Page 2 of 3

Re: The Best of 2009

Posted: June 23rd, 2009, 3:34 pm
by smartkid222
do you want the names of the teams that built the devices?--I dont have any to uplaod but i recognize a few devices in the gallery for what team they are
but wont that match the device to the placing it got?

Re: The Best of 2009

Posted: June 23rd, 2009, 3:44 pm
by Dark Sabre
Oh...yay for me misreading...I thought he wanted to tag the stuff on the wiki with team names.


Yeah, definitely...if you feel like adding comments to any of the gallery images that say what team they are from, go for it.


Re: The Best of 2009

Posted: January 24th, 2010, 6:54 pm
by scifipi
Wow, this seems like a great idea!!! :o :lol: :twisted:

Re: The Best of 2009

Posted: February 9th, 2010, 6:36 pm
by old
I do think that it would be appropriate to ask the person who's device is in the picture if they are ok with having their design posted for everyone to see. I have seen people go to great lengths to get pictures of other teams devices so that they can copy them, and I am quite sure that the team who's device gets copied is not happy about it. Some competitions actually specifically prohibit picture taking for this reason. So I would say that the pictures are great as long as the designer posts them, but not if they are posted by someone who happened to be at the competition and has no claim to the design. We don't want to get to the point where people feel they have to cover all the inner workings of their devices so that they won't get copied at Nationals, that just doesn't seem to be in the spirit of the competition.

Re: The Best of 2009

Posted: February 10th, 2010, 12:06 pm
by Balsa Man
Oh, two very different schools of thought on this one. I am ....of the other one. Discussed in a number of posts last year...

Science-O a) deals with/teaches both the content and process of science - and in the building events, engineering, and b) is a competition - with the building events open to the public and other competors.

A key aspect of science and engineering - as it is in the real world- as it works -is that one person's work is built on by others; sometimes by breakhroughs- big jumps- whole new concepts to a problem; sometimes by detailed improvement. In the realm of "things" - as in things built for the building events - there is always room for improvement. To not start from a good idea, and figure out how to improve on it - and to do the best research you can on what's the best current idea out there - would be....., well, stupid.

Except for national security stuff, and corporate trade secret stuff, the world of science and engineering is an open, collaborative, interactive one- people building on other's knowledge and progress. S-O is neither a matter of national security, nor of trade secrets.

The building events are public. If the organizers had intended the protection of designs and techniques, teams would test their devices one at a time, for the judge's eyes only. In that that's not how its done speaks to the intent of the organizers, doesn't it?

There is a good analogy in racing- highly competitive, success through developing neat, new trick parts, new approaches, refinement of old, good ideas. But when you come to the track, everybody gets to look and see. Not take apart and measure, but look at, take notes, take photos. If a competitor or coach see's something.....noteworthy, they are going to take notes- words, sketches. I don't think there is anything wrong with that. Photos, short of getting down 6inches away on key detail, are no different. Secrets are for before the competition - the cat is out of the bag, though, when its competition time. How, IMHO, it works, and should work. For someone to come up with a cool, significantly better idea on how to do something, and expect that no one else should recognize that advance as the new state-of-the art- and adopt and improve from there is.....contrary to what the scientific process is, and, I would argue, what Science-O is all aboul.

Just my personal opinion. I respect contrary views, but do not agree with them.

Re: The Best of 2009

Posted: February 10th, 2010, 2:43 pm
by gh
For many graduate and post-graduate level engineering competitions, teams are required to publish not only documents detailing their devices, but also likely papers, documenting especially any innovation in technique and construction—what the close-minded SO teams would consider secrets.

SO devices don't need such documentation because innovation in building events are easy to understand at first glance, but tournaments—and indeed the entire SO setup—encourage similar openness.

Besides, this is the nature of the Internet. You do something in public, expect to see pictures of it on teh webs. The more impressive it is, the greater the exposure you will receive. If you find your "secrets" in the public's eye, take it as a compliment.

Re: The Best of 2009

Posted: February 20th, 2010, 8:37 pm
by iMaster
We didn't go to nationals, we actually lost by 1 point, but I think you should DEFINITELY check out our Robo-Cross bot for 2008: It was pretty cool, if I may say so myself.