Poll

Would you routinely place a resistor in series with a jelly bean LED on an RPi 3.3V GPIO?

Yes
No
What's a resistor?
What's a datasheet?

Author Topic: Software guys, please, no.  (Read 17995 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline strawberry

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • !
  • Posts: 1199
  • Country: lv
Re: Software guys, please, no.
« Reply #25 on: September 18, 2022, 11:13:36 am »
IC output pins are current limited  but LEDs are not (modern LED die sizes are small to dissipate extra power)
 

Offline AndyBeez

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 858
  • Country: nu
Re: Software guys, please, no.
« Reply #26 on: September 18, 2022, 11:21:28 am »
Well, do not confuse Windows with useful software that works in a predictable fashion.

Or, dunno, don't confuse software with something useful that works in a predictable fashion if we are at that.
From WinNT to Win10, tech support guys spent their whole work lives doing Windows patching, often every day and night. Thank goodness for the DOS prompt? btw Microsoft dismissed the web as a 'fad', as then MS was wedded to it's business model of providing endless support (patches) for it's over priced corporate products.
 

Online langwadt

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4857
  • Country: dk
Re: Software guys, please, no.
« Reply #27 on: September 18, 2022, 11:24:50 am »
But he is most definitely a software guy first and foremost. [...] well, it works for him, and he asks viewers to convince him otherwise.
Ah, a "coder".

You know, the person who copy-pastes code off the web, until something compiles and passes through the minimal test.  In the open source world, the person who responds to bug reports with "it works on my machine, so I'm closing this bug report as invalid".

Please do not confuse him with anyone who can actually develop useful software that works in a predictable fashion, okay?
Just so you know. He wrote a significant part of Windows, a lot of his code like Task manager and disk formatter are still on your computer many years later.

yeh, afaik he wrote taskmanager just as tool for himself and it then ended up being incorporated in in windows,
zip folders he made and sold as a standalone program before it was added to windows

I tihnk he has a video talking about his biggest commit was after he went through all of the windows source to add unicode support



 
The following users thanked this post: tooki

Offline tooki

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 13157
  • Country: ch
Re: Software guys, please, no.
« Reply #28 on: September 18, 2022, 12:41:09 pm »
Look on the bright side. If it wasn't for idiots, there'd be no merit in competence.
He may not be a hardware guy, but he’s definitely not an idiot.

But he is most definitely a software guy first and foremost. [...] well, it works for him, and he asks viewers to convince him otherwise.
Ah, a "coder".

You know, the person who copy-pastes code off the web, until something compiles and passes through the minimal test.  In the open source world, the person who responds to bug reports with "it works on my machine, so I'm closing this bug report as invalid".

Please do not confuse him with anyone who can actually develop useful software that works in a predictable fashion, okay?
LMAO at how insanely incorrect you are.

You have, with certainty asymptotically approaching 100%, used software he wrote. As others said, he wrote some significant parts of Windows.

Well, do not confuse Windows with useful software that works in a predictable fashion.

Or, dunno, don't confuse software with something useful that works in a predictable fashion if we are at that.
What an ignorant statement. Windows isn’t even my preferred OS, but the fact is, it is useful software that performs well for most people who use it. It’s not perfect (no product is!), but it’s good enough that no alternative has been able to dethrone it, despite decades of attempts. (The only time Windows has ever been dethroned was in internet servers, but I’d argue that Windows’ dominance for a while was the weird blip, and that the internet’s “native” OS is UNIX/Linux.)
 
The following users thanked this post: rsjsouza, langwadt, newbrain

Offline Brumby

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 12413
  • Country: au
Re: Software guys, please, no.
« Reply #29 on: September 18, 2022, 01:17:12 pm »
For  a demo like this I think it's perfectly reasonable to omit the resistor for simplicity. Nothing will burn or catch fire. The LED and GPIO pin will limit the current enough.
I wouldn't disagree, but there was further comment that he had done this "for years" without problem.  That makes me wince - just a little.
 

Offline AndyBeez

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 858
  • Country: nu
Re: Software guys, please, no.
« Reply #30 on: September 18, 2022, 02:14:44 pm »
If anyone wants to know why a series resistor is needed with an LED, check out Big Clive's "Pound shop Xmas disaster" video on YouTube:
 

Offline xrunner

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7836
  • Country: us
  • hp>Agilent>Keysight>???
Re: Software guys, please, no.
« Reply #31 on: September 18, 2022, 02:15:40 pm »
Can you hammer a nail with the bottom of your Skilsaw? Sure ... you might will be shunned by professional carpenters but it'll work most of the time.

Of course we know you should calculate a current limiting resistor value from the supplied voltage and voltage drop of the LED. But as we see, for a cheap demo that's working at 50% DC - meh. Maybe it'll get stressed in a few 10's of thousands of cycles. So what - just grab another one and keep going. But for a professional design you wouldn't want to do it 1.

1. I would have preferred he explained that a little better but maybe he wants comments for attention
I told my friends I could teach them to be funny, but they all just laughed at me.
 

Offline cgroen

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 642
  • Country: dk
    • Carstens personal web
Re: Software guys, please, no.
« Reply #32 on: September 18, 2022, 02:48:08 pm »
Well, do not confuse Windows with useful software that works in a predictable fashion.

Or, dunno, don't confuse software with something useful that works in a predictable fashion if we are at that.

Well, Windows has been working here for the last many many years, maybe you are doing something wrong ?
 
The following users thanked this post: newbrain, Fire Doger

Offline thinkfat

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 2161
  • Country: de
  • This is just a hobby I spend too much time on.
    • Matthias' Hackerstübchen
Re: Software guys, please, no.
« Reply #33 on: September 18, 2022, 03:14:08 pm »
No need to worry about burning out GPIO pins, since RPis are plentiful and easy to obtain at the moment.

Hah! Good one!
Everybody likes gadgets. Until they try to make them.
 

Online Nominal Animal

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7193
  • Country: fi
    • My home page and email address
Re: Software guys, please, no.
« Reply #34 on: September 18, 2022, 03:59:56 pm »
...You know, the person who copy-pastes code off the web, until something compiles and passes through the minimal test.  In the open source world, the person who responds to bug reports with "it works on my machine, so I'm closing this bug report as invalid".
Which is why I gave up on open source development. Often some dumb Reddit bros with a Linux shell for social skills.
And which is why I do not care how popular Linux (or any open source project) is, only how civilized/sane/rational the core developer community is.

It would be so nice if people were rational and cared more... but that's an utopia.

He made his bones writing code long before “the web” existed.
Which doesn't change the underlying personality type at all.  If you wish, I'll amend my definition into "the person who has learned nothing in the last thirty years, because they believe they've done this long enough to know it all already".

I've met many people like this, even in universities –– although I prefer to only interact with the ones who like learning and arguing rationally, and are not swayed by arguments from authority, and most importantly, know and admit when they are beginners outside their domain of expertise.

Just so you know. He wrote a significant part of Windows
Ah, that explains a lot.

a lot of his code like Task manager and disk formatter are still on your computer many years later.
No, they aren't.  The first and last Windows machine I ever had used Windows 98.  Guess why?  It just isn't a good OS at all.  It is popular, but for reasons completely different to code quality or robustness.

I tihnk he has a video talking about his biggest commit was after he went through all of the windows source to add unicode support
Which is another thing Windows never got right.  In particular, Unicode code points range from 0 to 1114111, inclusive.  Windows' wide character support isn't unicode, it's actually UTF-16, and many Windows programs don't deal with code points 65536..1114111 correctly because of that or other related issues.

You know, because "65536 glyphs is enough to cater for all languages".  Except it isn't.

LMAO at how insanely incorrect you are.

You have, with certainty asymptotically approaching 100%, used software he wrote. As others said, he wrote some significant parts of Windows.
You have, with certainty asymptotically approaching 100%, used software I've contributed to, so essentially used software I've "written".

Doesn't that make you insanely incorrect, by your own argument?



I know I've offended your Coding Guru, but fact is, a lot of popular code, open source or not, is utter crap because most developers just don't care about the engineering part enough.  Things like robustness and security must be designed in, they cannot be added on top later on, yet most coders are absolutely fine with writing something that works, and leaving the "rest" –– like buffer overrun checks in C –– for "later".

These people work on both proprietary and open source code.  They are common.  They are successful, because the actual quality of their work product is unrelated to their popularity or career development.  You are utterly, horribly misguided if you think their long careers or popularity of their work product is somehow an indicator of the quality or sanity of their work product: the world does not work that way.  In essence, you are looking at the brand the person has built, instead of the actual work product.

Shame on you.
 

Offline tooki

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 13157
  • Country: ch
Re: Software guys, please, no.
« Reply #35 on: September 18, 2022, 04:26:09 pm »
LMAO at how insanely incorrect you are.

You have, with certainty asymptotically approaching 100%, used software he wrote. As others said, he wrote some significant parts of Windows.
You have, with certainty asymptotically approaching 100%, used software I've contributed to, so essentially used software I've "written".

