Driver to drive?

On Tuesday, April 15, 2014 2:39:05 PM UTC-4, bud-- wrote:

On 4/15/2014 10:01 AM, hasitsicsare2011@gmail.com wrote:



In the case of Homeopathy, I just keep an open mind.





Your open mind appears to have dribbled out and there is none left.

Don't forget he Buddhists! We are an extended empty mind plus
nothing at the core!
I am trying to focus on the big hoaxes. To focus on homeopathy is like the
a dictator parading out the usual suspects, excluding himself. Put it this way,
the perpetrators of the hoaxes like to accuse the homeopathy crowd so as to
distract attention from themselves. I'm interested in the big fish.

 

On Wednesday, April 16, 2014 7:56:53 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:

On Wednesday, 16 April 2014 19:39:28 UTC+10, Martin Brown wrote:

On 15/04/2014 23:10, Bill Sloman wrote:



On Wednesday, 16 April 2014 02:29:38 UTC+10, haitic...@gmail.com wrote:



LIBERAL HOAX #3 - Carcinogens







I want to add the area of carcinogens in the environment. This piece of flim-flam is beloved of the government because they can "protect us" and make us passive in the face of a major threat. Centralized government is desperate to find a way to be useful, because it makes them look good, and maybe in some there is a twinge of guilt about their theft of money from the economy.







So insulate your roof with loose asbestos.







You'll get mesothelioma, and so will your kids, but not fast enough to get you out of the gene pool early enough to do any good.







http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesothelioma







As the unfortunate punk rock guru Malcolm McClaren knows to his cost.







http://metro.co.uk/2010/04/12/malcom-mclaren-exposed-to-asbestos-in-sex-shop-233221/







He is unusually high profile most of the other fatalities have been low



profile laggers, boilermen and furnace workers in industrial plant.







snipped the rest of the pig-ignorant twaddle



beta-naphthylamine would be a lot more effective and is extremely potent

against males - causing a lethal bladder cancer in most men. It was

amongst the first serious industrial carcinogens to be identified in the

dyestuffs industry and is now largely banned worldwide.



http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/roc/twelfth/profiles/naphthylamine.pdf



Smokers are also exposed to it in tobacco smoke and bladder cancer will

shorten their life expectancy if their heart or lungs don't fail first.



Tobacco smoke contains a wide variety of carcinogens. My father was heavy smoker until his heart started acting up when he was in his early sixties.



He die of kidney cancer when he was 82, rather than lung cancer - I never got around to telling him that kidney cancer is twice as common amongst heavy smokers (more than 20 cigarettes a day) than it is in the general population. The risk is supposed to go back to normal if you've not smoked for ten years, and he'd not smoked for nearly twenty years when the kidney cancer showed up, so perhaps my restraint was justified.



Cancer theory says that it takes about six individual mutations to turn a normal stem cell into a cancer stem cell, and one would imagine that any period of inhaling mutagens would give them a head start.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knudson_hypothesis

Kidney would suggest something related to exposure to some paper processing chemicals as being more likely than the smoking. Some occupations have fairly to very high cancer risks associated with them, check out exterminators and also the lawn treatment people, cancer risk is very high.

--

Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[David Brown]

On 15/04/14 19:25, Tim Williams wrote:

"David Brown" <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote in message
news:liiqok$j04$1@dont-email.me...
In the real world, separate memory spaces for data and code is not /too/
bad, as long as read-only data is in the same memory space as read-write
data. (I don't mean you should be able to write over the read-only data
- it's fine for it to be protected in some way.) Harvard architecture
micros like the PICs and the AVRs are a serious pain to work with, and
the separate memory spaces means you have to jump through hoops to make
read-only data work. Slow, inefficient, and error-prone.

Regarding AVR8s at least, if you've only worked with them through GCC, I
understand that. The last time I tried to do something involved (a menu
datastructure stored in program memory), I found it was impossible to
convince the compiler that A connects to B to C to A, not to mention
trying to find what convoluted data type it wanted (is it a pointer to
data to PGM to..??!).

It is nearly always /possible/ to get the setup you want, but it is
sometimes very difficult.

I've worked with AVRs with a few different compilers, and from
assembler, though I use mainly gcc.

There is /no/ way to write good, clear code, with a standards-compliant
compiler and no extra keywords, generating standard object files, and
get proper control of read-only data in flash on an AVR or other
microcontroller with separate memory spaces.

