Driver to drive?

[Jan Panteltje]

On a sunny day (Mon, 5 Jan 2015 05:22:03 -0800 (PST)) it happened
meow2222@care2.com wrote in
<3855c7f3-783d-49fb-8be4-5ea53b6d1acf@googlegroups.com>:

On Monday, January 5, 2015 10:18:45 AM UTC, Jan Panteltje wrote:
Somebody needs to build this,

Unless there are spice models for neons & copper oxide diodes

Na, I have worked wit selenium rectifiers, even in the late sixties.
But I have also repaired Russian electronics, and can assure you that at least
in some areas they were ahead with real si diodes.
Just like they are ahead now US no longer can even put a person on the ISS.

I was reading just now Ukrain nazis damaged a TV station in their own territory they considered pro Russian.
So much for the free west.
If I was Putin (I'm not) I would have said: Now f*ck off or I flatten Kiev.
That is what Kiev is doing to their own people in the east.
War would have been over with those nazi pussies long time ago.
Really the ONLY way to stop violence is give them an overdose of it themselves.
Never mind what the EU wants, Greece may leave the Euro soon, more will follow.
Drachi will ruin the Euro further (now below 1.2 $) that Italian knows all about hundreds of lires for a pizza.
Greece will devaluate every odd year and twice if it rains.
0bama keeps randomly bombing countries and sells teh fugitives as cheap labor to Germany, EU,
Merkel says 'we need those be nice to them;'.
Roman empire, Caesar, history, repeating.
0bama hypocrite plays poor black slave for his votes, makes slaves himself every day.

oh, politics, the art of total bullshit

Na, managing the masses.

It is good to do analysis without the media flipper 'color it our way' system.
When I was young in school learning about all the civilizations doing all those stupid and bad things,
it was presented as 'now everything is better (well Europe after WW2) and US is the good guy
blah blah...

Human nature has not changed a bit though since they killed all the native Americans (genocide),
Caesar, what have you, and Cartago must be destroyed.

But the way it is sold has changed, now via your glass fiber.

I can say these things who cares.
You only get to be a problem for the guys who pull the puppet's (masses) strings when somebody starts
listening to you.
I bet on mosquitos being the next species

But playing the puppet show is a science, not bull excrement.
I like science.

 

[George Herold]

On Monday, January 5, 2015 12:46:44 PM UTC-5, Don Y wrote:

Hi George,

On 1/5/2015 7:40 AM, George Herold wrote:

I've also thought about having some kind of online support forum for our products.
In the least, I could just make all my various email responses to problems
available online.

I'm not sure (legally -- IANAL) you can just unilaterally decide to publish
emails from customers (i.e., any "included text") without their consent
"after the fact". OTOH, if they are participating in a mailing list *known*
to be sharing their comments with others (of which they have no control)
that probably sidesteps the issue.

Yeah I figured that. I thought it would have to be re-written..
at least the questions and then posted as FAQs.

But A much better forum would be something where users
could help each other. An email list server or such.

Yes. IME, users see things differently than designers, marketeers, etc. It
can also draw traffic to you for very little *direct* cost. And, of course,
if you keep an ear to it, give you an idea of what people *want* (instead of
creating a new product only to discover no real market, etc.).

It's not something I know much about. Are you setting something up?
What technology are you favoring?

I had set up a mailing list service. Basically, just a piece of code that:
- fetches mail from an account (which need not reside on "your" server)
- verifies that the sender is legitimate (so only "members" can post)
- does some gross checks on the content (e.g., profanity, etc.)
- resends the message to the "list" (again, doesn't need "your" server)

(there are several other features that make it a bit more usable than
other "OTS" solutions)

IME, mailing lists are a win because they deliver content *to* the
user. The user doesn't have to "check to see if anything new has been
said" by visiting a web site. The user can chose to archive whatever
he wants and *preserve* what's important (to *him*) -- eliding all else.
It keeps things on-topic (folks who digress can be censored by other
participants ultimately losing access to the resource). Eliminates
spam (you can't just "join" the list; the vendor adds you to the list
with a "verified purchase" -- obviously only works in certain markets).
It's low cost (you don't have to maintain a "web site" -- just a list of
email addresses in a TEXT file), can be implemented damn near anywhere
(an old PC, on a server, on a smart phone, etc.) and *moved* almost
instantly, etc.

A list server (email thing) might be the right way. I'm on a few.
I guess one problem is activity level.
If there is only a little activity then
there is not all that much incentive for people to ask questions.
(Versus emailing or calling me directly.)

In any approach, the *technology* isn;t the problem. Rather, it's "policy"
and "control" that tend to be the real issues.

I.e., do *you* (or an agent of yours) want to be an active participant in
those discussions? Or, just let it operate on its own? Do you want to
exercise control over the *content*? E.g., what if a disgruntled customer
starts berating you and your products... do you "shut him up" by disconnecting
him from the resource? Or, engage him in a public discussion and hope others
see his folly? Or, ignore him altogether and let his comments "speak for
HIMSELF"?

My *personal* (not speaking on behalf of any client) belief is you should
try to address his comments rationally. Not "giving away the farm" just
to make him happy (which then sets a public precedent for others to mimic).
And, *hope* your professionalism comes through and is respected by the
others reading the exchange.

IME, offering a full refund is a quick way to shut someone up. "Hey, if
you don't like the product, we'll buy it back from you and you can find
someone else who you *hope* has a better product." Of course, if they
*don't* exercise this option, there is a tacit understanding that they
must think your product "worth the money" -- given the alternatives that
they have available. And, if they *do* exercise the option and later
*return* to the mailing list (cuz they'd be dropped from the list once
you refunded their money!), then it tells others that the choice to
opt for the refund turned out to be a *wrong* choice! :

[Of course, if they take the refund and you never hear from them again,
that's also a win for you -- one less "unhappy" customer!]

No that's not a problem. I think customer service is one thing we do right.
Support, generous return/repair policy, and yeah if you totally don't
like it then we'll take it back and sell it to someone else.

I'll send you a copy of the summary I've been preparing for client so
you can see what options are available and the pros/cons of each approach.

Oh wow, thanks but that's not really necessary.
I've got no time to try and get this up and running.
To be honest I think it would better for me to post a bunch of
"how to" videos on the web.
That would help ease the "fear factor" that some users may have.
And might also be useful for marketing.

We've recently shipped a number of diode laser apparatus to India
and I'm waiting for the questions... It's one of our harder experiments.
A video showing simple alignment and tuning would certainly forestall
a number of problems....AFAICT no on reads the manual.
I'd have to clean up some, my optics table looks like a bomb hit it.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/e9ip354vk2bxgwd/DSCF0015.JPG?dl=0

George H.

[NB: you'd also have to address "accessibility" issues. E.g., sighted users
can more readily avail themselves of indexes, graphical displays of thread
structure, etc. OTOH, you can assume the reader already has tools with
which they are comfortable for those tasks...]

