Language:
switch to room list switch to menu My folders
Go to page: 1 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 ... Last
[#] Wed Aug 19 2009 12:43:06 EDT from LoanShark @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


Are POTS lines grounded at all? What about DSL-ified POTS lines? I know for CATV or an antenna drop, you need to ground the coax sheath. This protects you from surges on the sheath. It doesn't protect you from surges on the center conductor, except to the extent that your equipment can shunt surges to ground.

We had some lightning strikes very close by last night, causing a brief power brownout or two. I don't have an inline surge suppressor on the antenna drop, but it is grounded. Not grounded to code, as we're not using #6 copper, but it is grounded. I guess it's holding up so far.

[#] Wed Aug 19 2009 13:39:48 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

The POTS pair itself is not grounded, but the messenger wire usually doubles as a ground. I'd definitely believe it if a DSL modem were fried by lightning, or even if a strike made it through the modem and also took out equipment downstream.

However, the person who made this comment has fiber. The cable stock that Verizon uses is completely non-metallic -- it doesn't even have a messenger wire. That means 100% of his copper wiring, for all services, is indoors.
<<shrug>>

My comms gear isn't "grounded to code" either. It's "grounded to common sense" which is probably something I ought to revisit.

[#] Wed Aug 19 2009 14:00:11 EDT from LoanShark @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Aug 19 2009 1:39pm from IGnatius T Foobar @uncnsrd
The POTS pair itself is not grounded, but the messenger wire usually
doubles as a ground. I'd definitely believe it if a DSL modem were
fried by lightning, or even if a strike made it through the modem and

also took out equipment downstream.

Ok, I just looked it up. The telephone signal pair uses differential signalling, so it's not possible to simply ground one conductor in the pair like you ground the coax sheath. The messenger wire doesn't go to your premises and although it may itself be grounded, as said it's not possible to ground signalling wires to the messenger wire. So with a few miles of local loop, there are lots of opportunities for induced current to come in.

If you want surge suppression, you need to ground to your electrical system.

[#] Wed Aug 19 2009 15:05:57 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

If there is a messenger wire it is usually grounded. Certain types of cable (mainly the older single pair cables) didn't have a messenger wire and therefore are not groundable, but most modern cable stock typically contains a messenger member which is pulled out a bit where it joins the side of the house or building, and then continues down to the NID where they attach it to the nearest available ground, such as an electric meter, with a tag that reads "If this clamp or wire is loose or must be removed please call telephone company repair service."

Regardless of that, though, you're absolutely correct; there are lots of opportunities for induced current to come in.

[#] Wed Aug 19 2009 18:39:19 EDT from LoanShark @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]


So what's the point, exactly? The messenger wire is grounded, but it's not connected to anything else in the phone system. They're gambling that some percentage of the overcurrent from a lightning strike will just "jump" to the messenger wire and follow that to ground? Doesn't seem like it will help much - lightning can jump a lot of things and a messenger wire hardly seems like the shortest path to ground from the perspective of a lightning bolt.

Meanwhile, the path to ground created by the messenger wire is not connected to your handset/modem/whatever, and this stuff is all typically connected without any shunt to your electrical ground.

[#] Wed Aug 19 2009 19:02:02 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I would imagine that a messenger wire, being connected to the ground, would be a more attractive target than the signal wires.

It's merely academic though; we all know that lightning can and does strike the signal wires, destroying any equipment it reaches.

That doesn't explain the guy who claims that a lightning strike took out his router, though. His telco connection is fiber. If the lightning strike caused a big power surge, it's a pretty big coincidence that the only piece of electronic equipment that was damaged was his router.

[#] Thu Aug 20 2009 16:08:03 EDT from skpacman @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

http://developers.slashdot.org/story/09/08/19/1259210/Behind-Menuet-an-OS-Written-Entirely-In-Assembly

http://www.menuetos.net/

Now that's one fast OS...  completely built on Assembly instead of C# and it's small enough to fit on a FLOPPY DISK!!! (but that's because of the lack of device drivers and hardware support... once that picks up it'll beef-up big time..) I was going to give it a shot tonight and see what all it has to offer. Just think of how fast response times would be for hosting websites from this platform, or building native games for it... oh the possibilities. But it's not UNIX based so some people may label it as "Progress...."... and it's STILL better than Micro$tupid Windoze...

-- 
Stephen D King
The Kings Photography
http://www.thekingsphotography.com
"When the rich wage war,
it's the poor that die..."
- Linkin Park "Hands Held High"



[#] Thu Aug 20 2009 16:26:04 EDT from Ford II @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Well, I'm a bigger fan of assembly than most people, but nowadays even I appreciate the pointlessness of that task.
Sure it has a place, in embedded systems controlling time sensitive things, but all that means is that it becomes completely useless if/when amd and intel change the arcitecture too much.
I realize that's not going to happen any time soon, but they still have to write for the lowest common denominator assembly of any chip they may want to run on.
And you're not going to get support for any hardware. HEll linux has crappy support and it's REALLY POPULAR and runs on tons of chips of completely different architectures.
Good luck getting a foothold.
Nice proof of concept and it has it's niche, but it will never "beef-up big time" as you say
.

And no, I will not label it progress, for it is not progress.
It is not backwards or worse than older OSes. It is a branch into a dead end, in my opinion. It is not bad, it is just pointless, other than an excercise in coolness factor.
OS/2 was written entirely in assembly too. And this doesn't have the backing of a company like IBM.

[#] Thu Aug 20 2009 16:55:57 EDT from skpacman @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

 

"I appreciate the pointlessness of that task."
"It is a branch into a dead end, in my opinion. It is not bad, it is just pointless, other than an excercise in coolness factor."

Exactly why I'm impressed. They put so much work into an operating system that will be seldomly used and end up a "dead end" but it has its uses for what it's worth. I wouldn't attempt a large scale implementation but its good to have people willing to put that much work into a project.
...now if only they could help in the linux community...


-- 
Stephen D King
The Kings Photography
http://www.thekingsphotography.com
"When the rich wage war,
it's the poor that die..."
- Linkin Park "Hands Held High"



[#] Thu Aug 20 2009 17:11:09 EDT from Ford II @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

...now if only they could help in the linux community...

And there you've hit upon a very important part of human society.
People lust after what they are interested in, not what is neccesarily for the greater good.
If you think about it, it's amazing we've progressed as far as we have considering how few people ever agree on doing the same thing the same way or that it should even be done.
This is more a testament of the human spirit from your point of view, which probably unfortunately means humans aren't going to die out nearly as quickly as I'd hope they would. But I'll be dead anyway, so I won't care .
But if everybody really did what was for the better good and didn't waste time on competing technologies or competitive efforts of any kind, well... we'd have communism.
And we all know how well that works out.

[#] Thu Aug 20 2009 17:47:42 EDT from skpacman @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

 

Thu Aug 20 2009 05:11:09 PM EDT from Ford II @ Uncensored
...now if only they could help in the linux community...

And there you've hit upon a very important part of human society.
People lust after what they are interested in, not what is neccesarily for the greater good.
If you think about it, it's amazing we've progressed as far as we have considering how few people ever agree on doing the same thing the same way or that it should even be done.
This is more a testament of the human spirit from your point of view, which probably unfortunately means humans aren't going to die out nearly as quickly as I'd hope they would. But I'll be dead anyway, so I won't care .
But if everybody really did what was for the better good and didn't waste time on competing technologies or competitive efforts of any kind, well... we'd have communism.
And we all know how well that works out.

>.< yup.. it seems people devote efforts where they're either unseen or unappreciated (or both) more often than "the greater good" as you say.

Think of how far our technology could have evolved if people didn't compete. Hard to say though; without competition, there's very little motivation to be 'better'.

-- 
Stephen D King
The Kings Photography
http://www.thekingsphotography.com
"When the rich wage war,
it's the poor that die..."
- Linkin Park "Hands Held High"



[#] Thu Aug 20 2009 18:15:04 EDT from Ragnar Danneskjold @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Actually, think how far we would have come if it weren't for "backward compatibility".

[#] Thu Aug 20 2009 19:32:06 EDT from Ford II @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

oh yeah look at apple. genius.

[#] Fri Aug 21 2009 08:10:24 EDT from skpacman @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Update on my MenuetOS adventure:

It not only fits on a floppy disk, it REQUIRES a floppy disc.

