Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register
Groups > sci.electronics.design > #740095
| From | john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.electronics.design |
| Subject | Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 |
| Date | 2026-02-04 08:47 -0800 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <77t6ok9eblp9b5q4oe1o0uv5osd7iosh5g@4ax.com> (permalink) |
| References | (6 earlier) <d954ok5rti2a92sk0idbql8gtua0ve1kak@4ax.com> <te74okpcgutb7p968fgc9dilkj2nvfs3gd@4ax.com> <10lum32$233h2$1@dont-email.me> <i9b6ok5hds7c6ski9nan3l7e1agbmhemml@4ax.com> <53673fd3-3d1f-9f49-1e50-1b470a7662db@electrooptical.net> |
On Wed, 4 Feb 2026 10:52:28 -0500, Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> wrote: >On 2026-02-04 06:37, john larkin wrote: >> On Wed, 4 Feb 2026 16:39:39 +1100, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> >> wrote: >> >>> On 4/02/2026 3:24 am, john larkin wrote: >>>> On Tue, 03 Feb 2026 08:03:02 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Mon, 02 Feb 2026 20:47:06 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, 02 Feb 2026 19:37:43 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, 02 Feb 2026 17:29:26 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Mon, 02 Feb 2026 14:33:15 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Mon, 02 Feb 2026 10:05:09 -0800, john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> This morning's Register is all AI. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> https://www.theregister.com/ >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> This is a crazy fad, dot.bomb all over again. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I don't believe The Register is totally AI. >>>>>>>>> How do I know? I simply asked an AI. >>>>>>>>> <https://chatgpt.com/share/698122a9-e830-800c-a13a-58ae48e22ef4> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I meant it was all about AI. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I beg to differ. If I search The Register for "AI" with: >>>>>>> <https://search.theregister.com/?q=AI> >>>>>>> I find 11 articles today (Feb 2, 2026) that mention "AI". I don't >>>>>>> know how many articles appears to on all topics, but I can guess(tm) a >>>>>>> very rough average by comparing the number of articles containing "AI" >>>>>>> (10363) with the number of articles for everything in The Register >>>>>>> database, containing just "a" (232280), which I assume include >>>>>>> literally all articles in English. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 10363 / 232280 = 0.0446 = 4.5% >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If I search for "Artificial Intelligence": >>>>>>> <https://search.theregister.com/?q=%22Artificial+Intelligence%22&results_per_page=20&site=&sort=date> >>>>>>> it finds only 2219 hits. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 2219 / 232280 = 0.0096 = 0.01% >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I would expect a much larger percentage if the articles were "all >>>>>>> about AI". >>>>>> >>>>>> I said "this morning" >>>>> >>>>> "This morning" was why I concentrated on estimating the percentage of >>>>> AI articles that appeared on Feb 2, 2026 in The Register. I have no >>>>> easy way to count the number of AI related articles that appeared that >>>>> morning. My guess(tm) is the AI content was a small percentage of the >>>>> articles which appeared on Feb 2. >>>>> >>>>>> You are obviously Bill Sloman. >>>>> >>>>> There is probably some similarity between my writing and his. However, >>>>> any possible similarity doesn't invalidate my logic. >>>>> >>>>> I did not intended to offend you in any manner. I just spent four >>>>> days unsuccessfully troubleshooting an electrical fault in my 2001 >>>>> Subaru Forester. I was rather frustrated and felt the need to do >>>>> something different and to offload my frustrations. My apologies for >>>>> not correctly deducing your intentions. >>>> >>>> I can see that four days chasing a car bug could be annoying. I gave >>>> up car repair some decades ago; it's just too complex and it makes >>>> your fingernails dirty. >>>> >>>> Well, not literally 100% of the Register pieces were AI, but most >>>> were. Only about half are this morning. >>> >>> Then why say "all"? >>> >>>> It's all going to crash one >>>> day soon. People are raising and burning too much money, like in the >>>> first .com (aka .bomb) thing. >>> >>> It will certainly come off the boil as the real advantages become better >>> defined, and the disadvantages become more obvious. >>> >>> It isn't likely that it will follow the same trajectory as the dot.com >>> bubble - it's a different technology offering different advantages, and >>> many of the people involved lived through the dot.com bubble. >>>> The google AI responses are actually useful sometimes, and sometimes >>>> wrong. I asked it if an Efinix T20 FPGA could run my logic at 250 MHz, >>>> and it basically said yes, and it works. The logic includes my 50-cent >>>> 40 MHz DDS clock generator, which benefits from clocking fast. Period >>>> jitter is at least 10:1 better than just using the MSB of an NCO. >>> >>> And if you knew what you were doing you could have worked that out by >>> applying native, rather than artificial, intelligence. >>> >>> The jitter on the output of a clocked system is usually limited by the >>> jitter on the edges of the master clock, and if you can run that faster >>> the jitter on its edges will usually be less. >>> >>> Apparently the best you can do at the moment (if IEEE Spectrum is to be >>> believed) is to use a whispering gallery mode in a sapphire crystal >>> immersed in liquid helium as your master oscillator. The long term >>> stability isn't as good as an atomic clock, but the short term jitter is >>> appreciably better. >> >> We can buy cheap surface-mount XOs with ps or even fs of RMS jitter. >> It's the DDS part that wrecks things. For 50 cents it looks like we >> can generate any frequency up to 40 MHz with ps jitter and 36-bit >> frequency resolution. It's cool to play with. >> >> https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/n12quxajp59egahv1b48i/DDS_1KHz.jpg?rlkey=8w0tlr3h1rxeif3byepzub947&raw=1 >> >> There's a tiny non-monoticity step at the zero crossing, caused by the >> resistance of the FPGA outputs. That can be tuned out. > >So you're summing the FPGA outputs via resistors? How many bits do you >anticipate using? You still have the subharmonic spur problem unless >you're using the full width of the phase accumulator (or at least all >the bits that change). > >Cheers > >Phil Hobbs https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/exwm68xr6uwya4jyu2cbc/X116_DDS.jpg?rlkey=3b72xlxwi73uk22ni9cs80fix&raw=1 Six bits looks pretty good. Even 5 is nice in simulation. Eventually the analog issues make more bits useless, so 6 looked about right. It was a real pain to Spice this! Actually sort of fun. The NCO will be 32 or maybe 36 bits. The Efinix likes to do math in 18 bit chunks. The sine lookup table is 12 bits, because it's basically free. I'm seeing sub-ns period jitter on my scope, and I expect it will be better when the lowpass filter and comparator are all on a pcb. Here's the proto board. It tested a bunch of stuff. https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/npkdfdb4shr2m2jokqa1l/X116_On_Plate.jpg?rlkey=negw6radsojplh0zso6gha2vb&raw=1 John Larkin Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center Lunatic Fringe Electronics
Back to sci.electronics.design | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-02-02 04:38 -0700
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-02 07:37 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> - 2026-02-02 11:37 -0500
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-02 08:57 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-03 15:15 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-05 00:59 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-04 08:52 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-05 16:37 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-05 08:13 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-06 17:43 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-02 10:05 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 bitrex <user@example.net> - 2026-02-02 13:47 -0500
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-02-02 12:07 -0700
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2026-02-02 14:33 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-02 17:29 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2026-02-02 19:37 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-02 20:47 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-03 16:08 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2026-02-03 08:03 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-03 08:24 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-04 16:39 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-04 03:37 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-04 23:50 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-04 08:33 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-05 16:01 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Gerhard Hoffmann <dk4xp@arcor.de> - 2026-02-05 12:38 +0100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-05 08:36 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-06 17:47 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-06 11:06 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-07 15:32 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-07 08:24 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-08 15:26 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Gerhard Hoffmann <dk4xp@arcor.de> - 2026-02-07 11:37 +0100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-08 00:16 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Jeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please> - 2026-02-07 15:45 +0100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-08 02:35 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Liz Tuddenham) - 2026-02-07 16:37 +0000
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-08 15:13 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Liz Tuddenham) - 2026-02-08 12:38 +0000
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-09 00:59 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-07 08:54 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-08 15:43 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Jeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please> - 2026-02-07 19:13 +0100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-07 10:51 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 wmartin <wwm@wwmartin.net> - 2026-02-07 15:06 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-08 15:56 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-08 15:53 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-07 08:38 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-08 15:58 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-07 08:34 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-08 16:00 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-05 08:29 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-06 17:56 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-06 03:56 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-07 00:48 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-06 09:06 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> - 2026-02-07 15:44 +1100
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> - 2026-02-04 10:52 -0500
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-04 08:47 -0800
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 bitrex <user@example.net> - 2026-02-02 14:11 -0500
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-02-02 12:24 -0700
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2026-02-07 06:51 -0700
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 "Edward Rawde" <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2026-02-02 19:31 -0500
Re: AI Will Create More Jobs Than It Eliminates By 2027 john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> - 2026-02-02 19:33 -0800
csiph-web