Doesn't that make you insanely incorrect, by your own argument?
Of course not, because your statement was that he was a “copy and paste from the web” coder, and that’s nonsense, because you’ve used code he wrote before the web was even really a thing.

Your retort doesn’t even make logical sense, it just makes you look like a whiny child crying “no, YOU’RE the butthole!” I didn’t make ANY claims about your coding abilities, so what code you’ve written has zero bearing on the truthfulness of my reply.

I know I've offended your Coding Guru, but fact is, a lot of popular code, open source or not, is utter crap because most developers just don't care about the engineering part enough.  Things like robustness and security must be designed in, they cannot be added on top later on, yet most coders are absolutely fine with writing something that works, and leaving the "rest" –– like buffer overrun checks in C –– for "later".

These people work on both proprietary and open source code.  They are common.  They are successful, because the actual quality of their work product is unrelated to their popularity or career development.  You are utterly, horribly misguided if you think their long careers or popularity of their work product is somehow an indicator of the quality or sanity of their work product: the world does not work that way.  In essence, you are looking at the brand the person has built, instead of the actual work product.

Shame on you.
I should feel shame because I don’t agree with your shitting on someone you know nothing about? (And don’t patronize me by claiming he’s my “guru”. That’s simply not true. I don’t have any particular feelings about him either way.)

I completely agree that experience tells you little about the quality of someone’s work.

But your claim was that he was a cut and paste from the web coder, and that’s just nonsense.
 
The following users thanked this post: rsjsouza, wraper, newbrain, sokoloff, cgroen

Online Nominal Animal

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7193
  • Country: fi
    • My home page and email address
Re: Software guys, please, no.
« Reply #36 on: September 18, 2022, 04:47:55 pm »
your statement was that he was a “copy and paste from the web” coder, and that’s nonsense
You do know they do not actually physically exist, right?  I mean, anyone who only does that will not work in the industry for long.

It was a characterization, an analog to describe the approach to their work, not a literal description of their work pattern.

Double shame on you for willfully acting as if you didn't realize that.  You knew perfectly well that I was describing the mentality, and not the exact behaviour.

(Perhaps I should have written "the kind of person who" instead of "the person who"; but I suspect you would have resorted to this same fallacious argument even then.  It is not like you are considering any of my actual points here at all, just asserting that mine are wrong, because the sky is blue, and there are twelve months in a year –– that is, asserting my actual points are irrelevant, because if you twist my argument just a little bit, it no longer makes any sense to you.  Word games, not rational argumentation.)

And triple shame on you for completely ignoring the core of my argument: that just because they are popular and have had a long successful career, does not prove their work product is anything but a degree above garbage; it only proves that they have made themselves a successful brand.
 

Online wraper

  • Supporter
  • ****
  • Posts: 17952
  • Country: lv
Re: Software guys, please, no.
« Reply #37 on: September 18, 2022, 04:52:08 pm »
your statement was that he was a “copy and paste from the web” coder, and that’s nonsense
You do know they do not actually physically exist, right?  I mean, anyone who only does that will not work in the industry for long.

It was a characterization, an analog to describe the approach to their work, not a literal description of their work pattern.

Double shame on you for willfully acting as if you didn't realize that.  You knew perfectly well that I was describing the mentality, and not the exact behaviour.

(Perhaps I should have written "the kind of person who" instead of "the person who"; but I suspect you would have resorted to this same fallacious argument even then.  It is not like you are considering any of my actual points here at all, just asserting that mine are wrong, because the sky is blue, and there are twelve months in a year –– that is, asserting my actual points are irrelevant, because if you twist my argument just a little bit, it no longer makes any sense to you.  Word games, not rational argumentation.)

And triple shame on you for completely ignoring the core of my argument: that just because they are popular and have had a long successful career, does not prove their work product is anything but a degree above garbage; it only proves that they have made themselves a successful brand.
So you characterize a person you know nothing about. If you watched particular video, there are no signs of "the kind of person who" either.
 
The following users thanked this post: rsjsouza, tooki, newbrain

Online Nominal Animal

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7193
  • Country: fi
    • My home page and email address
Re: Software guys, please, no.
« Reply #38 on: September 18, 2022, 04:55:54 pm »
Your retort doesn’t even make logical sense, it just makes you look like a whiny child crying “no, YOU’RE the butthole!” I didn’t make ANY claims about your coding abilities, so what code you’ve written has zero bearing on the truthfulness of my reply.
You wrote, and I quote, "LMAO at how insanely incorrect you are.  You have, with certainty asymptotically approaching 100%, used software he wrote. As others said, he wrote some significant parts of Windows."

What is that but not an argument based on authority; asserting that because he wrote significant parts of windows, his work product must be good?

