T
Tabby
Guest
On Friday, 31 December 2021 at 02:59:27 UTC, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
Now we get double conversion, SSB, reliable ICs, microprocessors & informative displays, stable operation, digital readout, SDR etc etc. I still prefer the ancient stuff though. Ingenious, charming & cranky are ok with me.
On Thu, 30 Dec 2021 17:16:55 -0800 (PST), Tabby <tabb...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Wednesday, 29 December 2021 at 22:30:43 UTC, John Larkin wrote:
On Wed, 29 Dec 2021 13:58:10 -0800 (PST), Tabby <tabb...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Saturday, 18 December 2021 at 19:48:13 UTC, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 11:11:20 -0800 (PST), Rich S
richsuli...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Saturday, December 18, 2021 at 6:12:25 PM UTC, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 09:49:03 -0800, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com
wrote:
On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 12:15:37 -0500, Phil Hobbs
pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net> wrote:
jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 11:42:58 -0500, Phil Hobbs
pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net> wrote:
John Larkin wrote:
https://www.flux.ai/p
Does anyone use that? It looks to me like a bunch of script kiddies
who don\'t know much about electronics.
Where can I buy a 2N2000? Or a green LED that needs one? Or a
polarized 10 pF cap?
Sounds as though they\'re not even mildly activated.
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
They did raise $12M to do this.
Well, they need some razzin\', then.
Cheers
Phil Hobbs
I keep getting emails from the founder guru, and keep telling him that
his demo schematics are obviously stupid.
1. Few people in tech actually understand electricity.
2. Most people are strongly affected by peer pressure, emotionally
influenced by other opinions and group concensus.
So an electronic design collaboration with high group visibility is a
terrible idea.
There might be ways to fix this.
--
I yam what I yam - Popeye
I assume this is another \"Doing Hardware is just like Doing
Software\" motives.
And they\'re motivated by the appeal and relative
success in collaborative digital platform development.
Where, the software components are highly defined
structures and standardized; the programmers (\"developers\")
use all sorts of support tools to allow for a distributed
collaborative working environment. Is it miraculous? No.
It is progress, in that people can join & leave the team.
So labor cost can be managed. Ah hah!
It can take time to get major things done. Tasks are
broken down & prioritized into \'sprints\', etc.
So what do you think - Can Hardware be broken down
into same ways & managed like software?
I wonder how much actual invention, creating new architectures, is
used in software projects, as opposed to just grunting out a lot of
code. Grunting can reasonably be parallelized.
Certainly a few software structures needed real invention: internet
protocols, file systems, file formats, os kernals.
An electronic design can be broken down into parts. Someone can do the
power supplies, someone the real signal electronics, and other people
the FPGA and uP code and PCB layout. But I think one skilled badass
should be in charge.
Who decides what psu voltage to use?
\'No, I refuse to run the valves at 5v B+.\'
\'But this TRF reflex neutralised project shows it can be done. It\'ll save us another supply. And look, it even boasts near zero sensitivity!\'
I did suggest that the person in charge should be skilled.
Of course. There are still plenty of opinion differences.
\"TRF reflex neutralised project\" is old-timeish radio, which was
interesting. What\'s different now is that voltage gain used to be hard
to come by, and now it\'s basically free.
Now we get double conversion, SSB, reliable ICs, microprocessors & informative displays, stable operation, digital readout, SDR etc etc. I still prefer the ancient stuff though. Ingenious, charming & cranky are ok with me.