Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.electronics.design > #454263

Re: Another Word For Linear?

Show all headers | View raw

On 3/30/2017 12:48 AM, Larry Sheldon wrote:
> On 3/30/2017 00:52, Don Y wrote:
>> On 3/29/2017 10:45 PM, Larry Sheldon wrote:
>>> On 3/29/2017 21:22, Don Y wrote:
>>>> On 3/29/2017 6:38 PM, nuny@bid.nes wrote:
>>>>> Suppose someone comes to you with a piece of audio gear with a volume
>>>>> knob
>>>>> with all its response at one end. You immediately know that some idiot
>>>>> subbed a linear pot for a log pot (or vice versa depending on the
>>>>> circuit).
>>>>>
>>>>> While trying to explain the cause and your solution, how do you
>>>>> describe it?
>>>>> I'm looking for colloquial terms your average idiot in the street will
>>>>> grasp intuitively.
>>>>>
>>>>> "The new control will operate more smoothly."
>>>>>
>>>>> "...proportionately."
>>>>>
>>>>> "...evenly."
>>>>
>>>> "A more even (uniform?) response"
>>>
>>> Somewhere between "wrong" and "meaningless".  The linear pot gives a
>>> "more even
>>> (uniform?) response" of resistance change per degree of rotation than
>>> a log
>>> pot--that IS the problem.
>>>
>>> You do not WANT a "more even (uniform?) response", you want a response
>>> that
>>> matches (more closely) the human ear response.
>>
>> No.  You want a term that "your average street idiot will grasp
>> intuitively".
>> Presumably, without resorting to graphs and verbose examples.
>>
>> (Do you think the "average street idiot" understands how *he* perceives
>> sound?)
>
> My generalized belief (valid here) is that most people are not as stupid as
> most subject-matter-specific geeks wish they were.

You're being far too generous -- or incredibly naive.

If I told an 8 year old to "pick a string of 8 characters including
at least one digit, uppercase, lowercase and punctuation mark", he'd
undoubtedly be able to do so.  Yet, tell a (responsible?) adult to do the
same TO PROTECT HIS ONLINE ACCOUNT (i.e., his MONEY), and he'll do
something like "P@ssw0rD" -- despite having read the periodic headlines
reporting on breaches and compromised accounts.  Many of which deliberately
mentioning such BAD password choices.

Or, failing to change the DEFAULT password on the bits of kit they purchase?

Or, NOT opening attachments in email?

Becoming drawn in by calls/threats from the "IRS" on their home phone?
(wouldn't you at least think of calling the phone number IN THE PHONE BOOK
for the IRS if so threatened?)

Sending monies to Nigerian princes?  ("Gee, I wonder why he picked *me*
as his BENEFICIARY?")

(In the past) Being unable to set the clock on their VCR to be rid of
that annoying "blinking 12:00"?

Leaving their MD's office with a diagnosis that is little more (to them)
than "alphabet soup" instead of asking for a "plain english" translation
(it's *their* condition that the MD has described; presumably they would
want to UNDERSTAND what the MD was telling them)

Reading *two* pages of instructions written at a 6th grade level for a
recent purchase?

Unplugging an appliance before working on it?

NOT smoking while refueling a vehicle?

NOT using a screwdriver as a chisel?

FAILING to wear eye/ear protection?

What term would you use to describe these?  ("stupid" comes to mind)

Note that *none* of these require "special", domain-specific knowledge,
beyond COMMON SENSE!

Half the population is of below average intelligence.  :>  Many (most?) are
"lazy thinkers" and need things "spelled out" for them, explicitly.  Dealing
in abstractions is such an abstract concept that most can't even conceive of
what that means!  People don't like to "ask questions" if those questions
will HIGHLIGHT their ignorance/lack of understanding.  Like the patient
nodding his head as the MD spews lots of latin terms describing his condition
VERY EXPLICITLY (for the MD!) -- and being completely clueless as to what
the MD has said *or* what it means for them.

You want to offer explanations that the user can wrap their head around
without *needing* a lecture on psychoacoustics or electronics -- so he
can describe his problem -- AND YOUR REMEDY -- to others without THEM
pestering him for an explanation of what *you* meant.

A friend was diagnosed as having some sort of systemic infection.  They
cultured the organism over a period of 4 weeks -- prescribing a wide-spectrum
antibiotic for him in that interval.  At the end of the interval, they claimed
"nothing grew" and sent him on his way (the 4 weeks of GI distress being just
an unfortunate aspect of the treatment plan).