Pro bono day. First of the new year :-/

 

On Monday, January 5, 2015 7:57:57 PM UTC, piglet wrote:

On 05/01/2015 09:54, meow2222@care2.com wrote:
The neon switches with 90v steps 4 times a cycle. The diodes switch with whatever their Vdrop is 4 times a cycle.
Presumably here's how it works:
When the neon's conducting, C to the mains is C1 = 0.25-0.5uF
When the neon's oc, C to the mains is C3 = 200-500pF
So probably the 2 switching devices cause different resonant frequencies in the LC tank.

Not forgetting the anywhere from 30-70% of the time that the neon is
short-circuited by the bi-metal switch that got warmed by the neons
glow. As Jan P wrote the irregularity of that would drive listeners crazy..

Admirably clever/devious/evil circuit.

piglet

Would it close? Is there enough neon current to make that happen?

In a traditional 40w 240v T12 glowstart fitting, run current is around 0.25A (due to pf), so preheat current is higher than that with neon shorted, god knows what when its open, but I guess not much, its only a small neon. Which suggests you may be right, and it'll open & close frequently. So it would presumably switch between 2 transmitting bands as the bimetal opens & closes.


NT

 

On Monday, January 5, 2015 7:35:48 PM UTC, rickman wrote:

On 1/5/2015 1:37 PM, meow2222@care2.com wrote:
On Monday, January 5, 2015 4:11:48 PM UTC, rickman wrote:
On 1/5/2015 4:58 AM, meow2222@care2.com wrote:
On Sunday, January 4, 2015 10:30:21 PM UTC, rickman wrote:
On 1/4/2015 2:20 PM, meow2222@care2.com wrote:
On Sunday, January 4, 2015 5:54:01 PM UTC, rickman wrote:
On 1/4/2015 3:22 AM, meow2222@care2.com wrote:
On 1/3/2015 1:45 AM, meow2222@care2.com wrote:
On Thursday, November 20, 2014 12:38:37 AM UTC, rickman wrote:
On 11/19/2014 7:19 PM, Joerg wrote:

It's always good to learn about those because one can do weird tricks
with them. They are also useful as gain control elements. I just hope
they won't disappear. I think TV will eventually vanish and go Internet
and then they'd likely be obsoleted because that is the only mass market
for them that I know of.

I can't see TVs ever loosing a tuner. That would only happen when TV
station broadcasts go away and I don't think that is at all on the
horizon.

As internet speeds creep up, by the time we all have a bundle of fibres the bandwidth supplied by air broadcast will become pointless and almost worthless. The end looks inevitable. A single fibre bundle can wipe out uhf tv, all current radio bands and phone lines, so it will for cost reasons.

Except that they will never bring fiber to every household. There are
lots of places that don't even have cable which is why there is satellite..

The whole developed world has mains electicity supplied, a huge undertaking to achieve. Why? Its worth it. Living in 50 or 100yrs time without fast internet will be unthinkable, just as we're no longer prepared to live with a 32v generator in the basement. It'll happen. In this country the rare houses with no mains supply are worth 10s of thoussands less because of it. That price brings a lot of willingness, and so it will with internet eventually.

You are confusing having Fiber with having Internet. The two are not
the same thing.

of course im not. how else do you propose people get huge banwidth in future?

I'm not proposing anything. I'm saying your analogy of not having fiber
in every house hold is like not having electricity is bogus because
people can live rich, full lives using other modes of Internet access
while other sources of electricity fall far short of the conventional
power distribution system.

There are many houses which don't have decent Internet access where I
live because the economics don't justify the investment by the Internet
companies. Being a monopoly the public utilities are required to
provide service to nearly everyone.

What you're saying applies today, upto a point. What I'm saying applies in 50 or 100 years. As time goes on ever more will be done using data transfer, and the deficit in not having fast net will get ever bigger until it becomes simply unacceptable. Its the exact same pattern that happened with electricity distribution.

In 50 years we will likely both be dead and there is no point in
speculating what will be important and what won't. It's just too far
removed. You have no way of knowing what the needs will be at that time.

A lot of people have looked at the future of computing. There are things we don't know, and things we can be fairly confident of. And the latter includes a massive increase in the automated use of relatively trivial data to optimise the design and operation of most things in life.

We also know that infrastructure keeps advancing - it inevitably will in any developed country. The lack of nationwide fast broadband in the 1st world is hampering business and thus economic development, and large sums continue to be invested year on year in improving this infrastructure. I dont see that about to stop any decade soon.

You dont need a crystal ball or to know all the details at this point to be pretty confident that internet infrastructure will keep spreading wider, getting faster and gaining more capacity.

I'd venture that the situation with net provision today has a fair bit in common with the electrification situation in the 1930s.

What you said was so broad and vague as to certainly be true... until
that last bit about the parallel with electrification. Universal
electrification happened because the government pushed it and made it
both a priority and a mandate to the monopolies as part of their
responsibility for operating a monopoly.

Government prioritised and pushed it because it made so much difference to the economy and standards of living.

The same is true for the net when a significant % of the population still crawls along with dialup - how can you do business via dialup? Its a huge waste of time & restriction.

And as computing power grows, the desire/need for more bandwidth will intensify greatly. Even today I wouldnt be prepared to go back to dialup.

This monopoly does not exist in Internet access and so there will be no
mandate or even "priority". It is all profit driven so that many parts
of the country will not see the large investments because there is
insufficient return. Heck, even in the second largest city in Maryland,
I can't get DSL because the phone lines are hobbled by 1970's
infrastructure Verizon won't replace because there is not sufficient
profit.

There already is significant investment in net infrastructure, every single year. Its been going on for some time. As time goes on it'll only get more important. And with rising wealth over time, corner cutting policies become ever less accepted as decades go by.


NT

 

[Martin Brown]

On 03/01/2015 19:04, Don Y wrote:

Hi,

With the obsolescence of USENET in favor of more "portal-based" forums,

On the plus side significantly better SNR and moderation to keep the
whole thing on topic. Experts that have been driven away from Usenet
still reside in various specialist forums or mailing lists.

On the minus side you end up with yet another password and userid for
each and every forum and you have to remember to go and look at it.

what are the relative advantages/disadvantages of corporate-sponsored
(and hosted?) forums vs. more "independent" approaches? I've seen

Disadvantage of corporate sponsored ones is that posts criticising
defects in their products won't appear or if they do won't last long.

good (and bad) examples of each and can only conclude that the "players"
are the deciding factor (?)

There have to be enough people reading it for it to work at all.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

 

[rickman]

On 1/5/2015 4:58 AM, meow2222@care2.com wrote:

On Sunday, January 4, 2015 10:30:21 PM UTC, rickman wrote:
On 1/4/2015 2:20 PM, meow2222@care2.com wrote:
On Sunday, January 4, 2015 5:54:01 PM UTC, rickman wrote:
On 1/4/2015 3:22 AM, meow2222@care2.com wrote:
On 1/3/2015 1:45 AM, meow2222@care2.com wrote:
On Thursday, November 20, 2014 12:38:37 AM UTC, rickman wrote:
On 11/19/2014 7:19 PM, Joerg wrote:

It's always good to learn about those because one can do weird tricks
with them. They are also useful as gain control elements. I just hope
they won't disappear. I think TV will eventually vanish and go Internet
and then they'd likely be obsoleted because that is the only mass market
for them that I know of.

I can't see TVs ever loosing a tuner. That would only happen when TV
station broadcasts go away and I don't think that is at all on the
horizon.

As internet speeds creep up, by the time we all have a bundle of fibres the bandwidth supplied by air broadcast will become pointless and almost worthless. The end looks inevitable. A single fibre bundle can wipe out uhf tv, all current radio bands and phone lines, so it will for cost reasons.

Except that they will never bring fiber to every household. There are
lots of places that don't even have cable which is why there is satellite..

The whole developed world has mains electicity supplied, a huge undertaking to achieve. Why? Its worth it. Living in 50 or 100yrs time without fast internet will be unthinkable, just as we're no longer prepared to live with a 32v generator in the basement. It'll happen. In this country the rare houses with no mains supply are worth 10s of thoussands less because of it. That price brings a lot of willingness, and so it will with internet eventually.

You are confusing having Fiber with having Internet. The two are not
the same thing.

of course im not. how else do you propose people get huge banwidth in future?

I'm not proposing anything. I'm saying your analogy of not having fiber
in every house hold is like not having electricity is bogus because
people can live rich, full lives using other modes of Internet access
while other sources of electricity fall far short of the conventional
power distribution system.

There are many houses which don't have decent Internet access where I
live because the economics don't justify the investment by the Internet
companies. Being a monopoly the public utilities are required to
provide service to nearly everyone.

What you're saying applies today, upto a point. What I'm saying applies in 50 or 100 years. As time goes on ever more will be done using data transfer, and the deficit in not having fast net will get ever bigger until it becomes simply unacceptable. Its the exact same pattern that happened with electricity distribution.

In 50 years we will likely both be dead and there is no point in
speculating what will be important and what won't. It's just too far
removed. You have no way of knowing what the needs will be at that time.

--

Rick

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Sun, 04 Jan 2015 20:40:03 -0800, Robert Baer
<robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
On Sat, 03 Jan 2015 18:16:50 -0800, Robert Baer
robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote:

Attached are screenshots of attempt to login to a webmail spam check
site that i use.
As you can see, there is a complaint about the password (altho, the
problem might really be the username).
I know i have the user name and password correct,because the EXACT
same character construction is used and WORKS wen i do this in Win2K.
Also, that e-mail that is allued to in LLC1.jpg seems to not be sent.

What gives?

They're obviously targeting Robert Baer, paranoid though you may be,
doesn't mean they're not out to get you>:-}

...Jim Thompson
Did you dig that out of SkyBuck's frazzle box?

Nope. That's a _very_ old gag line, paraphrased from... "Just because
you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you".

...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.

 

[Sergey Kubushyn]

meow2222@care2.com wrote:

On Monday, January 5, 2015 10:18:45 AM UTC, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Mon, 5 Jan 2015 01:54:00 -0800 (PST)) it happened
meow2222@care2.com wrote in
910564b0-6207-495c-b74a-9d4448ae1d91@googlegroups.com>:

On Monday, January 5, 2015 9:09:32 AM UTC, Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Sun, 4 Jan 2015 13:09:20 -0800 (PST)) it happened
meow2222@care2.com wrote in
a1f1d940-3cae-4096-a1d7-d4983aa72cc8@googlegroups.com>:

https://app.box.com/s/hin6mhzpzl147473r1td

I'm wondering why the circuit's more complex than just:
RC ballast
neon
coil & C

Last night, before falling asleep, I think I figured out the rest of the 'why' of this circuit:

1) the diodes cause harmonics of 50 Hz every zero crossing of the mains, this
is transformed to the RF tuned circuit, and then transmitted via the antenna.
Mainly odd harmonics, but there is a lot of slow rise etc, so probably even harmonics too.
This gives an annoying AM (sideband every 50 Hz) rattle.

2) the FL starter tube (or whatever you call) it interrupts this at irregular intervals,
mostly in the second or part thereof range.

The purpose of (2) is to f*ck up the AM receiver AGC.

Normally when you only jam with that AM rattle, you could get used to it,
or even filter it out afterwards, I used an elliptical filter to remove 60 Hz with harmonics from a long audio recording from
some conference.
http://panteltje.com/panteltje/newsflex/download.html#humfilter

But now when the jam signal is cut, the receiver AGC will turn the gain up so the remote political brain wash is made
audible.
Just after the gain reaches near maximum,,, the jammer comes in with full strength (locally).
BRBRBRBRBRBRBRBBRBBrBrrbrbrbrbrsilence(AGC gain now low)this is the voice of A(hardly audible if at all)
BRBRBRBRBRBRBRBRBRBRBBrBrbrbrbrbrb
etc etc etc.
Very hard to listen to that without ear damage,,,
Manual AGC does not help a lot either, you still need the gain to hear far away stations, and need fading compensation on
short wave.

So its simple, its effective.

The neon switches with 90v steps 4 times a cycle. The diodes switch with whatever their Vdrop is 4 times a cycle.
Presumably here's how it works:
When the neon's conducting, C to the mains is C1 = 0.25-0.5uF
When the neon's oc, C to the mains is C3 = 200-500pF
So probably the 2 switching devices cause different resonant frequencies in the LC tank.

Somebody needs to build this,

Unless there are spice models for neons & copper oxide diodes

Those are NOT copper oxide. D220S (that is what they are on that bogus snake
oil device schematics) are STABISTORS. It is like zeners but used in forward
direction. Not any different from using a diode forward drop for low voltage
reference and those are actually very similar to regular russian low signal
silicon D220 diodes (close to 1N914, 1N4148 etc) and packed in the same
package. The only difference is their forward drop was specified and
supposed to be relatively constant and within tolerance. Trailing "S"
(cyrillic "C") stays for "Stabistor". There were several different
stabistors with voltage drops from 0.7 to 1.3 Volts available back then.

Also russian FL starters were not Neon -- they glow purple so it is more
like argon or whatever else -- but that doesn't make much difference except
higher strike voltage. Mains power is 220V 50Hz there.

---
******************************************************************
* KSI@home KOI8 Net < > The impossible we do immediately. *
* Las Vegas NV, USA < > Miracles require 24-hour notice. *
******************************************************************

 

[Don Y]

Hi Dimiter,

On 1/4/2015 5:35 PM, Dimiter_Popoff wrote:

[attrs elided]

Said another way, what sorts of "support venues" would you consider
appropriate for *your* products -- and *why* (esp why *not*!).

Our customers are not that many, I wish they were in the thousands so
I had to organize something like that. Then our devices are typically
used by end users, not developers - where the user manual tends to
do a good enough job. For the few cases when people have some issue
usually it can be resolved one on one over the net, being able to
see the *same* screen at both sides (the netMCA working over RFB/VNC)
makes things quite easy.

Understood. I was *going* to conclude that the "quality" of user probably
plays a role in the extent to which "support" is required (wrt the level
of familiarity with the topics -- newbies can get by with folks who know
where the POWER switch is located! :-/ ).