There are different tricks used, and different compromises, but you
cannot write code as clearly, efficiently, and as portably as you can
with single address space processors.

Some of the methods I have seen are "progmem" attributes and related
macros (older gcc), flash memory spaces (newer gcc), "__flash" keywords
(IAR), and abuse of "const" (Imagecraft). Other possibilities are
complex C++ classes and templates, accessor functions, "universal"
pointers (also in newer gcc), and full-program optimisation with a
particularly smart compiler.

The underlying instructions couldn't be simpler:
- Load Z with address you want to look at
- LPM Z[+] to retrieve half a WORD (postincrement optional)
Hardly a rich operation (no immediate or indexed offset modes), but that's
not inconsistent with that sort of thing anyway.

Yes, it /could/ be simpler - it could use the same instructions that are
used to access other data. And therein lies the problem.

The main downside is, programming RISC in assembly is so boring because
you need four instructions to get anything done.

No, there is no problem - I've done plenty of RISC assembly programming
(on AVRs and MSP430 in particular). It's not hard, and you don't have
to use more instructions. Typically AVR and MSP430 code is a lot more
compact than on small CISC devices I have worked with in assembly,
including 8051, COP8, HPC, PIC. The code/data space split doesn't cause
much of an issue in assembly programming, but it is a pain for C and
other high-level languages.

RISC assembly programming on big cpus, such as PPC, is a pain because
they are so complex. But so is assembly programming on big CISC cpus.

Tim

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

On Wed, 16 Apr 2014 09:50:17 +0100, the renowned Martin Brown
<|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:

There is a slight difference in that to get a UK passport or drivers
licence you will have to expend a fair chunk of money and time.

Very few people carry either document around with them routinely.

There are other ways than a national ID. Ontario requires photo ID for
a Drivers licence, and you have to have it with you when driving, so
most people have photo ID with them at all times.

http://wpmedia.blogs.windsorstar.com/2012/03/licence-01.jpg?w=630

If you don't have a Drivers license the same Provincial authority can
issue a photo ID card, since its so often requested, if not required.

http://files.ontariogovernment.ca/pictures/ontario-photo_sample_en.jpg

If you qualify for health insurance, you will probably have an OHIP
card with a photo.

http://beta.images.theglobeandmail.com/bc1/news/national/article4442364.ece/ALTERNATES/w620/healthcard.JPG

If you have neither, you're probably an immigrant

http://www.peianc.com/sitefiles/Image/Content/Guide/documents/pr.jpg
(federal)

Or maybe you have Indian status

http://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/DAM/DAM-INTER-HQ/STAGING/images-images/crd2_1100100032425_eng.jpg
(federal)

Or a firearmslicense
http://www.pierrelemieux.org/Gun_licence_%202007-07-05.jpg
(federal)

Most people keep their passports stashed safely away at home.

Usually being in possession of the drop-off slip is enough for picking
parcels up, but they can ask for photo ID when *shipping* things at
the counter of FedEx etc.

The obvious national ID would be a Social Insurance card, but it's
legally prohibited from being used as such except for financial stuff,
and they don't carry a photo (or they'd have to be renewed regularly).



Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com

 

On Tuesday, April 15, 2014 12:12:09 AM UTC+1, haitic...@gmail.com wrote:

I'm open to any suggestions of further scientific flim-flam. On my list are
AI, medical research, much nano-technology, alternative energy, climate change,
SSRI drugs, medical treatments, IPhone, IOT...

Freud & modern psychiatry are 2 more


NT

 

[David Brown]

On 15/04/14 18:01, haiticare2011@gmail.com wrote:

Friends are more important than diet or anything else!

Explain that, materialist scientists!



When I see things like that, I am hesitant to dismiss homeopathy completely.



When you write that, I have no hesitation in dismissing you completely.


I don't blame you! Homeopathy is a hard pill to swallow!

No, homoeopathy is complete and utter bollocks. It is the same drivel
as crystal healing, astrology and similar nonsense. There are some
"alternative medicine" treatments that /may/ have some minor physical
effect in some cases, in theory (though not necessarily a good effect) -
acupuncture is one such "treatment". But homoeopathy is well within the
category of provably zero effect (while acupuncture is has zero provable
effect).

Note that this does not mean that there is no measurable health effect
from going to a homeopathist (or other imaginary "alternative
treatement") - there are two types of effects that are very real. One
is that some people believe in such nonsense and as a result they fail
to get required proper medical treatment. This is, of course, a serious
health risk.

