Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
On 12/06/2015 3:10 PM, Jasen Betts wrote:
On 2015-06-12, Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote:
True, and I think especially in this case because saying "Led
Lighting" that
way would sound the same as "Leadlighting", and that's just not going
to help
society in the long run.
Say "Led illumination", "Led lamp(s)" etc is there a risk of confusion.
I don't know about Dave Jones, but I think Mike Harrison has a bit of an
excuse because his job is in building lighting installations. If
you're with
someone trying to diagnose a fault in an array of a few hundred LEDs, I
think it's understandable to go the easy route.
As far as I'm concerned: widespread adoption = bad. Use during in-depth
chatter amongst electronics nerds = acceptable.
Why should we have all the fun?
Yes, the last thing you want is to be _Led_ down that path.
Perhaps you are dragging feet of lead?
I still believe the average Joe doesn't have a clue what L.E.D. stands
for, so the writing is on the wall for you 'spellers'.
On 13/06/2015 6:47 PM, BuckyBalls wrote:
On 12/06/2015 3:10 PM, Jasen Betts wrote:
On 2015-06-12, Computer Nerd Kev <not@telling.you.invalid> wrote:
True, and I think especially in this case because saying "Led
Lighting" that
way would sound the same as "Leadlighting", and that's just not going
to help
society in the long run.
Say "Led illumination", "Led lamp(s)" etc is there a risk of confusion.
I don't know about Dave Jones, but I think Mike Harrison has a bit
of an
excuse because his job is in building lighting installations. If
you're with
someone trying to diagnose a fault in an array of a few hundred LEDs, I
think it's understandable to go the easy route.
As far as I'm concerned: widespread adoption = bad. Use during in-depth
chatter amongst electronics nerds = acceptable.
Why should we have all the fun?
Yes, the last thing you want is to be _Led_ down that path.
Perhaps you are dragging feet of lead?
I still believe the average Joe doesn't have a clue what L.E.D. stands
for, so the writing is on the wall for you 'spellers'.
Yeah, like how ROMs refer to firmware/binaries now and is DOS Denial of
Service or Disk Operating System?
Just because some people are lazy and/or clueless doesn't mean we must
all accept it.
Language is not set in stone, and nobody arguing for 'el' 'ee' 'dee' has
explained why MOSFET is OK but LED is not. What often happens over time is
acronyms that can be pronounced as a word tend to end up being pronounced
as a word, so you get NASA, LASER, CRO, MOSFET, FIFA etc. while others that
are not easily said as a word stay as abbreviations and are spelt out, like
LCD, PCB, FBI, BBC, TV, DSO, DVD etc. This trend has nothing to do with
being lazy or careless, it just reflects the real-world usage and the
tendency to make language more efficient.
(The more astute reader will note there is a pattern in deciding whether an
acronym can be pronounced as a word or needs to be spelt out. It has to do
with the presence and position of the vowel(s).)
"BuckyBalls" wrote in message news:cuqhg6F7sffU1@mid.individual.net...
. . .
Language is not set in stone, and nobody arguing for 'el' 'ee' 'dee'
has explained why MOSFET is OK but LED is not. What often happens over
time is acronyms that can be pronounced as a word tend to end up being
pronounced as a word, so you get NASA, LASER, CRO, MOSFET, FIFA etc.
while others that are not easily said as a word stay as abbreviations
and are spelt out, like LCD, PCB, FBI, BBC, TV, DSO, DVD etc. This
trend has nothing to do with being lazy or careless, it just reflects
the real-world usage and the tendency to make language more efficient.
(The more astute reader will note there is a pattern in deciding
whether an acronym can be pronounced as a word or needs to be spelt
out. It has to do with the presence and position of the vowel(s).)
In a previous life I was confronted with acronyms all day and every day.
There seemed to be regional differences as to whether people pronounced
some as words or not. Most Aussies pronounced CICS as kicks, while the
Yanks tended to spell it out as sea eye sea es.
There were some "contrived" acronyms that were always pronounced, such
at the CATBERT - Collector Attribute Table for Block Extension Reuse
Table - there was also a DILBERT and DOGBERT.
Yet others were half spelled, and half pronounced. VTAM was never vee
tee ay em, but always vee tam, and DASD was daz dee.
"BuckyBalls" wrote in message news:cuqhg6F7sffU1@mid.individual.net...
. . .
Language is not set in stone, and nobody arguing for 'el' 'ee' 'dee'
has explained why MOSFET is OK but LED is not. What often happens over
time is acronyms that can be pronounced as a word tend to end up being
pronounced as a word, so you get NASA, LASER, CRO, MOSFET, FIFA etc.
while others that are not easily said as a word stay as abbreviations
and are spelt out, like LCD, PCB, FBI, BBC, TV, DSO, DVD etc. This
trend has nothing to do with being lazy or careless, it just reflects
the real-world usage and the tendency to make language more efficient.