The quality of our users is typically fairly high, those are people
who have been dealing with systems a lot less friendly than ours.
Some (many?) of them have no basic networking knowledge so the
main obstacle we had initially was until their unit would come
online..... Since we started to supply a router with it,
prepared such they could have a "quick start" - just plug things
and have them running (e.g. the router would assign their device
a known IP address, would forward ports it has to forward so
whatever server part on the device is running will be accessible
from the outside etc.) this problem largely disappeared.

Makes sense. The effort (on your part) to provide that "up front"
is probably saved many times over vs. trying to talk them through the
process when they have problems.

When they ultimately contact you for an issue, is it something that
you can quickly resolve:
"Click here, type this in there, then set the detector..."
or is it a "problem solving" experience for you, as well?

If I have to do a serious developer support group it would be
via a mailing list. Just let the people who actually have something
to do with it join, then leave the thing alone. Archive the messages
in a way convenient enough to access - what more does one need.
By controlling the population on the list one can afford to allow all
sorts of attachments etc. etc.

Exactly. That was my original thinking.

But, I've received some feedback suggesting some folks are grumbling
about the format/medium. Turns out, they check their email on their
*phones* and it's really not convenient for viewing certain types of
"non text".

Oh come on, this is a non-issue. If the browser on a phone cannot deal
with what is going to be posted on the list then what will they use.

Agreed. I suspect there is some other motivation for pestering me
about this (perhaps trying to drag me back onto the payroll?).

I've declined to take on the work. As a "compromise", decided to put
together a summary of OTHER options they have to address their support
desires. But, mailing lists are the only "cheap" solution (doesn't
require setting up a server or maintaining a portal, etc.).

So, more "corporate involvement". Hence my question re: more direct
corporate involvement in that "forum"...

Have them use a webmail client if whatever else is not working and be
done with it, nobody needs all sorts of formats known to humanity
in one place to provide technical support. GIF, JPEG, PDF, text,
html - they will be able to view this right away on practically
everything, just the amount of swearing it will take will vary
between platforms (sometimes dramatically, you should see me using
the cheap android tablet I have for bed use....).
The rest can go as application/octet-stream, would go this way
whatever format you choose anyway.

Current implementation is reasonably clever. E.g., I resample JPEG
attachments to ensure they're a more manageable size (easier than having
to educate everyone who submits them to do this; *or*, reject too
many messages because of 10MB JPEG attachments, etc.). This saves the
folks who submit them from having to take that deliberate step before
posting... (and cuts down on grumbling from folks who have to "pay"
to receive huge "irrelevant" pictures).

Keep warm. We harvested the Navel oranges a few days ago (weather turned
cold enough to put the fruit at jeopardy). Thankfully (?) a small crop
(in terms of NUMBERS). But, they're all *huge* -- at least a pound (500g)
each! So, they effectively take up a lot of space regardless...

Whoa, half a ton oranges (well, kilogram but sounds pretty huge
to me ).

Yeah, they're pretty big. Lemons were big as well -- 60 pounds off the
little 3 ft tree! No idea what we'll do with all the juice when it
"grows up"!

We had just a few apples this year - the apple trees (here at least)
give plenty of apples every other year only. So we left the few apples
untouched, some are still on the tree - and they did find some good use:

Sadly, not cold enough for apples, here. And, the variety that I like
is not sold in stores (apparently doesn't travel well).

Keep warm! :>

 

[Don Y]

Hi George,

On 1/5/2015 7:40 AM, George Herold wrote:

I've also thought about having some kind of online support forum for our products.
In the least, I could just make all my various email responses to problems
available online.

I'm not sure (legally -- IANAL) you can just unilaterally decide to publish
emails from customers (i.e., any "included text") without their consent
"after the fact". OTOH, if they are participating in a mailing list *known*
to be sharing their comments with others (of which they have no control)
that probably sidesteps the issue.

But A much better forum would be something where users
could help each other. An email list server or such.

Yes. IME, users see things differently than designers, marketeers, etc. It
can also draw traffic to you for very little *direct* cost. And, of course,
if you keep an ear to it, give you an idea of what people *want* (instead of
creating a new product only to discover no real market, etc.).

It's not something I know much about. Are you setting something up?
What technology are you favoring?

I had set up a mailing list service. Basically, just a piece of code that:
- fetches mail from an account (which need not reside on "your" server)
- verifies that the sender is legitimate (so only "members" can post)
- does some gross checks on the content (e.g., profanity, etc.)
- resends the message to the "list" (again, doesn't need "your" server)

(there are several other features that make it a bit more usable than
other "OTS" solutions)

IME, mailing lists are a win because they deliver content *to* the
user. The user doesn't have to "check to see if anything new has been
said" by visiting a web site. The user can chose to archive whatever
he wants and *preserve* what's important (to *him*) -- eliding all else.
It keeps things on-topic (folks who digress can be censored by other
participants ultimately losing access to the resource). Eliminates
spam (you can't just "join" the list; the vendor adds you to the list
with a "verified purchase" -- obviously only works in certain markets).
It's low cost (you don't have to maintain a "web site" -- just a list of
email addresses in a TEXT file), can be implemented damn near anywhere
(an old PC, on a server, on a smart phone, etc.) and *moved* almost
instantly, etc.

In any approach, the *technology* isn;t the problem. Rather, it's "policy"
and "control" that tend to be the real issues.

I.e., do *you* (or an agent of yours) want to be an active participant in
those discussions? Or, just let it operate on its own? Do you want to
exercise control over the *content*? E.g., what if a disgruntled customer
starts berating you and your products... do you "shut him up" by disconnecting
him from the resource? Or, engage him in a public discussion and hope others
see his folly? Or, ignore him altogether and let his comments "speak for
HIMSELF"?

My *personal* (not speaking on behalf of any client) belief is you should
try to address his comments rationally. Not "giving away the farm" just
to make him happy (which then sets a public precedent for others to mimic).
And, *hope* your professionalism comes through and is respected by the
others reading the exchange.

IME, offering a full refund is a quick way to shut someone up. "Hey, if
you don't like the product, we'll buy it back from you and you can find
someone else who you *hope* has a better product." Of course, if they
*don't* exercise this option, there is a tacit understanding that they
must think your product "worth the money" -- given the alternatives that
they have available. And, if they *do* exercise the option and later
*return* to the mailing list (cuz they'd be dropped from the list once
you refunded their money!), then it tells others that the choice to
opt for the refund turned out to be a *wrong* choice! :>

[Of course, if they take the refund and you never hear from them again,
that's also a win for you -- one less "unhappy" customer!]

I'll send you a copy of the summary I've been preparing for client so
you can see what options are available and the pros/cons of each approach.

[NB: you'd also have to address "accessibility" issues. E.g., sighted users
can more readily avail themselves of indexes, graphical displays of thread
structure, etc. OTOH, you can assume the reader already has tools with
which they are comfortable for those tasks...]

Pro bono day. First of the new year :-/

 

[Joerg]

Don Y wrote:

Hi George,

On 1/5/2015 7:40 AM, George Herold wrote:

[...]

It's not something I know much about. Are you setting something up?
What technology are you favoring?

