Newsgroups: comp.robotics
Path: brunix!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!cs.uiuc.edu!kadie
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M Kadie)
Subject: Re: "That's not robotics; that's toy building"
Message-ID: <CBK0M9.H1u@cs.uiuc.edu>
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
References: <CBHzGn.DI6@cs.uiuc.edu> <247cg1$9e4@wampyr.cc.uow.edu.au> <GERRY.93Aug10100832@onion.cmu.edu>
Date: Tue, 10 Aug 1993 17:30:08 GMT
Lines: 34

gerry@cmu.edu (Gerry Roston) writes:

[...]
>Now personally, I feel that most hobbiest who claim to be building
>robots aren't. They are making toys, clever toys, expensive toys, but
>toys none-the-less.
[...]

Consider the following two analogous statements:

a)
>Now personally, I feel that most hobbiest who claim to be doing
>computer science aren't. They are making applications, clever
>applications, expensive applications, but applications none-the-less.

And:

b)
>Now personally, I feel that most hobbiest who claim to be writing
>programs aren't. They are making applications, clever applications,
>expensive applications, but applications none-the-less.

The first is in true (in my opinion). You could even say that what is
"computer science" is time dependent.

The second is false (in my opinion). 

Robotics needs a noninsulting way of distingishing robotics research
from applied robotics.

- Carl
-- 
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent any organization; this is just me.
 = kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