The other effect is similar to the "network of friends" effect.
Physical health and psychological feelings are not independent - being
ill makes you feel bad, but feeling bad can also make you ill. So if
some "treatment" makes you feel better, it can help your bodies own
defence and repair mechanisms do their job, and it can help you help
yourself (such as by encouraging you to eat properly and move around
rather than lying ill in bed). But it is not the homoeopathy or the
bottles of water that help - it is the person taking time to listen to
your problems, reducing your stress and relaxing you that helps. And if
you /think/ that a "treatment" is helping you, then this effect is
re-enforced (much due to reduction in stress and worry) - that is the
placebo effect. The placebo effect is so strong that it even works
(though less effectively) when you know the "treatment" is a placebo!

But so are the health
benefits of networks of friends!

No, this is not difficult to understand at all. See above.

Someone said that intelligence is the ability to hold two differing ideas in
mind at the same time. In my defense, that is what I am forced to do in some
cases. In the case of Homeopathy, I just keep an open mind.

Keep an open mind - but not so open that your brains dribble out.

There seems to be a popular concept that all ideas and theories are
equally valid, and should be discussed and considered together. But
despite the popularity, the concept is totally wrong.

So by all means keep an open mind on things that are not well
understood, or when there could be complicating factors that make it
difficult to be scientifically categoric about effects. But for clear,
simple, well-understood concepts with solid scientific evidence and
indisputable everyday experience, there is no need to be open-minded.
Just as you are not open-minded about how gravity works when you drop a
pencil, you should not be open-minded about how dissolving substances in
water works.

Quantum mechanics is a good example of what could be dismissed completely. It
just violates ordinary principles of thought. It just rocks you back on your
heels and forces you to admit your rational means of thought is worthless in
some major respects.

Yes, quantum mechanics is counter-intuitive (at least until you have
studied it significantly - many of its results drop out as inevitable
logical consequences of simple intuitive ideas). But that does not mean
that other counter-intuitive ideas may be correct!

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_lu5_5Od7WY>

 

[Mike Perkins]

On 16/04/2014 09:30, Martin Brown wrote:

On 16/04/2014 08:41, John Devereux wrote:
Robert Baer <robertbaer@localnet.com> writes:

haiticare2011@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, April 14, 2014 6:09:57 PM UTC-4, Mike Perkins wrote:
I ordered components from DigiKey a short while ago.
Unfortunately no one was in when UPS delivered.
The UPS UK website says that 3 delivery attempts will be made.
However the consignment has gone to a "shop" and is now stuck there.
UPS require "government photo-ID" for me me to retrieve the
consignment
from the shop and I currently don't have any at hand and UPS won't
attempt any more deliveries.

Yes I can get my photo-ID but it's not at hand at the moment, I can
have

something sent to me, but this is all very silly and myopic.

Has anyone else been in the same situation and how did they
overcome the

problem?

tough. I have to admit - some parts of the story dont make sense.
You say that
UPS will try 3X, but they tried once and now package is stuck at
their shop. ???


One idea is systematically make phone calls higher and higher in UPS.
That will only piss them of, and i absolutely guarantee that the
package will disappear off the face of the earth and it will be
impossible to get UPS to pay their so-called insurance.

It is *Digikeys* problem. Failing that, in the UK, it is the credit card
companies problem.

Not really. UPS has strict identification requirements for collection of
the parcel. The recipient has the choice of either satisfying their
overly strict requirements or not collecting his package.

Plenty countries require photoID when collecting potentially valuable
parcels. The OP's problem is his lack of any convenient photoID and the
UKs totally haphazard list A/list B approach to "proving" your identity.

If you don't have a UK passport or modern UK drivers licence you are
pretty well stuck if asked to produce "government photoID".

I actually have both, but not currently with me as working remotely.

If UPS are so worried about identity you would have thought their
machines or their parcel shops would be taking a photo of the recipient,
far easier than deciphering an electronic signature or "sight" of photo-ID.



--
Mike Perkins
Video Solutions Ltd
www.videosolutions.ltd.uk

 

[Martin Brown]

On 16/04/2014 14:11, dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:

On Monday, April 14, 2014 4:05:15 AM UTC-4, Martin Brown wrote:
Actually no you are wrong. The fault in this case lies in the Unix based
OpenSSL and it was used by many banks and other corporate secure
websites. Tools are available now to check if the dozy b*stards have
fixed their sites and the only sensible thing to do is change your
password(s) on all affected sites once they are secure again.

