RJ45, RJ12, RJ14 cables, straight-through or crossover?

[Jan Panteltje]

On a sunny day (12 May 2019 18:09:31 -0700) it happened Winfield Hill
<hill@rowland.harvard.edu> wrote in <qbag4b0al4@drn.newsguy.com>:

Jeff Liebermann wrote...

(...)
Are you doing something like this?
http://hivetool.net
http://wiki.hivetool.org/HiveTool.org

Yes, all that and much much more. 60 sensors so far,
and now adding 12 more, including gas sensors. E.g.,
we count every single bee trip in/out of hive, see up
to 170,000 trips (not under 10,000). Including the
back door. Two microphone sensor channels. Also
getting sugar-water level. LoRa real-time reporting.
As a scientific research tool, have learned a lot, I
hope, but not yet sure of value to experienced beehive
operators. Had 6 systems out last season, will deploy
15 more this season.

I wonder if this sort of technology
https://www.fastcompany.com/3059127/what-happened-to-the-mosquito-zapping-laser-that-was-going-to-stop-malaria
without the killing green laser part,
can be used to track individual Bs.
Each B having its own wing flapping pattern, some AI learning software..
Maybe ask that Microsoft inventer?

 

Jan Panteltje <pNaOnStPeAlMtje@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:qbb29q$rbl$1@dont-email.me:

Each B having its own wing flapping pattern, some AI learning
software..

Their own wing flapping pattern?

No, they are all the same and their wing flapping 'patterns' are too.

The software counts the actual bees. It does not discriminated down
to wing motion... And never will.

 

[Winfield Hill]

DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote...

The software counts the actual bees.

We count every bee trip going in or out of the hive.
This is a little different from measuring bee flights.
Standing in front of the hive, watching for 15 minutes,
say in the morning, virtually all of the IN/OUT trips
are associated with a flight. The bees seem to know
exactly what they're doing, and concentrate on that.

And yet we count up to 20x as many trips as they
measure flights. OK, it is true that in the late
afternoon, I've observed a lot of IN/OUT activity
not associated with bee flights. They seem unsure
at that point in time, and may even make a wall of
bees on the front of the hive. But this time-frame
is not when we get most trips counted. It appears
that their camera and software must miss seeing a
lot of flights.


--
Thanks,
- Win

 

Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote in
news:2f6bcccd-60b0-4883-901c-6554f4087dbb@googlegroups.com:

He's speculating they can learn the sound of each individual bee
like they can distinguish the unique sounds of propellers on
submarines.

Fat chance. The term 'din' comes to mind.

Who knows, maybe... some day. Do Bees do crazy
Ivans?

No, and neither do Russian sub commanders.

Back out and go to high speed camera and track them in and out
farther than the current window. IOW increase the resolution and
frame rate of the current optical system (I know it takes a lot of
fast storage). Look at other factors later on. Polish the shine on
what you already have.

 

[Rick C]

On Monday, May 13, 2019 at 6:58:34 AM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

Jan Panteltje <pNaOnStPeAlMtje@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:qbb29q$rbl$1@dont-email.me:

Each B having its own wing flapping pattern, some AI learning
software..

Their own wing flapping pattern?

No, they are all the same and their wing flapping 'patterns' are too.

The software counts the actual bees. It does not discriminated down
to wing motion... And never will.

He's speculating they can learn the sound of each individual bee like they can distinguish the unique sounds of propellers on submarines. Who knows, maybe... some day. Do Bees do crazy Ivans?

--

Rick C.

- Get 5,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

Winfield Hill <hill@rowland.harvard.edu> wrote in
news:qbbn5l024fu@drn.newsguy.com:

DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote...

The software counts the actual bees.

We count every bee trip going in or out of the hive.
This is a little different from measuring bee flights.
Standing in front of the hive, watching for 15 minutes,
say in the morning, virtually all of the IN/OUT trips
are associated with a flight. The bees seem to know
exactly what they're doing, and concentrate on that.

And yet we count up to 20x as many trips as they
measure flights. OK, it is true that in the late
afternoon, I've observed a lot of IN/OUT activity
not associated with bee flights. They seem unsure
at that point in time, and may even make a wall of
bees on the front of the hive. But this time-frame
is not when we get most trips counted. It appears
that their camera and software must miss seeing a
lot of flights.

Paralax error goes up during large exodus/ingress periods.

I used to make pharma tablet counters and they had 16 channels for
the pills to fall through and yet would still fail if two went
through together past the optical sensor in a channel.

Most pharmacies I see these days have gone back to hand counting.
much cheaper than the expensive tablet counters.

Reduce camera resolution and increase frame rate. Somewhere there
is a happy medium where optimal counting is the result.

