Silly question, AC power plugs

On Wed, 23 May 2012 22:35:32 -0700, John Larkin
<jjSNIPlarkin@highTHISlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Wed, 23 May 2012 21:35:32 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 22:28:30 -0700, John Larkin
jjSNIPlarkin@highTHISlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 21:24:50 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 14:49:48 -0700, John Larkin
jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 11:30:05 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 08:30:21 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:


You have said that you're not an engineer, and that your electronics
is self-taught. Unless you forced yourself to learn the math, that
puts you at a disadvantage when discussing theory.

One good thing about EE school is that we were forced to learn the
theory and do the math. And we were taught to be careful and check our
work before turning it in. A lot of engineering is about avoiding
risk, and the more complex a system, the more careful you have to be
if it's ever going to work. One reason we can build a very complex
laser controller, and get it to work first-rev, is that we check the
hell out of our stuff before we etch boards. It's a lot of grunt work,
but it pays off.

---
You never miss a chance to spout platitudes and pat yourself on the
back, do you?

There's nothing glorious about grunt-level checking your work. I can
see why you don't do it.

Because he's incapable of checking anything more complicated than a 555?
...even a 240V plug?

I think he's used to doing simple stuff, like 555s and 4000-series
hairball async logic. If it's just a few chips, you can take some
risks and eventually get it to work most of the time. If you've got an
8-layer board with, say, 500 parts, and simulation isn't feasible, and
you allow a 1% risk of messing any one up, let's see, the chance of it
working is 0.99^500, which is under 1%. It might work on the third or
fourth board spin, maybe.

The three boards I've designed this year (for the new PPoE) are all over 1000
components (1000, 1200, and 1500). We'll see how well I did on the first in a
few days (our CM has made a mess of assembly).


That's always scary, the first board.
Click to expand...
Indeed.

Do all the parts fit?
Click to expand...
Don't know yet. We haven't gotten in back from the CM. I found out this
morning that they're asking about reference designators that don't exist and
parts that are clearly marked as OPEN.

Do the power supplies come up?

Can the uP run code?

Does the FPGA configure?
Click to expand...
No FPGAs on this one. I only have one minor CPLD on these.

That's just for starters, but those are milestones.

We always assemble the first articles in-house. That way, we can talk
to the assemblers if any problems come up.
Click to expand...
Our only manufacturing capability is in Mexico. We're specifically trying to
avoid using them.
 
On Thu, 24 May 2012 10:51:52 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
<krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Wed, 23 May 2012 22:35:32 -0700, John Larkin
jjSNIPlarkin@highTHISlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Wed, 23 May 2012 21:35:32 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 22:28:30 -0700, John Larkin
jjSNIPlarkin@highTHISlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 21:24:50 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 14:49:48 -0700, John Larkin
jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 11:30:05 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 08:30:21 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:


You have said that you're not an engineer, and that your electronics
is self-taught. Unless you forced yourself to learn the math, that
puts you at a disadvantage when discussing theory.

One good thing about EE school is that we were forced to learn the
theory and do the math. And we were taught to be careful and check our
work before turning it in. A lot of engineering is about avoiding
risk, and the more complex a system, the more careful you have to be
if it's ever going to work. One reason we can build a very complex
laser controller, and get it to work first-rev, is that we check the
hell out of our stuff before we etch boards. It's a lot of grunt work,
but it pays off.

---
You never miss a chance to spout platitudes and pat yourself on the
back, do you?

There's nothing glorious about grunt-level checking your work. I can
see why you don't do it.

Because he's incapable of checking anything more complicated than a 555?
...even a 240V plug?

I think he's used to doing simple stuff, like 555s and 4000-series
hairball async logic. If it's just a few chips, you can take some
risks and eventually get it to work most of the time. If you've got an
8-layer board with, say, 500 parts, and simulation isn't feasible, and
you allow a 1% risk of messing any one up, let's see, the chance of it
working is 0.99^500, which is under 1%. It might work on the third or
fourth board spin, maybe.

