Personifying my sentiments through a popular figure
who may or may not be of the same ethnicity as myself strikes you as racist? If I call you Honey Badger
since Honey Badger just doesn't give a s**t about video signals (it tweaks what it wants!) would it strike you as speciesist? (Or is that genusist?)
Yes, as I said, I found your choice rather curious and I never heard of her. It might just speak to what you think of black people, a kind of stereotype as portrayed with that image and the ebonics cast on her with the "ain't" usage, so yes, there could be some racial undertones there having chosen this... I also like how you cast doubt on your race, floating the possibility that you could be of the same race as her as a response. Well, your first link, at this time, fails to load, and I don't really care to click the other ("ain't" got time for it, your nonsense that is, heh!
) . Anyway, yes, a most excellent contribution to the thread! Thanks!!
I'm failing to find a generalization. Perhaps you could use examples? Would it be a generalization to say that your main takeaway from this thread is that resistors aren't readily available in every value? This is perhaps my most minor criticism of the work, but the one you keep coming back to.
Failing, yes, a concept you're rather familiar with. The content of your meme "Correct NightWolve?? Ain't nobody got time for that.
" attempts to generalize me as impossibly arrogant to correct. The arrogant one claims generalized arrogance at the other party, that it has been generally incorrect, and tries (tries
, not actually succeeds) to be funny about it with something some would find questionable/offensive, etc. It also does possibly bring into question some sort of long standing issue, like you knew me or something and brought in additional negative baggage. Not an unreasonable possible interpretation or conclusion.
And as for your attempt to shift the issue onto resistors, you're the one that kept crying/heckling about "preferred values," not me! I didn't somehow indicate I used a pot to force an exact 80 Ohms in that schematic... It goes back to the point, rather than ask/probe further since I entered the thread, you just went on the attack. You're a shoot-first type of jackass, in addition to the rest of it, being abrasive, arrogant, elitist ("Rawr, you losers aren't trained engineers doing this! It makes me mad!
"), hypocritical, etc. I see a massive superiority complex like I've not seen in a long while! There's literally not even a single case of you admitting to anything wrong; you completely lack the ability to admit that you've been wrong in anything or guilty of jumping the gun, etc. What an amazingly excessive level of pride there! Instead of owning up to anything, you just shift the issue like the weasel that you are!
I wonder perhaps because you also had a hard-on for me before I even got here
I did? I don't recall ever
communicating with you before this thread--we don't even hang out at the same spots. If you hadn't shown up we never would have. Your reputation had preceded you with me, once, by way of an old PCE acquaintance who I guess scuffled with you about 10 years ago over something (maybe credit?) I cannot remember, and I don't even remember the message board.
The thought occurred to me, that's why I voiced it out loud. I didn't declare it a fact, so don't go getting carried away with it!! You didn't have to go into such detail! Granted, with troll hostilities, you're gonna seize upon whatever wrong guesses might be put forward to reduce your embarrassment and have something else to attack with, so I understand your little speech there. Anyway, I simply posed a possibility, as I said, your meme made me wonder. So OK, point noted, you had no prior grudge with me, and your attempt to generalize me with that meme is entirely just from posts in this thread then... Fairy enough.
As for this PCE acquaintance you brought up and crediting, it sounds like Derrick Sobodash or "D-Boy," who once falsely accused me of not crediting him in the Ys IV translation project on his blog. When I discovered the accusation, I contacted him, showed the ReadMe to his face and the crediting that was *always* there for his font application (feidian) and help, etc. So, that issue was resolved. But, that is the problem with passive-aggressive behavior and not first communicating with the person who you feel you have a problem with, before making and spreading accusations publicly.
Oh BTW, what's this "we" business ? This, "If you hadn't shown up we never would have.
" ?? We never would have ? What is that, the royal 'we' usage or just a proofreading failure on your part or ?? Letting something slip there ? No, pffffft, never mind, don't bother answering that.
kyuusaku wrote:I know very little about you personally--and I'm more than fine with that.
Likewise! Like you think you're gonna hurt with me that. Heh. You're nothing but contemptible as far as I'm concerned!
kyuusaku wrote:You've had many opportunities to learn from the criticism with grace.
Hah, talk about something so self-applicable! How fantastically hypocritical!
kyuusaku wrote:Instead you're intent on staying ignorant of video signals and standards, transistor operation, transmission lines, perhaps even Ohm's law.
Here we go again! It's breathtaking to watch this, really! I remember your pre-edit version of a prior post, where you made a more inflammatory accusation in the form of, "YOU DO NOT RESPECT THE SCIENCE!!!! RAAAWRRR!!!!