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/heartbleed-bug-undermines-the-safety-of-nearly-two-thirds-of-the-web-9247918.html?origin=internalSearch

For once MickeySoft is not guilty. This was an entirely open source MFU!

Not necessarily a MFU.

I think it probably was. Too much of blunderbuss to be spook stuff.

In this TED talk (recorded in March), starting at ~18:00, Snowden
describes a deliberate, concerted effort to compromise SSL:

SNOWDEN: "[Bullrun]... They're building in backdoors that not only
the NSA can exploit, but anyone else who has time and research to find
it [...] if we lose the trust of SSL--which was specifically targeted [...]"

http://www.ted.com/talks/edward_snowden_here_s_how_we_take_back_the_internet

Although it is tempting to attribute this to deliberate intent I doubt
that it is sufficiently focussed enough to be spook stuff. They tend to
make the cryptography weaker than it should be so that there is some
cunning way in using knowledge of a built in but not obvious weakness.

The objective being to be able to read specific intercepts from targets
of interest. Snaffling random Mumsnet passwords isn't their style!

I think this was just a genuine SNAFU. And all the people who used the
open source code without running it through a static vulnerabilities
analysis are just as guilty of failing to use due diligence. This code
was used in a very critical and sensitive security application.

Since Google reported the "bug" April 1, the talk appears to predate
the HeartBleed story.

"Never attribute to malloc() ..." --Hacker's Razor

Cheers,
James Arthur

It is when malloc fails or someone forgets to give back the allocated
memory or retains and uses a pointer to it that things go haywire.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

 

[David Brown]

On 16/04/14 15:36, haiticare2011@gmail.com wrote:

On Wednesday, April 16, 2014 8:20:01 AM UTC-4, David Brown wrote:
On 15/04/14 18:01, haizticare2011v@gmail.ccom wrote:
x


Friends are more important than diet or anything else!



Explain that, materialist scientists!


snip snip


The determining factor for me about "Hoaxes" is the following:

1. they involve a large amount of money in the perps pockets

Lots of people make money from selling homoeopathic "medicine" and
"treatments".

> 2. they involve disinformation to a large group of people

There is a surprisingly large number of people who believe there is at
least some effect of homoeopathy. And while many of the practitioners
know it is bunk (and are therefore conmen), I'm sure there are plenty
who really think it works (and have therefore been conned themselves by
suppliers of homoeopathy "medicines", books, and other products).

There is an even larger number of people who - like you - think it
should be treated with an open mind instead of being ridiculed.

> 3. official bodies are usually involved.

Authorities usually allow people to practice homoeopathy, rather than
treating the conmen as the criminals they are.

> 4. "true believer" advocates push the beliefs in public as proven fact

As do believers in homoeopathy.

So by your definition of a hoax (which I don't agree with as a good
definition), homoeopathy is clearly a hoax.

The reason I go easy on Homeopathy is it's small change compared to the hidden
hoaxes. Homeopathy is a "Brave New World" hoax. It is a hoax that the pols
point to and say: "See, there is a hoax." An official hoax.
Now, if the structure of institutional science itself is largely a hoax, then
a minor hoax like homeopathy provides a welcome distraction, doesn't it?

In sum, it is a "red herring."

There are certainly greater evils in the world than homoeopathy, but it
is certainly a hoax nonetheless. A shoplifter is not a bank robber, but
he is still a criminal.

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Wed, 16 Apr 2014 02:19:59 GMT, Ralph Barone
<address_is@invalid.invalid> wrote:

Jan Panteltje <panteltje@yahoo.com> wrote:
On a sunny day (Mon, 14 Apr 2014 20:57:11 -0700 (PDT)) it happened panfilero
panfilero@gmail.com> wrote in
3cc79148-b2ec-4410-a66a-51666fa01053@googlegroups.com>:

I'm interested in sensing AC and DC currents, 0-8A nominally, but up to 160=
A for 10msec current surges from both AC and DC sources... I'm after the be=
st resolution I can get... I don't know if it's possible to do this for bot=
h AC and DC off the same current sense circuit... I was thinking a shunt th=
rough a current sense amplifier then to an RMS to DC converter IC... but I'=
m not sure if this is the best approach... any suggestions?

much thanks!

I have some nice Hall sensor based DC sensors....
No shunt losses.
http://nl.farnell.com/lem/hx-10-p-sp2/current-transducer/dp/1617421
There are lower current models too.

