching the past six years, I have never once looked back at my massive collection for ideas or techniques. There's no need to-- the moment a Mission device runs, it's open to scrutiny over almost anything, whether it be design, fabrication, quality, reliability or construction methods. Anyone sharp enough to notice details in the typical short run-time enough to reproduce them is too sharp to need photography. It's no different than singing a song in public at the top of your lungs and when others listen and repeat it, accuse them of stealing the song.

Dark Sabre and others who have done phenomenally well at States as well as Nationals have openly posted pictures, plans and answered technical questions-- and still couldn't be beat. Why? Because you can't teach (or photograph) quality, dependability or reliability, and those are traits that kill MOST Mission devices. You have to learn it yourself. They're pros (DS's average score at Nationals is PERFECT), and knew that they can't be beat by mere INFORMATION.

Your coach had no legal standing in demanding the pics be deleted. You might want to Google "The Photographer's Right", which is the best legal review of all this.

Your coach also (most likely) accomplished nothing, as RECUVA free software (which I use, one of hundreds) can un-delete the images quite easily. I'll bet the photographer involved has already spent time un-deleting and reviewing the pictures, as well as laughing at them-- and your coach.

At Nationals in 1999, Mission devices had no laser pointers. Why? Because they were illegal in Chicago! There's a nifty clause in the general rules where illegal activities are also banned in SO. As an event sup, I've stopped confrontations exactly like these in mere seconds just by threatening to file a TEAM DISQUALIFICATION over anti-photography threats.

The fear of photography in Mission started not because of "secrets", but because of camera flashes (there were no digital cameras then and 200-speed film was the fastest cheap film) inappropriately triggering photocell circuits. Enforcement was nothing less than extreme, until rules were changed to make shielding the builder's responsibility.

Every so often I'll run into a builder that's so certain that they have something new that they don't even want to show me. Two things: No view equals no points-- it's in the rules. I also go out of my way to find the earliest possible reference to whatever it is that they claimed was new. I have a pretty good reference library & collection of my own; the earliest in-print was 1840 and the earliest by recollection involved Ben Franklin.

I could go further into motivations behind both photographing as well as preventing photography, and systematic photographing by adults, but it's almost 2 AM, and I also promised I'd be nice. Seriously, instead of getting angry, take it as a compliment of the highest sort.

that is taking away the spirit of the event, right?

[AlphaTauri]

Well, I guess if we're so concerned about other people "stealing ideas", logically the next step is to prevent anyone from watching MP runs, because people could, you know, SEE competitors' devices, take notice of ones that run well, and remember how those other teams are accomplishing their tasks. Oh, and while we're at it, we should make all the impounding builders wear blindfolds (which totally wouldn't cause any accidents ) so they won't see other teams' devices at impound, and also put all the devices in a windowless room and take them out one at a time to run so no one can look at them and steal ideas.

Sarcasm aside, "spirit of the rules" is always a finicky clause, however I would argue that the spirit of science itself is learning from observation and sharing knowledge. If Newton had never published his theory of gravity, Einstein would never have come up with General Relativity. If Gregor Mendel hadn't shared his work on the genetics of pea plants, Watson, Crick, and Franklin would never have discovered the structure of DNA. If Edison had kept the idea of the light bulb to himself, we might not even have electric lighting, let alone things like computers. If Orville and Wilbur Wright hadn't shared the powered airplane with the world, we wouldn't have supersonic jets, helicopters, or any spacecraft at all... You get the point - current ideas spur innovation, leading to better ideas. It's the same way with MP.

And as Uncle Fester said, quality is the most important, er, quality in any build. Helicopter builders don't complain about having to fly their devices in front of an open audience, because they know that workmanship and extensive testing play much more into how well a heli flies than the design does. I'd let any team at my Regionals take a look at my heli if they wanted to (I'm the Regional champion), because ultimately it's how well I built it that counts, not just how I built it.

[Cheese_Muffin_Man]

I'm not 100 percent sure about the Code of Ethics, but I don't think it's taking away the spirit of the rules. Like what some other people have said, everyone would have their own interpretation of what a mission device may be, how reliable it is, how easy it is to construct etc. So, by simply taking pictures, no one is really breaking the Code of Ethics. Besides, only two of those teams (one at some competitions) will advance to the next competition. What's the chance that the person who is taking the picture is a parent of one of the students on the advancing team? Even if they are not, I doubt that they will use the idea in their own mission (they probably already have something for the task that works for them, so it wouldn't be worth changing it. If anything, they would want to make their own idea more efficient rather than changing the whole thing). The probability is that the person taking the picture is associated with a person on a non-advancing team. So what if they take pictures? It's not like they are going to tell any of the advancing teams.

