 |
|
| Science Forum Index » Electronics - Design Forum » OT: Only in America... |
|
Page 3 of 4 Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next |
|
| Author |
Message |
| John Fields... |
 Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 1:43 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 09:34:43 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
[quote]On Nov 6, 4:13 pm, John Fields <jfie... at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 14:35:10 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
On Nov 5, 3:58 pm, John Fields <jfie... at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 04:56:33 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
On Nov 5, 5:15 am, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terr... at (no spam) earthlink.net
wrote:
John Fields wrote:
On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 15:59:20 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
My "unique" talents were recognised for what they were worth. I'd
prefer to be working at the moment, but there are enough good
electronic engineers around that society isn't going to founder for
want of my contribution.
---
Actually, I think society is probably less likely to founder because of
the lack of your "contribution". ;)
So much for Bill's lame claims on aus.electronics that he's educating
people on the sci.electronics groups.
Some people aren't easy to educate, and both you and John Fields would
seem to fall into that catagory.
---
If, by "education", you mean hitching my wagon to your star, then I'd
much prefer something other than a white dwarf.
Education is getting people to think for themselves in a useful way.
It isn't about hitching anybody's wagon to someone else's wagon train.
---
Only trouble with that definition is that for people to be able to think
in a useful way requires them to follow your lead and believe the way
you do.
Not necessarily. There are a variety of ways of thinking for yourself
in a useful way. You don't seem to have mastered any of them.
[/quote]
---
Perhaps, from your point of view, but then you can't even decipher a
simple metaphor so I'd say you were pretty myopic.
---
[quote]In other words, by hitching their wagon to your wagon train and
heading for the same destination; one example of which would be to never
use a 555.
I've never said that one should never use a 555 - I've merely pointed
out that in almost all situations there are now better alternatives.
[/quote]
---
Oh, please...
You stated, once, that you'd tried to use one, that it was a crappy part
which didn't meet your expectations and, because of that, you'd never
use one.
---
[quote]
That, of course, presumes you do have a wagon train, and I seriously
doubt whether you do.
You were claiming that my view of "education" would involve your
hitching your wagon (which I seriously doubt you have) to my "star"
whatever that might be.
[/quote]
---
You're not very good at this, are you?
It's a simple metaphor, Bill.
The star is your dream, what drives you, what you follow, and the wagon
is what I use to carry me through my life.
So hitching _my_ wagon to _your_ star would be tantamount to my
unhitching it from mine and living my life as you saw fit for me to live
it.
Certainly nothing I'd even consider.
---
[quote]I adjusted the analogy by substituting an
equally figurative wagon train for your "star",
[/quote]
---
Because you didn't understand the analogy?
---
[quote]but since I was
engaged in rejecting the idea that education involves leaders and
followers, I wouldn't be offering to let you hook your wagon to my
wagon train even in the remote event that I came to possess a wagon
train in Texas.
[/quote]
---
If it's _your_ wagon train and you get to determine who "gets" to hook
up to it or not, then your statement carries the implicit meaning that
you're the boss; i.e., the leader, and those who are allowed to hook up
are the followers.
JF |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| L.A.T.... |
| Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 1:54 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
"John Fields" <jfields at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:a5r8f5dcadtk9c9dqbuvnvqu5brsoimgh9 at (no spam) 4ax.com...
[quote]On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 09:34:43 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
bill.sloman at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
On Nov 6, 4:13 pm, John Fields <jfie... at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 14:35:10 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
On Nov 5, 3:58 pm, John Fields <jfie... at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 04:56:33 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
On Nov 5, 5:15 am, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terr... at (no spam) earthlink.net
wrote:
John Fields wrote:
On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 15:59:20 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
My "unique" talents were recognised for what they were worth.
I'd
prefer to be working at the moment, but there are enough good
electronic engineers around that society isn't going to founder
for
want of my contribution.
---
Actually, I think society is probably less likely to founder
because of
the lack of your "contribution". ;)
So much for Bill's lame claims on aus.electronics that he's
educating
people on the sci.electronics groups.
Some people aren't easy to educate, and both you and John Fields
would
seem to fall into that catagory.
---
If, by "education", you mean hitching my wagon to your star, then I'd
much prefer something other than a white dwarf.
Education is getting people to think for themselves in a useful way.
It isn't about hitching anybody's wagon to someone else's wagon train.
---
Only trouble with that definition is that for people to be able to think
in a useful way requires them to follow your lead and believe the way
you do.
Not necessarily. There are a variety of ways of thinking for yourself
in a useful way. You don't seem to have mastered any of them.
---
Perhaps, from your point of view, but then you can't even decipher a
simple metaphor so I'd say you were pretty myopic.
---
In other words, by hitching their wagon to your wagon train and
heading for the same destination; one example of which would be to never
use a 555.
I've never said that one should never use a 555 - I've merely pointed
out that in almost all situations there are now better alternatives.
---
Oh, please...
You stated, once, that you'd tried to use one, that it was a crappy part
which didn't meet your expectations and, because of that, you'd never
use one.
---
That, of course, presumes you do have a wagon train, and I seriously
doubt whether you do.
You were claiming that my view of "education" would involve your
hitching your wagon (which I seriously doubt you have) to my "star"
whatever that might be.
---
You're not very good at this, are you?
It's a simple metaphor, Bill.
The star is your dream, what drives you, what you follow, and the wagon
is what I use to carry me through my life.
So hitching _my_ wagon to _your_ star would be tantamount to my
unhitching it from mine and living my life as you saw fit for me to live
it.
Certainly nothing I'd even consider.