" No shunt losses". OK, since we all know that TANSTAAFL, would anyone
care to estimate what the additional impedance of running a wire past a
Hall effect sensor is? It takes real force to push those electrons and
holes around, you know. Just the thought of calculating the answer makes my
brain hurt.

I have three of the LEM-50A units. Nice!

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson | mens |
| Analog Innovations | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| San Tan Valley, AZ 85142 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

 

[David Brown]

On 16/04/14 16:11, haiticare2011@gmail.com wrote:

The best guy to listen to about this is Prof. Bruce Ames, originator of the "Ames Carcinogen test." He now says that all the dangerous carcinogens is just a bunch of bunk. (bruce ames yourtube) He is THE main man on carcinogens, and at age 80, says his life work (or that part of it - he did work on mitochondrial aging and aging in general which is very current.) -was mistaken.



Wrong. "He was concerned that overzealous attention to the relatively minor health effects of trace quantities of carcinogens may divert scarce financial resources away from major health risks, and cause public confusion about the relative importance of different hazards."




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruce_Ames



He isn't saying that there aren't any carcinogens around - rather that there are lots, many of them natural, and that getting too fussed about trace quantities of the less potent carcinogens can be a waste of time and a distraction from more serious health risks.



As usual, you have misunderstood the message.

I'm sorry I have hurt your feelings, but it is you who have misunderstood the
message. I have known Bruce Ames personally as well as reading his published
papers. You should read them if you want to understand him.

To correct your misunderstanding of my message:

1. There has been a huge emphasis on the 20,000 carcinogens, as I explained to you.
2. Bruce Ames states categorically that carcinogens cause 1% of cancers, poor nutrition causes 99%.

Then either:

1. Bruce Ames is totally wrong.

or

2. You have misunderstood him.


I'm guessing Ames is probably wrong to some extent - most people taking
extreme positions are. But I am very confident that /you/ are
misunderstanding him.

Here's a hint for you - if poor nutrition causes 99% of cancer, why do
people who eat properly sometimes get cancer? Why do people who eat
badly sometimes /not/ get cancer? Why is there virtually no real-world
statistical correlation supporting a causal link?


There are /many/ causes of cancer, and /many/ contributing factors.
Carcinogens of various sorts are often a factor (though I don't disagree
that the roles of many carcinogens are overstated). Environmental
factors such as radiation, particularly sunlight, are a big factor.
Poor nutrition is certainly a factor in some cases, as is an obsession
about the latest fads of healthy eating (eating too many anti-oxidants
reduces your body's ability to fight early stages of cancer). Genetics
is a huge contributor. Viruses have been clearly identified in some
cancers, and could potentially be a major cause of most cancers - we
know far too little about viruses.

In some cases, carcinogens are clear. If you are a moderate to heavy
smoker in the western world, the chances are over 50% that you will die
of a smoking-related disease - and about half those deaths will involve
cancer.

I am guessing that you think big government is a kind of wise mentor maybe, but
there is no way to misinterpret Ames's position, as you have done.

Now, I may have been at fault for not saying "invisible carcinogens." The carcinogens that the EPA (here) is concerned to protect us from are not the
obvious poisons like working with asbestos for 30 years, but the every day
exposure to a myriad of minor carcinogens which number in the thousands.
You should read his scientific papers in PNAS, etc. And again, if you disagree
with what I am saying, then show me in the scientific papers where I misinterpret him. Ames is very categorical about this - it's radical.

And several more points: Many, if not most, government scientists at EPA
disagree with Bruce Ames. You may also. But Prof. Bruce Ames is not lightly
dismissed, nor his work distorted. He is making a radical statement.
Second, Bruce Ames is the foremost authority on carcinogens out there.

Here's a clue - when most scientists or experts disagree with a small
number of "radical thinkers", it usually means the radical thinkers are
wrong. /Occasionally/ they are correct - and it is good to have radical
thinkers to come up with radically new ideas. But for most of the time,
they are wrong.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof - not just
extraordinary media attention.

Finally, my definition of a "scientific hoax" is it fills roughly these aspects:
1. A group makes big money from it.
2. an official body supports it.
3. a widespread belief is promulgated about it.
4. A group of "true believers" defends it to the bitter end.


The carcinogen industry has a huge bureaucracy and has those who believe
anything Daddy Sam tells them. Unfortunately, the main proponent, Bruce Ames,
has jumped ship. How embarrassing!

