Chip with simple program for Toy

TVO ilmoitti keväällä -07, että Suomeen aletaan jo syksystä rakentamaan
kuten sanoivat YVA:ssa peräti kolmea ydinvoimalahanketta kerrallaan! Kului
vain hetki kesän alkuun ja KTM/Pekkarinen ilmoitti, että ydinhankkeitten
starttiin otetaan liki 2v etäisyyslisäaika! Mitä oli tapahtunut? 2007 jää
historiaan vuotena jonka jälkeen suljettiin maailman viimeinen
energiapositiivinen uraanikaivos. Niinikää viimeinen uraanikaivos Tsekissä.

Jotain todella ihmeellistä asiaan liittyy, kun paniikissa samana vuonna
lukuisat Euroopan maat Ranska, Italia, Saksa jne. ilmoittivat rikokseksi
maassaan, jos sinne tulee yhtään uraaninkaivajaa. Mitään näistä ei
tiedotettu Suomessa. Ei edes sitä, että -07 Venäjän presidentti Putin sanoi
lopettavansa maailman uraanin kriittisimmän jalostuksen Majakissa tekevän
isotooppilaitoksensa toiminnan kannattamattomana ja energiapositiivisen,
kuten sanottiin pysyvän uraaninkaivuun loppumiseen maailmassa. Ydinalan
ammattipiireissä tiedetään, että koko Euroopan uraani kiertää Majakin
pullonkaulan kautta jatkuvasti. Joten asioiden totaalitäärinen blackout
tiedotusvälineissämme mykistää.

OL-3 projektiaan hakeva TVO oli edellämainitut eduskunnalle hakemuksessaan
esilletuonut. Jo 1988 MIT:n ennakoiman energiapositiivisen uraanin
loppumisen 0,3% malmikeskiarvon alituksesta oli hyvissä ajoin ollut tietoa
myös ydinsektorilaisilla. Mikään yllätys polttoaineuraaniloppuminen ei
ollut. TVO oli ilmoittanut anomukseensa Eduskunnalle, että noin v.2020
mennessä peräti jo viidennes ydinvoimasta perustuu plutoniumjätepolttoaineen
kierrätyksiin. OL-3 laitos on sittemmin todettu v.2008 laittomaksi
plutoniumpolttolaitokseksi, johon esim. nyky Suomella ei ole käyttöoikeutta.
Lisäksi OL-3 laitos on todettu myös niin epävakaan palamalimitin
koekappaleeksi, että Hautala ilmoitti toukokuussa -08, miten koko systeemi
menee USA:n perussyynitutkimuksiin, ties monestako
ydinturvarikkomuksestaan. Suomen plutoniumajon vaatima NATO-jäsenyys on myös
tutkinnan taustalla yhä auki. OL-3 laitos joutuu siis odottelemaan
starttilupaansa seuraavat 3-vuotta. Ennakoinnissa jo nyt on, että koko
laitoksen aiotut polttoainelimitit, 1.5-2v latausseisokit,
uraaninipitoisuudet ja vastaavat mennevät uusiksi. Jopa pysyvä
starttauskielto koko laitostyypille on täysin mahdollinen.