---
I adjusted the analogy by substituting an
equally figurative wagon train for your "star",
---
Because you didn't understand the analogy?
---
but since I was
engaged in rejecting the idea that education involves leaders and
followers, I wouldn't be offering to let you hook your wagon to my
wagon train even in the remote event that I came to possess a wagon
train in Texas.
---
If it's _your_ wagon train and you get to determine who "gets" to hook
up to it or not, then your statement carries the implicit meaning that
you're the boss; i.e., the leader, and those who are allowed to hook up
are the followers.
JF
Only in aus.electronics[/quote] |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Bill Sloman... |
| Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 1:56 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 6, 7:08 pm, Jim Yanik <jya... at (no spam) abuse.gov> wrote:
[quote]John Fields <jfie... at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote innews:moe8f5hgj01hce6mftstm0jo6jgndgbqsl at (no spam) 4ax.com:
On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 14:35:10 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
On Nov 5, 3:58 pm, John Fields <jfie... at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 04:56:33 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
On Nov 5, 5:15 am, "Michael A. Terrell"
mike.terr... at (no spam) earthlink.net> wrote:
John Fields wrote:
On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 15:59:20 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
My "unique" talents were recognised for what they were worth.
I'd prefer to be working at the moment, but there are enough
good electronic engineers around that society isn't going to
founder for want of my contribution.
---
Actually, I think society is probably less likely to founder
because of the lack of your "contribution". ;)
So much for Bill's lame claims on aus.electronics that he's
educating people on the sci.electronics groups.
Some people aren't easy to educate, and both you and John Fields
would seem to fall into that catagory.
---
If, by "education", you mean hitching my wagon to your star, then
I'd much prefer something other than a white dwarf.
Education is getting people to think for themselves in a useful way.
not anymore. Not since the Fabian Society decided to infiltrate education
to indoctrinate children to be socialists.
[/quote]
The Fabian Society "rejected Karl Marx’s notion of revolutionary class
struggle and favoured a peaceful and evolutionary change to socialism.
They chose education and gradual acceptance of socialist thought,
instead of forced, violent indoctrination."
Their preferred method of working was to collect statistical evidence
about the way society actuallly worked and put it in the hands of
sympathetic politicians.
This way of working is attractive to academics - the data the Fabians
collected was checkable - unlike the sort of rubbish right-wingers
like Jim post here. It has consequently informed the academic training
of a number of generations of teachers.
Jim Yanik and other like-minded right-wingers dissapprove of this, in
exactly the same way that creationists dissapprove of the way that
Darwinism dominates the training of biology teachers.
The Fabians and the Darwinians have the fact on their side, which is
terribly unfair, but decisive.
[quote]you can see it's worked,as most school teachers and college profs are
"progressives",and vote mostly DemocRAT.(Plus they elected Obama,a
Marxist.)
[/quote]
Jim Yanik doesn't know enough to be aware that the Fabians rejected
Marxism, and he's stupid enough to believe that he can credibly claim
that Barak Obama is a Marxist - which is roughly on a par with
claiming that the Earth is flat and was created 6000 years ago.
<snip>
--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Bill Sloman... |
| Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 2:15 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 7, 12:11 am, John Fields <jfie... at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
[quote]On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 09:53:00 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
On Nov 6, 4:03 pm, John Fields <jfie... at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 15:00:35 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
On Nov 5, 4:13 pm, John Fields <jfie... at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 04:54:50 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
On Nov 5, 1:26 am, John Fields <jfie... at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 15:59:20 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
[/quote]
<snip>
[quote]I do remember one in particular, though, where I had suggested a single
555 and you countered with some expensive, obsolete, dual something or
other, 16 pin monstrosity with performance specs no better than a 555's.
---
No better than the 555's data sheet specifications. Unfortunately, to
get the circuit to do what was required you had to add a diode to your
555, which would have degraded its performace below data sheet
specifications.
---
Yet the application wouldn't have suffered, so what's your point?
---
Since you don't seem to understand specifications and
tolerances, this point has never registered with you.
---
Nonsense.
[/quote]
"Yet the application wouldn't have suffered". If the specification
mattered at all, the application would have suffered. Like I said, you
don't understand specifications or tolerances.
[quote]Nice try, but stone axes have been made obsolete by the invention of
iron axes, while I'm not obsolete, merely unfashionable.
---
You think there aren't iron axes around who have made you obsolete as
well as unfashionable?
---
[/quote]
A new breed of engineer made of a completely different material?
Presuably this wouldn't be a DNA-based material. Have you been
kidnapped by - rather undiscriminating - aliens recently? I can
understand why they would have thrown you back.
<snip>
[quote]I don't need access to abse to know that you don't use many
components, and that you don't use any of them well. You once posted a
circuit including a 0.5H inductor with zero series resistance and zero
parallel capacitance - I then posted a version of the circuit with a
real inductor (available off the shelf from Farnell/Newark) which
would actually work, but you still claim to be a practical designer of
real circuits for real customers, not all that convincingly.
---
I'm sure the circuit I posted was just to illustrate a concept.
[/quote]
The OP wanted a 100kHz oscillator that drew very little current.
Producing a circuit designed around an unrealistic inductor
illustrated that you didn't have much grasp of what is involved in
designing real circuits with real components.
--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Greegor... |
| Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 2:49 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
BS > My "unique" talents were recognised for what they were worth. I'd
BS > prefer to be working at the moment, but there are enough good
BS > electronic engineers around that society isn't going to founder
for
BS > want of my contribution.
JF > Actually, I think society is probably less likely to
JF > founder because of the lack of your "contribution". ;)
MAT > So much for Bill's lame claims on aus.electronics that
MAT > he's educating people on the sci.electronics groups.
BS > Some people aren't easy to educate, and both you and
BS > John Fields would seem to fall into that catagory.
JF > If, by "education", you mean hitching my wagon to your star,
JF > then I'd much prefer something other than a white dwarf.
BS > Education is getting people to think for themselves in a useful
way.
Useful to WHO? Some idealistic political crusade? You?
Your idea of "educating people" ranks right up there with
Pol Pot and the sarcasm of "Arbeit macht frei" !
BS > It isn't about hitching anybody's wagon to someone else's wagon
train.
So much so you preach your kookery to people in OTHER COUNTRIES! |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Greegor... |
| Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 3:46 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
[quote]For people who happen to live in areas without a proper sewage system,
a "honey-wagon" is truck that goes around and collects human excreta.
The US doesn't like spending money on services that improve the health
of the community as a whole, so many communities persist with this
rather primitive form of sewage collection, which has long been
superseded in other advanced industrialised countries.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cesspool_emptier
Advanced industrial communites do still have honey waggons, but they
service temporary and mobile toilets, and there are not enough of them
to make the word part of the active vocabulary of the bulk of the
population.
[/quote]
Sloman, septic tanks are commonly used for homes that are
some distance outside of metro or city services.
Are you pretending that every home between Nijmegen
and Amsterdam is plumbed into a city sewer system?
Even in Australia there must be rural homes
outside of the range of city sewer systems.
What kind of high tech civilized poop chute
do they use in rural parts of Netherlands or
Australia?
Don't they use septic tanks? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| John Fields... |
| Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 6:11 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 09:53:00 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
[quote]On Nov 6, 4:03 pm, John Fields <jfie... at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 15:00:35 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
On Nov 5, 4:13 pm, John Fields <jfie... at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 04:54:50 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
On Nov 5, 1:26 am, John Fields <jfie... at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 15:59:20 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
My "unique" talents were recognised for what they were worth. I'd
prefer to be working at the moment, but there are enough good
electronic engineers around that society isn't going to founder for
want of my contribution.
---
Actually, I think society is probably less likely to founder because of
the lack of your "contribution". ;)
Since my contribution would probably not have included any 555's, I
can understand why you might think that.
---
You make my point in that had you chosen to use 555's where and when it
was appropriate, the abominations you created and foisted on society in
order to avoid the hated 555 have, no doubt, had a deleterious effect.
---
And the "obominations" that I created and foisted on society were?
---
Not "obominations", Bill, "abominations".
Perhaps you were thinking of our president???
---
If you can't identify them, your claim that they would have been less
abominable if they'd included a 555 or two does seem to be slightly
arbitrary.
---
If I were to keep records of your cock-ups I'd have to go buy an extra
file cabinet or two, and I'm not really that interested in chronicling
your failures. YMMV.
First find your cock-up, then tell us what was wrong with it. Stupid
comments about imagined cock-ups don't ctu any ice.
[/quote]
---
"ctu" ???
There's the latest one, LOL
---
[quote]I do remember one in particular, though, where I had suggested a single
555 and you countered with some expensive, obsolete, dual something or
other, 16 pin monstrosity with performance specs no better than a 555's.
---
No better than the 555's data sheet specifications. Unfortunately, to
get the circuit to do what was required you had to add a diode to your
555, which would have degraded its performace below data sheet
specifications.
[/quote]
---
Yet the application wouldn't have suffered, so what's your point?
---
[quote]Since you don't seem to understand specifications and
tolerances, this point has never registered with you.
[/quote]
---
Nonsense.
---
[quote]Since we now get along fine
without stone axes, despite their importance in the early days of
civilisation, you point of view probably shouldn't be taken all that
seriously.
---
I never thought about it that way,
There's not much evidnece that you've ever thought about anything.
---
"evidnece"??? Tsk,tsk,tsk.
---
Getting excited about typos again?
[/quote]
---
Not at all, just pointing out that insulting someone and then committing
the same offence you accuse them of, in the same breath, is quite
telling. In a humorous "PKB" kind of way.
---
[quote]but since you brought it up it seems
like you have quite a bit in common with stone axes.
Oh, really? There's presumably some cute analogy out there waiting to
be invented by someone who has the capacity to invent some way in
which I have something in common with a stone axe.
---
No invention required, just read between the lines.
However, since you seem to have trouble with even that degree of
subtlety, I'll spell it out for you: Stone axes and you may have been
important once upon a time, but in the present you're both largely
useless.
---
Nice try, but stone axes have been made obsolete by the invention of
iron axes, while I'm not obsolete, merely unfashionable.
[/quote]
---
You think there aren't iron axes around who have made you obsolete as
well as unfashionable?
---
[quote]Obviously you don't
have that capacity - it's the kind of defect we'd expect in someone
who is still enthusiastic about a component that was designed back in
1971.
---
Hey, it wasn't me with the defect which kept you from figuring out the
analogy, and why shouldn't I be enthusiastic about an almost forty year
old component if it's the perfect thing for the job at hand?
---
To someone who only has a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
[/quote]
---
Depends on the hammer, doesn't it?
---
[quote]Since then people have invented new and interesting components, but
none of them has distracted you from your single-minded commitment to
the 555 - you don't seem to have any spare capacity left to master
another component.
---
Well, since you don't have access to abse you _would_ be in the dark
about what components I use and in which ways I use them.
