On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:16 PM, patrick <patrickpecor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Star wars never thought it of it as being very practical.
> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 7:01:11 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith wrote:
>> How about a telescoping, articulating tentacle that mounts to a wall or
>> the ceiling? Aliens love that tech (Abyss, War of the Worlds)
>> Travis
>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Travis Smith <trav...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I think we're on the right track, but I'd like to second the idea that
>>> this thing be attainable/upgradable from a base model. I'd prefer shitty
>>> but robust to awesome and always almost ready.
>>> -Travis
>>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 12:51, Kevin Fusselman <ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>> So, sorta like one of those gigapixel cameras in reverse...
>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:50 PM, David Knaack <david...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>> I was thinking that the high def wide angle feed would go through a
>>>> stream filter to crop out the desired section of the image (and maybe
>>>> transform it to remove the wide angle distortion), providing a software
>>>> based pan/tilt feature while keeping hardware and bandwidth down.
>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 12:40 PM, "Kevin Fusselman" <ke...@fusselman.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Nah, 1080p is fine; we'll compensate for the bandwidth in framerate...
>>>>> how does 0.2fps sound? :)
>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:15 PM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Kevin is worried about bandwidth for high def.
>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 9:17:24 AM UTC-6, David Knaack wrote:
>>>>>>> If the camera itself is high def we might be able to get away with
>>>>>>> using a wide angle view to avoid building a control system for the camera.
>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 8:57 AM, "patrick" <patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> I feel it needs the same capability that the MMM has to tilt up and
>>>>>>>> down. the panning of course would be done by the robot.
>>>>>>>> On Monday, November 5, 2012 7:41:26 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith wrote:
>>>>>>>>> OMGers,
>>>>>>>>> Hey, I'm moving to Japan, its happening.
>>>>>>>>> Completely due to self interest, I'm suddenly smitten with the
>>>>>>>>> idea of making a telepresence robot. The basic plan would be to make one
>>>>>>>>> on the cheap using skype, a cheap laptop, a roomba, and some mechanism for
>>>>>>>>> changing the height of the laptop. Usage would probably need to be limited
>>>>>>>>> to our members in absentsia, as I would want to enjoy consistent problem
>>>>>>>>> free use of the device, and random people on the internet lack
>>>>>>>>> stewardship. For this right I'm willing to front the cash.
>>>>>>>>> The point? While I won't be around, I wanna be around. OMG and
>>>>>>>>> hanging out with you guys is pretty much my favorite part about Omaha.
>>>>>>>>> Patrick votes yes as well (just a guess). Anyone want to get in
>>>>>>>>> on this project? Deadline is February for a working model. We can go easy
>>>>>>>>> and work with models already out there, or get creative and make our own
>>>>>>>>> monstrosity.
Star wars was usually the opposite of practical... Seriously, where do you
park a super star destroyer?
On Nov 6, 2012 7:20 PM, "Travis Smith" <travi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> True, the best you got with that was the door guard at Jabba's Palace.
> That guy was an ass.
> Travis
> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:16 PM, patrick <patrickpecor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Star wars never thought it of it as being very practical.
>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 7:01:11 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith wrote:
>>> How about a telescoping, articulating tentacle that mounts to a wall or
>>> the ceiling? Aliens love that tech (Abyss, War of the Worlds)
>>> Travis
>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Travis Smith <trav...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> I think we're on the right track, but I'd like to second the idea that
>>>> this thing be attainable/upgradable from a base model. I'd prefer shitty
>>>> but robust to awesome and always almost ready.
>>>> -Travis
>>>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 12:51, Kevin Fusselman <ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>>> So, sorta like one of those gigapixel cameras in reverse...
>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:50 PM, David Knaack <david...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>> I was thinking that the high def wide angle feed would go through a
>>>>> stream filter to crop out the desired section of the image (and maybe
>>>>> transform it to remove the wide angle distortion), providing a software
>>>>> based pan/tilt feature while keeping hardware and bandwidth down.
>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 12:40 PM, "Kevin Fusselman" <ke...@fusselman.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> Nah, 1080p is fine; we'll compensate for the bandwidth in
>>>>>> framerate... how does 0.2fps sound? :)
>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:15 PM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>> Kevin is worried about bandwidth for high def.
>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 9:17:24 AM UTC-6, David Knaack wrote:
>>>>>>>> If the camera itself is high def we might be able to get away with
>>>>>>>> using a wide angle view to avoid building a control system for the camera.
>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 8:57 AM, "patrick" <patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I feel it needs the same capability that the MMM has to tilt up
>>>>>>>>> and down. the panning of course would be done by the robot.
>>>>>>>>> On Monday, November 5, 2012 7:41:26 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> OMGers,
>>>>>>>>>> Hey, I'm moving to Japan, its happening.
>>>>>>>>>> Completely due to self interest, I'm suddenly smitten with the
>>>>>>>>>> idea of making a telepresence robot. The basic plan would be to make one
>>>>>>>>>> on the cheap using skype, a cheap laptop, a roomba, and some mechanism for
>>>>>>>>>> changing the height of the laptop. Usage would probably need to be limited
>>>>>>>>>> to our members in absentsia, as I would want to enjoy consistent problem
>>>>>>>>>> free use of the device, and random people on the internet lack
>>>>>>>>>> stewardship. For this right I'm willing to front the cash.
>>>>>>>>>> The point? While I won't be around, I wanna be around. OMG and
>>>>>>>>>> hanging out with you guys is pretty much my favorite part about Omaha.
>>>>>>>>>> Patrick votes yes as well (just a guess). Anyone want to get in
>>>>>>>>>> on this project? Deadline is February for a working model. We can go easy
>>>>>>>>>> and work with models already out there, or get creative and make our own
>>>>>>>>>> monstrosity.
On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Kevin Fusselman <ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
> Star wars was usually the opposite of practical... Seriously, where do you
> park a super star destroyer?
> On Nov 6, 2012 7:20 PM, "Travis Smith" <travi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> True, the best you got with that was the door guard at Jabba's Palace.
>> That guy was an ass.
>> Travis
>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:16 PM, patrick <patrickpecor...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>> Star wars never thought it of it as being very practical.
>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 7:01:11 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith wrote:
>>>> How about a telescoping, articulating tentacle that mounts to a wall or
>>>> the ceiling? Aliens love that tech (Abyss, War of the Worlds)
>>>> Travis
>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Travis Smith <trav...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> I think we're on the right track, but I'd like to second the idea that
>>>>> this thing be attainable/upgradable from a base model. I'd prefer shitty
>>>>> but robust to awesome and always almost ready.
>>>>> -Travis
>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 12:51, Kevin Fusselman <ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>>>> So, sorta like one of those gigapixel cameras in reverse...
>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:50 PM, David Knaack <david...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>> I was thinking that the high def wide angle feed would go through a
>>>>>> stream filter to crop out the desired section of the image (and maybe
>>>>>> transform it to remove the wide angle distortion), providing a software
>>>>>> based pan/tilt feature while keeping hardware and bandwidth down.
>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 12:40 PM, "Kevin Fusselman" <ke...@fusselman.org>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> Nah, 1080p is fine; we'll compensate for the bandwidth in
>>>>>>> framerate... how does 0.2fps sound? :)
>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:15 PM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>> Kevin is worried about bandwidth for high def.
>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 9:17:24 AM UTC-6, David Knaack wrote:
>>>>>>>>> If the camera itself is high def we might be able to get away with
>>>>>>>>> using a wide angle view to avoid building a control system for the camera.
>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 8:57 AM, "patrick" <patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> I feel it needs the same capability that the MMM has to tilt up
>>>>>>>>>> and down. the panning of course would be done by the robot.
>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, November 5, 2012 7:41:26 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> OMGers,
>>>>>>>>>>> Hey, I'm moving to Japan, its happening.
>>>>>>>>>>> Completely due to self interest, I'm suddenly smitten with the
>>>>>>>>>>> idea of making a telepresence robot. The basic plan would be to make one
>>>>>>>>>>> on the cheap using skype, a cheap laptop, a roomba, and some mechanism for
>>>>>>>>>>> changing the height of the laptop. Usage would probably need to be limited
>>>>>>>>>>> to our members in absentsia, as I would want to enjoy consistent problem
>>>>>>>>>>> free use of the device, and random people on the internet lack
>>>>>>>>>>> stewardship. For this right I'm willing to front the cash.
>>>>>>>>>>> The point? While I won't be around, I wanna be around. OMG and
>>>>>>>>>>> hanging out with you guys is pretty much my favorite part about Omaha.
>>>>>>>>>>> Patrick votes yes as well (just a guess). Anyone want to get in
>>>>>>>>>>> on this project? Deadline is February for a working model. We can go easy
>>>>>>>>>>> and work with models already out there, or get creative and make our own
>>>>>>>>>>> monstrosity.
> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Kevin Fusselman <ke...@fusselman.org>wrote:
>> Star wars was usually the opposite of practical... Seriously, where do
>> you park a super star destroyer?
>> On Nov 6, 2012 7:20 PM, "Travis Smith" <travi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> True, the best you got with that was the door guard at Jabba's Palace.
>>> That guy was an ass.
>>> Travis
>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:16 PM, patrick <patrickpecor...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>> Star wars never thought it of it as being very practical.
>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 7:01:11 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith wrote:
>>>>> How about a telescoping, articulating tentacle that mounts to a wall
>>>>> or the ceiling? Aliens love that tech (Abyss, War of the Worlds)
>>>>> Travis
>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Travis Smith <trav...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>> I think we're on the right track, but I'd like to second the idea
>>>>>> that this thing be attainable/upgradable from a base model. I'd prefer
>>>>>> shitty but robust to awesome and always almost ready.
>>>>>> -Travis
>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 12:51, Kevin Fusselman <ke...@fusselman.org>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> So, sorta like one of those gigapixel cameras in reverse...
>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:50 PM, David Knaack <david...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>> I was thinking that the high def wide angle feed would go through a
>>>>>>> stream filter to crop out the desired section of the image (and maybe
>>>>>>> transform it to remove the wide angle distortion), providing a software
>>>>>>> based pan/tilt feature while keeping hardware and bandwidth down.
>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 12:40 PM, "Kevin Fusselman" <ke...@fusselman.org>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Nah, 1080p is fine; we'll compensate for the bandwidth in
>>>>>>>> framerate... how does 0.2fps sound? :)
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:15 PM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Kevin is worried about bandwidth for high def.
>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 9:17:24 AM UTC-6, David Knaack wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> If the camera itself is high def we might be able to get away
>>>>>>>>>> with using a wide angle view to avoid building a control system for the
>>>>>>>>>> camera.
>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 8:57 AM, "patrick" <patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> I feel it needs the same capability that the MMM has to tilt up
>>>>>>>>>>> and down. the panning of course would be done by the robot.
>>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, November 5, 2012 7:41:26 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> OMGers,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Hey, I'm moving to Japan, its happening.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Completely due to self interest, I'm suddenly smitten with the
>>>>>>>>>>>> idea of making a telepresence robot. The basic plan would be to make one
>>>>>>>>>>>> on the cheap using skype, a cheap laptop, a roomba, and some mechanism for
>>>>>>>>>>>> changing the height of the laptop. Usage would probably need to be limited
>>>>>>>>>>>> to our members in absentsia, as I would want to enjoy consistent problem
>>>>>>>>>>>> free use of the device, and random people on the internet lack
>>>>>>>>>>>> stewardship. For this right I'm willing to front the cash.
>>>>>>>>>>>> The point? While I won't be around, I wanna be around. OMG
>>>>>>>>>>>> and hanging out with you guys is pretty much my favorite part about Omaha.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Patrick votes yes as well (just a guess). Anyone want to get
>>>>>>>>>>>> in on this project? Deadline is February for a working model. We can go
>>>>>>>>>>>> easy and work with models already out there, or get creative and make our
>>>>>>>>>>>> own monstrosity.
>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Kevin Fusselman <ke...@fusselman.org>wrote:
>>> Star wars was usually the opposite of practical... Seriously, where do
>>> you park a super star destroyer?
>>> On Nov 6, 2012 7:20 PM, "Travis Smith" <travi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> True, the best you got with that was the door guard at Jabba's Palace.
>>>> That guy was an ass.
>>>> Travis
>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:16 PM, patrick <patrickpecor...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>> Star wars never thought it of it as being very practical.
>>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 7:01:11 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith wrote:
>>>>>> How about a telescoping, articulating tentacle that mounts to a wall
>>>>>> or the ceiling? Aliens love that tech (Abyss, War of the Worlds)
>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Travis Smith <trav...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>> I think we're on the right track, but I'd like to second the idea
>>>>>>> that this thing be attainable/upgradable from a base model. I'd prefer
>>>>>>> shitty but robust to awesome and always almost ready.
>>>>>>> -Travis
>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 12:51, Kevin Fusselman <ke...@fusselman.org>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> So, sorta like one of those gigapixel cameras in reverse...
>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:50 PM, David Knaack <david...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>> I was thinking that the high def wide angle feed would go through a
>>>>>>>> stream filter to crop out the desired section of the image (and maybe
>>>>>>>> transform it to remove the wide angle distortion), providing a software
>>>>>>>> based pan/tilt feature while keeping hardware and bandwidth down.
>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 12:40 PM, "Kevin Fusselman" <ke...@fusselman.org>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Nah, 1080p is fine; we'll compensate for the bandwidth in
>>>>>>>>> framerate... how does 0.2fps sound? :)
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:15 PM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Kevin is worried about bandwidth for high def.
>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 9:17:24 AM UTC-6, David Knaack wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> If the camera itself is high def we might be able to get away
>>>>>>>>>>> with using a wide angle view to avoid building a control system for the
>>>>>>>>>>> camera.
>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 8:57 AM, "patrick" <patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> I feel it needs the same capability that the MMM has to tilt up
>>>>>>>>>>>> and down. the panning of course would be done by the robot.
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, November 5, 2012 7:41:26 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> OMGers,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hey, I'm moving to Japan, its happening.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Completely due to self interest, I'm suddenly smitten with the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> idea of making a telepresence robot. The basic plan would be to make one
>>>>>>>>>>>>> on the cheap using skype, a cheap laptop, a roomba, and some mechanism for
>>>>>>>>>>>>> changing the height of the laptop. Usage would probably need to be limited
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to our members in absentsia, as I would want to enjoy consistent problem
>>>>>>>>>>>>> free use of the device, and random people on the internet lack
>>>>>>>>>>>>> stewardship. For this right I'm willing to front the cash.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The point? While I won't be around, I wanna be around. OMG
>>>>>>>>>>>>> and hanging out with you guys is pretty much my favorite part about Omaha.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Patrick votes yes as well (just a guess). Anyone want to get
>>>>>>>>>>>>> in on this project? Deadline is February for a working model. We can go
>>>>>>>>>>>>> easy and work with models already out there, or get creative and make our
>>>>>>>>>>>>> own monstrosity.
Would have to look into LCD situation, but I don't think it'd be too
difficult. I was thinking we could also maybe interface it with the
chipKit board and IO shield for movement/sensor control since we have quite
a few of those laying around ;)
>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Kevin Fusselman <ke...@fusselman.org>wrote:
>>>> Star wars was usually the opposite of practical... Seriously, where do
>>>> you park a super star destroyer?
>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 7:20 PM, "Travis Smith" <travi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> True, the best you got with that was the door guard at Jabba's
>>>>> Palace. That guy was an ass.
>>>>> Travis
>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:16 PM, patrick <patrickpecor...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>> Star wars never thought it of it as being very practical.
>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 7:01:11 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith wrote:
>>>>>>> How about a telescoping, articulating tentacle that mounts to a wall
>>>>>>> or the ceiling? Aliens love that tech (Abyss, War of the Worlds)
>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Travis Smith <trav...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>> I think we're on the right track, but I'd like to second the idea
>>>>>>>> that this thing be attainable/upgradable from a base model. I'd prefer
>>>>>>>> shitty but robust to awesome and always almost ready.
>>>>>>>> -Travis
>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 12:51, Kevin Fusselman <ke...@fusselman.org>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> So, sorta like one of those gigapixel cameras in reverse...
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:50 PM, David Knaack <david...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I was thinking that the high def wide angle feed would go through
>>>>>>>>> a stream filter to crop out the desired section of the image (and maybe
>>>>>>>>> transform it to remove the wide angle distortion), providing a software
>>>>>>>>> based pan/tilt feature while keeping hardware and bandwidth down.
>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 12:40 PM, "Kevin Fusselman" <ke...@fusselman.org>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Nah, 1080p is fine; we'll compensate for the bandwidth in
>>>>>>>>>> framerate... how does 0.2fps sound? :)
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:15 PM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Kevin is worried about bandwidth for high def.
>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 9:17:24 AM UTC-6, David Knaack
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> If the camera itself is high def we might be able to get away
>>>>>>>>>>>> with using a wide angle view to avoid building a control system for the
>>>>>>>>>>>> camera.
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 8:57 AM, "patrick" <patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I feel it needs the same capability that the MMM has to tilt
>>>>>>>>>>>>> up and down. the panning of course would be done by the robot.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, November 5, 2012 7:41:26 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OMGers,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hey, I'm moving to Japan, its happening.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Completely due to self interest, I'm suddenly smitten with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the idea of making a telepresence robot. The basic plan would be to make
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one on the cheap using skype, a cheap laptop, a roomba, and some mechanism
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for changing the height of the laptop. Usage would probably need to be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> limited to our members in absentsia, as I would want to enjoy consistent
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> problem free use of the device, and random people on the internet lack
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stewardship. For this right I'm willing to front the cash.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The point? While I won't be around, I wanna be around. OMG
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and hanging out with you guys is pretty much my favorite part about Omaha.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Patrick votes yes as well (just a guess). Anyone want to get
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in on this project? Deadline is February for a working model. We can go
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> easy and work with models already out there, or get creative and make our
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> own monstrosity.
I thought about a Pi. I see it as having certain features: low power,
small, cheap.
In this case, we will have lots of battery relative to the usage time, so
low power isn't a driving factor.
Small also isn't a driver, considering that we're looking at something on
the order of a 17" screen up top and something that can carry a load of
SLA's and motors on the bottom. (Size might be more of a factor if we
wanted to source a much smaller display, something around 7" or so, but I
have a feeling that doing that potentially creates some constraints without
providing very much benefit.)
Cheap is good, but I wouldn't be surprised if we can acquire one or more
laptops with more processing and storage than a Pi for equal or lower cost.
So while it's a cool platform, I'm not seeing how it is a competitor to a
laptop in this particular application.
On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 10:09 PM, David J. Gotrik <dgot...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Would have to look into LCD situation, but I don't think it'd be too
> difficult. I was thinking we could also maybe interface it with the
> chipKit board and IO shield for movement/sensor control since we have quite
> a few of those laying around ;)
> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:28 PM, Travis Smith <travi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Kevin Fusselman <ke...@fusselman.org>wrote:
>>>>> Star wars was usually the opposite of practical... Seriously, where do
>>>>> you park a super star destroyer?
>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 7:20 PM, "Travis Smith" <travi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> True, the best you got with that was the door guard at Jabba's
>>>>>> Palace. That guy was an ass.
>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:16 PM, patrick <patrickpecor...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>> Star wars never thought it of it as being very practical.
>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 7:01:11 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith wrote:
>>>>>>>> How about a telescoping, articulating tentacle that mounts to a
>>>>>>>> wall or the ceiling? Aliens love that tech (Abyss, War of the Worlds)
>>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Travis Smith <trav...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I think we're on the right track, but I'd like to second the idea
>>>>>>>>> that this thing be attainable/upgradable from a base model. I'd prefer
>>>>>>>>> shitty but robust to awesome and always almost ready.
>>>>>>>>> -Travis
>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 12:51, Kevin Fusselman <ke...@fusselman.org>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> So, sorta like one of those gigapixel cameras in reverse...
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:50 PM, David Knaack <david...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> I was thinking that the high def wide angle feed would go through
>>>>>>>>>> a stream filter to crop out the desired section of the image (and maybe
>>>>>>>>>> transform it to remove the wide angle distortion), providing a software
>>>>>>>>>> based pan/tilt feature while keeping hardware and bandwidth down.
>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 12:40 PM, "Kevin Fusselman" <ke...@fusselman.org>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Nah, 1080p is fine; we'll compensate for the bandwidth in
>>>>>>>>>>> framerate... how does 0.2fps sound? :)
>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:15 PM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Kevin is worried about bandwidth for high def.
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 9:17:24 AM UTC-6, David Knaack
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> If the camera itself is high def we might be able to get away
>>>>>>>>>>>>> with using a wide angle view to avoid building a control system for the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> camera.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 8:57 AM, "patrick" <patrick...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I feel it needs the same capability that the MMM has to tilt
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> up and down. the panning of course would be done by the robot.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, November 5, 2012 7:41:26 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OMGers,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hey, I'm moving to Japan, its happening.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Completely due to self interest, I'm suddenly smitten with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the idea of making a telepresence robot. The basic plan would be to make
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one on the cheap using skype, a cheap laptop, a roomba, and some mechanism
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for changing the height of the laptop. Usage would probably need to be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> limited to our members in absentsia, as I would want to enjoy consistent
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> problem free use of the device, and random people on the internet lack
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stewardship. For this right I'm willing to front the cash.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The point? While I won't be around, I wanna be around. OMG
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and hanging out with you guys is pretty much my favorite part about Omaha.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Patrick votes yes as well (just a guess). Anyone want to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> get in on this project? Deadline is February for a working model. We can
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> go easy and work with models already out there, or get creative and make
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> our own monstrosity.
I'm not able to make it to the Makery nearly as much as I'd like and am very interested in this taking off.
I have a 17" vesa monitor (circa 2003 so it isn't HD), raspberry pi with wifi adapter, 720p usb camera, and working roomba available for the project. Let me know if any of the components can be put to use.
- Mike
On Nov 6, 2012, at 11:29 PM, David Knaack <davidkna...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I thought about a Pi. I see it as having certain features: low power, small, cheap.
> In this case, we will have lots of battery relative to the usage time, so low power isn't a driving factor.
> Small also isn't a driver, considering that we're looking at something on the order of a 17" screen up top and something that can carry a load of SLA's and motors on the bottom. (Size might be more of a factor if we wanted to source a much smaller display, something around 7" or so, but I have a feeling that doing that potentially creates some constraints without providing very much benefit.)
> Cheap is good, but I wouldn't be surprised if we can acquire one or more laptops with more processing and storage than a Pi for equal or lower cost.
> So while it's a cool platform, I'm not seeing how it is a competitor to a laptop in this particular application.
> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 10:09 PM, David J. Gotrik <dgot...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Instead of a laptop; couldn't we just have everything running off a raspberry pi?
>> Would have to look into LCD situation, but I don't think it'd be too difficult. I was thinking we could also maybe interface it with the chipKit board and IO shield for movement/sensor control since we have quite a few of those laying around ;)
>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Kevin Fusselman <ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>>>>> Star wars was usually the opposite of practical... Seriously, where do you park a super star destroyer?
>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 7:20 PM, "Travis Smith" <travi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> True, the best you got with that was the door guard at Jabba's Palace. That guy was an ass.
>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:16 PM, patrick <patrickpecor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Star wars never thought it of it as being very practical.
>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 7:01:11 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith wrote:
>>>>>>>>> How about a telescoping, articulating tentacle that mounts to a wall or the ceiling? Aliens love that tech (Abyss, War of the Worlds)
>>>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Travis Smith <trav...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> I think we're on the right track, but I'd like to second the idea that this thing be attainable/upgradable from a base model. I'd prefer shitty but robust to awesome and always almost ready.
>>>>>>>>>> -Travis
>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 12:51, Kevin Fusselman <ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> So, sorta like one of those gigapixel cameras in reverse...
>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:50 PM, David Knaack <david...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> I was thinking that the high def wide angle feed would go through a stream filter to crop out the desired section of the image (and maybe transform it to remove the wide angle distortion), providing a software based pan/tilt feature while keeping hardware and bandwidth down.
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 12:40 PM, "Kevin Fusselman" <ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nah, 1080p is fine; we'll compensate for the bandwidth in framerate... how does 0.2fps sound? :)
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:15 PM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kevin is worried about bandwidth for high def.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 9:17:24 AM UTC-6, David Knaack wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If the camera itself is high def we might be able to get away with using a wide angle view to avoid building a control system for the camera.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 8:57 AM, "patrick" <patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I feel it needs the same capability that the MMM has to tilt up and down. the panning of course would be done by the robot.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, November 5, 2012 7:41:26 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OMGers,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hey, I'm moving to Japan, its happening.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Completely due to self interest, I'm suddenly smitten with the idea of making a telepresence robot. The basic plan would be to make one on the cheap using skype, a cheap laptop, a roomba, and some mechanism for changing the height of the laptop. Usage would probably need to be limited to our members in absentsia, as I would want to enjoy consistent problem free use of the device, and random people on the internet lack stewardship. For this right I'm willing to front the cash.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The point? While I won't be around, I wanna be around. OMG and hanging out with you guys is pretty much my favorite part about Omaha.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Patrick votes yes as well (just a guess). Anyone want to get in on this project? Deadline is February for a working model. We can go easy and work with models already out there, or get creative and make our own monstrosity.
On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 7:34:16 AM UTC-6, tavshed wrote:
> I'm not able to make it to the Makery nearly as much as I'd like and am > very interested in this taking off.
> I have a 17" vesa monitor (circa 2003 so it isn't HD), raspberry pi with > wifi adapter, 720p usb camera, and working roomba available for the > project. Let me know if any of the components can be put to use.
> - Mike
> On Nov 6, 2012, at 11:29 PM, David Knaack <david...@gmail.com<javascript:>> > wrote:
> I thought about a Pi. I see it as having certain features: low power, > small, cheap.
> In this case, we will have lots of battery relative to the usage time, so > low power isn't a driving factor.
> Small also isn't a driver, considering that we're looking at something on > the order of a 17" screen up top and something that can carry a load of > SLA's and motors on the bottom. (Size might be more of a factor if we > wanted to source a much smaller display, something around 7" or so, but I > have a feeling that doing that potentially creates some constraints without > providing very much benefit.)
> Cheap is good, but I wouldn't be surprised if we can acquire one or more > laptops with more processing and storage than a Pi for equal or lower cost.
> So while it's a cool platform, I'm not seeing how it is a competitor to a > laptop in this particular application.
> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 10:09 PM, David J. Gotrik <dgo...@gmail.com<javascript:> > > wrote:
>> Instead of a laptop; couldn't we just have everything running off a >> raspberry pi?
>> Would have to look into LCD situation, but I don't think it'd be too >> difficult. I was thinking we could also maybe interface it with the >> chipKit board and IO shield for movement/sensor control since we have quite >> a few of those laying around ;)
>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:28 PM, Travis Smith <trav...@gmail.com<javascript:> >> > wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Kevin Fusselman <ke...@fusselman.org<javascript:> >>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>> Star wars was usually the opposite of practical... Seriously, where >>>>>> do you park a super star destroyer? >>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 7:20 PM, "Travis Smith" <trav...@gmail.com<javascript:>> >>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> True, the best you got with that was the door guard at Jabba's >>>>>>> Palace. That guy was an ass.
>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:16 PM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com<javascript:> >>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>> Star wars never thought it of it as being very practical.
>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 7:01:11 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith wrote:
>>>>>>>>> How about a telescoping, articulating tentacle that mounts to a >>>>>>>>> wall or the ceiling? Aliens love that tech (Abyss, War of the Worlds)
>>>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Travis Smith <trav...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> I think we're on the right track, but I'd like to second the idea >>>>>>>>>> that this thing be attainable/upgradable from a base model. I'd prefer >>>>>>>>>> shitty but robust to awesome and always almost ready.
>>>>>>>>>> -Travis
>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 12:51, Kevin Fusselman <ke...@fusselman.org> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> So, sorta like one of those gigapixel cameras in reverse...
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:50 PM, David Knaack <david...@gmail.com >>>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> I was thinking that the high def wide angle feed would go >>>>>>>>>>> through a stream filter to crop out the desired section of the image (and >>>>>>>>>>> maybe transform it to remove the wide angle distortion), providing a >>>>>>>>>>> software based pan/tilt feature while keeping hardware and bandwidth down. >>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 12:40 PM, "Kevin Fusselman" <ke...@fusselman.org> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Nah, 1080p is fine; we'll compensate for the bandwidth in >>>>>>>>>>>> framerate... how does 0.2fps sound? :)
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:15 PM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kevin is worried about bandwidth for high def.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 9:17:24 AM UTC-6, David Knaack >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If the camera itself is high def we might be able to get away >>>>>>>>>>>>>> with using a wide angle view to avoid building a control system for the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> camera. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 8:57 AM, "patrick" <patrick...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I feel it needs the same capability that the MMM has to tilt >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> up and down. the panning of course would be done by the robot.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, November 5, 2012 7:41:26 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OMGers,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hey, I'm moving to Japan, its happening.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Completely due to self interest, I'm suddenly smitten with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the idea of making a telepresence robot. The basic plan would be to make >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one on the cheap using skype, a cheap laptop, a roomba, and some mechanism >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for changing the height of the laptop. Usage would probably need to be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> limited to our members in absentsia, as I would want to enjoy consistent >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> problem free use of the device, and random people on the internet lack >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stewardship. For this right I'm willing to front the cash.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The point? While I won't be around, I wanna be around. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OMG and hanging out with you guys is pretty much my favorite part about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Omaha.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Patrick votes yes as well (just a guess). Anyone want to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> get in on this project? Deadline is February for a working model. We can >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> go easy and work with models already out there, or get creative and make >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> our own monstrosity.
Sorry I think I came off kinda rude there. Mike im not sure if I remember you but I think we will be limiting the use of this system to regular attending/paying members. Paying members with out attending may be allowed that depends on those building it and usage stats.
On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 8:22:49 AM UTC-6, patrick wrote:
> Perhaps the use of this should be limited to paying members.
> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 7:34:16 AM UTC-6, tavshed wrote:
>> I'm not able to make it to the Makery nearly as much as I'd like and am >> very interested in this taking off.
>> I have a 17" vesa monitor (circa 2003 so it isn't HD), raspberry pi with >> wifi adapter, 720p usb camera, and working roomba available for the >> project. Let me know if any of the components can be put to use.
>> - Mike
>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 11:29 PM, David Knaack <david...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I thought about a Pi. I see it as having certain features: low power, >> small, cheap.
>> In this case, we will have lots of battery relative to the usage time, so >> low power isn't a driving factor.
>> Small also isn't a driver, considering that we're looking at something on >> the order of a 17" screen up top and something that can carry a load of >> SLA's and motors on the bottom. (Size might be more of a factor if we >> wanted to source a much smaller display, something around 7" or so, but I >> have a feeling that doing that potentially creates some constraints without >> providing very much benefit.)
>> Cheap is good, but I wouldn't be surprised if we can acquire one or more >> laptops with more processing and storage than a Pi for equal or lower cost.
>> So while it's a cool platform, I'm not seeing how it is a competitor to a >> laptop in this particular application.
>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 10:09 PM, David J. Gotrik <dgo...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>> Instead of a laptop; couldn't we just have everything running off a >>> raspberry pi?
>>> Would have to look into LCD situation, but I don't think it'd be too >>> difficult. I was thinking we could also maybe interface it with the >>> chipKit board and IO shield for movement/sensor control since we have quite >>> a few of those laying around ;)
>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:28 PM, Travis Smith <trav...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Kevin Fusselman <ke...@fusselman.org>wrote:
>>>>>>> Star wars was usually the opposite of practical... Seriously, where >>>>>>> do you park a super star destroyer? >>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 7:20 PM, "Travis Smith" <trav...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> True, the best you got with that was the door guard at Jabba's >>>>>>>> Palace. That guy was an ass.
>>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:16 PM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Star wars never thought it of it as being very practical.
>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 7:01:11 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> How about a telescoping, articulating tentacle that mounts to a >>>>>>>>>> wall or the ceiling? Aliens love that tech (Abyss, War of the Worlds)
>>>>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Travis Smith <trav...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> I think we're on the right track, but I'd like to second the >>>>>>>>>>> idea that this thing be attainable/upgradable from a base model. I'd >>>>>>>>>>> prefer shitty but robust to awesome and always almost ready.
>>>>>>>>>>> -Travis
>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 12:51, Kevin Fusselman <ke...@fusselman.org> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> So, sorta like one of those gigapixel cameras in reverse...
>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:50 PM, David Knaack < >>>>>>>>>>> david...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> I was thinking that the high def wide angle feed would go >>>>>>>>>>>> through a stream filter to crop out the desired section of the image (and >>>>>>>>>>>> maybe transform it to remove the wide angle distortion), providing a >>>>>>>>>>>> software based pan/tilt feature while keeping hardware and bandwidth down. >>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 12:40 PM, "Kevin Fusselman" < >>>>>>>>>>>> ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nah, 1080p is fine; we'll compensate for the bandwidth in >>>>>>>>>>>>> framerate... how does 0.2fps sound? :)
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:15 PM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com >>>>>>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kevin is worried about bandwidth for high def.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 9:17:24 AM UTC-6, David Knaack >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If the camera itself is high def we might be able to get >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> away with using a wide angle view to avoid building a control system for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the camera. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 8:57 AM, "patrick" <patrick...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I feel it needs the same capability that the MMM has to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tilt up and down. the panning of course would be done by the robot.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, November 5, 2012 7:41:26 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OMGers,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hey, I'm moving to Japan, its happening.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Completely due to self interest, I'm suddenly smitten with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the idea of making a telepresence robot. The basic plan would be to make >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one on the cheap using skype, a cheap laptop, a roomba, and some mechanism >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for changing the height of the laptop. Usage would probably need to be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> limited to our members in absentsia, as I would want to enjoy consistent >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> problem free use of the device, and random people on the internet lack >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> stewardship. For this right I'm willing to front the cash.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The point? While I won't be around, I wanna be around. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OMG and hanging out with you guys is pretty much my favorite part about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Omaha.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Patrick votes yes as well (just a guess). Anyone want to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> get in on this project? Deadline is February for a working model. We can >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> go easy and work with models already out there, or get creative and make >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> our own monstrosity.
> Sorry I think I came off kinda rude there. Mike im not sure if I remember you but I think we will be limiting the use of this system to regular attending/paying members. Paying members with out attending may be allowed that depends on those building it and usage stats.
> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 8:22:49 AM UTC-6, patrick wrote:
>> Perhaps the use of this should be limited to paying members.
>> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 7:34:16 AM UTC-6, tavshed wrote:
>>> I'm not able to make it to the Makery nearly as much as I'd like and am very interested in this taking off.
>>> I have a 17" vesa monitor (circa 2003 so it isn't HD), raspberry pi with wifi adapter, 720p usb camera, and working roomba available for the project. Let me know if any of the components can be put to use.
>>> - Mike
>>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 11:29 PM, David Knaack <david...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> I thought about a Pi. I see it as having certain features: low power, small, cheap.
>>>> In this case, we will have lots of battery relative to the usage time, so low power isn't a driving factor.
>>>> Small also isn't a driver, considering that we're looking at something on the order of a 17" screen up top and something that can carry a load of SLA's and motors on the bottom. (Size might be more of a factor if we wanted to source a much smaller display, something around 7" or so, but I have a feeling that doing that potentially creates some constraints without providing very much benefit.)
>>>> Cheap is good, but I wouldn't be surprised if we can acquire one or more laptops with more processing and storage than a Pi for equal or lower cost.
>>>> So while it's a cool platform, I'm not seeing how it is a competitor to a laptop in this particular application.
>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 10:09 PM, David J. Gotrik <dgo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Instead of a laptop; couldn't we just have everything running off a raspberry pi?
>>>>> Would have to look into LCD situation, but I don't think it'd be too difficult. I was thinking we could also maybe interface it with the chipKit board and IO shield for movement/sensor control since we have quite a few of those laying around ;)
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Kevin Fusselman <ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Star wars was usually the opposite of practical... Seriously, where do you park a super star destroyer?
>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 7:20 PM, "Travis Smith" <trav...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> True, the best you got with that was the door guard at Jabba's Palace. That guy was an ass.
>>>>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:16 PM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Star wars never thought it of it as being very practical.
>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 7:01:11 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> How about a telescoping, articulating tentacle that mounts to a wall or the ceiling? Aliens love that tech (Abyss, War of the Worlds)
>>>>>>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Travis Smith <trav...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we're on the right track, but I'd like to second the idea that this thing be attainable/upgradable from a base model. I'd prefer shitty but robust to awesome and always almost ready.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 12:51, Kevin Fusselman <ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, sorta like one of those gigapixel cameras in reverse...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:50 PM, David Knaack <david...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I was thinking that the high def wide angle feed would go through a stream filter to crop out the desired section of the image (and maybe transform it to remove the wide angle distortion), providing a software based pan/tilt feature while keeping hardware and bandwidth down.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 12:40 PM, "Kevin Fusselman" <ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nah, 1080p is fine; we'll compensate for the bandwidth in framerate... how does 0.2fps sound? :)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:15 PM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kevin is worried about bandwidth for high def.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 9:17:24 AM UTC-6, David Knaack wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If the camera itself is high def we might be able to get away with using a wide angle view to avoid building a control system for the camera.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 8:57 AM, "patrick" <patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I feel it needs the same capability that the MMM has to tilt up and down. the panning of course would be done by the robot.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, November 5, 2012 7:41:26 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OMGers,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hey, I'm moving to Japan, its happening.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Completely due to self interest, I'm suddenly smitten with the idea of making a telepresence robot. The basic plan would be to make one on the cheap using skype, a cheap laptop, a roomba, and some mechanism for changing the height of the laptop. Usage would probably need to be limited to our members in absentsia, as I would want to enjoy consistent problem free use of the device, and random people on the internet lack stewardship. For this right I'm willing to front the cash.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The point? While I won't be around, I wanna be around. OMG and hanging out with you guys is pretty much my favorite part about Omaha.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Patrick votes yes as well (just a guess). Anyone want to get in on this project? Deadline is February for a working model. We can go easy and work with models already out there, or get creative and make our own monstrosity.
Erm...I can see where this might be going. Robot doesn't exist yet.
Patrick and I really want it because there is no way possible we'll be able
to attend the meetings, and there are no makerspaces where he lives or
where I'm going. That's our motivation: extreme lack. He lives in
Mississippi, for example.
I can see how lots of other people would have valid reasons for having one
of these things, though.
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:25 AM, patrick <patrickpecor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sorry I think I came off kinda rude there. Mike im not sure if I remember
> you but I think we will be limiting the use of this system to regular
> attending/paying members. Paying members with out attending may be allowed
> that depends on those building it and usage stats.
> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 8:22:49 AM UTC-6, patrick wrote:
>> Perhaps the use of this should be limited to paying members.
>> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 7:34:16 AM UTC-6, tavshed wrote:
>>> I'm not able to make it to the Makery nearly as much as I'd like and am
>>> very interested in this taking off.
>>> I have a 17" vesa monitor (circa 2003 so it isn't HD), raspberry pi with
>>> wifi adapter, 720p usb camera, and working roomba available for the
>>> project. Let me know if any of the components can be put to use.
>>> - Mike
>>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 11:29 PM, David Knaack <david...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I thought about a Pi. I see it as having certain features: low power,
>>> small, cheap.
>>> In this case, we will have lots of battery relative to the usage time,
>>> so low power isn't a driving factor.
>>> Small also isn't a driver, considering that we're looking at something
>>> on the order of a 17" screen up top and something that can carry a load of
>>> SLA's and motors on the bottom. (Size might be more of a factor if we
>>> wanted to source a much smaller display, something around 7" or so, but I
>>> have a feeling that doing that potentially creates some constraints without
>>> providing very much benefit.)
>>> Cheap is good, but I wouldn't be surprised if we can acquire one or more
>>> laptops with more processing and storage than a Pi for equal or lower cost.
>>> So while it's a cool platform, I'm not seeing how it is a competitor to
>>> a laptop in this particular application.
>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 10:09 PM, David J. Gotrik <dgo...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>> Instead of a laptop; couldn't we just have everything running off a
>>>> raspberry pi?
>>>> Would have to look into LCD situation, but I don't think it'd be too
>>>> difficult. I was thinking we could also maybe interface it with the
>>>> chipKit board and IO shield for movement/sensor control since we have quite
>>>> a few of those laying around ;)
>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:28 PM, Travis Smith <trav...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Kevin Fusselman <ke...@fusselman.org
>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>> Star wars was usually the opposite of practical... Seriously, where
>>>>>>>> do you park a super star destroyer?
>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 7:20 PM, "Travis Smith" <trav...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> True, the best you got with that was the door guard at Jabba's
>>>>>>>>> Palace. That guy was an ass.
>>>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:16 PM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Star wars never thought it of it as being very practical.
>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 7:01:11 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> How about a telescoping, articulating tentacle that mounts to a
>>>>>>>>>>> wall or the ceiling? Aliens love that tech (Abyss, War of the Worlds)
>>>>>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Travis Smith <trav...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we're on the right track, but I'd like to second the
>>>>>>>>>>>> idea that this thing be attainable/upgradable from a base model. I'd
>>>>>>>>>>>> prefer shitty but robust to awesome and always almost ready.
>>>>>>>>>>>> -Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 12:51, Kevin Fusselman <ke...@fusselman.org>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> So, sorta like one of those gigapixel cameras in reverse...
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:50 PM, David Knaack <
>>>>>>>>>>>> david...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I was thinking that the high def wide angle feed would go
>>>>>>>>>>>>> through a stream filter to crop out the desired section of the image (and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> maybe transform it to remove the wide angle distortion), providing a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> software based pan/tilt feature while keeping hardware and bandwidth down.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 12:40 PM, "Kevin Fusselman" <
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nah, 1080p is fine; we'll compensate for the bandwidth in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> framerate... how does 0.2fps sound? :)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:15 PM, patrick <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kevin is worried about bandwidth for high def.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 9:17:24 AM UTC-6, David Knaack
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If the camera itself is high def we might be able to get
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> away with using a wide angle view to avoid building a control system for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the camera.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 8:57 AM, "patrick" <patrick...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I feel it needs the same capability that the MMM has to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tilt up and down. the panning of course would be done by the robot.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, November 5, 2012 7:41:26 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OMGers,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hey, I'm moving to Japan, its happening.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Completely due to self interest, I'm suddenly smitten
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with the idea of making a telepresence robot. The basic plan would be to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make one on the cheap using skype, a cheap laptop, a roomba, and some
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mechanism for changing the height of the laptop. Usage would probably need
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to be limited to our members in absentsia, as I would want to enjoy
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consistent problem free use of the device, and random people on the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> internet lack stewardship. For this right I'm willing to front the cash.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The point? While I won't be around, I wanna be around.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OMG and hanging out with you guys is pretty much my favorite part about
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Omaha.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Patrick votes yes as well (just a guess). Anyone want to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> get in on this project? Deadline is February for a working model. We can
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> go easy and work with models already out there, or get creative and make
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> our own monstrosity.
Yeah making a fleet of them is both impractical and there isn't any space available for that. Jason I could see wanting to use it isn't he still in Boston?
On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 8:32:28 AM UTC-6, Travis Smith wrote:
> Erm...I can see where this might be going. Robot doesn't exist yet. > Patrick and I really want it because there is no way possible we'll be able > to attend the meetings, and there are no makerspaces where he lives or > where I'm going. That's our motivation: extreme lack. He lives in > Mississippi, for example.
> I can see how lots of other people would have valid reasons for having one > of these things, though.
> Travis
> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:25 AM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com<javascript:> > > wrote:
>> Sorry I think I came off kinda rude there. Mike im not sure if I remember >> you but I think we will be limiting the use of this system to regular >> attending/paying members. Paying members with out attending may be allowed >> that depends on those building it and usage stats.
>> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 8:22:49 AM UTC-6, patrick wrote:
>>> Perhaps the use of this should be limited to paying members.
>>> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 7:34:16 AM UTC-6, tavshed wrote:
>>>> I'm not able to make it to the Makery nearly as much as I'd like and am >>>> very interested in this taking off.
>>>> I have a 17" vesa monitor (circa 2003 so it isn't HD), raspberry pi >>>> with wifi adapter, 720p usb camera, and working roomba available for the >>>> project. Let me know if any of the components can be put to use.
>>>> - Mike
>>>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 11:29 PM, David Knaack <david...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> I thought about a Pi. I see it as having certain features: low power, >>>> small, cheap.
>>>> In this case, we will have lots of battery relative to the usage time, >>>> so low power isn't a driving factor.
>>>> Small also isn't a driver, considering that we're looking at something >>>> on the order of a 17" screen up top and something that can carry a load of >>>> SLA's and motors on the bottom. (Size might be more of a factor if we >>>> wanted to source a much smaller display, something around 7" or so, but I >>>> have a feeling that doing that potentially creates some constraints without >>>> providing very much benefit.)
>>>> Cheap is good, but I wouldn't be surprised if we can acquire one or >>>> more laptops with more processing and storage than a Pi for equal or lower >>>> cost.
>>>> So while it's a cool platform, I'm not seeing how it is a competitor to >>>> a laptop in this particular application.
>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 10:09 PM, David J. Gotrik <dgo...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>> Instead of a laptop; couldn't we just have everything running off a >>>>> raspberry pi?
>>>>> Would have to look into LCD situation, but I don't think it'd be too >>>>> difficult. I was thinking we could also maybe interface it with the >>>>> chipKit board and IO shield for movement/sensor control since we have quite >>>>> a few of those laying around ;)
>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:28 PM, Travis Smith <trav...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Kevin Fusselman < >>>>>>>> ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Star wars was usually the opposite of practical... Seriously, >>>>>>>>> where do you park a super star destroyer? >>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 7:20 PM, "Travis Smith" <trav...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> True, the best you got with that was the door guard at Jabba's >>>>>>>>>> Palace. That guy was an ass.
>>>>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:16 PM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Star wars never thought it of it as being very practical.
>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 7:01:11 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> How about a telescoping, articulating tentacle that mounts to a >>>>>>>>>>>> wall or the ceiling? Aliens love that tech (Abyss, War of the Worlds)
>>>>>>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Travis Smith <trav...@gmail.com >>>>>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we're on the right track, but I'd like to second the >>>>>>>>>>>>> idea that this thing be attainable/upgradable from a base model. I'd >>>>>>>>>>>>> prefer shitty but robust to awesome and always almost ready.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 12:51, Kevin Fusselman <ke...@fusselman.org> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, sorta like one of those gigapixel cameras in reverse...
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:50 PM, David Knaack < >>>>>>>>>>>>> david...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I was thinking that the high def wide angle feed would go >>>>>>>>>>>>>> through a stream filter to crop out the desired section of the image (and >>>>>>>>>>>>>> maybe transform it to remove the wide angle distortion), providing a >>>>>>>>>>>>>> software based pan/tilt feature while keeping hardware and bandwidth down. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 12:40 PM, "Kevin Fusselman" < >>>>>>>>>>>>>> ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nah, 1080p is fine; we'll compensate for the bandwidth in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> framerate... how does 0.2fps sound? :)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:15 PM, patrick < >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kevin is worried about bandwidth for high def.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 9:17:24 AM UTC-6, David Knaack >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If the camera itself is high def we might be able to get >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> away with using a wide angle view to avoid building a control system for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the camera. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 8:57 AM, "patrick" <patrick...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I feel it needs the same capability that the MMM has to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tilt up and down. the panning of course would be done by the robot.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, November 5, 2012 7:41:26 PM UTC-6, Travis >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Smith wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OMGers,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hey, I'm moving to Japan, its happening.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Completely due to self interest, I'm suddenly smitten >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with the idea of making a telepresence robot. The basic plan would be to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make one on the cheap using skype, a cheap laptop, a roomba, and some >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mechanism for changing the height of the laptop. Usage would probably need >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to be limited to our members in absentsia, as I would want to enjoy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consistent problem free use of the device, and random people on the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> internet lack stewardship. For this right I'm willing to front the cash.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The point? While I won't be around, I wanna be around. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OMG and hanging out with you guys is pretty much my favorite part about >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Omaha.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Patrick votes yes as well (just a guess). Anyone want >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to get in on this project? Deadline is February for a working model. We >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can go easy and work with models already out there, or get creative and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make our own monstrosity.
Roombas are about $70 average on ebay. Not sure what base would be best,
but I'm throwing that on there for comparison. Hella slow, but should be a
stable platform. Has code out there to hack it.
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:35 AM, patrick <patrickpecor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yeah making a fleet of them is both impractical and there isn't any space
> available for that. Jason I could see wanting to use it isn't he still in
> Boston?
> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 8:32:28 AM UTC-6, Travis Smith wrote:
>> Erm...I can see where this might be going. Robot doesn't exist yet.
>> Patrick and I really want it because there is no way possible we'll be able
>> to attend the meetings, and there are no makerspaces where he lives or
>> where I'm going. That's our motivation: extreme lack. He lives in
>> Mississippi, for example.
>> I can see how lots of other people would have valid reasons for having
>> one of these things, though.
>> Travis
>> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:25 AM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Sorry I think I came off kinda rude there. Mike im not sure if I
>>> remember you but I think we will be limiting the use of this system to
>>> regular attending/paying members. Paying members with out attending may be
>>> allowed that depends on those building it and usage stats.
>>> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 8:22:49 AM UTC-6, patrick wrote:
>>>> Perhaps the use of this should be limited to paying members.
>>>> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 7:34:16 AM UTC-6, tavshed wrote:
>>>>> I'm not able to make it to the Makery nearly as much as I'd like and
>>>>> am very interested in this taking off.
>>>>> I have a 17" vesa monitor (circa 2003 so it isn't HD), raspberry pi
>>>>> with wifi adapter, 720p usb camera, and working roomba available for the
>>>>> project. Let me know if any of the components can be put to use.
>>>>> - Mike
>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 11:29 PM, David Knaack <david...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> I thought about a Pi. I see it as having certain features: low power,
>>>>> small, cheap.
>>>>> In this case, we will have lots of battery relative to the usage time,
>>>>> so low power isn't a driving factor.
>>>>> Small also isn't a driver, considering that we're looking at something
>>>>> on the order of a 17" screen up top and something that can carry a load of
>>>>> SLA's and motors on the bottom. (Size might be more of a factor if we
>>>>> wanted to source a much smaller display, something around 7" or so, but I
>>>>> have a feeling that doing that potentially creates some constraints without
>>>>> providing very much benefit.)
>>>>> Cheap is good, but I wouldn't be surprised if we can acquire one or
>>>>> more laptops with more processing and storage than a Pi for equal or lower
>>>>> cost.
>>>>> So while it's a cool platform, I'm not seeing how it is a competitor
>>>>> to a laptop in this particular application.
>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 10:09 PM, David J. Gotrik <dgo...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>> Instead of a laptop; couldn't we just have everything running off a
>>>>>> raspberry pi?
>>>>>> Would have to look into LCD situation, but I don't think it'd be too
>>>>>> difficult. I was thinking we could also maybe interface it with the
>>>>>> chipKit board and IO shield for movement/sensor control since we have quite
>>>>>> a few of those laying around ;)
>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:28 PM, Travis Smith <trav...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Kevin Fusselman <
>>>>>>>>> ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Star wars was usually the opposite of practical... Seriously,
>>>>>>>>>> where do you park a super star destroyer?
>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 7:20 PM, "Travis Smith" <trav...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> True, the best you got with that was the door guard at Jabba's
>>>>>>>>>>> Palace. That guy was an ass.
>>>>>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:16 PM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Star wars never thought it of it as being very practical.
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 7:01:11 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> How about a telescoping, articulating tentacle that mounts to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> a wall or the ceiling? Aliens love that tech (Abyss, War of the Worlds)
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Travis Smith <
>>>>>>>>>>>>> trav...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we're on the right track, but I'd like to second the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> idea that this thing be attainable/upgradable from a base model. I'd
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> prefer shitty but robust to awesome and always almost ready.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 12:51, Kevin Fusselman <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, sorta like one of those gigapixel cameras in reverse...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:50 PM, David Knaack <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> david...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I was thinking that the high def wide angle feed would go
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> through a stream filter to crop out the desired section of the image (and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maybe transform it to remove the wide angle distortion), providing a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> software based pan/tilt feature while keeping hardware and bandwidth down.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 12:40 PM, "Kevin Fusselman" <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nah, 1080p is fine; we'll compensate for the bandwidth in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> framerate... how does 0.2fps sound? :)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:15 PM, patrick <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kevin is worried about bandwidth for high def.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 9:17:24 AM UTC-6, David
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Knaack wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If the camera itself is high def we might be able to get
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> away with using a wide angle view to avoid building a control system for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the camera.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 8:57 AM, "patrick" <patrick...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I feel it needs the same capability that the MMM has to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tilt up and down. the panning of course would be done by the robot.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, November 5, 2012 7:41:26 PM UTC-6, Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Smith wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OMGers,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hey, I'm moving to Japan, its happening.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Completely due to self interest, I'm suddenly smitten
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with the idea of making a telepresence robot. The basic plan would be to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make one on the cheap using skype, a cheap laptop, a roomba, and some
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mechanism for changing the height of the laptop. Usage would probably need
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to be limited to our members in absentsia, as I would want to enjoy
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consistent problem free use of the device, and random people on the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> internet lack stewardship. For this right I'm willing to front the cash.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The point? While I won't be around, I wanna be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> around. OMG and hanging out with you guys is pretty much my favorite part
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about Omaha.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Patrick votes yes as well (just a guess). Anyone want
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to get in on this project? Deadline is February for a working model. We
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can go easy and work with models already out there, or get creative and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make our own monstrosity.
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:35 AM, patrick <patrickpecor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yeah making a fleet of them is both impractical and there isn't any space
> available for that. Jason I could see wanting to use it isn't he still in
> Boston?
> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 8:32:28 AM UTC-6, Travis Smith wrote:
>> Erm...I can see where this might be going. Robot doesn't exist yet.
>> Patrick and I really want it because there is no way possible we'll be able
>> to attend the meetings, and there are no makerspaces where he lives or
>> where I'm going. That's our motivation: extreme lack. He lives in
>> Mississippi, for example.
>> I can see how lots of other people would have valid reasons for having
>> one of these things, though.
>> Travis
>> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:25 AM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Sorry I think I came off kinda rude there. Mike im not sure if I
>>> remember you but I think we will be limiting the use of this system to
>>> regular attending/paying members. Paying members with out attending may be
>>> allowed that depends on those building it and usage stats.
>>> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 8:22:49 AM UTC-6, patrick wrote:
>>>> Perhaps the use of this should be limited to paying members.
>>>> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 7:34:16 AM UTC-6, tavshed wrote:
>>>>> I'm not able to make it to the Makery nearly as much as I'd like and
>>>>> am very interested in this taking off.
>>>>> I have a 17" vesa monitor (circa 2003 so it isn't HD), raspberry pi
>>>>> with wifi adapter, 720p usb camera, and working roomba available for the
>>>>> project. Let me know if any of the components can be put to use.
>>>>> - Mike
>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 11:29 PM, David Knaack <david...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> I thought about a Pi. I see it as having certain features: low power,
>>>>> small, cheap.
>>>>> In this case, we will have lots of battery relative to the usage time,
>>>>> so low power isn't a driving factor.
>>>>> Small also isn't a driver, considering that we're looking at something
>>>>> on the order of a 17" screen up top and something that can carry a load of
>>>>> SLA's and motors on the bottom. (Size might be more of a factor if we
>>>>> wanted to source a much smaller display, something around 7" or so, but I
>>>>> have a feeling that doing that potentially creates some constraints without
>>>>> providing very much benefit.)
>>>>> Cheap is good, but I wouldn't be surprised if we can acquire one or
>>>>> more laptops with more processing and storage than a Pi for equal or lower
>>>>> cost.
>>>>> So while it's a cool platform, I'm not seeing how it is a competitor
>>>>> to a laptop in this particular application.
>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 10:09 PM, David J. Gotrik <dgo...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>> Instead of a laptop; couldn't we just have everything running off a
>>>>>> raspberry pi?
>>>>>> Would have to look into LCD situation, but I don't think it'd be too
>>>>>> difficult. I was thinking we could also maybe interface it with the
>>>>>> chipKit board and IO shield for movement/sensor control since we have quite
>>>>>> a few of those laying around ;)
>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:28 PM, Travis Smith <trav...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Kevin Fusselman <
>>>>>>>>> ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Star wars was usually the opposite of practical... Seriously,
>>>>>>>>>> where do you park a super star destroyer?
>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 7:20 PM, "Travis Smith" <trav...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> True, the best you got with that was the door guard at Jabba's
>>>>>>>>>>> Palace. That guy was an ass.
>>>>>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:16 PM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Star wars never thought it of it as being very practical.
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 7:01:11 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> How about a telescoping, articulating tentacle that mounts to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> a wall or the ceiling? Aliens love that tech (Abyss, War of the Worlds)
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Travis Smith <
>>>>>>>>>>>>> trav...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we're on the right track, but I'd like to second the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> idea that this thing be attainable/upgradable from a base model. I'd
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> prefer shitty but robust to awesome and always almost ready.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 12:51, Kevin Fusselman <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, sorta like one of those gigapixel cameras in reverse...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:50 PM, David Knaack <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> david...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I was thinking that the high def wide angle feed would go
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> through a stream filter to crop out the desired section of the image (and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maybe transform it to remove the wide angle distortion), providing a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> software based pan/tilt feature while keeping hardware and bandwidth down.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 12:40 PM, "Kevin Fusselman" <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nah, 1080p is fine; we'll compensate for the bandwidth in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> framerate... how does 0.2fps sound? :)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:15 PM, patrick <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kevin is worried about bandwidth for high def.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 9:17:24 AM UTC-6, David
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Knaack wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If the camera itself is high def we might be able to get
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> away with using a wide angle view to avoid building a control system for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the camera.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 8:57 AM, "patrick" <patrick...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I feel it needs the same capability that the MMM has to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tilt up and down. the panning of course would be done by the robot.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, November 5, 2012 7:41:26 PM UTC-6, Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Smith wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OMGers,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hey, I'm moving to Japan, its happening.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Completely due to self interest, I'm suddenly smitten
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with the idea of making a telepresence robot. The basic plan would be to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make one on the cheap using skype, a cheap laptop, a roomba, and some
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mechanism for changing the height of the laptop. Usage would probably need
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to be limited to our members in absentsia, as I would want to enjoy
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consistent problem free use of the device, and random people on the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> internet lack stewardship. For this right I'm willing to front the cash.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The point? While I won't be around, I wanna be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> around. OMG and hanging out with you guys is pretty much my favorite part
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about Omaha.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Patrick votes yes as well (just a guess). Anyone want
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to get in on this project? Deadline is February for a working model. We
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can go easy and work with models already out there, or get creative and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make our own monstrosity.
Solution! I believe Skype does teleconferencing. Everyone could get on
the party line that is the robot, and one person could pilot. The bot
would be a bit schizophrenic, but hey, whatever, it fits.
> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:35 AM, patrick <patrickpecor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Yeah making a fleet of them is both impractical and there isn't any space
>> available for that. Jason I could see wanting to use it isn't he still in
>> Boston?
>> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 8:32:28 AM UTC-6, Travis Smith wrote:
>>> Erm...I can see where this might be going. Robot doesn't exist yet.
>>> Patrick and I really want it because there is no way possible we'll be able
>>> to attend the meetings, and there are no makerspaces where he lives or
>>> where I'm going. That's our motivation: extreme lack. He lives in
>>> Mississippi, for example.
>>> I can see how lots of other people would have valid reasons for having
>>> one of these things, though.
>>> Travis
>>> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:25 AM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Sorry I think I came off kinda rude there. Mike im not sure if I
>>>> remember you but I think we will be limiting the use of this system to
>>>> regular attending/paying members. Paying members with out attending may be
>>>> allowed that depends on those building it and usage stats.
>>>> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 8:22:49 AM UTC-6, patrick wrote:
>>>>> Perhaps the use of this should be limited to paying members.
>>>>> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 7:34:16 AM UTC-6, tavshed wrote:
>>>>>> I'm not able to make it to the Makery nearly as much as I'd like and
>>>>>> am very interested in this taking off.
>>>>>> I have a 17" vesa monitor (circa 2003 so it isn't HD), raspberry pi
>>>>>> with wifi adapter, 720p usb camera, and working roomba available for the
>>>>>> project. Let me know if any of the components can be put to use.
>>>>>> - Mike
>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 11:29 PM, David Knaack <david...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> I thought about a Pi. I see it as having certain features: low power,
>>>>>> small, cheap.
>>>>>> In this case, we will have lots of battery relative to the usage
>>>>>> time, so low power isn't a driving factor.
>>>>>> Small also isn't a driver, considering that we're looking at
>>>>>> something on the order of a 17" screen up top and something that can carry
>>>>>> a load of SLA's and motors on the bottom. (Size might be more of a factor
>>>>>> if we wanted to source a much smaller display, something around 7" or so,
>>>>>> but I have a feeling that doing that potentially creates some constraints
>>>>>> without providing very much benefit.)
>>>>>> Cheap is good, but I wouldn't be surprised if we can acquire one or
>>>>>> more laptops with more processing and storage than a Pi for equal or lower
>>>>>> cost.
>>>>>> So while it's a cool platform, I'm not seeing how it is a competitor
>>>>>> to a laptop in this particular application.
>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 10:09 PM, David J. Gotrik <dgo...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>> Instead of a laptop; couldn't we just have everything running off a
>>>>>>> raspberry pi?
>>>>>>> Would have to look into LCD situation, but I don't think it'd be too
>>>>>>> difficult. I was thinking we could also maybe interface it with the
>>>>>>> chipKit board and IO shield for movement/sensor control since we have quite
>>>>>>> a few of those laying around ;)
>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:28 PM, Travis Smith <trav...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Kevin Fusselman <
>>>>>>>>>> ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Star wars was usually the opposite of practical... Seriously,
>>>>>>>>>>> where do you park a super star destroyer?
>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 7:20 PM, "Travis Smith" <trav...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> True, the best you got with that was the door guard at Jabba's
>>>>>>>>>>>> Palace. That guy was an ass.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:16 PM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Star wars never thought it of it as being very practical.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 7:01:11 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How about a telescoping, articulating tentacle that mounts to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a wall or the ceiling? Aliens love that tech (Abyss, War of the Worlds)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Travis Smith <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trav...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we're on the right track, but I'd like to second the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> idea that this thing be attainable/upgradable from a base model. I'd
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> prefer shitty but robust to awesome and always almost ready.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 12:51, Kevin Fusselman <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, sorta like one of those gigapixel cameras in reverse...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:50 PM, David Knaack <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> david...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I was thinking that the high def wide angle feed would go
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> through a stream filter to crop out the desired section of the image (and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maybe transform it to remove the wide angle distortion), providing a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> software based pan/tilt feature while keeping hardware and bandwidth down.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 12:40 PM, "Kevin Fusselman" <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nah, 1080p is fine; we'll compensate for the bandwidth in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> framerate... how does 0.2fps sound? :)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:15 PM, patrick <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kevin is worried about bandwidth for high def.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 9:17:24 AM UTC-6, David
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Knaack wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If the camera itself is high def we might be able to get
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> away with using a wide angle view to avoid building a control system for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the camera.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 8:57 AM, "patrick" <patrick...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I feel it needs the same capability that the MMM has to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tilt up and down. the panning of course would be done by the robot.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, November 5, 2012 7:41:26 PM UTC-6, Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Smith wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OMGers,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hey, I'm moving to Japan, its happening.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Completely due to self interest, I'm suddenly smitten
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with the idea of making a telepresence robot. The basic plan would be to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make one on the cheap using skype, a cheap laptop, a roomba, and some
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mechanism for changing the height of the laptop. Usage would probably need
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to be limited to our members in absentsia, as I would want to enjoy
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consistent problem free use of the device, and random people on the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> internet lack stewardship. For this right I'm willing to front the cash.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The point? While I won't be around, I wanna be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> around. OMG and hanging out with you guys is pretty much my favorite part
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about Omaha.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Patrick votes yes as well (just a guess). Anyone want
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to get in on this project? Deadline is February for a working model. We
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can go easy and work with models already out there, or get creative and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make our own monstrosity.
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:49 AM, Travis Smith <travi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Solution! I believe Skype does teleconferencing. Everyone could get on
> the party line that is the robot, and one person could pilot. The bot
> would be a bit schizophrenic, but hey, whatever, it fits.
> Travis
> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:38 AM, Brandon Norris <blnor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:35 AM, patrick <patrickpecor...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>> Yeah making a fleet of them is both impractical and there isn't any
>>> space available for that. Jason I could see wanting to use it isn't he
>>> still in Boston?
>>> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 8:32:28 AM UTC-6, Travis Smith wrote:
>>>> Erm...I can see where this might be going. Robot doesn't exist yet.
>>>> Patrick and I really want it because there is no way possible we'll be able
>>>> to attend the meetings, and there are no makerspaces where he lives or
>>>> where I'm going. That's our motivation: extreme lack. He lives in
>>>> Mississippi, for example.
>>>> I can see how lots of other people would have valid reasons for having
>>>> one of these things, though.
>>>> Travis
>>>> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:25 AM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Sorry I think I came off kinda rude there. Mike im not sure if I
>>>>> remember you but I think we will be limiting the use of this system to
>>>>> regular attending/paying members. Paying members with out attending may be
>>>>> allowed that depends on those building it and usage stats.
>>>>> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 8:22:49 AM UTC-6, patrick wrote:
>>>>>> Perhaps the use of this should be limited to paying members.
>>>>>> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 7:34:16 AM UTC-6, tavshed wrote:
>>>>>>> I'm not able to make it to the Makery nearly as much as I'd like and
>>>>>>> am very interested in this taking off.
>>>>>>> I have a 17" vesa monitor (circa 2003 so it isn't HD), raspberry pi
>>>>>>> with wifi adapter, 720p usb camera, and working roomba available for the
>>>>>>> project. Let me know if any of the components can be put to use.
>>>>>>> - Mike
>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 11:29 PM, David Knaack <david...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> I thought about a Pi. I see it as having certain features: low
>>>>>>> power, small, cheap.
>>>>>>> In this case, we will have lots of battery relative to the usage
>>>>>>> time, so low power isn't a driving factor.
>>>>>>> Small also isn't a driver, considering that we're looking at
>>>>>>> something on the order of a 17" screen up top and something that can carry
>>>>>>> a load of SLA's and motors on the bottom. (Size might be more of a factor
>>>>>>> if we wanted to source a much smaller display, something around 7" or so,
>>>>>>> but I have a feeling that doing that potentially creates some constraints
>>>>>>> without providing very much benefit.)
>>>>>>> Cheap is good, but I wouldn't be surprised if we can acquire one or
>>>>>>> more laptops with more processing and storage than a Pi for equal or lower
>>>>>>> cost.
>>>>>>> So while it's a cool platform, I'm not seeing how it is a competitor
>>>>>>> to a laptop in this particular application.
>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 10:09 PM, David J. Gotrik <dgo...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>> Instead of a laptop; couldn't we just have everything running off a
>>>>>>>> raspberry pi?
>>>>>>>> Would have to look into LCD situation, but I don't think it'd be
>>>>>>>> too difficult. I was thinking we could also maybe interface it with the
>>>>>>>> chipKit board and IO shield for movement/sensor control since we have quite
>>>>>>>> a few of those laying around ;)
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:28 PM, Travis Smith <trav...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Kevin Fusselman <
>>>>>>>>>>> ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Star wars was usually the opposite of practical... Seriously,
>>>>>>>>>>>> where do you park a super star destroyer?
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 7:20 PM, "Travis Smith" <trav...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> True, the best you got with that was the door guard at Jabba's
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Palace. That guy was an ass.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:16 PM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Star wars never thought it of it as being very practical.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 7:01:11 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How about a telescoping, articulating tentacle that mounts
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to a wall or the ceiling? Aliens love that tech (Abyss, War of the Worlds)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Travis Smith <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trav...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we're on the right track, but I'd like to second
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the idea that this thing be attainable/upgradable from a base model. I'd
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> prefer shitty but robust to awesome and always almost ready.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 12:51, Kevin Fusselman <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, sorta like one of those gigapixel cameras in reverse...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:50 PM, David Knaack <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> david...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I was thinking that the high def wide angle feed would go
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> through a stream filter to crop out the desired section of the image (and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maybe transform it to remove the wide angle distortion), providing a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> software based pan/tilt feature while keeping hardware and bandwidth down.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 12:40 PM, "Kevin Fusselman" <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nah, 1080p is fine; we'll compensate for the bandwidth
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in framerate... how does 0.2fps sound? :)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:15 PM, patrick <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kevin is worried about bandwidth for high def.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 9:17:24 AM UTC-6, David
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Knaack wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If the camera itself is high def we might be able to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> get away with using a wide angle view to avoid building a control system
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for the camera.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 8:57 AM, "patrick" <patrick...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I feel it needs the same capability that the MMM has
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to tilt up and down. the panning of course would be done by the robot.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, November 5, 2012 7:41:26 PM UTC-6, Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Smith wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OMGers,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hey, I'm moving to Japan, its happening.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Completely due to self interest, I'm suddenly smitten
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with the idea of making a telepresence robot. The basic plan would be to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make one on the cheap using skype, a cheap laptop, a roomba, and some
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mechanism for changing the height of the laptop. Usage would probably need
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to be limited to our members in absentsia, as I would want to enjoy
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consistent problem free use of the device, and random people on the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> internet lack stewardship. For this right I'm willing to front the cash.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The point? While I won't be around, I wanna be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> around. OMG and hanging out with you guys is pretty much my favorite part
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about Omaha.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Patrick votes yes as well (just a guess). Anyone
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> want to get in on
> Solution! I believe Skype does teleconferencing. Everyone could get on the party line that is the robot, and one person could pilot. The bot would be a bit schizophrenic, but hey, whatever, it fits.
> Travis
> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:38 AM, Brandon Norris <blnor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think it may go something like this
> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:35 AM, patrick <patrickpecor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yeah making a fleet of them is both impractical and there isn't any space available for that. Jason I could see wanting to use it isn't he still in Boston?
> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 8:32:28 AM UTC-6, Travis Smith wrote:
> Erm...I can see where this might be going. Robot doesn't exist yet. Patrick and I really want it because there is no way possible we'll be able to attend the meetings, and there are no makerspaces where he lives or where I'm going. That's our motivation: extreme lack. He lives in Mississippi, for example.
> I can see how lots of other people would have valid reasons for having one of these things, though.
> Travis
> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:25 AM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sorry I think I came off kinda rude there. Mike im not sure if I remember you but I think we will be limiting the use of this system to regular attending/paying members. Paying members with out attending may be allowed that depends on those building it and usage stats.
> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 8:22:49 AM UTC-6, patrick wrote:
> Perhaps the use of this should be limited to paying members.
> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 7:34:16 AM UTC-6, tavshed wrote:
> I'm not able to make it to the Makery nearly as much as I'd like and am very interested in this taking off.
> I have a 17" vesa monitor (circa 2003 so it isn't HD), raspberry pi with wifi adapter, 720p usb camera, and working roomba available for the project. Let me know if any of the components can be put to use.
> - Mike
> On Nov 6, 2012, at 11:29 PM, David Knaack <david...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I thought about a Pi. I see it as having certain features: low power, small, cheap.
>> In this case, we will have lots of battery relative to the usage time, so low power isn't a driving factor.
>> Small also isn't a driver, considering that we're looking at something on the order of a 17" screen up top and something that can carry a load of SLA's and motors on the bottom. (Size might be more of a factor if we wanted to source a much smaller display, something around 7" or so, but I have a feeling that doing that potentially creates some constraints without providing very much benefit.)
>> Cheap is good, but I wouldn't be surprised if we can acquire one or more laptops with more processing and storage than a Pi for equal or lower cost.
>> So while it's a cool platform, I'm not seeing how it is a competitor to a laptop in this particular application.
>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 10:09 PM, David J. Gotrik <dgo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Instead of a laptop; couldn't we just have everything running off a raspberry pi?
>> Would have to look into LCD situation, but I don't think it'd be too difficult. I was thinking we could also maybe interface it with the chipKit board and IO shield for movement/sensor control since we have quite a few of those laying around ;)
>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Kevin Fusselman <ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>> Star wars was usually the opposite of practical... Seriously, where do you park a super star destroyer?
>> On Nov 6, 2012 7:20 PM, "Travis Smith" <trav...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> True, the best you got with that was the door guard at Jabba's Palace. That guy was an ass.
>> Travis
>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:16 PM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Star wars never thought it of it as being very practical.
>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 7:01:11 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith wrote:
>> How about a telescoping, articulating tentacle that mounts to a wall or the ceiling? Aliens love that tech (Abyss, War of the Worlds)
>> Travis
>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Travis Smith <trav...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I think we're on the right track, but I'd like to second the idea that this thing be attainable/upgradable from a base model. I'd prefer shitty but robust to awesome and always almost ready.
>> -Travis
>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 12:51, Kevin Fusselman <ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>> So, sorta like one of those gigapixel cameras in reverse...
>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:50 PM, David Knaack <david...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I was thinking that the high def wide angle feed would go through a stream filter to crop out the desired section of the image (and maybe transform it to remove the wide angle distortion), providing a software based pan/tilt feature while keeping hardware and bandwidth down.
>>> On Nov 6, 2012 12:40 PM, "Kevin Fusselman" <ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>> Nah, 1080p is fine; we'll compensate for the bandwidth in framerate... how does 0.2fps sound? :)
>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:15 PM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Kevin is worried about bandwidth for high def.
>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 9:17:24 AM UTC-6, David Knaack wrote:
>>> If the camera itself is high def we might be able to get away with using a wide angle view to avoid building a control system for the camera.
>>> On Nov 6, 2012 8:57 AM, "patrick" <patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I feel it needs the same capability that the MMM has to tilt up and down. the panning of course would be done by the robot.
>>> On Monday, November 5, 2012 7:41:26 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith wrote:
>>> OMGers,
>>> Hey, I'm moving to Japan, its happening.
>>> Completely due to self interest, I'm suddenly smitten with the idea of making a telepresence robot. The basic plan would be to make one on the cheap using skype, a cheap laptop, a roomba, and some mechanism for changing the height of the laptop. Usage would probably need to be limited to our members in absentsia, as I would want to enjoy consistent problem free use of the device, and random people on the internet lack stewardship. For this right I'm willing to front the cash.
>>> The point? While I won't be around, I wanna be around. OMG and hanging out with you guys is pretty much my favorite part about Omaha.
>>> Patrick votes yes as well (just a guess). Anyone want to get in on this project? Deadline is February for a working model. We can go easy and work with models already out there, or get creative and make our own monstrosity.
> Solution! I believe Skype does teleconferencing. Everyone could get on the party line that is the robot, and one person could pilot. The bot would be a bit schizophrenic, but hey, whatever, it fits.
> Travis
> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:38 AM, Brandon Norris <blnor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I think it may go something like this
>> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:35 AM, patrick <patrickpecor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Yeah making a fleet of them is both impractical and there isn't any space available for that. Jason I could see wanting to use it isn't he still in Boston?
>>> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 8:32:28 AM UTC-6, Travis Smith wrote:
>>>> Erm...I can see where this might be going. Robot doesn't exist yet. Patrick and I really want it because there is no way possible we'll be able to attend the meetings, and there are no makerspaces where he lives or where I'm going. That's our motivation: extreme lack. He lives in Mississippi, for example.
>>>> I can see how lots of other people would have valid reasons for having one of these things, though.
>>>> Travis
>>>> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:25 AM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Sorry I think I came off kinda rude there. Mike im not sure if I remember you but I think we will be limiting the use of this system to regular attending/paying members. Paying members with out attending may be allowed that depends on those building it and usage stats.
>>>>> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 8:22:49 AM UTC-6, patrick wrote:
>>>>>> Perhaps the use of this should be limited to paying members.
>>>>>> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 7:34:16 AM UTC-6, tavshed wrote:
>>>>>>> I'm not able to make it to the Makery nearly as much as I'd like and am very interested in this taking off.
>>>>>>> I have a 17" vesa monitor (circa 2003 so it isn't HD), raspberry pi with wifi adapter, 720p usb camera, and working roomba available for the project. Let me know if any of the components can be put to use.
>>>>>>> - Mike
>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 11:29 PM, David Knaack <david...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> I thought about a Pi. I see it as having certain features: low power, small, cheap.
>>>>>>>> In this case, we will have lots of battery relative to the usage time, so low power isn't a driving factor.
>>>>>>>> Small also isn't a driver, considering that we're looking at something on the order of a 17" screen up top and something that can carry a load of SLA's and motors on the bottom. (Size might be more of a factor if we wanted to source a much smaller display, something around 7" or so, but I have a feeling that doing that potentially creates some constraints without providing very much benefit.)
>>>>>>>> Cheap is good, but I wouldn't be surprised if we can acquire one or more laptops with more processing and storage than a Pi for equal or lower cost.
>>>>>>>> So while it's a cool platform, I'm not seeing how it is a competitor to a laptop in this particular application.
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 10:09 PM, David J. Gotrik <dgo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Instead of a laptop; couldn't we just have everything running off a raspberry pi?
>>>>>>>>> Would have to look into LCD situation, but I don't think it'd be too difficult. I was thinking we could also maybe interface it with the chipKit board and IO shield for movement/sensor control since we have quite a few of those laying around ;)
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:28 PM, Travis Smith <trav...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> http://youtu.be/ycDXejvsYJk
>>>>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:25 PM, Travis Smith <trav...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Lulz
>>>>>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:23 PM, Brandon Norris <blno...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Anywhere you want!
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Kevin Fusselman <ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Star wars was usually the opposite of practical... Seriously, where do you park a super star destroyer?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 7:20 PM, "Travis Smith" <trav...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> True, the best you got with that was the door guard at Jabba's Palace. That guy was an ass.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:16 PM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Star wars never thought it of it as being very practical.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 7:01:11 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How about a telescoping, articulating tentacle that mounts to a wall or the ceiling? Aliens love that tech (Abyss, War of the Worlds)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Travis Smith <trav...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we're on the right track, but I'd like to second the idea that this thing be attainable/upgradable from a base model. I'd prefer shitty but robust to awesome and always almost ready.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 12:51, Kevin Fusselman <ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, sorta like one of those gigapixel cameras in reverse...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:50 PM, David Knaack <david...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I was thinking that the high def wide angle feed would go through a stream filter to crop out the desired section of the image (and maybe transform it to remove the wide angle distortion), providing a software based pan/tilt feature while keeping hardware and bandwidth down.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 12:40 PM, "Kevin Fusselman" <ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nah, 1080p is fine; we'll compensate for the bandwidth in framerate... how does 0.2fps sound? :)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:15 PM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kevin is worried about bandwidth for high def.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 9:17:24 AM UTC-6, David Knaack wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If the camera itself is high def we might be able to get away with using a wide angle view to avoid building a control system for the camera.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 8:57 AM, "patrick" <patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I feel it needs the same capability that the MMM has to tilt up and down. the panning of course would be done by the robot.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, November 5, 2012 7:41:26 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OMGers,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hey, I'm moving to Japan, its happening.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Completely due to self interest, I'm suddenly smitten with the idea of making a telepresence robot. The basic plan would be to make one on the cheap using skype, a cheap laptop, a roomba, and some mechanism for changing the height of the laptop. Usage would probably need to be limited to our members in absentsia, as I would want to enjoy consistent problem free use of the device, and random people on the internet lack stewardship. For this right I'm willing to front the cash.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The point? While I won't be around, I wanna be around. OMG and hanging out with you guys is pretty much my favorite part about Omaha.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Patrick votes yes as well (just a guess). Anyone want to get in on this project? Deadline is February for a working model. We can go easy and work with models already out there, or get creative and make our own monstrosity.
Yea, we could get better about streaming/recording those... Background
noise is a huge [but not insurmountable] challenge, both mechanical and
personal.
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 9:12 AM, tavshed <tavs...@tavshed.com> wrote:
> My interest is being able to watch presentations.
> - Mike
> On Nov 7, 2012, at 8:49 AM, Travis Smith <travi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Solution! I believe Skype does teleconferencing. Everyone could get on
> the party line that is the robot, and one person could pilot. The bot
> would be a bit schizophrenic, but hey, whatever, it fits.
> Travis
> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:38 AM, Brandon Norris <blnor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:35 AM, patrick <patrickpecor...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>> Yeah making a fleet of them is both impractical and there isn't any
>>> space available for that. Jason I could see wanting to use it isn't he
>>> still in Boston?
>>> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 8:32:28 AM UTC-6, Travis Smith wrote:
>>>> Erm...I can see where this might be going. Robot doesn't exist yet.
>>>> Patrick and I really want it because there is no way possible we'll be able
>>>> to attend the meetings, and there are no makerspaces where he lives or
>>>> where I'm going. That's our motivation: extreme lack. He lives in
>>>> Mississippi, for example.
>>>> I can see how lots of other people would have valid reasons for having
>>>> one of these things, though.
>>>> Travis
>>>> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:25 AM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Sorry I think I came off kinda rude there. Mike im not sure if I
>>>>> remember you but I think we will be limiting the use of this system to
>>>>> regular attending/paying members. Paying members with out attending may be
>>>>> allowed that depends on those building it and usage stats.
>>>>> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 8:22:49 AM UTC-6, patrick wrote:
>>>>>> Perhaps the use of this should be limited to paying members.
>>>>>> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 7:34:16 AM UTC-6, tavshed wrote:
>>>>>>> I'm not able to make it to the Makery nearly as much as I'd like and
>>>>>>> am very interested in this taking off.
>>>>>>> I have a 17" vesa monitor (circa 2003 so it isn't HD), raspberry pi
>>>>>>> with wifi adapter, 720p usb camera, and working roomba available for the
>>>>>>> project. Let me know if any of the components can be put to use.
>>>>>>> - Mike
>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 11:29 PM, David Knaack <david...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> I thought about a Pi. I see it as having certain features: low
>>>>>>> power, small, cheap.
>>>>>>> In this case, we will have lots of battery relative to the usage
>>>>>>> time, so low power isn't a driving factor.
>>>>>>> Small also isn't a driver, considering that we're looking at
>>>>>>> something on the order of a 17" screen up top and something that can carry
>>>>>>> a load of SLA's and motors on the bottom. (Size might be more of a factor
>>>>>>> if we wanted to source a much smaller display, something around 7" or so,
>>>>>>> but I have a feeling that doing that potentially creates some constraints
>>>>>>> without providing very much benefit.)
>>>>>>> Cheap is good, but I wouldn't be surprised if we can acquire one or
>>>>>>> more laptops with more processing and storage than a Pi for equal or lower
>>>>>>> cost.
>>>>>>> So while it's a cool platform, I'm not seeing how it is a competitor
>>>>>>> to a laptop in this particular application.
>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 10:09 PM, David J. Gotrik <dgo...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>> Instead of a laptop; couldn't we just have everything running off a
>>>>>>>> raspberry pi?
>>>>>>>> Would have to look into LCD situation, but I don't think it'd be
>>>>>>>> too difficult. I was thinking we could also maybe interface it with the
>>>>>>>> chipKit board and IO shield for movement/sensor control since we have quite
>>>>>>>> a few of those laying around ;)
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:28 PM, Travis Smith <trav...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Kevin Fusselman <
>>>>>>>>>>> ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Star wars was usually the opposite of practical... Seriously,
>>>>>>>>>>>> where do you park a super star destroyer?
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 7:20 PM, "Travis Smith" <trav...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> True, the best you got with that was the door guard at Jabba's
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Palace. That guy was an ass.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:16 PM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Star wars never thought it of it as being very practical.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 7:01:11 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How about a telescoping, articulating tentacle that mounts
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to a wall or the ceiling? Aliens love that tech (Abyss, War of the Worlds)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Travis Smith <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trav...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we're on the right track, but I'd like to second
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the idea that this thing be attainable/upgradable from a base model. I'd
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> prefer shitty but robust to awesome and always almost ready.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 12:51, Kevin Fusselman <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, sorta like one of those gigapixel cameras in reverse...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:50 PM, David Knaack <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> david...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I was thinking that the high def wide angle feed would go
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> through a stream filter to crop out the desired section of the image (and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maybe transform it to remove the wide angle distortion), providing a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> software based pan/tilt feature while keeping hardware and bandwidth down.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 12:40 PM, "Kevin Fusselman" <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nah, 1080p is fine; we'll compensate for the bandwidth
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in framerate... how does 0.2fps sound? :)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:15 PM, patrick <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kevin is worried about bandwidth for high def.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 9:17:24 AM UTC-6, David
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Knaack wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If the camera itself is high def we might be able to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> get away with using a wide angle view to avoid building a control system
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for the camera.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 8:57 AM, "patrick" <patrick...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I feel it needs the same capability that the MMM has
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to tilt up and down. the panning of course would be done by the robot.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, November 5, 2012 7:41:26 PM UTC-6, Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Smith wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OMGers,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hey, I'm moving to Japan, its happening.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Completely due to self interest, I'm suddenly smitten
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with the idea of making a telepresence robot. The basic plan would be to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make one on the cheap using skype, a cheap laptop, a roomba, and some
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mechanism for changing the height of the laptop. Usage would probably need
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to be limited to our members in absentsia, as I would want to enjoy
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consistent problem free use of the device, and random people on the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> internet lack stewardship. For this right I'm willing to front the cash.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The point? While I won't be around, I wanna be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> around. OMG and hanging out with you guys is pretty much my favorite
> The Skype teleconference option may only be available to subscription members (I.e. paid). Google+ hangout might be another option.
> Sent from my iPad
> On Nov 7, 2012, at 8:49 AM, Travis Smith <travi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Solution! I believe Skype does teleconferencing. Everyone could get on the party line that is the robot, and one person could pilot. The bot would be a bit schizophrenic, but hey, whatever, it fits.
>> Travis
>> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:38 AM, Brandon Norris <blnor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I think it may go something like this
>>> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:35 AM, patrick <patrickpecor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Yeah making a fleet of them is both impractical and there isn't any space available for that. Jason I could see wanting to use it isn't he still in Boston?
>>>> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 8:32:28 AM UTC-6, Travis Smith wrote:
>>>>> Erm...I can see where this might be going. Robot doesn't exist yet. Patrick and I really want it because there is no way possible we'll be able to attend the meetings, and there are no makerspaces where he lives or where I'm going. That's our motivation: extreme lack. He lives in Mississippi, for example.
>>>>> I can see how lots of other people would have valid reasons for having one of these things, though.
>>>>> Travis
>>>>> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:25 AM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Sorry I think I came off kinda rude there. Mike im not sure if I remember you but I think we will be limiting the use of this system to regular attending/paying members. Paying members with out attending may be allowed that depends on those building it and usage stats.
>>>>>> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 8:22:49 AM UTC-6, patrick wrote:
>>>>>>> Perhaps the use of this should be limited to paying members.
>>>>>>> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 7:34:16 AM UTC-6, tavshed wrote:
>>>>>>>> I'm not able to make it to the Makery nearly as much as I'd like and am very interested in this taking off.
>>>>>>>> I have a 17" vesa monitor (circa 2003 so it isn't HD), raspberry pi with wifi adapter, 720p usb camera, and working roomba available for the project. Let me know if any of the components can be put to use.
>>>>>>>> - Mike
>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 11:29 PM, David Knaack <david...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I thought about a Pi. I see it as having certain features: low power, small, cheap.
>>>>>>>>> In this case, we will have lots of battery relative to the usage time, so low power isn't a driving factor.
>>>>>>>>> Small also isn't a driver, considering that we're looking at something on the order of a 17" screen up top and something that can carry a load of SLA's and motors on the bottom. (Size might be more of a factor if we wanted to source a much smaller display, something around 7" or so, but I have a feeling that doing that potentially creates some constraints without providing very much benefit.)
>>>>>>>>> Cheap is good, but I wouldn't be surprised if we can acquire one or more laptops with more processing and storage than a Pi for equal or lower cost.
>>>>>>>>> So while it's a cool platform, I'm not seeing how it is a competitor to a laptop in this particular application.
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 10:09 PM, David J. Gotrik <dgo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Instead of a laptop; couldn't we just have everything running off a raspberry pi?
>>>>>>>>>> Would have to look into LCD situation, but I don't think it'd be too difficult. I was thinking we could also maybe interface it with the chipKit board and IO shield for movement/sensor control since we have quite a few of those laying around ;)
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:28 PM, Travis Smith <trav...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> http://youtu.be/ycDXejvsYJk
>>>>>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:25 PM, Travis Smith <trav...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Lulz
>>>>>>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:23 PM, Brandon Norris <blno...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anywhere you want!
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Kevin Fusselman <ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Star wars was usually the opposite of practical... Seriously, where do you park a super star destroyer?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 7:20 PM, "Travis Smith" <trav...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> True, the best you got with that was the door guard at Jabba's Palace. That guy was an ass.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:16 PM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Star wars never thought it of it as being very practical.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 7:01:11 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How about a telescoping, articulating tentacle that mounts to a wall or the ceiling? Aliens love that tech (Abyss, War of the Worlds)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Travis Smith <trav...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we're on the right track, but I'd like to second the idea that this thing be attainable/upgradable from a base model. I'd prefer shitty but robust to awesome and always almost ready.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 12:51, Kevin Fusselman <ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, sorta like one of those gigapixel cameras in reverse...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:50 PM, David Knaack <david...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I was thinking that the high def wide angle feed would go through a stream filter to crop out the desired section of the image (and maybe transform it to remove the wide angle distortion), providing a software based pan/tilt feature while keeping hardware and bandwidth down.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 12:40 PM, "Kevin Fusselman" <ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nah, 1080p is fine; we'll compensate for the bandwidth in framerate... how does 0.2fps sound? :)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:15 PM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kevin is worried about bandwidth for high def.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 9:17:24 AM UTC-6, David Knaack wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If the camera itself is high def we might be able to get away with using a wide angle view to avoid building a control system for the camera.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 8:57 AM, "patrick" <patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I feel it needs the same capability that the MMM has to tilt up and down. the panning of course would be done by the robot.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, November 5, 2012 7:41:26 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OMGers,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hey, I'm moving to Japan, its happening.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Completely due to self interest, I'm suddenly smitten with the idea of making a telepresence robot. The basic plan would be to make one on the cheap using skype, a cheap laptop, a roomba, and some mechanism for changing the height of the laptop. Usage would probably need to be limited to our members in absentsia, as I would want to enjoy consistent problem free use of the device, and random people on the internet lack stewardship. For this right I'm willing to front the cash.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The point? While I won't be around, I wanna be around. OMG and hanging out with you guys is pretty much my favorite part about Omaha.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Patrick votes yes as well (just a guess). Anyone want to get in on this project? Deadline is February for a working model. We can go easy and work with models already out there, or get creative and make our own monstrosity.
> I'll donate a 1-year Skype premium account for teleconferencing if that would be useful. I don't want to sidetrack Travis' original idea though.
> - Mike
> On Nov 7, 2012, at 9:00 AM, "Eric J. Kaplan" <ekapla...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The Skype teleconference option may only be available to subscription members (I.e. paid). Google+ hangout might be another option.
>> Sent from my iPad
>> On Nov 7, 2012, at 8:49 AM, Travis Smith <travi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Solution! I believe Skype does teleconferencing. Everyone could get on the party line that is the robot, and one person could pilot. The bot would be a bit schizophrenic, but hey, whatever, it fits.
>>> Travis
>>> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:38 AM, Brandon Norris <blnor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> I think it may go something like this
>>>> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:35 AM, patrick <patrickpecor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Yeah making a fleet of them is both impractical and there isn't any space available for that. Jason I could see wanting to use it isn't he still in Boston?
>>>>> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 8:32:28 AM UTC-6, Travis Smith wrote:
>>>>>> Erm...I can see where this might be going. Robot doesn't exist yet. Patrick and I really want it because there is no way possible we'll be able to attend the meetings, and there are no makerspaces where he lives or where I'm going. That's our motivation: extreme lack. He lives in Mississippi, for example.
>>>>>> I can see how lots of other people would have valid reasons for having one of these things, though.
>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:25 AM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Sorry I think I came off kinda rude there. Mike im not sure if I remember you but I think we will be limiting the use of this system to regular attending/paying members. Paying members with out attending may be allowed that depends on those building it and usage stats.
>>>>>>> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 8:22:49 AM UTC-6, patrick wrote:
>>>>>>>> Perhaps the use of this should be limited to paying members.
>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 7:34:16 AM UTC-6, tavshed wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I'm not able to make it to the Makery nearly as much as I'd like and am very interested in this taking off.
>>>>>>>>> I have a 17" vesa monitor (circa 2003 so it isn't HD), raspberry pi with wifi adapter, 720p usb camera, and working roomba available for the project. Let me know if any of the components can be put to use.
>>>>>>>>> - Mike
>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 11:29 PM, David Knaack <david...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> I thought about a Pi. I see it as having certain features: low power, small, cheap.
>>>>>>>>>> In this case, we will have lots of battery relative to the usage time, so low power isn't a driving factor.
>>>>>>>>>> Small also isn't a driver, considering that we're looking at something on the order of a 17" screen up top and something that can carry a load of SLA's and motors on the bottom. (Size might be more of a factor if we wanted to source a much smaller display, something around 7" or so, but I have a feeling that doing that potentially creates some constraints without providing very much benefit.)
>>>>>>>>>> Cheap is good, but I wouldn't be surprised if we can acquire one or more laptops with more processing and storage than a Pi for equal or lower cost.
>>>>>>>>>> So while it's a cool platform, I'm not seeing how it is a competitor to a laptop in this particular application.
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 10:09 PM, David J. Gotrik <dgo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Instead of a laptop; couldn't we just have everything running off a raspberry pi?
>>>>>>>>>>> Would have to look into LCD situation, but I don't think it'd be too difficult. I was thinking we could also maybe interface it with the chipKit board and IO shield for movement/sensor control since we have quite a few of those laying around ;)
>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:28 PM, Travis Smith <trav...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> http://youtu.be/ycDXejvsYJk
>>>>>>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:25 PM, Travis Smith <trav...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lulz
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:23 PM, Brandon Norris <blno...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anywhere you want!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Kevin Fusselman <ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Star wars was usually the opposite of practical... Seriously, where do you park a super star destroyer?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 7:20 PM, "Travis Smith" <trav...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> True, the best you got with that was the door guard at Jabba's Palace. That guy was an ass.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:16 PM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Star wars never thought it of it as being very practical.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 7:01:11 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How about a telescoping, articulating tentacle that mounts to a wall or the ceiling? Aliens love that tech (Abyss, War of the Worlds)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Travis Smith <trav...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we're on the right track, but I'd like to second the idea that this thing be attainable/upgradable from a base model. I'd prefer shitty but robust to awesome and always almost ready.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 12:51, Kevin Fusselman <ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, sorta like one of those gigapixel cameras in reverse...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:50 PM, David Knaack <david...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I was thinking that the high def wide angle feed would go through a stream filter to crop out the desired section of the image (and maybe transform it to remove the wide angle distortion), providing a software based pan/tilt feature while keeping hardware and bandwidth down.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 12:40 PM, "Kevin Fusselman" <ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nah, 1080p is fine; we'll compensate for the bandwidth in framerate... how does 0.2fps sound? :)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:15 PM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kevin is worried about bandwidth for high def.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 9:17:24 AM UTC-6, David Knaack wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If the camera itself is high def we might be able to get away with using a wide angle view to avoid building a control system for the camera.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 8:57 AM, "patrick" <patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I feel it needs the same capability that the MMM has to tilt up and down. the panning of course would be done by the robot.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, November 5, 2012 7:41:26 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OMGers,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hey, I'm moving to Japan, its happening.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Completely due to self interest, I'm suddenly smitten with the idea of making a telepresence robot. The basic plan would be to make one on the cheap using skype, a cheap laptop, a roomba, and some mechanism for changing the height of the laptop. Usage would probably need to be limited to our members in absentsia, as I would want to enjoy consistent problem free use of the device, and random people on the internet lack stewardship. For this right I'm willing to front the cash.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The point? While I won't be around, I wanna be around. OMG and hanging out with you guys is pretty much my favorite part about Omaha.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Patrick votes yes as well (just a guess). Anyone want to get in on this project? Deadline is February for a working model. We can go easy and work with models already out there, or get creative and make our own monstrosity.
Not to be Debbie-Downer here, but I think we need to give serious
consideration to the available space and the implications of a robot moving
around in it. Things can get pretty tight there, especially on Tuesdays
when we have lots of people (that's a good thing!) working on lots of
projects (that's an even-better thing!). There is often ducking or
swerving to get from one point to another, avoiding an elbow or a piece of
pipe or a crowd of observers.
Certainly a Shelbot<http://bigbangtheory.wikia.com/wiki/Mobile_Virtual_Presence_Device>would
be a cool thing to build and develop, and certainly would be slick to
show off at events and in our display booth. But is it going to be
unrealistic to functionally move around the space, such that it gets left
in the corner? And what happens on meeting night when Travis, Patrick, AND
Mike all want to participate?
And while I realize it's a boon for the folks to see and control remotely,
someone will need to take responsibility for keeping it charged,
operational, and maintaining it should the network or power go down. We
seem to have a plate-load of challenges already maintaining our internet
and MMM equipment as it is.
Would a better solution be to flood the space with webcams and microphones,
accessible from a web page? Maybe a page with a map of the space and
locations of each camera, clicking on the location on the map brings up the
image and activates the mic? Or maybe a monitor/webcam/mic combo (running
off a RasPi), each one strategically placed? You could even have some sort
of protocol that indicates an "in-use" location and gives the user the
option to select another location. So Travis could be on one monitor,
Patrick on another, and Mike on a third.
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Travis Smith <travi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Excellent! I think it could be. We'll have to see
> What the consensus is.
> Had another idea that may draw some into this thing:
> Borrowing Dave's wide angle lens idea, how about we make this sucker look
> like a Dalek?
> -Travis
> On Nov 7, 2012, at 9:16, tavshed <tavs...@tavshed.com> wrote:
> I'll donate a 1-year Skype premium account for teleconferencing if that
> would be useful. I don't want to sidetrack Travis' original idea though.
> - Mike
> On Nov 7, 2012, at 9:00 AM, "Eric J. Kaplan" <ekapla...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The Skype teleconference option may only be available to subscription
> members (I.e. paid). Google+ hangout might be another option.
> Sent from my iPad
> On Nov 7, 2012, at 8:49 AM, Travis Smith <travi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Solution! I believe Skype does teleconferencing. Everyone could get on
> the party line that is the robot, and one person could pilot. The bot
> would be a bit schizophrenic, but hey, whatever, it fits.
> Travis
> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:38 AM, Brandon Norris <blnor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:35 AM, patrick <patrickpecor...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>> Yeah making a fleet of them is both impractical and there isn't any
>>> space available for that. Jason I could see wanting to use it isn't he
>>> still in Boston?
>>> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 8:32:28 AM UTC-6, Travis Smith wrote:
>>>> Erm...I can see where this might be going. Robot doesn't exist yet.
>>>> Patrick and I really want it because there is no way possible we'll be able
>>>> to attend the meetings, and there are no makerspaces where he lives or
>>>> where I'm going. That's our motivation: extreme lack. He lives in
>>>> Mississippi, for example.
>>>> I can see how lots of other people would have valid reasons for having
>>>> one of these things, though.
>>>> Travis
>>>> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:25 AM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Sorry I think I came off kinda rude there. Mike im not sure if I
>>>>> remember you but I think we will be limiting the use of this system to
>>>>> regular attending/paying members. Paying members with out attending may be
>>>>> allowed that depends on those building it and usage stats.
>>>>> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 8:22:49 AM UTC-6, patrick wrote:
>>>>>> Perhaps the use of this should be limited to paying members.
>>>>>> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 7:34:16 AM UTC-6, tavshed wrote:
>>>>>>> I'm not able to make it to the Makery nearly as much as I'd like and
>>>>>>> am very interested in this taking off.
>>>>>>> I have a 17" vesa monitor (circa 2003 so it isn't HD), raspberry pi
>>>>>>> with wifi adapter, 720p usb camera, and working roomba available for the
>>>>>>> project. Let me know if any of the components can be put to use.
>>>>>>> - Mike
>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 11:29 PM, David Knaack <david...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> I thought about a Pi. I see it as having certain features: low
>>>>>>> power, small, cheap.
>>>>>>> In this case, we will have lots of battery relative to the usage
>>>>>>> time, so low power isn't a driving factor.
>>>>>>> Small also isn't a driver, considering that we're looking at
>>>>>>> something on the order of a 17" screen up top and something that can carry
>>>>>>> a load of SLA's and motors on the bottom. (Size might be more of a factor
>>>>>>> if we wanted to source a much smaller display, something around 7" or so,
>>>>>>> but I have a feeling that doing that potentially creates some constraints
>>>>>>> without providing very much benefit.)
>>>>>>> Cheap is good, but I wouldn't be surprised if we can acquire one or
>>>>>>> more laptops with more processing and storage than a Pi for equal or lower
>>>>>>> cost.
>>>>>>> So while it's a cool platform, I'm not seeing how it is a competitor
>>>>>>> to a laptop in this particular application.
>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 10:09 PM, David J. Gotrik <dgo...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>> Instead of a laptop; couldn't we just have everything running off a
>>>>>>>> raspberry pi?
>>>>>>>> Would have to look into LCD situation, but I don't think it'd be
>>>>>>>> too difficult. I was thinking we could also maybe interface it with the
>>>>>>>> chipKit board and IO shield for movement/sensor control since we have quite
>>>>>>>> a few of those laying around ;)
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:28 PM, Travis Smith <trav...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Kevin Fusselman <
>>>>>>>>>>> ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Star wars was usually the opposite of practical... Seriously,
>>>>>>>>>>>> where do you park a super star destroyer?
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 7:20 PM, "Travis Smith" <trav...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> True, the best you got with that was the door guard at Jabba's
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Palace. That guy was an ass.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:16 PM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Star wars never thought it of it as being very practical.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 7:01:11 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How about a telescoping, articulating tentacle that mounts
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to a wall or the ceiling? Aliens love that tech (Abyss, War of the Worlds)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Travis Smith <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trav...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we're on the right track, but I'd like to second
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the idea that this thing be attainable/upgradable from a base model. I'd
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> prefer shitty but robust to awesome and always almost ready.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 12:51, Kevin Fusselman <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, sorta like one of those gigapixel cameras in reverse...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 12:50 PM, David Knaack <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> david...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I was thinking that the high def wide angle feed would go
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> through a stream filter to crop out the desired section of the image (and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> maybe transform it to remove the wide angle distortion), providing a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> software based pan/tilt feature while keeping hardware and bandwidth down.
Wait, are you suggesting that a Protocol Droid is somehow inferior to a
smartphone? :) (hint: You don't need a Wookie to transport a
malfunctioning smartphone...)
While the "Lots of portholes" solution is less flashy, it might be more
practical... Just a thought.
On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 11:32 AM, Eric Kaplan <ekapla...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Not to be Debbie-Downer here, but I think we need to give serious
> consideration to the available space and the implications of a robot moving
> around in it. Things can get pretty tight there, especially on Tuesdays
> when we have lots of people (that's a good thing!) working on lots of
> projects (that's an even-better thing!). There is often ducking or
> swerving to get from one point to another, avoiding an elbow or a piece of
> pipe or a crowd of observers.
> Certainly a Shelbot<http://bigbangtheory.wikia.com/wiki/Mobile_Virtual_Presence_Device>would be a cool thing to build and develop, and certainly would be slick to
> show off at events and in our display booth. But is it going to be
> unrealistic to functionally move around the space, such that it gets left
> in the corner? And what happens on meeting night when Travis, Patrick, AND
> Mike all want to participate?
> And while I realize it's a boon for the folks to see and control remotely,
> someone will need to take responsibility for keeping it charged,
> operational, and maintaining it should the network or power go down. We
> seem to have a plate-load of challenges already maintaining our internet
> and MMM equipment as it is.
> Would a better solution be to flood the space with webcams and
> microphones, accessible from a web page? Maybe a page with a map of the
> space and locations of each camera, clicking on the location on the map
> brings up the image and activates the mic? Or maybe a monitor/webcam/mic
> combo (running off a RasPi), each one strategically placed? You could even
> have some sort of protocol that indicates an "in-use" location and gives
> the user the option to select another location. So Travis could be on one
> monitor, Patrick on another, and Mike on a third.
> Just offering another perspective.....
> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Travis Smith <travi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Excellent! I think it could be. We'll have to see
>> What the consensus is.
>> Had another idea that may draw some into this thing:
>> Borrowing Dave's wide angle lens idea, how about we make this sucker look
>> like a Dalek?
>> -Travis
>> On Nov 7, 2012, at 9:16, tavshed <tavs...@tavshed.com> wrote:
>> I'll donate a 1-year Skype premium account for teleconferencing if that
>> would be useful. I don't want to sidetrack Travis' original idea though.
>> - Mike
>> On Nov 7, 2012, at 9:00 AM, "Eric J. Kaplan" <ekapla...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The Skype teleconference option may only be available to subscription
>> members (I.e. paid). Google+ hangout might be another option.
>> Sent from my iPad
>> On Nov 7, 2012, at 8:49 AM, Travis Smith <travi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Solution! I believe Skype does teleconferencing. Everyone could get on
>> the party line that is the robot, and one person could pilot. The bot
>> would be a bit schizophrenic, but hey, whatever, it fits.
>> Travis
>> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:38 AM, Brandon Norris <blnor...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:35 AM, patrick <patrickpecor...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>> Yeah making a fleet of them is both impractical and there isn't any
>>>> space available for that. Jason I could see wanting to use it isn't he
>>>> still in Boston?
>>>> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 8:32:28 AM UTC-6, Travis Smith wrote:
>>>>> Erm...I can see where this might be going. Robot doesn't exist yet.
>>>>> Patrick and I really want it because there is no way possible we'll be able
>>>>> to attend the meetings, and there are no makerspaces where he lives or
>>>>> where I'm going. That's our motivation: extreme lack. He lives in
>>>>> Mississippi, for example.
>>>>> I can see how lots of other people would have valid reasons for having
>>>>> one of these things, though.
>>>>> Travis
>>>>> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:25 AM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Sorry I think I came off kinda rude there. Mike im not sure if I
>>>>>> remember you but I think we will be limiting the use of this system to
>>>>>> regular attending/paying members. Paying members with out attending may be
>>>>>> allowed that depends on those building it and usage stats.
>>>>>> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 8:22:49 AM UTC-6, patrick wrote:
>>>>>>> Perhaps the use of this should be limited to paying members.
>>>>>>> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 7:34:16 AM UTC-6, tavshed wrote:
>>>>>>>> I'm not able to make it to the Makery nearly as much as I'd like
>>>>>>>> and am very interested in this taking off.
>>>>>>>> I have a 17" vesa monitor (circa 2003 so it isn't HD), raspberry pi
>>>>>>>> with wifi adapter, 720p usb camera, and working roomba available for the
>>>>>>>> project. Let me know if any of the components can be put to use.
>>>>>>>> - Mike
>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 11:29 PM, David Knaack <david...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> I thought about a Pi. I see it as having certain features: low
>>>>>>>> power, small, cheap.
>>>>>>>> In this case, we will have lots of battery relative to the usage
>>>>>>>> time, so low power isn't a driving factor.
>>>>>>>> Small also isn't a driver, considering that we're looking at
>>>>>>>> something on the order of a 17" screen up top and something that can carry
>>>>>>>> a load of SLA's and motors on the bottom. (Size might be more of a factor
>>>>>>>> if we wanted to source a much smaller display, something around 7" or so,
>>>>>>>> but I have a feeling that doing that potentially creates some constraints
>>>>>>>> without providing very much benefit.)
>>>>>>>> Cheap is good, but I wouldn't be surprised if we can acquire one or
>>>>>>>> more laptops with more processing and storage than a Pi for equal or lower
>>>>>>>> cost.
>>>>>>>> So while it's a cool platform, I'm not seeing how it is a
>>>>>>>> competitor to a laptop in this particular application.
>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 10:09 PM, David J. Gotrik <dgo...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Instead of a laptop; couldn't we just have everything running off
>>>>>>>>> a raspberry pi?
>>>>>>>>> Would have to look into LCD situation, but I don't think it'd be
>>>>>>>>> too difficult. I was thinking we could also maybe interface it with the
>>>>>>>>> chipKit board and IO shield for movement/sensor control since we have quite
>>>>>>>>> a few of those laying around ;)
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:28 PM, Travis Smith <trav...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Kevin Fusselman <
>>>>>>>>>>>> ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Star wars was usually the opposite of practical... Seriously,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> where do you park a super star destroyer?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 7:20 PM, "Travis Smith" <trav...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> True, the best you got with that was the door guard at
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jabba's Palace. That guy was an ass.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:16 PM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Star wars never thought it of it as being very practical.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 7:01:11 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How about a telescoping, articulating tentacle that mounts
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to a wall or the ceiling? Aliens love that tech (Abyss, War of the Worlds)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Travis Smith <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trav...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think we're on the right track, but I'd like to second
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the idea that this thing be attainable/upgradable from a base model. I'd
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> prefer shitty but robust to awesome and always almost ready.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 12:51, Kevin Fusselman <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
> Wait, are you suggesting that a Protocol Droid is somehow inferior to a
> smartphone? :) (hint: You don't need a Wookie to transport a
> malfunctioning smartphone...)
> While the "Lots of portholes" solution is less flashy, it might be more
> practical... Just a thought.
> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 11:32 AM, Eric Kaplan <ekapla...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Not to be Debbie-Downer here, but I think we need to give serious
>> consideration to the available space and the implications of a robot moving
>> around in it. Things can get pretty tight there, especially on Tuesdays
>> when we have lots of people (that's a good thing!) working on lots of
>> projects (that's an even-better thing!). There is often ducking or
>> swerving to get from one point to another, avoiding an elbow or a piece of
>> pipe or a crowd of observers.
>> Certainly a Shelbot<http://bigbangtheory.wikia.com/wiki/Mobile_Virtual_Presence_Device>would be a cool thing to build and develop, and certainly would be slick to
>> show off at events and in our display booth. But is it going to be
>> unrealistic to functionally move around the space, such that it gets left
>> in the corner? And what happens on meeting night when Travis, Patrick, AND
>> Mike all want to participate?
>> And while I realize it's a boon for the folks to see and control
>> remotely, someone will need to take responsibility for keeping it charged,
>> operational, and maintaining it should the network or power go down. We
>> seem to have a plate-load of challenges already maintaining our internet
>> and MMM equipment as it is.
>> Would a better solution be to flood the space with webcams and
>> microphones, accessible from a web page? Maybe a page with a map of the
>> space and locations of each camera, clicking on the location on the map
>> brings up the image and activates the mic? Or maybe a monitor/webcam/mic
>> combo (running off a RasPi), each one strategically placed? You could even
>> have some sort of protocol that indicates an "in-use" location and gives
>> the user the option to select another location. So Travis could be on one
>> monitor, Patrick on another, and Mike on a third.
>> Just offering another perspective.....
>> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Travis Smith <travi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Excellent! I think it could be. We'll have to see
>>> What the consensus is.
>>> Had another idea that may draw some into this thing:
>>> Borrowing Dave's wide angle lens idea, how about we make this sucker
>>> look like a Dalek?
>>> -Travis
>>> On Nov 7, 2012, at 9:16, tavshed <tavs...@tavshed.com> wrote:
>>> I'll donate a 1-year Skype premium account for teleconferencing if that
>>> would be useful. I don't want to sidetrack Travis' original idea though.
>>> - Mike
>>> On Nov 7, 2012, at 9:00 AM, "Eric J. Kaplan" <ekapla...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> The Skype teleconference option may only be available to subscription
>>> members (I.e. paid). Google+ hangout might be another option.
>>> Sent from my iPad
>>> On Nov 7, 2012, at 8:49 AM, Travis Smith <travi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Solution! I believe Skype does teleconferencing. Everyone could get on
>>> the party line that is the robot, and one person could pilot. The bot
>>> would be a bit schizophrenic, but hey, whatever, it fits.
>>> Travis
>>> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:38 AM, Brandon Norris <blnor...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:35 AM, patrick <patrickpecor...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>> Yeah making a fleet of them is both impractical and there isn't any
>>>>> space available for that. Jason I could see wanting to use it isn't he
>>>>> still in Boston?
>>>>> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 8:32:28 AM UTC-6, Travis Smith wrote:
>>>>>> Erm...I can see where this might be going. Robot doesn't exist yet.
>>>>>> Patrick and I really want it because there is no way possible we'll be able
>>>>>> to attend the meetings, and there are no makerspaces where he lives or
>>>>>> where I'm going. That's our motivation: extreme lack. He lives in
>>>>>> Mississippi, for example.
>>>>>> I can see how lots of other people would have valid reasons for
>>>>>> having one of these things, though.
>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 7, 2012 at 8:25 AM, patrick <patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Sorry I think I came off kinda rude there. Mike im not sure if I
>>>>>>> remember you but I think we will be limiting the use of this system to
>>>>>>> regular attending/paying members. Paying members with out attending may be
>>>>>>> allowed that depends on those building it and usage stats.
>>>>>>> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 8:22:49 AM UTC-6, patrick wrote:
>>>>>>>> Perhaps the use of this should be limited to paying members.
>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, November 7, 2012 7:34:16 AM UTC-6, tavshed wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I'm not able to make it to the Makery nearly as much as I'd like
>>>>>>>>> and am very interested in this taking off.
>>>>>>>>> I have a 17" vesa monitor (circa 2003 so it isn't HD), raspberry
>>>>>>>>> pi with wifi adapter, 720p usb camera, and working roomba available for the
>>>>>>>>> project. Let me know if any of the components can be put to use.
>>>>>>>>> - Mike
>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012, at 11:29 PM, David Knaack <david...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I thought about a Pi. I see it as having certain features: low
>>>>>>>>> power, small, cheap.
>>>>>>>>> In this case, we will have lots of battery relative to the usage
>>>>>>>>> time, so low power isn't a driving factor.
>>>>>>>>> Small also isn't a driver, considering that we're looking at
>>>>>>>>> something on the order of a 17" screen up top and something that can carry
>>>>>>>>> a load of SLA's and motors on the bottom. (Size might be more of a factor
>>>>>>>>> if we wanted to source a much smaller display, something around 7" or so,
>>>>>>>>> but I have a feeling that doing that potentially creates some constraints
>>>>>>>>> without providing very much benefit.)
>>>>>>>>> Cheap is good, but I wouldn't be surprised if we can acquire one
>>>>>>>>> or more laptops with more processing and storage than a Pi for equal or
>>>>>>>>> lower cost.
>>>>>>>>> So while it's a cool platform, I'm not seeing how it is a
>>>>>>>>> competitor to a laptop in this particular application.
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 10:09 PM, David J. Gotrik <dgo...@gmail.com
>>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Instead of a laptop; couldn't we just have everything running off
>>>>>>>>>> a raspberry pi?
>>>>>>>>>> Would have to look into LCD situation, but I don't think it'd be
>>>>>>>>>> too difficult. I was thinking we could also maybe interface it with the
>>>>>>>>>> chipKit board and IO shield for movement/sensor control since we have quite
>>>>>>>>>> a few of those laying around ;)
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:28 PM, Travis Smith <trav...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:22 PM, Kevin Fusselman <
>>>>>>>>>>>>> ke...@fusselman.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Star wars was usually the opposite of practical... Seriously,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> where do you park a super star destroyer?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Nov 6, 2012 7:20 PM, "Travis Smith" <trav...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> True, the best you got with that was the door guard at
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jabba's Palace. That guy was an ass.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:16 PM, patrick <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patrick...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Star wars never thought it of it as being very practical.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, November 6, 2012 7:01:11 PM UTC-6, Travis Smith
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> How about a telescoping, articulating tentacle that mounts
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to a wall or the ceiling? Aliens love that tech (Abyss, War of the Worlds)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Travis
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 3:04 PM, Travis Smith <
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trav...@gmail.com> wrote:
