Driver to drive?

[Jorden Verwer]

Don Pearce wrote:

It can be handled the same way, but doesn't need to be. Noise must be
handled by filtering, with with a specific inline filter or effective
filtering by means of a control loop. DC will also be handled that way,
but for DC there is always the option of trimming it away with either an
adjustable or an SOT. You can't do that with noise, which makes them
fundamentally different things.
Trimming will only cancel the offset that is present at that instant. When

it drifts (and it will), you will experience offset again. Adjustable
trimming solutions can be viewed as very low bandwidth control loops (with
the person doing the adjustments closing the loop). There is no fundamental
difference.

 

[john jardine]

"Joerg" <notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote in message
news:v78Dk.1093$hc1.13@flpi150.ffdc.sbc.com...

Jim Thompson wrote:
On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 17:26:32 -0700, Joerg
notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote:

What's the jelly-bean level shifter du jour, the most popular?

Need to shift three sigs 3.3V to 5V and another three 5V to 3.3V. Stuff
us analog dudes normally don't do. The TXB0104 looks ok, so does the
74LVC4245. But the specs for both are horrible, incomplete at best. Not
much in drive levels mentioned, or just for one direction.

The topper is a comment in the TXB spec, "OE should be tied to GND
through a pulldown resistor; the minimum value of the resistor is
determined by the current-sourcing capability of the driver" That
driver
is obviously on the chip. Duh! Of course they also forgot what to do if
not needed. Pull up? Leave open? Who knows. Well, maybe they had a
kegger the night before ...

Here's what seems to qualify as a datasheet these days:
http://focus.ti.com/lit/ds/symlink/txb0104.pdf

VOH and VOL at 20uA. Microamperes! Couldn't believe it.

What's not to like about the 74LCX245?


Well, I am using the LVC4245 now. I like the two supplies on those, IOW
a "real" level translator. Got to deal with power sequencing though.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.

T'other month did an 'Xport' network adaptor thing for a customer. I
couldn't be arsed ordering or waiting for translator chips, so used a dozen
transistors instead. But I wasn't looking for 1nS switching .
I'm happily using more and more of the these transistor things as time goes
on, having had a belly full of I.C. stuff being obsoleted and the disruption
it causes.
Assembly cost of discretes would have been a problem 5 years ago but it's
now all pick-n-place and I've yet to hear a peep of complaint from the
production company.
Ltspice to pick-n-place to customer. Ain't modern technology the bee's
knees.
Earning a crust is getting much, much easier

 

[TheM]

"JeffM" <jeffm_@email.com> wrote in message news:f57461c2-2b27-4646-97fb-7da8e08a38f1@s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...

Boris Mohar wrote:
It this thing really working? The force is microscopic, though,
but that might not matter much for the intended purpose.

MooseFET wrote:
You need dilithium crystals to get much power out of it.

That's what I was thinking:
http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:7wI_TNSAoJQJatentlaw.typepad.com/patent/2005/03/patents_string_.html+rejection+Mar.24.*.2005+*-patent-examiner+warp.drive+graviton+Andrew.Worsley+concerns+Peter.Twist+Worsley-Twist

Same guys? Figures, sounded way too good.

M

 

[TheM]

"JeffM" <jeffm_@email.com> wrote in message news:f57461c2-2b27-4646-97fb-7da8e08a38f1@s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...

Boris Mohar wrote:
It this thing really working? The force is microscopic, though,
but that might not matter much for the intended purpose.

MooseFET wrote:
You need dilithium crystals to get much power out of it.

That's what I was thinking:
http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:7wI_TNSAoJQJatentlaw.typepad.com/patent/2005/03/patents_string_.html+rejection+Mar.24.*.2005+*-patent-examiner+warp.drive+graviton+Andrew.Worsley+concerns+Peter.Twist+Worsley-Twist

Believe it or not, it seems the British government is funding this crap!