TVO suunitteli syksyn laitosurakkansa siis sen varaan, että v.2007 kaikessa
hiljaisuudessa Cernissä tehtävät laserisotooppijalostuskokeet onnistuisivat
90% saannolle. 11% tulos romutti koko tämän mallin pysyvästi. Vaikka
koe-epäonnistumisesta on vuosi aikaa ja ydinvoimaloissamme ei tietoakaan
polttoaineista jatkoon asia on pidetty totalitäärisen salattuna! Mikä
tietysti suomennettuna tarkoittaa, ettei ydinyhtiöillä ole hajua mistä
jatkossa uraaninsa ottaa. Hallitukselta ei ole myös tullut lopullisia
starttausmääräyksiä edes Suomen 0,1% energianegatiivisen uraaninkaivuun 80
000km2 kokoisiin suuniteltuihin Arevan uraanikaivosmassiiveille. Näyttää
myös siltä, että Venäjän miltei sotajalalle kiukuttanut Askolan
isotooppijalostamoaie ydinaseperustushanke lupaavasti takkuaa. Maailmassa on
jäljellä oikeastaan vain parin vuoden asepurku-uraanivarastoja. Myös Venäjän
ydinalalle äärimmäisen vakavasta Majakin vuoden 2008 alasajosta ei olla
uskallettu hiiskua julkisuuteen mitään enteellisesti. Jotain ydinasian
vakavuudesta kertoo myös se, että pattitilanteessa huhutaan jopa hallituksen
kaatamisaikeista?
 
This is not a wager. �It is a free market free trade offer.

I'll pay $200 US for a hard copy answer to The Question from an
outspoken "market" economist at the Hoover Inst., Heritage Foundation,
American Enterprise, Cato, the Chicago School of Economics, von
Mises.*

The Question is:

"Does free speech precede each and every free trade?"

The rules are simple.

1. �The letterhead must be from Hoover Inst., Heritage Foundation,
American Enterprise, Cato, the Chicago School of Economics, von Mises
Inst.*

2. �The Question must appear in the body of the letter.

3. �Some text must appear to be an answer to The Question, either a
"yes" or "no" or "I dunno."

4. �The signature of the outspoken economist must appear in the
letter.

5. �Email BretCah...@aol.com a copy in an attached pdf or tiff file
along with a mailing address. �If you are really secretive include a
map of a stump or pipe where I can stuff the cash. ďż˝(Lower 48 only.)

* Other shill tanks may be considered.

Don't be silly. A professional economist with a job at the Cato Institute
isn't going to waste their time writing articles for $200.
Click to expand...
Certainly not if it will get the _outspoken_ market economist fired
and force him to start looking for a job in the productive sector.

But The Question is already causing many "market" economists to
reconsider their future.

Karl Rove quite astutely abandoned their free marketry rhetoric in
favor of jingoism.

"Either you support tax cuts for the rich or you're a Saddam lover."

If they cannot provide any political cover eventually their funding
will dry up.

It's obvious to more and more people their primary concern ain't free
markets.


Bret Cahill
 
On Aug 21, 1:27 pm, retrogro...@comcast.net wrote:
On Wed, 20 Aug 2008 22:08:18 -0400, Democracy Highlander

nospam_example_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
There is NO difference between the finality in communism and fascism. They
both lead to the same end: A plutocracy where a small oligarchy run as
tyrant over the enslaved people.

Sort of like capitalism in that regard. Or libertarianism. welcome to
human nature.
Click to expand...
Of course you have no actual evidence that's that's true.
Capitalism
historically didn't lead to a small oligarchy run as a tyrant over
the
enslaved people, it ran as a fairly large class desperately trying to
figure out how to serve the people. Small oligarchies are promoted
by anti-capitalist, anti-libertarian restrictions on trade like Anti-
Trust
laws and industry protection.
 
This is not a wager. ?It is a free market free trade offer.

I'll pay $200 US for a hard copy answer to The Question from an
outspoken "market" economist at the Hoover Inst., Heritage Foundation,
American Enterprise, Cato, the Chicago School of Economics, von
Mises.*

The Question is:

"Does free speech precede each and every free trade?"

? And what possible use could the answer to that question have?

Well into 13 figures a year to the U. S. economy.

So what?

�now there is a fine example of a logic. its called "what me worry"
Click to expand...
Actually he has "bigger fish to fry" than trillions a year, i. e.,
trying to debate a self evident truth.


Bret Cahill
 
"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote
BTW, in conventional English, The first word in a sentence is
capitalized.
Click to expand...
In conventional English, "capitalised" is spelt with
an "s". :)

I really wish this Cahill nincompoop would fuck off out
of s.e.b., for (last time I read any of it), his nonsense
had little to nothing to do with electronics. And most of
the threads I see on here now were originated by him.