[Cheese_Muffin_Man]

And I think that if taking pictures is controversial, very serious teams would not take the chance of getting DQ'ed in the event. So, its highly likely that the person who is taking the picture is just there to see how Science Olympiad works and to see what types of things students of this generation are able to build.

[bearasauras]

There is nothing in the rules - event rules or General Rules - that speaks to this; nothing that says it can't/shouldn't be done.
A competition is open to the public. Absent a rule/requirement/request from the event organizers/supervisors prohibiting photography/videoing, anyone is free to do so.
There are restrictions separating where competitors can be, and where spectators can be, and as long as a spectator follows these, there is no rule issue- whether they are watching, or photographing.

While it's not in the event rules or General Rules or Code of Ethics, there's something posted on the National Web Page regarding media. http://soinc.org/sites/default/files/up ... ns10_1.pdf. Depending on what your local tournament chooses to do, this may or may not be enforced. But before y'all jump on me, I'm just saying that this is what's posted. Personally, I still believe that a good scientist or engineer is one who shares ideas and collaborates with others. Having an awesome design will help in many of the events, but sound construction and practices are what differentiate between 1st place and 2nd place.

[fleet130]

It's interesting that the guidelines mentioned above spell out what student participants may do, but not what they may not do. Unacceptable scenario #1 does limit what participants may do, however it's not mentioned in the guidelines.

It's also interesting that, since Science Olympiad can impose no sanctions on people not associated with a team, these guidelines do not limit what they may do with photographs they take at a tournament. As long as they don't use photographs of people for profit (unless the people are incidental to the photo or the photo is newsworthy) they can do whatever they wish with the photos (including publish them on a website). If there are no people in the pictures, there are no restrictions.

You can search the archives for a more detailed discussion.

[chalker7]

It's interesting that the guidelines mentioned above spell out what student participants may do, but not what they may not do. Unacceptable scenario #1 does limit what participants may do, however it's not mentioned in the guidelines.

It's also interesting that, since Science Olympiad can impose no sanctions on people not associated with a team, these guidelines do not limit what they may do with photographs they take at a tournament. As long as they don't use photographs of people for profit (unless the people are incidental to the photo or the photo is newsworthy) they can do whatever they wish with the photos (including publish them on a website). If there are no people in the pictures, there are no restrictions.

You can search the archives for a more detailed discussion.

The above link, while somewhat relevant for competition purposes, was not meant as a judging/scoring guideline. It is meant to be a set of acceptable guidelines for teams in order to protect the national organizations' copyrights.

[Kid Cobain]

Well, I guess if we're so concerned about other people "stealing ideas", logically the next step is to prevent anyone from watching MP runs, because people could, you know, SEE competitors' devices, take notice of ones that run well, and remember how those other teams are accomplishing their tasks. Oh, and while we're at it, we should make all the impounding builders wear blindfolds (which totally wouldn't cause any accidents ) so they won't see other teams' devices at impound, and also put all the devices in a windowless room and take them out one at a time to run so no one can look at them and steal ideas.

Sarcasm aside, "spirit of the rules" is always a finicky clause, however I would argue that the spirit of science itself is learning from observation and sharing knowledge. If Newton had never published his theory of gravity, Einstein would never have come up with General Relativity. If Gregor Mendel hadn't shared his work on the genetics of pea plants, Watson, Crick, and Franklin would never have discovered the structure of DNA. If Edison had kept the idea of the light bulb to himself, we might not even have electric lighting, let alone things like computers. If Orville and Wilbur Wright hadn't shared the powered airplane with the world, we wouldn't have supersonic jets, helicopters, or any spacecraft at all... You get the point - current ideas spur innovation, leading to better ideas. It's the same way with MP.

And as Uncle Fester said, quality is the most important, er, quality in any build. Helicopter builders don't complain about having to fly their devices in front of an open audience, because they know that workmanship and extensive testing play much more into how well a heli flies than the design does. I'd let any team at my Regionals take a look at my heli if they wanted to (I'm the Regional champion), because ultimately it's how well I built it that counts, not just how I built it.

Looking at the mission is fine, but taking pictures home and trying to replicate the idea destroys creativity.