Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!nntp.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: john larkin Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design Subject: Re: good post on LinkedIn Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2026 07:41:09 -0800 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 117 Message-ID: References: <10lg730$3keb0$1@paganini.bofh.team> <10lhaak$1qjs6$1@dont-email.me> <1rpqslw.5dmmjjwws88wN%liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid> <10liadf$23qkg$1@dont-email.me> <1rpr404.iw4vr1dacqtvN%liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid> <10lii4e$26717$1@dont-email.me> <30lpnkp9erjgkk0hr8lrbt3kjikbhjnqnn@4ax.com> <10linik$28gp2$1@dont-email.me> <2v9qnkh3kdj1b0seonq6g1vsduq2i94ra9@4ax.com> <10lk3oo$2kic9$6@dont-email.me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2026 15:41:12 +0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="83864375aa95f1a41412f20cdb5fe640"; logging-data="3175380"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19IwCXDsrcZngTdqSlvfdQs" User-Agent: ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272 Cancel-Lock: sha1:zsFRIVK7IKdKbo3PK28hdLI5bhc= Xref: csiph.com sci.electronics.design:739960 On Sat, 31 Jan 2026 16:25:29 +1100, Bill Sloman wrote: >On 31/01/2026 8:53 am, john larkin wrote: >> On Sat, 31 Jan 2026 03:51:16 +1100, Bill Sloman >> wrote: >> >>> On 31/01/2026 3:04 am, john larkin wrote: >>>> On Sat, 31 Jan 2026 02:18:25 +1100, Bill Sloman >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 31/01/2026 12:43 am, Liz Tuddenham wrote: >>>>>> Bill Sloman wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 30/01/2026 9:15 pm, Liz Tuddenham wrote: >>>>>>>> Bill Sloman wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> [...] >>>>>>>>> The only electronics I did as a kid was to build a completely passive >>>>>>>>> crystal set >>>>>>>> [...] >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I think we may quote that in replies to some of your future posts. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It didn't include any parts with gain, or any power source. What's your >>>>>>> preferred description of the classic crystal set? >>>>>> >>>>>> The part that caught my eye was: " The only electronics I did as a kid". >>>>>> Many of us spent our childhood teaching ourselves electronics - so we >>>>>> may remind you of this difference next time you start making disparaging >>>>>> remarks about other engineers' knowledge and abilities. >>>>> >>>>> John Larkin seems to think it gives you some kind of advantage. >>>> >>>> Of course it does. As there is a huge advantage to learning chess or >>>> math or languages or soccer when you are young. Actually doing stuff >>>> involves practical feedbacks and acquired instincts. >>> >>> Instincts are what you were born with. What you get from doing stuff is >>> habits. >>> >>> Learning stuff too early can instill bad habits, and they are hard to >>> unlearn. >>> >>> Languages aren't learned any faster if you learn them young, and some >>> aspects of language can't be learned at all by very young kids. >>> >>>> University education seldom installs much in the way of instincts >>>> either. It's too rigid and formalized, and too late. >>> >>> Since instincts are what you get with your genome, universities can't >>> install them at all. >>> >>> Formal instruction at university is formal. It's mostly accompanied by >>> practical classes, which are a lot less rigid. >>> >>> The complicated stuff that most people learn at university mostly can't >>> be instilled into adolescents - some rare kids can learn it early, but >>> they tend to be exceptionally clever and need exceptional power of >>> concentration. About 30% of the undergraduate intake doesn't ever get >>> any kid of degree, and probably shouldn't have started at all. >>> >>>>> If you taught yourself when you were a kid, you didn't have a >>>>> well-qualified teacher. >>>> >>>> A mentor with instincts is great if you are lucky enough to have one. >>> >>> Instincts come from the genome. What good mentors have is experience, >>> and some understanding of what that experience has taught them. >>> >>> Electronics has advanced a lot over the past fifty years, and mentors >>> are correspondingly less useful as teachers. >>>>> At least when I got into it, I did have a >>>>> university library and book-shop to draw on and did get some advice from >>>>> people who really knew what they were doing. >>>> >>>> Obviously too late. >>> >>> What's obvious to you is what you want to see. Trump is even more deeply >>> into wishful thinking than you are. >>> >>>>> I learned a lot when I started doing electronic engineering as my main >>>>> job, and had some really skilled teachers and examplars, as a well as >>>>> lot of colleagues who merely thought that they knew what they were >>>>> doing, and earned a few disparaging remarks. A few disparaging remarks >>>>> got published as comments in the Review of Scientific Instruments. >>>> >>>> I sometimes read RSI when it's available. The circuits are hilarious. >>> >>> They tend to be functional, rather than elegant, and not always all that >>> up-to-date. I once got very rude about a paper lauding the use of 1Ok >>> ECL which got published after ECLinPs had been around for a few years. >>> >>> 10k ECL was about four times faster than TTL/CMOS, but ECinPS was four >>> times faster again. 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. >> >> A true ripple counter is as fast as its first flop. > >Rubbish. The state of the outputs of a multistage ripple counter isn't >useful until the increment has rippled through every stage. Consider a frequency divider. Your prime motivation is to contradict, not to think. That's very common. A true ripple counter is as fast as its first flop. John Larkin Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center Lunatic Fringe Electronics