If this were "real life", and he'd gone into say, clubs
and societies around a city, and started shouting rubbish over
people while they engaged in their various discussions,
and continued it for weeks, and forced entry when he was
told he was persona non grata, then pretty soon, several
people would get together and "pay him a visit" that would
convince him never to try it again.

Groups trimmed to just s.e.b..


Martin
 
On Aug 24, 3:02 pm, Bret Cahill <BretCah...@aol.com> wrote:
It's self-evident: poor wealth does not flow to the rich.
The only way for the rich to get richer is for new
wealth to be created. If you mean that the labor
of the poor is being expropriated, just say so.
It's absurd to claim that their wealth is being taken
away, since they have none, by definition.

The poor are never properly paid for their work in the first place.
Click to expand...
Define "properly."

This is why the outspoken market economists will always dodge The
Question, "does free speech precede each and every free trade?"
Click to expand...
That one has already been debunked, remember?
You can engage in a free trade in Korans in spite
of not being able to say that the Koran is false.

Or is the self-evident truth of the Korans falsity
"vital economic information" that would preclude
such a trade from being free?
 
On Aug 24, 4:21 pm, forbisga...@msn.com wrote:
On Aug 24, 3:41 pm, Fred Weiss <fredwe...@papertig.com> wrote:

True. To the extent that their wages are inflated by union contracts,
mandatory minimum wages, tariff protection, etc., they are paid *too
much*. (Which is precisely why so many jobs have gone overseas).

...

Furthermore, "free speech" is merely the right to express one's views
without restraint in a forum of one's own. It is not the right to loot
others.

So, for the poor to organize so as to stand up to superior economic
power is to engaging in looting?

I dont even thing free speach is sufficient for free trade.  I think
near equality of circumstances is required.  Any time people
with unequal power engage in trade the person with the greater
power has the advantage.  Nearly all laborers need their jobs to
survive but most businesses don't need any particular non-owner
employee to survive.
Click to expand...
By the same token, the laborers don't need that
particular job to survive. Competition is choice
is competition is choice. The problem with
socialist amd fascist monopolies is there is no
other alternative.
 
John Larkin wrote:
Looks like hell on my Panasonic dot-matrix printer.
Click to expand...

What model? I still have about a dozen on hand.


--
http://improve-usenet.org/index.html

Goggle Groups, and Web TV users must request to be white listed, or I
will not see your messages.

If you have broadband, your ISP may have a NNTP news server included in
your account: http://www.usenettools.net/ISP.htm
 
John Larkin wrote:

On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 10:20:27 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com> wrote:


On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 11:19:25 -0600, Vladimir Vassilevsky
antispam_bogus@hotmail.com> wrote:



John Larkin wrote:


On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 09:55:13 -0600, Vladimir Vassilevsky
antispam_bogus@hotmail.com> wrote:


John Larkin wrote:


I'm currently advertising (Craigslist) for an embedded-systems
programmer. The ad asks for "something like a resume" and a code
sample. Got lots of florid resumes, but only a few people (out of
close to 100) actually submitted code samples, and only one was a
decent, readable hunk of code. Pitiful. Would you hire an artist who
refuses to show you any of his work?

Have you listed the salary as well?

No. It would vary a lot, depending on the person.

Not a lot. You already made up the number in your head, and you know
exactly the type of the person that you need.


If I hire a talented
kid with little experience, and spend a lot of time on speculative
training, I'd pay less than for someone that I knew was going to be
very productive right away. I know a few people like that, but they're
not available for hire right now. Hell, I'd give them a piece of the
company.

Quit telling stories and playing games. Each thing in this world has the
price.


Would the decent engineer work for this salary?