M

 

[Anthony Fremont]

Phil Hobbs wrote:

Interestingly, the harvesters seem to toss any email address with
'spam' in the name. The reply-to address I use on Usenet is an
actual working email address, but I have never received a single
piece of spam addressed there.

I used to use an e-mail address that was intended to be disposable. It
contained the letter sequence s-p-a-m (amongst some other stuff) and I
almost never got any spam to it. I guess the spam-bot/harvesters are too
smart for their own good removing the sequence in hopes of creating a valid
address.

 

[BobW]

"John Larkin" <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message
news:3iaqd4t7qrgoq8s4aqjdhjub34tmbr1qe0@4ax.com...

I solved the problem:

ftp://66.117.156.8/KeithleyFix.jpg

ftp://66.117.156.8/MadeInUSA.JPG

John

Yep. In this case, the old adage "you get what you pay for" is certainly
true. Fluke makes good meters.

Bob
--
== All google group posts are automatically deleted due to spam ==

 

[ian field]

"Francisco José Cańizares Santofimia" <telefrancisco@gmail.com> wrote in
message
news:1fa3fb8e-337c-496f-9963-cedd54cef1fe@73g2000hsx.googlegroups.com...

Hello Everybody.

I'm looking for an article published in Radio Electronics, February
1986, starting on page 16 about a plywood dish (I think this is just a
correction of the main article on Radio Electronics, October 1985).

If anyone haves the magazine and can send the pages I want to:
telefrancisco@gmail.com ( I prefer this email) or to
telefrancisco@lycos.es I will be very pleased.

Regards,
Francisco.

Post a REQ: on News:alt.binaries.e-book.technical .

 

[Kris Krieger]

Richard Swaby <reswaby@dsl.pipex.com> wrote in
news:ftppd45egs0dj72kvcne9998p8b8dllrgo@4ax.com:

On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 15:51:01 -0500, Kris Krieger <me@dowmuff.in
wrote:

John Larkin <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in
news:7h5ld45p8400ikdf0igoepivtu3b31vp6q@4ax.com:

On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 12:20:04 -0500, Kris Krieger <me@dowmuff.in
wrote:

John Larkin <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in
news:85gid45tefdkqvthelm9se7h7ee4sc2p53@4ax.com:

On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 12:54:18 +0100, Richard Swaby
reswaby@dsl.pipex.com> wrote:

On Mon, 22 Sep 2008 11:59:18 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Mon, 22 Sep 2008 09:05:32 +0100, Richard Swaby
reswaby@dsl.pipex.com> wrote:


Why the hell does the US believe that it has the right to plant
anything, anywhere in the rest of the world?

That's a subject that deserves serious consideration. If one has
the power to save lives, or to promote freedom, is it a sin of
omission to do nothing? Do we respect the national soverignty of a
country ruled by an un-elected genocidal thug?

S. Hussein was indeed a genocidal thug, but well down the list of
thugs, elected or otherwise.

The probloem is that the US is selective about where it desires to
plant things. It's usually the case that the places of strrategic
usefulness are the first to be considered..


probloem?

strrategic?


WHat I'm wondering is, How is any of the above differnt from any other
nation? The main "difference" is that the US is a huge country and
has the resources to do what every nation (or at least, government)
wants to do: project its power. Certainly the USSR had done the
same, and Russia has shown it's own desire to return to that
tradition.

For the US, "projecting its power" consists of helping to establish
independent democracies that may or may not act in our immediate
interest. China "projects its power" in Tibet a lot different from the
way we have projected into Germany, Italy, or France. If Puerto Rico
or the American Virgin Islands voted for independence, they would have
it.

Even aside from motives, just purely and simply, "projection of power" -
all nations seek to do that, so as to gain a benefit, so it doesn't make
a lot of sense to condemn the US for it, but not any other nation.

I don't see "all nations" seeking to project their power. When was the
last time a Scandinavian country invaded anyone?

Power projection is not only applied military force. There is what's
currently called "soft power". Influence, trade, etc. all can be used
promote a nation's interests and give it greater status, which does
translate into a type of power.

Of course, it's entirely possible that I don't have a good understanding of
what "power projection" means, so maybe I ought to have said
"projection/promotion of self-interest".

All nations, not just
the US, are to be condemned for invading others for reasons other than
humanitarian. The distinction between "humanitarian" and reasons of
self interest are sometimes blurred, but it seems that the US are
leading the pack when it comes to "projection of power".

[snip ]

But even in the military sense, projection of power is not the same thing
as "invasion".

I have never either said or implied (either here or anywhere else) that the
US, or more precisely, the US gov.t, is "always right". Many Americans
objected to the actions against Iraq, and more than a few were labelled
"traitors", had their cars egged, and so on for having done so.

I'm not, however, going to give any sort of support to a hate-America
thing, in part because most (Note; does NOT mean all) national "humility"
for lack of a better word is due more to size than desire, bu talso in part
becasue the US has also done many good things around the world.

[snip]

 

[Kris Krieger]

Don Bowey <dbowey@comcast.net> wrote in
news:C5011144.C50E5%dbowey@comcast.net:

[snip]

Another interesting and important item was brought up by a guest on CNBC
about an hour ago, which the commentators quickly blew away acting like
they wished it was never said. The guest said he reviewed the
financials of the five largest financial companies, and found they have
the cash and are prepared to issue their next regular dividend. The sum
of the dividends would be about $400 Billion. His POV is that they
should skip the dividends and use the cash to fix their own businesses.
I agree for more reasons than I have time to spell out...... Except for
one: The money the institutions have on hand is the result of crap
business ethics and should be processed back to the people they stole it
from.

The only dicy thing for me re: the dividends are retirement accounts and
small investors. The only way to provide for retirement is to invest,
because savings alone don't keep up with inflation, and Social Security is
going down the tubes and not reliable as supplemental retirement income.

Re: the "bailout", I agree with Jim Cramer re: the need to renegotiate with
homeowners to slwo forclosures, slowly reverse teh housing glut, and thereby
stabilize home prices, and eventualyl allow banks toclaim real assets and use
those to borrow and lend money to individuals and small businesses.

 

[Jim Yanik]

Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@My-Web-Site.com> wrote in
news:5arqd416hqoabfjmlrrd1eoipkjmn91r7u@4ax.com:

Yep. But that's like old Tektronix stuff versus the new crap :-(

...Jim Thompson

What really bugs me,a 21+ yr. TEK employee(ex-TEK now...),is their
eliminating component-level circuit schematics from their "service"
manuals.

DAMN those TEK beancounters/upper management!

you can't believe how much "well,H-P doesn't do that" crap from management.

I wonder if Danaher will turn them around? Doubtful.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

 

[Kris Krieger]

John Larkin <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in
news:ltknd49buvrn3imgtchd86at7sahtv7d8d@4ax.com:

On Thu, 25 Sep 2008 12:31:08 -0500, Vladimir Vassilevsky
antispam_bogus@hotmail.com> wrote:



John Larkin wrote:


If 1% of the population is living in houses they couldn't afford, and
shouldn't have been allowed to buy, and we let them stay in them, and
the average hit is $300K, and you toss in the loan overhead, then it
about works out to $3000 to everybody else. It's a McMansion income
redistribution program.

Here is the message to people: "Dear people! Make more bad loans. Spend
more money,it is good for the economy. If anything happens, we are going
to save you".

Here is the message to businesses: "Dear businesses! Since now, the
profits are private, however your losses are covered by taxpayers".

If the laws are changed back to pre-99, and some draconian penalties
are added, and short-selling is restricted or eliminated, and maybe
the tax code were tweaked to discourage speculation, that wouldn't
send the messages you suggest.

Yup. Naked shorts rule was not enforced and the uptick rule was, IIRC,
repealed.

I don't see this as a black-and-white battel against "free-market
capitalism versus socialism" - the situation has never been, and is not,
that simplistic. What/s needed is a blaance so taht the market can operate
freely, BUT not subject to the multi-billion-dollar hedge funds that kill
the freedom of the market and end up not only driving stocks, and sometimes
companies themselves, into the ground, and destroying thousands (millions?)
of average peole's savings.

If we don't bite the bullet and do stuff, the entire economy could
collapse.It was all programmed in 1999 and sort of had to happen after
that.

I don't like generalizations and global statements. What exactly will
collapse and how? How would it affect the John Larkin's valuable
knowledge in designing the electonics? Would it make his measurement
equipment less accurate?


A lot of the economy runs on credit, like for big capital expenses,
and consumer buys of cars and houses, and construction loans. All that
could collapse if credit is unavailable.

Well-said, IMO.

Many companies work on orders and need to use credit toplay employees until
orders are paid for. If they can't obtain those short-term loans, oooops!,
no payroll...if enployees can't get paid, that impacts a whole hell of a
lot of other things.

Same goes for banks. No capital leads to no money in the ATMs.

My company has no debt, so we wouldn't be directly affected, but I'd
hate for my customers to, say, stop building railway engines or
pipelines or airplanes.

Exactly.

Mewnahile, I have CNN on while doing computer work, and right now, Lou
Dobbs is sniping and shouting about 'this disgusting bailout' and
blahblahblah, and calling anoyone who realizes things such as what you
wrote is nothign mroe than some willing liberal-media brainwash victim, or
some Bush-Pelosi @$$kissing weenie.

SOmehow, I don't picture you as either <LOL!>

 

[Guy Macon]

Didi wrote:

It happens to me for the third or fourth time within a year (I have
my current domain since 4 years or so).

Some spammer idiot floods the net with some spam message
and uses one of my email addresses (which do get their daily
portion of spam, of course) as a From: address. Consequently,
I get thousands of bouncing messages (got well over 5000 today...)
all day long.

My info@ my domain address was used for the second time
today - last time was a few months back. Then my didi@ my domain
address got used once or twice.
Is that figure right? How often does it happen to other people
over a similar period of time? My email addresses are just used
without any anti-spam precautions, I have 4 of that kind; info and
sales, didi and dp, all @ my domain. I have used didi and dp
for posting and they get somewhat more spam than the others,
dp being worst off as I use it most frequently for posting.
Mind you, I have never used info or sales to post, but they do
get tens of spam messages per day...

Not that I can see what can be done about it, just curious if
my addresses are chosen as a spoofed source address more
often than normal.

It used to happen to me, until I found a permanent solution.
Go to [ http://www.tuffmail.com/ ]. buy their $2.40/Month email
hosting, and follow the directions. Problem solved forever.





--
Guy Macon
<http://www.GuyMacon.com/>

 

[Kris Krieger]

Don Bowey <dbowey@comcast.net> wrote in
news:C502FEAC.C5322%dbowey@comcast.net:

On 9/26/08 3:49 PM, in article
Xns9B25B555D672Bmeadowmuffin@216.168.3.70, "Kris Krieger"
me@dowmuff.in> wrote:

Don Bowey <dbowey@comcast.net> wrote in
news:C5011144.C50E5%dbowey@comcast.net:

[snip]

Another interesting and important item was brought up by a guest on
CNBC about an hour ago, which the commentators quickly blew away
acting like they wished it was never said. The guest said he reviewed
the financials of the five largest financial companies, and found they
have the cash and are prepared to issue their next regular dividend.
The sum of the dividends would be about $400 Billion. His POV is that
they should skip the dividends and use the cash to fix their own
businesses. I agree for more reasons than I have time to spell
out...... Except for one: The money the institutions have on hand is
the result of crap business ethics and should be processed back to the
people they stole it from.

The only dicy thing for me re: the dividends are retirement accounts
and small investors. The only way to provide for retirement is to
invest, because savings alone don't keep up with inflation, and Social
Security is going down the tubes and not reliable as supplemental
retirement income.

Another poster looked into the prospects of dividends having the
magnitude stated on CNBC, and found no support for it. I followed-up by
looking at the CITI financials and, while our numbers don't agree, the
dividends, when combined with four other companies couldn't hit $400B,
so the desired impact just isn't there.

That's an interesting point. One thing for sure is that there seems to me
to be a lot of bad information floating around, which is part of why it's
so difficult to know what's going on.

Re: the "bailout", I agree with Jim Cramer re: the need to renegotiate
with homeowners to slwo forclosures, slowly reverse teh housing glut,
and thereby stabilize home prices, and eventualyl allow banks toclaim
real assets and use those to borrow and lend money to individuals and
small businesses.

A lot of buyers helped get themselves into the financial trouble they
are in, so they can't expect to do too well. OTOH, the mortgage
companies were irresponsible and enabled the lousy innovative financing
so I agree they should attempt to renegotiate loans to avoid
foreclosure. IMO, they would be money ahead of carrying the non-earning
property on their backs.

I agree; too many people brokered bad mortgages, and there have been rumors
of brokers who falsified paperwork just to make their commissions - then
sold the mortgages, as I understand it, by bundling bad ones in with decent
ones. I wish thre was a way to fond those poele, prosecute them, and make
them pay restitution.

People choosing to get in over their head did play a part, but my
completely personal and biased opinion is that the true malfeasance was
on the part of the brokers, since they're supposed to do what's necessary
to make sure that people *can* pay back the loan - and if they did not do
their jobs, then IMO they took money (commissions) under false pretenses
and don't deserve to keep the money they made .

 

[Kris Krieger]

JosephKK <quiettechblue@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:487rd4hqv7f2sqluoivpiu1vg47k5k8ul4@4ax.com:

On Fri, 26 Sep 2008 17:38:51 -0500, Kris Krieger <me@dowmuff.in
wrote:

Richard Swaby <reswaby@dsl.pipex.com> wrote in
news:ftppd45egs0dj72kvcne9998p8b8dllrgo@4ax.com:

On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 15:51:01 -0500, Kris Krieger <me@dowmuff.in
wrote:

John Larkin <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in
news:7h5ld45p8400ikdf0igoepivtu3b31vp6q@4ax.com:

On Wed, 24 Sep 2008 12:20:04 -0500, Kris Krieger <me@dowmuff.in
wrote:

John Larkin <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in
news:85gid45tefdkqvthelm9se7h7ee4sc2p53@4ax.com:

On Tue, 23 Sep 2008 12:54:18 +0100, Richard Swaby
reswaby@dsl.pipex.com> wrote:

On Mon, 22 Sep 2008 11:59:18 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Mon, 22 Sep 2008 09:05:32 +0100, Richard Swaby
reswaby@dsl.pipex.com> wrote:


Why the hell does the US believe that it has the right to plant
anything, anywhere in the rest of the world?

That's a subject that deserves serious consideration. If one has
the power to save lives, or to promote freedom, is it a sin of
omission to do nothing? Do we respect the national soverignty of
a country ruled by an un-elected genocidal thug?

S. Hussein was indeed a genocidal thug, but well down the list of
thugs, elected or otherwise.

The probloem is that the US is selective about where it desires to
plant things. It's usually the case that the places of strrategic
usefulness are the first to be considered..


probloem?

strrategic?


WHat I'm wondering is, How is any of the above differnt from any
other nation? The main "difference" is that the US is a huge
country and has the resources to do what every nation (or at least,
government) wants to do: project its power. Certainly the USSR had
done the same, and Russia has shown it's own desire to return to
that tradition.

For the US, "projecting its power" consists of helping to establish
independent democracies that may or may not act in our immediate
interest. China "projects its power" in Tibet a lot different from
the way we have projected into Germany, Italy, or France. If Puerto
Rico or the American Virgin Islands voted for independence, they
would have it.

Even aside from motives, just purely and simply, "projection of power"
- all nations seek to do that, so as to gain a benefit, so it doesn't
make a lot of sense to condemn the US for it, but not any other
nation.

I don't see "all nations" seeking to project their power. When was
the last time a Scandinavian country invaded anyone?


Power projection is not only applied military force. There is what's
currently called "soft power". Influence, trade, etc. all can be used
promote a nation's interests and give it greater status, which does
translate into a type of power.

Of course, it's entirely possible that I don't have a good understanding
of what "power projection" means, so maybe I ought to have said
"projection/promotion of self-interest".


All nations, not just
the US, are to be condemned for invading others for reasons other than
humanitarian. The distinction between "humanitarian" and reasons of
self interest are sometimes blurred, but it seems that the US are
leading the pack when it comes to "projection of power".

[snip ]

But even in the military sense, projection of power is not the same
thing as "invasion".

I have never either said or implied (either here or anywhere else) that
the US, or more precisely, the US gov.t, is "always right". Many
Americans objected to the actions against Iraq, and more than a few were
labelled "traitors", had their cars egged, and so on for having done so.

I'm not, however, going to give any sort of support to a hate-America
thing, in part because most (Note; does NOT mean all) national
"humility" for lack of a better word is due more to size than desire, bu
talso in part becasue the US has also done many good things around the
world.

[snip]



The US has not had humility since WW2. That's alright, this current
debacle is just the fourteenth "how do you" do toward reacquainting us
with humility. There should not be much more than 10 more to go.

It is my proper citizen's job to chastise my government when it goes
astray.

But that's different from demonizing America - I think what we both want is
for America to live up to the promise of its foundational ideals. It's
sortof like when yoour child misbehaves in that you don't correct the
behavior because the bad behavior makes you "hate" the child or think the
child is "evil"; rather, you correct the child becuase love wishes to
nurture positive potential.

 

[Kris Krieger]

John Larkin <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in
news:g2drd4d67bn2k668oc1slo1ug95f0k40jj@4ax.com:

On Fri, 26 Sep 2008 19:47:28 -0700, JosephKK <quiettechblue@yahoo.com
wrote:





The US has not had humility since WW2. That's alright, this current
debacle is just the fourteenth "how do you" do toward reacquainting us
with humility. There should not be much more than 10 more to go.

It is my proper citizen's job to chastise my government when it goes
astray.


Why does humility matter? What matters is the fortunes and lives of
the least fortunate in the world. This isn't some political game for
them.

John

IMO, becuase humility helps both an individual, and a nation, to approach
others as valued equals rather than as underlings.

 

[Kris Krieger]

default <default@defaulter.net> wrote in
news:1hrnd4pbdkqgh89ucilmenenb90hvkhunu@4ax.com:

Good to post (so people can read it) but this was the first draft/original
- any word on the text of more recent/amended versions...? I haven't seen
any but maybe someone else has had better luck...

http://money.cnn.com/2008/09/20/news/economy/treasury_proposal/index.htm?
postversion=2008092011

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Here's the text of the legislative proposal
sent by the White House overnight to lawmakers:

LEGISLATIVE PROPOSAL FOR TREASURY AUTHORITY TO PURCHASE
MORTGAGE-RELATED ASSETS

Section 1. Short Title.

This Act may be cited as ____________________.

Sec. 2. Purchases of Mortgage-Related Assets.

(a) Authority to Purchase.--The Secretary is authorized to purchase,
and to make and fund commitments to purchase, on such terms and
conditions as determined by the Secretary, mortgage-related assets
from any financial institution having its headquarters in the United
States.

(b) Necessary Actions.--The Secretary is authorized to take such
actions as the Secretary deems necessary to carry out the authorities
in this Act, including, without limitation:

(1) appointing such employees as may be required to carry out the
authorities in this Act and defining their duties;

(2) entering into contracts, including contracts for services
authorized by section 3109 of title 5, United States Code, without
regard to any other provision of law regarding public contracts;

(3) designating financial institutions as financial agents of the
Government, and they shall perform all such reasonable duties related
to this Act as financial agents of the Government as may be required
of them;

(4) establishing vehicles that are authorized, subject to supervision
by the Secretary, to purchase mortgage-related assets and issue
obligations; and

(5) issuing such regulations and other guidance as may be necessary or
appropriate to define terms or carry out the authorities of this Act.

Sec. 3. Considerations.

In exercising the authorities granted in this Act, the Secretary shall
take into consideration means for--

(1) providing stability or preventing disruption to the financial
markets or banking system; and

(2) protecting the taxpayer.

Sec. 4. Reports to Congress.

Within three months of the first exercise of the authority granted in
section 2(a), and semiannually thereafter, the Secretary shall report
to the Committees on the Budget, Financial Services, and Ways and
Means of the House of Representatives and the Committees on the
Budget, Finance, and Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate
with respect to the authorities exercised under this Act and the
considerations required by section 3.

Sec. 5. Rights; Management; Sale of Mortgage-Related Assets.

(a) Exercise of Rights.--The Secretary may, at any time, exercise any
rights received in connection with mortgage-related assets purchased
under this Act.

(b) Management of Mortgage-Related Assets.--The Secretary shall have
authority to manage mortgage-related assets purchased under this Act,
including revenues and portfolio risks therefrom.

(c) Sale of Mortgage-Related Assets.--The Secretary may, at any time,
upon terms and conditions and at prices determined by the Secretary,
sell, or enter into securities loans, repurchase transactions or other
financial transactions in regard to, any mortgage-related asset
purchased under this Act.

(d) Application of Sunset to Mortgage-Related Assets.--The authority
of the Secretary to hold any mortgage-related asset purchased under
this Act before the termination date in section 9, or to purchase or
fund the purchase of a mortgage-related asset under a commitment
entered into before the termination date in section 9, is not subject
to the provisions of section 9.

Sec. 6. Maximum Amount of Authorized Purchases.

The Secretary's authority to purchase mortgage-related assets under
this Act shall be limited to $700,000,000,000 outstanding at any one
time

Sec. 7. Funding.

For the purpose of the authorities granted in this Act, and for the
costs of administering those authorities, the Secretary may use the
proceeds of the sale of any securities issued under chapter 31 of
title 31, United States Code, and the purposes for which securities
may be issued under chapter 31 of title 31, United States Code, are
extended to include actions authorized by this Act, including the
payment of administrative expenses. Any funds expended for actions
authorized by this Act, including the payment of administrative
expenses, shall be deemed appropriated at the time of such
expenditure.

Sec. 8. Review.

Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are
non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be
reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.

Sec. 9. Termination of Authority.

The authorities under this Act, with the exception of authorities
granted in sections 2(b)(5), 5 and 7, shall terminate two years from
the date of enactment of this Act.

Sec. 10. Increase in Statutory Limit on the Public Debt.

Subsection (b) of section 3101 of title 31, United States Code, is
amended by striking out the dollar limitation contained in such
subsection and inserting in lieu thereof $11,315,000,000,000.

Sec. 11. Credit Reform.

The costs of purchases of mortgage-related assets made under section
2(a) of this Act shall be determined as provided under the Federal
Credit Reform Act of 1990, as applicable.

Sec. 12. Definitions.

For purposes of this section, the following definitions shall apply:

(1) Mortgage-Related Assets.--The term "mortgage-related assets" means
residential or commercial mortgages and any securities, obligations,
or other instruments that are based on or related to such mortgages,
that in each case was originated or issued on or before September 17,
2008.

(2) Secretary.--The term "Secretary" means the Secretary of the
Treasury.

(3) United States.--The term "United States" means the States,
territories, and possessions of the United States and the District of
Columbia. To top of page
First Published: September 20, 2008: 11:33 AM EDT

 

[Arie]

"Didi" wrote ...

It happens to me for the third or fourth time within a year (I have
my current domain since 4 years or so).
Some spammer idiot floods the net with some spam message
and uses one of my email addresses (which do get their daily
portion of spam, of course) as a From: address. Consequently,
I get thousands of bouncing messages (got well over 5000 today...)
all day long.
My info@ my domain address was used for the second time
today - last time was a few months back. Then my didi@ my domain
address got used once or twice.
Is that figure right? How often does it happen to other people
over a similar period of time? My email addresses are just used
without any anti-spam precautions, I have 4 of that kind; info and
sales, didi and dp, all @ my domain. I have used didi and dp
for posting and they get somewhat more spam than the others,
dp being worst off as I use it most frequently for posting.
Mind you, I have never used info or sales to post, but they do
get tens of spam messages per day...

Not that I can see what can be done about it, just curious if
my addresses are chosen as a spoofed source address more
often than normal.

I also have my own domain and so I can use any name@my.domain. Normally I
use a specific e-mail address for every party like mailinglists, etc. If
someone mis-uses it, I blacklist it and take another.

I also have a 'catch-all' active on my domain, and I see about 500 messages
a day returned from spam victims (sometimes there are storms of thousands a
day) since there are some spammers using something_random@my.domain as
sender. I have installed filters to detect spam returns (anything from
postmaster, anything with "bounced" or "returned mail" etc in the subject,
etc, etc.) and now it's less than one a day.

Arie.

 

[Uwe Bonnes]

In sci.electronics.components Joerg <notthisjoergsch@removethispacbell.net> wrote:
....

Well, I am using the LVC4245 now. I like the two supplies on those, IOW
a "real" level translator. Got to deal with power sequencing though.

Nowerdays I use the 74LVC8T245 or 74LVC1|2T45 ..
--
Uwe Bonnes bon@elektron.ikp.physik.tu-darmstadt.de

Institut fuer Kernphysik Schlossgartenstrasse 9 64289 Darmstadt
--------- Tel. 06151 162516 -------- Fax. 06151 164321 ----------

 

[amdx]

A really good player can make into the higher tiers and get
his name on the scoreboard - most have to be born into it.

Sorry, can't agree, in the U.S. we have lots of new millionares, they

started a small
business, worked hard, lived below their means, saved their money, raised
their kids.
And live happily sipping their wine in Arizona and elsewhere. There is
opportunity
if you want to use it. I have relatives that came here with little english
languge skill,
discrimination problems, they started a very small business, expanded it,
expanded it again.
Finally sold the business and property, to retire? No they still work hard
everyday but they
don't need to.. Oh, and they raised four kids and put them all through
college.

The purpose of this game is that you die before you realize it was a
game.

Seems like you have realized the game, so why not go out and play hard!

No country will survive that doesn't produce something that others are
willing to buy in a global economy. It can't be otherwise - goods are
what matters. The "information economy," or "service economy," are
smoke and mirrors.

The less fortunate? "They can just get jobs at McDonalds"

When your working at McDonalds it gives you motive to prepare yourself
for a better paying job. How many people don't move on from their entry
level jobs?
I am quite the optimist and yes I'm a turned bit pessimistic over the
latest economic downturn,
but I have not fallen over the cliff!
Rah! Rah! Rah!
Mike

PS. It is the democrats fault, if your saving plan (or lack of), or income
doesn't support you buying a
home, the government should not try to facilitate you buying a home.

--


----== Posted via Pronews.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet
News==----
http://www.pronews.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000
Newsgroups
---= - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

 

[amdx]

"Robert Blass" <blame@messenger.xcx> wrote in message
news:i8msd491di2ol26le4inugefcihotclr8i@xxx.org...

I am in need of how exactly to build a transmitter @ 20hz-1KHZ at a
high enough wattage to overcome/overload a simple stereo speaker.
Yes I did mean 20 HERTZ to One Kilo-Hertz.

So, is this a neighbor that has the volume to loud for you?
Mike