I'm genuinely interested in examples/citations of my alleged nonstandard usage and/or use of obscure words...?

I didn't say anything about, "non-standard", but I will say some of your words are obscure where I come from...obscure enough that I need to look them up and try to divine which definition fits the context. I am completely sure you use all the best rules of grammar and punctuation, but the way you do it is so unfamiliar to me that I struggle to keep up. I am also sure you can see that I'm no slouch when it comes to being able to use English and play by the rules, but you take it to a level I have never seen before.

How can I cite your errors? I can't. But I can cite things I had to look up or mentally redefine while perusing the High Voltage Thread:

LOPT, post #2, not previously defined.
polyepoxide, post #3 Not in Dictionary.
"with a PMT", Post #7. Still don't know what that means.
'Rader' Post #7. Not in dictionary.
(Grayer?) Post #7. More gray than something else?
"Clarence M. Dallys" Post #7. Not detected by my search engine, (Dogpile)

Take great care that moments are not introduced ...Post #3 Merely unusual. If I didn't have a pittance of physics education I would have been baffled.
'integral air-gap' Post #3. My experience is that the air gap is just called an air gap. Why it needs to be called, "integral" escapes me.
"sans provision for admission of same" Post #3. Where I come from this is expressed as, "regardless of the lack of penetration of the oil" (into the windings).
"Now I see that the moments means torques sorry because of languge barrer"...Post #6 What? Even Aleph seems to name your use of words as an impediment?
"You seem to be under some misapprehension", Post #7. In my world*, we say, "I think you misunderstood or, did not understand".
*With intent to abbreviate in the future.
"It would behoove you to bear in mind, as regards etiquette," Post #7. IMW, "Good manners suggest"
aural communication Post #7 IMW, "oral communication"
"favorability of said geometry owing to the greatly enhanced field emission attendant thereto" Post #7 IMW, "The shape makes the emission work better."
"ubiquity of mammography 'enhancer' cassettes" Still post #7. IMW, "Availability of phosphor enhanced x-ray film holders"
construct a scintillation detector implementing the 'Mammo screen' as the 'crystal' What? Construct a (low level radiation?) detector using something from Mamography as the crystal? What crystal? Does a scintillation detector contain a crystal? What kind of crystal?

All that in 3 of your posts!
Probably not a mistake in the pile, but reads like a foreign language to me.
Frustration has occurred.

 

Thanks @#12 !!!

Please know that, via provision of specific examples, you have provided the single most useful critique of my 'communication style' to date!

I hope you will read through the following with an eye to offering any further comments as you see fit! -- As you will see, I freely own a significant portion of 'the blame'!

OBTW: By way of avoidance of further confusion, please note that, owing to my ignorance of Aleph's identity at the time of the original posts' composition -- I addressed her as I would any other interested reader without regard to her, as it turned out, deeper knowledge of many of the subjects...

So, with no further ado:

polyepoxide, post #3 Not in Dictionary.

Merely a generic reference to compounds vulgarly referred to as 'epoxies'... (Which being a manifestation of my extreme distaste for 'tradyness' and all the damage owed thereto)

"with a PMT", Post #7. Still don't know what that means.

My bad! I should have expanded that! -- Here ya go via our linkable glossary (which being @Aleph(0)'s idea): PMT

Rader' Post #7. Not in dictionary.

Embarrassingly, such was merely my (admittedly lame) attempt at 'kludging' a moniker for 'ionizing radiation enthusiast' - à la 'coiler', 'surfer', 'caver', etc... Granted! Upon reflection such amounts to 'inside humor' on public fora - my sincere apologies

(Grayer?) Post #7. More gray than something else?

Same as above Please note that the RAD and the Gray are units of ionizing radiation dose...

"Clarence M. Dallys" Post #7. Not detected by my search engine, (Dogpile)

Here's a Wikipedia article on him... -- Mr. Dally represents the veritable 'poster child' for the dismal consequences of negligence with x-ray generating equipment - a very tragic case indeed

Take great care that moments are not introduced ...Post #3 Merely unusual. If I didn't have a pittance of physics education I would have been baffled.

I apologize that I perceive no difficulty with the above? - Perhaps you feel I'm coming across as 'scolding' the reader? Maybe... But then the not inconsiderable discouragement attending damage to/destruction of their 'hard won' transformer (especially at so early a stage) would likely prove 'fatal' to continued pursuit of the subject

'integral air-gap' Post #3. My experience is that the air gap is just called an air gap. Why it needs to be called, "integral" escapes me.

First off - I really should have referred to said feature as a reluctance gap ('air' is nothing to do with it) -- 'integral' was to emphasize the fact that, following reassembly of the broken form with adhesive, an 'equivalent gap' would thereafter be 'integral' to the structure -- I grant that 'equivalent' might have been a better word choice...

"sans provision for admission of same" Post #3. Where I come from this is expressed as, "regardless of the lack of penetration of the oil" (into the windings).

'twould seem a matter of formality? -- I feel my version is 'clearer' for its succinctness - but then the disparity of our views as regard the merits of formality is a 'known'

"Now I see that the moments means torques sorry because of languge barrer"...Post #6 What? Even Aleph seems to name your use of words as an impediment?

Yebut please recall that @Aleph(0) was putting on a bit of an 'Andy Kaufman' (i.e. faux ESL) act early on - À la her feigned confusion of heroin with heroine (ain't she funny) -- I'll let her speak for herself -- What say ye @Aleph(0)?

"You seem to be under some misapprehension", Post #7. In my world*, we say, "I think you misunderstood or, did not understand".

Formality? Dialect? Who knows?... In any event we seem we understand each other?

"It would behoove you to bear in mind, as regards etiquette," Post #7. IMW, "Good manners suggest"

Or, perhaps, 'Good manners require'? -- But then, inasmuch as 'etiquette' and 'manners' are not entirely synonymous -- context rules the day!

aural communication Post #7 IMW, "oral communication"

But then such is a common (and, I might add, quite understandable) misnomer -- By way of elucidation: "Aural" refers to hearing or that which is heard whereas "oral" refers to the mouth without regard to speech -- that said, long misuse has significantly 'blurred the lines', as it were...

Hence: An 'aural exam' may refer to an (for instance, academic) examination wherein questions are spoken by the examiner and/or responses are spoken by the 'examinee'--Whereas an 'oral exam' occurs in the course of a 'dental visit'

"favorability of said geometry owing to the greatly enhanced field emission attendant thereto" Post #7 IMW, "The shape makes the emission work better."

Not often, but sometimes formality and clarity properly come at the expense of word economy -- IMO the above is an example of such a case!

"ubiquity of mammography 'enhancer' cassettes" Still post #7. IMW, "Availability of phosphor enhanced x-ray film holders"

Inasmuch as sensitivity to low PEs (i.e. <=50 keV) was desirable, specification of mammography enhancers was vital...

construct a scintillation detector implementing the 'Mammo screen' as the 'crystal'

Construct a (low level radiation?) detector using something from Mamography as the crystal?

Correct. While such would, of course, prove inferior to proper scintillation material (for its protracted persistence and lower 'sensitivity'), I have come to realize that cost is a major issue with a surprising number of hobbyists and students alike - hence my attempt to 'reach out' to said demographic (again, I remind you that, at the time of the cited dialog, I was uncertain as to Aleph's identity)...

What crystal? Does a scintillation detector contain a crystal?

'Crystal', as applied to scintillometry, is a 'term of art' referring to a mass of low persistence florescent material used in conjunction with, typically, a photo-multiplier tube, applied to the detection of ionizing radiation...

What kind of crystal?

Classically anhydrous sodium iodide (NaI) was common -- Whereas modern scintillator "crystals" are typically composed of various polymers (do note the quotation marks)...

Probably not a mistake in the pile

As you have seen there were a few

but reads like a foreign language to me.
Frustration has occurred.

@#12 I daresay a significant part of said 'difficulty' owes to the fact that I was addressing an individual --as opposed to the public- (my bad) although I didn't 'know I knew' Aleph at that time, we clearly shared common interests leading to what is quaintly termed 'shop talk' -- Hence my present policy of 'expository speech' when addressing Aleph on the thread! -- Although said practice annoys her (on the grounds that same appears to ignore her knowledge of the subject) - It is my stance that public discussion on an educational thread on educational fora should be publicly accessible

Many, many thanks!
HP

 

You can make the 'internet' secure in a purely mechanical fashion but what you can't do is to eliminate the human factor and it's a big factor in all-round security (Snowden and the idiot Winner are examples of security cracks). Any encryption system is only as secure as the security of the key that is used by human operators even if they don't know the actual key. If only perfect computers communicated to each other then security is a mathematical calculation of the risk (A large proportion of the entire world’s computing resource has been put to work to reduce that risk in mining farms in China) of cracking keys at random in some blockchain, but humans are anything but random, they are very predictable in the ways to make them operate machines in an insecure matter. This is why a great many exploits are payloads inside of email and programs that report to be a official communication (sometimes using your stolen identity information to provide private information to trick you) or have an emotional motivating factor for use. Search Google for bitcoin and people who have been tricked into losing their coins and how the blockchain then becomes a roadblock to find the crooks.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/lauras...itcoin-using-only-phone-numbers/#1ec6e87138ba

https://hbr.org/2017/03/how-safe-are-blockchains-it-depends

Hi,

I dont know where you found that picture but that's a very good example. South Park makes some political statements sometimes which are often sarcastic but true.

FYI, That particular episode was when one of the kids went to the bank to start their first bank account, and within a few seconds after handing over the money, the money was lost somehow in the system with no explanation. It was funny

 

Please know that, via provision of specific examples, you have provided the single most useful critique of my 'communication style' to date!

I am happy that you find this enlightening. I couldn't imagine why you could not see the difference between my style and yours and decipher these things because you clearly have the upper hand in language use. I hope it is clear that I hold no ill will toward you. Style is not a character defect.

I shall now proceed to get "schooled".
Anything I don't mention is because I understand it rather easily.
(A lot of them I understand; I just wouldn't be inclined to say it that way.)

PMT, got it.
Dally, got it.
Hmmm...never heard of a "gray" as a unit of radiation.
polyepoxide, Is that from Chemistry class? Most people haven't had chemistry classes. I did Chem 101 (quant), but my teacher successfully discouraged a starting class of 400 people down to 28 (93% wash-out rate). I chose not to suffer another semester of his attitude just for a bit of background, while already knowing electronics was my chosen path. Besides, I consistently scored above 90% on the tests, did all of the extra credit work that was offered, wondered why a whole semester was used up on something so simple, and received a grade of, "C". Having scored "A" in high school chemistry while sleeping through class, I was convinced I could not satisfy that teacher, and so, I decided I couldn't afford a bunch of undeserved "C" grades in 5 point chemistry classes and stay on the Honor Roll.

Etiquette: more formal than "good manners". The iconoclast in me abhors that level of stuffiness. If I drank alcohol, you might call me a "beer and pizza" man compared to a "champagne and caviar" sort of person. If you wear that kind of crown around me, I feel a compulsion to knock it off your head.
tradyness: not in Dictionary.com, Merriam-Webster British dictionary, or The Urban dictionary.
A reference to, "Trade names"?

Whereas an 'oral exam' occurs in the course of a 'dental visit'

That's funny. True, but it struck me as amusing. It is entirely possible I heard "aural" used correctly and assumed I heard "oral". I think I told you, I was dressed down by a New Yorker for the difference between Ginny and Jenny because there is no aural difference between them in the Mid-west dialect.