A good embedded systems programmer would make as much as a good
engineer. Both should contribute about equal value. If a programmer
working one hour saves me or another design engineer one hour (I
wish!) then s/he'd be pretty valuable.



Would you bother for someone who refuses to show the money or who wants
something for nothing?


What are you raving about?

You are complaining that your ad is attracting only riff-raff. I am just
trying to explain why.


We have excellent pay and benefits, as the
ad notes.

That tells no information.


Nobody here works for nothing. Most hiring involves
evaluation and negotiation on both sides.

And, incidentally, about 100 people did bother. Maybe 4 or 5 are worth
interviewing.

Such a poor result is not because the world is pitiful, but because this
is the expected response to your request.



Vladimir Vassilevsky

DSP and Mixed Signal Design Consultant

http://www.abvolt.com




Sheeeesh! What a fuck-head! I take it you weren't qualified to apply
?:)

...Jim Thompson



Good point. He knows I'd never hire him. Far too rigid and far too
willing to reach firm conclusions on inadequate evidence. Dangerous.
Click to expand...
Fie, loosing the face again. I take the ad hominem attack as a scored
point :) The argument got straight to the target, wasn't it?

VLV
 
On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 17:13:40 +0000, James Arthur wrote:
...
Maybe I misunderstood,
Click to expand...
Nope.

but wasn't the goal to engage a
relay when a switch opens, then release the relay a minute
or two or three after the switch re-closes?
Click to expand...
Yup:
"The goal is to turn on a 12v relay with a switch that is closed when off
and open when on."

O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay! Both Johns have scresed one up today!
;-D

Cheers!
Rich
 
On Wed, 25 Feb 2009 21:32:33 -0500, Spehro Pefhany wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 01:08:45 GMT, the renowned James Arthur
Rich Grise wrote:
On Tue, 24 Feb 2009 18:58:40 +0000, James Arthur wrote:
....
He's not perfect--he programs in uppercase. Otherwise, yep,
pretty much.

Assembly has ALWAYS been written in upper case! Well, sometimes you
can comment in lower case for readability, but lower case code is
kinda airy-fairy. ;-)

Yeah, but he comments in uppercase too. Brute.

lower case is more readable because the letters are not all boxy-like-
they have some bits wot go above the base line and some wot go above
the others. The envelope of the word can be enough to allow it to be
recognized.

When I was a whippersnapper and computers were still made with stone
Click to expand...
axes and animal skins, all we HAD was upper case! ;-)

Cheers!
Rich
 
On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 18:35:49 GMT, James Arthur <bogusabdsqy@verizon.net>
wrote:

James Arthur wrote:
John Fields wrote:

But... something esle was running around in my head and here it is:
a _much, much_ better way to do it, Duh...


+V>-----------+--------+-----+----+--------+
| | | | |
[1M] [390] | [10K] [COIL]
| | | | |
| +----|+\ | D
____ | | | >--+------G 2N7000
O O---+--------|----|-/ S
| | | | |
| [68ľF] [Z10V] | |
| | | | |
GND>---+------+--------+-----+-------------+


snip


Maybe I misunderstood, but wasn't the goal to engage a
relay when a switch opens, then release the relay a minute
or two or three after the switch re-closes?

If the delays aren't critical, why not something
sloppy, like this:

+12v
-+-
|
.------------+----------+
| | |
[R1] | |
| |/ | |> /
+----------| Q1 [relay] | /
| |>. | O O
| | |
+-----[R2]---+-----. |--'
| | | |<-. Q2
O C1 --- | |--+
\ --- |
\ | ===
O === GND
| GND
===
GND


Turn-on / turn-off time ratio is limited by
R1 / R2, which can be large due to Q1, and
the high impedance of Q2's gate.

Q2 dissipation is high for a long time during
turnoff, so use a big part. Or add hysteresis
and a little elegance, at the expense of adding
parts.

A big Q2 can take the relay kick, so no diode
across the coil needed.