I don't need access to abse to know that you don't use many
components, and that you don't use any of them well. You once posted a
circuit including a 0.5H inductor with zero series resistance and zero
parallel capacitance - I then posted a version of the circuit with a
real inductor (available off the shelf from Farnell/Newark) which
would actually work, but you still claim to be a practical designer of
real circuits for real customers, not all that convincingly.
[/quote]
---
I'm sure the circuit I posted was just to illustrate a concept.
Had it not been, I'd have posted the circuit with real-world components,
as I normally do.
But, since you say you did, and that it would actually work just goes to
show that my concept was right.
Thanks!
---
[quote]Same thing goes for stuff that never gets to USENET.
/irony
Right. You are a design genius who is flooded with work and still
finds time to post his brilliant insights on the usenet.
/end irony
[/quote]
---
Actually, things are pretty slow right now and I'm allowing myself to
slip into retirement, so I'll have lots more time to bust your balls!
JF |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Jim Thompson... |
| Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 7:55 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 16:49:14 -0800 (PST), Greegor <greegor47 at (no spam) gmail.com>
wrote:
[quote]BS > My "unique" talents were recognised for what they were worth. I'd
BS > prefer to be working at the moment, but there are enough good
BS > electronic engineers around that society isn't going to founder
for
BS > want of my contribution.
JF > Actually, I think society is probably less likely to
JF > founder because of the lack of your "contribution". ;)
MAT > So much for Bill's lame claims on aus.electronics that
MAT > he's educating people on the sci.electronics groups.
BS > Some people aren't easy to educate, and both you and
BS > John Fields would seem to fall into that catagory.
JF > If, by "education", you mean hitching my wagon to your star,
JF > then I'd much prefer something other than a white dwarf.
BS > Education is getting people to think for themselves in a useful
way.
Useful to WHO? Some idealistic political crusade? You?
Your idea of "educating people" ranks right up there with
Pol Pot and the sarcasm of "Arbeit macht frei" !
BS > It isn't about hitching anybody's wagon to someone else's wagon
train.
So much so you preach your kookery to people in OTHER COUNTRIES!
[/quote]
Your unusual quoting style threw my troll/feeder killer for a
momentary loop, then I realized an easy solution... Bye 
...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |
Obama says, "I AM NOT a cry baby, Fox REALLY IS out to get me!" |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| John Fields... |
| Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 8:23 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 15:33:49 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
[quote]On Nov 6, 7:43 pm, John Fields <jfie... at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 09:34:43 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
On Nov 6, 4:13 pm, John Fields <jfie... at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 14:35:10 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
On Nov 5, 3:58 pm, John Fields <jfie... at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 04:56:33 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
On Nov 5, 5:15 am, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terr... at (no spam) earthlink.net
wrote:
John Fields wrote:
On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 15:59:20 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
My "unique" talents were recognised for what they were worth. I'd
prefer to be working at the moment, but there are enough good
electronic engineers around that society isn't going to founder for
want of my contribution.
---
Actually, I think society is probably less likely to founder because of
the lack of your "contribution". ;)
So much for Bill's lame claims on aus.electronics that he's educating
people on the sci.electronics groups.
Some people aren't easy to educate, and both you and John Fields would
seem to fall into that catagory.
---
If, by "education", you mean hitching my wagon to your star, then I'd
much prefer something other than a white dwarf.
Education is getting people to think for themselves in a useful way.
It isn't about hitching anybody's wagon to someone else's wagon train.
---
Only trouble with that definition is that for people to be able to think
in a useful way requires them to follow your lead and believe the way
you do.
Not necessarily. There are a variety of ways of thinking for yourself
in a useful way. You don't seem to have mastered any of them.
---
Perhaps, from your point of view, but then you can't even decipher a
simple metaphor so I'd say you were pretty myopic.
---
Deciphering a simple metaphor does depend on the simple metaphor
having some remote relationship with reality.
Yours didn't make the
cut.
[/quote]
---
Your inability to grok the relationship is no more my fault than is your
incessant prattle about that you'd like to be working but that no one
will have you and you don't want to set up a consultancy because...
well, insert any excuse which will keep you from having to do, in the
real world, what you must if you want what you want to happen and, when
it doesn't, to blame someone else for your failure, poor baby.
---
[quote]In other words, by hitching their wagon to your wagon train and
heading for the same destination; one example of which would be to never
use a 555.
I've never said that one should never use a 555 - I've merely pointed
out that in almost all situations there are now better alternatives.
---
Oh, please...
You stated, once, that you'd tried to use one, that it was a crappy part
which didn't meet your expectations and, because of that, you'd never
use one.
---
What I actually said was that the one time that it looked like a
serious contender, it didn't meet the - unusually stringent - quality
requirements, but then neither did the rather better LM322. I checked
it out from time to over the next few years for various other jobs,
but it never turned out to be useful in the sort of work that I was
doing.
[/quote]
---
While you pretend to cast an objective engineering eye on the device,
and then subjectively damn it for what you call its failings, it's
apparent from your posting history that you hate it and, perhaps its
inventor, Hanz Kamenzind (sp?) as well.
Matter of fact, you seem to hate all circuit designers.
Even Jim, who gave us OTS RS-232 with variable edge rates and for whom
you've repeatedly indicated you have nothing but scorn.
Seems the green-eyed monster has crawled under your skin, with your
permission, and now envy is eating you up.
---
[quote]That, of course, presumes you do have a wagon train, and I seriously
doubt whether you do.
You were claiming that my view of "education" would involve your
hitching your wagon (which I seriously doubt you have) to my "star"
whatever that might be.
