more EE Times nonsense
in [Design]
|
From: John Fields on 17 Apr 2010 08:47 On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 00:18:53 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman <bill.sloman(a)ieee.org> wrote: >On Apr 17, 1:27�am, dagmargoodb...(a)yahoo.com wrote: >> On Apr 16, 6:02�am,Bill Sloman<bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: >> >> >> >> > On Apr 16, 8:41�am, dagmargoodb...(a)yahoo.com wrote: >> >> > > On Apr 14, 3:41�am,Bill Sloman<bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: >> >> > > > On Apr 14, 2:01�am, John Larkin >> > > > > Get a job, bozo. Design some electronics. >> >> > > > "Get a job" is easier said than done, particularly for a 67-year-old >> > > > in the Netherlands. I'm still applying for the occasional job, but the >> > > > statistical expectation that I'll ever get one around here has gotten >> > > > to be vanishingly small. >> >> > > Obama and Pelosi have told us their new healthscare[tm] mandatory >> > > insurance thing will put jobs here in overdrive, spur innovation. >> > > (They're trying to copy you guys, sort of.) (Or maybe Venezuela.) >> >> > > Since you already have that, it ought to be easy for you to start up a >> > > company, and probably a lot of fun. � Just chunk out your life >> > > savings, hire a few employees, and off you go. >> >> > James Arthur doesn't seem to have noticed Obama's "new" mandatory >> > insurance thing was iveted by Bismark in Germany over a century ago. >> > It might conceiveably spur innovation in the USA - though the 64% >> >> 85% >> >> > of >> > the US population who already have medical insurance would seem to be >> > a perfectly adequate market to drive whatever innovation is necessary >> >> Obama said otherwise. �But then, he says so many things. �Shrug. >> >> > - but it isn't going to make a blind bit of difference to my >> > environment, where the nearest I've got to a job in recent years was >> > when Philips Medical Systems was contemplating developing a phased >> > array of ultrasound transducers for cooking tumours in situ - an old >> > idea that is still waiting on a method for measuring the temperature >> > rise inside the tumour being cooked. >> >> > I asked about temperature monitoring during the interview, and didn't >> > get an answer ... >> >> You're right, it's not creating jobs here either:http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/ArticlePrint.aspx?id=530389 >> >> So, back to the question, why not start your own outfit, and do it >> right? �That's what makes the world a better place, people starting >> cool companies and hiring folks to work in them. > >My wife has been after me to do that for years. It does require >inventing a product that could be developed without investing more >capital than we've got, which could be sold to a significant number of >customers without requring me to set up some kind of distribution >network. > >Since most of the work I've done has been on complex and expensive >scientific instruments sold into the international market in small >qunatities, my inspirations haven't yet met these criteria. --- Have you never heard of "Consulting"??? JF
From: John Fields on 17 Apr 2010 09:20 On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 23:53:03 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman <bill.sloman(a)ieee.org> wrote: >On Apr 16, 6:35�pm, John Fields <jfie...(a)austininstruments.com> wrote: >> On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 08:43:03 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman >> >> >> >> <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: >> >On Apr 16, 5:07�pm, John Fields <jfie...(a)austininstruments.com> wrote: >> >> On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 02:30:56 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman >> >> >> <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: >> >> >On Apr 16, 2:14�am, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terr...(a)earthlink.net> >> >> >wrote: >> >> >> "k...(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz" wrote: >> >> >> >> > On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 13:42:38 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell" >> >> >> > <mike.terr...(a)earthlink.net> wrote: >> >> >> >> > >John Fields wrote: >> >> >> >> > >> Ask anyone here and I'm sure they'll agree that you're a mean old man >> >> >> > >> with a 200 pond chip on his shoulder. >> >> >> >> > > � 200 pond? �Is he in 'The Land O'lakes'? ;-) >> >> >> >> > No, I the Land O'Lakes is in him. >> >> >> >> � �If we're lucky, Nijmegen will become a modern day Pompeii. >> >> >> >Pity about that. Iceland - in the middle of the Atlantic - has >> >> >volcanoes. >> >> >> >The Netherlands - well inside the European continental plate - >> >> >doesn't. >> >> >> >The idiot from Florida nees to learn some geophysics. >> >> >> --- >> >> The slow man from Nijmegen needs to learn to read between the lines. >> >> >> Terrell wasn't talking about volcanoes as much as he was about your >> >> demise being our good fortune. >> >> >Perhaps, but he was postulating a rather improbable event - a couple >> >of orders of magnitude more improbable than the original Pompeii, >> >which is still talked about, more than 2000 years later. He'd need a >> >monumental amount of "luck", which is to say it was pig-ignorant wish- >> >fulfillment. >> >> >You seem to be dim enough to have missed the point, as usual. >> >> --- >> The _point_ of his post was to state that your demise would be our good >> fortune, and regardless of whether he couched his metaphor in the >> trappings of a fortuitous volcanic eruption or, say, a lucky hit by a >> benevolent meteorite, it was the end which was important, not the odds >> of the means. > >Sure. Mike Terrell s a malignant idiot, and seems happy to contemplate >the demise of 150,000 people in Nijmegen in order to be rid of me. If >you find this to be a respectable point of view - as you seem to - >your values have to be pretty twisted. --- I don't have any problem with that, since if the residents of Nijmegen are foolhardy enough to allow someone who attracts earthquakes into their midst, they deserve whatever they get. JF
From: John Larkin on 17 Apr 2010 09:58 On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 00:44:19 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman <bill.sloman(a)ieee.org> wrote: >On Apr 16, 6:38�pm, John Larkin ><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 02:47:34 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman >> >> >> >> <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: >> >On Apr 14, 2:01�am, John Larkin >> ><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> >> On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 15:00:49 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman >> >> >> <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: >> >> >On Apr 13, 9:58�pm, John Larkin >> >> ><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> >> >> On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 11:49:50 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman >> >> >> >> <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: >> >> >> >On Apr 13, 6:39 pm, dagmargoodb...(a)yahoo.com wrote: >> >> >> >> On Apr 13, 11:14 am,Bill Sloman<bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> > On Apr 13, 6:00 pm, dagmargoodb...(a)yahoo.com wrote: >> >> >> >> > > On Apr 13, 2:31 am, Martin Brown <|||newspam...(a)nezumi.demon.co.uk> >> >> >> >> > > wrote: >> >> >> >> > > > It is EE Times that has bastardised the original article. >> >> >> >> >> > > >http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2010/belcher-water-0412.html >> >> >> >> >> > > Hey, just what we needed--a virus to get loose and bust all Earth's >> >> >> >> > > water to oxygen and hydrogen. >> >> >> >> >> > Do read the article. The virus just provides the scaffold for the >> >> >> >> > active nanoscale components, and MIT was merely boasting about having >> >> >> >> > developed the bit that would split off oxygen; the part that would >> >> >> >> > split off hydrogen is still under development. >> >> >> >> >> Humor. It's a higher function. >> >> >> >> >Looks more like inept plagarism to me - science-fiction writers have >> >> >> >been putting together duff end-of-the-world nanotechnology stories for >> >> >> >at least a decade now, and you've just copied the neglect-of- >> >> >> >conservation-of-energy aspect to try and make a feeble, unoriginal and >> >> >> >irrelevant joke. >> >> >> >> >As humour, it certainly high - dead and decaying - but scarcely >> >> >> >functional. >> >> >> >> Humor is fundamentally associated with design ability. Both require >> >> >> welcoming ambiguity and seeing things from numerous different >> >> >> perspectives. >> >> >> >Then James Arthur must be defectve in design ability, if that was his >> >> >idea of humour. >> >> >> I know that he's not, and I know that you are. >> >> >Since your information about my design ability is defective, I don't >> >see any reason to trust your opinion about his. Both are likely >> >invented to make you feel better. >> >> >> And he has a great singing voice. >> >> >According to Edmund Crispin, the resonant space inside the head >> >requried for a great singing voice uses up skull volume that could >> >otherwise have been occupied by brains, and James Arthur's mindless >> >endorsement of right-wing idiocies does imply that his skull is >> >largely empy. >> >> >> And he's a pretty good cook. >> >> >Who isn't? >> >> >> Do you sing or cook? We know you don't design. >> >> >I don't sing - not enough resonat spaces inside the skull - though I >> >do play the piano (without much experise). I do cook. And I do design >> >electronic circuits from time to time, despite your inability to >> >process information to the contrary. >> >> >> >> You wouldn't understand. >> >> >> >John Larkin once again reinvents reality to suit his perverse point of >> >> >view. He doesn't recognise a real joke when he sees one in the >> >> >mirror ... >> >> >> Get a job, bozo. Design some electronics. >> >> >I've been trying to get another job for the past six years. It hasn't >> >worked, but not for want of effort. You've needed to learn a bit more >> >about the world outside electronics for a whole lot longer, and >> >there's absolutely no evidence that you've realised this yet, let >> >alone done something about it - the books you do claim to read are all >> >neatly packaged misinformation designed to make Republicans feel happy >> >about their favourite delusions - anytime now you will be quoting from >> >Sarah Palin's text-book on international politics (which someone is >> >probably ghosting for her even now). >> >> Wow, I never knew that Jane Austen and Anthony Trollope and P G >> Wodehouse and William Shekespeare were Republicans. That's actually >> comforting, and makes sense. They all understood how the world works. > >I read them when I was lot younger than I am now. That you have only >just got around to reading the classics doesn't really surprise me - >you show all the other signs of a single-track education (excessively >concentrated on electronics). I read Dickens (and Thomas Love Peacock) >when I was running the Melbourne University computer (they only had >one back then) at four in the morning - bitter experience demonstrated >that I couldn't debug my programs at that time of night, so I read >while my program ran, and when home when it has finished (or crashed, >as it sometimes did). I have not "just got around" to reading great (and even silly) literature. I transitioned from si-fi to more serious stuff in my 20s. I like to reread the good stuff, often many times, because really great writing is like really great food, worth repeating at decent intervals. You keep making up stuff you'd like to be true, but isn't. That sort of disconnect is very bad for electronic design. There's something slow, even ponderous, about Dickens that puts me off. He's not worth rereading often. I think his stuff was a social revelation in his time but isn't universal enough to wear well. He dealt with circumstances, the outer life, more than motivations, the inner life. John
From: krw on 17 Apr 2010 11:50 On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 05:40:49 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > >"krw(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz" wrote: >> >> Fun? You must like dentists, too. ;-) > > > Not me. I prefer an oral surgeon who knows what they are doing. >Twice, I've had dentists who couldn't remove a damaged tooth and had to >wait days to see an oral surgeon. :( You're lucky. My boss had a couple of dentists, here, try to save a tooth, only to have to go to a surgeon to have it removed (and an implant inserted). Each one charged like they saved the tooth.
From: John Larkin on 17 Apr 2010 15:36
On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 09:01:01 -0500, John Fields <jfields(a)austininstruments.com> wrote: >On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 00:05:43 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman ><bill.sloman(a)ieee.org> wrote: > > >>You can make any kind of claim you like about the quality of your >>sense of humour, but - sadly for your claim to competence - you've >>been posting tedious predantry here for years, and the only comedy >>involved has been your delusion that you know what you are talking >>about. > >--- >What on Earth is "predantry", something that happens before a dance >party??? I think it's prep for dental surgery. John |