Re: Do you condemn Hamas?

On 9/06/2024 10:01 am, john larkin wrote:

On Sat, 8 Jun 2024 23:59:33 +0200, Jeroen Belleman
<jeroen@nospam.please> wrote:
 

On 6/8/24 21:55, john larkin wrote:

On Sat, 8 Jun 2024 19:30:11 +0200, Jeroen Belleman
<jeroen@nospam.please> wrote:
>

On 6/8/24 16:45, john larkin wrote:

On Sat, 8 Jun 2024 09:54:42 -0000 (UTC), Cursitor Doom
<cd999666@notformail.com> wrote:
>

On Sat, 8 Jun 2024 10:43:15 +0200, Jeroen Belleman wrote:
>

On 6/8/24 01:37, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:57:54 +0200, Jeroen Belleman wrote:
>

On 6/7/24 23:11, Mike Monett VE3BTI wrote:

Jeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please> wrote:
>

On 6/7/24 16:49, john larkin wrote:
[...]

Basically I'll choose some promising starting point and then
try to move forward through the solution space, exploring
interesting branches on the way. Rarely I'll throw everything
out and start over.

 That's incremental design, which is necessary, but it doesn't create
entirely new circuits or products.

"Rarely I'll throw  everything out and start over". That isn't incremental design. You don't do that - or if you have you haven't talked about it. I've commented on this before.

Some big companies stick to tweaking what they know, and get crushed
by upstarts in dorm rooms.
 Some big companies have futurists and fellows whose job is to consider
possibilities. Somebody at Boeing is thinking about what airplanes (or
whatever) might look like 30 years from now. I have friends at
Raytheon and ASML whose job is to do that, think far away from where
they are now.

But the comapany superstructure means that it doesn't happen often.
ASML was a spin-off from Philips, and took their human factors department with them. I applied for one job at ASML and made it to interview, but didn't seem to fit the pattern that their personnel officers expected,

I like to imagine planting a grenade inside my brain and blowing bits
all over the possible solution space, to start a zillion parallel
processors. Let that soak for a while.

What a silly idea.

There are think tanks like HRL that do just that.

Not exactly. They sell expertise, and planting a grenade inside an expert's brain would destroy that expertise. Brainstorming is a rather different sort of activity.

Most engineers are uncomfortable with uncertainty and confusion so
latch onto a design concept ASAP, preferably something already
sanctioned somewhere, and buckle down to implementing.

If you know of a solution that will work, you'd be mad not to use it.
I had a good idea in 1978 that a programmable logic device to make it practical. I got my hands on one in 1993 and it ended up in
Sloman A.W., Buggs P., Molloy J., and Stewart D. “A microcontroller-based driver to stabilise the temperature of an optical stage to 1mK in the range 4C to 38C, using a Peltier heat pump and a thermistor sensor” Measurement Science and Technology, 7 1653-64 (1996)

It's still a serial process. I can't see much of the space at
once. Maybe you can. So much the better for you.

 It takes some practice to be willing to be confused for a while.

You seem to be confused most of the time.

It helps to be a bit autistic, to not much care what other people think.

And some people think that you confuse tinkering with a circuit with circuit design.
Somebody thinks that a two-transistor emitter-coupled monostable is a "horrendous mess" can expect to earn that kind of reputation.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Norton antivirus software.
www.norton.com