Ice Cream Jonsey wrote: Sat Jun 10, 2023 3:07 pm You are wrong, however.

gnorW.

(Meaning: you got it backwards.)

Tdarcos wrote: Sat Jun 10, 2023 7:14 am

Ice Cream Jonsey wrote: Mon Jun 05, 2023 10:10 am Vark was talking about being too eager to go into screen-staring mode on modern technology and you spewed something about suburbs. Come on. Get your head in the game.

No, it was exactly on point.

No, it wasn't but it doesn't matter.

You are wrong, however.

Yes or no would have worked, but then we wouldn't know about mixed use neighborhoods

Ice Cream Jonsey wrote: Mon Jun 05, 2023 10:10 am Vark was talking about being too eager to go into screen-staring mode on modern technology and you spewed something about suburbs. Come on. Get your head in the game.

No, it was exactly on point. Let me repeat his question and paraphrase my answer:

Tdarcos wrote: Mon Jun 05, 2023 2:00 am

AArdvark wrote: Sun Jun 04, 2023 5:37 pm Are we letting our stuff take over our lives?

'Vark, that question was answered in the affirmative about 65 years ago, when ... we built cities and suburbs... to serve the needs of automobiles.

I could probably have been clearer. We could have set up neighborhoods to be "mixed use" where you have homes, and shops, and townhouses, and apartment buildings all together, making communities walkable and aligned towards the needs of people. Instead, we built insular neighborhoods of single-family homes distant from services, requiring automobiles for us to be able to do any errands.

Thus, cities are built to support the needs of automobiles, not people. Are we letting our stuff take over our lives? We already have.

Gentlemen, gentlemen, please.

Tdarcos wrote: Mon Jun 05, 2023 9:38 am

Ice Cream Jonsey wrote: Mon Jun 05, 2023 8:00 am "Vark, that question was answered in the affirmative about 65 years ago, when in the mid '50s, instead of building neighborhoods to support people, by having grocery stores and other small merchants mixed in with places to visit like parks, and mixed homes, all within walking distance of each other, we built cities and suburbs with lots of housing tracts far from any services, and installed the infrastructure to serve the needs of automobiles."

No.

Wrong.

Vark was talking about being too eager to go into screen-staring mode on modern technology and you spewed something about suburbs. Come on. Get your head in the game.

Ice Cream Jonsey wrote: Mon Jun 05, 2023 8:00 am "Vark, that question was answered in the affirmative about 65 years ago, when in the mid '50s, instead of building neighborhoods to support people, by having grocery stores and other small merchants mixed in with places to visit like parks, and mixed homes, all within walking distance of each other, we built cities and suburbs with lots of housing tracts far from any services, and installed the infrastructure to serve the needs of automobiles."

No.

Wrong.

"Vark, that question was answered in the affirmative about 65 years ago, when in the mid '50s, instead of building neighborhoods to support people, by having grocery stores and other small merchants mixed in with places to visit like parks, and mixed homes, all within walking distance of each other, we built cities and suburbs with lots of housing tracts far from any services, and installed the infrastructure to serve the needs of automobiles."


No.

AArdvark wrote: Sun Jun 04, 2023 5:37 pm My boy has a water bottle...excuse me, a hydration bottle, that is connected to his smart watch via Bluetooth. I was at his house today and the cap on this bottle started flashing. He received a notification on his watch. Puzzled, I asked him about it. Apparently the bottle reminds him to take a drink and stay hydrated.

So are we, as a society, too connected with things? Did he need an expensive bottle to drink water on a schedule? Are we letting our stuff take over our lives?

"Why, CGG, the bottles told me to drink 'em, and they were all flashin' and dancin'. They notified me!"

I'd say sure, suurrree the bottles started talking to you, pal, as I helped the gentlemen in the white coats load them into the van with the state emblem on the side.

AArdvark wrote: Sun Jun 04, 2023 5:37 pm So are we, as a society, too connected with things?

Possibly, I'm not sure. I need to search Google and Bing, make a request on Facebook and Twitter, then check YouTube for anything on the subject; I'll get back to you.

AArdvark wrote: Sun Jun 04, 2023 5:37 pm Did he need an expensive bottle to drink water on a schedule?

No, a cheap watch with an alarm will do so. Or a $25 cell phone with the calendar app set up. Sometimes people buy technology because they are gadget freaks.

AArdvark wrote: Sun Jun 04, 2023 5:37 pm Are we letting our stuff take over our lives?

'Vark, that question was answered in the affirmative about 65 years ago, when in the mid '50s, instead of building neighborhoods to support people, by having grocery stores and other small merchants mixed in with places to visit like parks, and mixed homes, all within walking distance of each other, we built cities and suburbs with lots of housing tracts far from any services, and installed the infrastructure to serve the needs of automobiles.

My boy has a water bottle...excuse me, a hydration bottle, that is connected to his smart watch via Bluetooth. I was at his house today and the cap on this bottle started flashing. He received a notification on his watch. Puzzled, I asked him about it. Apparently the bottle reminds him to take a drink and stay hydrated.

So are we, as a society, too connected with things? Did he need an expensive bottle to drink water on a schedule? Are we letting our stuff take over our lives?

'Vark, to fit this thread, buy some slightly higher quality fruit spread to put on toast than jelly, and paint it all over a door. Then you can tell your wife the title of this thread, substituting "I" for "Aardvark," of course.

I want to bump this thread, kind of like a reusable grocery bag.

More in a bit...

AArdvark wrote: Tue Jun 02, 2020 3:06 pm What can you tell us about lasers for cutting steel?

They bounce off my chest.

What can you tell us about lasers for cutting steel?

Anything requiring line of sight or aiming at the target is using infrared (think of aiming a laser pointer). Anything that works even if you can't see the target is using no-license-required radio frequencies such as cordless telephones and wifi. Candles and incandescent/fluorescent lamps may affect infrared but should have no affect on radios.

Danger sign on very large laser, used to cut 3/4" steel: DANGER! IF YOU LOOKED AT THIS LASER BEFORE, DO NOT LOOK AT LASER WITH YOUR REMAINING EYE!

Flack wrote: Mon Jun 01, 2020 7:36 pm Different problem. The Wii sensor bar uses infrared to track the Wiimote. A lot of people who got Nintendo Wiis for Christmas reported that Christmas tree lights interfered with the Wiimote's tracking system.

A garage door opener should work non line of sight (ie -- from outside, when the door's shut). Here's a blog post about RF interference from cheaper LED bulbs (the cheaper ones have less RF shielding, apparently): https://blog.lightingsupply.com/blog/do ... or-openers

I'd replace those bulbs and then use them at work to mess with things.

Ahh ok! Come to think of it I recall if I had candles burning in the coffee table in front of the tv it would also happen.

Ever since incandescent bulbs started being phased out, I learned to handle ratng in lumens. To know the equivalent that works for you, multiply the incandescent watts by 16. So a 40 watt is 640 lumens, 60 watt is 960, and so on. I ususally needed about a 100 watt bulb to see okay, or 1600 lumens. That is a 26 watt fluorescent, or a 13 watt LED.

Incandescents forced electricity through a tungsten fillament, which glowed, wasting most of the energy as heat, which is why incandescent light bulbs were hot to the touch. Fluorescents are more efficient, and LEDs even more so.

An LED excites a semiconductor to trigger the generation of photons, but as a result it can generate radio-frequency interference (RFI), in some cases on the same frequencies as portable telephones (the kind people have on home phone lines, not cell phones) and garage door openers. Depending on bulb and garage door opener or transmitter, the interference is in the 2.4 or 5 GHZ frequencies. The solution is what you did, either find one that has better shielding or the color does not interfere with the garage door opener. In looking this up I discovered garage door opener devices are radios; I thought it was like infrared as a TV remote uses, only you don't have to put the target outside as the transmitter is an actual radio, thus LEDs can interfere with them.

If you look on the transmitter or the opener itself there will be an FCC advisory saying it is approved for use subject to two conditions (1) it must not cause interference to other devices; (2) it must accept interference from other devices, including interference which may result in undesired operation. And I didn't even have to look that up, I remembered.

At least it was an easy fix. I was thinking maybe it was just a rogue pair of bulbs not built to specs and emitting on frequencies it shouldn't, but I did a search and found out this seems to be a very common problem. 1000 Bulbs has a blog post about RF quiet bulbs. They specifically mention LED bulbs interfering with garage openers and say you might still have problems even if you have bulbs that are shielded to prevent interference and meet FCC Part 18 standards. CFLs and rough service incandescents (where heat isn't an issue) still have their place evidently.

LED bulbs are great from an efficiency and theoretical longevity point of view, but it's too bad the light bulb is now much more complicated than what Edison and the earlier pioneers envisioned. Light bulbs, how do they work?!

Different problem. The Wii sensor bar uses infrared to track the Wiimote. A lot of people who got Nintendo Wiis for Christmas reported that Christmas tree lights interfered with the Wiimote's tracking system.

A garage door opener should work non line of sight (ie -- from outside, when the door's shut). Here's a blog post about RF interference from cheaper LED bulbs (the cheaper ones have less RF shielding, apparently): https://blog.lightingsupply.com/blog/do ... or-openers

I'd replace those bulbs and then use them at work to mess with things.