Can Christian Electronic Designers Design?
in [Design]
|
From: JosephKK on 31 Mar 2010 20:50 On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 15:08:39 -0700, John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 11:52:01 -0700 (PDT), brent ><bulegoge(a)columbus.rr.com> wrote: > >>On Mar 30, 7:12 am, John Larkin >><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >>> On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 14:40:43 +1100, "David L. Jones" >>> >>> <altz...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> >D from BC wrote: >>> >> mmm sseems a little quiet in SED so... >>> >> Time for another mega-troll. >>> >>> >> Are Christian beliefs in conflict with good electronics engineering? >>> >>> >There appears to be no evidence that delusion and electronics design ability >>> >are mutually exclusive. >>> >>> >Dave. >>> >>> Not as long as you're happy spinning the pcb etch four or five times, >>> and shipping a lot of bugs. To get it right the first time, you can't >>> lie to yourself about anything. >>> >>> John >> >>Anyone that thinks they can get any meaningful new board design done >>in one pass is delusional. > >We do it most of the time, namely ship complex designs with uPs, >FPGAs, analog stuff, power conditioning. We go from paper designs to >multilayer PC boards, formally release the rev A documentation, let >manufacturing build the first articles, and make them work. We don't >prototype and don't breadboard and usually ship rev A. > >This is a spectroscopy controller. The board on the left side of the >plate is a Kontron SBC. On the right is our board: PCI express, BGA >FPGA, BGA DRAM, fast ADC, two 128 MHz arbs, power supplies, lots of >slower analog and digital i/o. Off to the side is the operator >interface and a couple of option boards. First etch it all works. > >ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/First_Light.jpg > >Here it is packaged: > >ftp://jjlarkin.lmi.net/First_box.jpg > > >Anyone who usually screws up the first pass is sloppy. > >John You are talking past each other.
From: Archimedes' Lever on 31 Mar 2010 20:51 On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 11:35:02 -0700, D from BC <myrealaddress(a)comic.com> wrote: >btw.... Jesus should have turned water into freshly squeezed orange >juice. This is vastly more impressive since oranges are not native in >the middle east. He would have, were they having deficiency issues at the time. You are a loser, boy. You just won't find out for a while.
From: JosephKK on 31 Mar 2010 21:15 On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 17:13:03 -0700, D from BC <myrealaddress(a)comic.com> wrote: >In article <me25r51895gmdonabssgckmpomtf0v6div(a)4ax.com>, spam(a)spam.com >says... >> >> You should try your question here! >> >> alt.religion.christian-identity > >But it's more interesting to get a engineer/designers point of view >because electronics requires reasoning and analysis. >If that same reasoning and analysis is pointed toward >Christianity...then I'm curious as to what happens. > >Does an engineer/designer admit to irrational thinking in a field where >irrational thinking is generally frowned upon? > >Does the belief in God, Jesus or perhaps transistor fairies diminish an >engineers credibility in the skill of critical thinking? > >Can an engineer look good if he says, 'I have faith it won't blow up.' >to board members? I have to use binary and count on both hands to even try to enumerate the engineers that went in front of the Board/Investors spouting all the numbers work out only to be proven wrong in the first public trial. And that is just famous cases from the 20th century.
From: John Larkin on 31 Mar 2010 21:36 On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 16:39:23 -0700, Archimedes' Lever <OneBigLever(a)InfiniteSeries.Org> wrote: >On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 15:28:00 -0700, John Larkin ><jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > >>On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 11:35:02 -0700, D from BC >><myrealaddress(a)comic.com> wrote: >> >>>In article <a524r51rn73jjudigj69jkd5et7tqorrjo(a)4ax.com>, >>>jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com says... >>>> >>>> On Mon, 29 Mar 2010 21:41:56 -0700, Mr.Eko >>>> <ekointhedirt(a)lostisland.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> >On Mon, 29 Mar 2010 20:02:57 -0700, D from BC <myrealaddress(a)comic.com> >>>> >wrote: >>>> > >>>> >>If I got this right... >>>> >>The reason why you believe in God is because it works for those that >>>> >>believe in God. >>>> >>uhh.. That's too ambiguous for me.. >>>> >>I'm understanding that as: The reason why you believe in God is because >>>> >>others believe in God. >>>> >>Correct? >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > It appears that you have never had a beautiful, wonderful, early >>>> >morning, early spring walk through a flowering Western US desert or >>>> >Eastern US woodland. >>>> > >>>> > That would be a mere two of the reasons why an observer of such wonders >>>> >becomes certain that it is the result of creation. >>>> >>>> It's not certainty to me, but it's sure suspicious that Earth is such >>>> an improbably beautiful place, and that we are alive now. The >>>> probability of those things happening is so close to zero that it >>>> doesn't matter. >>>> >>>> Consider living near the triple point of water: clouds, rivers, snow, >>>> all at the same time. >>>> >>>> Consider the neatly separated minerals for the taking, and the >>>> fuel/oxidizer in abundance. Consider the clear atmosphere, dense >>>> enough for flight but clear enough that we can see the stars. >>>> >>>> I bet D from BC is unimpressed. >>>> >>>> John >>> >>>I'm more impressed about everything because I make no claims as to what >>>started the universe. I have a mystery... you don't. >>> >>>You claim the supernatural and the supernatural has a bad track record. >> >>What a doofus you are. Read my posts. I have claimed none of the >>things you ascribe to me. What I am guilty of is respecting other >>peoples' beliefs. >> >>You're an idiot and a mean-spirited churl. >> >>John > But when I call someone stupid, it is a troll. > > I guess that makes you a hypocrite. The other possibility is that you are both stupid. John
From: John Larkin on 31 Mar 2010 21:37
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 17:47:31 -0700, "JosephKK"<quiettechblue(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 07:10:58 -0700, John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > >>On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 01:33:47 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman >><bill.sloman(a)ieee.org> wrote: >> >>>On Mar 30, 5:40�am, "David L. Jones" <altz...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>> D from BC wrote: >>>> > mmm sseems a little quiet in SED so... >>>> > Time for another mega-troll. >>>> >>>> > Are Christian beliefs in conflict with good electronics engineering? >>>> >>>> There appears to be no evidence that delusion and electronics design ability >>>> are mutually exclusive. >>> >>>Jim Thompson believes in the Republicans. That's pretty much the same >>>level of silliness. >> >>Bill Sloman proves that dreary realism isn't necessarily associated >>with electronic design ability. >> >>John > >If you has used socialism instead of realism, you might have had a point. >Slowman is immune to reason. Yes, he is such a creature of passion. John |