You are illogical.

If you extended the same logic to me, you should show me the same utter dereference to me as you do to him.

My argument is that that logic is untenable, a fallacy; that popularity is unrelated to quality, and you should not show any dereference to any person in any case.  Instead, you should examine what they say and do, and use that to evaluate the basis of their claims.

Here, you have a person who has done one thing for a long time.  He shows signs of a certain very common mentality, "it works for me, so it is correct".  I am deriding that mentality to the utmost, because I have not seen a single field of engineering or science where that produced good results.  However, I know that such assertions, if made with the correct social overtures and language, make a person popular, and lets them have a very successful career.

It is also the reason why so much software is utter shit.  I don't blame the social gamers, the people who succeed by making themselves a brand, so that the quality of their work product does not matter.  I blame you, for agreeing with them, and supporting them.

And that is exactly where the "shame on you" comes from: for being irrational and emotive, instead of rational and analytical, and still considering yourselves engineers or scientists.
 

Online Nominal Animal

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 7193
  • Country: fi
    • My home page and email address
Re: Software guys, please, no.
« Reply #39 on: September 18, 2022, 05:00:58 pm »
So you characterize a person you know nothing about. If you watched particular video, there are no signs of "the kind of person who" either.
I believe he is a very nice, personable, interesting person, who can present himself positively in every situation.
And that I do not want to have to rely on a single line of code he wrote, for exactly the reasons above.

If you disagree, fine.  But do consider that our disagreement has zero value to anyone; only the reasons behind the different opinions have value.
 

Online SiliconWizard

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 15798
  • Country: fr
Re: Software guys, please, no.
« Reply #40 on: September 18, 2022, 06:11:06 pm »
I have watched a number of his videos. And while this guy sounds "nice", the videos are well produced and there are occasional fun anecdotes, in the end I don't find the information he conveys particularly interesting, and for the relatively small amount of videos he made where he actually writes code, uh, yeah. Not particularly interesting, and if this is what a "star developer" is at MS, this would not be very surprising. Now when he gets into hardware, that's usually even funnier.
 

Offline pcprogrammer

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4670
  • Country: nl
Re: Software guys, please, no.
« Reply #41 on: September 18, 2022, 06:26:46 pm »
And that is why I gave up on youtube. It is mostly about entertainment and has little substance. And even though some are better to watch, how many commodore 64, trs-80, apple II repair videos, or I made this gadget or wrote this software or checked out this scope can you watch. To me it gets boring after a while, and for learning I rather have a proper datasheet to figure it out myself.

Offline tooki

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 13157
  • Country: ch
Re: Software guys, please, no.
« Reply #42 on: September 18, 2022, 07:57:08 pm »
your statement was that he was a “copy and paste from the web” coder, and that’s nonsense
You do know they do not actually physically exist, right?  I mean, anyone who only does that will not work in the industry for long.

It was a characterization, an analog to describe the approach to their work, not a literal description of their work pattern.

Double shame on you for willfully acting as if you didn't realize that.  You knew perfectly well that I was describing the mentality, and not the exact behaviour.

(Perhaps I should have written "the kind of person who" instead of "the person who"; but I suspect you would have resorted to this same fallacious argument even then.  It is not like you are considering any of my actual points here at all, just asserting that mine are wrong, because the sky is blue, and there are twelve months in a year –– that is, asserting my actual points are irrelevant, because if you twist my argument just a little bit, it no longer makes any sense to you.  Word games, not rational argumentation.)

And triple shame on you for completely ignoring the core of my argument: that just because they are popular and have had a long successful career, does not prove their work product is anything but a degree above garbage; it only proves that they have made themselves a successful brand.
You are, again, putting words in my mouth.

I do understand it’s a characterization, and never claimed otherwise. But your claim was that he is someone who isn’t
…anyone who can actually develop useful software that works in a predictable fashion

Which is nonsense since he’s written software that is useful and has worked in a predictable fashion.
 
The following users thanked this post: WattsThat

Offline tooki

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 13157
  • Country: ch
Re: Software guys, please, no.
« Reply #43 on: September 18, 2022, 08:02:05 pm »
Your retort doesn’t even make logical sense, it just makes you look like a whiny child crying “no, YOU’RE the butthole!” I didn’t make ANY claims about your coding abilities, so what code you’ve written has zero bearing on the truthfulness of my reply.
You wrote, and I quote, "LMAO at how insanely incorrect you are.  You have, with certainty asymptotically approaching 100%, used software he wrote. As others said, he wrote some significant parts of Windows."

What is that but not an argument based on authority; asserting that because he wrote significant parts of windows, his work product must be good?