Then, called him back claiming it was a *fungal* infection and put him on
some new (?) medication for another 4 weeks.  *My* questions (as an univolved
third party):
- did they identify the organism?
- are you now on an anti-fungal?
- will they repeat the culture after 4 weeks to VERIFY THE ORGANISM IS GONE?
   (else, how will you KNOW you have been cured?  You were asymptomatic to
   begin with so that doesn't suggest you'll KNOW from your own observations
   that you're "healed")

He knew none of these answers.  In hindsight, I felt bad *asking* them as I'd
assumed anyone faced with such a lengthy/uncomfortable treatment would
WANT/demand to know what's involved!  And, how *he* would be able to reassure
himself that he was "cured".

When you explain something, it never hurts to offer more information in a
lower level of complexity and let the user latch onto what he wants/needs
to satisfy his "curiosity".  This isn't "patronizing" -- especially if
you're in the business of dealing with a number of different individuals,
each of differing capabilities.  Its relatively easy for the individual to
indicate his understanding of your "simple" explanation and drill down
for more detail -- just by his choice of vocabulary in followup questions.

> In the instant case "somebody installed the wrong part here.  Replacing it with
> the correct part should fix the problem." is correct, to the point, and
> probably sufficient.  (The possible follow on question "what's wrong with it?"
> can be pursued factually as well.)
>
> No bullshit, no Politically Correct, no unwarranted overbearing eye rolling, ...

Where's the "bullshit", "PC" or "eye rolling" in *my* response -- of which
you were so dismissive?

Back to sci.electronics.design | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Another Word For Linear? "nuny@bid.nes" <alien8752@gmail.com> - 2017-03-29 18:38 -0700
  Re: Another Word For Linear? eacaws@gmail.com - 2017-03-29 18:48 -0700
  Re: Another Word For Linear? bill.sloman@ieee.org - 2017-03-29 18:50 -0700
  Re: Another Word For Linear? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-03-29 19:22 -0700
    Re: Another Word For Linear? Larry Sheldon <lfsheldon@gmail.com> - 2017-03-30 00:45 -0500
      Re: Another Word For Linear? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-03-29 22:52 -0700
        Re: Another Word For Linear? Larry Sheldon <lfsheldon@gmail.com> - 2017-03-30 02:48 -0500
          Re: Another Word For Linear? bulegoge@columbus.rr.com - 2017-03-30 10:37 -0700
          Re: Another Word For Linear? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-03-30 12:47 -0700
            Re: Another Word For Linear? gray_wolf <g_wolf@nospam.com> - 2017-03-30 19:31 -0500
              Re: Another Word For Linear? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-03-30 18:19 -0700
            Re: Another Word For Linear? dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com - 2017-04-03 15:03 -0700
              Re: Another Word For Linear? krw@notreal.com - 2017-04-03 20:39 -0400
                Re: Another Word For Linear? dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com - 2017-04-05 11:03 -0700
  Re: Another Word For Linear? tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-29 20:03 -0700
    Re: Another Word For Linear? Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.com> - 2017-03-29 22:17 -0500
    Re: Another Word For Linear? Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2017-03-29 15:26 +1100
      Re: Another Word For Linear? tabbypurr@gmail.com - 2017-03-29 21:30 -0700
  Re: Another Word For Linear? bitrex <bitrex@de.lete.earthlink.net> - 2017-03-30 00:16 -0400
    Re: Another Word For Linear? BM2335 <BM265@DMM.com.au> - 2017-03-30 12:18 +0800
    Re: Another Word For Linear? Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2017-03-29 15:56 +1100
      Re: Another Word For Linear? bitrex <bitrex@de.lete.earthlink.net> - 2017-03-30 01:13 -0400
    Re: Another Word For Linear? krw@notreal.com - 2017-03-30 20:47 -0400
  Re: Another Word For Linear? Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2017-03-29 22:34 -0700
    Re: Another Word For Linear? Larry Sheldon <lfsheldon@gmail.com> - 2017-03-30 00:48 -0500
    Re: Another Word For Linear? Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2017-03-30 00:06 -0700
  Re: Another Word For Linear? Larry Sheldon <lfsheldon@gmail.com> - 2017-03-30 00:39 -0500
  Re: Another Word For Linear? Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-03-30 08:14 +0100
  Re: Another Word For Linear? djlocher56@gmail.com - 2017-03-30 04:41 -0700
  Re: Another Word For Linear? Jon Elson <elson@pico-systems.com> - 2017-03-30 16:47 -0500
    Re: Another Word For Linear? Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2017-03-30 17:03 -0700
    Re: Another Word For Linear? Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> - 2017-03-30 17:20 -0700
  Re: Another Word For Linear? John Fields <jfields@austininstruments.com> - 2017-03-30 19:23 -0500
  Re: Another Word For Linear? "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> - 2017-04-03 00:33 -0400

csiph-web