Re: 1-wire to USB converter that can use 1820s directly

["Robert Green" <ROBERT_GREEN1963@xxxxxxxxx>]

"Robert L Bass" <sales@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:8nle42t8ef66r9jtsqe4q9fij9uup9rv1p@xxxxxxxxxx
> > I suppose that's not impressive to someone that's a internet
> > personality themselves.  :-0
>
> I wouldn't know.  I don't personally know any "Internet personalities."

What's that old AI joke?  "Yesterday I did not know what an expert system
was.  Today I are one!"  You  is one, Bob.  Anyone who's got an army of
harpies ready to gnaw at their liver at the mere mention of their name
qualifies you.  FO seems to nominate you as the Greatest Usenet Villian that
Ever Lived on at least a weekly basis.

> > I've done a lot of requirements analyses in my life.  It's always been
> > incredible to me how wildly systems requirements morph as the design
> > evolves.  Unfortunately, it's often not in a good way!  Usenet at times
> > reflects the worst part of the process by inducing the "Telephone Game"
> > effect in a very predictable way.  As soon as someone makes a twist,
> > everyone else twists that way.  If we're talking flying red ducks and
> > someone says flying red chickens, suddenly, there's lots of chicken
talk.
> > It immediately puts the OP in a contentious posture.
>
> If the OP (we're talking in general now; not specific people please)
happens to
> be contentious, yes.  It's always the poster's choice how to reply.  You
don't
> *make* me angry but I might *choose* to become angry.

I viewed RS's visit as I would a visit of a traveling minstrel.  There's a
lot of amusement value to be had from watching people's reactions to him.
He elicits strong responses everywhere he goes.

> > He has to say, forcefully, I don't LIKE chicken (for whatever reason).
>
> He doesn't *have to* do anything.  He can simply say, "Gee, thanks but
that's
> not what I'm after because...." or he can use the "F" word as you
suggested.

I was actually related some of my own experience in other groups when I
asked similar questions.  Instead of asking why I was so insistent on what I
wanted, I got reams of drivel about why on earth I would ever want to do
what I wanted to do.  I found it exasperating and was sorely tempted to
react as Rod does.

> >> I didn't mean to criticize him at all.  In fact, I specifically
> >> said that was not the point.  I was only trying to say that
> >> "easy" and "hard" are relative.
> >
> > I know what you were trying to say.  I just wanted to point
> > out that criticizing someone...
>
> Now who's not listening?

Touche.  But whatever spin you want to put on it, there's the very likely
possibility that the OP will see you as disingenuine when you suggest he go
out a learn a new technique or skill to solve his problem, especially when
it's a skill you don't possess.

> > I was just being sarcastic.  Most people respond to posts for
> > some personal reason.  Whether it's to share knowledge,
> > bust chops or get "attaboys" there's always a personal element
> > to a response.
>
> Sarcasm can sometimes be witty and funny, especially if the other person
can see
> the wry smile on your face.  Unfortunately, in Usenet that's not possible
so it
> usually just sounds provocative.

That's why I view RS in the same mode as "shock jock" or one of the standup
insult comics.  If you don't take it for its amusement value, you'll blow a
blood vessel.  Life it too short!

> I respond to posts in CHA for two reasons.  Primarily, I enjoy the
conversation
> and the occasional opportunity to help someone.  Second, I make a living
selling
> hardware online to people with HA and security projects.
>
> > The good part is that you get lots of brainstorming and get
> > to look at ideas you may not have considered.  The bad part
> > is that the thread can wander so far away from the original
> > post that the replies are basically worthless.
>
> Depends on your perspective.  Realize that no one *owns* a thread.  As the
> discussion continues, information is shared about the original topic and
many
> related areas.  Sometimes you learn something important about a totally
> unrelated issue while following a thread about flying red ducks.

Very true.  But sometimes a meandering thread can be hell's bells for the OP
because there's a lot of discussion going on, but it's not very helpful.
When that's happened to me, I've felt slighted.  YMMV.

> > > As long as the subject matter is related to HA, I
> > > don't see that as a bad thing.
> >
> > It's not bad as long as it doesn't become contentious and
> > people start talking past each other and everyone starts
> > slipping on all the umbrage that's spilled everywhere.
>
> Again, that's the personal choice of each participant.  If you say you
think I'm
> an idiot but you need information on some subject I have at least three
options.
> I can ignore your post completely.  I can respond with disparaging
comments
> about your mother's use of military footwear or I can simply answer your
> question.  Most of the time I choose the third option.  My attitude is I'm
not
> here for you nor you for me.  I'm just here and so are you.

I have a slightly different view.  In most NG's I visit there are at least 3
or 4 (if not twenty or more) hot button issues and an equal number of
long-standing feuds.  Here, one reliable "hot button thread" is the "Is X-10
dead?" one.  I leave it to you to work out the ongoing feuds.  All of those
personal issues really distort who posts and why they post.

> > I just wanted to make the point that we're talking to
> > someone from another country...
>
> Did you mention that earlier?  I must have missed it.

I used the words "Oz" and "Ozian" to indicate he was from Australia.  While
most ockers get it, we seppos often do not.  And no, they don't call us
"seppos" because of our famous Zippo lighters or because of the Marx
Brothers.

> > ...Pushing the issue can really be read as calling the OP
> > stupid...
>
> Uh, no.  Explaining the difficulties associated with a particular type of
cable
> is not read as calling the OP stupid.  Insisting that it is might be a
good way
> to incite anger where none was intended though.

I guess the point was after the sixth or seventh admonition that satin cable
doesn't solder, it gets old.  Lots of people post answers before reading the
day's posts and don't realize they are posting yet another answer that's
already been marked "wrong" by the OP.

> >>>> That's an area where I have extensive knowledge and hands-on
> >>>> experience.
> >
> > American experience, anyway.
>
> Well, yes.  I'm American.  Presumably most people realize that from the
idiom.

It's never a sure thing these days.  Lots of foreigners speak and write
better English than many Americans.

> > The telco cords I've worked with were remarkably unsolderable.
> > They also would break the seal on the freezer door, so ours must
> > be different from his...
>
> Or the seal on his door is different.  I mentioned flat cable which
definitely
> will not break the seal on the door.  Whether that stuff makes it into his
> project will be something he decides.  What he got was information.
Hopefully,
> some of it was useful.  He sounds like a big boy.  I'm sure he can sort
things
> out.

I am sure he can.

 > The difference could easily be the lack of insulating
> > fibers that probably make our cords thicker and
> > sturdier but harder to solder.
>
> Actually, they're not part of the insulation.  The fibers are nylon which
has a
> greater tensile strength than the paper thin, extremely flexible
conductors.
> The fibers also stretch less than the insulation material.  If they didn't
the
> wires would break when the cord was pulled tightly.

You're correct.  The cords I have seen are copper twisted around a fiber
substrate and surrounded by it as well.  Clearly meant to enhance their
survivial as free-floating and often tugged on cords.

--
Bobby G.