Driver to drive?

[Bill Sloman]

On Friday, 7 November 2014 09:18:24 UTC+11, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno wrote:

On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 14:01:43 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
bill.sloman@gmail.com> Gave us:
On Friday, 7 November 2014 08:49:08 UTC+11, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno
wrote:
On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 13:19:34 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
bill.sloman@gmail.com> Gave us:
On Friday, 7 November 2014 08:00:58 UTC+11, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno
wrote:
It is more than a little obvious which line I was referring to, Usenet
peasant.

Really?

Absolutely, idiot.

Moronic assertion doesn't make it true.

Tell us which line you had in mind, and we might have reason to believe you - though I doubt it.

snipped pointless twaddle

You keep saying "we".

This is a public forum. I'd be surprised if anybody else were sill enough to read this juvenile spat, but I'm being polite to potential co-readers.

> Have you seen a doctor about your problem?

So far you haven't identified any problem that would prompt anybody to talk to a doctor. Being bad-mouthed by a half-wit isn't exactly a notifiable disorder.

> Again, you did NOT actually read the lyrics.

I posted a link to them, and I'd most certainly read them before I claimed that your reference was hopelessly unspecific. I could scarcely have identified your quote as a refrain if hadn't read the lyrics.

For somebody who thinks that quoting a refrain unambiguously points to a particular subsequent line, you display a rather poor grasp of what declarations imply.

<snipped the rest of the twaddle>

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Friday, 7 November 2014 09:03:35 UTC+11, Jim Thompson wrote:

On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 13:48:46 -0800, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno
DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> wrote:

On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 13:19:34 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
bill.sloman@gmail.com> Gave us:

On Friday, 7 November 2014 08:00:58 UTC+11, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno wrote:

<snip>

> Sloman is your typical PhD >:-]

Jim-out-of-touch-with-reality-Thompson hasn't noticed that most Ph.D.s work in the field where they got their Ph.D. Mine was in Physical Chemistry, but I moved across to electronic engineering within a couple of years. I got the Ph.D. in 1970 and have been a member of the IEEE since 1980 - which means that I'm now a life member. This does seem to qualify as less-than-typical behaviour.

The most likely outcome after getting a Ph.D. is an academic job in the same field. It isn't exactly a majority outcome - there aren't nearly enough academic jobs around for that - but moving from chemistry to electronics is a bigger step than most. Physics to electronics is a less dramatic step, but Rev.Sci.Instrum. regularly shows evidence that many people can't even manage that.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 11:51:47 -0800, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno
<DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> wrote:

On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 13:44:47 -0500, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> Gave us:

On 11/6/2014 1:36 PM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

I just spoke to John Fields. He said he was tired of the bickering on
the electronics newsgroups, and quit using them. He knows his website is
down, and said he hasn't got around to redoing it.

I know the feeling. But there are groups without so much of the crap.
This is one of the worst.


Yeah... all of YOUR "assessment posts" and pussy crybaby posts are a
major part of the noise level. Might as well throw in some filter file
edit session announcement posts to further clutter things.

Oh... yeah... you already did that too.

The Zimmerman complex abounds.

One can learn about the human condition so much by watching a modern TV
show, like "The Walking Dead".

John Lennon said it best though.

"A working class hero is something to be."

I'll let you figure out what the next line is, and what it means about
you.

Rickman is one of the worst offenders... all mouth and no brain.

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson | mens |
| Analog Innovations | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| San Tan Valley, AZ 85142 Skype: skypeanalog | |
| 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.

 

[DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUn]

On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 13:19:34 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@gmail.com> Gave us:

On Friday, 7 November 2014 08:00:58 UTC+11, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno wrote:

It is more than a little obvious which line I was referring to, Usenet
peasant.

Really?

Absolutely, idiot.

> One of the symptoms of mental illness

The mentally ill cannot make assessments about anyone, much less the
mentally ill. Oooops.

> is the delusion that one's thought processes are transparent to others.

Sorry, but the context of the thread, and everything else surrounding
the remark, DOES make it a "no brainer" for anyone, less yourself, to
get.

> Your thinking

You are an idiot. YOU cannot get the thinking of real men. You prove
it every day in this group alone.

> - if one can dignify what you post as "thinking"

I could give a fat flying fuck about dignification from or by an
utterly retarded pathetic excuse for a human, like you... but I don't.

> - is decidedly obscure.

Another term you are obviously clueless about.

>You'd probably be more highly though of

A retarded twerp like you has no clue what anyone other than yourself
"thinks", and you hard wired yourself stupid. That tells anyone about
the credibility of anything that spews forth from your second asshole,
asshole. It rests firmly at nil.

