[Don Pearce[_3_]]

On Fri, 04 Jul 2014 17:35:49 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Don Pearce wrote:
Makes sense to upgrade, then.

Problem is that one safety reg is now fighting another. Most devices
that use a swicthed-mode power supply contain Y1 capacitors to deal
with conducted interference. Every such device plugged into the mains
increases the unbalanced current caused by these caps to the point
where plugging a final one in can trip an RCD.

I've got an awful lot of them here, without problems. Although I do have
RCBOs. Which would tend to minimise the problem over a whole house RCD.

The only real answer is to either develop smart RCDs that only respond
to in-phase currents or increase the trip threshold. These things have
to be cheap, so it will be the latter.

If you increase the trip threshold it defeats the object?

Yes, the more segmented the mains the better. And defeating the object
is exactly what is happening.

d

[geoff]

On 5/07/2014 2:55 a.m., William Sommerwerck wrote:
"None" wrote in message
news "William Sommerwerck" wrote in message
...

There can be a gap between the literal written word, and the
implied meaning. It goes under the name of "connotation".

But when someone derives a connotation from your writing, you
throw a hissy little tantrum and tell them to read what you wrote.
You don't seem to understand that what you infer is very frequently
not actually implied by the writer.

What /you/ don't understand is that what the writer /meant/ to say
doesn't matter. It's what's actually on the page. And that's what we
have here -- a blanket statement about the universal unsuitability of 6V
power supplies for all 5V devices, which anyone who's had a reasonable
amount of electronics experience knows isn't true.

I am (horrors!) sometimes guilty of sloppy writing. But when I say "read
what I wrote", it's because people are carelessly or deliberately
misreading it -- not because I didn't consciously say what I meant.


Your hallucination that you're always right overwhelms your ability
to reason, so you start blubbering and pontificating. As entertainment,
it's on a par with a bad sitcom. Get a laugh track, li'l buddy.

We keep coming back to this, your claim that I said I was always right.
I never said any such thing, and (amazingly) you've correctly quoted me:

"I'm (almost) always right."

averring that the "almost" doesn't count. Here's a scene with your
fourth-grade English teacher:

"Captain Corcoran sings that he's "hardly ever sick at sea". What does
he mean, class? That...
He's never sick.
He's on occasion sick.
He's always sick. ?"
None's hand goes up, flapping as his body shakes.
The teacher sighs. "Yes, St Vitus?"
"He means he's always sick."
"How do you figure that?"
"Well, he says he's sick at sea."
"What about the 'hardly ever'?"
"Doesn't matter. He said 'sick at sea'."
"So you can just ignore the 'hardly ever'?"
"Of course."

Fifty years ago, I got 800+ on my math SAT, and 765 (I think) on
English. * Throughout college I got As in my English courses. (And I'm
an EE.) Don't tell me I don't understand words, or their meanings, or
how those meanings interact to convey ideas (intentionally or
unintentionally, literal or implied).

And as for fantasies... Yours about my not having a job because I'm a
poor writer, and not having any friends (for unstated reasons) -- from
what Wonderland do they descend from?

Everyone has problems. One of mine is the urge to respond to idiots. I
shouldn't, but I figure if I don't, I've implicitly given in to their
attacks. Perhaps some day one of my remarks will hit home, and None will
seek out the professional treatment he needs -- to find out why he has
nothing better to do than to pointlessly spew ad hominem attacks on
people he doesn't know.

* The reason for such a "low" English score appears to have been those
"analogy" questions. They're the only questions, on any type of test
I've ever taken, that gave me trouble. I often found myself trying to
distinguish between two answers that seemed only subtly different from
each other. As far as I know, the analogy questions were dropped from
the SAT several years ago. But I had no trouble finding this page:

http://www.onlinetestprep.com/engine/analogy.asp



Yep, without a doubt, any voltage PSU is fine into a device that
specifies 5V. Probably any polarity too.

geoff

[Sean Conolly]

"Trevor" wrote in message
...

"geoff" wrote in message
...
Jeepers - I wonder how many women got killed by food-processors and never
made the news ?

I bet they would make the news here if they did. Our press loves that sort
of thing. We even get coverage of every shooting massacre you have in the
USA, and that's nearly every other week!

I got curious and did a little searching, and all I could find were many
stories on the same single incident. Tragic though it was, I'm not sure it's
a rampant problem.

Sean

[William Sommerwerck]

"None" wrote in message ...

"I'm always always right."

Obviously a mis-type. (Everybody does these.) Mea culpa. I apologize /if/
that's what I wrote.


I'll tell you whatever I like, Willie.

Especially if it's a lie.

You have no authority here.

And your authority comes from...?

[Dave Plowman (News)]

In article ,
Sean Conolly wrote:
"Trevor" wrote in message
...

"geoff" wrote in message
...
Jeepers - I wonder how many women got killed by food-processors and
never made the news ?

