Driver to drive?

"Since I'm not actually an utter retard, I'm aware that
hard-to-falsify statements can be assembled into ostensibly
damning rhetoric."

I do not know th proper term for the opposite of a conspiracy theorist. first of all a theory has to be based on some facts, in fact so does a hypothesis. the OP is not really a hypothesis even. It makes no assertion. The reader assumes one.

You are the antithesis of a conspiracy theorist. You trust government and probebly big business as well. you have faith in huan nature and really, that indicats that you are a genrally good person and projecting. That means you think others are like you. Well I am here to tellya they ain't. Not one of them in government of big business or the media. They all have an agenda and all those agendas are very similar in nature. They are generally :

To gain more wealth and power.

As such, they do cooperate, and any cooperation for the enricment of the cooperators can be considered a conspiracy. See we have a cooperation, especially in th eUS, between government, big business and media. Their goal is clear, to gain or maintain wealth and power.

Is that so hard to understand ?

Now when I see people start this conspiracy theorist shit, it is a foregone conclusion they apparently trust government. To trust government though, on has to trust th mmbers of that government. You are in Australia, it is much miuch different here. Like th gun issue. We don't have more killings because we have more guns, we have more killings because we have mopre people who need to be killed. We breed criminals like cockroaches. You know all the ones you hear about ? For evey one of them there are lenty you don't. And then there are some that don't even make the statistics, because I, like many in this coutry, if we caught someone raping one of our Womenfolk, they would never find the body. Period. People like me, and there ar alot of us, only call the cops when our cars get stolen. The only reason to call if you get burglarized is if you have insurance. You think there are assault laws ? Get into a baarroom brawl, nobody calls the cops, the fighters just get kicked out the bar for a few months.

And the government is just as corrupt as the worst of the people. We already know that. Itis only people who have recently discovered it who want to shout it from the mountaintops. And the government will let them do it all day long bcause they frequently go too far, waste their credibility which lets the cooperators claim any accusations come from ____ wing nuts, or ____ wingnuts, depending on the day of the week.

Now what does the OP prove ? It provs that a buch of peole new each other. A bunch of people were in a position to do wrong. But it does not prove they did wrong.

So, would you vote to acquit Scott Peterson ? Th way you dismiss circumstantial evidence casually, you should.
 
On 9/17/2014 11:42 AM, David Brown wrote:
On 17/09/14 16:27, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Wednesday, 17 September 2014 23:58:41 UTC+10, David Brown wrote:
snip
Lots of people (including me) use news.eternal-september.org, which
is free. Thunderbird is free, and works on all platforms.

As I said, I've got Thunderbird and have used it to post stuff from
time to time. I'll take a look at news.eternal-september.org .

There is no excuse for not using a proper newsreader and
newsserver. GG posters annoy many people, and its use
automatically marks people as being inconsiderate, rude and
ignorant. Of course, in this group, inconsiderate rude and
ignorant is the norm - and regulars compete in new ways to display
these characteristics. But GG users get a fre head-start.

Well, I do go to the trouble of editing out the extra blank lines it
insists on inserting when I use it to respond to a message, so I'm
not entirely inconsiderate. I'm clearly not using Google.groups out
of ignorance. As for rudeness - I'm not posting the way
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno would like me to post, but he hasn't been
all that polite in the way he makes the argument, and neither have
you.


I'll agree that you seem to make more of an effort to conform to Usenet
standards than most GG users - so if I were actually "scoring" people
you'd come out well in comparison. But you would do even better without
GG - and it will save you a lot of effort along the way.

And yes, I am quite "to the point" regarding my dislike for GG - but I
don't think you can really compare my post to those of
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno !

You do know who he is, yes?
 
On Tue, 16 Sep 2014 18:32:40 -0700, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno wrote:

<< drivel snipped >>

> I could go on… but you get the idea.

If you play the record backwards for long enough, eventually you'll be
able to hear anything you want.