> if you left it that way - as an obscure creep rather than a comical one.

Even with the hint, you fail miserably.

Proving that you also failed to actually read the lyrics.

Nice try at acting like you did.

ANYONE reading them WOULD know EXACTLY which line I refer to.

And you spouting psychology is a huge joke, since you did NOT "see"
the blatantly obvious reference, and are obviously sporting a convoluted
view of reality.

YOU... will NEVER stop being a peasant.

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 13:48:46 -0800, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno
<DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> wrote:

On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 13:19:34 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
bill.sloman@gmail.com> Gave us:

On Friday, 7 November 2014 08:00:58 UTC+11, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno wrote:

It is more than a little obvious which line I was referring to, Usenet
peasant.

Really?

Absolutely, idiot.

One of the symptoms of mental illness

The mentally ill cannot make assessments about anyone, much less the
mentally ill. Oooops.

is the delusion that one's thought processes are transparent to others.

Sorry, but the context of the thread, and everything else surrounding
the remark, DOES make it a "no brainer" for anyone, less yourself, to
get.

Your thinking

You are an idiot. YOU cannot get the thinking of real men. You prove
it every day in this group alone.

- if one can dignify what you post as "thinking"

I could give a fat flying fuck about dignification from or by an
utterly retarded pathetic excuse for a human, like you... but I don't.

- is decidedly obscure.

Another term you are obviously clueless about.

You'd probably be more highly though of

A retarded twerp like you has no clue what anyone other than yourself
"thinks", and you hard wired yourself stupid. That tells anyone about
the credibility of anything that spews forth from your second asshole,
asshole. It rests firmly at nil.

if you left it that way - as an obscure creep rather than a comical one.

Even with the hint, you fail miserably.

Proving that you also failed to actually read the lyrics.

Nice try at acting like you did.

ANYONE reading them WOULD know EXACTLY which line I refer to.

And you spouting psychology is a huge joke, since you did NOT "see"
the blatantly obvious reference, and are obviously sporting a convoluted
view of reality.

YOU... will NEVER stop being a peasant.

Slowman is your typical PhD >:-]

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson | mens |
| Analog Innovations | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| San Tan Valley, AZ 85142 Skype: skypeanalog | |
| 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.

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Friday, 7 November 2014 13:38:26 UTC+11, Maynard A. Philbrook Jr. wrote:

In article <29120bcd-15be-4781-9079-fe13fa9bdfc3@googlegroups.com>,
bill.sloman@gmail.com says...

On Friday, 7 November 2014 09:03:35 UTC+11, Jim Thompson wrote:
On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 13:48:46 -0800, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno
DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> wrote:

On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 13:19:34 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
bill.sloman@gmail.com> Gave us:

On Friday, 7 November 2014 08:00:58 UTC+11, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno wrote:

snip

Sloman is your typical PhD >:-]

Jim-out-of-touch-with-reality-Thompson hasn't noticed that most Ph.D.s work in the field where they got their Ph.D. Mine was in Physical Chemistry, but I moved across to electronic engineering within a couple of years. I got the Ph.D. in 1970 and have been a member of the IEEE since 1980 - which means that I'm now a life member. This does seem to qualify as less-than-typical behaviour.

The most likely outcome after getting a Ph.D. is an academic job in the same field. It isn't exactly a majority outcome - there aren't nearly enough academic jobs around for that - but moving from chemistry to electronics is a bigger step than most. Physics to electronics is a less dramatic step, but Rev.Sci.Instrum. regularly shows evidence that many people can't even manage that.

You place yourself far above the pedestal,

What pedestal?

> when doing so, you only alienate yourself from others.

Please explain what you think you are talking about.

I bet that neck of yours suffers greatly from the massive malignant
tumor, barely balancing on it.

You'd lose. The malice is all yours. It's a pity you can't manage coherent malice - we could use a better class of insults. DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno clearly has ambitions in that direction, but he can't deliver either.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUn]

On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 14:01:43 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@gmail.com> Gave us:

On Friday, 7 November 2014 08:49:08 UTC+11, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno wrote:
On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 13:19:34 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
bill.sloman@gmail.com> Gave us:
On Friday, 7 November 2014 08:00:58 UTC+11, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno wrote:
It is more than a little obvious which line I was referring to, Usenet
peasant.

Really?

Absolutely, idiot.

Moronic assertion doesn't make it true.

Tell us which line you had in mind, and we might have reason to believe you - though I doubt it.

snipped pointless twaddle

You keep saying "we", twaddle boy.

Have you seen a doctor about your problem, child?

Again, you did NOT actually read the lyrics. That makes you a total
piece of shit. And yes, idiot... YOU are ONLY *one*, not any kind of
"we" at all.

If there were, it would be:

Pathetic you

Truly pathetic you

Abjectly pathetic you

and...

Mentally deranged pathetic you.

None of which qualify you to make assessments about others.

So, FOAD, idiots.

 

[DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUn]

On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 15:03:30 -0700, Jim Thompson
<To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> Gave us:

On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 13:48:46 -0800, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno
DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> wrote:

On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 13:19:34 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
bill.sloman@gmail.com> Gave us:

On Friday, 7 November 2014 08:00:58 UTC+11, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno wrote:

It is more than a little obvious which line I was referring to, Usenet
peasant.

Really?

Absolutely, idiot.

One of the symptoms of mental illness

The mentally ill cannot make assessments about anyone, much less the
mentally ill. Oooops.

is the delusion that one's thought processes are transparent to others.

Sorry, but the context of the thread, and everything else surrounding
the remark, DOES make it a "no brainer" for anyone, less yourself, to
get.

Your thinking

You are an idiot. YOU cannot get the thinking of real men. You prove
it every day in this group alone.

- if one can dignify what you post as "thinking"

I could give a fat flying fuck about dignification from or by an
utterly retarded pathetic excuse for a human, like you... but I don't.

- is decidedly obscure.

Another term you are obviously clueless about.

You'd probably be more highly though of

A retarded twerp like you has no clue what anyone other than yourself
"thinks", and you hard wired yourself stupid. That tells anyone about
the credibility of anything that spews forth from your second asshole,
asshole. It rests firmly at nil.

if you left it that way - as an obscure creep rather than a comical one.

Even with the hint, you fail miserably.

Proving that you also failed to actually read the lyrics.

Nice try at acting like you did.

ANYONE reading them WOULD know EXACTLY which line I refer to.

And you spouting psychology is a huge joke, since you did NOT "see"
the blatantly obvious reference, and are obviously sporting a convoluted
view of reality.

YOU... will NEVER stop being a peasant.

Slowman is your typical PhD >:-]

...Jim Thompson

Not PHeasant... D

PEASANT. :-D

Shame we can't shoot both at will.

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Friday, 7 November 2014 13:24:29 UTC+11, Maynard A. Philbrook Jr. wrote:

In article <f5a034f3-6906-4bb9-8bb2-c9439bd951b5@googlegroups.com>,
bill.sloman@gmail.com says...

On Friday, 7 November 2014 09:18:24 UTC+11, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno
wrote:
On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 14:01:43 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
bill.sloman@gmail.com> Gave us:
On Friday, 7 November 2014 08:49:08 UTC+11, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno
wrote:
On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 13:19:34 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
bill.sloman@gmail.com> Gave us:
On Friday, 7 November 2014 08:00:58 UTC+11,
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno wrote:

<snip>

snipped the rest of the twaddle

Frustrating, isn't it?

Not really. A spot of cathartic carping cheers me up no end, as you should have noticed.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 14:19:52 -0800, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno
<DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> wrote:

On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 15:03:30 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> Gave us:

On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 13:48:46 -0800, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno
DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> wrote:

On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 13:19:34 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
bill.sloman@gmail.com> Gave us:

On Friday, 7 November 2014 08:00:58 UTC+11, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno wrote:

It is more than a little obvious which line I was referring to, Usenet
peasant.

Really?

Absolutely, idiot.

One of the symptoms of mental illness

The mentally ill cannot make assessments about anyone, much less the
mentally ill. Oooops.

is the delusion that one's thought processes are transparent to others.

Sorry, but the context of the thread, and everything else surrounding
the remark, DOES make it a "no brainer" for anyone, less yourself, to
get.

Your thinking

You are an idiot. YOU cannot get the thinking of real men. You prove
it every day in this group alone.

- if one can dignify what you post as "thinking"

I could give a fat flying fuck about dignification from or by an
utterly retarded pathetic excuse for a human, like you... but I don't.

- is decidedly obscure.

Another term you are obviously clueless about.

You'd probably be more highly though of

A retarded twerp like you has no clue what anyone other than yourself
"thinks", and you hard wired yourself stupid. That tells anyone about
the credibility of anything that spews forth from your second asshole,
asshole. It rests firmly at nil.

if you left it that way - as an obscure creep rather than a comical one.

Even with the hint, you fail miserably.

Proving that you also failed to actually read the lyrics.

Nice try at acting like you did.

ANYONE reading them WOULD know EXACTLY which line I refer to.

