Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
> Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>> But then, I'm not good with time management. I tend to burn hours
>> working on "interesting" but irrelevant problems, and no time at all
>> working on the stuff that I don't know how to do.
> 
> Heh, you just described me.

I'm pretty sure I just described half the people on this server... ;-)

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Gail wrote:
> 
> "Orchid XP v8" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message 
> news:491c77d7$1@news.povray.org...
>> Gail wrote:
>>> Agreed. It's the perserverance that I'm struggling with right now 
>>> (even though I'm just doing an M.Sc)
>>
>> IIRC, the final year of my BSc was pretty insane...
> 
> Now try doing that, working full time and still keeping up with the tech 
> community (and contributing to it frequently)

Well, the other stuff you mention would be new to me anyway. ;-)

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Tom Austin wrote:

> It's all in the magic blue smoke.  All chips run on it - if you let it 
> out then it doesn't work any more.
> I just wonder how they get the blue smoke in there in the first place.

Dried frog pills, anyone?

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Tom Austin wrote:
> Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
>> Tom Austin <taustin> wrote:
>>> One think to keep in mind, you are best off not trying to drive the LED
>>> directly from the chip.  Some chips can do it, but most cannot.  Lots of
>>> times you need to put a *switch* that the gate switches.
>>
>> I have an electronics kit, with CMOS ICs, LEDs, and AA batteries 
>> adding up
>> to 9v. I have always connected LEDs directly at the output of gates. 
>> With a
>> resistor, of course (3.3k ohm), I mean without any kind of switch.
>>
> 
> 
> With TTL you should be able to drive a LED from the outputs.
> With CMOS you better check to be sure.

I have an electronics kit with TTL in it. (A 7400LS, no less.) All the 
diagrams drive the LEDs directly from it.

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Tom Austin wrote:
>> Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
>>> Tom Austin <taustin> wrote:
>>>> One think to keep in mind, you are best off not trying to drive the LED
>>>> directly from the chip.  Some chips can do it, but most cannot.  
>>>> Lots of
>>>> times you need to put a *switch* that the gate switches.
>>>
>>> I have an electronics kit, with CMOS ICs, LEDs, and AA batteries 
>>> adding up
>>> to 9v. I have always connected LEDs directly at the output of gates. 
>>> With a
>>> resistor, of course (3.3k ohm), I mean without any kind of switch.
>>>
>>
>>
>> With TTL you should be able to drive a LED from the outputs.
>> With CMOS you better check to be sure.
> 
> I have an electronics kit with TTL in it. (A 7400LS, no less.) All the 
> diagrams drive the LEDs directly from it.
> 

That's TTL - it can source current, i.e. drive a LED
CMOS usually cannot source as much current.

Post a reply to this message

Tom Austin <taustin> wrote:
> Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
>> Tom Austin <taustin> wrote:
>>> One think to keep in mind, you are best off not trying to drive the LED
>>> directly from the chip.  Some chips can do it, but most cannot.  Lots of
>>> times you need to put a *switch* that the gate switches.
>> 
>> I have an electronics kit, with CMOS ICs, LEDs, and AA batteries adding
>> up to 9v. I have always connected LEDs directly at the output of gates.
>> With a resistor, of course (3.3k ohm), I mean without any kind of switch.
>> 
> 
> With TTL you should be able to drive a LED from the outputs.
> With CMOS you better check to be sure.

It's all CMOS. In very few places it actually uses an extra transistor or
switch to drive an output.

Post a reply to this message

On 13-Nov-08 10:26, Invisible wrote:
>>> Well, London isn't "remote", but no sane person would want to go there. 
>>
>> ?
> 
> Heh. You'll get me into trouble. :-P
> 
>>> The people who aren't in London are in places like Southampton, York, 
>>> etc.
>>>
>>
>> I happen to be in Amsterdam actually. Or don't I count as people? (or 
>> is that '... do I not...')
> 
> I meant the other companies I researched. A lot of them were in London, 
> and the rest were in far-flung parts of the UK.

ok that was s/people/companies then.

> 
> Korg UK is in Milton Keynes. But there office is about 10 square feet, 
> so I'm guessing it's just an admin office...
> 
>>> Um... the obvious problem here is that I'm obviously not intelligent 
>>> enough to do a PhD. :-P
>>
>> Intelligence is not a prerequisite for a PhD position. As long as you 
>> have a MSc or equivalent you could be hired.
> 
> Well, I don't have an MSc. I only have a BSc.

Didn't know that, that changes a lot, I guess.

> (You know the random Asian guys asking me to fix their Java? *They* were 
> the MSc students!)
> 
>> Please, leave the job of finding reasons why you are not qualified to 
>> the selection committee. BTW if it ever comes to this I will probably 
>> not take part is the job interview. I might know too much about you to 
>> be objective.
> 
> Why would you want me anyway? Surely somebody who already lives in 
> Amsterdam would be a more sensible choice? :-P

See, you are doing it again; leave the job of finding reasons why you 
are not qualified to the selection committee. Where someone lives now is 
totally unimportant.

The reason why I might like you to be in the team is a simply sum: one 
analyses what is needed and what we do have. We will have 2 PhD 
positions available knowing what I and a fellow postdoc can, we subtract 
that from the things we need and what is left is the minimum set of 
skills the other team members combined need to have. Which is still a 
very diverse set of skills and knowledge. My estimate is that with an 
added Andrew, what is left may be possible to fill with one person. Or 
if you start at the other end: for some likely kind of applicant to fill 
one position we will have an almost Andy shaped hole left.

Post a reply to this message

Darren New schrieb:
> Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
>> But I finally learned to tie my shoe laces a few weeks ago. From a
>> website... :/
> 
> And I'm in my 40's, and only learned I was tying my shoes wrong last 
> year.  I've been using a granny knot instead of a square knot for 40 years.

Well, I just checked, and I'm using a granny knot, too. I'm not going to 
change it, it works after all.

Manuel

Post a reply to this message

Darren New wrote:
> Odd. Never heard of that. I can see your point, but I would think the
> number of people who go thru the MS saying they'll get a PhD and knowing
> they're going to bail before then must be fairly low. Maybe where that
> has happened too often they instituted this policy.

	It's probably more the exception rather than the rule. And usually only
at a few of the top places. Where I went, it was the case for CS and not
Elect Eng (or, AFAIK, any other engineering). John Hopkins is also that
way for CS. I know universities that have it that way for Electrical
(Caltech).

	As for the number of people who go into MS saying they'll do a PhD and
"bailing out" - probably most of them in my department - which needs you
to take the MS. You typically don't get funding if you say you don't
plan on a PhD. So everyone says they do intend to do one.

-- 
I think animal testing is a terrible idea. They get all nervous and give
the wrong answers.


                    /\  /\               /\  /
                   /  \/  \ u e e n     /  \/  a w a z
                       >>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
                                   anl

Post a reply to this message

Manuel Kasten wrote:
> Well, I just checked, and I'm using a granny knot, too. I'm not going to 
> change it, it works after all.

I find I tie my shoes once or twice a day now, instead of every hour or so.

-- 
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)

Post a reply to this message