Oh, I forgot about the high voltage. Needs a diode to
protect Q1 b-e.
+12v
-+-
|
.------------+----------+
| | |
[R1] | |
| D1 |/ | |> /
+---|>|----| Q1 [relay] | /
| |>. | O O
| | |
+-----[R2]---+-----. |--'
| | | |<-. Q2
O C1 --- | |--+
\ --- |
\ | ===
O === GND
| GND
===
GND



This version uses hysteresis to make the relay
drop out more cleanly:


+12v
-+-
|
.-------------------+----+----+
| | | |
[R1] [R3] [D1][relay] |> /
| | | | | /
| | '----+ O O
| | |
| | |/
| +-------| Q2
+--[R2]--+-----. |--' |>.
| | | |<-. Q1 |
O C1 --- | |--+---------'
\ --- |
\ | [R3]
O | |
| === ===
=== GND GND
GND
Click to expand...
---
Sure, why not?

There's lots of ways to skin a cat. :)

JF
 
On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 08:45:47 -0800, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 10:32:55 -0600, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 09:14:12 -0600, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:


---
But... something esle was running around in my head and here it is:
a _much, much_ better way to do it, Duh...



Or just...


+V>-----------+--------+-----+----+--------+
| |
[1M] [COIL]
| |
| e
____ | / -----b pnp darlington or
O O---+------------------/ c low threshold pfet
| | |
| [68ľF] |
| | |
GND>---+------+--------+-----+-------------+
Click to expand...
---
Huh???

RTFM

JF
 
On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 06:33:21 +0000, James Arthur wrote:
....
.SBTTL IRQ6 SERVICE

; The HITLOCK mechanism enforces a minimum irq-to-irq delay so
^^^^^^^^^^
Click to expand...

IRQ-to-IRQ. There is no "irq". ;-)

Cheers!
Rich
 
On Wed, 25 Feb 2009 14:38:34 -0800, John Larkin wrote:
REAL PROGRAMMERS DON'T USE LOWER CASE.
Click to expand...
So, how are those FORTRAN FPGAs working out for you? ;-)

Cheers!
Rich
 
Rich Grise wrote:
On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 17:13:40 +0000, James Arthur wrote:
...
Maybe I misunderstood,

Nope.

but wasn't the goal to engage a
relay when a switch opens, then release the relay a minute
or two or three after the switch re-closes?

Yup:
"The goal is to turn on a 12v relay with a switch that is closed when off
and open when on."

O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay! Both Johns have scresed one up today!
;-D

Cheers!
Rich
Click to expand...
I think John Larkin was simplifying John Field's function,
not responding to the OP.

I posted a couple circuits. Here's the fewest parts I
can manage:


+12v
-+-
|
.-----------------------+
| |
[R1] |
| D1 | |> /
+---|>|------. [relay] | /
| | | O O
| | |
+-----[R2]---+-----. |--'
| | | |<-. Q1
O C1 --- | |--+
\ --- |
\ | ===
O === GND
| GND
===
GND

If R2 = 1000 x R1, and the hold-ON is 3 minutes,
the turn-on time is <180mS.

James Arthur
 
On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 18:50:35 GMT, Rich Grise <rich@example.net> wrote:

On Thu, 26 Feb 2009 02:30:47 +0000, Jon Kirwan wrote:

On Wed, 25 Feb 2009 21:52:09 GMT, Rich Grise <rich@example.net> wrote:

snip
Bank-switching is evil.

Only if you think being exposed to hardware that balances competing
needs well is evil.

Were they too cheap (or incompetent) to just stack one on top of the
other (even with mapping for the common ones) and select it with an
address bit?

Thanks,
Rich
Click to expand...
You need more address bits that way, which means that LARGE amount
program memory space (= money) is wasted because of a few instructions
that cross page boundaries. Multiply that times large quantities and
you'd be p*ssing away huge amounts of cash. Not everyone can afford to
be so wasteful, you know.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top