I bet they would make the news here if they did. Our press loves that
sort of thing. We even get coverage of every shooting massacre you
have in the USA, and that's nearly every other week!

I got curious and did a little searching, and all I could find were many
stories on the same single incident. Tragic though it was, I'm not sure
it's a rampant problem.

Given the number of these things in use it would be more surprising if
such an incident hadn't happened.

--
*My wife and I had words. But I didn't get to use mine.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

[None]

"William Sommerwerck" wrote in message
...
"None" wrote in message
...

"I'm always always right."

Obviously a mis-type. (Everybody does these.) Mea culpa. I apologize
/if/ that's what I wrote.

"What /you/ don't understand is that what the writer /meant/ to say
doesn't
matter. It's what's actually on the page."

"I'm always always right."

"I never said any such thing ...'

And your authority comes from...?

What authority? I don't need authority. I don't need to imagine that I
know what your motives are. I don't need to infer connotations. I
don't need to change the subject to strange fantasies about fourth
grade teachers. I don't need to reference everything to a science
fiction world. All I have to do is quote your own words back to you,
and you start ranting about how it's supposedly a lie.

Read what you wrote.

[geoff]

On 5/07/2014 4:55 p.m., Sean Conolly wrote:
"Trevor" wrote in message
...

"geoff" wrote in message
...
Jeepers - I wonder how many women got killed by food-processors and never
made the news ?

I bet they would make the news here if they did. Our press loves that sort
of thing. We even get coverage of every shooting massacre you have in the
USA, and that's nearly every other week!

I got curious and did a little searching, and all I could find were many
stories on the same single incident. Tragic though it was, I'm not sure it's
a rampant problem.

About the same as USB chargers then ....

geoff

[geoff]

On 5/07/2014 8:38 p.m., William Sommerwerck wrote:
"None" wrote in message
...

"I'm always always right."

Obviously a mis-type. (Everybody does these.) Mea culpa. I apologize
/if/ that's what I wrote.

More likely a simple Freudian slip.

geoff

[Trevor]

"Sean Conolly" wrote in message
...
I got curious and did a little searching, and all I could find were many
stories on the same single incident. Tragic though it was, I'm not sure
it's a rampant problem.

Well I never said it was an everyday occurance, but that's little
consolation for the woman involved!

Trevor.

[Trevor]

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
I got curious and did a little searching, and all I could find were many
stories on the same single incident. Tragic though it was, I'm not sure
it's a rampant problem.

Given the number of these things in use it would be more surprising if
such an incident hadn't happened.

Given that the device didn't meet the regulated safety requirements, you are
right. No such instances have occurred for devices that did meet the
mandatory safety requirements for mains powered devices however. Which is
pretty good IMO.

Trevor.

[William Sommerwerck]

"geoff" wrote in message
...
On 5/07/2014 8:38 p.m., William Sommerwerck wrote:
"None" wrote in message
...

"I'm always always right."

Obviously a mis-type. (Everybody does these.) Mea culpa.
I apologize /if/ that's what I wrote.

More likely a simple Freudian slip.

At least you have a sense of humor about it.

[William Sommerwerck]

There's just no pleasing some people.

None has this warped fantasy that I claimed to be always right. He produced
evidence of this, an excerpt from an e-mail I supposedly wrote:

"I'm always always right."

If this is a real quote (and it probably is), it must be a mistyping, because
there's no comma after the first always. (I'm notorious for excess
punctuation.) Regardless, it's the sort of mistake we see in UseNet postings,
and I and others make all the time.

He has proof that I'm not always right, and am aware of it. What more does he
want? Public seppuku? Well, I ain't Butterfly.

On a more serious note...

None's treatment of me and others shows, not necessarily mental illness, but
bad judgment and a lack of self control (things I'm occasionally guilty of). *
To that might be added extreme annoyance that human beings don't behave the
way he thinks they ought to. (I have that problem, too.) I urge him to find
someone to discuss it with.

* My "justification" is being provoked by people like None.

[None]

"William Sommerwerck" wrote in message
...
There's just no pleasing some people.

None has this warped fantasy that I claimed to be always right. He
produced evidence of this, an excerpt from an e-mail I supposedly
wrote:

I never said anything about any email. But keep trying to change the
facts. Speaking of warped fantasy, have you fabricated any stories
about fourth-grade teachers, or imagined yourself on some magical
spaceship today?


"I'm always always right."

You wrote it, and publicly posted it. And now you're furiously
backpedaling, trying to pretend that there' some question about
whether you actually wrote it.

If this is a real quote (and it probably is), it must be a
mistyping, because there's no comma after the first always. (I'm
notorious for excess punctuation.) Regardless, it's the sort of
mistake we see in UseNet postings, and I and others make all the
time.

You're still not willing to live up to the standard that you like to
spew about. That what's written on the page is what really matters.
And you're still trying to raise uncertainty about what it is that you
wrote, lacking the balls to simply own up to your own hypocrisy. You
claim that you know the meaning and connotation behind others'
writing, but you can't face up to the obvious clear statements that
you write. You're a sloppy writer, but you pretend otherwise. You
invent interpretations not evidenced by others' writing, claiming that
you, the self-proclaimed genius, know it all.

