Driver to drive?

[Kevin Aylward]

John Fields wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 15:34:51 GMT, "Kevin Aylward"
salesEXTRACT@anasoft.co.uk> wrote:

John Fields wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 02:40:41 -0500, "Aunty Kreist"
Aunty_Kreist@satanickittens.net> wrote:


But, you raise a good point...when does a fetus become a human
life?

---
That's been argued to death, already, but in my view it's when the
new strand of DNA is assembled.

But since such a condition is not conscious, that opinion is not
scientifically justifiable. Its just a well that's what I believe
for no good reason.

---
The point is not whether it's conscious or not,

Absolutely it is. That's *all* that matters. Its what *determines*
whether "life" should be respected for its *own* sake. For example, a
carrot may be considered "life", but to respect it for itself is daft.

(although it could be
argued that our conception of "consciousness" isn't completely
accurate)

I agree definition on consciousness is difficult, but what ever it is,
that's the axiom I use.

it's that it's alive and has a goal, that goal being to
become what we call conscious.

Non conscious goals, in this context, are irrelevant by my book.

Explain why a carrot, with is "alive", should be respected. Until you
can do this, you don't have an argument to respect a similar status
"life".

---

Sure I agree, that deciding just when an object is first conscious is
almost impossible, but it aint when an egg is just fertilised. Its
certainly after a few months minimum though.

---
If you don't know when, you can't say not when.\

Yep you can. Its not a line, there is a *region* where we can say
absolutely that it is not conscious from before one line and conscious
from another line after it. Only the region in-between the time is there
uncertainty. I gave a conservative figure of two months. The figure I
got this from was Carl Sagan noting that it is at least 3 months before
there is enough neural connections to form a brain as we know it.

So, drawing the line at say, 2 months, means that we just let some non
conscious blobs of chemicals be accorded the status of conscious blobs.
So what. The error is on the side of the pro-lifers. I can live with
that

---

And, sure, current science alone, is not enough to dictate all moral
issues like this, but its a no brainer for the first months of
conception. A foetus is just an amorphous blob of chemicals, and
that's all the respect it deservers.

---
Well, Kevin, it _is_ alive, so killing it's a _little_ different than
throwing your chemistry set away.

Nope. Sure its alive, but its just as alive as a carrot.

The concept of using "alive" as the decider is fundamentally flawed, and
missed by most. What truly matters is whether or not the object has ever
been conscious.

To repeat:

"Consciousness should be the deciding issue on moral issues"

IMO!

Where is the dividing line between 9
months and 2 months? I don't know, and it doesn't matter if one
wants to restrict to prior to two months.

---
For me, there _is_ no dividing line. If it's alive it won't die by
_my_ hand; YMMV

You must have some religious bent.

There is simply no good reason, imo, that an arbitrary definition of
"life" be used for such a decision.

If you were never conscious, you would never have known anything.
Consciousness is key, not life.

---

If you can give an actual *argument* as to why a non conscious
amorphous blob of chemicals should be given rights that a conscious
blob of chemicals is given, lets hear it.

---
Because it's as helpless as a new-born baby?

So is a carrot.

See argument, above, about consciousness.
---

Its this simple. Morals only depend on consciousness. No consciousness
no morals.

Kevin Aylward
salesEXTRACT@anasoft.co.uk
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.

 

[Aunty Kreist]

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:jjevu05vfmqdojfoka7hjckfa5nct7ui65@4ax.com...

On Wed, 19 Jan 2005 23:41:04 -0500, "Aunty Kreist"
Aunty_Kreist@satanickittens.net> wrote:


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:1d9uu056435icrb5o804l822rqjk33pgdp@4ax.com...
On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 03:02:54 GMT, "Clint Clark" <clint@artdsm.com
wrote:

What Is God?

God is the creator of our universe.

--
John Fields


Prove it.

---
Disprove it.

The burden of the proof is on you. You claimed it as fact. Now pony up, boi.

--
John Fields

 

[Chuck Harris]

Rich Grise wrote:

Pkg-config does live on my system, but it does nothing interesting
because there are no .pc files on my RH9 system. AFAIK there never were.
I have compiled numerous packages, and gEDA is the first I have found
that requires pkg-config. Further, your detection of gtk2 is the only
package in gEDA that ./configure misses. Until I built my first version
of gEDA, PKG_CONFIG_PATH wasn't even set on my machine. (I cannot prove
it, but I don't think it is set by any RH9 system)


Here's part of why I don't like Redmond^H^H^H^HHat:
richgrise@thunderbird:/opt/gEDA/Source/glib-2.4.8
$ cat /etc/slackware-version
Slackware 10.0.0
richgrise@thunderbird:/opt/gEDA/Source/glib-2.4.8
$ uname -a
Linux thunderbird 2.4.26 #6 Mon Jun 14 19:07:27 PDT 2004 i686 unknown unknown GNU/Linux
richgrise@thunderbird:/opt/gEDA/Source/glib-2.4.8
$ find / -name "*.pc" -print 2> /dev/null | wc
120 120 4470
richgrise@thunderbird:/opt/gEDA/Source/glib-2.4.8
$ ls -l /var/log/packages/gtk*
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 10282 2004-06-26 09:13 /var/log/packages/gtk+-1.2.10-i386-3
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 45775 2004-06-26 09:13 /var/log/packages/gtk+2-2.4.3-i486-1
richgrise@thunderbird:/opt/gEDA/Source/glib-2.4.8

I'd never heard of .pc files until I stumbled onto this thread, and I've
been a Slacker for a number of years.

But I have heard that Redmond^H^H^H^HHat changes configurations from what
works out of the box, such that you have to use Redmond^H^H^H^HHat RPM's
or it won't install right. There are Slack precompiled packages, or at
least they come with an install script that results in a binary and
configs that are the same as if you'd run ./configure, make, and install
from source. From what I've heard, RH doesn't do it that way. They modify
everything.

This is much too close to the Gates of hell for comfort, for me.

Thanks,
Rich

I have done some digging on my system, and found that the only use
of pkg-config is in gui applications that use the gtk* system. I did some
manual page reading and found that pkg-config is a reworked version of
a utility that used to be called gtk-config.

Ok, here's the rub: pkg-config is an attempt at making it easier to
rebuild packages. It gives you somewhat useful information about the
various compile and link options used in building a compliant package.
But outside of gtk based gui applications, *nobody* uses it.

And here's what is wrong with pkg-config. It has a built-in structure
of paths to the various .pc files that are used to describe the system.
The decision on what paths to incorporate in pkg-config is made by the
install part of the "./configure, make, make install" sequence used to
build pkg-config. It bases the paths on where it was originally aimed
at installation. But it would appear that there is no documented way
of asking the utility pkg-config what its default search paths are!
And it would also appear that there is no system wide configuration file
for pkg-config that allows you to tell it what directories to look in
for .pc files. Just the kludge PKG_CONFIG_PATH, which, like LD_LIBRARY_PATH,
is intended for test builds *ONLY*; things like checking to see if a new
version of a library creams your system. Never for distributed packages!

Now, why doesn't *my* pkg-config work. Well, a quick look shows me that
my version was built on December 17th, 2004. I was futzing around with
an earlier version of the gEDA suite around then. I wanted to see if I
could run a trial design from schematic to pc layout. Because of the
problem I had with gSCHEM linking up to transistor symbols, I tried
rebuilding the system using the some mechanism or other, I forget now.

Well, when I rebuilt the system I must have allowed the fool thing to
install its own version of pkg-config over my native version. Only problem
is the version was installed based in my home directory, so pkg-config's
default search paths are based in /home/chuck/gEDA, which doesn't point
to any useful .pc files.

PHBBBBBT!!!

I really hate it when folks use nonstandard stuff in distributions!!!

-Chuck

OBTW, Rich, when I first started linux it was with Yggdrisle's
Slackware linux. My problem was *their* distribution couldn't be
built from source because they put everything in the wrong places.
They broke the many "#include ../../../../../../../foo.h" references
that are endemic to unix programs. With RedHat, everything was where
it belonged. I could build everything from sources without a hitch.

As time passed, Slackware got smart and fixed their distribution, and
RedHat got lazy and fixed everyone elses programs to match their
file system layout ....sigh!