The best way to identify hoaxes and conspiracies is to follow the money.
Ask yourself who makes most money - the people getting grants to study
these carcinogens, the bureaucrats making a living from lists of
carcinogens, or the companies making and selling products that use
carcinogens? This third group outweigh the first ones by many orders of
magnitude.

 

[whit3rd]

On Tuesday, April 15, 2014 11:38:25 PM UTC-7, Jan Panteltje wrote:

On a sunny day (Wed, 16 Apr 2014 02:19:59 GMT) it happened Ralph Barone

address_is@invalid.invalid> wrote in

74523550419266093.557672address_is-invalid.invalid@shawnews>:



Jan Panteltje <panteltje@yahoo.com> wrote:

On a sunny day (Mon, 14 Apr 2014 20:57:11 -0700 (PDT)) it happened panfilero

panfilero@gmail.com> wrote in

3cc79148-b2ec-4410-a66a-51666fa01053@googlegroups.com>:



I'm interested in sensing AC and DC currents, 0-8A nominally, but up to 160=

A for 10msec current surges from both AC and DC sources...

There is an other way:

http://panteltje.com/pub/play_back_head_current_sensor_img_1153.jpg

That is an old playback head from a walkman against a mains lead.
Very little losses in the straight wire,
very good frequency response (to kHz).

It's a good solution, for AC; the possibility of high DC currents,
though, means that one might possibly have to attend to demagnetizing
the playback head in order to keep it calibrated. Tape
head demagnetizers are intended, after all, to change the
head's properties using nearby currents!

 

[Tim Williams]

Sounds like cutting force.

Kick back sounds much more like, say, a 5 kilo rotating mass going from
3000 RPM to 1500 RPM in, oh, 1/4 rotation or less. Do the acceleration
and force figures on that...

Tim

--
Seven Transistor Labs
Electrical Engineering Consultation
Website: http://seventransistorlabs.com

"Jasen Betts" <jasen@xnet.co.nz> wrote in message
news:liiub4$hd0$1@gonzo.reversiblemaps.ath.cx...

On 2014-04-12, krw@attt.bizz <krw@attt.bizz> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Apr 2014 08:53:57 -0700 (PDT), Lasse Langwadt Christensen
langwadt@fonz.dk> wrote:



no I haven't stalled a saw that would be pointless, I back off when I
can hear it bog down

So you admit that you're lying, now.

ok, I'm dense, please explain in what direction that force will be?

Ever hear of "kick-back"?

kick back is a fault condition where the sides of the saw blade
contact the cut,

a 8.25" saw running at 3000 RPM so the teeth are doing

50Hz x 0.21m x pi = about 33m/s

with a 1 hp motor behind it that's

745W / 33m/s = 22N

so about 5 pounds-force in American units

some of that force will not be parrallel to the cut and will be
pulling the work against the baseplate instead of pushing against the
saw's progress, and so won't be felt by the operator.

that force figure may seem a little low, I'm basically guessing based on
the
specs found here.

http://www.homedepot.com/p/Makita-15-Amp-8-1-4-in-Magnesium-Circular-Saw-5008MGA/100659890#specifications

5200 max RPM, so I picked 3000 as the working speed, which sounds
about right, I think I've pushed harder on smallr a saw without
slowing it that much it

I guess that means the motor is more than 1 horsepower, as they claim.

Next time I'm cutting s panel I might fit my saw with a reluctsnce
pickup and measure the speed and power at the same time, probably not
until summer.

--
umop apisdn


--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---

 

[Tim Williams]

"David Brown" <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote in message
news:lilpeq$42a$1@dont-email.me...

Typically AVR and MSP430 code is a lot more
compact than on small CISC devices I have worked with in assembly,
including 8051, COP8, HPC, PIC.

Wat. You're shittin' me, right?..

None of those is close to being as nice. Taking 'nice' to mean, fewer
assembly lines required to accomplish various tasks.

It's like you're calling them CISC just because they have no registers.
Which is why they take as many instructions, you're always pulling stuff
through the accumulator or whatever.

I want to say AVR has more instructions (arguably, many of which could be
called addressing modes, Atmel just doesn't enumerate them as such) than
PIC. (But it's been a while since I looked at the PIC instruction set.)
What's "CISC" about PIC if that's the case?

Or compare 8051 to Z80, though you still don't get read-modify-write
instructions, so arithmetic in memory still isn't any better. Does that
make Z80 RISC too?...

RISC assembly programming on big cpus, such as PPC, is a pain because
they are so complex. But so is assembly programming on big CISC cpus.

Can't argue with that. From what I've seen, I'd rather do assembly on x86
than full-on ARM (having written 8086 before, but only looked at the ARM
instruction set).

I'd probably change my mind once I learned enough to work with.
Conditionals per instruction though, that's a compiler's dream. I suppose
it's about time something like that has caught on; I want to say IA432 was
supposed to do that, but that ended up a major flop for a variety of
reasons. PCs to this day are still x86, though they're RISC inside. Go
figure. The kinds of code-heavy roles where, yeah you can optimize the
inner loops -- and should, once you've exhausted other means -- but you've
just got so damn much code that you'd be mental to do any small fraction
of it in assembly.

Tim

--
Seven Transistor Labs
Electrical Engineering Consultation
Website: http://seventransistorlabs.com

 

On 15 Apr 2014 09:32:20 GMT, Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> wrote:

On 2014-04-12, krw@attt.bizz <krw@attt.bizz> wrote:
On Sat, 12 Apr 2014 08:53:57 -0700 (PDT), Lasse Langwadt Christensen
langwadt@fonz.dk> wrote:



no I haven't stalled a saw that would be pointless, I back off when I
can hear it bog down

So you admit that you're lying, now.

ok, I'm dense, please explain in what direction that force will be?

Ever hear of "kick-back"?

kick back is a fault condition where the sides of the saw blade
contact the cut,

....and that's what you have to prepare for.

a 8.25" saw running at 3000 RPM so the teeth are doing

50Hz x 0.21m x pi = about 33m/s

with a 1 hp motor behind it that's

745W / 33m/s = 22N

so about 5 pounds-force in American units

some of that force will not be parrallel to the cut and will be
pulling the work against the baseplate instead of pushing against the
saw's progress, and so won't be felt by the operator.

that force figure may seem a little low, I'm basically guessing based on the
specs found here.

http://www.homedepot.com/p/Makita-15-Amp-8-1-4-in-Magnesium-Circular-Saw-5008MGA/100659890#specifications

5200 max RPM, so I picked 3000 as the working speed, which sounds
about right, I think I've pushed harder on smallr a saw without
slowing it that much it

I guess that means the motor is more than 1 horsepower, as they claim.

Bullshit.

Next time I'm cutting s panel I might fit my saw with a reluctsnce
pickup and measure the speed and power at the same time, probably not
until summer.

 

[Mike Perkins]

On 14/04/2014 23:09, Mike Perkins wrote:

I ordered components from DigiKey a short while ago.

Unfortunately no one was in when UPS delivered.

The UPS UK website says that 3 delivery attempts will be made.

However the consignment has gone to a "shop" and is now stuck there.

UPS require "government photo-ID" for me me to retrieve the consignment
from the shop and I currently don't have any at hand and UPS won't
attempt any more deliveries.

Yes I can get my photo-ID but it's not at hand at the moment, I can have
something sent to me, but this is all very silly and myopic.

Has anyone else been in the same situation and how did they overcome the
problem?

Yesterday I spoke to a very nice lady yesterday at UPS who rescheduled
another delivery and said it will be with me today.

Yep, website tracking says they receive request and that the parcel was
"In Transit" yesterday afternoon. Yippee

Guess what!! Today, no delivery. Website now says "Exception".

Phoned UPS-UK, they say that the local "Centre" will call me within the
hour.

Guess what!! No phone call.

Phoned UPS-UK again, they said the "Centre" tried calling me and were
unable to contact me or leave a message. They confirmed the number I
gave as being correct which is funny as my mobile has an answerphone and
has been switched on.
Seemingly despite online tracking info he was suggesting the parcel was
never picked up from the "shop" but I would still receive it this evening.

Naturally I'm not confident.

I cannot recommend UPS! No other carrier has ever given me this
magnitude of run-around and grief.


--
Mike Perkins
Video Solutions Ltd
www.videosolutions.ltd.uk

 

[Spehro Pefhany]

On Wed, 16 Apr 2014 17:36:39 +0100, Mike Perkins <spam@spam.com>
wrote:

I cannot recommend UPS! No other carrier has ever given me this
magnitude of run-around and grief.

Ah, then you've yet to experience DHL.

--sp

 

[rickman]

On 4/14/2014 7:11 PM, Mike Perkins wrote:

On 14/04/2014 23:59, haiticare2011@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, April 14, 2014 6:09:57 PM UTC-4, Mike Perkins wrote:
I ordered components from DigiKey a short while ago.



Unfortunately no one was in when UPS delivered.



The UPS UK website says that 3 delivery attempts will be made.



However the consignment has gone to a "shop" and is now stuck there.



UPS require "government photo-ID" for me me to retrieve the consignment

from the shop and I currently don't have any at hand and UPS won't

attempt any more deliveries.



Yes I can get my photo-ID but it's not at hand at the moment, I can have

something sent to me, but this is all very silly and myopic.



Has anyone else been in the same situation and how did they overcome the

problem?



--

Mike Perkins

Video Solutions Ltd

www.videosolutions.ltd.uk

tough. I have to admit - some parts of the story dont make sense. You
say that
UPS will try 3X, but they tried once and now package is stuck at their
shop. ???

Sorry. The UPS website says 3 times, and I have conflicting reasons from
DigiKey and UPS-UK why they only tried once and won't try again.

One idea is systematically make phone calls higher and higher in UPS.

I have been given another number by DigiKey for UPS here and will try
again in the morning.

I haven't read the full thread yet, but I know UPS can be a PITA. The
last package they attempted to deliver to me was not left on the carport
as they usually do and it was not held at the office for five days like
they usually do. In the office they told me both of these were at the
request of the shipper and the shipper says this is not so. In the end
I never got my package and ended up canceling the order rather than have
it reshipped.

The times UPS has delivered to the house when I was at home they don't
even ring the bell, they drop the package on the stoop and literally run
off. I hardly ever make it to the door before they drive away.

UPS leaves the details of the delivery to the discretion of the driver
which seems to work when it works and doesn't work when it doesn't work.

--

Rick

 

[rickman]

On 4/14/2014 7:19 PM, Maynard A. Philbrook Jr. wrote:
....snip...

Has anyone else been in the same situation and how did they overcome the
problem?

Sure, the best thing to do is have the package sent elsewhere next
time.

I have the option to have it sent to my work location, the guy at the
docks just signs for everything that comes in. Just put a ATT: xxxxxxx,
also if you pick those cheap rates, they may even deliver sooner than
normal, over making you wait for the maximum delivery time!

I know the OP is in the UK, but here in the states a very underrated
delivery service is Priority mail with the USPS. Digikey is in a rather
remote corner of Minnesota which makes them a 4 day delivery to me when
shipped by ground. But the USPS consistently delivers in 2 days and is
only $5 for a package regardless of weight. They have a flat rate box
which holds a reasonable amount of electronic parts. I won't use UPS
anymore if I have any other choice.

--

Rick

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Thursday, 17 April 2014 01:08:16 UTC+10, haitic...@gmail.com wrote:

On Tuesday, April 15, 2014 2:39:05 PM UTC-4, bud-- wrote:
On 4/15/2014 10:01 AM, hasitsicsare2011@gmail.com wrote:

In the case of Homeopathy, I just keep an open mind.

Your open mind appears to have dribbled out and there is none left.

Don't forget he Buddhists! We are an extended empty mind plus
nothing at the core!

I am trying to focus on the big hoaxes. To focus on homeopathy is like the a dictator parading out the usual suspects, excluding himself. Put it this way, the perpetrators of the hoaxes like to accuse the homeopathy crowd so as to distract attention from themselves. I'm interested in the big fish.

Sure you are. But when you claim the Human Genome Project to be a hoax, you demonstrate that you are a lunatic conspiracy theory nut-case.

The Human Genome Project has collected real data, and the results as the technique has been made cheaper, now allowing us to look at the differences between individual genomes, and - in cancer victims - the differences between the genomes of individual cells - has been very informative, and looks like being even more informative as we develop a better understanding of the flood of data it delivers.

You got to be pig-ignorant not to be aware of this. It's been publicised for every level of understanding in the differing branches of the media over the last decade or so.

If you were unaware that the Human Genome Project is widely seen as a spectacular success, you have to have had your head firmly buried in the sand.

If you are prepared to discount all these reports you aren't a sceptic but rather the sort of demented conspiracy theory fan who rates a paranoid claim that something has been faked above truckloads of evidence demonstrating that it's real.

Presumably you believe that the moon landings were all faked and that Obama wasn't born on Hawaii ....

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney