Chip with simple program for Toy

[Jamie]

Doug Miller wrote:

In article <1178494834.481770.159400@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, big_money64 <big_money64@yahoo.com> wrote:

This is one of the few sites that offers great information and
devices, for penis enlargement, that really work. You'll be excited
when you see the end result. Well worth buying. I've been using it for
3 months now and have gained 4 inches. Give it a look. You'll love it,
and the ladies will definitely love it!


So sorry to hear that you needed that.

Can't imagine why you think I might, though...

I gotta add to that..

I have found a simple approach of seeing gain in my manly hood!
and that is simply losing a few pounds so that there a less of an
obstacle in the way of my view!


--
"I'm never wrong, once i thought i was, but was mistaken"
Real Programmers Do things like this.
http://webpages.charter.net/jamie_5

 

[Daniel Mandic]

Radium wrote:

1. Fans or other cooling equipment
2. Moving parts
3. Magnetic parts
4. Discs
5. ROM

In addition, my dream PC does not experience any latency or use any
buffering at all.

take what's available or make a better one ;-), yes?


But you are right with new, so called 'modern', Soundcards.


Bloating the Kernel, MickyMouse Connectors, Crippled FLAT sound, no
instruments, whistling system-RAM sample sounds played via a
communication-OS (XP, 2000 etc.).


Purest crap in its modest form. PC.

(With hardware sound buffer ))).... what a sh..)




Best regards,

Daniel Mandic

 

[nobody@nowhere.net]

On 10 May 2007 15:30:30 -0700, Radium <glucegen1@gmail.com> wrote:

On May 10, 2:12 pm, "DaveM" <masondg4...@comcast99.net> wrote:

Where has Radium gone? Haven't seen any of his dribble in a few days. Maybe
the idiocy of his notion finally sunk in??

LOL, I'm still here and dreaming of a PC that has the advantages of
the world's current best PC along with additional advantages. For
example, my dream PC is entirely chip-based and does *not* require any
of the following:

1. Fans or other cooling equipment
2. Moving parts
3. Magnetic parts
4. Discs
5. ROM

In addition, my dream PC does not experience any latency or use any
buffering at all.

Add to that wish list:

Peace for the peoples
Bread for the hungry
Land for the farmers
Factories for the workers

LOL

NNN

 

[Jon Slaughter]

<wise.of.clean790@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1178876870.381948.272640@n59g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...

http://jessicasboobs.blogspot.com/ - Download snazzy jessica images (I
bet you will find her naked)

OMG!! A naked girl!! I haven't seen one of those in years!!! Where do I sign
up?!?!?!

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

wise.of.clean790@gmail.com wrote:

http://
--

Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

wise.of.clean790@gmail.com wrote:

http://

abuse@telus.com


--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

 

[Blash]

wise.of.clean790@gmail.com wrote on 5/11/07 5:59 PM:

http://britneyboobs.blogspot.com/2007/05/britney-spears-slips-up-again-exposes
.html
- Exclusive pics of Britney Spears.......

Jeez thanks.....everyones' been waiting!!!

 

[Daniel Mandic]

Radium wrote:

My dream PC is as hardware, real-time, and digital as possible. In
addition, it uses the least amount of buffering required [hopefully
none] and experiences the least amount of latency possible [again,
hopefully none].

Hi!


Your dream PC can't be digital...



Best regards,

Daniel Mandic

 

[Daniel Mandic]

MooseFET wrote:

This may be your dream but it may also be a nightmare. You also said
you wanted low power and no fan. If you want a lot of speed, you
really want a good cooling system and a whole lot of power. If you
want to make a faster system with low power, you want to make use of
things like lookup tables and hashes. Forbidding the use of large
ROMs means you really can do that.

Hi MooseFET!


It depends to the application you need.

For example, a 486 with some freeware (LTSpice, FreePCB e.g.) can
outperform the old methods for schematic-design, not to mention all the
gimmicks of FreePCB (netlist, rats-nest, routing... wonderful!!!).
[Here is no need for a fast and hungry PC]

But an ol' Celluloid (e.g. std. 35mm) film will outperform any digital
version, especially when seen on big cinema screen
[Here, the faster the digital, the better :-(, with a foreseenable
No-Ending. Update Paradise ]

Audio is much easier to handle by digital but still not has the charme
of top-class magnetic tapes and/or vinyl-can.



Digital is better for my first mentioned... imho.


Best regards,

Daniel Mandic

 

[Daniel Mandic]

MooseFET wrote:

Actually, I think we now haver to say "was clueless". He does appear
to be learning. I don't think he is doing so efficiently but he is
doing it. He is very like a lot of early students on the subject of
electronics. He hasn't yet learned how to learn the subject.

The Basics are the most difficult ;-). U, I and R /or G.



Best regards,

Daniel Mandic

 

On May 14, 2:08 am, ready.or.speci...@gmail.com wrote:

http://jessicasboobs.blogspot.com/2007/05/jessica-simpson-furious-aft...
- Have a look and see what I mean its a boob job you just can't afFORD
to miss out on!

Ummm..I'll have to increase the air pressure in my Jessica Simpson
deluxe model love doll..about 42 psi should do it.

co jones

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

JBoatcapt@cox.net wrote:

On May 14, 2:08 am, ready.or.speci...@gmail.com wrote:
http://jessicasboobs.blogspot.com/2007/05/jessica-simpson-furious-aft...
- Have a look and see what I mean its a boob job you just can't afFORD
to miss out on!

Ummm..I'll have to increase the air pressure in my Jessica Simpson
deluxe model love doll..about 42 psi should do it.

co jones

Is it true that the inflatable version is smarter that the real
thing?


--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

 

[Daniel Mandic]

Wilco Dijkstra wrote:

Let me get this straight. If someone claims "the earth is flat" and
someone else calls that trolling and asks for evidence supporting
that claim, which poster is the troll according to your definition?

Which World? The Small or the Great World?

Nothing is really flat... (except the Monolith, of course ;-)).



Best Regards,

Daniel Mandic

 

[John Fields]

On 14 May 2007 23:09:58 GMT, "Daniel Mandic" <daniel_mandic@aon.at>
wrote:

Wilco Dijkstra wrote:

Let me get this straight. If someone claims "the earth is flat" and
someone else calls that trolling and asks for evidence supporting
that claim, which poster is the troll according to your definition?

Which World? The Small or the Great World?

Nothing is really flat... (except the Monolith, of course ;-)).

---
If a plane is defined as being flat, then it is.


--
JF

 

[Rich Grise]

On Mon, 14 May 2007 23:09:58 +0000, Daniel Mandic wrote:

Wilco Dijkstra wrote:

Let me get this straight. If someone claims "the earth is flat" and
someone else calls that trolling and asks for evidence supporting
that claim, which poster is the troll according to your definition?

Which World? The Small or the Great World?

Nothing is really flat... (except the Monolith, of course ;-)).

Have you ever noticed that, except for light beams, there are no straight
lines in Nature?

Cheers!
Rich

 

[Don Bowey]

On 5/14/07 6:42 PM, in article pan.2007.05.15.02.43.21.981474@example.net,
"Rich Grise" <rich@example.net> wrote:

On Mon, 14 May 2007 23:09:58 +0000, Daniel Mandic wrote:
Wilco Dijkstra wrote:

Let me get this straight. If someone claims "the earth is flat" and
someone else calls that trolling and asks for evidence supporting
that claim, which poster is the troll according to your definition?

Which World? The Small or the Great World?

Nothing is really flat... (except the Monolith, of course ;-)).


Have you ever noticed that, except for light beams, there are no straight
lines in Nature?

Some light beams aren't straight either. It's all relative.

Cheers!
Rich

 

[Daniel Mandic]

Rich Grise wrote:

Have you ever noticed that, except for light beams, there are no
straight lines in Nature?

Cheers!
Rich

Hi Rich!


Even Light is attractable to the force of Gravity . It is very
straight, though.... (more an effect, not a cause, IMHO. As humans
do..., themself they aren't straight, but its Works...)



Best regards,

Daniel Mandic

 

[demonospamdubious@yahoo.c]

On May 14, 12:08 am, ready.or.speci...@gmail.com wrote:

..

 

[D from BC]

On Thu, 17 May 2007 16:42:21 GMT, Rich Grise <rich@example.net> wrote:

Crossposted to sci.electronics.design,sci.electronics.basics ;
followups-to set to sci.electronics.basics.

I found a 556 in my junque box, and thought it'd be fun to flash an LED or
something, but I only need one half of it. I know unterminated inputs are
anathema for digital chips, but what about the spare half of a 556? From
the schem. on the data sheet,
http://www.national.com/pf/LM/LM556.html
http://www.national.com/ds.cgi/LM/LM556.pdf
it kinda looks like pulling them to either rail might be not too good for
the chip - what do you guys recommend?

Thanks!
Rich

I think anything within the datasheet supply rails is allowable to all
input pins..
Don't connect the output pin and the open collector to anything.

In a low current app,look at the datasheet to find out if a L or H to
the inputs consume more or less current.
It might be possible to leave all pins loose if the internal op amps
are not switching to input buzz pick up.. (It's not CMOS.)
It might consume a tiny bit more current if stuff is switching without
purpose.

D from BC

 

[John Fields]

On Thu, 17 May 2007 16:42:21 GMT, Rich Grise <rich@example.net>
wrote:

Crossposted to sci.electronics.design,sci.electronics.basics ;
followups-to set to sci.electronics.basics.

I found a 556 in my junque box, and thought it'd be fun to flash an LED or
something, but I only need one half of it. I know unterminated inputs are
anathema for digital chips, but what about the spare half of a 556? From
the schem. on the data sheet,
http://www.national.com/pf/LM/LM556.html
http://www.national.com/ds.cgi/LM/LM556.pdf
it kinda looks like pulling them to either rail might be not too good for
the chip - what do you guys recommend?

---
It's bipolar so no big deal, but if I wanted to nail everything down
I'd run THRESHOLD and RESET low, TRIGGER high, and let the rest of
it float.


--
JF