capacitive loading an opamp

Bill Sloman wrote:
> On Jan 2, 10:11 pm, Joerg <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> BillSlomanwrote:
>>> On Jan 2, 5:49 pm, Joerg <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>> BillSlomanwrote:
>>>>> On Jan 2, 2:03 am, Joerg <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>> BillSlomanwrote:
>>>>>>> On Dec 31 2011, 7:05 pm, Jamie
>>>>>>> <jamie_ka1lpa_not_valid_after_ka1l...@charter.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Joerg wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Oppie wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> "Spehro Pefhany" <speffS...@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>> news:g3vsf7pfm1v2cbp1cmmp2lnd2jp4qugn1c@4ax.com...
>>>>>>>>>>> I figured that out while I was still in high school- that app notes
>>>>>>>>>>> were generally not written by anyone resembling a practicing engineer.
>>>>>>>>>>> Mostly by being bitten by their example circuits.
>>>>>>>>>> With a few notable exceptions like Jim Williams.
>>>>>>>>>> I really miss his crumby scope photos and clear writing style that not
>>>>>>>>>> only sold parts but helped us to understand WHY things worked. There are
>>>>>>>>>> many trade-offs in a design and understanding the basics puts a value on
>>>>>>>>>> those choices.
>>>>>>>>> Yep. A good engineer quickly learns to first look at the author's name.
>>>>>>>>> If that is Jim Williams, Bob Pease, Robert Widlar, Dean Banerjee or one
>>>>>>>>> of the other gurus I know it's good stuff.
>>>>>>>>   Oh boy, you know how to get brownie points. Was there something a
>>>>>>>> mystery you've been working on lately? I am sure one of those guys will
>>>>>>>> charm right in now :)
>>>>>>> Jim Williams, Bob Pease and Robert Widlar are dead, Bob Widlar for
>>>>>>> some years now.
>>>>>>> Dan Banerjee still seems to be with us, but since he works for
>>>>>>> National Semiconductor, Joerg probably doesn't authorise enough parts
>>>>>>> per year to qualify for his interest.
>>>>>> You and your premature conclusions :-)
>>>>>> Dean actually answered one of the more unorthodox inquiries I had in
>>>>>> person. National impressed the heck out of me when he did, that was good
>>>>>> customer service. Bob Pease did, too, by the way. The only company that
>>>>>> could rival that in my cases is Linear Technology, and back in the old
>>>>>> days Analog Devices.
>>>>>>> You seem to be even more out of touch with reality than Jim Thopmson,
>>>>>>> who does still seem to know about electronics gurus, presumably
>>>>>>> because he's yet to lose contact with the realities of electronics.
>>>>>> So what kinds of products have you designed lately? Say, last year?
>>>>> Have you been spending time with John Larkin? Whenever I correct one
>>>>> of his nonsense off-topic posts, he tries to get back at me by asking
>>>>> that question.
>>>>> The answer is - as you well know - none. ...
>>>> So how can you accuse people of being about to lose contact with
>>>> electronics when yuo already have? Not that I find anything wrong with
>>>> that, I might switch to brewing beer or whatever when I retire, but then
>>>> I would not say such things here. In fact, I wouldn't even say them
>>>> right now.
>>>>>                                       ... The Dutch electronics
>>>>> industry is of the opinion that anybody over 55 ought to retire and
>>>>> that anybody over 65 is retired, and I'm 69, so I'm retired, whether I
>>>>> like it or not. I don't - as I mention here from time to time - but I
>>>>> don't have the contacts or the attitude necessary to set up a
>>>>> consulting business of my own, so I'm stuck with it. You've give me
>>>>> good advice on the subject which I'd need a personality transplant to
>>>>> be able to follow - I'm grateful for it, but it's not advice I'm
>>>>> equipped to exploit.
>>>> "Not equipped to exploit"? That is what I completely fail to understand.
>>> Personalities and talents differ from person to person. I'm not going
>>> to go out and cold call.
>> Ok, allow me one more question then: Why does your public profile on
>> LinkedIn end at 1969?
>>
>> If you are seriously interested in working I suggest to fill that out.
>> It can result in them calling you instead of the other way around.
>> Speaking from experience here :-)
> 
> I'm on LinkedIn because several of the people I worked with at EMI in
> 1976-79 are on LinkedIn - they were an unusually good bunch, and I
> take care to keep in contact. I'm now also linked to a couple of
> members of my field hockey team, one of my nephews and his mother. I
> suppose I ought to take it seriously and fill in some more detail, but
> the last time I tried that they seemed to want money.
> 
> I'll have another look ..
> 

Filling out your work history in the profile is free of charge. A photo
also lends a lot of credibility if you feel comfortable with that.


>>>>> I'm still fooling around with my variant on the Baxandall Class-D
>>>>> oscillator, but have yet to get beyond LTspice into gEDA to create a
>>>>> schematic of a circuit that I could build. I should probably talk to
>>>>> my GP about anti-depressants, but can't be bothered ...
>>>> Hint: LTSpice already makes a schematic that is good enough, so you can
>>>> flick that switch on the Weller already :-)
>>> In reality, the LTSpice simulation runs terribly slowly if you include
>>> the the comparator to drive the demodulator from the sine-wave output.
>>> Bodging the model of the ADG1636 so that it's switch threshold is 0V
>>> and hysterisis 10mV lets the simulation run much faster.
>>> There are a few other similar simplifications in the LTSpice circuit,
>>> and it doesn't include any of the extra hardware that I'll want to
>>> build in to be able to measure the - low - levels of the odd harmonics
>>> in the output, like the bridged differentiator tunable notch filter to
>>> get rid of the fundamental.
>> Hmm, but you wrote "have yet to get beyond LTspice into gEDA to create a
>> schematic of a circuit that I could build". Most of the bench prototypes
>> I build directly from the LTSpice schematic. I only enter stuff into the
>> real CAD if it is about to become a product or an idea needs to be
>> presented (LTSpice schematics are ugly).
> 
> gEDA lets me extract detailed parts lists from the schematic, and
> other good things. ...


Ummm, since LTSpice is a SPICE program it natively runs based on a
netlist so you already have one :-)


>            ... IIRR Farnell has got a minimum order value, so it
> makes sense to buy all the parts in one hit. I know that if I'm
> careful about the documentation I can buy all the parts at once and
> not miss anything, and that's the way I like to work if I'm not under
> time pressure. I'm certainly not under pressure at the moment, though
> it might be good idea to invent some kind of dead-line ...
> 

Without a deadline projects can get out of hand rather quickly.

-- 
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

On Tue, 03 Jan 2012 08:34:55 -0800, Joerg <invalid@invalid.invalid>
wrote:

>Bill Sloman wrote:
>> On Jan 2, 10:11 pm, Joerg <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>> BillSlomanwrote:
>>>> On Jan 2, 5:49 pm, Joerg <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> BillSlomanwrote:
>>>>>> On Jan 2, 2:03 am, Joerg <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>> BillSlomanwrote:
>>>>>>>> On Dec 31 2011, 7:05 pm, Jamie
>>>>>>>> <jamie_ka1lpa_not_valid_after_ka1l...@charter.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Joerg wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Oppie wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> "Spehro Pefhany" <speffS...@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>> news:g3vsf7pfm1v2cbp1cmmp2lnd2jp4qugn1c@4ax.com...
>>>>>>>>>>>> I figured that out while I was still in high school- that app notes
>>>>>>>>>>>> were generally not written by anyone resembling a practicing engineer.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Mostly by being bitten by their example circuits.
>>>>>>>>>>> With a few notable exceptions like Jim Williams.
>>>>>>>>>>> I really miss his crumby scope photos and clear writing style that not
>>>>>>>>>>> only sold parts but helped us to understand WHY things worked. There are
>>>>>>>>>>> many trade-offs in a design and understanding the basics puts a value on
>>>>>>>>>>> those choices.
>>>>>>>>>> Yep. A good engineer quickly learns to first look at the author's name.
>>>>>>>>>> If that is Jim Williams, Bob Pease, Robert Widlar, Dean Banerjee or one
>>>>>>>>>> of the other gurus I know it's good stuff.
>>>>>>>>>   Oh boy, you know how to get brownie points. Was there something a
>>>>>>>>> mystery you've been working on lately? I am sure one of those guys will
>>>>>>>>> charm right in now :)
>>>>>>>> Jim Williams, Bob Pease and Robert Widlar are dead, Bob Widlar for
>>>>>>>> some years now.
>>>>>>>> Dan Banerjee still seems to be with us, but since he works for
>>>>>>>> National Semiconductor, Joerg probably doesn't authorise enough parts
>>>>>>>> per year to qualify for his interest.
>>>>>>> You and your premature conclusions :-)
>>>>>>> Dean actually answered one of the more unorthodox inquiries I had in
>>>>>>> person. National impressed the heck out of me when he did, that was good
>>>>>>> customer service. Bob Pease did, too, by the way. The only company that
>>>>>>> could rival that in my cases is Linear Technology, and back in the old
>>>>>>> days Analog Devices.
>>>>>>>> You seem to be even more out of touch with reality than Jim Thopmson,
>>>>>>>> who does still seem to know about electronics gurus, presumably
>>>>>>>> because he's yet to lose contact with the realities of electronics.
>>>>>>> So what kinds of products have you designed lately? Say, last year?
>>>>>> Have you been spending time with John Larkin? Whenever I correct one
>>>>>> of his nonsense off-topic posts, he tries to get back at me by asking
>>>>>> that question.
>>>>>> The answer is - as you well know - none. ...
>>>>> So how can you accuse people of being about to lose contact with
>>>>> electronics when yuo already have? Not that I find anything wrong with
>>>>> that, I might switch to brewing beer or whatever when I retire, but then
>>>>> I would not say such things here. In fact, I wouldn't even say them
>>>>> right now.
>>>>>>                                       ... The Dutch electronics
>>>>>> industry is of the opinion that anybody over 55 ought to retire and
>>>>>> that anybody over 65 is retired, and I'm 69, so I'm retired, whether I
>>>>>> like it or not. I don't - as I mention here from time to time - but I
>>>>>> don't have the contacts or the attitude necessary to set up a
>>>>>> consulting business of my own, so I'm stuck with it. You've give me
>>>>>> good advice on the subject which I'd need a personality transplant to
>>>>>> be able to follow - I'm grateful for it, but it's not advice I'm
>>>>>> equipped to exploit.
>>>>> "Not equipped to exploit"? That is what I completely fail to understand.
>>>> Personalities and talents differ from person to person. I'm not going
>>>> to go out and cold call.
>>> Ok, allow me one more question then: Why does your public profile on
>>> LinkedIn end at 1969?
>>>
>>> If you are seriously interested in working I suggest to fill that out.
>>> It can result in them calling you instead of the other way around.
>>> Speaking from experience here :-)
>> 
>> I'm on LinkedIn because several of the people I worked with at EMI in
>> 1976-79 are on LinkedIn - they were an unusually good bunch, and I
>> take care to keep in contact. I'm now also linked to a couple of
>> members of my field hockey team, one of my nephews and his mother. I
>> suppose I ought to take it seriously and fill in some more detail, but
>> the last time I tried that they seemed to want money.
>> 
>> I'll have another look ..
>> 
>
>Filling out your work history in the profile is free of charge. A photo
>also lends a lot of credibility if you feel comfortable with that.
>
>
>>>>>> I'm still fooling around with my variant on the Baxandall Class-D
>>>>>> oscillator, but have yet to get beyond LTspice into gEDA to create a
>>>>>> schematic of a circuit that I could build. I should probably talk to
>>>>>> my GP about anti-depressants, but can't be bothered ...
>>>>> Hint: LTSpice already makes a schematic that is good enough, so you can
>>>>> flick that switch on the Weller already :-)
>>>> In reality, the LTSpice simulation runs terribly slowly if you include
>>>> the the comparator to drive the demodulator from the sine-wave output.
>>>> Bodging the model of the ADG1636 so that it's switch threshold is 0V
>>>> and hysterisis 10mV lets the simulation run much faster.
>>>> There are a few other similar simplifications in the LTSpice circuit,
>>>> and it doesn't include any of the extra hardware that I'll want to
>>>> build in to be able to measure the - low - levels of the odd harmonics
>>>> in the output, like the bridged differentiator tunable notch filter to
>>>> get rid of the fundamental.
>>> Hmm, but you wrote "have yet to get beyond LTspice into gEDA to create a
>>> schematic of a circuit that I could build". Most of the bench prototypes
>>> I build directly from the LTSpice schematic. I only enter stuff into the
>>> real CAD if it is about to become a product or an idea needs to be
>>> presented (LTSpice schematics are ugly).
>> 
>> gEDA lets me extract detailed parts lists from the schematic, and
>> other good things. ...
>
>
>Ummm, since LTSpice is a SPICE program it natively runs based on a
>netlist so you already have one :-)
>
>
>>            ... IIRR Farnell has got a minimum order value, so it
>> makes sense to buy all the parts in one hit. I know that if I'm
>> careful about the documentation I can buy all the parts at once and
>> not miss anything, and that's the way I like to work if I'm not under
>> time pressure. I'm certainly not under pressure at the moment, though
>> it might be good idea to invent some kind of dead-line ...
>> 
>
>Without a deadline projects can get out of hand rather quickly.


Or slowly.

John

John Devereux wrote:


> 
> I would if I hadn't broken all the bits of my dremel! :)
> 
I do things like that with an Xacto knife.  When the point chips
off, I take a few swipes on a sharpening stone, and that forms
a triangular tip.  I then drag this point backwards across the
copper, and it takes a few swipes to cut all the way through the
copper, leaving a gap about the width of the blade.  It can be a very
quick way to isolate regions of copper-clad.

Jon

On 1/3/2012 3:46 PM, Jon Elson wrote:
> John Devereux wrote:
>
>
>>
>> I would if I hadn't broken all the bits of my dremel! :)
>>
> I do things like that with an Xacto knife.  When the point chips
> off, I take a few swipes on a sharpening stone, and that forms
> a triangular tip.  I then drag this point backwards across the
> copper, and it takes a few swipes to cut all the way through the
> copper, leaving a gap about the width of the blade.  It can be a very
> quick way to isolate regions of copper-clad.
>
> Jon

I use the Dremel drill press and a grout removal bit. With a fence and 
patience, it makes nice, straight cuts in the copper.

John S

On 1/3/2012 3:46 PM, Jon Elson wrote:
> John Devereux wrote:
>
>
>>
>> I would if I hadn't broken all the bits of my dremel! :)
>>
> I do things like that with an Xacto knife.  When the point chips
> off, I take a few swipes on a sharpening stone, and that forms
> a triangular tip.  I then drag this point backwards across the
> copper, and it takes a few swipes to cut all the way through the
> copper, leaving a gap about the width of the blade.  It can be a very
> quick way to isolate regions of copper-clad.
>
> Jon

I also got some little bits that look sort of like tubing but the 
working end is coated with diamond dust. I use them in the drill press 
to cut circular islands in the copper. Although a bit expensive, they 
are very fast and easy to use.

John S

On Jan 3, 5:34=A0pm, Joerg <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> BillSlomanwrote:
> > On Jan 2, 10:11 pm, Joerg <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> >> BillSlomanwrote:
> >>> On Jan 2, 5:49 pm, Joerg <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> >>>> BillSlomanwrote:
> >>>>> On Jan 2, 2:03 am, Joerg <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> >>>>>> BillSlomanwrote:
> >>>>>>> On Dec 31 2011, 7:05 pm, Jamie
> >>>>>>> <jamie_ka1lpa_not_valid_after_ka1l...@charter.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Joerg wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Oppie wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> "Spehro Pefhany" <speffS...@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote in =
message
> >>>>>>>>>>news:g3vsf7pfm1v2cbp1cmmp2lnd2jp4qugn1c@4ax.com...

<snip>

> >> Ok, allow me one more question then: Why does your public profile on
> >> LinkedIn end at 1969?
>
> >> If you are seriously interested in working I suggest to fill that out.
> >> It can result in them calling you instead of the other way around.
> >> Speaking from experience here :-)
>
> > I'm on LinkedIn because several of the people I worked with at EMI in
> > 1976-79 are on LinkedIn - they were an unusually good bunch, and I
> > take care to keep in contact. I'm now also linked to a couple of
> > members of my field hockey team, one of my nephews and his mother. I
> > suppose I ought to take it seriously and fill in some more detail, but
> > the last time I tried that they seemed to want money.
>
> > I'll have another look ..
>
> Filling out your work history in the profile is free of charge.

So it is! I've only pushed on to 1971 so far, but I'll get up to date
eventually.

> A photo
> also lends a lot of credibility if you feel comfortable with that.

There was one on my hard disk. It won't add much to my credibility,
but it fills the gap.

I suppose that I shouldn't advertise that I'm white and anglo-saxon,
but you are right in saying that a photo engages the reader,and I
doubt that I'll be jumping the queue on any tinted non-Europeans, or
at least not on anybody under 65.

<snip>

--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

On Jan 3, 3:52=A0am, John Larkin
<jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Jan 2012 18:06:22 -0800 (PST),BillSloman
>
> <bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote:
> >On Jan 2, 6:52=A0pm, John Larkin
> ><jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
> >> On Mon, 2 Jan 2012 02:41:52 -0800 (PST),BillSloman
>
> >> <bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote:
> >> >On Jan 2, 2:03 am, Joerg <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> >> >> BillSlomanwrote:
> >> >> > On Dec 31 2011, 7:05 pm, Jamie
> >> >> > <jamie_ka1lpa_not_valid_after_ka1l...@charter.net> wrote:
> >> >> >> Joerg wrote:
> >> >> >>> Oppie wrote:
> >> >> >>>> "Spehro Pefhany" <speffS...@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote in =
message
> >> >> >>>>news:g3vsf7pfm1v2cbp1cmmp2lnd2jp4qugn1c@4ax.com...

<snip>

> >> The big question in a life is: is your intellect in charge of the
> >> direction of your life, or are you ruled by emotions?
>
> >Everybody is ruled by their emotions, and nobody can think entirely
> >straight. Read
>
> >"Thinking, Fast and slow" by Daniel Kahneman, ISBN: 978-0-374-27563-1.
> >It's brilliant, if rather worrying.
>
> >> It's funny that you pretend to be oh-so-smart, but in fact your
> >> intelligence is distorted, literally rendeded useless, by your
> >> emotions.
>
> >No more than anybody elses, and probably less than most. I've been
> >aware of Daniel Kahneman's work for some years now, and keep an eye on
> >the distortions in my thinking - this doesn't eliminate them, but
> >makes me think twice before I make decisions. "Rendered useless"
> >strikes me as a gross exaggeration
>
> >> If you were smart, you'd do something about that.
>
> >I do. Probably not as much as I might, but fighting with your sub-
> >conscious has its costs, and it often makes sense to go with a sub-
> >optimal decision that is easier to live with.
>
> So, not so smart.

Don't take it personally.
I've already taken Joerg's advice today, which has - unfortunately -
exhausted my reservoir of credulity.

--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

Bill Sloman wrote:
> On Jan 3, 5:34 pm, Joerg <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>> BillSlomanwrote:
>>> On Jan 2, 10:11 pm, Joerg <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>> BillSlomanwrote:
>>>>> On Jan 2, 5:49 pm, Joerg <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>> BillSlomanwrote:
>>>>>>> On Jan 2, 2:03 am, Joerg <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>> BillSlomanwrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Dec 31 2011, 7:05 pm, Jamie
>>>>>>>>> <jamie_ka1lpa_not_valid_after_ka1l...@charter.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Joerg wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Oppie wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> "Spehro Pefhany" <speffS...@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>> news:g3vsf7pfm1v2cbp1cmmp2lnd2jp4qugn1c@4ax.com...
> 
> <snip>
> 
>>>> Ok, allow me one more question then: Why does your public profile on
>>>> LinkedIn end at 1969?
>>>> If you are seriously interested in working I suggest to fill that out.
>>>> It can result in them calling you instead of the other way around.
>>>> Speaking from experience here :-)
>>> I'm on LinkedIn because several of the people I worked with at EMI in
>>> 1976-79 are on LinkedIn - they were an unusually good bunch, and I
>>> take care to keep in contact. I'm now also linked to a couple of
>>> members of my field hockey team, one of my nephews and his mother. I
>>> suppose I ought to take it seriously and fill in some more detail, but
>>> the last time I tried that they seemed to want money.
>>> I'll have another look ..
>> Filling out your work history in the profile is free of charge.
> 
> So it is! I've only pushed on to 1971 so far, but I'll get up to date
> eventually.
> 

And correct it to "... intended for the project ..." :-)

Fill in the rest, that took me less than 15min. The pay-off can be huge.


>> A photo
>> also lends a lot of credibility if you feel comfortable with that.
> 
> There was one on my hard disk. It won't add much to my credibility,
> but it fills the gap.
> 
> I suppose that I shouldn't advertise that I'm white and anglo-saxon,
> but you are right in saying that a photo engages the reader,and I
> doubt that I'll be jumping the queue on any tinted non-Europeans, or
> at least not on anybody under 65.
> 

Au contraire. Skin color, race or origin do not matter. But age and
experience can really make a (positive) difference. When someone goes
through the effort to slosh through LinkedIn that usually means they are
really up the creek with some project and need help, prontissimo. Then
they want someone who dunnit before, not some 25 year old Ph.D. who has
never wielded a soldering iron in his life.

Age discrimination often only exists in the minds of people. Yeah, some
European companies do it. But afterwards projects often get screwed up.
And that's where consultants come in 8-D

-- 
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

Bill Sloman wrote:
> On Jan 3, 3:52 am, John Larkin
> <jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 2 Jan 2012 18:06:22 -0800 (PST),BillSloman
>>
>> <bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote:
>>> On Jan 2, 6:52 pm, John Larkin
>>> <jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 2 Jan 2012 02:41:52 -0800 (PST),BillSloman
>>>> <bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote:
>>>>> On Jan 2, 2:03 am, Joerg <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>> BillSlomanwrote:
>>>>>>> On Dec 31 2011, 7:05 pm, Jamie
>>>>>>> <jamie_ka1lpa_not_valid_after_ka1l...@charter.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Joerg wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Oppie wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> "Spehro Pefhany" <speffS...@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>> news:g3vsf7pfm1v2cbp1cmmp2lnd2jp4qugn1c@4ax.com...
> 
> <snip>
> 
>>>> The big question in a life is: is your intellect in charge of the
>>>> direction of your life, or are you ruled by emotions?
>>> Everybody is ruled by their emotions, and nobody can think entirely
>>> straight. Read
>>> "Thinking, Fast and slow" by Daniel Kahneman, ISBN: 978-0-374-27563-1.
>>> It's brilliant, if rather worrying.
>>>> It's funny that you pretend to be oh-so-smart, but in fact your
>>>> intelligence is distorted, literally rendeded useless, by your
>>>> emotions.
>>> No more than anybody elses, and probably less than most. I've been
>>> aware of Daniel Kahneman's work for some years now, and keep an eye on
>>> the distortions in my thinking - this doesn't eliminate them, but
>>> makes me think twice before I make decisions. "Rendered useless"
>>> strikes me as a gross exaggeration
>>>> If you were smart, you'd do something about that.
>>> I do. Probably not as much as I might, but fighting with your sub-
>>> conscious has its costs, and it often makes sense to go with a sub-
>>> optimal decision that is easier to live with.
>> So, not so smart.
> 
> Don't take it personally.
> I've already taken Joerg's advice today, which has - unfortunately -
> exhausted my reservoir of credulity.
> 

Oh come on, you have written a grand total of two sentences and uploaded
one photo. Why not go all out and complete the profile as best as possible?

This stuff is IMHO seriously worth it and the effort is so small. Cost
is zero. What better marketing tool could there be?

-- 
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

Bill Sloman wrote:

> On Jan 3, 3:52 am, John Larkin
> <jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
> 
>>On Mon, 2 Jan 2012 18:06:22 -0800 (PST),BillSloman
>>
>><bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote:
>>
>>>On Jan 2, 6:52 pm, John Larkin
>>><jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Mon, 2 Jan 2012 02:41:52 -0800 (PST),BillSloman
>>
>>>><bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Jan 2, 2:03 am, Joerg <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>BillSlomanwrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On Dec 31 2011, 7:05 pm, Jamie
>>>>>>><jamie_ka1lpa_not_valid_after_ka1l...@charter.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Joerg wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Oppie wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>"Spehro Pefhany" <speffS...@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>news:g3vsf7pfm1v2cbp1cmmp2lnd2jp4qugn1c@4ax.com...
> 
> 
> <snip>
> 
>>>>The big question in a life is: is your intellect in charge of the
>>>>direction of your life, or are you ruled by emotions?
>>
>>>Everybody is ruled by their emotions, and nobody can think entirely
>>>straight. Read
>>
>>>"Thinking, Fast and slow" by Daniel Kahneman, ISBN: 978-0-374-27563-1.
>>>It's brilliant, if rather worrying.
>>
>>>>It's funny that you pretend to be oh-so-smart, but in fact your
>>>>intelligence is distorted, literally rendeded useless, by your
>>>>emotions.
>>
>>>No more than anybody elses, and probably less than most. I've been
>>>aware of Daniel Kahneman's work for some years now, and keep an eye on
>>>the distortions in my thinking - this doesn't eliminate them, but
>>>makes me think twice before I make decisions. "Rendered useless"
>>>strikes me as a gross exaggeration
>>
>>>>If you were smart, you'd do something about that.
>>
>>>I do. Probably not as much as I might, but fighting with your sub-
>>>conscious has its costs, and it often makes sense to go with a sub-
>>>optimal decision that is easier to live with.
>>
>>So, not so smart.
> 
> 
> Don't take it personally.
> I've already taken Joerg's advice today, which has - unfortunately -
> exhausted my reservoir of credulity.
> 
> --
> Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
> 
   You can't exhaust what you don't have, now or past pretense.

Jamie