And you spouting psychology is a huge joke, since you did NOT "see"
the blatantly obvious reference, and are obviously sporting a convoluted
view of reality.

YOU... will NEVER stop being a peasant.

Slowman is your typical PhD >:-]

...Jim Thompson


Not PHeasant... D

PEASANT. :-D

Shame we can't shoot both at will.

If you U.S. deteriorates to civil war, you can. Only the losers are
tried for war crimes >:-]

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson | mens |
| Analog Innovations | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| San Tan Valley, AZ 85142 Skype: skypeanalog | |
| 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.

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Friday, 7 November 2014 14:16:53 UTC+11, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno wrote:

On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 18:22:38 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
bill.sloman@gmail.com> Gave us:

but I moved across to electronic engineering within a couple of years.

With the only problem with that being that you do not know
electronics.

Perhaps, but I've managed to persuade the patent system and a couple of peer-reviewed journals that I know enough to get by.

Can you document a similar claim?

> Face it, Billy. You are an idiot, and you prove it every day in here.

The fact that you think that you can make that claim proves that you don't have much of clue. But we've known that for some time. I've been posting under my own name since 1996. You claim to have been posting for longer, but seem to have found it necessary to adopt a new pseudonym every few years. I really ought to ignore you, but there's a certain limited entertainment to be had from shooting down easy targets.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[amdx]

This thread is why John isn't here,

It is perfect

Mikek

 

[Brian Gregory]

On 04/11/2014 11:47, asdf wrote:

rickman wrote:

I'm not ragging on you. I am ranting in general. I see this often on
web pages. Someone decided it looks nicer to use less contrast on their
pages. Fine if you are browsing for beauty. I just want to be able to
read the durn things.

Although that page looks readable to me I can undesrstand you.

I stopped using white backgrounds ages ago as themes with dark
background are much more readable because they don't bring eyes
to saturation. This is why grey on black (or even dark grey) is much
more readable than the same grey on white background.
Too bad most web/app/desktop programmers/designers are
still stuck to the page-made-of-paper concept. A white screen emits
light while a piece of paper reflects it; when will they learn the
difference?

A search for "dark theme" on Google images will bring some examples.

For me this is wrong, at least with displays that emit light.
Dark text on bright background is clearer and light text on black
background is fuzzy. I presume it's because the dark background means my
iris opens up wide to let light in and this means I lose depth of focus.
Maybe your theory holds on younger people with really good eyes.

--

Brian Gregory (in the UK).
To email me please remove all the letter vee from my email address.

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

George Herold wrote:

Michael Terrell wrote:

I just spoke to John Fields. He said he was tired of the bickering on
the electronics newsgroups, and quit using them. He knows his website
is down, and said he hasn't got around to redoing it.

Thanks for checking Michael.

You're welcome. Too many people disappear without notice, and some
never return. I asked him to post once in a while, just to let us know
that he's still around.


--
Anyone wanting to run for any political office in the US should have to
have a DD214, and a honorable discharge.

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

Tim Wescott wrote:

On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 13:44:47 -0500, rickman wrote:

On 11/6/2014 1:36 PM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

I just spoke to John Fields. He said he was tired of the bickering
on
the electronics newsgroups, and quit using them. He knows his website
is down, and said he hasn't got around to redoing it.

I know the feeling. But there are groups without so much of the crap.
This is one of the worst.

Oh, heavens Rick -- you need to become an amateur machinist and subscribe
to rec.crafts.metalworking.

Then you'll see how civil and on-topic this group really is!

Don't feed the troll. I posted a simple update about John Fields, and
almost 2/3s of this thread is trolling. Only nine replies got through.


--
Anyone wanting to run for any political office in the US should have to
have a DD214, and a honorable discharge.

 

[DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUn]

On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 18:22:38 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@gmail.com> Gave us:

but I moved across to electronic engineering within a couple of years.

With the only problem with that being that you do not know
electronics.

Face it, Billy. You are an idiot, and you prove it every day in here.

 

[Maynard A. Philbrook Jr.]

In article <29120bcd-15be-4781-9079-fe13fa9bdfc3@googlegroups.com>,
bill.sloman@gmail.com says...

On Friday, 7 November 2014 09:03:35 UTC+11, Jim Thompson wrote:
On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 13:48:46 -0800, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno
DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> wrote:

On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 13:19:34 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
bill.sloman@gmail.com> Gave us:

On Friday, 7 November 2014 08:00:58 UTC+11, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno wrote:

snip

Sloman is your typical PhD >:-]

Jim-out-of-touch-with-reality-Thompson hasn't noticed that most Ph.D.s work in the field where they got their Ph.D. Mine was in Physical Chemistry, but I moved across to electronic engineering within a couple of years. I got the Ph.D. in 1970 and have been a member of the IEEE since 1980 - which means that I'm now a life member. This does seem to qualify as less-than-typical behaviour.

The most likely outcome after getting a Ph.D. is an academic job in the same field. It isn't exactly a majority outcome - there aren't nearly enough academic jobs around for that - but moving from chemistry to electronics is a bigger step than most. Physics to electronics is a less dramatic step, but Rev.Sci.Instrum. regularly shows evidence that many people can't even manage that.

You place yourself far above the pedestal, when doing so, you only
alienate yourself with others.

I bet that neck of yours suffers greatly from the massive malignant
tumor, barely balancing on it.

Jamie

 

[Maynard A. Philbrook Jr.]

In article <f5a034f3-6906-4bb9-8bb2-c9439bd951b5@googlegroups.com>,
bill.sloman@gmail.com says...

On Friday, 7 November 2014 09:18:24 UTC+11, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno wrote:
On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 14:01:43 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
bill.sloman@gmail.com> Gave us:
On Friday, 7 November 2014 08:49:08 UTC+11, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno
wrote:
On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 13:19:34 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
bill.sloman@gmail.com> Gave us:
On Friday, 7 November 2014 08:00:58 UTC+11, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno
wrote:
It is more than a little obvious which line I was referring to, Usenet
peasant.

Really?

Absolutely, idiot.

Moronic assertion doesn't make it true.

Tell us which line you had in mind, and we might have reason to believe you - though I doubt it.

snipped pointless twaddle

You keep saying "we".

This is a public forum. I'd be surprised if anybody else were sill enough to read this juvenile spat, but I'm being polite to potential co-readers.

Have you seen a doctor about your problem?

So far you haven't identified any problem that would prompt anybody to talk to a doctor. Being bad-mouthed by a half-wit isn't exactly a notifiable disorder.

Again, you did NOT actually read the lyrics.

I posted a link to them, and I'd most certainly read them before I claimed that your reference was hopelessly unspecific. I could scarcely have identified your quote as a refrain if hadn't read the lyrics.

For somebody who thinks that quoting a refrain unambiguously points to a particular subsequent line, you display a rather poor grasp of what declarations imply.

snipped the rest of the twaddle

Frustrating, isn't it?

Jamie

 

[Bill Sloman]

On 7/11/2014 9:31 AM, Jim Thompson wrote:

On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 14:19:52 -0800, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno
DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> wrote:
On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 15:03:30 -0700, Jim Thompson
To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> Gave us:
On Thu, 06 Nov 2014 13:48:46 -0800, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno
DLU1@DecadentLinuxUser.org> wrote:
On Thu, 6 Nov 2014 13:19:34 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
bill.sloman@gmail.com> Gave us:
On Friday, 7 November 2014 08:00:58 UTC+11, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno wrote:

<snip>

>> Shame we can't shoot both at will.

Neither Jim nor DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno ever seem to imagine that
their potential targets might shoot back - and Jim doesn't seem to
realise that his bloated figure offers a relatively large target.

If the U.S. deteriorates to civil war, you can. Only the losers are
tried for war crimes >:-]

Jim has advertised his civil war plans for shooting his neighbours so
often here that they've probably worked out their pre-emptive strike
already. He'd be one of the early losers - unlikely to last long enough
to get tried for war crimes, condemned for the incompetence of revealing
his barbaric plans rather early earlier than anybody with any grasp of
elementary tactics would have done.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[whit3rd]

On Tuesday, November 4, 2014 11:24:20 AM UTC-8, Tim Wescott wrote:

On Tue, 04 Nov 2014 17:38:01 +0100, blisca wrote:

...i have to measure the current absorbed by small circuits,in
battery appplications Normally i deal with consumptions big as 20mA in
run mode and 2uA in sleep mode.

One method that sometimes i use is to desconnect the battery,leaving the
circuit feeded only by a 10,000 uF capacitor,seldom and quickly measured
by an high impedence multimeter,(of course not a 10 Mohm oscilloscope
probe).Measuring the difference in voltage at a specified times...

If the circuit is otherwise isolated, the best way to do the measurement
may be to put your 100 ohm resistor between the circuit ground and the
negative terminal of the battery

That's an ammeter, but for most purposes an integrating function (that
measures amp-hours) would be useful. I'd nominate a flyback-type
power source, where a switching supply dumps a fixed charge on the
output with each cycle (i.e. not a pulse-width-modulation type).
Then, you just count the pulses, for a second, or hour, to know how
many milliamp-hours were consumed.