The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered
-
@HardwareGeek said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
@Benjamin-Hall said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
The core was simulating trajectories of atoms using coupled quantum electrons to classical nuclei. I was attempting (didn't really work all that well) to add back in quantum nuclear behavior after-the-fact on top of those trajectories.
I understood some of those words.
Translation: he wrote FORTRAN stuff.
-
@topspin
SPANK! SPANK! SPANK!
-
@dkf said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
It'll undergo collapse into one of the standard states when observed, same as any quantum system.
Now that's some danish bullshit. Of course it won't collapse, it's the world that will split into two timelines.
-
@Gąska said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
has again devolved into multiple competing standards (USB-C, Quick Charge, Apple doing their own thing...)
Eh, that's true in a sense, but at the same time, none of those standards are entirely incompatible. A standard USB port is capable of charging most any device, and most of them fall back to 2.4a USB 2.0 if their preferred flavor isn't connected. It's still annoying, but not nearly as bad as it could be.
-
@sloosecannon said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
A standard USB port is capable of charging most any device
There are some weird things in the spec, and some manufacturers have actually implemented it.
For example, I have an old phone which can be charged only by a real USB port on a computer or a hacked socket with data wires shorted together. Cheap chinese chargers have data lines completely disconnected and the device 'correctly' recognizes it as not a charger, and it won't charge. Because RFC says so.
-
@topspin said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
@HardwareGeek said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
@Benjamin-Hall said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
The core was simulating trajectories of atoms using coupled quantum electrons to classical nuclei. I was attempting (didn't really work all that well) to add back in quantum nuclear behavior after-the-fact on top of those trajectories.
I understood some of those words.
Translation: he wrote FORTRAN stuff.
Fortunately all the FORTRAN stuff was written. Mine was a proof of concept in Python, taking the data from the ENDYNE runs.
-
@Benjamin-Hall Lucky you.
-
@sloosecannon said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
most of them fall back to 2.4a USB 2.0 if their preferred flavor isn't connected
That's if you're lucky. They can also fall back to 0.5A, or even to 0.1A if they follow the spec to the letter. You'd better not be in a hurry.
-
@sebastian-galczynski said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
@sloosecannon said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
There are some weird things in the specThat's an understatement. There's not a single spec, there are several of them and several versions of each, not to mention the manufacturers who implement them incorrectly, or use something proprietary instead.
From experience, having to handle that is not a pleasant experience. It's a mess, and it's getting progressively worse.
-
There are actually charge controller chips that basically interrogate the device for what it wants and reconfigures the USB port for that kind of charging. They're usually only found on Qualcomm Quick Charge ports because they're pretty high BOM cost, though (and they all implement Qualcomm QC)
-
@sebastian-galczynski said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
@sloosecannon said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
A standard USB port is capable of charging most any device
There are some weird things in the spec, and some manufacturers have actually implemented it.
For example, I have an old phone which can be charged only by a real USB port on a computer or a hacked socket with data wires shorted together. Cheap chinese chargers have data lines completely disconnected and the device 'correctly' recognizes it as not a charger, and it won't charge. Because RFC says so.That's why I said most.
I haven't encountered something weird like that in literally years. They exist, but not commonly.
-
@sloosecannon said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
I haven't encountered something weird like that in literally years. They exist, but not commonly.
The problem is that those chargers are, from the point of the device, a complete unknown. So you have three options:
A. play it safe, and only use the lowest current that is guaranteed to be available in all cases (100 mA)
B. hope for the best and use 500 mA (or more if you really don't care about standards and safety).
C. ramp up the current while monitoring the voltage to find the best operating point.
If you choose option A, users of those chargers will complain than charging their devices takes ages.
If you choose option B, you may overload the charger and potentially damage it.
If you choose option C, you need a more expensive charging circuit, and the risk of overloading is only reduced, not completely eliminated.I designed a USB device a few years ago, and chose option A. My rationale was "such chargers are likely to bargain-bin ones with zero protection against overload, and safe is better than sorry". Marketing people would probably push option B.