The three boards I've designed this year (for the new PPoE) are all over 1000
components (1000, 1200, and 1500). We'll see how well I did on the first in a
few days (our CM has made a mess of assembly).


That's always scary, the first board.

Indeed.

Do all the parts fit?

Don't know yet. We haven't gotten in back from the CM. I found out this
morning that they're asking about reference designators that don't exist and
parts that are clearly marked as OPEN.

Do the power supplies come up?

Can the uP run code?

Does the FPGA configure?

No FPGAs on this one. I only have one minor CPLD on these.

That's just for starters, but those are milestones.

We always assemble the first articles in-house. That way, we can talk
to the assemblers if any problems come up.

Our only manufacturing capability is in Mexico. We're specifically trying to
avoid using them.
Click to expand...
I have toyed with the idea of sending all our PCB assembly to Mexico
or China or Arizona or some other bleak place where labor is cheap.
Assembling electronics in downtown San Francisco is insane. But the
quality would suffer, and so would my people. But I can sure see why
manufacturing, and entire companies, are fleeing the USA and
California in particular.


--

John Larkin Highland Technology Inc
www.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com

Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators
Custom timing and laser controllers
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links
VME analog, thermocouple, LVDT, synchro, tachometer
Multichannel arbitrary waveform generators
 
On Thu, 24 May 2012 05:37:06 -0500, John Fields
<jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 22:28:30 -0700, John Larkin
jjSNIPlarkin@highTHISlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 21:24:50 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 14:49:48 -0700, John Larkin
jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 11:30:05 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 08:30:21 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:


You have said that you're not an engineer, and that your electronics
is self-taught. Unless you forced yourself to learn the math, that
puts you at a disadvantage when discussing theory.

One good thing about EE school is that we were forced to learn the
theory and do the math. And we were taught to be careful and check our
work before turning it in. A lot of engineering is about avoiding
risk, and the more complex a system, the more careful you have to be
if it's ever going to work. One reason we can build a very complex
laser controller, and get it to work first-rev, is that we check the
hell out of our stuff before we etch boards. It's a lot of grunt work,
but it pays off.

---
You never miss a chance to spout platitudes and pat yourself on the
back, do you?

There's nothing glorious about grunt-level checking your work. I can
see why you don't do it.

Because he's incapable of checking anything more complicated than a 555?
...even a 240V plug?

I think he's used to doing simple stuff, like 555s and 4000-series
hairball async logic. If it's just a few chips, you can take some
risks and eventually get it to work most of the time. If you've got an
8-layer board with, say, 500 parts, and simulation isn't feasible, and
you allow a 1% risk of messing any one up, let's see, the chance of it
working is 0.99^500, which is under 1%. It might work on the third or
fourth board spin, maybe.

---
While I've posted a lot more stuff here than you have - pro bono and
without a lot of fanfare -
Click to expand...
And usually wrong the first few times.


--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators
Custom laser drivers and controllers
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links
VME thermocouple, LVDT, synchro acquisition and simulation
 
On Thu, 24 May 2012 11:27:20 -0700, John Larkin
<jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Thu, 24 May 2012 05:37:06 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 22:28:30 -0700, John Larkin
jjSNIPlarkin@highTHISlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 21:24:50 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 14:49:48 -0700, John Larkin
jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 11:30:05 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 08:30:21 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:


You have said that you're not an engineer, and that your electronics
is self-taught. Unless you forced yourself to learn the math, that
puts you at a disadvantage when discussing theory.

One good thing about EE school is that we were forced to learn the
theory and do the math. And we were taught to be careful and check our
work before turning it in. A lot of engineering is about avoiding
risk, and the more complex a system, the more careful you have to be
if it's ever going to work. One reason we can build a very complex
laser controller, and get it to work first-rev, is that we check the
hell out of our stuff before we etch boards. It's a lot of grunt work,
but it pays off.

