I was there on that fateful day, were you?
Your place for discussion about RPGs, gaming, music, movies, anime, computers, sports, and any other stuff we care to talk about...
Balance Board to be used to flush out terrorists?
- Because playing them is not enough, we have to bitch about them daily, too. We had a Gameplay forum, but it got replaced by GameFAQs.
Sure there are. Just like there's better computers that use the Cell processor, but I use PS3s because it's orders of magnitude cheaper. I bet these researchers are in the same position: the Wii balance board is the cheapest way for them to get their hands on those kind of sensors in a compact and usable form.
What I meant was, sure, this technology could be used for the purpose, but is it really the best technology? Wouldn't this be one of the situations where you'd want to pay for the better quality? If you use the Cell processor, it's a matter of time you're discussing. But if this thing is only x sensitive, wouldn't you want to pay more for a y sensitivity to make the processes more accurate?
I was there on that fateful day, were you?
Research isn't production. That is, it's usually sufficient to prove that a concept works. Researchers can often do this with tools and products that aren't good enough for production use, but prove the idea is valid. I can see the Wii's balance board being good enough to prove the idea works, but using much more sensitive technology in production (if it makes it that far).
Research is also often a bootstrapped process. In order to get the grants that will allow them to buy the more sensitive equipment, it helps to have preliminary results that show the idea has promise. Spending ~$100 on a Wii balance board doesn't require a grant.
Research is also often a bootstrapped process. In order to get the grants that will allow them to buy the more sensitive equipment, it helps to have preliminary results that show the idea has promise. Spending ~$100 on a Wii balance board doesn't require a grant.
And I'm sure they could get a discount from Nintendo on the product for some PR as well.Kupek wrote:Research isn't production. That is, it's usually sufficient to prove that a concept works. Researchers can often do this with tools and products that aren't good enough for production use, but prove the idea is valid. I can see the Wii's balance board being good enough to prove the idea works, but using much more sensitive technology in production (if it makes it that far).
Research is also often a bootstrapped process. In order to get the grants that will allow them to buy the more sensitive equipment, it helps to have preliminary results that show the idea has promise. Spending ~$100 on a Wii balance board doesn't require a grant.
I'm just a little surprised they'd be interested in something like this over other stuff that's out there. Technology isn't exactly groundbreaking. And they are going to be modifying the Balance Board, it's not like you're gonna stand on one of them right in an airport.
Hey, if it works, great. And I'm all for the gov't attempting to save coin where possible, lord knows they don't do that nearly often enough.
I was there on that fateful day, were you?
I doubt they could get anything from Nintendo at least until after they have some good results. Same as the grants, really. But even then, I doubt it would happen. I've never considered asking Sony for anything.
I don't think people realize how much of a bootstrapped process most research is. When you have only an idea, you can't get the best equipment. You make do with what's readily available.
I don't think people realize how much of a bootstrapped process most research is. When you have only an idea, you can't get the best equipment. You make do with what's readily available.
I have no experience with private grants, but I bet they're about the same as government grants. That would include NSF, DOD and DOE. Grant proposals almost always have some form of preliminary results. It's a natural result of competition: lots of people are sending in proposals, and the ones that have some evidence that the research will be fruitful are going to be considered above those with none.