"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 21 Jan 2018 19:44:53 -0600, Robert Nichols
wrote:

On 01/18/2018 02:53 PM, Leon Fisk wrote:
On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 14:56:05 -0500
Ed Huntress wrote:

huge snip
It's disheartening to become obsolete. d8-)

Yeah, I use to fix stuff, good thing I retired when I did. Still
do for
friends when I feel ambitious, which isn't often nowadays. Now
people
replace stuff, even the "repair" guy...

I recently repaired a printer for a neighbor -- fixed a mechanical
problem with the paper feed deep inside the printer. Neighbor said I
should go into business repairing printers. I pointed out that for
my time at minimum wage I would have to charge twice what a new
printer would cost.

That's something that a lot of us overlook. And that's why we aren't
rich. d8-)

--
Ed Huntress

I factor in the knowledge gained from fixing something I didn't
previously understand, if relevant to the stuff I own or want to buy.

For example the repair instructions for the HP6110 3-in-1 printer I
was given say to swap it for a less troublesome newer model, but I
found that Mass Air Flow Sensor cleaner works fine to restore the
clouded front surface mirror.

-jsw

On Mon, 22 Jan 2018 07:28:26 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
news
On Sat, 20 Jan 2018 08:33:05 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 16:53:24 -0400, Leon Fisk
wrote:

On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 14:56:05 -0500
Ed Huntress wrote:

huge snip
It's disheartening to become obsolete. d8-)

Yeah, I use to fix stuff, good thing I retired when I did. Still
do
for
friends when I feel ambitious, which isn't often nowadays. Now
people
replace stuff, even the "repair" guy...

Yeah, the new "techs" are board replacers because the computer
diagnostics told them to do so.

In 1970 the Army trained me to repair computer communications
'peripherals' to the component level after memorizing the machines'
operations, but the material was so difficult that only students
with
science degrees completed it. Four of us survived the forty week
course, whittled down from over 80 entrants. We were available only
because the grad school draft deferment had been dropped.

Wow, large drop rate. I learned the basics at Coleman College, but
only stayed working in the field for 3 years. That means I don't
have
a firm background in it, unfortunately, and can't look at a circuit
on
the PCB and tell you what it does and how. :-( SKS bought the
company
I worked for and moved it to Sandy Eggo, changing my 11 minute
commute
to over 2 hours per day. I took the separation package.


The Army was soon forced to revert to a test procedure for board
swappers. I think the problem was that people who could do it were
qualified for better jobs. I certainly preferred designing and
building new equipment over repairing older stuff.

Good for you, and I can certainly understand your preference.
Who repaired the boards, or did they? That would be good stock to
help turn the board swappers into real techs.

AFAIK we were trained to the Depot (highest) level although we didn't
have comparable test or soldering equipment, if any, in the "field",
more often a forest. In fact during Vietnam Europe was starved of
everything, we couldn't even get wiper blades etc for Jeeps and kept
about half our allotment of them running with personal purchases from
J.C.Whitney, which resulted in dangerously overpowered engines and
numerous roll-overs on winding back roads better suited to the
Ultimate Driving Machine. Most soldiers didn't go off base and thus
had money to burn.

Testing has evolved in the direction of not requiring expert
operators, it leverages the knowledge that designed / debugged the
prototype.
http://www.4pcb.com/pcb-electrical-testing.html

The Golden Board test is a good example. It and the Device Under Test
are driven identically in parallel and the test station or operator
looks for differences. The test station designer (me) needs to provide
a black-box imitation of the rest of the system.

State-of-the-art stuff. Is there a rule similar to Moore's Law for
tech? Everything has made fantastic jumps since I was playing around
with it in the late '80s, that's for sure.

-


A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion,
butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet,
balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying,
take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations,
analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a
tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is
for insects.

-Robert A. Heinlein

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 22 Jan 2018 07:28:26 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
news
On Sat, 20 Jan 2018 08:33:05 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Larry Jaques" wrote in
message
m...
On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 16:53:24 -0400, Leon Fisk
wrote:

On Thu, 18 Jan 2018 14:56:05 -0500
Ed Huntress wrote:

huge snip
It's disheartening to become obsolete. d8-)

Yeah, I use to fix stuff, good thing I retired when I did. Still
do
for
friends when I feel ambitious, which isn't often nowadays. Now
people
replace stuff, even the "repair" guy...