He has proof that I'm not always right, and am aware of it. What
more does he want? Public seppuku? Well, I ain't Butterfly.

Poor baby. It would help your case if you'd stop blubbering and
blustering about being always right, even when it's qualified with
"almost" which you try to minimize with parentheses. You're frequently
wrong, but you keep pretending that it's some kind of rare event.

On a more serious note...

Oooooh! Serious!

None's treatment of me and others shows, not necessarily mental
illness, but bad judgment and a lack of self control (things I'm
occasionally guilty of). * To that might be added extreme annoyance
that human beings don't behave the way he thinks they ought to. (I
have that problem, too.) I urge him to find someone to discuss it
with.

Are you really lacking in self-awareness to the extent that you can't
see how appropriate it is to address those concerns back on yourself?
Yeah, you probably are. You're too busy pretending that you're so much
better than everyone else.

* My "justification" is being provoked by people like None.

Sure. It's all about how you're justified in being an arrogant putz,
and refusing to admit your substantial fallibility.

[William Sommerwerck]

None has serious problems. I hope anyone who knows him can help him find
someone to talk to.

[None]

"William Sommerwerck" wrote in message
...
None has serious problems. I hope anyone who knows him can help him
find someone to talk to.

It obviously gets under your skin when I quote your own words at you,
and suggest that they might be held to the same standards that you
insist on applying to others. Although you occasionally give lip
service to the idea that you may make mistakes, it's clear that you
are very disturbed by the notion that it's a commonplace occurrence,
and you are loath to actually admit it in real life. You just can't
stand seeing your own utterances being subject to the same standards
about which you pontificate. When I act as a caricature of you, you
become extremely upset. You should hold your own bloviating up to the
mirror of reality more often. You'd see how pompous and unpleasant you
can be. But since you refuse to look in the mirror, I'll continue to
mirror your own words at you. Your own writing disturbs you very much,
but you should really get used to it.

"I am always always right."
"I never said any such thing ..."
"It's what's actually on the page."
"Read what I wrote."

Despite the denials and phony outrage, those are your own words,
from your own posts, Willy.

You just can't stand to see your own words next to each other like
that, because of what it says about your pretenses about your own
superiority.

Read what you wrote, Willy. It's hilarious. If you must be a
self-aggrandizing hypocrite with a bloated opinion of your superiority
and self-worth, you could at least grow a sense of humor about it.
You're actually pretty entertaining, in a village-idiot sort of way.

[William Sommerwerck]

"None" wrote in message
m...
"William Sommerwerck" wrote in message
...

None has serious problems. I hope anyone who knows him can
help him find someone to talk to.

stupid response snipped

You are the guilty party. You provoked this. And I am not the only victim.

Instead of simply politely criticizing, you go for the throat. You think that
the best way to spend your time is to attack people you don't like. It isn't.

I used to think you were just a jerk. It's become obvious you're mentally
disturbed. You need help. Get it.

[None]

"William Sommerwerck" wrote in message
...
"None" wrote in message
m...
"William Sommerwerck" wrote in message
...

None has serious problems. I hope anyone who knows him can
help him find someone to talk to.

stupid response snipped

Your own words. That's what you call stupid? Maybe there's hope for
you! But no, probably not.

You are the guilty party. You provoked this. And I am not the only
victim.

Guilty of quoting your own words. That's what really gets your goat,
isn't it? You can't face your own contradictions.

You berate anyone who has the temerity to disagree with your own
self-appointed "genius". Especially when they take the upper hand in a
disagreement by showing understanding that you lack, showing your
failure to write clearly, call you out for clear errors in matters of
demonstrable fact, or, horror of horrors, showing where you try to
deny your own statements rather than simply admit errors. Some victim!

Instead of simply politely criticizing,

You've shown no capability for polite criticism. Just condescension.

you go for the throat. You think that
the best way to spend your time is to attack people you don't like.
It isn't.

That's what you do, Willie. I show you your own reflection, and it
enrages you.

I used to think you were just a jerk. It's become obvious you're
mentally disturbed. You need help. Get it.

A dilettante psychologist, to add to the list of things you think you
know better than everyone else.

Read what you wrote. If you dare. Many of your accusations are telling
descriptions of your own words. Read what you wrote, if you can muster
up the self-awareness ... which seems unlikely.

[None]

"William Sommerwerck" wrote:

You want to play games? Let's play games. I'm ready.

Apparently not.
....

"I'm always always right."

If this is a real quote (and it probably is), it must be a
mistyping, because there's no comma after the first always. (I'm
notorious for excess punctuation.) Regardless, it's the sort of
mistake we see in UseNet postings, and I and others make all the
time.

"What /you/ don't understand is that what the writer /meant/ to say
doesn't
matter. It's what's actually on the page." WS