Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register
Groups > sci.electronics.design > #739937
| From | Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.electronics.design |
| Subject | Re: good post on LinkedIn |
| Date | 2026-01-31 15:45 +1100 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <10lk1e1$2kic9$2@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | (7 earlier) <1rpr404.iw4vr1dacqtvN%liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid> <10lii4e$26717$1@dont-email.me> <30lpnkp9erjgkk0hr8lrbt3kjikbhjnqnn@4ax.com> <10linik$28gp2$1@dont-email.me> <10lj2lo$3vun0$1@paganini.bofh.team> |
On 31/01/2026 7:00 am, Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester wrote: > Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote: > |------------------------------------------------------------------------| > |"Languages aren't learned any faster if you learn them young" | > |------------------------------------------------------------------------| > > It is much easier for a child to learn a language than it is for an > old person. Only because a child doesn't have anything else to. The downside of learning your first language as a child is that you have to work out what language is. Noam Chomsky thinks that evolution has provided every human with a built-in language learning mechanism, but people with a better idea of of how evolution works are aware that it would have to have been built on some pre-existing processing mechanisms, and nobody has any useful ideas about what that might have been. Music processing has had some attention, but hasn't offered any useful insights that I've heard of. People differ a lot in their capacity to learn second languages. Dutch is pretty much identical to German, and if you are fluent in one most people can get to be fluent in the other in six months. English isn't wildly different from either, but the benchmark there is eighteen months (as I did at 50 years of age - I did have minimal German then). Basque is about a different from any other European language as you can get, but apparently most people can learn even that just as fast. > Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote: > |------------------------------------------------------------------------| > |"The same paper described a ripple carry counter | > |where the carry propagation wasn't fast enough to match the maximum | > |count rate claimed. No mention at all of a synchronous counter. | > | | > |It was a particularly horrible example, quite the worst I've ever seen."| > |------------------------------------------------------------------------| > > What paper is that paper? Why is it published? The comment is Sloman A.W. “Comment on ‘Modular digital box-car for applications in pulsed laser spectroscopy” Review of Scientific Instruments, 67 3763-4 (1996) If you go to the comment you will get a reference to the paper I was commenting on. I was once told that my comment was more interesting than paper I was commenting, which wasn't much of a compliment. -- Bill Sloman, Sydney
Back to sci.electronics.design | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Re: good post on LinkedIn Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-01-29 14:26 +0000
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-01-29 09:04 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-01-29 17:57 +0000
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-01-29 10:59 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-01-30 00:48 +0000
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-01-29 17:01 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-01-30 01:28 +0000
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-01-30 15:14 +1100
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-01-30 11:52 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-01-31 16:05 +1100
Re: good post on LinkedIn Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-01-31 12:34 +0000
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-01-31 07:29 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-01 20:59 +1100
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-01 03:06 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-02 00:17 +1100
Re: Excel and accountants, good post on LinkedIn John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-01-31 23:21 +0000
Re: Excel and accountants, good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-01-31 16:22 -0800
Re: Excel and accountants, good post on LinkedIn Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-02-01 02:13 +0000
Re: Excel and accountants, good post on LinkedIn Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-01-31 19:31 -0700
Re: Excel and accountants, good post on LinkedIn albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl - 2026-02-01 21:58 +0100
Re: Excel and accountants, good post on LinkedIn Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-02-01 14:36 -0700
Re: good post on LinkedIn Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-01-31 03:56 +0000
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-01-31 15:23 +1100
Re: good post on LinkedIn Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-01-31 14:36 +0000
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-01 21:31 +1100
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-01-30 14:59 +1100
Re: good post on LinkedIn liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Liz Tuddenham) - 2026-01-30 10:15 +0000
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-01-31 00:06 +1100
Re: good post on LinkedIn liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Liz Tuddenham) - 2026-01-30 13:43 +0000
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-01-31 02:18 +1100
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-01-30 08:04 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-01-31 03:51 +1100
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-01-30 09:46 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-01-30 20:00 +0000
Re: good post on LinkedIn Jeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please> - 2026-01-30 22:49 +0100
Re: good post on LinkedIn Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-01-30 22:52 +0000
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-01-31 16:02 +1100
Re: good post on LinkedIn Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-01-31 13:33 +0000
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-01 01:31 +1100
Re: good post on LinkedIn Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-01-31 19:16 +0000
Re: history of Fortran, good post on LinkedIn John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-01-31 23:10 +0000
Sorry re history of Fortran, good post on LinkedIn Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-01-31 23:25 +0000
Re: Sorry re history of Fortran, good post on LinkedIn John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> - 2026-02-01 02:43 +0000
Re: Sorry re history of Fortran, good post on LinkedIn OrangeFish <OrangeFish@invalid.invalid> - 2026-02-01 18:00 -0500
Re: history of Fortran, good post on LinkedIn albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl - 2026-02-01 22:11 +0100
Re: history of Fortran, good post on LinkedIn Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-02-01 14:42 -0700
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-01 21:36 +1100
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-01-30 15:53 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-01-31 16:14 +1100
Re: good post on LinkedIn Jeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please> - 2026-01-31 11:21 +0100
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-01-31 07:34 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn Jeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please> - 2026-01-31 21:42 +0100
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-01-31 13:36 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-01 21:57 +1100
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-01 03:10 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-02 00:37 +1100
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-01 07:36 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-03 16:27 +1100
Re: good post on LinkedIn albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl - 2026-02-01 22:21 +0100
Re: good post on LinkedIn liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Liz Tuddenham) - 2026-01-31 09:00 +0000
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-01-31 15:45 +1100
Re: good post on LinkedIn Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-01-31 14:26 +0000
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-01-30 13:53 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-01-31 16:25 +1100
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-01-31 07:41 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn Gerhard Hoffmann <dk4xp@arcor.de> - 2026-01-31 17:33 +0100
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-01-31 10:07 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-01-31 11:26 -0700
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-01 22:04 +1100
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-01 07:38 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-03 16:37 +1100
Re: good post on LinkedIn Gerhard Hoffmann <dk4xp@arcor.de> - 2026-01-30 15:06 +0100
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-01-30 11:55 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn wmartin <wwm@wwmartin.net> - 2026-01-30 11:27 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-01-30 18:54 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-01-30 23:26 -0700
Re: good post on LinkedIn liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Liz Tuddenham) - 2026-01-31 09:22 +0000
Re: good post on LinkedIn Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-01-31 02:50 -0700
Re: good post on LinkedIn Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-01-30 04:36 -0700
Re: good post on LinkedIn legg <legg@nospam.magma.ca> - 2026-01-30 09:24 -0500
Re: good post on LinkedIn Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-01-30 09:56 -0700
Re: good post on LinkedIn Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-01-30 10:05 -0700
Re: good post on LinkedIn legg <legg@nospam.magma.ca> - 2026-01-30 14:22 -0500
Re: good post on LinkedIn Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-01-30 19:09 -0700
Re: good post on LinkedIn legg <legg@nospam.magma.ca> - 2026-01-30 22:16 -0500
Re: good post on LinkedIn Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-01-30 22:27 -0700
Re: good post on LinkedIn Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-01-31 03:40 +0000
Re: good post on LinkedIn Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-01-30 22:46 -0700
Re: good post on LinkedIn Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-01-31 15:20 +0000
Re: good post on LinkedIn Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-01-31 08:44 -0700
Re: good post on LinkedIn Nioclás Pól Caileán de Ghloucester <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-01-31 17:13 +0000
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-01-31 07:55 -0800
Re: good post on LinkedIn john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-01-30 08:15 -0800
csiph-web