---
You never miss a chance to spout platitudes and pat yourself on the
back, do you?

There's nothing glorious about grunt-level checking your work. I can
see why you don't do it.

Because he's incapable of checking anything more complicated than a 555?
...even a 240V plug?

I think he's used to doing simple stuff, like 555s and 4000-series
hairball async logic. If it's just a few chips, you can take some
risks and eventually get it to work most of the time. If you've got an
8-layer board with, say, 500 parts, and simulation isn't feasible, and
you allow a 1% risk of messing any one up, let's see, the chance of it
working is 0.99^500, which is under 1%. It might work on the third or
fourth board spin, maybe.

---
While I've posted a lot more stuff here than you have - pro bono and
without a lot of fanfare -

And usually wrong the first few times.
Click to expand...
---
Even if that were true, which it isn't, so what?

The work gets done, if there are any errors they get fixed, and the
querant goes away happy.

--
JF
 
On Thu, 24 May 2012 15:15:40 +0100, "Ian Field"
<gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:

krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote in message
news:tvfsr7tsokt7r9j6r8sm9op3regb9qo408@4ax.com...
On Thu, 24 May 2012 06:41:54 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Wed, 23 May 2012 21:59:27 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:


Accusing anyone of being racist, without cause, is despicable. He's no
better
than Jessie Jackson or Al Sharpton.

---
You don't read for content, do you?

Here's the "dialog" leading up to the accusation:

----------------------------------------------------
KRW: AlwaysWrong comes to mind.

JF: Another favorite target of the lynch mob.

KRW: With good reason.

JF: Sounds like: "We'll give 'em a fair trial and hang 'em in the
morning."

----------
Note that my likening Prongy's relentlessly cruel antagonists to a
lynch mob wasn't questioned by KRW, but rather agreed to with his
"With good reason." comment.

"Relentlessly cruel"? You must be an idiot if you believe that. He is
relentless and his presence is cruel. You've joined him.
---
snipped irrelevance...

Snip yourself


JF should be sterilised in the best interests of human evolution.
Click to expand...
---
Hitler's your hero?

--
JF
 
"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:313tr7psmf3d5d261ke6otn17bc4klt95b@4ax.com...
On Thu, 24 May 2012 11:27:20 -0700, John Larkin
jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Thu, 24 May 2012 05:37:06 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 22:28:30 -0700, John Larkin
jjSNIPlarkin@highTHISlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 21:24:50 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 14:49:48 -0700, John Larkin
jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 11:30:05 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 08:30:21 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:


You have said that you're not an engineer, and that your electronics
is self-taught. Unless you forced yourself to learn the math, that
puts you at a disadvantage when discussing theory.

One good thing about EE school is that we were forced to learn the
theory and do the math. And we were taught to be careful and check
our
work before turning it in. A lot of engineering is about avoiding
risk, and the more complex a system, the more careful you have to be
if it's ever going to work. One reason we can build a very complex
laser controller, and get it to work first-rev, is that we check the
hell out of our stuff before we etch boards. It's a lot of grunt
work,
but it pays off.

---
You never miss a chance to spout platitudes and pat yourself on the
back, do you?

There's nothing glorious about grunt-level checking your work. I can
see why you don't do it.

Because he's incapable of checking anything more complicated than a
555?
...even a 240V plug?

I think he's used to doing simple stuff, like 555s and 4000-series
hairball async logic. If it's just a few chips, you can take some
risks and eventually get it to work most of the time. If you've got an
8-layer board with, say, 500 parts, and simulation isn't feasible, and
you allow a 1% risk of messing any one up, let's see, the chance of it
working is 0.99^500, which is under 1%. It might work on the third or
fourth board spin, maybe.

---
While I've posted a lot more stuff here than you have - pro bono and
without a lot of fanfare -

And usually wrong the first few times.

---
Even if that were true, which it isn't, so what?

The work gets done, if there are any errors they get fixed, and the
querant goes away happy.
Click to expand...

..........well, laughing a lot anyway.
 
On Thu, 24 May 2012 10:08:56 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
<krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Thu, 24 May 2012 06:41:54 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Wed, 23 May 2012 21:59:27 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:


Accusing anyone of being racist, without cause, is despicable. He's no better
than Jessie Jackson or Al Sharpton.

---
You don't read for content, do you?

Here's the "dialog" leading up to the accusation:

----------------------------------------------------
KRW: AlwaysWrong comes to mind.

JF: Another favorite target of the lynch mob.

KRW: With good reason.

JF: Sounds like: "We'll give 'em a fair trial and hang 'em in the
morning."

----------
Note that my likening Prongy's relentlessly cruel antagonists to a
lynch mob wasn't questioned by KRW, but rather agreed to with his
"With good reason." comment.

"Relentlessly cruel"? You must be an idiot if you believe that.
Click to expand...
---
I'd be an idiot if I _didn't_ believe that since it's as plain as day
that you and the rest of the lynch mob derive great pleasure from
ridiculing him instead of pointing out his errors in a way that would
help, instead of hurt.
---

He is relentless and his presence is cruel.
Click to expand...
---
In what way?
---

You've joined him.

---
No, but we're both islands.
---

---
snipped irrelevance...

Snip yourself
Click to expand...
---
What do you mean?
---

JF: Don't those white sheets and pointy hats get uncomfortable
sometimes?

KRW: You must be Obama. Anything you don't like is "racist".

----------
Note that the "white sheets and pointy hats" was referring to the
often worn garb of a lynch mob, and since Prongy's race wasn't
mentioned, the race issue wasn't brought up until KRW likened me to
Obama.
----------

Liar. It's *clearly* a reference to the KKK, which you draw the moral
equivalence.
Click to expand...
---
The KKK _is_ a lynch mob, so your admission to being a member of a
lynch mob _is_ morally equivalent to being a member of the KKK.

Of course you'll squeal that the KKK is much worse than your gang, but
the goal of both is the same; to silence those whom they don't like.
---

You are despicable, and no better than Sharpton, Jackson, or
Obama. ...a race baiter.

Your goal post movement isn't going unnoticed.
Click to expand...
---
Interesting that you draw attention to what isn't happening, pretend
it is, then damn it and turn a deaf ear to the tune in play.

--
JF
 
On Thu, 24 May 2012 10:51:52 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
<krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:


Our only manufacturing capability is in Mexico. We're specifically trying to
avoid using them.
Click to expand...
---
Going into the surplus parts business, then, are you?

--
JF
 
On Thu, 24 May 2012 20:47:08 +0100, "Ian Field"
<gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:313tr7psmf3d5d261ke6otn17bc4klt95b@4ax.com...
On Thu, 24 May 2012 11:27:20 -0700, John Larkin
jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Thu, 24 May 2012 05:37:06 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 22:28:30 -0700, John Larkin
jjSNIPlarkin@highTHISlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 21:24:50 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 14:49:48 -0700, John Larkin
jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 11:30:05 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 08:30:21 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:


You have said that you're not an engineer, and that your electronics
is self-taught. Unless you forced yourself to learn the math, that
puts you at a disadvantage when discussing theory.

One good thing about EE school is that we were forced to learn the
theory and do the math. And we were taught to be careful and check
our
work before turning it in. A lot of engineering is about avoiding
risk, and the more complex a system, the more careful you have to be
if it's ever going to work. One reason we can build a very complex
laser controller, and get it to work first-rev, is that we check the
hell out of our stuff before we etch boards. It's a lot of grunt
work,
but it pays off.

---
You never miss a chance to spout platitudes and pat yourself on the
back, do you?

There's nothing glorious about grunt-level checking your work. I can
see why you don't do it.

Because he's incapable of checking anything more complicated than a
555?
...even a 240V plug?

I think he's used to doing simple stuff, like 555s and 4000-series
hairball async logic. If it's just a few chips, you can take some
risks and eventually get it to work most of the time. If you've got an
8-layer board with, say, 500 parts, and simulation isn't feasible, and
you allow a 1% risk of messing any one up, let's see, the chance of it
working is 0.99^500, which is under 1%. It might work on the third or
fourth board spin, maybe.

---
While I've posted a lot more stuff here than you have - pro bono and
without a lot of fanfare -

And usually wrong the first few times.

---
Even if that were true, which it isn't, so what?

The work gets done, if there are any errors they get fixed, and the
querant goes away happy.


.........well, laughing a lot anyway.
Click to expand...
---
On his way to the bank.

YMMV

--
JF
 
"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:e88tr75itfk5gh6fsn8nj5n5jo6o3jbd9k@4ax.com...
On Thu, 24 May 2012 20:47:08 +0100, "Ian Field"
gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:313tr7psmf3d5d261ke6otn17bc4klt95b@4ax.com...
On Thu, 24 May 2012 11:27:20 -0700, John Larkin
jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Thu, 24 May 2012 05:37:06 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 22:28:30 -0700, John Larkin
jjSNIPlarkin@highTHISlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 21:24:50 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 14:49:48 -0700, John Larkin
jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 11:30:05 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 08:30:21 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:


You have said that you're not an engineer, and that your
electronics
is self-taught. Unless you forced yourself to learn the math, that
puts you at a disadvantage when discussing theory.

One good thing about EE school is that we were forced to learn the
theory and do the math. And we were taught to be careful and check
our
work before turning it in. A lot of engineering is about avoiding
risk, and the more complex a system, the more careful you have to
be
if it's ever going to work. One reason we can build a very complex
laser controller, and get it to work first-rev, is that we check
the
hell out of our stuff before we etch boards. It's a lot of grunt
work,
but it pays off.

---
You never miss a chance to spout platitudes and pat yourself on the
back, do you?

There's nothing glorious about grunt-level checking your work. I can
see why you don't do it.

Because he's incapable of checking anything more complicated than a
555?
...even a 240V plug?

I think he's used to doing simple stuff, like 555s and 4000-series
hairball async logic. If it's just a few chips, you can take some
risks and eventually get it to work most of the time. If you've got an
8-layer board with, say, 500 parts, and simulation isn't feasible, and
you allow a 1% risk of messing any one up, let's see, the chance of it
working is 0.99^500, which is under 1%. It might work on the third or
fourth board spin, maybe.

---
While I've posted a lot more stuff here than you have - pro bono and
without a lot of fanfare -

And usually wrong the first few times.

---
Even if that were true, which it isn't, so what?

The work gets done, if there are any errors they get fixed, and the
querant goes away happy.


.........well, laughing a lot anyway.

---
On his way to the bank.
Click to expand...

You charge for the crap you spout here?!
 
On Thu, 24 May 2012 15:27:19 -0500, John Fields
<jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Thu, 24 May 2012 10:08:56 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Thu, 24 May 2012 06:41:54 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Wed, 23 May 2012 21:59:27 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:


Accusing anyone of being racist, without cause, is despicable. He's no better
than Jessie Jackson or Al Sharpton.

---
You don't read for content, do you?

Here's the "dialog" leading up to the accusation:

----------------------------------------------------
KRW: AlwaysWrong comes to mind.

JF: Another favorite target of the lynch mob.

KRW: With good reason.

JF: Sounds like: "We'll give 'em a fair trial and hang 'em in the
morning."

----------
Note that my likening Prongy's relentlessly cruel antagonists to a
lynch mob wasn't questioned by KRW, but rather agreed to with his
"With good reason." comment.

"Relentlessly cruel"? You must be an idiot if you believe that.

---
I'd be an idiot if I _didn't_ believe that since it's as plain as day
that you and the rest of the lynch mob derive great pleasure from
ridiculing him instead of pointing out his errors in a way that would
help, instead of hurt.
Click to expand...
Like you (and there are a lot of similarities), AlwaysWrong is immune to the
facts.

---

He is relentless and his presence is cruel.

---
In what way?
Click to expand...
Look in a mirror and you'll get a small glimpse.

---

You've joined him.

---
No, but we're both islands.
Click to expand...
Desert.

---

---
snipped irrelevance...

Snip yourself

---
What do you mean?
Click to expand...
Go away.
---

JF: Don't those white sheets and pointy hats get uncomfortable
sometimes?

KRW: You must be Obama. Anything you don't like is "racist".

----------
Note that the "white sheets and pointy hats" was referring to the
often worn garb of a lynch mob, and since Prongy's race wasn't
mentioned, the race issue wasn't brought up until KRW likened me to
Obama.
----------

Liar. It's *clearly* a reference to the KKK, which you draw the moral
equivalence.

---
The KKK _is_ a lynch mob, so your admission to being a member of a
lynch mob _is_ morally equivalent to being a member of the KKK.
Click to expand...
Balloney. The KKK is an obvious (counter) racial slur. As such, you are no
better than Sharpton, Jackson, or Obama. You're despicable.

Of course you'll squeal that the KKK is much worse than your gang, but
the goal of both is the same; to silence those whom they don't like.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, you won't listen either.

---

You are despicable, and no better than Sharpton, Jackson, or
Obama. ...a race baiter.

Your goal post movement isn't going unnoticed.

---
Interesting that you draw attention to what isn't happening, pretend
it is, then damn it and turn a deaf ear to the tune in play.
Click to expand...
No, that's your MO. You're trying to draw attention to your complete lack of
knowledge about simple electricity.
 
On Thu, 24 May 2012 05:56:58 -0500, John Fields
<jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Wed, 23 May 2012 21:32:54 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Wed, 23 May 2012 19:27:06 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 21:19:39 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 17:04:08 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 15:15:26 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 11:25:05 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 08:22:47 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 06:06:21 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 19:41:12 -0700, John Larkin
jjSNIPlarkin@highTHISlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 20:30:54 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 09:38:51 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 07:21:35 -0700, John Larkin
jjSNIPlarkin@highTHISlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Mon, 21 May 2012 06:23:48 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 May 2012 15:13:30 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 May 2012 16:49:50 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 May 2012 09:18:07 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

You said this:


A blade made of brass with a width of 1/4", a thickness of 1/16" and a
length of about an inch is hardly flimsy, and serves us well when we
opt to go to 240V and eke out four times the power available from the
mains without changing plugs.

A simple situation was posited, by you, where the correct answer was
"2". Your answer was "4."

---
Here's what I wrote, with the earlier "120V" omission included:

"A blade made of brass with a width of 1/4", a thickness of 1/16" and
a length of about an inch is hardly flimsy, and serves us well when we
opt to go to 240V and eke out four times the power available from the
^^^^^^^^^^ Wrong!
120V mains without changing plugs."
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Wrong!

Speaking of uneducable...

---
A likely contender blindly jumps right in.

IKWYABWAI is about your speed.

---

I thought that it would be obvious to anyone schooled in the art that
under the conditions I outlined the load resistance would remain
constant, but such turned out not to be the case.

Utter nonsense.

---
I said: "Anyone skilled in the art" which, as you've demonstrated,
obviously excludes you.

Wrong again, AlwaysWrong Jr. You said "four times the power available", which
is FALSE. It might deliver four times the power to a small resistive load,
but there is *NOT* "four times the power available". Now go back and take
grade school electricity.

How else would what I posted have been true if that wasn't the case?

It was *NOT* true, moron.

---
Bosh.

You really are as dumb as DimBulb.

It's so easy for the demons of the inquisition to make accusations and
so time-consuming to prove them false that I'd like to, at least, see
the math supporting the validity of your claim.

We've been through this before. You didn't learn anything then and you're not
likely to now, either. The current is limited by the wiring and outlet. If
you double the voltage in a circuit it is only capable of TWICE the power, not
four times, as you continue to claim.

Can you post that, please?

I have corrected you several times, as have others. You're too dense to
learn, though.

The premise, as I've stated from the onset, is that a load be
connected across a voltage source and the power dissipated by the load
measured.

You're a liar. That is *NOT* what you claimed.

The argument is that if that load is disconnected from the original
source and connected across a voltage source with an output amplitude
half that of the first, the conclusion must be that the power
dissipated in the last instance was 1/4 of the power dissipated in the
first.

That is NOT what you claimed, liar.

---

Oh well...
---

So you invented a completely different situation in which the correct
answer was indeed 4, and pretended that's what the question was.
call that stupid.

---
If that were true it would be more aptly labeled "Larkinese".

No, it's a perfect Fields answer.

---
Ignoratio elenchi.

Good grief, you're a stupid shit!

---
Ad Hominem

Fact. It's sad, but true.


Using a 120 volt outlet on a 240 volt circuit isn't too bright either.

---
Depends on who's doing it and why.

No, it's stupid in all cases.

---
Fallacy of hasty generalization.

Wrong again, Jr.

---
Care to expound?

Give a counterexample, where it's safe.

---

It's certainly not surprising that you'd think it acceptable.

---
Ad hominem

The truth sometimes hurts, idiot.

---
Indeed, and whether or not i'm an idiot, It seems you're in pain most
of the time.

Your opinion is irrelevant. The fact is that as an "engineer", you suck. Dumb
as DimBulb.

---
Tsk, tsk, tsk...

So much invective.

So little substance.
Click to expand...
So you *did* look in the mirror.
 
On Thu, 24 May 2012 07:43:03 -0500, John Fields
<jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On 24 May 2012 11:16:42 GMT, Jasen Betts <jasen@xnet.co.nz> wrote:

On 2012-05-22, John Fields <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:
On Tue, 22 May 2012 08:22:47 -0700, John Larkin
---
Here's what I wrote, with the earlier "120V" omission included:

"A blade made of brass with a width of 1/4", a thickness of 1/16" and
a length of about an inch is hardly flimsy, and serves us well when we
opt to go to 240V and eke out four times the power available from the
120V mains without changing plugs."

I thought that it would be obvious to anyone schooled in the art that
under the conditions I outlined the load resistance would remain
constant, but such turned out not to be the case.

The path you took to that conclusion is obvious, but it's obviously wrong.

---
It's not obviously wrong to me, so why don't you show the proof?
Click to expand...
A dozen people have but you're impervious to facts.

---

The load doesn't determine the power available, the supply does that.

---
You must have missed the implied: ..."four times the power available
to the load"...
Click to expand...
Which is *wrong*. There is only two times the power AVAILABLE TO THE LOAD.
The current carrying capability of the circuit has not increased.

---

Would't it be easier (and safer) to just reduce the load resistance by a
factor of 10 and get 10 times more power from the outlet.

---
Apples and oranges.
Click to expand...
 
On Thu, 24 May 2012 08:19:14 -0700, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Thu, 24 May 2012 10:51:52 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Wed, 23 May 2012 22:35:32 -0700, John Larkin
jjSNIPlarkin@highTHISlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Wed, 23 May 2012 21:35:32 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 22:28:30 -0700, John Larkin
jjSNIPlarkin@highTHISlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 21:24:50 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 14:49:48 -0700, John Larkin
jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 11:30:05 -0500, John Fields
jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Tue, 22 May 2012 08:30:21 -0700, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:


You have said that you're not an engineer, and that your electronics
is self-taught. Unless you forced yourself to learn the math, that
puts you at a disadvantage when discussing theory.

One good thing about EE school is that we were forced to learn the
theory and do the math. And we were taught to be careful and check our
work before turning it in. A lot of engineering is about avoiding
risk, and the more complex a system, the more careful you have to be
if it's ever going to work. One reason we can build a very complex
laser controller, and get it to work first-rev, is that we check the
hell out of our stuff before we etch boards. It's a lot of grunt work,
but it pays off.

---
You never miss a chance to spout platitudes and pat yourself on the
back, do you?

There's nothing glorious about grunt-level checking your work. I can
see why you don't do it.

Because he's incapable of checking anything more complicated than a 555?
...even a 240V plug?

I think he's used to doing simple stuff, like 555s and 4000-series
hairball async logic. If it's just a few chips, you can take some
risks and eventually get it to work most of the time. If you've got an
8-layer board with, say, 500 parts, and simulation isn't feasible, and
you allow a 1% risk of messing any one up, let's see, the chance of it
working is 0.99^500, which is under 1%. It might work on the third or
fourth board spin, maybe.

The three boards I've designed this year (for the new PPoE) are all over 1000
components (1000, 1200, and 1500). We'll see how well I did on the first in a
few days (our CM has made a mess of assembly).


That's always scary, the first board.

Indeed.

Do all the parts fit?

Don't know yet. We haven't gotten in back from the CM. I found out this
morning that they're asking about reference designators that don't exist and
parts that are clearly marked as OPEN.

Do the power supplies come up?

Can the uP run code?

Does the FPGA configure?

No FPGAs on this one. I only have one minor CPLD on these.

That's just for starters, but those are milestones.

We always assemble the first articles in-house. That way, we can talk
to the assemblers if any problems come up.

Our only manufacturing capability is in Mexico. We're specifically trying to
avoid using them.

I have toyed with the idea of sending all our PCB assembly to Mexico
or China or Arizona or some other bleak place where labor is cheap.
Assembling electronics in downtown San Francisco is insane. But the
quality would suffer, and so would my people. But I can sure see why
manufacturing, and entire companies, are fleeing the USA and
California in particular.
Click to expand...
Up until 2008 they manufactured everything right here (a Japanese company
building electronics in the USA, go figure). When the bottom fell out, they
packed up the entire manufacturing operation and moved it to Mexico. The moved
the prototype line, too, and merged it with manufacturing. If we want to
build a prototype (we build 25 to 50 systems as prototypes) we have to
interrupt the manufacturing line and it can be a six or eight week wait. It's
better, all around, if we keep the work locally. Unfortunately, we didn't
realize the CM was going to ship the work to their parent company in Texas.
 
On Thu, 24 May 2012 15:56:08 -0500, John Fields
<jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote:

On Thu, 24 May 2012 10:51:52 -0400, "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:


Our only manufacturing capability is in Mexico. We're specifically trying to
avoid using them.

---
Going into the surplus parts business, then, are you?
Click to expand...
That makes about as much sense as anything else you've said this month; zero.
 
On Thu, 24 May 2012 22:19:26 +0100, "Ian Field"
<gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:e88tr75itfk5gh6fsn8nj5n5jo6o3jbd9k@4ax.com...
On Thu, 24 May 2012 20:47:08 +0100, "Ian Field"
gangprobing.alien@ntlworld.com> wrote:


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:313tr7psmf3d5d261ke6otn17bc4klt95b@4ax.com...

And usually wrong the first few times.

---
Even if that were true, which it isn't, so what?

The work gets done, if there are any errors they get fixed, and the
querant goes away happy.


.........well, laughing a lot anyway.

---
On his way to the bank.


You charge for the crap you spout here?!
Click to expand...
Worse, he charges his customers for the hairballs he "designs".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top