>.< all of mine are old and demagnetized.

needless to say, i havent tried loading the OS yet...

-- 
Stephen D King
The Kings Photography
http://www.thekingsphotography.com
"When the rich wage war,
it's the poor that die..."
- Linkin Park "Hands Held High"



[#] Fri Aug 21 2009 09:57:06 EDT from IGnatius T Foobar @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

You need a virtual machine!

[#] Fri Aug 21 2009 14:51:24 EDT from Ford II @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I was going to say that.
you can make a file into a floppy disk in a vm.

[#] Sat Aug 22 2009 17:10:38 EDT from skpacman @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

 

Fri Aug 21 2009 02:51:24 PM EDT from Ford II @ Uncensored
I was going to say that.
you can make a file into a floppy disk in a vm.

duh... i should have thought of that... >.<

thanks..  i'll let you know how it goes

-- 
Stephen D King
The Kings Photography
http://www.thekingsphotography.com
"When the rich wage war,
it's the poor that die..."
- Linkin Park "Hands Held High"



[#] Mon Aug 24 2009 09:47:17 EDT from Ford II @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

I spent a lot of time this weekend doing research to buy parts for a new machine.
One thing I realized is that people are stupid. Even technical people.
Specifically I'm talking about the overclocking crowd.
Now I'm all about getting as much for your money as possible, but there are LOTS of people on newegg who complain that they overclock things andit doesn't work.
I don't know if this is how it works anymore but in the good old days, intel would build a chip to the best specifications that it could, then test it. If it tested reliably at a 3ghz chip, it was sold as a 3ghz chip.
If it only tested reliably at 2.5ghz, it was sold as a 2.5ghz chip.
Now in the days of quad cores, I can see where it would be hard to build a chip where all four cores tested reliably at 3ghz, which is why those chips are so much more expensive than the 2.8ghz for example.
So people buy the 2.8ghz then try and overclock them and complain when they don't work.
Fucking morons.

[#] Mon Aug 24 2009 14:53:41 EDT from skpacman @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

 

Mon Aug 24 2009 09:47:17 AM EDT from Ford II @ Uncensored
I spent a lot of time this weekend doing research to buy parts for a new machine.
One thing I realized is that people are stupid. Even technical people.
Specifically I'm talking about the overclocking crowd.
Now I'm all about getting as much for your money as possible, but there are LOTS of people on newegg who complain that they overclock things andit doesn't work.
I don't know if this is how it works anymore but in the good old days, intel would build a chip to the best specifications that it could, then test it. If it tested reliably at a 3ghz chip, it was sold as a 3ghz chip.

If it only tested reliably at 2.5ghz, it was sold as a 2.5ghz chip.
Now in the days of quad cores, I can see where it would be hard to build a chip where all four cores tested reliably at 3ghz, which is why those chips are so much more expensive than the 2.8ghz for example.
So people buy the 2.8ghz then try and overclock them and complain when they don't work.
Fucking morons.

Agreed.  My processor is Intel Core2 Quad Q6600 @2.4GHz on an older ASUS P-5NE/SLI mobo and I've only done a 2% overclock with a 4% voltage boost and got it up to 2.54ghz.. i can push it to 2.7, but why do it? i'm perfectly happy with the stability and reliability at 2.4 and have no need to overclock.

Overclocking has such a small difference on overall performance that i see no real reason to do it unless you're doing some extremely heavy data processing... then it MIGHT make a dent, but it's not going to show extreme performance boost like most claim. You want a performance boost? Go with faster MEMORY, your processor could flatten any memory on the market just because most are still using a north-bridge... i like the new tri-channel stuff coming out.. Nalheim i7 is changing things.

that's enough for my OC rant... my point is, i dont see any reason to overclock a perfectly good processor and risk stability and wattage issues.

-- 
Stephen D King
The Kings Photography
http://www.thekingsphotography.com



[#] Mon Aug 24 2009 22:01:36 EDT from Ford II @ Uncensored

[Reply] [ReplyQuoted] [Headers] [Print]

Yeah, I don't get the whole voltage thing. You might have to explaine it to me. I don't plan on overclocking (I got one of the 9650s :-) but I've heard noises about sometimes you have to screw with them anyway.

Go to page: 1 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 ... Last