-
@Gąska said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
@djls45 in most cases, yes. And the observation happens at birth. And the observer is the doctor overseeing the pregnancy. Exact procedure might vary by country.
And now I think I understand what the machine that goes "Ping!" is used for.
-
@sebastian-galczynski said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
@sloosecannon said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
A standard USB port is capable of charging most any device
There are some weird things in the spec, and some manufacturers have actually implemented it.
For example, I have an old phone which can be charged only by a real USB port on a computer or a hacked socket with data wires shorted together. Cheap chinese chargers have data lines completely disconnected and the device 'correctly' recognizes it as not a charger, and it won't charge. Because RFC says so.See also: the PS3 controller. Because why would you ever want to charge a wireless controller with a battery pack or wall charger near the couch, rather than running a cord all the way to the console?
-
@HardwareGeek said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
@Benjamin-Hall said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
The core was simulating trajectories of atoms using coupled quantum electrons to classical nuclei. I was attempting (didn't really work all that well) to add back in quantum nuclear behavior after-the-fact on top of those trajectories.
I understood some of those words.
That's how I felt about this one:
@pie_flavor said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
Oh it serves UTF-8. But tripcodes are parsed using Shift-JIS. So when I use a tripcode generator to make my post extra annoying, I always have to reopen the output file as Shift-JIS instead of UTF-8. Luckily VSC has a 'reopen with encoding' button right at the bottom.
-
@Cursorkeys If you don't know what tripcode is, it means you're not mentally disabled. If you don't know what Shift JIS is, it means you're one lucky bastard. If you don't know what UTF-8 is, stay away from programming until you read up on the struggle of non-English people against the technology.
-
@Gąska said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
@Cursorkeys If you don't know what tripcode is
No idea, sounds like that's for the best then.
Shift-JIS
I know of it, but I've never had to use it.
UTF-8
Unfortunately yes, and even more unfortunately also our own I-wish-it-was-uuencode abomination.
Struggles of non-English people against the technology.
More than enough struggle here for everyone!
-
@Gąska said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
tripcode
That's a character encoding that's designed to trip up all programmers?
-
@Gąska said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
@Cursorkeys If you don't know what UTF-8 is, stay away from programming until you read up on the struggle of non-English people against the technology.
*goes on a rant about these privileged English speaking white cishets who don't have to struggle with having an
ßin their name that asshole journals print asβ.
-
@Cursorkeys said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
@Gąska said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
@Cursorkeys If you don't know what tripcode is
No idea, sounds like that's for the best then.
4chan has no accounts system. So if you want to uniquely identify yourself, you type in a password after a pound sign in your username field, and the system hashes it using
crypt, salted with itself. The result is converted to base 64 and displayed after your username on any post you send with that password. The algorithm is fairly simple, so you can run a program to brute-force tripcodes that display certain character sequences. The connection with Shift-JIS is that two-byte characters are interpreted using Shift-JIS instead of UTF-8 since 4chan was originally an English copy of a Japanese-only community, and sometimes two-byte characters are necessary because of control characters or characters that disrupt parsing.
-
@dcon said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
@Gąska said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
tripcode
That's a character encoding that's designed to trip up all programmers?
You might be thinking of EBCDIC:
The gaps between letters made simple code that worked in ASCII fail on EBCDIC. For example,
for (c='A';c<='Z';++c)would setcto the 26 letters in the ASCII alphabet, but 41 characters including a number of unassigned ones in EBCDIC. Fixing this required complicating the code with function calls which was greatly resisted by programmers.
-
@JBert said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
@dcon said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
@Gąska said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
tripcode
That's a character encoding that's designed to trip up all programmers?
You might be thinking of EBCDIC:
The gaps between letters made simple code that worked in ASCII fail on EBCDIC. For example,
for (c='A';c<='Z';++c)would setcto the 26 letters in the ASCII alphabet, but 41 characters including a number of unassigned ones in EBCDIC. Fixing this required complicating the code with function calls which was greatly resisted by programmers.Or, as I discovered at a gig, a character set that was almost exactly, but not quite, like ISO 8859-1. And broke in strange ways. And it came from a mainframe that the people who kept it alive didn't really know how it worked, so after having discovered the odd characterset being the root cause of bugs,, I also had to convince the maintainers of the other system that they were in fact not using ISO 8859-1.
I hate character encodings.
-
@JBert Ah, well, that one is a classic case of "your own damn fault". Characters are characters, not numbers.
-
@HardwareGeek said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
@Benjamin-Hall said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
The core was simulating trajectories of atoms using coupled quantum electrons to classical nuclei. I was attempting (didn't really work all that well) to add back in quantum nuclear behavior after-the-fact on top of those trajectories.
I understood some of those words.
I think he was saying he had a program that would model the motion of atoms by using the standard model for the protons and neutrons, but the quantum model for electrons, and his project was to try to add the calculations for quantum-model proton and neutron movement after the standard-model motion had already been calculated.
Does that help?
@Benjamin-Hall, is that close enough to accurate?
-
@sebastian-galczynski said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
@dkf said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
It'll undergo collapse into one of the standard states when observed, same as any quantum system.
Now that's some danish bullshit. Of course it won't collapse, it's the world that will split into two timelines.
How can we tell the difference?
-
@Carnage said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
@JBert said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
@dcon said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
@Gąska said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
tripcode
That's a character encoding that's designed to trip up all programmers?
You might be thinking of EBCDIC:
The gaps between letters made simple code that worked in ASCII fail on EBCDIC. For example,
for (c='A';c<='Z';++c)would setcto the 26 letters in the ASCII alphabet, but 41 characters including a number of unassigned ones in EBCDIC. Fixing this required complicating the code with function calls which was greatly resisted by programmers.Or, as I discovered at a gig, a character set that was almost exactly, but not quite, like ISO 8859-1.
ISO 8859-2?
-
@Gąska said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
@Carnage said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
@JBert said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
@dcon said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
@Gąska said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
tripcode
That's a character encoding that's designed to trip up all programmers?
You might be thinking of EBCDIC:
The gaps between letters made simple code that worked in ASCII fail on EBCDIC. For example,
for (c='A';c<='Z';++c)would setcto the 26 letters in the ASCII alphabet, but 41 characters including a number of unassigned ones in EBCDIC. Fixing this required complicating the code with function calls which was greatly resisted by programmers.Or, as I discovered at a gig, a character set that was almost exactly, but not quite, like ISO 8859-1.
ISO 8859-2?
8859-15
-
@Gąska said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
@Carnage said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
@JBert said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
@dcon said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
@Gąska said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
tripcode
That's a character encoding that's designed to trip up all programmers?
You might be thinking of EBCDIC:
The gaps between letters made simple code that worked in ASCII fail on EBCDIC. For example,
for (c='A';c<='Z';++c)would setcto the 26 letters in the ASCII alphabet, but 41 characters including a number of unassigned ones in EBCDIC. Fixing this required complicating the code with function calls which was greatly resisted by programmers.Or, as I discovered at a gig, a character set that was almost exactly, but not quite, like ISO 8859-1.
ISO 8859-2?
No, the name was a bunch of letters similar to EBCDIC, but not quite the same I think. Memory is a bit hazy.
That was a theme with working with those old, nay ancient, big iron systems. Kindof like something that's sortof a standard but not really. And the strangeness bites you in the ass at the most inopportune moments.
-
@Gąska said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
the struggle of non-English people against the technology.
Have you ever had to explain to a CxO why you can implement Japanese language in the HTTP UI of a device, but NOT on the physical display of that same device (that has <512KB of built-in FLASH total)?
And no, hiragana/katagana were ruled out by the marketing team, as they'd "make it look as if it were aimed at the simple-minded and/or childish".
-
@acrow now I want to know how it ended.
-
@Carnage said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
No, the name was a bunch of letters similar to EBCDIC, but not quite the same I think. Memory is a bit hazy.
There were a number of strange ASCII extensions over the years.
-
@Gąska In the end, we didn't implement any languages other than english. Since we're talking about non-consumer equipment, support for languages was a nice-to-have afterthought, not a requirement. Uniformity was of greater importance than usability. But it would have differentiated us from the competition, especially in Japan where we're newcomers to the market.
Sorry no funny.
For the next version of the product, if I'm still here to see it, the following changes will be made:
a. Menu library changed to something that can handle swapping text labels for images at runtime. And handles not having a mouse or full keyboard better. Way too many hacky value-input screens now.
b. Language pack support, to allow storing said images on a 25xx FLASH IC at runtime. Have to make PC tools for generating the language packs, too, unless someone can point me to existing ones.
c. External FLASH IC, so that settings and serial number don't get erased by the unavoidable field upgrade of the software.EDIT:
Thinking about this now just made me realize that, if I get all the text strings at the same time, I can cherry-pick just the characters that were actually used. Reducing the font from 60k characters to something that may just fit into the built-in flash.
But to do that, I'll have to either write a new font converter or write a parser for the currently used library's (D4D) font-generator output. So, it's not over yet after all. You just extended my misery by another 2-3 years that this garbage can spend on the market before we HAVE to replace the hardware with something better. Thanks a lot.
-
@djls45 close enough, although we'd call the "standard model" Newtonian mechanics--the Standard Model is actually a quantum thing.
Basically the electron behavior was found at each step using Schrodinger's equation, which created a force on the nuclei which then moved classically in this dynamic potential.
My idea was to create a multi-valued "potential surface" from a bundle of trajectories (using the simulation to sample the space) and then treat the nuclei as wave packets on this surface, with scattering at the "seam) where the surfaces met.
-
@Gąska said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
@pie_flavor okay then, I'll append my statement - everyone actually settled on a single definite standard for character encoding, except 4chan.
Just like line endings.
-
@sloosecannon said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
@Gąska said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
has again devolved into multiple competing standards (USB-C, Quick Charge, Apple doing their own thing...)
Eh, that's true in a sense, but at the same time, none of those standards are entirely incompatible. A standard USB port is capable of charging most any device, and most of them fall back to 2.4a USB 2.0 if their preferred flavor isn't connected. It's still annoying, but not nearly as bad as it could be.
-
@boomzilla at least all modern AC adapters are now certified for 100-240V 50-60Hz, so all you care about is whether the plug touches the socket - no need for those bulky transformers anymore.
-
@Benjamin-Hall said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
My idea was to create a multi-valued "potential surface" from a bundle of trajectories (using the simulation to sample the space) and then treat the nuclei as wave packets on this surface, with scattering at the "seam) where the surfaces met.
Is the effect large enough to matter, given the fact that even one proton is far heavier than all the electrons in an atom of even the chunkiest element ever made?
-
@topspin said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
@Gąska said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
@Carnage said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
@JBert said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
@dcon said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
@Gąska said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
tripcode
That's a character encoding that's designed to trip up all programmers?
You might be thinking of EBCDIC:
The gaps between letters made simple code that worked in ASCII fail on EBCDIC. For example,
for (c='A';c<='Z';++c)would setcto the 26 letters in the ASCII alphabet, but 41 characters including a number of unassigned ones in EBCDIC. Fixing this required complicating the code with function calls which was greatly resisted by programmers.Or, as I discovered at a gig, a character set that was almost exactly, but not quite, like ISO 8859-1.
ISO 8859-2?
8859-15
My guess would be Windows-1252.
-
@dkf said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
@Benjamin-Hall said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
My idea was to create a multi-valued "potential surface" from a bundle of trajectories (using the simulation to sample the space) and then treat the nuclei as wave packets on this surface, with scattering at the "seam) where the surfaces met.
Is the effect large enough to matter, given the fact that even one proton is far heavier than all the electrons in an atom of even the chunkiest element ever made?
Depends on the system. For "high" energies (>10 keV/amu)? Not really. There the Bohr-Oppenheimer approximation works fine. Intermediate energies (~1kev/amu) and simple systems? Still not a big effect. Low energies (< 100 eV/amu)? Absolutely. In those regimes, the error bars on experiment and theory are such that being within a factor of 2 of experiment is pretty darn good and an order of magnitude is not that bad. Everything's done with log-log plots cause otherwise it looks horrible
-
@Gąska said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
@Cursorkeys If you don't know what tripcode is, it means you're not mentally disabled. If you don't know what Shift JIS is, it means you're one lucky bastard. If you don't know what UTF-8 is, stay away from programming until you read up on the struggle of non-English people against the technology.
Got my second 10 upvotes notification for this post. I wonder which part the person who's got mad, got mad about.
-
@acrow said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
You just extended my misery by another 2-3 years that this garbage can spend on the market before we HAVE to replace the hardware with something better. Thanks a lot.
HTH, HAND, GTFO etc.
-
@boomzilla said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
Now, go through and interpret each of those as an emoji...
-
@anotherusername
That's not right. I can tell from personal experience, and just leaning to my left, that the slants on "Type I" are more like 60° above the horizontal.I do like the EU plug though. Could an electrician please tell me what advantage polarised plugs gives you, because I haven't been able to find out.
-
@kazitor said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
Could an electrician please tell me what advantage polarised plugs gives you, because I haven't been able to find out.
Connecting a "hot" wire to another "hot" wire won't do anything (don't do it while they're hot, obviously -- but when you flip the power back on, nothing will happen). Same goes for connecting a "neutral" to a "neutral". But exciting things can happen if you connect a "hot" wire to a "neutral" wire.
It shouldn't generally matter unless you get a loop in the circuit somewhere. But if you do get a loop, having the correct polarity on all of the connections means the difference between nothing happening vs. having a short circuit.
-
@anotherusername another two reasons
-
some equipment comes with a single channel switch to turn on/off, if you want most of the unit cold you want the switch on the live wire. So polarization should ensure that (except not all wiring in the wild is compliant)
-
a unit fuse goes in only one AC wire, you want it to be on the live one to ensure the biggest cold area.
-
-
@anotherusername said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
Connecting a "hot" wire to another "hot" wire won't do anything
That's only true for single-phase systems, and even in that case, having loops is a really bad idea (if the two hot wires are from different circuits, it makes circuits breakers inoperative).
The only exception is the electrical system used in the UK, which has loops by design, and includes extra fuses for that reason.
-
@anotherusername Perhaps I understand less than I thought (unsurprising).
The way I see it, some plugs like the AU ones are polarised, so the plug is specifically designed so it cannot be reversed.
Other plugs, like the German Schuko, are not and so their plugs are reversible.What I want to know is why those ones handle being swapped just fine, where as others apparently can't. And then also why my polarised-plug charger worked just fine through an adapter in Germany.
-
@acrow said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
But to do that, I'll have to either write a new font converter or write a parser for the currently used library's (D4D) font-generator output. So, it's not over yet after all. You just extended my misery by another 2-3 years that this garbage can spend on the market before we HAVE to replace the hardware with something better. Thanks a lot.
I heard there were chips that generate fonts for you. Maybe you could slap one of those instead of using a library?
-
@Tsaukpaetra but it would cost like five cents per unit! Are you out of your mind!?
-
@kazitor said in The most pointless ISO standard I've encountered:
The way I see it, some plugs like the AU ones are polarised, so the plug is specifically designed so it cannot be reversed.
Other plugs, like the German Schuko, are not and so their plugs are reversible.What I want to know is why those ones handle being swapped just fine, where as others apparently can't. And then also why my polarised-plug charger worked just fine through an adapter in Germany.
The Schuko an Euro plugs are not polarized because EU regulations for electrical equipment know only two cases: either the whole appliance is completely insulated and equipped with a Euro plug, therefore touching live parts isn't possible even in case of a fault and it doesn't matter where the live wire goes, or the appliance has conducting parts you can touch, in which case it must have a Schuko plug and conducting parts connected to protective earth, so it doesn't matter where the live wire is either.
That's all just a safety consideration though, the devices themselves don't care either way because it's always AC.