"sans provision for admission": IMW, "admission" is what you pay for at the gate, or reluctantly do during a police interrogation. Admission of oil conjures a comical picture of a quart of oil paying for entry into the windings. Around here, oil penetrates, or saturates, but it doesn't ask to be admitted.
"specification of mammography enhancers was vital..." I did not know that. I assumed all x-ray cassettes were built to utilize the least radiation congruent with efficacy.

'Crystal', as applied to scintillometry, is a 'term of art' referring to a mass of low persistence florescent material used in conjunction with, typically, a photo-multiplier tube, applied to the detection of ionizing radiation..

Wow! Still getting schooled!

Perhaps you feel I'm coming across as 'scolding' the reader?

The difficulty I have in understanding you leaves few, if any, brain cells to try to divine your emotional content. In fact, I suspect the, "formal" tone intentionally obfuscates that aspect.

Where do you get this kind of education??? I don't even know which classes I would enroll in to emulate you!

 

Hello there,

To me there is no solution to this problem except for intensive legislation.
The people responsible have to be tracked down and held accountable.

The interesting part is that the people responsible are not the ones who initiate the hack itself, but the people who develop the software that handles the hack attempt.

Quite a while back, i developed a controller board that connected to a computer which never connected to the internet, not even once. The main program of the controller board was quite simple: all it had to do was take an upload from the host computer. The computer would then upload the program to run on the controller board, and this could be changed as needed as the controller board storage was always volatile with the only non volatile code being the code in the ROM that allowed the program uploads to be stored in RAM.
Now the communication was fairly secure between the two, but there was always the chance of noise getting into the system where that would mess up the bytes and therefore mess up the program being uploaded, but by a fairly simple way of detecting this, there was no chance that noise would mess up any bytes, because if it did the slave would request the bytes to be resent, and even if they got messed up again the slave would request them to be sent a third time, and so on and so forth, until all the bytes were sent successfully. Thus, if there was any chance that something tried to interfere with the bytes, it would be detected, and at the very least, time out.and therefore at least the damaged (hacked) code would not be able to run.

Now i am sure that many here can visualize how non complicated this kind of transfer can be. The question is, why does it happen so frequently in the modern computer connected to the internet?

Well the answer isnt that hard t figure out, i dont think (comments welcome). When i made the controller board and the computer program codes, i was under total control of what would happen during the course of each upload to the controller board. When i connect to the internet today with a more modern computer however, the operating system has all the control, and i have almost none except in the background.

So the root cause is the operating system and there is nothing done to hold those liable for the damage caused by that system. That's like nothing else we have that we purchase from another company. The simple thing is, they get away with it. Until that is changed, we'll never see hack free internet even with quantum entanglement technology, the new state of the art future communication standard, and that is because the operating system makers are never held responsible for damages for when they dont do something right.

When we look at the recent election hack attempts and email hacks by a foreign government, we can see the damage can be very severe, yet no one involved in the technology is ever held accountable. If that's the way things are to continue, then the hacks will just get better and better where anyone with the capability can alter almost anything in the country they feel like altering.

Interesting thought of the day:
You cant sell virus software if no computer ever gets a virus.

 

So the root cause is the operating system and there is nothing done to hold those liable for the damage caused by that system. That's like nothing else we have that we purchase from another company. The simple thing is, they get away with it. Until that is changed, we'll never see hack free internet even with quantum entanglement technology, the new state of the art future communication standard, and that is because the operating system makers are never held responsible for damages for when they dont do something right.

Linux is open-source, fix it.

 

HP.......academic ebonics.

 

Linux is open-source, fix it.

Hi,

What's up?

I identify a problem and you suggest that i do the fixing? Why me?

It would be quite an undertaking but the main problem is support from manufacturers that make hardware (as well as software). Not all of them want to support Linux, and it's almost impossible for one single individual to write drivers for every single piece of hardware out there. Maybe work on a browser? Not sure if that is enough as all the underlying root function calls still come into question.

Theoretically though i think it is possible to create an operating system that cant be hacked. I also think the people who do this every day should be able to do it. I think the real question is whether or not they really want to do it.

If i was younger i would turn Linux into a robust, resilient system, But i am surprised that no one has actually done this yet.

 

Hi,
If i was younger i would turn Linux into a robust, resilient system, But i am surprised that no one has actually done this yet.

Don't worry, Linux already is a robust, resilient system that runs (with other Unix-like systems) most of the backbone of the internet. Your comments show you don't really understand operating systems and networking concepts in the detail needed to make logical solutions to today's problems.

 

C'mon guys. Everybody knows Linux won't keep State actors out of the Internet. I think that was covered in post #6 and post #9.
Please try to contribute to the title of this Thread.

 

C'mon guys. Everybody knows Linux won't keep State actors out of the Internet. I think that was covered in post #6 and post #9.
Please try to contribute to the title of this Thread.

Nothing will keep State actors out of the internet because it's regulated by those same State actors. Your data packets will be intercepted but will those data packets be encrypted with strong systems that will resist all methods but brute force cracking. End to end strong encryption and unbreakable authentication of users are the only real answers but even that's only effective in making the communications path secure. There is no known method to make humans secure once that information in our hands and heads after transmission as we manipulate it.

On of the problem with Blockstack and other blockchains is they depend on Proof_of_work to protect the chain from tampering. For a regular guy this might be costly when profit is the goal but for a 'State' actor the 100M needed to be the major Bitcoin miner is a rounding error on the budget and for maybe 10x that budget you could completely control the generation and alteration of blocks in a Blockstack CPU network because the blockchain’s basic premise is decentralized trust not a system with maybe 60% of total network CPU power. The encrypted data on the original block might still be secure but now the trust in the distributed ledger blockchains record of events is lost so you could spoof another users actions or cover your own actions without detection so consensus of transactions is lost also.

This blockchain CPU network power is expensive in terms of energy, one projected cost is 14 Gigawatts of electricity by 2020, that's the energy usage of Denmark and ~4,000 kg of carbon dioxide would be emitted per bitcoin mined.

 

Nothing will keep State actors out of the internet because it's regulated by those same State actors. Your data packets will be intercepted but will those data packets be encrypted with strong systems that will resist all methods but brute force cracking. End to end strong encryption and unbreakable authentication of users are the only real answers but even that's only effective in making the communications path secure. There is no known method to make humans secure once that information in our hands and heads after transmission as we manipulate it.

On of the problem with Blockstack and other blockchains is they depend on Proof_of_work to protect the chain from tampering. For a regular guy this might be costly when profit is the goal but for a 'State' actor the 100M needed to be the major Bitcoin miner is a rounding error on the budget and for maybe 10x that budget you could completely control the generation and alteration of blocks in a Blockstack CPU network because the blockchain’s basic premise is decentralized trust not a system with maybe 60% of total network CPU power. The encrypted data on the original block might still be secure but now the trust in the distributed ledger blockchains record of events is lost so you could spoof another users actions or cover your own actions without detection so consensus of transactions is lost also.

This blockchain CPU network power is expensive in terms of energy, one projected cost is 14 Gigawatts of electricity by 2020, that's the energy usage of Denmark and ~4,000 kg of carbon dioxide would be emitted per bitcoin mined.

14 nuclear power plants just to power CPU for payments?

A small trade off, correction, its called "rounding error" in newspeak.

For sure theres some completely new definition description of backdoor based on japanese philosophy

"State security"

You seriously think the japanese would let go state security, ever?

Watched too much Akira eh?

Get lost Kaneda you punk.

 

I am happy that you find this enlightening. I couldn't imagine why you could not see the difference between my style and yours and decipher these things because you clearly have the upper hand in language use. I hope it is clear that I hold no ill will toward you. Style is not a character defect.

I shall now proceed to get "schooled".
Anything I don't mention is because I understand it rather easily.
(A lot of them I understand; I just wouldn't be inclined to say it that way.)

PMT, got it.
Dally, got it.
Hmmm...never heard of a "gray" as a unit of radiation.
polyepoxide, Is that from Chemistry class? Most people haven't had chemistry classes. I did Chem 101 (quant), but my teacher successfully discouraged a starting class of 400 people down to 28 (93% wash-out rate). I chose not to suffer another semester of his attitude just for a bit of background, while already knowing electronics was my chosen path. Besides, I consistently scored above 90% on the tests, did all of the extra credit work that was offered, wondered why a whole semester was used up on something so simple, and received a grade of, "C". Having scored "A" in high school chemistry while sleeping through class, I was convinced I could not satisfy that teacher, and so, I decided I couldn't afford a bunch of undeserved "C" grades in 5 point chemistry classes and stay on the Honor Roll.

Etiquette: more formal than "good manners". The iconoclast in me abhors that level of stuffiness. If I drank alcohol, you might call me a "beer and pizza" man compared to a "champagne and caviar" sort of person. If you wear that kind of crown around me, I feel a compulsion to knock it off your head.
tradyness: not in Dictionary.com, Merriam-Webster British dictionary, or The Urban dictionary.
A reference to, "Trade names"?

That's funny. True, but it struck me as amusing. It is entirely possible I heard "aural" used correctly and assumed I heard "oral". I think I told you, I was dressed down by a New Yorker for the difference between Ginny and Jenny because there is no aural difference between them in the Mid-west dialect.

"sans provision for admission": IMW, "admission" is what you pay for at the gate, or reluctantly do during a police interrogation. Admission of oil conjures a comical picture of a quart of oil paying for entry into the windings. Around here, oil penetrates, or saturates, but it doesn't ask to be admitted.
"specification of mammography enhancers was vital..." I did not know that. I assumed all x-ray cassettes were built to utilize the least radiation congruent with efficacy.

Wow! Still getting schooled!

The difficulty I have in understanding you leaves few, if any, brain cells to try to divine your emotional content. In fact, I suspect the, "formal" tone intentionally obfuscates that aspect.

Where do you get this kind of education??? I don't even know which classes I would enroll in to emulate you!

@#12 -- Inasmuch as your (this) thread is yet 'on-topic active' I've taken the decision to post my reply to your (above quoted) post HERE

Many thanks
HP

 

Don't worry, Linux already is a robust, resilient system that runs (with other Unix-like systems) most of the backbone of the internet. Your comments show you don't really understand operating systems and networking concepts in the detail needed to make logical solutions to today's problems.

Hello,

You have some sort of problem or something?
If you want to discuss these issues that's fine, but mocking never helps.

By your comments, which always contain a hint of mocking BTW, point to some systematic bias that is outside the realm of fact. You would rather find some sort of subtle way of mocking a comment than trying to address the issues at hand, in almost every thread you have commented in. In fact, the only positive thing you've said recently is, "start your own thread", which is kinda funny really.

Also by your comments, everything works the way it should and nothing can be done about it. That tells me why you mock every solution (just about) you hear. If you believe there is no solution, you will never find out.
Also, in one post i see, "Fix Linux" then in another post i see "Linux is just fine". Could you make up your mind?

"Linux is just fine". Yeah, that's why no one uses Windows

It may be hard to deal with some things, but in threads like this if we could find some solution to the security issues we could make some progress, even if it was just a small step.

Linux would probably be a good starting point yes. Back in my earlier days i did upgrade operating systems. I also had to start from pure hardware and get machines up and running with programs that had to be hard coded into PROM's of the age now past.

 

Veering off topic.
Closed.