Yeah, the new "techs" are board replacers because the computer
diagnostics told them to do so.

In 1970 the Army trained me to repair computer communications
'peripherals' to the component level after memorizing the
machines'
operations, but the material was so difficult that only students
with
science degrees completed it. Four of us survived the forty week
course, whittled down from over 80 entrants. We were available
only
because the grad school draft deferment had been dropped.

Wow, large drop rate. I learned the basics at Coleman College,
but
only stayed working in the field for 3 years. That means I don't
have
a firm background in it, unfortunately, and can't look at a
circuit
on
the PCB and tell you what it does and how. :-( SKS bought the
company
I worked for and moved it to Sandy Eggo, changing my 11 minute
commute
to over 2 hours per day. I took the separation package.


The Army was soon forced to revert to a test procedure for board
swappers. I think the problem was that people who could do it were
qualified for better jobs. I certainly preferred designing and
building new equipment over repairing older stuff.

Good for you, and I can certainly understand your preference.
Who repaired the boards, or did they? That would be good stock to
help turn the board swappers into real techs.

AFAIK we were trained to the Depot (highest) level although we
didn't
have comparable test or soldering equipment, if any, in the "field",
more often a forest. In fact during Vietnam Europe was starved of
everything, we couldn't even get wiper blades etc for Jeeps and kept
about half our allotment of them running with personal purchases
from
J.C.Whitney, which resulted in dangerously overpowered engines and
numerous roll-overs on winding back roads better suited to the
Ultimate Driving Machine. Most soldiers didn't go off base and thus
had money to burn.

Testing has evolved in the direction of not requiring expert
operators, it leverages the knowledge that designed / debugged the
prototype.
http://www.4pcb.com/pcb-electrical-testing.html

The Golden Board test is a good example. It and the Device Under
Test
are driven identically in parallel and the test station or operator
looks for differences. The test station designer (me) needs to
provide
a black-box imitation of the rest of the system.

State-of-the-art stuff. Is there a rule similar to Moore's Law for
tech? Everything has made fantastic jumps since I was playing
around
with it in the late '80s, that's for sure.


Once tech reaches Good Enough the improvements slow way down. Maximum
CPU clock speed leveled off around 4 GHz quite a while ago.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compar...tel_processors

I doubt most people would recognize a Boeing 707 airliner or an F-4
Phantom fighter built in 1958 as being a quaint half-century-old
antique, and today's models aren't even faster.
-jsw

In rec.crafts.metalworking, Jim Wilkins wrote:
"Larry Jaques" wrote:
State-of-the-art stuff. Is there a rule similar to Moore's Law for
tech? Everything has made fantastic jumps since I was playing
around with it in the late '80s, that's for sure.
Once tech reaches Good Enough the improvements slow way down. Maximum
CPU clock speed leveled off around 4 GHz quite a while ago.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compar...tel_processors

I doubt most people would recognize a Boeing 707 airliner or an F-4
Phantom fighter built in 1958 as being a quaint half-century-old
antique, and today's models aren't even faster.

Here's a great talk about Moore's Law that also uses a long detailed
aircraft history analogy to talk about that "Good Enough" barrier:

http://idlewords.com/talks/web_desig..._100_years.htm

A quote from the middle:

These are the victories of good enough. This stuff is fast enough.

Intel could probably build a 20 GHz processor, just like Boeing can
make a Mach 3 airliner. But they won't. There's a corrollary to
Moore's law, that every time you double the number of transistors,
your production costs go up. Every two years, Intel has to build a
completely new factory and production line for this stuff. And the
industry is turning away from super high performance, because most
people don't need it.

Certainly the first half of if it is going to be relevant to people not
in the original audience of web designers. The author has a smooth
insightful way to mock things.

Elijah
------
one of the newest talks compares ham radio to the internet

"Eli the Bearded" wrote in message
...
In rec.crafts.metalworking, Jim Wilkins
wrote:
"Larry Jaques" wrote:
State-of-the-art stuff. Is there a rule similar to Moore's Law
for
tech? Everything has made fantastic jumps since I was playing
around with it in the late '80s, that's for sure.
Once tech reaches Good Enough the improvements slow way down.
Maximum
CPU clock speed leveled off around 4 GHz quite a while ago.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compar...tel_processors

I doubt most people would recognize a Boeing 707 airliner or an F-4
Phantom fighter built in 1958 as being a quaint half-century-old
antique, and today's models aren't even faster.