--

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com
 
On 9/17/2014 9:42 PM, rickman wrote:
On 9/18/2014 12:35 AM, rickman wrote:
On 9/17/2014 10:36 PM, mpm wrote:
Somewhat off topic, but maybe someone here knows a "numerically
inexpensive" way to do this:

I have (x,y,z) data - about 1.6 million points. (maybe more)

The (x,y) is somewhat regularly spaced already, but I want to resample
this data so that the (x,y) values "snap" to a grid of my choosing. I
don't mind interpolating the values where necessary, and I realize
there are several methods to accomplish that.

What I want is a program that can input my original (x,y) data and
output a reasonable approximation of that data snapped to what will
ultimately be a lower density grid.

I thought about using Excel, but my version will not accept that many
rows.
Also, after rounding, I would probably still have some duplicates to
get rid of... which sounds like a real hassle in Excel.

I'm sure this problem has been beat to death already.
Will MatLab do it?
I thought Surfer would do it, but I either forgot how, or it just
can't do it.

Maybe I'm missing something here. When you say grid, you mean a grid
with regular spacing, like increments of 10 or 20? That seems to be a
rather simple task of dividing by the grid spacing, rounding and then
multiplying by the grid spacing. If you are working with integers you
add half the grid spacing before dividing and then just multiply. The
integer truncation does the rounding job nicely.

I would write a program to do this. What languages are you familiar
with? Forth is a good one and very easy to use because of it's
interactivity. You get a command line that you can test each routine
from as you write it.

Where is your data presently?

Oh, after reading Don's post I get it. You want the Z value to be
adjusted to suit the new X,Y position after moving to the grid, right?

Don's solution might work pretty well.

I'd be more cautious than that. A lot depends on what "somewhat
regularly spaced already" means as well as how sensitive the
function (being "mapped") is to changes in x and y.

E.g., a potential data set:

(1,1,23) (2,1,18) (3,1,15)
(0.9,1.99,8) (1.9,2.1,19) (2.9,1.05,16)
(1.8,3.2,7) (2.1,2.8,25) (3.2,3.9,12)

I.e., the data aren't *exactly* aligned on a unit grid (my
suggestion assumed they were "close enough" -- so the observed
value of z didn't substantially differ from what it *would*
have been "on the original, implied grid".

Mathematica *may* be able to do this. It can interpolate
using predefined "interpolating functions" (linear, cubic,
etc.) as well as allowing you to define your own (this
assumes you know the sensitivity of the observed function
in localized domains).

The caveat might be that you have to specify the function
that you are interpolating as a list of x,y,z (instead of
just z-values at an implicit REGULAR grid)
 
On 18/09/2014 1:52 PM, josephkk wrote:
On Wed, 17 Sep 2014 13:23:29 +0200, David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no
wrote:

On 17/09/14 09:14, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Wednesday, 17 September 2014 17:01:03 UTC+10,
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno wrote:
On Tue, 16 Sep 2014 23:02:54 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman
bill.sloman@gmail.com> Gave us:

Google doesn't like the non-alphabetic characters used in the
original subject line *you* posted - which makes you the absolute
total retard, as if we weren't aware of that already.

Google is NOT Usenet, Sloman.

Obviously not. It a cheap and convenient way of accessing it.

I've no doubt that you are proud of your steam-driven keyboard and
hydraulic display, but the rest of the world has moved on.


Actually, a /real/ newsreader is equally cheap and far more convenient
for accessing Usenet groups that you frequent. Google groups posting
interface is the worst thing that ever happened to Usenet. Please change.

What? Sloman doing anything that might improve his credibility? Fat
chance. "pan" is free and pretty good and eternal-september is free. Good
matches for Bill's ideal price structure, but will he use either for any
reason? I won't believe it until i see it. 'E has a bad
not-discovered-by-me issue.

Josephkk can be quite sensible from time to time, but this isn't one of
them.

I'm as susceptible to not-invented-here as the next engineer, but I
don't make a religion of it.

Eternal September is cheap enough to be attractive, and it does keep up
to date, which is what really matters.