---
You're not very good at this, are you?
It's a simple metaphor, Bill.
The star is your dream, what drives you, what you follow, and the wagon
is what I use to carry me through my life.
The "star" may be your dream, and Disney seems to have made this a
popular image for kiddy programs. Knowing that real stars are enormous
masses of very hot gas a very long way away rather kills that image
for educated adults.
[/quote]
---
Educated adults can, if they "get it", enjoy the multiple meanings and
glean wisdom from Disney's presentations.
Your hatred of all things non-Sloman turns your light down even further.
---
[quote]So hitching _my_ wagon to _your_ star would be tantamount to my
unhitching it from mine and living my life as you saw fit for me to live
it.
Certainly nothing I'd even consider.
Nor anything I'd suggest.
[/quote]
---
You lie.
You take every opportunity to advertise whatever talents you may have as
divine and denigrate everyone else's as inconsequential.
---
[quote]You could do with more education than you have got -
[/quote]
---
Couldn't we all?
---
[quote]a broader appreciation of what semiconductor components
other than the 555 have to offer would be a good start. You don't seem
to be equipped to come to grips with more difficult subjects - Laplace
transforms and elementary statistics come to mind - of the kind I've
run into in my career, so that aspect of my experience isn't an area
that I'd even try to inform you about.
[/quote]
---
Suits me.
---
[quote]I adjusted the analogy by substituting an
equally figurative wagon train for your "star",
---
Because you didn't understand the analogy?
---
Because is seemed bizarrely pretentious.
[/quote]
---
In what way?
---
[quote]but since I was
engaged in rejecting the idea that education involves leaders and
followers, I wouldn't be offering to let you hook your wagon to my
wagon train even in the remote event that I came to possess a wagon
train in Texas.
---
If it's _your_ wagon train and you get to determine who "gets" to hook
up to it or not, then your statement carries the implicit meaning that
you're the boss; i.e., the leader, and those who are allowed to hook up
are the followers.
That was your image of education. Not mine. You keep on struggling to
set up this pathetic strawman image of me as some kind of wannabe
leader trying to educate you into some kind of obedient follower.
[/quote]
---
It's not a straw man, it's not a struggle, its as obvious as the
difference between night and day, and it's not just me.
That is, you're forever harping on what's right and what's wrong and
whoever disagrees with you is either misguided, or stupid, or both.
Believing that, of course, makes you right in all things, which places
you in a position of authority and makes you a leader.
Even when confronted with incontrovertible evidence which proves that
your point of view is untenable you still carry on with the game, doing
whatever little song and dance you have to in order to change the
subject or dodge the issue.
---
[quote]In this you are being a little over-ambitious.
[/quote]
---
So I'm wrong, and I should believe that you're right, huh?
What else is new?
---
[quote]Any sensible leader stuck with a follower like you would repudiate him
as fast as possible out of pure self-preservation.
[/quote]
---
And you don't try to???
JF |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| John Fields... |
| Posted: Sat Nov 07, 2009 8:43 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 16:15:07 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
[quote]On Nov 7, 12:11 am, John Fields <jfie... at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 09:53:00 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
On Nov 6, 4:03 pm, John Fields <jfie... at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 15:00:35 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
On Nov 5, 4:13 pm, John Fields <jfie... at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 04:54:50 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
On Nov 5, 1:26 am, John Fields <jfie... at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 15:59:20 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
snip
I do remember one in particular, though, where I had suggested a single
555 and you countered with some expensive, obsolete, dual something or
other, 16 pin monstrosity with performance specs no better than a 555's.
---
No better than the 555's data sheet specifications. Unfortunately, to
get the circuit to do what was required you had to add a diode to your
555, which would have degraded its performace below data sheet
specifications.
---
Yet the application wouldn't have suffered, so what's your point?
---
Since you don't seem to understand specifications and
tolerances, this point has never registered with you.
---
Nonsense.
"Yet the application wouldn't have suffered". If the specification
mattered at all, the application would have suffered. Like I said, you
don't understand specifications or tolerances.
[/quote]
---
So if you have to drive to the store in the most practical way and you
have a choice between a Ford and a Ferrari, you'd choose the Ferrari?
---
[quote]Nice try, but stone axes have been made obsolete by the invention of
iron axes, while I'm not obsolete, merely unfashionable.
---
You think there aren't iron axes around who have made you obsolete as
well as unfashionable?
---
A new breed of engineer made of a completely different material?
[/quote]
---
Sure. New attitudes, new components, new methods, better giants on whose
shoulders to stand, etc.
---
What have you got against a spelling checker?
/
[quote]Presuably this wouldn't be a DNA-based material. Have you been
kidnapped by - rather undiscriminating - aliens recently? I can
understand why they would have thrown you back.
[/quote]
---
Not thrown me back, thanked me and placed me back, gently, on terra
firma.
You they would have thrown to the dogs.
---
[quote]snip
I don't need access to abse to know that you don't use many
components, and that you don't use any of them well. You once posted a
circuit including a 0.5H inductor with zero series resistance and zero
parallel capacitance - I then posted a version of the circuit with a
real inductor (available off the shelf from Farnell/Newark) which
would actually work, but you still claim to be a practical designer of
real circuits for real customers, not all that convincingly.
---
I'm sure the circuit I posted was just to illustrate a concept.
The OP wanted a 100kHz oscillator that drew very little current.
Producing a circuit designed around an unrealistic inductor
illustrated that you didn't have much grasp of what is involved in
designing real circuits with real components.
[/quote]
---
US Patent # 4937519
JF |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Bill Sloman... |
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 4:06 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 7, 2:23 pm, John Fields <jfie... at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
[quote]On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 15:33:49 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
On Nov 6, 7:43 pm, John Fields <jfie... at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 09:34:43 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
On Nov 6, 4:13 pm, John Fields <jfie... at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 14:35:10 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
On Nov 5, 3:58 pm, John Fields <jfie... at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 04:56:33 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
On Nov 5, 5:15 am, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terr... at (no spam) earthlink.net
wrote:
John Fields wrote:
On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 15:59:20 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
My "unique" talents were recognised for what they were worth. I'd
prefer to be working at the moment, but there are enough good
electronic engineers around that society isn't going to founder for
want of my contribution.
---
Actually, I think society is probably less likely to founder because of
the lack of your "contribution". ;)
So much for Bill's lame claims on aus.electronics that he's educating
people on the sci.electronics groups.
Some people aren't easy to educate, and both you and John Fields would
seem to fall into that catagory.
---
If, by "education", you mean hitching my wagon to your star, then I'd
much prefer something other than a white dwarf.
Education is getting people to think for themselves in a useful way.
It isn't about hitching anybody's wagon to someone else's wagon train.
---
Only trouble with that definition is that for people to be able to think
in a useful way requires them to follow your lead and believe the way
you do.
Not necessarily. There are a variety of ways of thinking for yourself
in a useful way. You don't seem to have mastered any of them.
---
Perhaps, from your point of view, but then you can't even decipher a
simple metaphor so I'd say you were pretty myopic.
---
Deciphering a simple metaphor does depend on the simple metaphor
having some remote relationship with reality.
Yours didn't make the cut.
---
Your inability to grok the relationship is no more my fault than is your
incessant prattle about that you'd like to be working but that no one
will have you and you don't want to set up a consultancy because...
[/quote]
I can't find any potential customers.
[quote]well, insert any excuse which will keep you from having to do, in the
real world, what you must if you want what you want to happen and, when
it doesn't, to blame someone else for your failure, poor baby.
[/quote]
My situation may not be ideal, but it's much too comforatable for me
to need sympathy.
[quote]In other words, by hitching their wagon to your wagon train and
heading for the same destination; one example of which would be to never
use a 555.
I've never said that one should never use a 555 - I've merely pointed
out that in almost all situations there are now better alternatives.
---
Oh, please...
You stated, once, that you'd tried to use one, that it was a crappy part
which didn't meet your expectations and, because of that, you'd never
use one.
---
What I actually said was that the one time that it looked like a
serious contender, it didn't meet the - unusually stringent - quality
requirements, but then neither did the rather better LM322. I checked
it out from time to over the next few years for various other jobs,
but it never turned out to be useful in the sort of work that I was
doing.
---
While you pretend to cast an objective engineering eye on the device,
and then subjectively damn it for what you call its failings, it's
apparent from your posting history that you hate it and, perhaps its
inventor, Hanz Kamenzind (sp?) as well.
[/quote]
Hans Camenzind, in his book "Designing Analog Chips" points out a
couple of ways in which the 555 could have been improved. The real
problem with the part is that it combines a monostable/bistable that
is decidedly sensitive to voltage noise with a power switch, which
injects tolerably large and rapidly changing currents into the Vee
connection that it shares with the monostable/bistable circuitry.
There are application where this isn't a real problem, but many fewer
(as a proportion of all applications) than there were in 1971. You
don't have to hate the circuit to be aware of this, though one does
need to know a little bit more about circuit design than you seem to
do.
[quote]Matter of fact, you seem to hate all circuit designers.
[/quote]
Not Barrie Gilbert and Bob Widlar, and Hans Camenzind's book is
admirably clear and easy to follow.
[quote]Even Jim, who gave us OTS RS-232 with variable edge rates and for whom
you've repeatedly indicated you have nothing but scorn.
[/quote]
He's no Barrie Gilbert or Bob Widlar. A journeyman rather than a
master of his craft. This isn't scorn, merely a practical assessment.
I'd recommend him to anybody who couldn't afford anything better.
Those of his circuits that I worked with were not easy to use but they
did work.
[quote]Seems the green-eyed monster has crawled under your skin, with your
permission, and now envy is eating you up.
[/quote]
If I envied anybody in that area, I'd envy Barry Gilbert and Bob
Widlar. I've met Barrie Gilbert and quite liked him - his interest in
Cambridge Instruments was limited to workig out whether we were
potential customers for the RF processing chips he was developing at
the time, which we weren't, but he was civil enough to conceal his
dissappointment.
I don't seem to do jealousy.
[quote]That, of course, presumes you do have a wagon train, and I seriously
doubt whether you do.
You were claiming that my view of "education" would involve your
hitching your wagon (which I seriously doubt you have) to my "star"
whatever that might be.
---
You're not very good at this, are you?
It's a simple metaphor, Bill.
The star is your dream, what drives you, what you follow, and the wagon
is what I use to carry me through my life.
The "star" may be your dream, and Disney seems to have made this a
popular image for kiddy programs. Knowing that real stars are enormous
masses of very hot gas a very long way away rather kills that image
for educated adults.
---
Educated adults can, if they "get it", enjoy the multiple meanings and
glean wisdom from Disney's presentations.
[/quote]
Multiple meanings and wisdom in Disney's presentations? Who do you
think you are kidding?
[quote]Your hatred of all things non-Sloman turns your light down even further.
[/quote]
"Hatred"? I dislike pretentious nonsense and satirise it when I can.