Here's a great talk about Moore's Law that also uses a long detailed
aircraft history analogy to talk about that "Good Enough" barrier:

http://idlewords.com/talks/web_desig..._100_years.htm

A quote from the middle:

These are the victories of good enough. This stuff is fast
enough.

Intel could probably build a 20 GHz processor, just like Boeing
can
make a Mach 3 airliner. But they won't. There's a corrollary to
Moore's law, that every time you double the number of
transistors,
your production costs go up. Every two years, Intel has to build
a
completely new factory and production line for this stuff. And
the
industry is turning away from super high performance, because
most
people don't need it.

Certainly the first half of if it is going to be relevant to people
not
in the original audience of web designers. The author has a smooth
insightful way to mock things.

Elijah
------
one of the newest talks compares ham radio to the internet

Those were certainly the long and the short of it.

On Mon, 22 Jan 2018 19:05:17 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Eli the Bearded" wrote in message
...
In rec.crafts.metalworking, Jim Wilkins
wrote:
"Larry Jaques" wrote:
State-of-the-art stuff. Is there a rule similar to Moore's Law
for
tech? Everything has made fantastic jumps since I was playing
around with it in the late '80s, that's for sure.
Once tech reaches Good Enough the improvements slow way down.
Maximum
CPU clock speed leveled off around 4 GHz quite a while ago.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compar...tel_processors

I doubt most people would recognize a Boeing 707 airliner or an F-4
Phantom fighter built in 1958 as being a quaint half-century-old
antique, and today's models aren't even faster.

Here's a great talk about Moore's Law that also uses a long detailed
aircraft history analogy to talk about that "Good Enough" barrier:

http://idlewords.com/talks/web_desig..._100_years.htm

Love the 2045 blurb:
--snip--
And if you think that the purpose of the Internet is to BECOME AS
GODS, IMMORTAL CREATURES OF PURE ENERGY LIVING IN A CRYSTALLINE
PARADISE OF OUR OWN INVENTION, then your goal is total and complete
revolution. Everything must go.

The future needs to get here as fast as possible, because your
biological clock is ticking!

The first group wants to CONNECT THE WORLD.

The second group wants to EAT THE WORLD.

And the third group wants to END THE WORLD.

These visions are not compatible.
--snip--


A quote from the middle:

These are the victories of good enough. This stuff is fast
enough.

Intel could probably build a 20 GHz processor, just like Boeing

If they're doing it now, they likely have the most advanced AIs in
existence and are predicting human behavior, investing in up and
coming market trends. Wall Street and D.C. would pay a bundle for
one.



one of the newest talks compares ham radio to the internet

Those were certainly the long and the short of it.

Waves?

-


A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion,
butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet,
balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying,
take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations,
analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a
tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is
for insects.

-Robert A. Heinlein

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 22 Jan 2018 19:05:17 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Eli the Bearded" wrote in message
...
In rec.crafts.metalworking, Jim Wilkins
wrote:
"Larry Jaques" wrote:
State-of-the-art stuff. Is there a rule similar to Moore's Law
for
tech? Everything has made fantastic jumps since I was playing
around with it in the late '80s, that's for sure.
Once tech reaches Good Enough the improvements slow way down.
Maximum
CPU clock speed leveled off around 4 GHz quite a while ago.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compar...tel_processors

I doubt most people would recognize a Boeing 707 airliner or an
F-4
Phantom fighter built in 1958 as being a quaint half-century-old
antique, and today's models aren't even faster.

Here's a great talk about Moore's Law that also uses a long
detailed
aircraft history analogy to talk about that "Good Enough" barrier:

http://idlewords.com/talks/web_desig..._100_years.htm

Love the 2045 blurb:
--snip--
And if you think that the purpose of the Internet is to BECOME AS
GODS, IMMORTAL CREATURES OF PURE ENERGY LIVING IN A CRYSTALLINE
PARADISE OF OUR OWN INVENTION, then your goal is total and complete
revolution. Everything must go.

The future needs to get here as fast as possible, because your
biological clock is ticking!

The first group wants to CONNECT THE WORLD.

The second group wants to EAT THE WORLD.

And the third group wants to END THE WORLD.

These visions are not compatible.
--snip--


A quote from the middle:

These are the victories of good enough. This stuff is fast
enough.

Intel could probably build a 20 GHz processor, just like Boeing

If they're doing it now, they likely have the most advanced AIs in
existence and are predicting human behavior, investing in up and
coming market trends. Wall Street and D.C. would pay a bundle for
one.

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/4...cessing-speed/

Larry Jaques on Wed, 17 Jan 2018
22:29:38 -0800 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:

Internet archive used to make djvu docs until about a year ago.
They were far superior to pdf. Don't know what happened other than I
found other people complaining about the loss too.

Hmm, I don't recall seeing the djvu format, or maybe just overlooked
them as not a format I recognized. What readers read them?

Speaking of which, I miss the hell out of DejaVu, the wonderful
pre-Google site.

I remember back when Google wasn't a bad search engine, either.

Some docs come from
Googles scanning project and really suck. I always avoid those if at
all possible...

Yeah, I downloaded a book which was supposed to be over 60% pictures
the other day and found that it had NONE in it. Paragraph
descriptions of everything followed by no pics. It's criminal,
Google!

I downloaded a book - massive tome, which had the passages I was
looking for. But the scan which had all manner of gibberish in it.
Bad OCR. Really bad. Plus many pages where column A is preceded by
column B, followed by Column C.
Fortunately, I found a PDF scan (with pictures) so I could start
sorting it out. Like I need another project.

--
pyotr filipivich
"With Age comes Wisdom. Although far too often, Age travels alone."

On Thu, 25 Jan 2018 07:16:27 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 22 Jan 2018 19:05:17 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Eli the Bearded" wrote in message
Intel could probably build a 20 GHz processor, just like Boeing

If they're doing it now, they likely have the most advanced AIs in
existence and are predicting human behavior, investing in up and
coming market trends. Wall Street and D.C. would pay a bundle for
one.

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/4...cessing-speed/

OK, for words, that may be one measurement. The test was for "lexical
decision tasks". What about identification of threats? Smells? Too
bright of a light? Now watch this guy shoot 2 balloons in 0.02 of a
second. Tell me how many synapses fired to make that happen.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hujvVmuLuoM
Jerry Miculek can draw, aim, & fire 8 rounds on multiple targets in
under a second after identifying a beep. How many synapses?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ChSazF41q-s
Cupstacking, anyone?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJu5MZfSvBE
So, obviously, there are differences in mental/physical task speeds.
I lean toward thinking that the brain works in the megaflop speeds,
myself.


As Moscoso said at the end, when he saw the article, he doesn't think
there's an upper limit, even in the lexical realm.

-


A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion,
butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet,
balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying,
take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations,
analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a
tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is
for insects.

-Robert A. Heinlein

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 25 Jan 2018 07:16:27 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 22 Jan 2018 19:05:17 -0500, "Jim Wilkins"
wrote:

"Eli the Bearded" wrote in message
Intel could probably build a 20 GHz processor, just like
Boeing

If they're doing it now, they likely have the most advanced AIs in
existence and are predicting human behavior, investing in up and
coming market trends. Wall Street and D.C. would pay a bundle for
one.

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/4...cessing-speed/

OK, for words, that may be one measurement. The test was for
"lexical
decision tasks". What about identification of threats? Smells?
Too
bright of a light? Now watch this guy shoot 2 balloons in 0.02 of a
second. Tell me how many synapses fired to make that happen.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hujvVmuLuoM
Jerry Miculek can draw, aim, & fire 8 rounds on multiple targets in
under a second after identifying a beep. How many synapses?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ChSazF41q-s
Cupstacking, anyone?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJu5MZfSvBE
So, obviously, there are differences in mental/physical task speeds.
I lean toward thinking that the brain works in the megaflop speeds,
myself.


As Moscoso said at the end, when he saw the article, he doesn't
think
there's an upper limit, even in the lexical realm.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_reading

http://bigthink.com/endless-innovati...t-for-how-long

..-jsw