I want to go to Debian, but I am finding it hard to get excited about
ripping my system apart and starting over...If only there was a safe
and easy way to move from RedHat to Debian...

 

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.electronics.design that Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlog
DOTyou.knowwhat> wrote (in <69tvu0p17f16dcr88e92k7djb0tj55u467@4ax.com&gt
about 'OT: Safe Riddles', on Thu, 20 Jan 2005:

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 11:06:13 -0600, the renowned John Fields <jfields@au
stininstruments.com> wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 09:36:45 -0600, "Rhyanon" <pissoff@uberbitch.com
wrote:

Well, through your eyes, the view is all shit, since your head is
permanently ensconed in yer ass. Typical xstain.

---
"Ensconed"? Typical cretin.

Embedded in one of these things:

http://www.ukstudentlife.com/Britain/Food/Cooking/Scone/Scone.jpg

With (spreadable) clotted cream and jam:

http://www.ukstudentlife.com/Britain/Food/Cooking/Scone/SconeJamCream.jp
g

'Scone' is a word that needs to be used with care. An English scone is
quite different from a Scottish scone.

Of course, this does not necessarily apply to 'sconce', an entirely
different object, not normally edible.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
The good news is that nothing is compulsory.
The bad news is that everything is prohibited.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

 

Its this simple. Morals only depend on consciousness. No consciousness
no morals.

So.... ipso facto....., all Liberals are unconscious?

 

[Don Pearce]

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 19:45:17 +0000, John Woodgate
<jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk> wrote:

'Scone' is a word that needs to be used with care. An English scone is
quite different from a Scottish scone.

Of course, this does not necessarily apply to 'sconce', an entirely
different object, not normally edible.
--

Of course a sconce is made of stone, while a scone is made of dough.

But we have the added complication of the stone of scone, which isn't
made of dough - but of stone. My grandmother made really nice rock
cakes, which are scones of stone - made of dough.

Gottit?

d

Pearce Consulting
http://www.pearce.uk.com

 

[Jose Maria Lopez Hernande]

Jose Maria Lopez Hernandez wrote:

Andy wrote:

Andy replies:

Having raised 2 girls and a boy , I know from personal
experience that a fetus does not take on human characteristics
until approximately 20 years after birth...

Up until that time, abortions should be legalized....
Andy :&gt)))


And for some guys even more...

Talking seriously, death penalty makes USA a third-world country.
Until you stop *murdering* people that way no one will consider
USA a civilizated country.


--

Jose Maria Lopez Hernandez
Director Tecnico de bgSEC
jkerouac@bgsec.com
bgSEC Seguridad y Consultoria de Sistemas Informaticos
http://www.bgsec.com
ESPAŃA

The only people for me are the mad ones -- the ones who are mad to live,
mad to talk, mad to be saved, desirous of everything at the same time,
the ones who never yawn or say a commonplace thing, but burn, burn, burn
like fabulous yellow Roman candles.
-- Jack Kerouac, "On the Road"

 

[DeathWish]

uvcceet@juno.com wrote:

Its this simple. Morals only depend on consciousness. No consciousness
no morals.



So.... ipso facto....., all Liberals are unconscious?

Heh.

 

[Rene Tschaggelar]

Paul Burridge wrote:

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 18:08:42 +0100, Rene Tschaggelar <none@none.net
wrote:


A 90% devaluation?? That'd certainly do the trick!
BTW, how much is a 'benchmark' Starbucks cappuccino in Switzerland
these days?

I have no idea, sorry.
From the exclusive locations, I guess it'll be quite expensive.
say 4 USD ?

Rene
--
Ing.Buero R.Tschaggelar - http://www.ibrtses.com
& commercial newsgroups - http://www.talkto.net

 

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.electronics.design that uvcceet@juno.com wrote (in
<41f00cda$1$woehfu$mr2ice@news.aros.net&gt about 'Peterson's Death
Sentence', on Thu, 20 Jan 2005:

Its this simple. Morals only depend on consciousness. No consciousness
no morals.


So.... ipso facto....., all Liberals are unconscious?

Or unconscionable? (;-)
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
The good news is that nothing is compulsory.
The bad news is that everything is prohibited.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

 

[TripleEight]

"Aunty Kreist" <Aunty_Kreist@satanickittens.net> wrote in message
news:35aea8F4ksoqrU1@individual.net...

| > >"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
| > >news:1d9uu056435icrb5o804l822rqjk33pgdp@4ax.com...
| > >> On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 03:02:54 GMT, "Clint Clark" <clint@artdsm.com>
| > >> wrote:
| > >>
| > >> >What Is God?
| > >>

God is something civilised groups of humans created to make sure the way of
being civilised is kept and followed. I think we owed a lot to this idea.
Without this God creation, humans won't have faith and trust in living
"properly". There wouldn't be order or code of conduct when there is no visual
policing and law enforcements. There probably won't be love, respect and
consideration for others fellow humans since upon doing doing such things there
wouldn't be "rewards". God fits into this formula of balance :what-you-do =
what-you-get-in-return.

Humans have always been afraid of the unknown and God easily fits into the
scarey corner of the human mind.

 

[Electric dabbler]

Hi,

I think Macrovision managed to get a court ruling to prevent such devices
being sold in Europe, as removing the copy protection infringed their
Patents in some way. Such boxes 'Video Enhancers' were quite widely made -
at work we bought one made by Hamma which has S-Video and Composite video
in/out. Although they might not be easily obtainable new Ebay might be worth
checking. There were plenty of magazine articles showing how to build one,
usually involving a sync separator IC and some logic driving an analogue
switch so that the appropriate parts of the video signal were set to black
level. I did build one but seem to remember black level clamping wasn't all
that good. I am surprised that a key component in the design you found is
obsolete, there is probably a substitute out there, perhaps post the name of
the chip you cannot get.

The Macrovision signal on a DVD disc is actually generated in the DVD player
rather than being recorded on the disc, a 'flag' on the disc tells the
player to turn on the Macrovision encoding. Another approach might be to
disable the Macrovision inside the DVD player, back in the days when DVD
players needed some form of hardware change to make them play Region 1
discs, the same modification would often disable the Macrovision allegedly
to stop problems with projection TV's which didn't like the Macrovision
signal. Nowadays in the UK Region modified DVD players are quite common but
I suspect they just play all discs rather than have the macrovision
disabled. Again Ebay might turn up an older DVD player with all the
modifications already done.

Philip

"Jim Thompson" <thegreatone@example.com> wrote in message
news:5mmvu0dgp00g5akk4aatptjjvnnuk4j9te@4ax.com...

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 03:10:58 -0800, "Joel Kolstad"
JKolstad71HatesSpam@Yahoo.Com> wrote:

Here in the US, Macrovision Killers are usually advertised as 'video
enhancers' with cute pictures on the advertisements showing the
characteristic darkening/lightening of the image that is the result of
Macrovision processing; this 'politically correct' approach seems to let
them remain on the shelves when perhaps they otherwise wouldn't.

They are pretty ubiquitous; I was in a CompUSA today and they had them.
It's true that there's not a whole lot in the box -- usually a sync
detector/separator IC and some logic for truly 'blanking' the blanking
interval rather than allowing Macrovision to goof around with it, although
I
have seen some fancier ones (such as the one at CompUSA) that have, e.g.,
PAL/NTSC selectability, S-Video connections, etc.

I'm sure you can find some schematics of Macrovision killers on the 'net,
but the boxes are usually <$30, so unless you're looking to learn some
more
about it, I'd just buy one and be happy.

---Joel Kolstad


Throw a scope on the video output and you can observe what's in
Macrovision... mostly just "whiter-than-white" bursts to confuse the
AGC in the recorder. Sometimes there's also some extra sync around
the vertical pulse. All really easy to fix once you think about it...
think REPLACE ;-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice480)460-2350 | |
| E-mail Address at Website Fax480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

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

Hi,

 

[Electric dabbler]

John Fields - Piss off and annoy other people with your Christian
right-wing claptrap. I always find it amusing how the same bunch of people
can get so worked up about such a technical issue yet there are real people
dying all the time in the world from hunger and disease - if you didn't have
your heads so far up your own arseholes you might have noticed this.

Philip

 

[David L. Jones]

Kevin wrote:

Hi Group,

Let me pick your collective brains to see if I'm on the right track
here:

The situation:
I'm designing a microcontroller-based data logger (don't yawn...yet)
that will interface to a piece of equipment and keep track of when
certain events occur. These details are kept in microcontroller ram
and must be maintained even through power loss / daily shutdown
without corruption or loss of data.

Microcontroller is the ever popular PIC16LF628A (Nanowatt/low
voltage)
using the 4 MHz Internal RC oscillator. I also plan to use a 32.768
KHz watch crystal to drive Timer1 so that the PIC can periodically
wake and check if power has returned and resume normal operation. I
need to preserve data in the PIC's ram during a power failure but due
to reliability concerns I think powering the PIC from battery during
loss of power is the safest solution versus using EEPROM etc.

I plan to power the PIC16LF628A using power from both the machine
(tapping into 12VDC power and regulating that to 3.3V for
power/charging) as well as a rechargeable lithium 3V battery (see
crude ASCII schematic below):

1N5817
IN4001 3.3V Reg Schottky Diode
12V *--->|---+----[LM2950-3.3]--->|-----------+------+----- To PIC
VDD
from | | | |
equipment | | | |
| | \ | +
| | 390 / |
==== 220uF | Ohms \ ==== 33uF
16V | / 6V
==== | | ==== Electrolytic
| | Panasonic ----- |
| | ML1220 battery --- |
| | 17 mAH 3V | |
| | | |
GND *--------+---------+----------------------+------+
from
equipment

1. Any recommendation for the Schottky diode? (through hole package -
no SMD parts). I'm thinking of something with a low Vf (so far the
best I've come up with is a 1N5817 - approx 0.4V) but are there any
other concerns I should be aware of?
The battery spec sheet mentions the charging voltage range should be
2.8V to 3.2V to achieve the rated mAH capacity. (I am pretty close to
the low side of this range as 3.3 - 0.4 = 2.8V). If I could use a
diode with a lower Vf it would help raise the charging voltage.

2. Although it's not on the schematic above I plan to detect whether
12V is present via an 4n25 optoisolator & zener diode ("power fail
signal") to determine whether power is failing/failed (and if so go
to
sleep). As stated above the PIC will periodically wake from sleep and
check if power has returned (so it can continue monitoring). This
sounds reasonable, right?

3. Should I be concerned about leakage from the 1N5817 diode when 12V
is absent and the PIC is on battery power? If this leakage is a
problem then what other charging circuit design should I use? I'd
like
to keep things simple and use only fairly common inexpensive parts
(nothing that you couldn't get from Digikey). Similarly, would
leakage
from the 33uF cap pose a problem?

4. Another thing I'm concerned about is battery life regarding
charge/discharge cycles. The battery specs list these as 1000 cycles.
Now the application shouldn't even remotely come close to draining
the
battery in daily usage but I'm just wondering about this. (I
understand that the datasheet is probably on the conservative side).
An alternative might be one of those large close-to-a-farad supercaps
but again I don't know how long the PIC will run off of one of these.

5. Because the PIC Vdd voltage is 3.3v input PIC pins will no longer
be to TTL specs in terms of voltage levels, correct?

6. Finally, is there anything I might have missed with regards to low
power design? (Already checked PIClist.com & read Microchip's "Power
Managed Tips N Tricks" app note (41200B).

Thanks for your assistance.

Kevin.

What is your total circuit current draw? (is it just the PIC?)
How often does your PIC wake up?
Can you run your PIC slower from 32.768KHz instead of 4MHZ?
How long does your data logger need to be installed for?
Can you tolerate changing the battery say once every year or two?

If you are talking only a mA or two total current then a set of
Alkaline D cells may last for several years. In that case you might be
able to forget about a rechargable solution.
If your PIC spends most of it's time in sleep mode then you might be
talking tens of microamps of total current, in which case the batteries
will work for near their shelf life. Lithiums may get you 5-10 years.

The simplist and most robust solution is just some Alkaline or Lithium
non-rechargable batteries. If you can get away with it, this is your
best option.