Google Groups does display threads in a way that I find more congenial,
but I can use Thunderbird to post stuff and keep the reactionaries happy.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
 
On 18/09/2014 11:58 AM, krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Wed, 17 Sep 2014 21:42:18 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:

On 9/17/2014 8:01 PM, krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Tue, 16 Sep 2014 21:28:32 -0500, Wildman <best_lay@yahoo.com
wrote:

On Tue, 16 Sep 2014 18:32:40 -0700
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> wrote:

snip

It is all true. Almost a year ago I said that I thought Obama
was a far left Communist and was promptly mocked for it. And
was told he was right of center. And they pointed to a far left
web site to back up that idiotic claim.

A year ago? What took you so long? It was obvious before he became
Senator.

Senator? I knew it as soon as he was born in Uganda!

No, I'm not surprised that you would believe that.

Krw can't recognise a satirical reactions as satirical. Making that kind
of higher-level distinction is a little beyond him.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
 
On 9/18/2014 3:43 AM, Bill Sloman wrote:
On 18/09/2014 11:58 AM, krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Wed, 17 Sep 2014 21:42:18 -0400, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:

On 9/17/2014 8:01 PM, krw@attt.bizz wrote:
On Tue, 16 Sep 2014 21:28:32 -0500, Wildman <best_lay@yahoo.com
wrote:

On Tue, 16 Sep 2014 18:32:40 -0700
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno <DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> wrote:

snip

It is all true. Almost a year ago I said that I thought Obama
was a far left Communist and was promptly mocked for it. And
was told he was right of center. And they pointed to a far left
web site to back up that idiotic claim.

A year ago? What took you so long? It was obvious before he became
Senator.

Senator? I knew it as soon as he was born in Uganda!

No, I'm not surprised that you would believe that.

Krw can't recognise a satirical reactions as satirical. Making that kind
of higher-level distinction is a little beyond him.

Yeah, I kinda wondered if my indirect reference to the birther thing
would slip past people. Not only is Uganda not Hawaii, it's not Kenya
either... lol.

--

Rick
 
On 18/09/2014 05:33, Don Y wrote:
On 9/17/2014 7:36 PM, mpm wrote:
Somewhat off topic, but maybe someone here knows a "numerically
inexpensive" way to do this:

I have (x,y,z) data - about 1.6 million points. (maybe more)

The (x,y) is somewhat regularly spaced already, but I want to
resample this data so that the (x,y) values "snap" to a grid of my
choosing. I don't mind interpolating the values where necessary, and
I realize there are several methods to accomplish that.

What I want is a program that can input my original (x,y) data and
output a reasonable approximation of that data snapped to what will
ultimately be a lower density grid.

I thought about using Excel, but my version will not accept that many
rows. Also, after rounding, I would probably still have some
duplicates to get rid of... which sounds like a real hassle in
Excel.

I'm sure this problem has been beat to death already. Will MatLab do
it? I thought Surfer would do it, but I either forgot how, or it just
can't do it.

Treat it as a grayscale image (you didn't mention how wide Z is)
and use a photographic resampling scheme (depends on whether you
want to linearly interpolate, etc.) to up/down-convert to the
desired "resolution"

?

Simplest would be bilinear from nearest neighbours which implies sorting
your data first by z,x,y to be efficient.

If your grid will be much coarser than your data sampling you might get
away with summing all values that fall into a grid square and keeping a
count of how many there were in each. It all depends on what you intend
to do with the gridded data afterwards. The devil is in the detail.

The only caveat about treating it as an image interpolation problem is
that if you intend to for example Fourier transform the gridded data
later then you have to be very much more careful about how you
interpolate your randomly sampled data to produce uniform coverage on a
regular grid. Methods for doing this are published in the literature for
aperture synthesis radio astronomy and MRI imaging.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown
 
On Wednesday, September 17, 2014 8:36:31 PM UTC-4, Martin Riddle wrote:
On Wed, 17 Sep 2014 14:27:37 -0700, John Larkin

jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:







http://www.ims-resistors.com/B-Series-Final.pdf



http://www.ims-resistors.com/P-Series.pdf

Thats a humongus pdf file, I thought it was a full catalog.

