https://www.flux.ai/p

Does anyone use that? It looks to me like a bunch of script kiddies
who don't know much about electronics.

Where can I buy a 2N2000? Or a green LED that needs one? Or a
polarized 10 pF cap?

--

If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end with doubts,
but if he will be content to begin with doubts he shall end in certainties.
Francis Bacon

On Friday, December 17, 2021 at 11:04:56 PM UTC, John Larkin wrote:
> https://www.flux.ai/p
>
> Does anyone use that? It looks to me like a bunch of script kiddies
> who don't know much about electronics.
>
> Where can I buy a 2N2000? Or a green LED that needs one? Or a
> polarized 10 pF cap?
>
> --
>
> If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end with doubts,
> but if he will be content to begin with doubts he shall end in certainties.
> Francis Bacon

Oy veh. This "cloud" business is getting stormy.
What's next? Collaborative brain surgery?

On 17/12/21 23:04, John Larkin wrote:
> https://www.flux.ai/p
>
> Does anyone use that? It looks to me like a bunch of script kiddies
> who don't know much about electronics.
>
> Where can I buy a 2N2000? Or a green LED that needs one? Or a
> polarized 10 pF cap?

After 28s of their 30s elevator pitch, they deign to spout
What is Flux?
Flux is a browser-based end-to-end electronic design tool
that breaks down barriers.
*Book a Demo*
Er, no. That's not how it works,

And after 30s
Gabe Ochoa Squarespace
"The electronics design software space sorely needs good
tools with good UX that are designed for a "software first"
age. This is so cool!"
Gag me with a spoon (I think that's a current kewl/hip expression)

On Fri, 17 Dec 2021 23:43:41 +0000, Tom Gardner
<spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

>On 17/12/21 23:04, John Larkin wrote:
>> https://www.flux.ai/p
>>
>> Does anyone use that? It looks to me like a bunch of script kiddies
>> who don't know much about electronics.
>>
>> Where can I buy a 2N2000? Or a green LED that needs one? Or a
>> polarized 10 pF cap?
>
>After 28s of their 30s elevator pitch, they deign to spout
> What is Flux?
> Flux is a browser-based end-to-end electronic design tool
> that breaks down barriers.
> *Book a Demo*
>Er, no. That's not how it works,
>
>And after 30s
> Gabe Ochoa Squarespace
> "The electronics design software space sorely needs good
> tools with good UX that are designed for a "software first"
> age. This is so cool!"

Collaborative design of a circuit board is a recipe for six or so etch
iterations. One person needs to be in charge.

>Gag me with a spoon (I think that's a current kewl/hip expression)

Sorry, that's from 1982. Moon Unit Zappa.

--

If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end with doubts,
but if he will be content to begin with doubts he shall end in certainties.
Francis Bacon

John Larkin wrote:
> https://www.flux.ai/p
>
> Does anyone use that? It looks to me like a bunch of script kiddies
> who don't know much about electronics.
>
> Where can I buy a 2N2000? Or a green LED that needs one? Or a
> polarized 10 pF cap?
>
>
>
>
>
Sounds as though they're not even mildly activated.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com

On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 11:42:58 -0500, Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

>John Larkin wrote:
>> https://www.flux.ai/p
>>
>> Does anyone use that? It looks to me like a bunch of script kiddies
>> who don't know much about electronics.
>>
>> Where can I buy a 2N2000? Or a green LED that needs one? Or a
>> polarized 10 pF cap?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>Sounds as though they're not even mildly activated.
>
>Cheers
>
>Phil Hobbs

They did raise $12M to do this.

--

I yam what I yam - Popeye

jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 11:42:58 -0500, Phil Hobbs
> <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
>
>> John Larkin wrote:
>>> https://www.flux.ai/p
>>>
>>> Does anyone use that? It looks to me like a bunch of script kiddies
>>> who don't know much about electronics.
>>>
>>> Where can I buy a 2N2000? Or a green LED that needs one? Or a
>>> polarized 10 pF cap?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Sounds as though they're not even mildly activated.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Phil Hobbs
>
> They did raise $12M to do this.
>
>
>
Well, they need some razzin', then. ;)

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com

On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 12:15:37 -0500, Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

>jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 11:42:58 -0500, Phil Hobbs
>> <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
>>
>>> John Larkin wrote:
>>>> https://www.flux.ai/p
>>>>
>>>> Does anyone use that? It looks to me like a bunch of script kiddies
>>>> who don't know much about electronics.
>>>>
>>>> Where can I buy a 2N2000? Or a green LED that needs one? Or a
>>>> polarized 10 pF cap?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Sounds as though they're not even mildly activated.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> Phil Hobbs
>>
>> They did raise $12M to do this.
>>
>>
>>
>Well, they need some razzin', then. ;)
>
>Cheers
>
>Phil Hobbs

I keep getting emails from the founder guru, and keep telling him that
his demo schematics are obviously stupid.

--

I yam what I yam - Popeye

On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 09:49:03 -0800, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com
wrote:

>On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 12:15:37 -0500, Phil Hobbs
><pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
>
>>jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>>> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 11:42:58 -0500, Phil Hobbs
>>> <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> John Larkin wrote:
>>>>> https://www.flux.ai/p
>>>>>
>>>>> Does anyone use that? It looks to me like a bunch of script kiddies
>>>>> who don't know much about electronics.
>>>>>
>>>>> Where can I buy a 2N2000? Or a green LED that needs one? Or a
>>>>> polarized 10 pF cap?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Sounds as though they're not even mildly activated.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>>
>>>> Phil Hobbs
>>>
>>> They did raise $12M to do this.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Well, they need some razzin', then. ;)
>>
>>Cheers
>>
>>Phil Hobbs
>
>I keep getting emails from the founder guru, and keep telling him that
>his demo schematics are obviously stupid.

1. Few people in tech actually understand electricity.

2. Most people are strongly affected by peer pressure, emotionally
influenced by other opinions and group concensus.

So an electronic design collaboration with high group visibility is a
terrible idea.

There might be ways to fix this.

--

I yam what I yam - Popeye

On Saturday, December 18, 2021 at 6:12:25 PM UTC, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 09:49:03 -0800, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com
> wrote:
>
> >On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 12:15:37 -0500, Phil Hobbs
> ><pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net> wrote:
> >
> >>jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> >>> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 11:42:58 -0500, Phil Hobbs
> >>> <pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> John Larkin wrote:
> >>>>> https://www.flux.ai/p
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Does anyone use that? It looks to me like a bunch of script kiddies
> >>>>> who don't know much about electronics.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Where can I buy a 2N2000? Or a green LED that needs one? Or a
> >>>>> polarized 10 pF cap?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> Sounds as though they're not even mildly activated.
> >>>>
> >>>> Cheers
> >>>>
> >>>> Phil Hobbs
> >>>
> >>> They did raise $12M to do this.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>Well, they need some razzin', then. ;)
> >>
> >>Cheers
> >>
> >>Phil Hobbs
> >
> >I keep getting emails from the founder guru, and keep telling him that
> >his demo schematics are obviously stupid.
> 1. Few people in tech actually understand electricity.
>
> 2. Most people are strongly affected by peer pressure, emotionally
> influenced by other opinions and group concensus.
>
> So an electronic design collaboration with high group visibility is a
> terrible idea.
>
> There might be ways to fix this.
> --
>
> I yam what I yam - Popeye

I assume this is another "Doing Hardware is just like Doing
Software" motives.
And they're motivated by the appeal and relative
success in collaborative digital platform development.
Where, the software components are highly defined
structures and standardized; the programmers ("developers")
use all sorts of support tools to allow for a distributed
collaborative working environment. Is it miraculous? No.
It is progress, in that people can join & leave the team.
So labor cost can be managed. Ah hah!
It can take time to get major things done. Tasks are
broken down & prioritized into 'sprints', etc.

So what do you think - Can Hardware be broken down
into same ways & managed like software?

On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 11:11:20 -0800 (PST), Rich S
<richsulinengineer@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Saturday, December 18, 2021 at 6:12:25 PM UTC, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 09:49:03 -0800, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com
>> wrote:
>>
>> >On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 12:15:37 -0500, Phil Hobbs
>> ><pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >>jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>> >>> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 11:42:58 -0500, Phil Hobbs
>> >>> <pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> John Larkin wrote:
>> >>>>> https://www.flux.ai/p
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Does anyone use that? It looks to me like a bunch of script kiddies
>> >>>>> who don't know much about electronics.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Where can I buy a 2N2000? Or a green LED that needs one? Or a
>> >>>>> polarized 10 pF cap?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>> Sounds as though they're not even mildly activated.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Cheers
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Phil Hobbs
>> >>>
>> >>> They did raise $12M to do this.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>Well, they need some razzin', then. ;)
>> >>
>> >>Cheers
>> >>
>> >>Phil Hobbs
>> >
>> >I keep getting emails from the founder guru, and keep telling him that
>> >his demo schematics are obviously stupid.
>> 1. Few people in tech actually understand electricity.
>>
>> 2. Most people are strongly affected by peer pressure, emotionally
>> influenced by other opinions and group concensus.
>>
>> So an electronic design collaboration with high group visibility is a
>> terrible idea.
>>
>> There might be ways to fix this.
>> --
>>
>> I yam what I yam - Popeye
>
>I assume this is another "Doing Hardware is just like Doing
>Software" motives.
>And they're motivated by the appeal and relative
>success in collaborative digital platform development.
>Where, the software components are highly defined
>structures and standardized; the programmers ("developers")
>use all sorts of support tools to allow for a distributed
>collaborative working environment. Is it miraculous? No.
>It is progress, in that people can join & leave the team.
>So labor cost can be managed. Ah hah!
>It can take time to get major things done. Tasks are
>broken down & prioritized into 'sprints', etc.
>
>So what do you think - Can Hardware be broken down
>into same ways & managed like software?
>
>

I wonder how much actual invention, creating new architectures, is
used in software projects, as opposed to just grunting out a lot of
code. Grunting can reasonably be parallelized.

Certainly a few software structures needed real invention: internet
protocols, file systems, file formats, os kernals.

An electronic design can be broken down into parts. Someone can do the
power supplies, someone the real signal electronics, and other people
the FPGA and uP code and PCB layout. But I think one skilled badass
should be in charge.

--

I yam what I yam - Popeye

Rich S wrote:
> On Saturday, December 18, 2021 at 6:12:25 PM UTC, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 09:49:03 -0800, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 12:15:37 -0500, Phil Hobbs
>>> <pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 11:42:58 -0500, Phil Hobbs
>>>>> <pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> John Larkin wrote:
>>>>>>> https://www.flux.ai/p
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Does anyone use that? It looks to me like a bunch of script kiddies
>>>>>>> who don't know much about electronics.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Where can I buy a 2N2000? Or a green LED that needs one? Or a
>>>>>>> polarized 10 pF cap?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sounds as though they're not even mildly activated.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Phil Hobbs
>>>>>
>>>>> They did raise $12M to do this.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Well, they need some razzin', then. ;)
>>>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>>
>>>> Phil Hobbs
>>>
>>> I keep getting emails from the founder guru, and keep telling him that
>>> his demo schematics are obviously stupid.
>> 1. Few people in tech actually understand electricity.
>>
>> 2. Most people are strongly affected by peer pressure, emotionally
>> influenced by other opinions and group concensus.
>>
>> So an electronic design collaboration with high group visibility is a
>> terrible idea.
>>
>> There might be ways to fix this.
>> --
>>
>> I yam what I yam - Popeye
>
> I assume this is another "Doing Hardware is just like Doing
> Software" motives.
> And they're motivated by the appeal and relative
> success in collaborative digital platform development.
> Where, the software components are highly defined
> structures and standardized; the programmers ("developers")
> use all sorts of support tools to allow for a distributed
> collaborative working environment. Is it miraculous? No.
> It is progress, in that people can join & leave the team.
> So labor cost can be managed. Ah hah!

If labor cost is an actual constraint for a project it's
probably not worth doing. At least in my youth, we'd bill
out to the company at something like 5x to 10x our
individual burdened run rate.

Of course then we'd get sold and said run rate would now
incorporate the cost of financing the acquisition.

In one acq, the host company bought it for $6B and sold
it to private equity for $125M five years later. I once
calculated how long it would take to burn tat many $20
bills one at a time in a burn barrel. It was longer
than five years.

Meanwhile, the "standard" components help turn schedules
from days to weeks, and nobody really knows if anything
works until it's deployed. They try, with CI flows
but somebody has to maintain that. And the developers
spend about 80% of their time on "pilpul" level
fine grained aesthetic choices with little emphasis on
actual correctness.

So there are CVEs. And people exploiting the exploits,
and people doing security theater about the exploits.

Have a good look at the bleeding edge ML offerings -
they're completely dependent on being emergent phenomena.
You can construct a story - derived from white papers -
about how they work but you can never actually know.

> It can take time to get major things done. Tasks are
> broken down & prioritized into 'sprints', etc.
>
> So what do you think - Can Hardware be broken down
> into same ways & managed like software?
>
>
>

Why would it be? Hardware development is largely[1]
a solved problem. Software's completely corrupted by
"social" this and "social" that. Get on the Reddit
tech fora - it's amazing what people get paid to do these
days.

[1] there's always an edge...

--
Les Cargill

On 18/12/21 21:33, Les Cargill wrote:
> Have a good look at the bleeding edge ML offerings -
> they're completely dependent on being emergent phenomena.
> You can construct a story - derived from white papers -
> about how they work but you can never actually know.

Oh, dog yes.

"7 Revealing Ways AIs Fail. Neural networks can be disastrously brittle,
forgetful, and surprisingly bad at math "
https://spectrum.ieee.org/ai-failures

On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 15:33:28 -0600, Les Cargill <lcargil99@gmail.com>
wrote:

>Rich S wrote:
>> On Saturday, December 18, 2021 at 6:12:25 PM UTC, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>>> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 09:49:03 -0800, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 12:15:37 -0500, Phil Hobbs
>>>> <pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 11:42:58 -0500, Phil Hobbs
>>>>>> <pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> John Larkin wrote:
>>>>>>>> https://www.flux.ai/p
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Does anyone use that? It looks to me like a bunch of script kiddies
>>>>>>>> who don't know much about electronics.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Where can I buy a 2N2000? Or a green LED that needs one? Or a
>>>>>>>> polarized 10 pF cap?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sounds as though they're not even mildly activated.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Phil Hobbs
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They did raise $12M to do this.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Well, they need some razzin', then. ;)
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>
>>>>> Phil Hobbs
>>>>
>>>> I keep getting emails from the founder guru, and keep telling him that
>>>> his demo schematics are obviously stupid.
>>> 1. Few people in tech actually understand electricity.
>>>
>>> 2. Most people are strongly affected by peer pressure, emotionally
>>> influenced by other opinions and group concensus.
>>>
>>> So an electronic design collaboration with high group visibility is a
>>> terrible idea.
>>>
>>> There might be ways to fix this.
>>> --
>>>
>>> I yam what I yam - Popeye
>>
>> I assume this is another "Doing Hardware is just like Doing
>> Software" motives.
>> And they're motivated by the appeal and relative
>> success in collaborative digital platform development.
>> Where, the software components are highly defined
>> structures and standardized; the programmers ("developers")
>> use all sorts of support tools to allow for a distributed
>> collaborative working environment. Is it miraculous? No.
>> It is progress, in that people can join & leave the team.
>> So labor cost can be managed. Ah hah!
>
>If labor cost is an actual constraint for a project it's
>probably not worth doing. At least in my youth, we'd bill
>out to the company at something like 5x to 10x our
>individual burdened run rate.

There's a limit on how much you can mark up the price when selling
engineering. There is almost no limit on how many times you can
manufacture and sell a design.

--

I yam what I yam - Popeye

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> [...]
> There might be ways to fix this.

"delete" comes to mind :)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=J8jM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
|_|O|_| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert
|_|_|O| PGP: DDAB 23FB 19FA 7D85 1CC1 E067 6D65 70E5 4CE7 2860
|O|O|O| Former PGP: 05CA 9A50 3F2E 1335 4DC5 4AEE 8E11 DDF3 1279 A281

On Tue, 28 Dec 2021 14:07:18 -0000 (UTC), Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net>
wrote:

>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA512
>
>jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>> [...]
>> There might be ways to fix this.
>
>"delete" comes to mind :)
>
>

1. Invent goofy idea

2. Raise $10M from silly people who have too much money

3. Enjoy life until the money runs out

4. Goto 1

--

I yam what I yam - Popeye

On Saturday, 18 December 2021 at 19:48:13 UTC, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 11:11:20 -0800 (PST), Rich S
> <richsuli...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Saturday, December 18, 2021 at 6:12:25 PM UTC, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> >> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 09:49:03 -0800, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 12:15:37 -0500, Phil Hobbs
> >> ><pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> >> >>> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 11:42:58 -0500, Phil Hobbs
> >> >>> <pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>>> John Larkin wrote:
> >> >>>>> https://www.flux.ai/p
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> Does anyone use that? It looks to me like a bunch of script kiddies
> >> >>>>> who don't know much about electronics.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> Where can I buy a 2N2000? Or a green LED that needs one? Or a
> >> >>>>> polarized 10 pF cap?
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>> Sounds as though they're not even mildly activated.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Cheers
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> Phil Hobbs
> >> >>>
> >> >>> They did raise $12M to do this.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>Well, they need some razzin', then. ;)
> >> >>
> >> >>Cheers
> >> >>
> >> >>Phil Hobbs
> >> >
> >> >I keep getting emails from the founder guru, and keep telling him that
> >> >his demo schematics are obviously stupid.
> >> 1. Few people in tech actually understand electricity.
> >>
> >> 2. Most people are strongly affected by peer pressure, emotionally
> >> influenced by other opinions and group concensus.
> >>
> >> So an electronic design collaboration with high group visibility is a
> >> terrible idea.
> >>
> >> There might be ways to fix this.
> >> --
> >>
> >> I yam what I yam - Popeye
> >
> >I assume this is another "Doing Hardware is just like Doing
> >Software" motives.
> >And they're motivated by the appeal and relative
> >success in collaborative digital platform development.
> >Where, the software components are highly defined
> >structures and standardized; the programmers ("developers")
> >use all sorts of support tools to allow for a distributed
> >collaborative working environment. Is it miraculous? No.
> >It is progress, in that people can join & leave the team.
> >So labor cost can be managed. Ah hah!
> >It can take time to get major things done. Tasks are
> >broken down & prioritized into 'sprints', etc.
> >
> >So what do you think - Can Hardware be broken down
> >into same ways & managed like software?
> >
> >
> I wonder how much actual invention, creating new architectures, is
> used in software projects, as opposed to just grunting out a lot of
> code. Grunting can reasonably be parallelized.
>
> Certainly a few software structures needed real invention: internet
> protocols, file systems, file formats, os kernals.
>
> An electronic design can be broken down into parts. Someone can do the
> power supplies, someone the real signal electronics, and other people
> the FPGA and uP code and PCB layout. But I think one skilled badass
> should be in charge.

Who decides what psu voltage to use?
'No, I refuse to run the valves at 5v B+.'
'But this TRF reflex neutralised project shows it can be done. It'll save us another supply. And look, it even boasts near zero sensitivity!'

On Wed, 29 Dec 2021 13:58:10 -0800 (PST), Tabby <tabbypurr@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Saturday, 18 December 2021 at 19:48:13 UTC, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 11:11:20 -0800 (PST), Rich S
>> <richsuli...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >On Saturday, December 18, 2021 at 6:12:25 PM UTC, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>> >> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 09:49:03 -0800, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 12:15:37 -0500, Phil Hobbs
>> >> ><pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >>jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>> >> >>> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 11:42:58 -0500, Phil Hobbs
>> >> >>> <pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net> wrote:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>> John Larkin wrote:
>> >> >>>>> https://www.flux.ai/p
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> Does anyone use that? It looks to me like a bunch of script kiddies
>> >> >>>>> who don't know much about electronics.
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>> Where can I buy a 2N2000? Or a green LED that needs one? Or a
>> >> >>>>> polarized 10 pF cap?
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>> Sounds as though they're not even mildly activated.
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Cheers
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>> Phil Hobbs
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> They did raise $12M to do this.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>Well, they need some razzin', then. ;)
>> >> >>
>> >> >>Cheers
>> >> >>
>> >> >>Phil Hobbs
>> >> >
>> >> >I keep getting emails from the founder guru, and keep telling him that
>> >> >his demo schematics are obviously stupid.
>> >> 1. Few people in tech actually understand electricity.
>> >>
>> >> 2. Most people are strongly affected by peer pressure, emotionally
>> >> influenced by other opinions and group concensus.
>> >>
>> >> So an electronic design collaboration with high group visibility is a
>> >> terrible idea.
>> >>
>> >> There might be ways to fix this.
>> >> --
>> >>
>> >> I yam what I yam - Popeye
>> >
>> >I assume this is another "Doing Hardware is just like Doing
>> >Software" motives.
>> >And they're motivated by the appeal and relative
>> >success in collaborative digital platform development.
>> >Where, the software components are highly defined
>> >structures and standardized; the programmers ("developers")
>> >use all sorts of support tools to allow for a distributed
>> >collaborative working environment. Is it miraculous? No.
>> >It is progress, in that people can join & leave the team.
>> >So labor cost can be managed. Ah hah!
>> >It can take time to get major things done. Tasks are
>> >broken down & prioritized into 'sprints', etc.
>> >
>> >So what do you think - Can Hardware be broken down
>> >into same ways & managed like software?
>> >
>> >
>> I wonder how much actual invention, creating new architectures, is
>> used in software projects, as opposed to just grunting out a lot of
>> code. Grunting can reasonably be parallelized.
>>
>> Certainly a few software structures needed real invention: internet
>> protocols, file systems, file formats, os kernals.
>>
>> An electronic design can be broken down into parts. Someone can do the
>> power supplies, someone the real signal electronics, and other people
>> the FPGA and uP code and PCB layout. But I think one skilled badass
>> should be in charge.
>
>Who decides what psu voltage to use?
>'No, I refuse to run the valves at 5v B+.'
>'But this TRF reflex neutralised project shows it can be done. It'll save us another supply. And look, it even boasts near zero sensitivity!'

I did suggest that the person in charge should be skilled.

--

If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end with doubts,
but if he will be content to begin with doubts he shall end in certainties.
Francis Bacon

On Wednesday, 29 December 2021 at 22:30:43 UTC, John Larkin wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Dec 2021 13:58:10 -0800 (PST), Tabby <tabb...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >On Saturday, 18 December 2021 at 19:48:13 UTC, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> >> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 11:11:20 -0800 (PST), Rich S
> >> <richsuli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Saturday, December 18, 2021 at 6:12:25 PM UTC, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> >> >> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 09:49:03 -0800, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 12:15:37 -0500, Phil Hobbs
> >> >> ><pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >>jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> >> >> >>> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 11:42:58 -0500, Phil Hobbs
> >> >> >>> <pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net> wrote:
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>>> John Larkin wrote:
> >> >> >>>>> https://www.flux.ai/p
> >> >> >>>>>
> >> >> >>>>> Does anyone use that? It looks to me like a bunch of script kiddies
> >> >> >>>>> who don't know much about electronics.
> >> >> >>>>>
> >> >> >>>>> Where can I buy a 2N2000? Or a green LED that needs one? Or a
> >> >> >>>>> polarized 10 pF cap?
> >> >> >>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>
> >> >> >>>>>
> >> >> >>>> Sounds as though they're not even mildly activated.
> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >>>> Cheers
> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >>>> Phil Hobbs
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> They did raise $12M to do this.
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>Well, they need some razzin', then. ;)
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>Cheers
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>Phil Hobbs
> >> >> >
> >> >> >I keep getting emails from the founder guru, and keep telling him that
> >> >> >his demo schematics are obviously stupid.
> >> >> 1. Few people in tech actually understand electricity.
> >> >>
> >> >> 2. Most people are strongly affected by peer pressure, emotionally
> >> >> influenced by other opinions and group concensus.
> >> >>
> >> >> So an electronic design collaboration with high group visibility is a
> >> >> terrible idea.
> >> >>
> >> >> There might be ways to fix this.
> >> >> --
> >> >>
> >> >> I yam what I yam - Popeye
> >> >
> >> >I assume this is another "Doing Hardware is just like Doing
> >> >Software" motives.
> >> >And they're motivated by the appeal and relative
> >> >success in collaborative digital platform development.
> >> >Where, the software components are highly defined
> >> >structures and standardized; the programmers ("developers")
> >> >use all sorts of support tools to allow for a distributed
> >> >collaborative working environment. Is it miraculous? No.
> >> >It is progress, in that people can join & leave the team.
> >> >So labor cost can be managed. Ah hah!
> >> >It can take time to get major things done. Tasks are
> >> >broken down & prioritized into 'sprints', etc.
> >> >
> >> >So what do you think - Can Hardware be broken down
> >> >into same ways & managed like software?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> I wonder how much actual invention, creating new architectures, is
> >> used in software projects, as opposed to just grunting out a lot of
> >> code. Grunting can reasonably be parallelized.
> >>
> >> Certainly a few software structures needed real invention: internet
> >> protocols, file systems, file formats, os kernals.
> >>
> >> An electronic design can be broken down into parts. Someone can do the
> >> power supplies, someone the real signal electronics, and other people
> >> the FPGA and uP code and PCB layout. But I think one skilled badass
> >> should be in charge.
> >
> >Who decides what psu voltage to use?
> >'No, I refuse to run the valves at 5v B+.'
> >'But this TRF reflex neutralised project shows it can be done. It'll save us another supply. And look, it even boasts near zero sensitivity!'
> I did suggest that the person in charge should be skilled.

Of course. There are still plenty of opinion differences.

On Thu, 30 Dec 2021 17:16:55 -0800 (PST), Tabby <tabbypurr@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Wednesday, 29 December 2021 at 22:30:43 UTC, John Larkin wrote:
>> On Wed, 29 Dec 2021 13:58:10 -0800 (PST), Tabby <tabb...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >On Saturday, 18 December 2021 at 19:48:13 UTC, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>> >> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 11:11:20 -0800 (PST), Rich S
>> >> <richsuli...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >On Saturday, December 18, 2021 at 6:12:25 PM UTC, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>> >> >> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 09:49:03 -0800, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com
>> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 12:15:37 -0500, Phil Hobbs
>> >> >> ><pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net> wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >>jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>> >> >> >>> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 11:42:58 -0500, Phil Hobbs
>> >> >> >>> <pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net> wrote:
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>>> John Larkin wrote:
>> >> >> >>>>> https://www.flux.ai/p
>> >> >> >>>>>
>> >> >> >>>>> Does anyone use that? It looks to me like a bunch of script kiddies
>> >> >> >>>>> who don't know much about electronics.
>> >> >> >>>>>
>> >> >> >>>>> Where can I buy a 2N2000? Or a green LED that needs one? Or a
>> >> >> >>>>> polarized 10 pF cap?
>> >> >> >>>>>
>> >> >> >>>>>
>> >> >> >>>>>
>> >> >> >>>>>
>> >> >> >>>>>
>> >> >> >>>> Sounds as though they're not even mildly activated.
>> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >>>> Cheers
>> >> >> >>>>
>> >> >> >>>> Phil Hobbs
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>> They did raise $12M to do this.
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>Well, they need some razzin', then. ;)
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>Cheers
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>Phil Hobbs
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >I keep getting emails from the founder guru, and keep telling him that
>> >> >> >his demo schematics are obviously stupid.
>> >> >> 1. Few people in tech actually understand electricity.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> 2. Most people are strongly affected by peer pressure, emotionally
>> >> >> influenced by other opinions and group concensus.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> So an electronic design collaboration with high group visibility is a
>> >> >> terrible idea.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> There might be ways to fix this.
>> >> >> --
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I yam what I yam - Popeye
>> >> >
>> >> >I assume this is another "Doing Hardware is just like Doing
>> >> >Software" motives.
>> >> >And they're motivated by the appeal and relative
>> >> >success in collaborative digital platform development.
>> >> >Where, the software components are highly defined
>> >> >structures and standardized; the programmers ("developers")
>> >> >use all sorts of support tools to allow for a distributed
>> >> >collaborative working environment. Is it miraculous? No.
>> >> >It is progress, in that people can join & leave the team.
>> >> >So labor cost can be managed. Ah hah!
>> >> >It can take time to get major things done. Tasks are
>> >> >broken down & prioritized into 'sprints', etc.
>> >> >
>> >> >So what do you think - Can Hardware be broken down
>> >> >into same ways & managed like software?
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> I wonder how much actual invention, creating new architectures, is
>> >> used in software projects, as opposed to just grunting out a lot of
>> >> code. Grunting can reasonably be parallelized.
>> >>
>> >> Certainly a few software structures needed real invention: internet
>> >> protocols, file systems, file formats, os kernals.
>> >>
>> >> An electronic design can be broken down into parts. Someone can do the
>> >> power supplies, someone the real signal electronics, and other people
>> >> the FPGA and uP code and PCB layout. But I think one skilled badass
>> >> should be in charge.
>> >
>> >Who decides what psu voltage to use?
>> >'No, I refuse to run the valves at 5v B+.'
>> >'But this TRF reflex neutralised project shows it can be done. It'll save us another supply. And look, it even boasts near zero sensitivity!'
>> I did suggest that the person in charge should be skilled.
>
>Of course. There are still plenty of opinion differences.

"TRF reflex neutralised project" is old-timeish radio, which was
interesting. What's different now is that voltage gain used to be hard
to come by, and now it's basically free.

--

I yam what I yam - Popeye

On Friday, 31 December 2021 at 02:59:27 UTC, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Dec 2021 17:16:55 -0800 (PST), Tabby <tabb...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >On Wednesday, 29 December 2021 at 22:30:43 UTC, John Larkin wrote:
> >> On Wed, 29 Dec 2021 13:58:10 -0800 (PST), Tabby <tabb...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >On Saturday, 18 December 2021 at 19:48:13 UTC, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> >> >> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 11:11:20 -0800 (PST), Rich S
> >> >> <richsuli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >On Saturday, December 18, 2021 at 6:12:25 PM UTC, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> >> >> >> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 09:49:03 -0800, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com
> >> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 12:15:37 -0500, Phil Hobbs
> >> >> >> ><pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net> wrote:
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >>jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> >> >> >> >>> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 11:42:58 -0500, Phil Hobbs
> >> >> >> >>> <pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net> wrote:
> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >> >>>> John Larkin wrote:
> >> >> >> >>>>> https://www.flux.ai/p
> >> >> >> >>>>>
> >> >> >> >>>>> Does anyone use that? It looks to me like a bunch of script kiddies
> >> >> >> >>>>> who don't know much about electronics.
> >> >> >> >>>>>
> >> >> >> >>>>> Where can I buy a 2N2000? Or a green LED that needs one? Or a
> >> >> >> >>>>> polarized 10 pF cap?
> >> >> >> >>>>>
> >> >> >> >>>>>
> >> >> >> >>>>>
> >> >> >> >>>>>
> >> >> >> >>>>>
> >> >> >> >>>> Sounds as though they're not even mildly activated.
> >> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >> >>>> Cheers
> >> >> >> >>>>
> >> >> >> >>>> Phil Hobbs
> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >> >>> They did raise $12M to do this.
> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >> >>Well, they need some razzin', then. ;)
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>Cheers
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >>Phil Hobbs
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >I keep getting emails from the founder guru, and keep telling him that
> >> >> >> >his demo schematics are obviously stupid.
> >> >> >> 1. Few people in tech actually understand electricity.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> 2. Most people are strongly affected by peer pressure, emotionally
> >> >> >> influenced by other opinions and group concensus.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> So an electronic design collaboration with high group visibility is a
> >> >> >> terrible idea.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> There might be ways to fix this.
> >> >> >> --
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> I yam what I yam - Popeye
> >> >> >
> >> >> >I assume this is another "Doing Hardware is just like Doing
> >> >> >Software" motives.
> >> >> >And they're motivated by the appeal and relative
> >> >> >success in collaborative digital platform development.
> >> >> >Where, the software components are highly defined
> >> >> >structures and standardized; the programmers ("developers")
> >> >> >use all sorts of support tools to allow for a distributed
> >> >> >collaborative working environment. Is it miraculous? No.
> >> >> >It is progress, in that people can join & leave the team.
> >> >> >So labor cost can be managed. Ah hah!
> >> >> >It can take time to get major things done. Tasks are
> >> >> >broken down & prioritized into 'sprints', etc.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >So what do you think - Can Hardware be broken down
> >> >> >into same ways & managed like software?
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> I wonder how much actual invention, creating new architectures, is
> >> >> used in software projects, as opposed to just grunting out a lot of
> >> >> code. Grunting can reasonably be parallelized.
> >> >>
> >> >> Certainly a few software structures needed real invention: internet
> >> >> protocols, file systems, file formats, os kernals.
> >> >>
> >> >> An electronic design can be broken down into parts. Someone can do the
> >> >> power supplies, someone the real signal electronics, and other people
> >> >> the FPGA and uP code and PCB layout. But I think one skilled badass
> >> >> should be in charge.
> >> >
> >> >Who decides what psu voltage to use?
> >> >'No, I refuse to run the valves at 5v B+.'
> >> >'But this TRF reflex neutralised project shows it can be done. It'll save us another supply. And look, it even boasts near zero sensitivity!'
> >> I did suggest that the person in charge should be skilled.
> >
> >Of course. There are still plenty of opinion differences.
> "TRF reflex neutralised project" is old-timeish radio, which was
> interesting. What's different now is that voltage gain used to be hard
> to come by, and now it's basically free.

Now we get double conversion, SSB, reliable ICs, microprocessors & informative displays, stable operation, digital readout, SDR etc etc. I still prefer the ancient stuff though. Ingenious, charming & cranky are ok with me.

Tabby wrote:
> On Friday, 31 December 2021 at 02:59:27 UTC,
> jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>> On Thu, 30 Dec 2021 17:16:55 -0800 (PST), Tabby
>> <tabb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wednesday, 29 December 2021 at 22:30:43 UTC, John Larkin
>>> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 29 Dec 2021 13:58:10 -0800 (PST), Tabby
>>>> <tabb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Saturday, 18 December 2021 at 19:48:13 UTC,
>>>>> jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>>>>>> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 11:11:20 -0800 (PST), Rich S
>>>>>> <richsuli...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Saturday, December 18, 2021 at 6:12:25 PM UTC,
>>>>>>> jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 09:49:03 -0800,
>>>>>>>> jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 12:15:37 -0500, Phil Hobbs
>>>>>>>>> <pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 11:42:58 -0500, Phil Hobbs
>>>>>>>>>>> <pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> John Larkin wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.flux.ai/p
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Does anyone use that? It looks to me like a
>>>>>>>>>>>>> bunch of script kiddies who don't know much
>>>>>>>>>>>>> about electronics.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where can I buy a 2N2000? Or a green LED that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> needs one? Or a polarized 10 pF cap?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Sounds as though they're not even mildly
>>>>>>>>>>>> activated.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Phil Hobbs
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> They did raise $12M to do this.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Well, they need some razzin', then. ;)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Phil Hobbs
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I keep getting emails from the founder guru, and keep
>>>>>>>>> telling him that his demo schematics are obviously
>>>>>>>>> stupid.
>>>>>>>> 1. Few people in tech actually understand electricity.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2. Most people are strongly affected by peer pressure,
>>>>>>>> emotionally influenced by other opinions and group
>>>>>>>> concensus.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So an electronic design collaboration with high group
>>>>>>>> visibility is a terrible idea.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There might be ways to fix this. --
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I yam what I yam - Popeye
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I assume this is another "Doing Hardware is just like
>>>>>>> Doing Software" motives. And they're motivated by the
>>>>>>> appeal and relative success in collaborative digital
>>>>>>> platform development. Where, the software components are
>>>>>>> highly defined structures and standardized; the
>>>>>>> programmers ("developers") use all sorts of support tools
>>>>>>> to allow for a distributed collaborative working
>>>>>>> environment. Is it miraculous? No. It is progress, in
>>>>>>> that people can join & leave the team. So labor cost can
>>>>>>> be managed. Ah hah! It can take time to get major things
>>>>>>> done. Tasks are broken down & prioritized into 'sprints',
>>>>>>> etc.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So what do you think - Can Hardware be broken down into
>>>>>>> same ways & managed like software?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> I wonder how much actual invention, creating new
>>>>>> architectures, is used in software projects, as opposed to
>>>>>> just grunting out a lot of code. Grunting can reasonably be
>>>>>> parallelized.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Certainly a few software structures needed real invention:
>>>>>> internet protocols, file systems, file formats, os
>>>>>> kernals.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> An electronic design can be broken down into parts. Someone
>>>>>> can do the power supplies, someone the real signal
>>>>>> electronics, and other people the FPGA and uP code and PCB
>>>>>> layout. But I think one skilled badass should be in
>>>>>> charge.
>>>>>
>>>>> Who decides what psu voltage to use? 'No, I refuse to run the
>>>>> valves at 5v B+.' 'But this TRF reflex neutralised project
>>>>> shows it can be done. It'll save us another supply. And look,
>>>>> it even boasts near zero sensitivity!'
>>>> I did suggest that the person in charge should be skilled.
>>>
>>> Of course. There are still plenty of opinion differences.
>> "TRF reflex neutralised project" is old-timeish radio, which was
>> interesting. What's different now is that voltage gain used to be
>> hard to come by, and now it's basically free.
>
> Now we get double conversion, SSB, reliable ICs, microprocessors &
> informative displays, stable operation, digital readout, SDR etc etc.
> I still prefer the ancient stuff though. Ingenious, charming & cranky
> are ok with me.

I wouldn't describe TRF as ingenious--it's more the Bigger Hammer
approach, with lots of stability and tracking problems. Superregens and
superhets, now _those_ were ingenious.

(Edwin Howard Armstrong is one of my technical heroes--besides both of
those supers, he also invented FM, and as a boy he even invented the
_oscillator_.)

I like early radio too--some of those components were real works of art,
especially multi-gang variable caps with plates sculpted so as to give
linear tuning with shaft angle for both RF and LO circuits at once.
Besides, I've used a bunch of early radio techniques in optics,
including making crystal radios that worked at 200 THz.

Cheers

Phil Hobbs

--
Dr Philip C D Hobbs
Principal Consultant
ElectroOptical Innovations LLC / Hobbs ElectroOptics
Optics, Electro-optics, Photonics, Analog Electronics
Briarcliff Manor NY 10510

http://electrooptical.net
http://hobbs-eo.com

On Thu, 6 Jan 2022 00:20:26 -0500, Phil Hobbs
<pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:

>Tabby wrote:
>> On Friday, 31 December 2021 at 02:59:27 UTC,
>> jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>>> On Thu, 30 Dec 2021 17:16:55 -0800 (PST), Tabby
>>> <tabb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wednesday, 29 December 2021 at 22:30:43 UTC, John Larkin
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 29 Dec 2021 13:58:10 -0800 (PST), Tabby
>>>>> <tabb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Saturday, 18 December 2021 at 19:48:13 UTC,
>>>>>> jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 11:11:20 -0800 (PST), Rich S
>>>>>>> <richsuli...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Saturday, December 18, 2021 at 6:12:25 PM UTC,
>>>>>>>> jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 09:49:03 -0800,
>>>>>>>>> jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 12:15:37 -0500, Phil Hobbs
>>>>>>>>>> <pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 11:42:58 -0500, Phil Hobbs
>>>>>>>>>>>> <pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> John Larkin wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.flux.ai/p
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Does anyone use that? It looks to me like a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bunch of script kiddies who don't know much
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about electronics.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where can I buy a 2N2000? Or a green LED that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> needs one? Or a polarized 10 pF cap?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sounds as though they're not even mildly
>>>>>>>>>>>>> activated.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Phil Hobbs
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> They did raise $12M to do this.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Well, they need some razzin', then. ;)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Phil Hobbs
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I keep getting emails from the founder guru, and keep
>>>>>>>>>> telling him that his demo schematics are obviously
>>>>>>>>>> stupid.
>>>>>>>>> 1. Few people in tech actually understand electricity.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 2. Most people are strongly affected by peer pressure,
>>>>>>>>> emotionally influenced by other opinions and group
>>>>>>>>> concensus.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So an electronic design collaboration with high group
>>>>>>>>> visibility is a terrible idea.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There might be ways to fix this. --
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I yam what I yam - Popeye
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I assume this is another "Doing Hardware is just like
>>>>>>>> Doing Software" motives. And they're motivated by the
>>>>>>>> appeal and relative success in collaborative digital
>>>>>>>> platform development. Where, the software components are
>>>>>>>> highly defined structures and standardized; the
>>>>>>>> programmers ("developers") use all sorts of support tools
>>>>>>>> to allow for a distributed collaborative working
>>>>>>>> environment. Is it miraculous? No. It is progress, in
>>>>>>>> that people can join & leave the team. So labor cost can
>>>>>>>> be managed. Ah hah! It can take time to get major things
>>>>>>>> done. Tasks are broken down & prioritized into 'sprints',
>>>>>>>> etc.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So what do you think - Can Hardware be broken down into
>>>>>>>> same ways & managed like software?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I wonder how much actual invention, creating new
>>>>>>> architectures, is used in software projects, as opposed to
>>>>>>> just grunting out a lot of code. Grunting can reasonably be
>>>>>>> parallelized.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Certainly a few software structures needed real invention:
>>>>>>> internet protocols, file systems, file formats, os
>>>>>>> kernals.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> An electronic design can be broken down into parts. Someone
>>>>>>> can do the power supplies, someone the real signal
>>>>>>> electronics, and other people the FPGA and uP code and PCB
>>>>>>> layout. But I think one skilled badass should be in
>>>>>>> charge.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Who decides what psu voltage to use? 'No, I refuse to run the
>>>>>> valves at 5v B+.' 'But this TRF reflex neutralised project
>>>>>> shows it can be done. It'll save us another supply. And look,
>>>>>> it even boasts near zero sensitivity!'
>>>>> I did suggest that the person in charge should be skilled.
>>>>
>>>> Of course. There are still plenty of opinion differences.
>>> "TRF reflex neutralised project" is old-timeish radio, which was
>>> interesting. What's different now is that voltage gain used to be
>>> hard to come by, and now it's basically free.
>>
>> Now we get double conversion, SSB, reliable ICs, microprocessors &
>> informative displays, stable operation, digital readout, SDR etc etc.
>> I still prefer the ancient stuff though. Ingenious, charming & cranky
>> are ok with me.
>
>I wouldn't describe TRF as ingenious--it's more the Bigger Hammer
>approach, with lots of stability and tracking problems. Superregens and
>superhets, now _those_ were ingenious.
>
>(Edwin Howard Armstrong is one of my technical heroes--besides both of
>those supers, he also invented FM, and as a boy he even invented the
>_oscillator_.)
>
>I like early radio too--some of those components were real works of art,
>especially multi-gang variable caps with plates sculpted so as to give
>linear tuning with shaft angle for both RF and LO circuits at once.
>Besides, I've used a bunch of early radio techniques in optics,
>including making crystal radios that worked at 200 THz.
>
>Cheers
>
>Phil Hobbs

Given a 200T detector, did you make a superhet?

I've considered another receiver topology: locate a second antenna
near the receive antenna, and short #2 with a diode driven by a square
wave... sort of a chopper effect.

--

If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end with doubts,
but if he will be content to begin with doubts he shall end in certainties.
Francis Bacon

John Larkin wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Jan 2022 00:20:26 -0500, Phil Hobbs
> <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote:
>
>> Tabby wrote:
>>> On Friday, 31 December 2021 at 02:59:27 UTC,
>>> jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 30 Dec 2021 17:16:55 -0800 (PST), Tabby
>>>> <tabb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Wednesday, 29 December 2021 at 22:30:43 UTC, John Larkin
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, 29 Dec 2021 13:58:10 -0800 (PST), Tabby
>>>>>> <tabb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Saturday, 18 December 2021 at 19:48:13 UTC,
>>>>>>> jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 11:11:20 -0800 (PST), Rich S
>>>>>>>> <richsuli...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, December 18, 2021 at 6:12:25 PM UTC,
>>>>>>>>> jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 09:49:03 -0800,
>>>>>>>>>> jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 12:15:37 -0500, Phil Hobbs
>>>>>>>>>>> <pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 11:42:58 -0500, Phil
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hobbs <pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> John Larkin wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.flux.ai/p
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Does anyone use that? It looks to me like
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a bunch of script kiddies who don't know
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> much about electronics.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where can I buy a 2N2000? Or a green LED
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that needs one? Or a polarized 10 pF
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cap?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sounds as though they're not even mildly
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> activated.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Phil Hobbs
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> They did raise $12M to do this.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, they need some razzin', then. ;)
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Phil Hobbs
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I keep getting emails from the founder guru, and
>>>>>>>>>>> keep telling him that his demo schematics are
>>>>>>>>>>> obviously stupid.
>>>>>>>>>> 1. Few people in tech actually understand
>>>>>>>>>> electricity.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 2. Most people are strongly affected by peer
>>>>>>>>>> pressure, emotionally influenced by other opinions
>>>>>>>>>> and group concensus.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So an electronic design collaboration with high
>>>>>>>>>> group visibility is a terrible idea.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> There might be ways to fix this. --
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I yam what I yam - Popeye
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I assume this is another "Doing Hardware is just
>>>>>>>>> like Doing Software" motives. And they're motivated
>>>>>>>>> by the appeal and relative success in collaborative
>>>>>>>>> digital platform development. Where, the software
>>>>>>>>> components are highly defined structures and
>>>>>>>>> standardized; the programmers ("developers") use all
>>>>>>>>> sorts of support tools to allow for a distributed
>>>>>>>>> collaborative working environment. Is it miraculous?
>>>>>>>>> No. It is progress, in that people can join & leave
>>>>>>>>> the team. So labor cost can be managed. Ah hah! It
>>>>>>>>> can take time to get major things done. Tasks are
>>>>>>>>> broken down & prioritized into 'sprints', etc.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So what do you think - Can Hardware be broken down
>>>>>>>>> into same ways & managed like software?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I wonder how much actual invention, creating new
>>>>>>>> architectures, is used in software projects, as opposed
>>>>>>>> to just grunting out a lot of code. Grunting can
>>>>>>>> reasonably be parallelized.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Certainly a few software structures needed real
>>>>>>>> invention: internet protocols, file systems, file
>>>>>>>> formats, os kernals.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> An electronic design can be broken down into parts.
>>>>>>>> Someone can do the power supplies, someone the real
>>>>>>>> signal electronics, and other people the FPGA and uP
>>>>>>>> code and PCB layout. But I think one skilled badass
>>>>>>>> should be in charge.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Who decides what psu voltage to use? 'No, I refuse to run
>>>>>>> the valves at 5v B+.' 'But this TRF reflex neutralised
>>>>>>> project shows it can be done. It'll save us another
>>>>>>> supply. And look, it even boasts near zero sensitivity!'
>>>>>> I did suggest that the person in charge should be skilled.
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course. There are still plenty of opinion differences.
>>>> "TRF reflex neutralised project" is old-timeish radio, which
>>>> was interesting. What's different now is that voltage gain used
>>>> to be hard to come by, and now it's basically free.
>>>
>>> Now we get double conversion, SSB, reliable ICs, microprocessors
>>> & informative displays, stable operation, digital readout, SDR
>>> etc etc. I still prefer the ancient stuff though. Ingenious,
>>> charming & cranky are ok with me.
>>
>> I wouldn't describe TRF as ingenious--it's more the Bigger Hammer
>> approach, with lots of stability and tracking problems.
>> Superregens and superhets, now _those_ were ingenious.
>>
>> (Edwin Howard Armstrong is one of my technical heroes--besides both
>> of those supers, he also invented FM, and as a boy he even invented
>> the _oscillator_.)
>>
>> I like early radio too--some of those components were real works of
>> art, especially multi-gang variable caps with plates sculpted so as
>> to give linear tuning with shaft angle for both RF and LO circuits
>> at once. Besides, I've used a bunch of early radio techniques in
>> optics, including making crystal radios that worked at 200 THz.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Phil Hobbs
>
> Given a 200T detector, did you make a superhet?

On Thursday, 6 January 2022 at 05:20:40 UTC, Phil Hobbs wrote:
> Tabby wrote:
> > On Friday, 31 December 2021 at 02:59:27 UTC,
> > jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> >> On Thu, 30 Dec 2021 17:16:55 -0800 (PST), Tabby
> >> <tabb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Wednesday, 29 December 2021 at 22:30:43 UTC, John Larkin
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> On Wed, 29 Dec 2021 13:58:10 -0800 (PST), Tabby
> >>>> <tabb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>> On Saturday, 18 December 2021 at 19:48:13 UTC,
> >>>>> jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> >>>>>> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 11:11:20 -0800 (PST), Rich S
> >>>>>> <richsuli...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Saturday, December 18, 2021 at 6:12:25 PM UTC,
> >>>>>>> jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 09:49:03 -0800,
> >>>>>>>> jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 12:15:37 -0500, Phil Hobbs
> >>>>>>>>> <pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 11:42:58 -0500, Phil Hobbs
> >>>>>>>>>>> <pcdhSpamM...@electrooptical.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> John Larkin wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.flux.ai/p
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Does anyone use that? It looks to me like a
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> bunch of script kiddies who don't know much
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> about electronics.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Where can I buy a 2N2000? Or a green LED that
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> needs one? Or a polarized 10 pF cap?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Sounds as though they're not even mildly
> >>>>>>>>>>>> activated.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Phil Hobbs
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> They did raise $12M to do this.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Well, they need some razzin', then. ;)
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Cheers
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Phil Hobbs
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I keep getting emails from the founder guru, and keep
> >>>>>>>>> telling him that his demo schematics are obviously
> >>>>>>>>> stupid.
> >>>>>>>> 1. Few people in tech actually understand electricity.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> 2. Most people are strongly affected by peer pressure,
> >>>>>>>> emotionally influenced by other opinions and group
> >>>>>>>> concensus.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> So an electronic design collaboration with high group
> >>>>>>>> visibility is a terrible idea.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> There might be ways to fix this. --
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I yam what I yam - Popeye
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I assume this is another "Doing Hardware is just like
> >>>>>>> Doing Software" motives. And they're motivated by the
> >>>>>>> appeal and relative success in collaborative digital
> >>>>>>> platform development. Where, the software components are
> >>>>>>> highly defined structures and standardized; the
> >>>>>>> programmers ("developers") use all sorts of support tools
> >>>>>>> to allow for a distributed collaborative working
> >>>>>>> environment. Is it miraculous? No. It is progress, in
> >>>>>>> that people can join & leave the team. So labor cost can
> >>>>>>> be managed. Ah hah! It can take time to get major things
> >>>>>>> done. Tasks are broken down & prioritized into 'sprints',
> >>>>>>> etc.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> So what do you think - Can Hardware be broken down into
> >>>>>>> same ways & managed like software?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> I wonder how much actual invention, creating new
> >>>>>> architectures, is used in software projects, as opposed to
> >>>>>> just grunting out a lot of code. Grunting can reasonably be
> >>>>>> parallelized.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Certainly a few software structures needed real invention:
> >>>>>> internet protocols, file systems, file formats, os
> >>>>>> kernals.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> An electronic design can be broken down into parts. Someone
> >>>>>> can do the power supplies, someone the real signal
> >>>>>> electronics, and other people the FPGA and uP code and PCB
> >>>>>> layout. But I think one skilled badass should be in
> >>>>>> charge.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Who decides what psu voltage to use? 'No, I refuse to run the
> >>>>> valves at 5v B+.' 'But this TRF reflex neutralised project
> >>>>> shows it can be done. It'll save us another supply. And look,
> >>>>> it even boasts near zero sensitivity!'
> >>>> I did suggest that the person in charge should be skilled.
> >>>
> >>> Of course. There are still plenty of opinion differences.
> >> "TRF reflex neutralised project" is old-timeish radio, which was
> >> interesting. What's different now is that voltage gain used to be
> >> hard to come by, and now it's basically free.
> >
> > Now we get double conversion, SSB, reliable ICs, microprocessors &
> > informative displays, stable operation, digital readout, SDR etc etc.
> > I still prefer the ancient stuff though. Ingenious, charming & cranky
> > are ok with me.
> I wouldn't describe TRF as ingenious--it's more the Bigger Hammer
> approach, with lots of stability and tracking problems. Superregens and
> superhets, now _those_ were ingenious.
>
> (Edwin Howard Armstrong is one of my technical heroes--besides both of
> those supers, he also invented FM, and as a boy he even invented the
> _oscillator_.)
>
> I like early radio too--some of those components were real works of art,
> especially multi-gang variable caps with plates sculpted so as to give
> linear tuning with shaft angle for both RF and LO circuits at once.
> Besides, I've used a bunch of early radio techniques in optics,
> including making crystal radios that worked at 200 THz.
> Cheers
>
> Phil Hobbs

FWIW I think all the once new reception techniques were ingenious. I just don't enjoy the more modern ones. We only see them as not ingenious because they're familiar to us. Early radio did so much with so little.