Dave

 

[Rick Thompson]

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 11:46:53 -0500, Chuck Harris
<cf-NO-SPAM-harris@erols.com> wrote:

I want to go to Debian, but I am finding it hard to get excited about
ripping my system apart and starting over...If only there was a safe
and easy way to move from RedHat to Debian...

The EDA vendors only support RedHat, so I'm sticking with it, whatever
its faults. And, finally, after all these years, we now actually have
a professional Linux distribution, that's not just put together by
hackers. But I'll tell you what really pi**es me off about it - they
now charge an *annual* subscription for it. I've been buying Windoze
distributions for 20-odd years, and I've never once had to pay an
annual subscription. I bought my current Win2K 4 years ago, and I can
still download updates and security fixes for free. What exactly makes
RedHat think that they can charge year-on-year for that? If they'd
just asked me for a one-off $200 then I'd have paid it. I'm running
FC2 now, despite having to download the whole thing.

Rick

 

[John Woodgate]

I read in sci.electronics.design that Andrew <xxragexx@gmail.com> wrote
(in <1106052954.911329.53790@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com&gt about 'DC
Motor Control - Heat Issue', on Tue, 18 Jan 2005:

Does anyone have any reccomendations of companies offering inductors in
the 470uH range that can handle roughly 15A+ continuous current? Renco
has these parts, however, they are $60+.

470 uH and 15A could be much cheaper if the inductance has to be
effective only at fairly low frequencies (say up to 10 kHz or so).
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only.
The good news is that nothing is compulsory.
The bad news is that everything is prohibited.
http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk Also see http://www.isce.org.uk

 

[John Fields]

On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 17:39:25 +0000, John Woodgate
<jmw@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk> wrote:

I read in sci.electronics.design that John Fields <jfields@austininstrum
ents.com> wrote (in <qdmvu0locfpur7kth98c9kkb87qaaaddnr@4ax.com&gt about
'Peterson's Death Sentence', on Thu, 20 Jan 2005:

Then, with the inevitable advances in medical technology one would
expect, that "time of survival" will be pushed closer and closer to the
time of conception until it will be possible to bring a fertilized egg
to term out of the womb.

Given enough money, this could probably be done now.

If such is the case, then you argue that life
begins at conception but that we can't currently support it ex-utero
that early?

LIFE begins at conception. That isn't the point, IMHO. It's difficult to
argue that an unimplanted foetus has the full panoply of human rights.

'Human rights' is not a concept within science, so science (rational
deduction) can't provide a solution.

It's a 'line-drawing' situation, and people can NEVER agree where to
draw the line. One might be bitterly opposed to abortion on demand until
a daughter is pregnant.

---
Ahhhhh... a rational voice...

Agreed.

--
John Fields

 

In <D9UHd.182678$48.88729@fe1.news.blueyonder.co.uk>, on 01/20/05
at 08:04 PM, "Kevin Aylward" <salesEXTRACT@anasoft.co.uk> said:

Its all academic anyway, we are all going to cease to exist. So, shag as
many birds as you can before you go.

If you are going to cease to exist, why don't you just go now? Its not as
if you will be laying around for eternity wishing you were still alive and
regretting killing yourself. People who say they want to live and enjoy
are not realizing that if you are going to cease to exist, you are wasting
your time here.

 

[Guy Macon]

Ian Stirling wrote:

Joel Kolstad wrote:

Ian Stirling wrote...

Unfortunately, AIUI, there are no really cheap solutions to
providing a USB host,

They're getting much cheaper.

http://www.linuxdevices.com/news/NS5169576412.html

Seems I may be wrong, I last looked a fair few months ago.
I don't know how much above device is (awaiting quote).

Please let us know how much they are.

 

In <n4qdnZOjm_eEj23cRVnyvQ@eclipse.net.uk>, on 01/20/05
at 08:18 PM, "TripleEight" <888@msn.com> said:

Humans have always been afraid of the unknown and God easily fits into
the scarey corner of the human mind.

Oh brother.... If there is no superior being, whence commeth the basic
rights of living? If my right to be free and live as I choose comes from
another human, then that right can be revoked. If I am only allowed to
live because someone else says its okay, how long till that right is taken
away as well.

Governments exist to insure rights, not to grant them. No God... No
rights.