I had set up a mailing list service. Basically, just a piece of code that:
- fetches mail from an account (which need not reside on "your" server)
- verifies that the sender is legitimate (so only "members" can post)
- does some gross checks on the content (e.g., profanity, etc.)
- resends the message to the "list" (again, doesn't need "your" server)

(there are several other features that make it a bit more usable than
other "OTS" solutions)

IME, mailing lists are a win because they deliver content *to* the
user. ...

And there's the problem. Imagine sitting in Outer Podunk on a rickety
Internet connection. Now instead of just headers a major barrage of
mailing list message bodies floods in that you really don't want right now.

... The user doesn't have to "check to see if anything new has been
said" by visiting a web site.

That is exactly what this here user wants

... The user can chose to archive whatever
he wants and *preserve* what's important (to *him*) -- eliding all else.

The why would I want all the unwanted stuff downloaded onto my PC in the
first place?

[...]

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

 

[Jamie M]

On 1/1/2015 6:12 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

On Thu, 01 Jan 2015 17:12:26 -0800, Jamie M <jmorken@shaw.ca> wrote:

I made a 14.8V (4s) lithium ion battery pack (18650 cells 4s3p)

Protected cells or unprotected?

and after gluing the batteries together into the pack,

I use cellophane packing tape or shrink tubing.

I used a
multimeter to check if any of the cases were shorted anywhere (some of
the thin plastic covering on the batteries was removed). Before
conneting the batteries in series, I noticed that the third and fourth
section of the battery (11.1V and 14.8V) had a measureable 0.1V and 0.5V
voltage across the terminals of the batteries.

gnd-3.7 (3p 19650 batteries)

3.7-7.4 (3p 19650 batteries)

7.4-11.1(a) (3p 19650 batteries)

(b)11.1-14.8(c) (3p 19650 batteries)

That should be 18650 cells.

The four 3p packs above are glued together but not electrically
connected in series yet, but when measuring the voltage from a
to b, the multimeter shows 0.1V and from a to c shows 0.5V.

All four of the 3p battery packs are individually at 3.8V.

Mystery!?

Not really, In order to have a voltage across something that isn't
connected to the meter, you have to have a leakage current somewhere.
Conductive glue perhaps? Your hand on the volts guesser probe
providing a conduction path to the battery? Cells "insulated" with
conductive aluminum coated mylar tape? Difficult to tell what you're
doing. Photos?

I haven't tried to short (through a load) the 0.5V to see if it
is a low impedance short, but the main thing I was curious about is
where the 0.5V can come from. I am guessing that if I put a 220ohm
resistor across it the multimeter would read zero, but still 0.5V
seems high!

Put about 10K ohms across the volts guesser leads to swamp out any
leakage path. If it then reads zero, you probably have a leakage
path, somewhere.

Hint: Think about a balance charger for whatever it is you're
building. Something like this:
http://www.hobbyking.com/hobbyking/store/__6478__IMAX_B6_AC_Charger_Discharger_1_6_Cells_GENUINE_.html

Drivel: Don't assume that your 18650 cells run at the claimed
capacity. I tested some 3000 ma-hr Ultrafire cells and measured about
850 ma-hr at 1.3A.
http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/LiPo/Ultrafire%20LiPo%203000%20ma-hr%2018650%20test.jpg
The 1.3A is higher than the normal test current of 0.2 * ma-hr rating
or 600 ma but that's what the flashlight under test was normal
drawing.

Hi,

I put a series 10K resistor with the multimter and still measured 0.5V,
I did a current test with the resistor and there is 0.6uA of leakage
current shown on the multimeter. I think the glue I used must be
slightly conductive. I think it is safe to leave with that small
leakage current, eventually the batteries will discharge unevenly but
I think the leakage current might be lower than the self discharge rate
anyway.

The batteries are CGR18650CF high drain types, I already have that same
balance charger you linked to.

I tried the ultrafire batteries before, but I think I got quite a bit
less than the 850mAHr you measured.

cheers,
Jamie

 

[Jamie M]

On 1/5/2015 11:31 AM, Jamie M wrote:

s it the multimeter would read zero, but still 0.5V
seems high!

Put about 10K ohms across the volts guesser leads to swamp out any
leakage path. If it then reads zero, you probably have a leakage
path, somewhere.

Hint: Think about a balance charger for whatever it is you're
building. Something like this:
http://www.hobbyking.com/hobbyking/store/__6478__IMAX_B6_AC_Charger_Discharger_1_6_Cells_GENUINE_.html


Drivel: Don't assume that your 18650 cells run at the claimed
capacity. I tested some 3000 ma-hr Ultrafire cells and measured about
850 ma-hr at 1.3A.
http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/LiPo/Ultrafire%20LiPo%203000%20ma-hr%2018650%20test.jpg

The 1.3A is higher than t

Oops meant to say I did a current test *without* the resistor.

 

[rickman]

On 1/5/2015 1:37 PM, meow2222@care2.com wrote:

On Monday, January 5, 2015 4:11:48 PM UTC, rickman wrote:
On 1/5/2015 4:58 AM, meow2222@care2.com wrote:
On Sunday, January 4, 2015 10:30:21 PM UTC, rickman wrote:
On 1/4/2015 2:20 PM, meow2222@care2.com wrote:
On Sunday, January 4, 2015 5:54:01 PM UTC, rickman wrote:
On 1/4/2015 3:22 AM, meow2222@care2.com wrote:
On 1/3/2015 1:45 AM, meow2222@care2.com wrote:
On Thursday, November 20, 2014 12:38:37 AM UTC, rickman wrote:
On 11/19/2014 7:19 PM, Joerg wrote:

It's always good to learn about those because one can do weird tricks
with them. They are also useful as gain control elements. I just hope
they won't disappear. I think TV will eventually vanish and go Internet
and then they'd likely be obsoleted because that is the only mass market
for them that I know of.

I can't see TVs ever loosing a tuner. That would only happen when TV
station broadcasts go away and I don't think that is at all on the
horizon.

As internet speeds creep up, by the time we all have a bundle of fibres the bandwidth supplied by air broadcast will become pointless and almost worthless. The end looks inevitable. A single fibre bundle can wipe out uhf tv, all current radio bands and phone lines, so it will for cost reasons.

Except that they will never bring fiber to every household. There are
lots of places that don't even have cable which is why there is satellite..

The whole developed world has mains electicity supplied, a huge undertaking to achieve. Why? Its worth it. Living in 50 or 100yrs time without fast internet will be unthinkable, just as we're no longer prepared to live with a 32v generator in the basement. It'll happen. In this country the rare houses with no mains supply are worth 10s of thoussands less because of it. That price brings a lot of willingness, and so it will with internet eventually.

You are confusing having Fiber with having Internet. The two are not
the same thing.

of course im not. how else do you propose people get huge banwidth in future?

I'm not proposing anything. I'm saying your analogy of not having fiber
in every house hold is like not having electricity is bogus because
people can live rich, full lives using other modes of Internet access
while other sources of electricity fall far short of the conventional
power distribution system.

There are many houses which don't have decent Internet access where I
live because the economics don't justify the investment by the Internet
companies. Being a monopoly the public utilities are required to
provide service to nearly everyone.