(The more astute reader will note there is a pattern in deciding
whether an acronym can be pronounced as a word or needs to be spelt
out. It has to do with the presence and position of the vowel(s).)
In a previous life I was confronted with acronyms all day and every day.
There seemed to be regional differences as to whether people pronounced
some as words or not. Most Aussies pronounced CICS as kicks, while the
Yanks tended to spell it out as sea eye sea es.
There were some "contrived" acronyms that were always pronounced, such
at the CATBERT - Collector Attribute Table for Block Extension Reuse
Table - there was also a DILBERT and DOGBERT.
Yet others were half spelled, and half pronounced. VTAM was never vee
tee ay em, but always vee tam, and DASD was daz dee.
On 22/06/2015 11:47 PM, Andy Wood wrote:
"BuckyBalls" wrote in message news:cuqhg6F7sffU1@mid.individual.net...
. . .
Language is not set in stone, and nobody arguing for 'el' 'ee' 'dee'
has explained why MOSFET is OK but LED is not. What often happens over
time is acronyms that can be pronounced as a word tend to end up being
pronounced as a word, so you get NASA, LASER, CRO, MOSFET, FIFA etc.
while others that are not easily said as a word stay as abbreviations
and are spelt out, like LCD, PCB, FBI, BBC, TV, DSO, DVD etc. This
trend has nothing to do with being lazy or careless, it just reflects
the real-world usage and the tendency to make language more efficient.
(The more astute reader will note there is a pattern in deciding
whether an acronym can be pronounced as a word or needs to be spelt
out. It has to do with the presence and position of the vowel(s).)
In a previous life I was confronted with acronyms all day and every day.
There seemed to be regional differences as to whether people pronounced
some as words or not. Most Aussies pronounced CICS as kicks, while the
Yanks tended to spell it out as sea eye sea es.
There were some "contrived" acronyms that were always pronounced, such
at the CATBERT - Collector Attribute Table for Block Extension Reuse
Table - there was also a DILBERT and DOGBERT.
Yet others were half spelled, and half pronounced. VTAM was never vee
tee ay em, but always vee tam, and DASD was daz dee.
There's ORCA the Organisation for Really Contrived Acronyms..
http://orcacronyms.blogspot.de/
I like this one from OZ
BUGA UP http://www.bugaup.org/
Following on from BUGA UP, are there any old farts here who saw the
billboard for 7 NEWS circa 1980 that was 'improved' by BUGA UP style
graffiti?
The billboard originally just read "7 NEWS The best news you'll get
all day" To which was added "Fraser run over by tractor".
Every time I drive past a local church that has a big sign outside saying
"Jesus Heals!" it makes me want to write "So do I - and I've got the scars
to prove it!". (Or "So why do stigmata bleed then?") <g
"~misfit~" wrote in message news:mmdge8$baq$1@dont-email.me...
...
Every time I drive past a local church that has a big sign outside
saying "Jesus Heals!" it makes me want to write "So do I - and I've
got the scars to prove it!". (Or "So why do stigmata bleed then?") <g
Where I grew up (another place and time, that is for sure) I could see a
huge red neon sign over the other side of town. "Jesus red" it
proclaimed, and I never really thought about what it meant, other than
the colour of the sign suited the message. Years later, the penny
dropped, it was the local lingo for "Jesus saves". And so should you.
On 2/06/2015 1:47 PM, felix_unger wrote:
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2928997/batteriser-is-a-250-gadget-that-
extends-disposable-battery-life-by-800-percent.html
I think the claims need to be, if not taken with a pinch of salt, at
least understood for exactly what they are.
The patent
https://www.google.com.au/patents/US20120121943?dq=20120121943
+A1&hl=en&sa=X&ei=3TxtVf2zNYWO8QXdwYKgDw&ved=0CBwQ6AEwAA
states
"Some electronic equipments that use disposable batteries, such as AA
batteries, are designed to stop operating when the battery voltage drops
by 10% or so. That means when the voltage of an AA battery drops to
about 1.4V or 1.35V."
Now, that may be true, but if the voltage curves shown in figure 7 of
the patent are correct, equipment that bails at 1.35 is clearly being
exceedingly wasteful. Note that the claims is only that "some" do. Not
that the majority do, nor that most do.
By comparison, equipment that's happy to run until the voltage drops to
1V will have removed most of the available energy from the battery.
Further, if, as is possible, such equipment contains a linear regulator
to provide a constant internal voltage, then adding the Batteriser to
provide a constant 1.5V input will just run the battery down faster as
the regulator dissipates more energy as heat.
So my take on this is that it can probably work, but that it will not
deliver anything like the benefits claimed, and in some (how many, I
don't know) cases, it will actually be detrimental.
Sylvia.