Novel idea, Alumina in SMT resistor packages.
Maybe just a typo on your part, but it's AlN not Al2O3. ~10x the thermal conductivity.

George H.
 
I found the same SMD H72P sot-223 in a router (TP-Link 8968). I finally realized that it is a PNP transistor. Also a BC 327 can replace it.
in case you need the pinout do not hesitate to contact me via email.
drsoubhi@gmail.com

On Friday, 11 February 2011 23:46:51 UTC+3, petrus bitbyter wrote:
"John-Del" <ohger1s@aol.com> schreef in bericht
news:d2904773-26c9-486b-8421-1e6f234cdec5@q2g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 10, 1:01 pm, "petrus bitbyter" <petrus.bitby...@hotmail.com
wrote:
So I have an SMD semiconductor - most likely a transistor - in a SOT-223
package marked H72P. Found several lists of SMD semicondector codes on the
net but no H72P. Anyone knows what kind of beast I'm dealing with?

petrsu bitbyter

What I do is look for another device just like it elsewhere on the
board. Hopefully there is at least one more. From there, with a dmm
you can find out if it's a transistor, polarity, and whether it has a
resistor internal (digital transistor).

It's a small board and there's only one one transistor with that mark on it.
It seems to drive a 2SD882 medium power transistor as it's middle leg is
connected to the base of that 2SD882. I have no schematic and I don't like
to reverse engineer the whole board especially as I found too many unknown
components on it. Thanks anyway.

petrus bitbyter
 
you should try enamel wire, just cut to length and dip the end in a

blob of solder on the iron, instant stripping



-Lasse

He might have some of the wire where the enamel is designed for burn off. It does exist.

Steve
 
On 9/17/2014 2:06 PM, David Brown wrote:
On 17/09/14 18:52, John S wrote:
On 9/17/2014 11:42 AM, David Brown wrote:


I'll agree that you seem to make more of an effort to conform to Usenet
standards than most GG users - so if I were actually "scoring" people
you'd come out well in comparison. But you would do even better without
GG - and it will save you a lot of effort along the way.

And yes, I am quite "to the point" regarding my dislike for GG - but I
don't think you can really compare my post to those of
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno !

You do know who he is, yes?

Who, "DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno" ? No, I don't know who he is - have I
missed something obvious?

AlwaysWrong and many other nyms.
 
On 9/18/2014 1:02 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
On 18/09/2014 05:33, Don Y wrote:
On 9/17/2014 7:36 PM, mpm wrote:
Somewhat off topic, but maybe someone here knows a "numerically
inexpensive" way to do this:

I have (x,y,z) data - about 1.6 million points. (maybe more)

The (x,y) is somewhat regularly spaced already, but I want to
resample this data so that the (x,y) values "snap" to a grid of my
choosing. I don't mind interpolating the values where necessary, and
I realize there are several methods to accomplish that.

What I want is a program that can input my original (x,y) data and
output a reasonable approximation of that data snapped to what will
ultimately be a lower density grid.

I thought about using Excel, but my version will not accept that many
rows. Also, after rounding, I would probably still have some
duplicates to get rid of... which sounds like a real hassle in
Excel.

I'm sure this problem has been beat to death already. Will MatLab do
it? I thought Surfer would do it, but I either forgot how, or it just
can't do it.

Treat it as a grayscale image (you didn't mention how wide Z is)
and use a photographic resampling scheme (depends on whether you
want to linearly interpolate, etc.) to up/down-convert to the
desired "resolution"

?

Simplest would be bilinear from nearest neighbours which implies sorting
your data first by z,x,y to be efficient.

If your grid will be much coarser than your data sampling you might get
away with summing all values that fall into a grid square and keeping a
count of how many there were in each. It all depends on what you intend
to do with the gridded data afterwards. The devil is in the detail.