What you're saying applies today, upto a point. What I'm saying applies in 50 or 100 years. As time goes on ever more will be done using data transfer, and the deficit in not having fast net will get ever bigger until it becomes simply unacceptable. Its the exact same pattern that happened with electricity distribution.

In 50 years we will likely both be dead and there is no point in
speculating what will be important and what won't. It's just too far
removed. You have no way of knowing what the needs will be at that time.

A lot of people have looked at the future of computing. There are things we don't know, and things we can be fairly confident of. And the latter includes a massive increase in the automated use of relatively trivial data to optimise the design and operation of most things in life.

We also know that infrastructure keeps advancing - it inevitably will in any developed country. The lack of nationwide fast broadband in the 1st world is hampering business and thus economic development, and large sums continue to be invested year on year in improving this infrastructure. I dont see that about to stop any decade soon.

You dont need a crystal ball or to know all the details at this point to be pretty confident that internet infrastructure will keep spreading wider, getting faster and gaining more capacity.

I'd venture that the situation with net provision today has a fair bit in common with the electrification situation in the 1930s.

What you said was so broad and vague as to certainly be true... until
that last bit about the parallel with electrification. Universal
electrification happened because the government pushed it and made it
both a priority and a mandate to the monopolies as part of their
responsibility for operating a monopoly.

This monopoly does not exist in Internet access and so there will be no
mandate or even "priority". It is all profit driven so that many parts
of the country will not see the large investments because there is
insufficient return. Heck, even in the second largest city in Maryland,
I can't get DSL because the phone lines are hobbled by 1970's
infrastructure Verizon won't replace because there is not sufficient
profit.

--

Rick

 

[piglet]

On 05/01/2015 09:54, meow2222@care2.com wrote:

The neon switches with 90v steps 4 times a cycle. The diodes switch with whatever their Vdrop is 4 times a cycle.
Presumably here's how it works:
When the neon's conducting, C to the mains is C1 = 0.25-0.5uF
When the neon's oc, C to the mains is C3 = 200-500pF
So probably the 2 switching devices cause different resonant frequencies in the LC tank.

Not forgetting the anywhere from 30-70% of the time that the neon is
short-circuited by the bi-metal switch that got warmed by the neons
glow. As Jan P wrote the irregularity of that would drive listeners crazy.

Admirably clever/devious/evil circuit.

piglet

 

[George Herold]

On Monday, January 5, 2015 3:41:45 PM UTC-5, Glenn wrote:

On 04/01/15 03.45, Sylvia Else wrote:
I had (naively, perhaps) thought that the main reason for having a
transformer in a sinewave inverter circuit was to provide isolation,
between the mains voltage output and the low voltage input, so that the
latter would not be live.

My thinking was then that if that's not a consideration (because the
input is also at a dangerous voltage) then one could dispense with the
transformer.

Yet the standard PWM sinewave inverter circuit seems to rely on the very
high transformer primary inductance for its function. Certainly, I
haven't managed to conceive a transformerless PWM circuit that works,
even in SPICE.

So I tried conceiving of it as a buck converter, where the regulated
output voltage tracks the required sinewave. That doesn't work because
there's not enough output current at lowish points in the output cycle
to discharge the smoothing capacitor fast enough for the output voltage
to track properly.

My generator's original inverter clearly did not have a 2.5kW 50Hz
transformer, just two chokes (perhaps 300uH) on the mains output lines,
and two electrolytic capacitors (220uF, if memory serves - certainly
about that).

Equally, my 300W pure-sinewave inverter does not contain a 300W 50Hz
transformer. It contains what looks like a transformer, but nothing like
that big.

It appears I'm missing something, and multiple Google searches have not
been informative. Anyone have knowledge of this?

Sylvia.


Hi Sylvia

How about this one?:

Here is a one [active] switch inverter - but besides the one switch, it
also has two parallel coupled reverse-blocking-switches closer to the
output, that functions as active rectification - see the schematic at
page 2:

A Synchronous Single Switch Inverter - Purdue School of:
http://www.engr.iupui.edu/~aizadian/index_files/Papers/C-58.pdf
Quote: "...
Four modes of operation were detected in creation of negative and
positive polarity voltages.
...
Not only did the bench test work, it lead to the discovery of several
other circuits and controllers for high-power inverters with lower
switching loss, higher voltage performance and lighter reconfigured
circuits.

Wow! this is quite a post! Thanks. I know little about SMPS.
The paper has only simulation data. By bench test
I assume you (or someone) has built it and tested it?

The fast switch is the RB-IGBT you refer to later?
What about T1 T2? (I haven't chased down all your links.
that would take a while....)

George H.

Therefore, as the number of high frequency switching devices is
decreased, the efficiency is increased. For instance, a 90% efficient
[H-bridge] converter becomes 97.2% efficient.
...
CONCLUSION
A new power inverter circuit was introduced that required only one high
frequency switching transistor. The inverter used a synchronizing
structure to change the voltage polarity on demand. Therefore, real time
generation of infinite voltage levels was realized. The state space
equations demonstrated a forth order system.
..."

The inverter could be used for solar micro-inverters:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_micro-inverter

The inverter could also be used for:
* brushless motor
* step motor

The circuit is a "all-in-one". It could be used for (T1 and T2 refer to
the iupui.edu article):

* Positive DC, DV. T1 is used for active rectification. T2 is not used.

* Negative DC, DV. T2 is used for active rectification. T1 is not used.

* Any curve shape can be amplified with a signal from a suitable signal
generator. (retangular, saw tooth, triangular...) T1 is used for
positive curve parts - and T2 is used for negative curve parts.

Could it be used for a Class D audio amplifier with the right control
circuit? Low enough distortion?

The circuit bear resemblance with a reversed SEPIC:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-ended_primary-inductor_converter

-

Indiana University. (2012, October 17). New class of power inverter
could mean cheaper, faster hybrid vehicles. ScienceDaily:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/10/121017153913.htm
Citat: "...
Izadian's invention, the result of a creative reconfiguration of an
electrical circuit during a laboratory experiment, would make inverters
cheaper, lighter and therefore more efficient than current models.
...
For example, unwanted harmonics are greatly reduced with Izadian's
invention.
..."

-

Additional reading:
http://www.engr.iupui.edu/~aizadian/index_files/Page356.htm
http://www.engr.iupui.edu/~aizadian/

Active rectification (synchronous rectification):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_rectification

-

They must be but besides the one switch, it also has two parallel
coupled e.g. Reverse Blocking IGBT (RB-IGBT). (Or two serially connected
Power MOSFETs. The Power MOSFETs must be connected so that their
substrate diodes have opposite directions):

http://www.google.dk/search?q=RB-IGBT

Application Characteristics of an Experimental RB-IGBT (Reverse Blocking
IGBT) Module:
http://www.pwrx.com/pwrx/app/04ias42p4.PDF

A High Efficiency Indirect Matrix Converter Utilizing RB-IGBTs:
http://www.pes.ee.ethz.ch/uploads/tx_ethpublications/friedli_PESC06.pdf

-

Definition:

http://www.ece.uic.edu/~i445/2011_445_Lecture7.pdf
Quote: "...
* Active switch: Switch state is controlled exclusively
by a third terminal (control terminal).

