I do a fair amount of code reading for patent and trade secret lawsuits.
 The legal protections for produced source code are enough to curl your
hair, so you\'d expect that the code would really be something special.
From the tens of thousands of lines I\'ve seen of such \'crown jewels\',
the quality and the density of good ideas is far lower than on Stack
Overflow, say.
Sometimes that\'s why they want to keep it so secret
David Brown wrote:
On 17/01/2022 15:44, Phil Hobbs wrote:
Pomegranate Bastard wrote:
On Sun, 16 Jan 2022 17:29:12 +0100, David Brown
david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
On 16/01/2022 16:25, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 16 Jan 2022 13:49:15 +0000, Pomegranate Bastard
PommyB@aol.com> wrote:
On Sat, 15 Jan 2022 20:11:26 -0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:
John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote in
news:6nv3ugto7ejcn4lsdte4jrduf6oag2o1ph@4ax.com:
Conservatives are better engineers too.
  You just can\'t stop spouting retarded, divisive stupid shit, eh?
You should have somebody sew that upper anus shut.
Best ignore the gullible old narcissist.
Several of them. They don\'t design electronics anyhow.
You do realise that people who actually /do/ design work - real
work, on
real products - rarely discuss details of proprietary designs with
random strangers on the internet? The only people here who talk about
their work are amateurs (nothing wrong with that - it is not an insult
of any kind), retirees (again, nothing wrong with that) and people who
boast about how much better they are than everyone else, despite a
complete absence of any kind of evidence or justification.
Precisely. Couldn\'t have put it better myself.
Classically narcissistic behaviour.
Dunno--I discuss my proprietary designs here all the time, and put them
in books too. It helps my business, as well as sometimes generating
useful info for me as well as others.
IME the folks who hold their \'crown jewels\' super close to the vest tend
to overrate said jewels\' actual value by a lot. I\'ve had people tell me
\"in confidence\" things I\'d known for 20 years, such as that you need to
filter the drive to your TE coolers very carefully to avoid crap getting
into the cold-plate circuitry.
One big difference is whether the designs are your own property, or the
customers\'. In my work, the majority of what we do is design for
customers - I could not possibly give out information about those
designs to others. The same would apply to employees of a company.
If you own your company and make your own designs, then you have all the
rights and can discuss them as you want - but I think that would be the
case for only a very small proportion of professional engineers.
That\'s true, but it\'s a very different statement from the preceding.
I do a fair amount of code reading for patent and trade secret lawsuits.
  The legal protections for produced source code are enough to curl your
hair, so you\'d expect that the code would really be something special.
 From the tens of thousands of lines I\'ve seen of such \'crown jewels\',
the quality and the density of good ideas is far lower than on Stack
Overflow, say.
Sometimes that\'s why they want to keep it so secret
Could well be. A lot of it is real genuine crudware--a clever
engineering manager could set his competition back years just by leaking
it to them. \"Technical debt\", Venezuela style.
Most engineering - electronic or software - is not hugely innovative.
Good engineering is mainly about implementing solid, reliable and
cost-effective solutions. Revolutionary new ideas are relatively rare,
but of course they can be very important. (What is that saying?
Invention is 1% innovation, 99% perspiration?)
Edison said that because he was doing it wrong. (Just ask Nikola Tesla
next time you see him--he\'ll confirm it.)Â Edison introduced a very
important engineering metric--the inspiration/perspiration ratio--but
his quoted value of just over 1% shows a lot of room for improvement.
On 17/01/2022 15:44, Phil Hobbs wrote:
Pomegranate Bastard wrote:
On Sun, 16 Jan 2022 17:29:12 +0100, David Brown
david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
On 16/01/2022 16:25, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 16 Jan 2022 13:49:15 +0000, Pomegranate Bastard
PommyB@aol.com> wrote:
On Sat, 15 Jan 2022 20:11:26 -0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:
John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote in
news:6nv3ugto7ejcn4lsdte4jrduf6oag2o1ph@4ax.com:
Conservatives are better engineers too.
You just can\'t stop spouting retarded, divisive stupid shit, eh?
You should have somebody sew that upper anus shut.
Best ignore the gullible old narcissist.
Several of them. They don\'t design electronics anyhow.
You do realise that people who actually /do/ design work - real work, on
real products - rarely discuss details of proprietary designs with
random strangers on the internet? The only people here who talk about
their work are amateurs (nothing wrong with that - it is not an insult
of any kind), retirees (again, nothing wrong with that) and people who
boast about how much better they are than everyone else, despite a
complete absence of any kind of evidence or justification.
Precisely. Couldn\'t have put it better myself.
Classically narcissistic behaviour.
Dunno--I discuss my proprietary designs here all the time, and put them
in books too. It helps my business, as well as sometimes generating
useful info for me as well as others.
IME the folks who hold their \'crown jewels\' super close to the vest tend
to overrate said jewels\' actual value by a lot. I\'ve had people tell me
\"in confidence\" things I\'d known for 20 years, such as that you need to
filter the drive to your TE coolers very carefully to avoid crap getting
into the cold-plate circuitry.
One big difference is whether the designs are your own property, or the
customers\'. In my work, the majority of what we do is design for
customers - I could not possibly give out information about those
designs to others. The same would apply to employees of a company.
If you own your company and make your own designs, then you have all the
rights and can discuss them as you want - but I think that would be the
case for only a very small proportion of professional engineers.
I do a fair amount of code reading for patent and trade secret lawsuits.
The legal protections for produced source code are enough to curl your
hair, so you\'d expect that the code would really be something special.
From the tens of thousands of lines I\'ve seen of such \'crown jewels\',
the quality and the density of good ideas is far lower than on Stack
Overflow, say.
Sometimes that\'s why they want to keep it so secret
Most engineering - electronic or software - is not hugely innovative.
Good engineering is mainly about implementing solid, reliable and
cost-effective solutions. Revolutionary new ideas are relatively rare,
but of course they can be very important. (What is that saying?
Invention is 1% innovation, 99% perspiration?)
Larkin will claim his stuff is all new revolutionary ideas, but we all
know the value of his claims.
On 17/01/2022 19:59, Phil Hobbs wrote:
David Brown wrote:
On 17/01/2022 15:44, Phil Hobbs wrote:
Pomegranate Bastard wrote:
On Sun, 16 Jan 2022 17:29:12 +0100, David Brown
david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
On 16/01/2022 16:25, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 16 Jan 2022 13:49:15 +0000, Pomegranate Bastard
PommyB@aol.com> wrote:
On Sat, 15 Jan 2022 20:11:26 -0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:
John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote in
news:6nv3ugto7ejcn4lsdte4jrduf6oag2o1ph@4ax.com:
Conservatives are better engineers too.
You just can\'t stop spouting retarded, divisive stupid shit, eh?
You should have somebody sew that upper anus shut.
Best ignore the gullible old narcissist.
Several of them. They don\'t design electronics anyhow.
You do realise that people who actually /do/ design work - real
work, on
real products - rarely discuss details of proprietary designs with
random strangers on the internet? The only people here who talk about
their work are amateurs (nothing wrong with that - it is not an insult
of any kind), retirees (again, nothing wrong with that) and people who
boast about how much better they are than everyone else, despite a
complete absence of any kind of evidence or justification.
Precisely. Couldn\'t have put it better myself.
Classically narcissistic behaviour.
Dunno--I discuss my proprietary designs here all the time, and put them
in books too. It helps my business, as well as sometimes generating
useful info for me as well as others.
IME the folks who hold their \'crown jewels\' super close to the vest tend
to overrate said jewels\' actual value by a lot. I\'ve had people tell me
\"in confidence\" things I\'d known for 20 years, such as that you need to
filter the drive to your TE coolers very carefully to avoid crap getting
into the cold-plate circuitry.
One big difference is whether the designs are your own property, or the
customers\'. In my work, the majority of what we do is design for
customers - I could not possibly give out information about those
designs to others. The same would apply to employees of a company.
If you own your company and make your own designs, then you have all the
rights and can discuss them as you want - but I think that would be the
case for only a very small proportion of professional engineers.
That\'s true, but it\'s a very different statement from the preceding.
I do a fair amount of code reading for patent and trade secret lawsuits.
The legal protections for produced source code are enough to curl your
hair, so you\'d expect that the code would really be something special.
From the tens of thousands of lines I\'ve seen of such \'crown jewels\',
the quality and the density of good ideas is far lower than on Stack
Overflow, say.
Sometimes that\'s why they want to keep it so secret
Could well be. A lot of it is real genuine crudware--a clever
engineering manager could set his competition back years just by leaking
it to them. \"Technical debt\", Venezuela style.
Most engineering - electronic or software - is not hugely innovative.
Good engineering is mainly about implementing solid, reliable and
cost-effective solutions. Revolutionary new ideas are relatively rare,
but of course they can be very important. (What is that saying?
Invention is 1% innovation, 99% perspiration?)
Edison said that because he was doing it wrong. (Just ask Nikola Tesla
next time you see him--he\'ll confirm it.) Edison introduced a very
important engineering metric--the inspiration/perspiration ratio--but
his quoted value of just over 1% shows a lot of room for improvement.
Sure - I don\'t think the numbers are realistic (even if it were possible
to quantify them). My point is that most of the content of good designs
is not actually particularly new or exciting - a little bit of new idea
can go a long way. (And I don\'t disagree with your suggestion that a
lot of designs are neither good nor innovative!).
Larkin will claim his stuff is all new revolutionary ideas, but we all
know the value of his claims.
John and I have collaborated on several projects over the last dozen
years or so. He\'s one of the two or three best designers I know, and
great fun to design things with. I\'m hoping to do a bit of that next
week, in fact, when EOI is making a collective visit to Photonics West.
Maybe you move in more rarefied circles.
I have no reason to suspect that John Larkin is /not/ a good designer.
I simply see no reason to place any weight in his own opinions of
himself or his views on engineering. It is entirely reasonable to
suppose he is very good at a narrow and specialised field while being so
ignorant, biased or confused in so many other topics that turn up in
this newsgroup.
David Brown wrote:
On 17/01/2022 15:44, Phil Hobbs wrote:
Pomegranate Bastard wrote:
On Sun, 16 Jan 2022 17:29:12 +0100, David Brown
david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
On 16/01/2022 16:25, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 16 Jan 2022 13:49:15 +0000, Pomegranate Bastard
PommyB@aol.com> wrote:
On Sat, 15 Jan 2022 20:11:26 -0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:
John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote in
news:6nv3ugto7ejcn4lsdte4jrduf6oag2o1ph@4ax.com:
Conservatives are better engineers too.
You just can\'t stop spouting retarded, divisive stupid shit, eh?
You should have somebody sew that upper anus shut.
Best ignore the gullible old narcissist.
Several of them. They don\'t design electronics anyhow.
You do realise that people who actually /do/ design work - real work, on
real products - rarely discuss details of proprietary designs with
random strangers on the internet? The only people here who talk about
their work are amateurs (nothing wrong with that - it is not an insult
of any kind), retirees (again, nothing wrong with that) and people who
boast about how much better they are than everyone else, despite a
complete absence of any kind of evidence or justification.
Precisely. Couldn\'t have put it better myself.
Classically narcissistic behaviour.
Dunno--I discuss my proprietary designs here all the time, and put them
in books too. It helps my business, as well as sometimes generating
useful info for me as well as others.
IME the folks who hold their \'crown jewels\' super close to the vest tend
to overrate said jewels\' actual value by a lot. I\'ve had people tell me
\"in confidence\" things I\'d known for 20 years, such as that you need to
filter the drive to your TE coolers very carefully to avoid crap getting
into the cold-plate circuitry.
One big difference is whether the designs are your own property, or the
customers\'. In my work, the majority of what we do is design for
customers - I could not possibly give out information about those
designs to others. The same would apply to employees of a company.
If you own your company and make your own designs, then you have all the
rights and can discuss them as you want - but I think that would be the
case for only a very small proportion of professional engineers.
That\'s true, but it\'s a very different statement from the preceding.
I do a fair amount of code reading for patent and trade secret lawsuits.
The legal protections for produced source code are enough to curl your
hair, so you\'d expect that the code would really be something special.
From the tens of thousands of lines I\'ve seen of such \'crown jewels\',
the quality and the density of good ideas is far lower than on Stack
Overflow, say.
Sometimes that\'s why they want to keep it so secret
Could well be. A lot of it is real genuine crudware--a clever
engineering manager could set his competition back years just by leaking
it to them. \"Technical debt\", Venezuela style.
Most engineering - electronic or software - is not hugely innovative.
Good engineering is mainly about implementing solid, reliable and
cost-effective solutions. Revolutionary new ideas are relatively rare,
but of course they can be very important. (What is that saying?
Invention is 1% innovation, 99% perspiration?)
Edison said that because he was doing it wrong. (Just ask Nikola Tesla
next time you see him--he\'ll confirm it.) Edison introduced a very
important engineering metric--the inspiration/perspiration ratio--but
his quoted value of just over 1% shows a lot of room for improvement.
Larkin will claim his stuff is all new revolutionary ideas, but we all
know the value of his claims.
John and I have collaborated on several projects over the last dozen
years or so. He\'s one of the two or three best designers I know, and
great fun to design things with. I\'m hoping to do a bit of that next
week, in fact, when EOI is making a collective visit to Photonics West.
On 17/01/2022 19:59, Phil Hobbs wrote:
David Brown wrote:
On 17/01/2022 15:44, Phil Hobbs wrote:
Pomegranate Bastard wrote:
On Sun, 16 Jan 2022 17:29:12 +0100, David Brown
david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
On 16/01/2022 16:25, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 16 Jan 2022 13:49:15 +0000, Pomegranate Bastard
PommyB@aol.com> wrote:
On Sat, 15 Jan 2022 20:11:26 -0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:
John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote in
news:6nv3ugto7ejcn4lsdte4jrduf6oag2o1ph@4ax.com:
Conservatives are better engineers too.
  You just can\'t stop spouting retarded, divisive stupid shit, eh?
You should have somebody sew that upper anus shut.
Best ignore the gullible old narcissist.
Several of them. They don\'t design electronics anyhow.
You do realise that people who actually /do/ design work - real
work, on
real products - rarely discuss details of proprietary designs with
random strangers on the internet? The only people here who talk about
their work are amateurs (nothing wrong with that - it is not an insult
of any kind), retirees (again, nothing wrong with that) and people who
boast about how much better they are than everyone else, despite a
complete absence of any kind of evidence or justification.
Precisely. Couldn\'t have put it better myself.
Classically narcissistic behaviour.
Dunno--I discuss my proprietary designs here all the time, and put them
in books too. It helps my business, as well as sometimes generating
useful info for me as well as others.
IME the folks who hold their \'crown jewels\' super close to the vest tend
to overrate said jewels\' actual value by a lot. I\'ve had people tell me
\"in confidence\" things I\'d known for 20 years, such as that you need to
filter the drive to your TE coolers very carefully to avoid crap getting
into the cold-plate circuitry.
One big difference is whether the designs are your own property, or the
customers\'. In my work, the majority of what we do is design for
customers - I could not possibly give out information about those
designs to others. The same would apply to employees of a company.
If you own your company and make your own designs, then you have all the
rights and can discuss them as you want - but I think that would be the
case for only a very small proportion of professional engineers.
That\'s true, but it\'s a very different statement from the preceding.
I do a fair amount of code reading for patent and trade secret lawsuits.
  The legal protections for produced source code are enough to curl your
hair, so you\'d expect that the code would really be something special.
 From the tens of thousands of lines I\'ve seen of such \'crown jewels\',
the quality and the density of good ideas is far lower than on Stack
Overflow, say.
Sometimes that\'s why they want to keep it so secret
Could well be. A lot of it is real genuine crudware--a clever
engineering manager could set his competition back years just by leaking
it to them. \"Technical debt\", Venezuela style.
Most engineering - electronic or software - is not hugely innovative.
Good engineering is mainly about implementing solid, reliable and
cost-effective solutions. Revolutionary new ideas are relatively rare,
but of course they can be very important. (What is that saying?
Invention is 1% innovation, 99% perspiration?)
Edison said that because he was doing it wrong. (Just ask Nikola Tesla
next time you see him--he\'ll confirm it.)Â Edison introduced a very
important engineering metric--the inspiration/perspiration ratio--but
his quoted value of just over 1% shows a lot of room for improvement.
Sure - I don\'t think the numbers are realistic (even if it were possible
to quantify them). My point is that most of the content of good designs
is not actually particularly new or exciting - a little bit of new idea
can go a long way. (And I don\'t disagree with your suggestion that a
lot of designs are neither good nor innovative!).
Larkin will claim his stuff is all new revolutionary ideas, but we all
know the value of his claims.
John and I have collaborated on several projects over the last dozen
years or so. He\'s one of the two or three best designers I know, and
great fun to design things with. I\'m hoping to do a bit of that next
week, in fact, when EOI is making a collective visit to Photonics West.
Maybe you move in more rarefied circles.
I have no reason to suspect that John Larkin is /not/ a good designer.
I simply see no reason to place any weight in his own opinions of
himself or his views on engineering. It is entirely reasonable to
suppose he is very good at a narrow and specialised field while being so
ignorant, biased or confused in so many other topics that turn up in
this newsgroup.
On Mon, 17 Jan 2022 13:59:49 -0500, Phil Hobbs
pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
David Brown wrote:
On 17/01/2022 15:44, Phil Hobbs wrote:
Pomegranate Bastard wrote:
On Sun, 16 Jan 2022 17:29:12 +0100, David Brown
david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
On 16/01/2022 16:25, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Sun, 16 Jan 2022 13:49:15 +0000, Pomegranate Bastard
PommyB@aol.com> wrote:
On Sat, 15 Jan 2022 20:11:26 -0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:
John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote in
news:6nv3ugto7ejcn4lsdte4jrduf6oag2o1ph@4ax.com:
Conservatives are better engineers too.
 You just can\'t stop spouting retarded, divisive stupid shit, eh?
You should have somebody sew that upper anus shut.
Best ignore the gullible old narcissist.
Several of them. They don\'t design electronics anyhow.
You do realise that people who actually /do/ design work - real work, on
real products - rarely discuss details of proprietary designs with
random strangers on the internet? The only people here who talk about
their work are amateurs (nothing wrong with that - it is not an insult
of any kind), retirees (again, nothing wrong with that) and people who
boast about how much better they are than everyone else, despite a
complete absence of any kind of evidence or justification.
Precisely. Couldn\'t have put it better myself.
Classically narcissistic behaviour.
Dunno--I discuss my proprietary designs here all the time, and put them
in books too. It helps my business, as well as sometimes generating
useful info for me as well as others.
IME the folks who hold their \'crown jewels\' super close to the vest tend
to overrate said jewels\' actual value by a lot. I\'ve had people tell me
\"in confidence\" things I\'d known for 20 years, such as that you need to
filter the drive to your TE coolers very carefully to avoid crap getting
into the cold-plate circuitry.
One big difference is whether the designs are your own property, or the
customers\'. In my work, the majority of what we do is design for
customers - I could not possibly give out information about those
designs to others. The same would apply to employees of a company.
If you own your company and make your own designs, then you have all the
rights and can discuss them as you want - but I think that would be the
case for only a very small proportion of professional engineers.
That\'s true, but it\'s a very different statement from the preceding.
I do a fair amount of code reading for patent and trade secret lawsuits.
 The legal protections for produced source code are enough to curl your
hair, so you\'d expect that the code would really be something special.
From the tens of thousands of lines I\'ve seen of such \'crown jewels\',
the quality and the density of good ideas is far lower than on Stack
Overflow, say.
Sometimes that\'s why they want to keep it so secret
Could well be. A lot of it is real genuine crudware--a clever
engineering manager could set his competition back years just by leaking
it to them. \"Technical debt\", Venezuela style.
Most engineering - electronic or software - is not hugely innovative.
Good engineering is mainly about implementing solid, reliable and
cost-effective solutions. Revolutionary new ideas are relatively rare,
but of course they can be very important. (What is that saying?
Invention is 1% innovation, 99% perspiration?)
Edison said that because he was doing it wrong. (Just ask Nikola Tesla
next time you see him--he\'ll confirm it.) Edison introduced a very
important engineering metric--the inspiration/perspiration ratio--but
his quoted value of just over 1% shows a lot of room for improvement.
Larkin will claim his stuff is all new revolutionary ideas, but we all
know the value of his claims.
John and I have collaborated on several projects over the last dozen
years or so. He\'s one of the two or three best designers I know, and
great fun to design things with. I\'m hoping to do a bit of that next
week, in fact, when EOI is making a collective visit to Photonics West.
Bring proof of vax or they won\'t let you in.