Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register
Groups > sci.electronics.design > #739995
| From | john larkin <jl@glen--canyon.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.electronics.design |
| Subject | Re: good post on LinkedIn |
| Date | 2026-02-01 07:36 -0800 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <rjsunklov4427h9slqh46d0a8g51alr2hv@4ax.com> (permalink) |
| References | (7 earlier) <10llpfk$370ll$1@dont-email.me> <55tsnkddaav66lahdiqtarc2qi9a420jeb@4ax.com> <10lnbi6$3jmuk$4@dont-email.me> <b3dunkdmrs52ln35kmkbe04ns0ehukot34@4ax.com> <10lnkvl$3oefp$2@dont-email.me> |
On Mon, 2 Feb 2026 00:37:55 +1100, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote: >On 1/02/2026 10:10 pm, john larkin wrote: >> On Sun, 1 Feb 2026 21:57:08 +1100, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> >> wrote: >> >>> On 1/02/2026 8:36 am, john larkin wrote: >>>> On Sat, 31 Jan 2026 21:42:27 +0100, Jeroen Belleman >>>> <jeroen@nospam.please> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 1/31/26 16:34, john larkin wrote: >>>>>> On Sat, 31 Jan 2026 11:21:44 +0100, Jeroen Belleman >>>>>> <jeroen@nospam.please> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 1/31/26 00:53, john larkin wrote: >>>>>>>> On Fri, 30 Jan 2026 22:49:12 +0100, Jeroen Belleman >>>>>>>> <jeroen@nospam.please> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 1/30/26 21:00, 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. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> An often repeated myth, entirely untrue. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Adults can learn a new language in much less time than a >>>>>>>>> child, provided they are motivated and immersed. Those are >>>>>>>>> the keys, motivation and immersion. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Jeroen Belleman >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Adults rarely acquire a new accent at native level. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> https://news.mit.edu/2018/cognitive-scientists-define-critical-period-learning-language-0501 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> John Larkin >>>>>>>> Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center >>>>>>>> Lunatic Fringe Electronics >>>>>>> >>>>>>> True, but those natives probably don't have the linguistic >>>>>>> abilities of the foreign speaker. Your thinking is shaped >>>>>>> by language, and speaking more languages is enriching. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I'm native Dutch, but I've been told I have a French >>>>>>> accent now. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Jeroen Belleman >>>>>> >>>>>> Which language is best for thinking about electronics? >>>>>> >>>>>> I think circuits in pictures, not words, but people are very >>>>>> different. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> John Larkin >>>>>> Highland Tech Glen Canyon Design Center >>>>>> Lunatic Fringe Electronics >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> That has to be English, I think. Anyway, for quite some time now, >>>>> English has been the common language of science and technology, >>>>> electronics included. It has been French for a while, and Latin >>>>> for a long period before that. And ancient Greek before that, and >>>>> and ,,, >>>>> >>>>> Jeroen Belleman >>>>> >>>> >>>> English is shockingly irregular. >>> >>> Not really. It's just another language which evolved. Imagining English >>> was ever designed is plain silly. >>> >>>> One word can mean six things and >>>> there are a zillion words to express a concept. >>> >>> Quite a lot of word meanings are context dependent. Dictionaries deal >>> with this by quoting word use in the various different contexts. >>> >>>> Plus there are places like the UK with their own weird versions. >>> >>> At one level English is the language spoken in England, and the >>> derivations spoken in the US and Australia are the weird versions. >>> >>> Some of the oddities of US English reflect the fact that some of the >>> evolution of British English over the past few centuries didn't make it >>> across the Atlantic. >>> >>>> Given the concept that ambiguity generates creativity, maybe English >>>> is a good language to invent in. >>> >>> The idea that ambiguity generates creativity is one that I haven't come >>> across. Google throw up a few examples from the past few years, so it >>> may be currently fashionable word salad. >>> >>> Ambiguity didn't feature in any of the ideas I've had that ended up >>> patented, nor in any of the 25-odd ideas that my father got patents for. >>> I'm not familiar with all of Alan Dower Blumlein's 128 patents, but the >>> none of the ones I do know about had anything ambiguous about them. >> >> With all the patents in your family, you must be very wealthy. > >If you are an employee you don't get any extra just because you have a >patent. My father did end up pretty well off, but none of it came >directly from the patents. > >The most significant one - for the counter-current cooking of wood chips >into paper pulp - didn't earn much in the way of royalties. Kamyr, who >made all the digestors used by the industry, chose not to pay royalties, >and it wasn't worth suing them, or the people who used the process in >continuous digestors that they'd bought from Kamyr. Journal papers and patents are mostly vanity expenses. Designing electronics can be a source of revenue. 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
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