* Passive switch: Switch state is controlled by the
applied current and/or voltage at terminals 1 and 2.
...
Single-quadrant switch: on-state i(t) and off-state v(t) are unipolar.
[e.g. diode-like, reverse blocking]
..."


Better name: One active switch inverter.

The two active rectification switches are passive switches.

.

A half bridge uses two active switches.

A full bridge uses four active switches.

-

Alternative:

Design:

T1 serially connected to T2.

T1 is N-MOSFET with drain "up" (drain connected to L2 and C1).

T2 is N-MOSFET with drain "down" (drain connected to zero/commen).

T1 and T2 sources connected together.

.

Active rectification:

When positive output is needed T2 is on. T1 do active rectification.

When negative output is needed T1 is on. T2 do active rectification.

Glenn

 

[Glenn]

On 04/01/15 03.45, Sylvia Else wrote:

I had (naively, perhaps) thought that the main reason for having a
transformer in a sinewave inverter circuit was to provide isolation,
between the mains voltage output and the low voltage input, so that the
latter would not be live.

My thinking was then that if that's not a consideration (because the
input is also at a dangerous voltage) then one could dispense with the
transformer.

Yet the standard PWM sinewave inverter circuit seems to rely on the very
high transformer primary inductance for its function. Certainly, I
haven't managed to conceive a transformerless PWM circuit that works,
even in SPICE.

So I tried conceiving of it as a buck converter, where the regulated
output voltage tracks the required sinewave. That doesn't work because
there's not enough output current at lowish points in the output cycle
to discharge the smoothing capacitor fast enough for the output voltage
to track properly.

My generator's original inverter clearly did not have a 2.5kW 50Hz
transformer, just two chokes (perhaps 300uH) on the mains output lines,
and two electrolytic capacitors (220uF, if memory serves - certainly
about that).

Equally, my 300W pure-sinewave inverter does not contain a 300W 50Hz
transformer. It contains what looks like a transformer, but nothing like
that big.

It appears I'm missing something, and multiple Google searches have not
been informative. Anyone have knowledge of this?

Sylvia.

Hi Sylvia

How about this one?:

Here is a one [active] switch inverter - but besides the one switch, it
also has two parallel coupled reverse-blocking-switches closer to the
output, that functions as active rectification - see the schematic at
page 2:

A Synchronous Single Switch Inverter - Purdue School of:
http://www.engr.iupui.edu/~aizadian/index_files/Papers/C-58.pdf
Quote: "...
Four modes of operation were detected in creation of negative and
positive polarity voltages.
....
Not only did the bench test work, it lead to the discovery of several
other circuits and controllers for high-power inverters with lower
switching loss, higher voltage performance and lighter reconfigured
circuits.

Therefore, as the number of high frequency switching devices is
decreased, the efficiency is increased. For instance, a 90% efficient
[H-bridge] converter becomes 97.2% efficient.
....
CONCLUSION
A new power inverter circuit was introduced that required only one high
frequency switching transistor. The inverter used a synchronizing
structure to change the voltage polarity on demand. Therefore, real time
generation of infinite voltage levels was realized. The state space
equations demonstrated a forth order system.
...."

The inverter could be used for solar micro-inverters:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_micro-inverter

The inverter could also be used for:
* brushless motor
* step motor

The circuit is a "all-in-one". It could be used for (T1 and T2 refer to
the iupui.edu article):

* Positive DC, DV. T1 is used for active rectification. T2 is not used.

* Negative DC, DV. T2 is used for active rectification. T1 is not used.

* Any curve shape can be amplified with a signal from a suitable signal
generator. (retangular, saw tooth, triangular...) T1 is used for
positive curve parts - and T2 is used for negative curve parts.

Could it be used for a Class D audio amplifier with the right control
circuit? Low enough distortion?

The circuit bear resemblance with a reversed SEPIC:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-ended_primary-inductor_converter

-

Indiana University. (2012, October 17). New class of power inverter
could mean cheaper, faster hybrid vehicles. ScienceDaily:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/10/121017153913.htm
Citat: "...
Izadian's invention, the result of a creative reconfiguration of an
electrical circuit during a laboratory experiment, would make inverters
cheaper, lighter and therefore more efficient than current models.
....
For example, unwanted harmonics are greatly reduced with Izadian's
invention.
...."

-

Additional reading:
http://www.engr.iupui.edu/~aizadian/index_files/Page356.htm
http://www.engr.iupui.edu/~aizadian/

Active rectification (synchronous rectification):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_rectification

-

They must be but besides the one switch, it also has two parallel
coupled e.g. Reverse Blocking IGBT (RB-IGBT). (Or two serially connected
Power MOSFETs. The Power MOSFETs must be connected so that their
substrate diodes have opposite directions):

http://www.google.dk/search?q=RB-IGBT

Application Characteristics of an Experimental RB-IGBT (Reverse Blocking
IGBT) Module:
http://www.pwrx.com/pwrx/app/04ias42p4.PDF

A High Efficiency Indirect Matrix Converter Utilizing RB-IGBTs:
http://www.pes.ee.ethz.ch/uploads/tx_ethpublications/friedli_PESC06.pdf

-

Definition:

http://www.ece.uic.edu/~i445/2011_445_Lecture7.pdf
Quote: "...
* Active switch: Switch state is controlled exclusively
by a third terminal (control terminal).

* Passive switch: Switch state is controlled by the
applied current and/or voltage at terminals 1 and 2.
....
Single-quadrant switch: on-state i(t) and off-state v(t) are unipolar.
[e.g. diode-like, reverse blocking]
...."


Better name: One active switch inverter.

The two active rectification switches are passive switches.

..

A half bridge uses two active switches.

A full bridge uses four active switches.

-

Alternative:

Design:

T1 serially connected to T2.

T1 is N-MOSFET with drain "up" (drain connected to L2 and C1).

T2 is N-MOSFET with drain "down" (drain connected to zero/commen).

T1 and T2 sources connected together.

..

Active rectification:

When positive output is needed T2 is on. T1 do active rectification.

When negative output is needed T1 is on. T2 do active rectification.

Glenn

 

[Maynard A. Philbrook Jr.]

In article <m86ihm$vbm$1@dont-email.me>, tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid
says...

On 2.1.15 16:43, Maynard A. Philbrook Jr. wrote:
In article <m84732$6hc$1@node2.news.atman.pl>, peter.pan@neverland.mil
says...

Tauno Voipio wrote:

The 220k timing resistor is too small, keeping the PUT continuosly on.
The following thing oscillates.

Thank you all very much, in both cases the non-oscillation
seems to be caused by too low resistor value. In the case
of the PUT-based circuit I have not enough experience to
judge whether Spice is right or wrong, but I remember well
my experiments performed over a decade ago with a *real* neon
oscillator. It used to work with pretty any reasonable resistor.
The simulation provided by John does not oscillate with 470k
and with 560k it oscillates *exactly twice*. With 680k it works
well. I must confess that my excitement about Spice has just
entered a colder period... :-/

Once again, thank you for your help!

Best regards, Piotr
Here is your example with an LED, I added a R to the base of the
NPN and a R in series with the LED to not over do it.
You will also notice the Trans set point, it shows "Startup".