Exactly. Note, also, that the OP hasn't claimed the data were
*strictly* ON a grid to begin with. How tolerant the data is
to tiny changes in x,y will indicate how readily *forcing*
the data onto such a grid would work (without distorting the
data before you've begun!)

The only caveat about treating it as an image interpolation problem is
that if you intend to for example Fourier transform the gridded data
later then you have to be very much more careful about how you
interpolate your randomly sampled data to produce uniform coverage on a
regular grid. Methods for doing this are published in the literature for
aperture synthesis radio astronomy and MRI imaging.

Yes. (generic) Images are resampled with a different set of
evaluation criteria. I offered the idea as a quickie way of
seeing if the results would be what was desired (by the OP).

[without having to write a bit of code and *test* that code...]

If *my* problem, I'd explore Mathematica's capabilities more
closely (delightful piece of code, that!)
 
On 9/17/2014 6:55 PM, Bill Sloman wrote:
On 18/09/2014 1:52 AM, John S wrote:
On 9/17/2014 10:17 AM, Bill Sloman wrote:
On 18/09/2014 12:52 AM, John S wrote:
On 9/17/2014 9:27 AM, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Wednesday, 17 September 2014 23:58:41 UTC+10, David Brown wrote:
On 17/09/14 13:44, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Wednesday, 17 September 2014 21:23:29 UTC+10, David Brown
wrote:
On 17/09/14 09:14, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Wednesday, 17 September 2014 17:01:03 UTC+10,
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno wrote:
On Tue, 16 Sep 2014 23:02:54 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman
bill.sloman@gmail.com> Gave us:

snip

I, by the way, am using Thunderbird and Eternal September.

And this is being posted using Thunderbird via Eternal September.

And, looks great!

The Google Groups interface still provides better access to what's
been posted.

I don't have trouble like that. Perhaps it is a lack of familiarity on
your part?

Don't be silly. When I last looked I was one of the more enthusiastic
posters to this group.

I meant your lack of familiarity with Thunderbird, not Usenet. See
rickman's post concerning use of Thunderbird.


Thunderbird organises posts in the traditional way, and if you want to
check for up-dates on a thread that started a while ago, you have to
scroll up to the oldest surviving posting and click on it to see the
thread. The header is a high-lighted if there's been a new posting since
you last looked, but you have to scroll up to it to see that.

Google Groups sorts thread on the basis of the most recent posting,
so active threads are almost always available without you having to
scroll through a bunch of less active postings.

In any case, you must be the judge of that. Please try it a
bit longer. If you get too frustrated, then give up. Nobody will be
worse off.

By the way, I think I restored the header to the OP's.
Just for a test.

You took out the question marks - which were the non-alphabetic
characters that Google Groups didn't like. Somebody else seems
to have found a "question mark" character that Google Groups will
display.

Don Fredericks does seem to go in for the sort of eccentric
punctuation that nutters seem to like, so having the question
marks visible is a form of mental health warning.
 
On Friday, 19 September 2014 00:01:11 UTC+10, John Larkin wrote:
On Wed, 17 Sep 2014 21:37:49 -0700, Kevin McMurtrie
mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> wrote:
In article <n4vj1a5j0ag5v8rji03bii0huq57gv1up4@4ax.com>,
John Larkin <jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

http://www.ims-resistors.com/B-Series-Final.pdf

http://www.ims-resistors.com/P-Series.pdf

Pyrolytic graphite tape is neat stuff too.

It's electrically conductive, isn't it?

We need diamond, preferably isotopically pure diamond.

Isotopically enriched is good enough - 50% higher thermal conductivity with 15 times less C13 than natural carbon, And it is easier to isotopically enrich carbon than it is to enrich uranium. C12 and C13 are more different than U235 and U238 - as in 8.33% opposed to 1.28%.

I'm not sure that you actually need it. Natural diamond is a great deal more thermally conductive than anything else - excluding super-fluid liquid helium and other stuff that it's hard to accommodate in regular manufacturing - and the extra 50% that you can get by making it more nearly isotopically pure is rather gilding the lily.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
 
On 2014-09-18, mpm <mpmillard@aol.com> wrote:
Somewhat off topic, but maybe someone here knows a "numerically inexpensive" way to do this:

I have (x,y,z) data - about 1.6 million points. (maybe more)

The (x,y) is somewhat regularly spaced already, but I want to
resample this data so that the (x,y) values "snap" to a grid of my
choosing. I don't mind interpolating the values where necessary, and
I realize there are several methods to accomplish that.

you can't interpolate a point. what aren't you telling us?

What I want is a program that can input my original (x,y) data and output a reasonable approximation of that data snapped to what will ultimately be a lower density grid.

I thought about using Excel, but my version will not accept that many rows.
Also, after rounding, I would probably still have some duplicates to get rid of... which sounds like a real hassle in Excel.

I'm sure this problem has been beat to death already.
Will MatLab do it?
I thought Surfer would do it, but I either forgot how, or it just can't do it.

you've got data, use a statistics package, or a database, or a
general purpose programming language you are comfortable with.

--
umop apisdn


--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---
 
On 18/09/2014 11:36, Don Y wrote:
On 9/18/2014 1:02 AM, Martin Brown wrote:

The only caveat about treating it as an image interpolation problem is
that if you intend to for example Fourier transform the gridded data
later then you have to be very much more careful about how you
interpolate your randomly sampled data to produce uniform coverage on a
regular grid. Methods for doing this are published in the literature for
aperture synthesis radio astronomy and MRI imaging.

Yes. (generic) Images are resampled with a different set of
evaluation criteria. I offered the idea as a quickie way of
seeing if the results would be what was desired (by the OP).

[without having to write a bit of code and *test* that code...]

If *my* problem, I'd explore Mathematica's capabilities more
closely (delightful piece of code, that!)

I agree. Although for bigger datasets IDL is also worth considering
especially if you can get it on an academic license.

http://www.exelisvis.co.uk/ProductsServices/IDL.aspx

Such tools can be used for good or ill and I have seen some very good
data turned into appalling incomprehensible infographics by it too!

--
Regards,
Martin Brown
 
On Wed, 17 Sep 2014 19:36:34 -0700, mpm <mpmillard@aol.com> wrote:

Somewhat off topic, but maybe someone here knows a "numerically
inexpensive" way to do this:

I have (x,y,z) data - about 1.6 million points. (maybe more)

The (x,y) is somewhat regularly spaced already, but I want to resample
this data so that the (x,y) values "snap" to a grid of my choosing. I
don't mind interpolating the values where necessary, and I realize there
are several methods to accomplish that.

What I want is a program that can input my original (x,y) data and
output a reasonable approximation of that data snapped to what will
ultimately be a lower density grid.

I thought about using Excel, but my version will not accept that many
rows.
Also, after rounding, I would probably still have some duplicates to get
rid of... which sounds like a real hassle in Excel.

I'm sure this problem has been beat to death already.
Will MatLab do it?
I thought Surfer would do it, but I either forgot how, or it just can't
do it.

Thanks.
-mpm

yes! but I use the free MatLab clone, octave. Have this problem ALL the
time, but I don't snap to grid, I find the linearly interpolated value
inside the x-y square and often change to a 'radial' format for special
curve fitting.

However, can be a bit slow, so instead change code to C/C++ and that's a
screamer.

LTspice has built-in ability to linearly interpolate all those pesky
unevenly spaced .tran points into linear space.
 
On Wed, 17 Sep 2014 21:33:15 -0700, Don Y <this@is.not.me.com> wrote:

...snip....

Treat it as a grayscale image (you didn't mention how wide Z is)
and use a photographic resampling scheme (depends on whether you
want to linearly interpolate, etc.) to up/down-convert to the
desired "resolution"

Wow! Never thought of considering that, thanks! I see some 'fraught with
perils' but still extremely interesting concept.
 

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top