It's a hobby, like doing cross word puzzles. Hatred requires emotional
involvement.
<snipped stuff with which I can't be bothered to get emotionally
involved>
--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Bill Sloman... |
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 4:14 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 7, 2:46 am, Greegor <greego... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]For people who happen to live in areas without a proper sewage system,
a "honey-wagon" is truck that goes around and collects human excreta.
The US doesn't like spending money on services that improve the health
of the community as a whole, so many communities persist with this
rather primitive form of sewage collection, which has long been
superseded in other advanced industrialised countries.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cesspool_emptier
Advanced industrial communites do still have honey waggons, but they
service temporary and mobile toilets, and there are not enough of them
to make the word part of the active vocabulary of the bulk of the
population.
Sloman, septic tanks are commonly used for homes that are
some distance outside of metro or city services.
Are you pretending that every home between Nijmegen
and Amsterdam is plumbed into a city sewer system?
Even in Australia there must be rural homes
outside of the range of city sewer systems.
What kind of high tech civilized poop chute
do they use in rural parts of Netherlands or
Australia?
Don't they use septic tanks?
[/quote]
Sure they use septic tanks. The house we live in now depended on
septic tanks when we bought it - the previous owner had been too cheap
to hook the house up to the sewer on the street outside - but the
tanks weren't emptied by a honey-wagon, but by a local pig farmer who
added the contents to the waste produced by his pigs.
The point is that the proportion of house that rely on septic tanks
and honey wagons is so low in both Australia and the Netherlands that
word "honey wagon" fall outside the
regular vocabulary.
--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Bill Sloman... |
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 4:23 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 7, 2:43 pm, John Fields <jfie... at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
[quote]On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 16:15:07 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
On Nov 7, 12:11 am, John Fields <jfie... at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 09:53:00 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
On Nov 6, 4:03 pm, John Fields <jfie... at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 15:00:35 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
On Nov 5, 4:13 pm, John Fields <jfie... at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 04:54:50 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
On Nov 5, 1:26 am, John Fields <jfie... at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 15:59:20 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
snip
I do remember one in particular, though, where I had suggested a single
555 and you countered with some expensive, obsolete, dual something or
other, 16 pin monstrosity with performance specs no better than a 555's.
---
No better than the 555's data sheet specifications. Unfortunately, to
get the circuit to do what was required you had to add a diode to your
555, which would have degraded its performace below data sheet
specifications.
---
Yet the application wouldn't have suffered, so what's your point?
---
Since you don't seem to understand specifications and
tolerances, this point has never registered with you.
---
Nonsense.
"Yet the application wouldn't have suffered". If the specification
mattered at all, the application would have suffered. Like I said, you
don't understand specifications or tolerances.
---
So if you have to drive to the store in the most practical way and you
have a choice between a Ford and a Ferrari, you'd choose the Ferrari?
---
Nice try, but stone axes have been made obsolete by the invention of
iron axes, while I'm not obsolete, merely unfashionable.
---
You think there aren't iron axes around who have made you obsolete as
well as unfashionable?
---
A new breed of engineer made of a completely different material?
---
Sure. New attitudes, new components, new methods, better giants on whose
shoulders to stand, etc.
---
[/quote]
Since I've been using the latest circuits as they became availalble
for the past thirty-odd years, and you are still fixated on the 555,
you might like to consider who looks more like the stone axe.
[quote]Presuably this wouldn't be a DNA-based material. Have you been
kidnapped by - rather undiscriminating - aliens recently? I can
understand why they would have thrown you back.
---
Not thrown me back, thanked me and placed me back, gently, on terra
firma.
You they would have thrown to the dogs.
---
[/quote]
Assuming that is were true - which seems unlikely - such a gesture
might well have poisoned whatever symbionts fulfil the role of dogs in
their community.
[quote]snip
I don't need access to abse to know that you don't use many
components, and that you don't use any of them well. You once posted a
circuit including a 0.5H inductor with zero series resistance and zero
parallel capacitance - I then posted a version of the circuit with a
real inductor (available off the shelf from Farnell/Newark) which
would actually work, but you still claim to be a practical designer of
real circuits for real customers, not all that convincingly.
---
I'm sure the circuit I posted was just to illustrate a concept.
The OP wanted a 100kHz oscillator that drew very little current.
Producing a circuit designed around an unrealistic inductor
illustrated that you didn't have much grasp of what is involved in
designing real circuits with real components.
---
US Patent # 4937519
[/quote]
"An apparatus for identifying conductors form an elongated group of
(n) conductors, comprising:"
"Form"?
And it does look as if it might have been obvious to those skilled in
the art from sometime around 1900.
--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Bill Sloman... |
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 8:15 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 8, 4:47 pm, John Fields <jfie... at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
[quote]On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 06:06:58 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
On Nov 7, 2:23 pm, John Fields <jfie... at (no spam) austininstruments.com> wrote:
---
Your inability to grok the relationship is no more my fault than is your
incessant prattle about that you'd like to be working but that no one
will have you and you don't want to set up a consultancy because...
I can't find any potential customers.
well, insert any excuse which will keep you from having to do, in the
real world, what you must if you want what you want to happen and, when
it doesn't, to blame someone else for your failure, poor baby.
"I can't find any potential customers." Is a dandy excuse.
[/quote]
And a compelling reason not to invest more time and money in what
turned out to be an unrealitic idea. Some excuses do happen to be
valid.
[quote]My situation may not be ideal, but it's much too comfortable for me
to need sympathy.
---
It's not sympathy, it's sarcasm, and if its "comfortable" enough for
you to not need to look for work then, in reality, you probably don't
want to work.
[/quote]
Your attempts at sarcasm are noted, but they are on a par with your
attempts at logic.
The fact that I don't need to work doesn't mean that I don't want to
work, but it does mean that I can reject boring work, like stacking
shelves at the local supermarket. The local employment situation has
perked up enough that I fianlly found a local job I could apply for
earlier this week, not that I think that I've got much chance of
getting it.
[quote]
While you pretend to cast an objective engineering eye on the device,
and then subjectively damn it for what you call its failings, it's
apparent from your posting history that you hate it and, perhaps its
inventor, Hanz Kamenzind (sp?) as well.
Hans Camenzind, in his book "Designing Analog Chips" points out a
couple of ways in which the 555 could have been improved. The real
problem with the part is that it combines a monostable/bistable that
is decidedly sensitive to voltage noise with a power switch, which
injects tolerably large and rapidly changing currents into the Vee
connection that it shares with the monostable/bistable circuitry.
There are application where this isn't a real problem, but many fewer
(as a proportion of all applications) than there were in 1971. You
don't have to hate the circuit to be aware of this, though one does
need to know a little bit more about circuit design than you seem to
do.
---
Since your unfamiliarity with the device itself from a hands-on point of
view suggests that you only learned about the problem from Kamenzind's
book, I suggest you're the one suffering from a lack of circuit design
experience since the rest of us generally solved the problem by
connecting an adequate reservoir capacitor across the chip's supply
terminals.
[/quote]
How very clever of you. What do you do when that isn't enough? Bearing
in mind that every wet-behind-the-ears junior engineer will have tried
this before coming to you for help.
[quote]With the advent of CMOS 555s, however, (Maxim's ICM7555 for instance)
the problem has been eliminated.
[/quote]
Idiot.
[quote]Matter of fact, you seem to hate all circuit designers.
Not Barrie Gilbert and Bob Widlar, and Hans Camenzind's book is
admirably clear and easy to follow.
Everybody else though, huh?
[/quote]
I don't even hate Jim Thompson, though I do find him fun to pillory.
[quote]Even Jim, who gave us OTS RS-232 with variable edge rates and for whom
you've repeatedly indicated you have nothing but scorn.
He's no Barrie Gilbert or Bob Widlar. A journeyman rather than a
master of his craft. This isn't scorn, merely a practical assessment.
I'd recommend him to anybody who couldn't afford anything better.
Those of his circuits that I worked with were not easy to use but they
did work.
A poor workman blames his tools.
[/quote]
Because a good workman finds or makes good tools.
[quote]Seems the green-eyed monster has crawled under your skin, with your
permission, and now envy is eating you up.
If I envied anybody in that area, I'd envy Barry Gilbert and Bob
Widlar. I've met Barrie Gilbert and quite liked him - his interest in
Cambridge Instruments was limited to workig out whether we were
potential customers for the RF processing chips he was developing at
the time, which we weren't, but he was civil enough to conceal his
dissappointment.
I don't seem to do jealousy.
You don't seem to see it.
[/quote]
Because it doesn't exist.
[quote]You're not very good at this, are you?
It's a simple metaphor, Bill.
The star is your dream, what drives you, what you follow, and the wagon
is what I use to carry me through my life.
The "star" may be your dream, and Disney seems to have made this a
popular image for kiddy programs. Knowing that real stars are enormous
masses of very hot gas a very long way away rather kills that image
for educated adults.
---
Educated adults can, if they "get it", enjoy the multiple meanings and
glean wisdom from Disney's presentations.
Multiple meanings and wisdom in Disney's presentations? Who do you
think you are kidding?
Well, if you don't get it you can't see it.
[/quote]
If it isn't there, you can't see it.
[quote]Your hatred of all things non-Sloman turns your light down even further.
"Hatred"? I dislike pretentious nonsense and satirise it when I can.
And yet I see no self-referential satire in anything you write.
[/quote]
You don't see much, do you.
[quote]It's a hobby, like doing cross word puzzles. Hatred requires emotional
involvement.
snipped stuff with which I can't be bothered to get emotionally
involved
Stuff you hate?
[/quote]
Stuff that bores me and would bore any lurker.
--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Bill Sloman... |
| Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 8:25 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Nov 8, 3:55 pm, Pieyed Piper
<pieyedPi... at (no spam) thebongshopattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote:
[quote]On Sun, 8 Nov 2009 06:23:23 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
bill.slo... at (no spam) ieee.org> wrote:
Since I've been using the latest circuits as they became availalble
for the past thirty-odd years, and you are still fixated on the 555,
you might like to consider who looks more like the stone axe.
You really don't get it.
The "latest circuits" are many times, the very same circuits in modern
form factors using modern fab processes. There are several tens of
iterations of the 555, so it would appear that it is not merely John that
it carries favor with.
[/quote]
You mean the CMOS 7555. And that is mainly used by people who are
recycling old circuits without thinking to much about what they are
doing.
[quote] Also, if you have been out of work for more than a few years, you are
hardly familiar with "the latest and greatest" on a first hand basis.
[/quote]
Very few people are. It is rare for a new circuit or a new technology
to show up at the precise moment that you could use it; the usual
state of things is that you get a new project and poke around to see
if anything new has come up since you were last busy in that area.
Meanwhile I read the trade journals and go off to the occasional
seminar - the latest Renesas M16C/6C microcontroller offer a USB
port, which may be handy if I ever find a prject that needs a
microcontroller.
--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Fri Dec 04, 2009 5:50 pm
|
|