You forgot to correct the time constant. The oscillation frequency
was spoiled to 12 ms/cycle, due to changed trip voltages. The
frequency cannot be sensed as blinking.

Sorry!

Jamie

 

On Mon, 05 Jan 2015 11:11:27 -0500, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:

On 1/5/2015 4:58 AM, meow2222@care2.com wrote:
On Sunday, January 4, 2015 10:30:21 PM UTC, rickman wrote:
On 1/4/2015 2:20 PM, meow2222@care2.com wrote:
On Sunday, January 4, 2015 5:54:01 PM UTC, rickman wrote:
On 1/4/2015 3:22 AM, meow2222@care2.com wrote:
On 1/3/2015 1:45 AM, meow2222@care2.com wrote:
On Thursday, November 20, 2014 12:38:37 AM UTC, rickman wrote:
On 11/19/2014 7:19 PM, Joerg wrote:

It's always good to learn about those because one can do weird tricks
with them. They are also useful as gain control elements. I just hope
they won't disappear. I think TV will eventually vanish and go Internet
and then they'd likely be obsoleted because that is the only mass market
for them that I know of.

I can't see TVs ever loosing a tuner. That would only happen when TV
station broadcasts go away and I don't think that is at all on the
horizon.

As internet speeds creep up, by the time we all have a bundle of fibres the bandwidth supplied by air broadcast will become pointless and almost worthless. The end looks inevitable. A single fibre bundle can wipe out uhf tv, all current radio bands and phone lines, so it will for cost reasons.

Except that they will never bring fiber to every household. There are
lots of places that don't even have cable which is why there is satellite..

The whole developed world has mains electicity supplied, a huge undertaking to achieve. Why? Its worth it. Living in 50 or 100yrs time without fast internet will be unthinkable, just as we're no longer prepared to live with a 32v generator in the basement. It'll happen. In this country the rare houses with no mains supply are worth 10s of thoussands less because of it. That price brings a lot of willingness, and so it will with internet eventually.

You are confusing having Fiber with having Internet. The two are not
the same thing.

of course im not. how else do you propose people get huge banwidth in future?

I'm not proposing anything. I'm saying your analogy of not having fiber
in every house hold is like not having electricity is bogus because
people can live rich, full lives using other modes of Internet access
while other sources of electricity fall far short of the conventional
power distribution system.

There are many houses which don't have decent Internet access where I
live because the economics don't justify the investment by the Internet
companies. Being a monopoly the public utilities are required to
provide service to nearly everyone.

What you're saying applies today, upto a point. What I'm saying applies in 50 or 100 years. As time goes on ever more will be done using data transfer, and the deficit in not having fast net will get ever bigger until it becomes simply unacceptable. Its the exact same pattern that happened with electricity distribution.

In 50 years we will likely both be dead and there is no point in
speculating what will be important and what won't. It's just too far
removed. You have no way of knowing what the needs will be at that time.

Where's my hoverboard?!

 

On Mon, 05 Jan 2015 14:35:26 -0500, rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote:

On 1/5/2015 1:37 PM, meow2222@care2.com wrote:
On Monday, January 5, 2015 4:11:48 PM UTC, rickman wrote:
On 1/5/2015 4:58 AM, meow2222@care2.com wrote:
On Sunday, January 4, 2015 10:30:21 PM UTC, rickman wrote:
On 1/4/2015 2:20 PM, meow2222@care2.com wrote:
On Sunday, January 4, 2015 5:54:01 PM UTC, rickman wrote:
On 1/4/2015 3:22 AM, meow2222@care2.com wrote:
On 1/3/2015 1:45 AM, meow2222@care2.com wrote:
On Thursday, November 20, 2014 12:38:37 AM UTC, rickman wrote:
On 11/19/2014 7:19 PM, Joerg wrote:

It's always good to learn about those because one can do weird tricks
with them. They are also useful as gain control elements. I just hope
they won't disappear. I think TV will eventually vanish and go Internet
and then they'd likely be obsoleted because that is the only mass market
for them that I know of.

I can't see TVs ever loosing a tuner. That would only happen when TV
station broadcasts go away and I don't think that is at all on the
horizon.

As internet speeds creep up, by the time we all have a bundle of fibres the bandwidth supplied by air broadcast will become pointless and almost worthless. The end looks inevitable. A single fibre bundle can wipe out uhf tv, all current radio bands and phone lines, so it will for cost reasons.

Except that they will never bring fiber to every household. There are
lots of places that don't even have cable which is why there is satellite..

The whole developed world has mains electicity supplied, a huge undertaking to achieve. Why? Its worth it. Living in 50 or 100yrs time without fast internet will be unthinkable, just as we're no longer prepared to live with a 32v generator in the basement. It'll happen. In this country the rare houses with no mains supply are worth 10s of thoussands less because of it. That price brings a lot of willingness, and so it will with internet eventually.

You are confusing having Fiber with having Internet. The two are not
the same thing.

of course im not. how else do you propose people get huge banwidth in future?

I'm not proposing anything. I'm saying your analogy of not having fiber
in every house hold is like not having electricity is bogus because
people can live rich, full lives using other modes of Internet access
while other sources of electricity fall far short of the conventional
power distribution system.

There are many houses which don't have decent Internet access where I
live because the economics don't justify the investment by the Internet
companies. Being a monopoly the public utilities are required to
provide service to nearly everyone.

What you're saying applies today, upto a point. What I'm saying applies in 50 or 100 years. As time goes on ever more will be done using data transfer, and the deficit in not having fast net will get ever bigger until it becomes simply unacceptable. Its the exact same pattern that happened with electricity distribution.

In 50 years we will likely both be dead and there is no point in
speculating what will be important and what won't. It's just too far
removed. You have no way of knowing what the needs will be at that time.

A lot of people have looked at the future of computing. There are things we don't know, and things we can be fairly confident of. And the latter includes a massive increase in the automated use of relatively trivial data to optimise the design and operation of most things in life.

We also know that infrastructure keeps advancing - it inevitably will in any developed country. The lack of nationwide fast broadband in the 1st world is hampering business and thus economic development, and large sums continue to be invested year on year in improving this infrastructure. I dont see that about to stop any decade soon.

You dont need a crystal ball or to know all the details at this point to be pretty confident that internet infrastructure will keep spreading wider, getting faster and gaining more capacity.

I'd venture that the situation with net provision today has a fair bit in common with the electrification situation in the 1930s.

What you said was so broad and vague as to certainly be true... until
that last bit about the parallel with electrification. Universal
electrification happened because the government pushed it and made it
both a priority and a mandate to the monopolies as part of their
responsibility for operating a monopoly.

This monopoly does not exist in Internet access and so there will be no
mandate or even "priority". It is all profit driven so that many parts
of the country will not see the large investments because there is
insufficient return. Heck, even in the second largest city in Maryland,
I can't get DSL because the phone lines are hobbled by 1970's
infrastructure Verizon won't replace because there is not sufficient
profit.

Your dream may come true.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2015/01/02/get-ready-the-fcc-says-itll-vote-on-net-neutrality-in-february/