You are illogical.

If you extended the same logic to me, you should show me the same utter dereference to me as you do to him.
It is NOT an appeal to authority, it’s a direct response to THIS claim:
Please do not confuse him with anyone who can actually develop useful software that works in a predictable fashion, okay?
That is a claim which is easily disproven, and which others in this thread disproved before I even responded.

Nobody is claiming he’s a star programmer (I’m not enough of a programmer to be a judge of code quality, nor do I claim to be.) But you made some easily falsifiable statements that have been falsified.

All the rest of your replies to me, with all the stuff you’ve put in my mouth, all the ridiculous claims of “emotional” response, idolatry, etc: sorry, you’re just being a condescending asshole based on your lazy, imprecise reading of what I did and did not say — and your own faulty memory of what YOU said. And based on that fantasy in your brain, you constructed an entire alternative narrative about me that I didn’t even do or say, and then had the audacity to “shame” me publicly for. Fuck off, dude.
« Last Edit: September 18, 2022, 08:12:56 pm by tooki »
 

Offline tooki

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 13157
  • Country: ch
Re: Software guys, please, no.
« Reply #44 on: September 18, 2022, 08:12:31 pm »
So you characterize a person you know nothing about. If you watched particular video, there are no signs of "the kind of person who" either.
Thank you for confirming exactly what I thought.

I guess it’s no surprise he then wrote two walls of text characterizing me…
 

Online coppercone2

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 11339
  • Country: us
  • $
Re: Software guys, please, no.
« Reply #45 on: September 18, 2022, 10:32:58 pm »
you don't need a resistor for the base of the transistor  ;D

how about parallel GPIO pins for running that 5V relay at 3.3V right from the MCU ?? it clicks! ;)

that little square can do anything! discrete components are obsolete, just throw more microprocessors at the problem. Who needs to have a buffer when you can just parallel some atmegas??

I am waiting for a circuit that uses atmega connected to mains because someone figured out how to get it to short out to make the correct passive component. Universal building block if you know how to burn it out properly. If 500V is applied between pins 3 and 15 you can get a 30kohm resistor roughly 30% of the time.
« Last Edit: September 18, 2022, 10:40:56 pm by coppercone2 »
 

Offline nigelwright7557

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 706
  • Country: gb
    • Electronic controls
Re: Software guys, please, no.
« Reply #46 on: September 18, 2022, 10:46:22 pm »

You know, the person who copy-pastes code off the web, until something compiles and passes through the minimal test.  In the open source world, the person who responds to bug reports with "it works on my machine, so I'm closing this bug report as invalid".

Please do not confuse him with anyone who can actually develop useful software that works in a predictable fashion, okay?

I have been a coder for 40 years and still sometimes just rip some code off the net.

The last rip was a fast fourier transform for a digital oscilloscope.
It took four go's to find one that actually worked well.
Even then I had to get into it to extract the frequency domain data from it.

Microchip have vast databases of software for PIC's to save time and help programmers.
Why start from scratch if its already been done and tested ?
 

Offline nigelwright7557

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 706
  • Country: gb
    • Electronic controls
Re: Software guys, please, no.
« Reply #47 on: September 18, 2022, 10:49:01 pm »


I am waiting for a circuit that uses atmega connected to mains because someone figured out how to get it to short out to make the correct passive component.

I was poking mains through a 390K resistor into a PIC 40 years ago.

Its not so simple with newer PIC's. If the pin does A2D then it doesn't have the same protection as standard i/o pins.
 

Offline eti

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • !
  • Posts: 1801
  • Country: gb
  • MOD: a.k.a Unlokia, glossywhite, iamwhoiam etc
Re: Software guys, please, no.
« Reply #48 on: September 18, 2022, 11:17:53 pm »
Look on the bright side. If it wasn't for idiots, there'd be no merit in competence.

You reckon Dave Plummer an “idiot”? He’s anything BUT. The guy is basically a savant. Bit rude, to put it mildly.
 
The following users thanked this post: tooki, cgroen

Offline eti

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • !
  • Posts: 1801
  • Country: gb
  • MOD: a.k.a Unlokia, glossywhite, iamwhoiam etc
Re: Software guys, please, no.
« Reply #49 on: September 18, 2022, 11:25:37 pm »
This thread has devolved into an aspie ego-fest. Invest some days in watching Dave’s videos - ALL of them if you wish - and learning about this lovely man. He’s a kind, witty and utterly brilliant man. He’s also a millionaire, and you don’t become a millionaire from being stupid (unless you perform a heist).

Grow up, buffoons.
 
The following users thanked this post: tooki, cgroen


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf