I don't know if the parent comment was trying to equate American English and Simple English - I can see it as a way to dismiss American English as a "lesser" language (which it isn't, as you say), but I wouldn't start by assuming that.
On the individual scale, something like a Sigma Metalytics resistivity analyser (passes an electric field through the sample, checks to see if resistivity, conductivity, weight or size all match up to what you'd expect from a homogeneous gold sample of that size or weight). On the commercial scale, an XRF spectrometer. Both methods are completely non-destructive, and highly accurate (the XRF more so).
(the two scales are due to price and bulk: the Sigma is about the size of a hardback book and a few hundred pounds, an XRF is the size of a large 3d-printer and many thousands).
XRF will go a millimetre or so into the sample AFAIK - it's mainly useful for finding alloy contamination, e.g. "this is 99.99% gold" vs "this is 73% gold and 27% other things" - you really want to use both techniques. Resistivity/conductivity is about average composition, XRF is about elemental purity.
Huh, impressive - I guess I'm out of date (and/or the people I listen to about such things have a working XRF already and don't want to replace a working unit).
I don't think it's a dumb question, though I guess some might question its relevance. Side-comments can be interesting, though.
I don't know why they did it, but it follows the same pattern as the pi400 - develop a whole new board, rather than a daughterboard for the pi4 compute module. If I had to guess, it's probably about reducing e-waste: if someone wants a compute module and it's out of stock but there are pi500s available, why wouldn't they buy a pi500, strip the compute module out and dump the rest of the machine in the bin?
And to be fair to them, they're dogfooding a fair amount - the RP1 and the RP2 are in the design, rather than a generic southbridge and keyboard controller.
Three "bad" missiles over a five minute period. The hit on the WCK convoy killed the latest 7 out of over 200 aid workers who have been killed in Gaza since this latest war began.
I took a look at our CO and we have a bunch of different Northern Telecom DMS Documentation binders. Stuff like Installation Manual (Module 00 to 18), Volume 3 Power-up Methods, DMS-10 Family OMP/RLCM Book 1, DMS-10 Family Volume 1 Generic: 400 Part 2. We also have a bunch of old CDROMs with documentation on them, as NT started just sending documentation like that instead.
But yeah there are books upon books of stuff here, and Northern Telecom isn't a company anymore from what I understand, so finding documentation is pretty limited if you don't already have an in.
I've been looking through everything we have (including the CDROMs from 2002-2003) but the main issue is that the publication numbers listed for the physical manual they need (03-4200) is quite different than the publication numbers for all of our stuff. Everything we have uses a publication number like 297-3601-450, so it's possible that installation manual is a separate, special manual you/the company installing the switch would have for the initial physical install and the rest of the publications assume you already have an installed DMS-10.
There's a chance we never even had that manual ourselves, if that's the case! I did find our original installation proposal documents - our DMS-10 was installed in 1989/1990 :)
Yeah, same here: I upgraded to an FP4 about three months ago (from an increasingly-broken-down Samsung Galaxy S9), after puzzling for a while over whether I should wait for what looked like an imminent FP5 or just grab the FP4 that was available now. I don't regret my choice fwiw.
The battery already lasts two days under my usage model, and the phone still has a five year warranty and OS support for another three years. I see that Fairphone are still selling some repair parts for FP2 and FP3, so I expect to be able to repair my phone through that whole time period unless something weird happens.
The FP5 looks like a nice upgrade, but I don't feel short-changed: I got a new phone when my old one was failing, and it's not absolutely top-of-the-line, and that's fine. Like you, I'll think harder about the next round of upgrades (maybe to the FP6, maybe the FP7), and I'd love it if Fairphone were to be clearer about their release schedule, but I understand that they don't want to Osborne themselves.
The thing is, there ARE chunks of spectrum dedicated to digital comms within the amateur radio bands.
Here's a link to the VHF band plan we use here in the UK - obviously I can't speak for other countries: [https://rsgb.services/public/bandplans/19/ ]. It's _littered_ with SSTV, beacon and digital mode allocations (and for clarity, that's a good thing). The digital mode allocations are full of people chatting in text using FT-8 or JS8Call (more in HF than VHF, those, but the principle holds). On the next page, there's an entire 1MHz allocation dedicated to wideband digital data modes.
If you're a licensee, there's plenty of innovation and digital experimentation space available. Sure, a chunk of the traditionalist ham community aren't excited about it, but there's plenty of us who are. And, as ever, you don't need a license to receive...
TBH, I don't have a problem with Rust so much as I have/had a problem with a section of the rust community.
The shouting fanbeings of rust put me off looking into it for years, because when I kept getting "rewrite it in rust!" as the answer to "there's a problem with $THIS_CODE" when talking with colleagues, _even when those colleagues had minimal rust experience_, all I could conclude was that the whole thing was an empty promise and that no-one knew how to solve the problem, but everyone "knew" that the New Cool Language was the way to fix everything.
Generalisation from incomplete data - no doubt there was a sensible majority in the rust community, but the fanbeings were _loud_.
FWIW I was wrong: I'm getting into rust now and I like what I see, and the discussions around it online and with colleagues are pretty sensible. But, it's taken a while to get there and when you've been in tech for a couple of decades you see this hype cycle and get jaded to it. Erlang is the new hotness ... OCaml is the new hotness ... Java is the new hotness, rewrite everything in Java, wait C# is the new hotness...
I suspect rust is here to stay, and I'm gonna learn more about it, and I regret some of my past words about it. But my problem was never with the increased memory safety, or the language at all, pretty much, just the early community.
TL;DR: Other humans are the worst, bug reported, fix unlikely :)
No, but I see what you mean. Generating hydrogen and methane using electricity will probably never be that efficient, but if you have spare power then using it to get 60% of its energy back again in the form of future burnables may still be worth it (percentage guessed and probably optimistic).
In the context of heat pumps, a "backup heating strip" is a resistive heating element - electricity goes in, heat comes out just like an old electric heater. They're generally used during defrost cycles for the external air handler in cold weather, or to provide a temporary thermal boost when the heat pump is having performance trouble e.g. when the exterior temperature is near the bottom of the heat pump's operating range.
Whole-house heating with resistive electric heating is going to get expensive, quickly. If they're serious about installing these in cold weather climates, they should have more information about the cut over temperature and the efficiency of the heat pumps at those temperatures.
Just for context, my heat pumps cut over around 40-45 degrees to gas-based heat.
High efficiency heat pumps with built-in defrosters (or "heating strips") can often provide full heating capacity (ie: 48,000btu for a 4 ton unit) down to -12f, with reduced output at even lower temps. The COP efficiency drops quite a bit though and it will eventually get to a point where it is essentially as energy efficient as a resistive heater. Whether it's more efficient than using gas or not is a difficult calculation based on your gas price, heat pump COP temperature curve and electricity price. If you expect to see <-20f temperatures regularly, you'll want/need a backup heat source anyway.
Yeah, I'd like to see those figures too, and I think they might surprise you (and me). I don't have figures or references to hand here, but as I understand it modern heat pumps should be good down at least a little way below freezing. They're widely used and popular in Norway, for example, and the Norwegians aren't exactly new to cold weather.
You have an older system. New systems can provide 100% rated capacity well below freezing. Mine is -5F and not specifically a "cold climate" unit. The unit in OP seems to offer 100% nameplate capacity at 5F.
These are brand new heat pumps. I don’t think it’s possible to have high efficiency at cold temps because of the need for a defrost cycle. I just check and mine are around 2 COP at 8F and 5 COP at 40F.
It is not clear why your heat pump cuts over at 40 degrees if it still has COP of 2 at 8 degrees. Presumably a cost-effectiveness calculation if gas is cheap in your area. If you had heat strips instead of gas, the "cut over" temperature would be much lower. If your unit is capable of operating at full capacity below 8F, it would likely only use resistive heating below 5F. For most climate zones, that is fine and your unit does not sound like one specifically deemed a "cold climate" heat pump, the which now regularly achieve full rated output down to -15F. Of course, it's only rarely that cold even in "cold climate" zones so operating down at a COP of 1 for these short durations is not a real problem. The impetus for systems designed for lower temperature operation is not really aimed at those with cheap gas but at those living where heat pumps were previously only feasible for heating if using much more expensive ground source systems. Achieving year-round heat with only the heat pump eliminates the need for a furnace so you have to include this missing gear and installation cost in your analysis.
I don't know if the parent comment was trying to equate American English and Simple English - I can see it as a way to dismiss American English as a "lesser" language (which it isn't, as you say), but I wouldn't start by assuming that.