 

[Joseph Gwinn]

On May 12, 2019, Jeff Liebermann wrote
(in article<u4hhde1k2ko9n80l5vbiflg2lkhcl566kr@4ax.com&gt:

On Sun, 12 May 2019 23:01:53 +0000 (UTC),

DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> wrote in
news:8vvgde5mfaet0rva8vjkacf4pcs8ueudma@4ax.com:

"Standards are a good thing. Every company should have one."
I forgot who said that.

Probably Carnegie, Morgan, or Rockefeller... Naaah!
Sounds more like something Twain would have said.

It was much more recent. As I vaguely recall, it was said by a well
known computah industry luminary during some long forgotten patent
battle the 1990's. However, Google couldn't find it, so the quote
must not exist.

2nd best:
The good thing about standards is that there are so many
to choose from. (Andrew S. Tanenbaum)

These are very old jokes in the standards world. No idea where these jokes
came from, but well before 1990 (when I entered the standards world).

Joe Gwinn

 

[Tom Del Rosso]

Winfield Hill wrote:

RJ45 network cables come in straight-through, and
in crossover versions. Does straight-through in a
patch cable mean that pin 1 in goes to pin 1 out?

What about everyday telephone cables? A flat cable,
with wires going straight into the plug on each end.
Physically, it looks like the very definition of
straight-through. But does pin 1 in go to pin 1 out?
NO!! Since the two plugs face in opposite directions,
pin 1 goes to pin 4, and etc. Pin 1 to pin 1, would
require a wire crossover or a 180-degree cable twist.

The plugs don't have to face opposite directions. One can be rotated,
which means flat cable can be 1-1 or 1-8.

For example look at the "Yost" style pinout for RS232 signals over RJ45.
It has Tx and Rx on 3 and 6 of the RJ45, and RTS and CTS on 1 and 8, so
you can rotate one connector to change the cable from straight RS232 to
a null modem cable. This pinout is only really helpful with flat cable.

What about the straight-through RJ45 network cables?
Yes! These DO have pin 1 in going to pin 1 out. And
it's the crossover type that has pin 1 to pin 8, etc.

No! A crossover ethernet cable has 1<>3 and 2<>6, because 1/2 is the +/-
of the transmit pair and 3/6 is the receive pair. The 4/5 pair and the
7/8 pair are still straight through on the ethernet crossover.

I thought about this at 3 AM, looked at a telephone
cable, and changed the PCB layout for my beehive's
five-sensor I2C jacks. But wait, are RJ11 RJ14 6P4C
phone and RJ12 6P5C data cables different? Checking,
Yes! An RJ11 voice cable can worked reversed, but
an RJ12 data straight-through is pin 1 to pin 1.
Some sellers of RJ11 RJ14 cables let you specify to
get straight pin 1 to pin 1, or "reversed".

Sheesh, changing my PCB jack wiring back again.

I don't know RJ12 off the top of my head. 6P5C? An odd number of
contacts?

 

[Winfield Hill]

Tom Del Rosso wrote...

it's the crossover type that has pin 1 to pin 8, etc.

No! A crossover ethernet cable ...

Excuse me, the reversed-form above is "rollover".

> I don't know RJ12 off the top of my head. 6P5C?

RJ12 is 6P6C, data cable. pin 1 to pin 1.


--
Thanks,
- Win

 

[David Lesher]

Winfield Hill <hill@rowland.harvard.edu> writes:

Tom Del Rosso wrote...

it's the crossover type that has pin 1 to pin 8, etc.

No! A crossover ethernet cable ...

Excuse me, the reversed-form above is "rollover".

I don't know RJ12 off the top of my head. 6P5C?

RJ12 is 6P6C, data cable. pin 1 to pin 1.

Or 2 POTS lines on one cable. Actually, per 47 CFR part 68, a
RJ12 is used for POTS+exclusion and A-control, the RJ14 is the
multiple line configuration. But people talk RJ12.






--
A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz@nrk.com
& no one will talk to a host that's close..........................
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433

 

David Lesher <wb8foz@panix.com> wrote in news:qbclbm$spp$1
@reader2.panix.com:

Winfield Hill <hill@rowland.harvard.edu> writes:

Tom Del Rosso wrote...

it's the crossover type that has pin 1 to pin 8, etc.

No! A crossover ethernet cable ...

Excuse me, the reversed-form above is "rollover".

I don't know RJ12 off the top of my head. 6P5C?

RJ12 is 6P6C, data cable. pin 1 to pin 1.

Or 2 POTS lines on one cable. Actually, per 47 CFR part 68, a
RJ12 is used for POTS+exclusion and A-control, the RJ14 is the
multiple line configuration. But people talk RJ12.

They also used a pair for power feed. Remember the proncess
phone? It had a lit dial/keypad.

Why do mouse maker make mice that fail after a few hundred or
thousand clicks, yet Western Electric made keypads that could take
millions of cycles and I think they were not even sealed?

 

[Winfield Hill]

DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote...

Why do mouse maker make mice that fail after a few hundred or
thousand clicks, yet Western Electric made keypads that could
take millions of cycles and I think they were not even sealed?

I'm a big fan of Logitech M570 trackballs. Logitech uses
a standard microswitch, and it fails within a year or so.
There's a host of U-tube videos, where blokes suggest
alternate brands of switches, and show repair. Little,
or no data yet, on the alternate brands of switch types.


--
Thanks,
- Win

 

[Tom Del Rosso]

DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

Why do mouse maker make mice that fail after a few hundred or
thousand clicks, yet Western Electric made keypads that could take
millions of cycles and I think they were not even sealed?

Well of course they lasted. The original DTMF keypads had self-wiping
contacts with _thick_ gold plating. There were bars, like cam shafts,
running under the rows and columns. The buttons pushed cams that rotated
the bars, and there was a final cam on the end of each bar that pushed a
leaf switch with lots of gold on the end. So there was only 1 switch
per row or column.

 

Winfield Hill <hill@rowland.harvard.edu> wrote in news:qbeamj02s05
@drn.newsguy.com:

DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote...

Why do mouse maker make mice that fail after a few hundred or
thousand clicks, yet Western Electric made keypads that could
take millions of cycles and I think they were not even sealed?

I'm a big fan of Logitech M570 trackballs. Logitech uses
a standard microswitch, and it fails within a year or so.
There's a host of U-tube videos, where blokes suggest
alternate brands of switches, and show repair. Little,
or no data yet, on the alternate brands of switch types.

Oh there are plenty of mil spec quality multi-million cycle sealed
snap switches out there.

My favorite was the original trackball. Wired though. Weird that
gamers liked it so much as when the first bt wires mice came out
there were delays and 'sleep modes'. Logi figured out that they
needed near zero latency coms. I too now like and own many M570
units. I carry one around in my multi-laptop bag.

That original was so popular at the onset of wireless mice that it
sole used in as is condition on ebay for more than twice what they
sold for new.

I wanted to 3D print a tiny 'optical' switch design that relies on
the chopper wheel idea, but with only a single chop at a time.

That one would last for millions of cycles.

 

[David Lesher]

"Tom Del Rosso" <fizzbintuesday@that-google-mail-domain.com> writes:

Well of course they lasted. The original DTMF keypads had self-wiping
contacts with _thick_ gold plating. There were bars, like cam shafts,
running under the rows and columns. The buttons pushed cams that rotated
the bars, and there was a final cam on the end of each bar that pushed a
leaf switch with lots of gold on the end. So there was only 1 switch
per row or column.

But they saved money by using only ONE expensive transistor.

Of course what was expensive on 1960 was cheap in 1980 and vice
versa; but Ma still kept the same design...


--
A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz@nrk.com
& no one will talk to a host that's close..........................
Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433
is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433

 

David Lesher <wb8foz@panix.com> wrote in
news:qbhoti$p8v$1@reader2.panix.com:

"Tom Del Rosso" <fizzbintuesday@that-google-mail-domain.com
writes:


Well of course they lasted. The original DTMF keypads had
self-wiping contacts with _thick_ gold plating. There were bars,
like cam shafts, running under the rows and columns. The buttons
pushed cams that rotated the bars, and there was a final cam on
the end of each bar that pushed a leaf switch with lots of gold on
the end. So there was only 1 switch per row or column.


But they saved money by using only ONE expensive transistor.

Of course what was expensive on 1960 was cheap in 1980 and vice
versa; but Ma still kept the same design...

If it ain't broke...

 

[Jasen Betts]

On 2019-05-14, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org <DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org> wrote:

Winfield Hill <hill@rowland.harvard.edu> wrote in news:qbeamj02s05
@drn.newsguy.com:

DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote...

Why do mouse maker make mice that fail after a few hundred or
thousand clicks, yet Western Electric made keypads that could
take millions of cycles and I think they were not even sealed?

I'm a big fan of Logitech M570 trackballs. Logitech uses
a standard microswitch, and it fails within a year or so.
There's a host of U-tube videos, where blokes suggest
alternate brands of switches, and show repair. Little,
or no data yet, on the alternate brands of switch types.



Oh there are plenty of mil spec quality multi-million cycle sealed
snap switches out there.

My favorite was the original trackball. Wired though. Weird that
gamers liked it so much as when the first bt wires mice came out
there were delays and 'sleep modes'. Logi figured out that they
needed near zero latency coms. I too now like and own many M570
units. I carry one around in my multi-laptop bag.

That original was so popular at the onset of wireless mice that it
sole used in as is condition on ebay for more than twice what they
sold for new.

I wanted to 3D print a tiny 'optical' switch design that relies on
the chopper wheel idea, but with only a single chop at a time.

That one would last for millions of cycles.

there are available optical key(board)switches in the Cherry MX
form-factor. (but different board pads) I forget who makes them


--
When I tried casting out nines I made a hash of it.