" like a madman, a wild-eyed, blatantly false and unfair accusation! But, you later decided to edit it out and toned it down somewhat, of course, now it's back in a different form given your anger level... Heh. You're pathetic, that's the truth!
kyuusaku wrote:This is what I know (all substantiateable):
Right, a list of your distortions, exaggerations, straw men, revised history, etc. of my positions and this situation in general. Well done!
kyuusaku wrote:-you built a video driver (which you colloquially call an amplifier despite it not performing signal amplification) by way of circuit-bending and around unfounded pretenses.
It's a basic transistor amp and yes, it actually does amplify the signals in question. Why wouldn't it ? AFAIK, that basic circuit design is referred to as a transistor amp, a "common-emitter amplifier" circuit, etc. and I'm not responsible for starting that reference, but I see in your hysterical quest to find all sorts of possible attacks to continue on, it doesn't surprise me you came up with this one, apparently holding me accountable, selectively, for the general, colloquial reference of "transistor amp" found throughout the Internet, even Wiki which you previously linked, and in use by most others, etc. I don't hear others refer to such designs as "video drivers" much. Sorry about that... Ever hear the expression "selective outrage?" Anyhow, not much else to say to this... I do hate to take the bait on your nonsense and waste more of my time, but I'm not gonna leave your garbage/spin unanswered.
kyuusaku wrote:-you receive engineering advice from a purportedly professional EE friend, whose qualifications are suspect upon approval of this work.
Ah, I see. Going after his credibility now. Problem is that steve has actually made worthwhile contributions to many gamers, be it his repair/mod jobs or the design of a general RGB->YPbPr circuit which was pressed onto a PCB and currently being sold/installed, etc. Unlike JROK, the design is out there for free for those willing to build it themselves. Compared to him, you're just a little bitchy bitch, emphasis on the little.
I told him about this thread actually, specifically the 1K issue and a transistor breakdown scenario. He said that, yeah, at 5 Volts, the chances are next to nil for transistor breakdown, but added the ole "Never say never..." So, he stood by that. He also agreed there's current waste with the pull-down values, but it's acceptable. And once again, that's the range SNES engineers used for Luma/Y, so it wasn't this great offense that you hysterically claim that it is!
But no, his qualifications are just fine as far as I can tell, minus the amazing arrogance and superiority complex that you so clearly exhibit here. I'd say if anyone's qualifications are suspect and not to be trusted, all signs point to YOU! BTW, if you wanna attack him to his face, since you're feeling so uppity, I'd be happy to provide you with his contact info.
kyuusaku wrote:-you assert that electrical theory and manufacturability problems I've thrown at you is "nitpicking".
Strawman. No, I assert that your nitpicking of the 80 Ohm issue, when it was a solid resistor all along, when it was physically labeled 82 Ohms, and it only ever could've been following a "preferred value" standard as the industry appears to manufacture them based on this standard, THAT was nitpicking! Ultimately, a difference of 1-2 Ohms compared to what professionals use for the Luma/Y and you're STILL at it!!
kyuusaku wrote:-you've self-promoted the work, and defended it from critique using logical fallacies and by throwing someone who had tried your circuit (and may or may not have built it correctly) under the bus.
Yes, it's called sharing hobby work that you've become interested in, just as others have shared their circuits in here as well, much to your displeasure. And to claim I threw somebody under the bus is absurd, blatantly dishonest! I simply pointed out that the first schematic of mine that he shared here was done so privately via PM, and I wasn't quite confident enough with it to share publicly since I was still experimenting. It was sort of a rough draft version and I put it together quickly for him though it was written in a way in preparation for eventually making it public. The newer one was my choice to publicly share. So yes, my preference would've been not to have publicly shared the first one that I made for him. It was incomplete, didn't tell you what to do for Luma/Y, and it appears now you might not need an amp in some cases, etc. I changed the default output resistances as well relative to my 1990 motherboard obviously.
kyuusaku wrote:-you appear to have an appetite for attention/theatrics/prosing, but through your posts you have projecting these attributes onto myself, which astute readers hopefully will find as confusing as I have. Every post I've made responds to key points with appropriate concision. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Honestly, you're a joke at this point. "Rawr, every thing I've done has been correct, point to point, everything you have done has been confusing, incorrect, attention-seeking, etc
." Nice little version of your "history" there.
kyuusaku wrote:-you've resorted to arbitrary off-point personal attacks, emotional outbursts and irate private messages. I can't even intellectually see the humor in them, maybe a tiny bit in the PM and latest few emoticons.
Well, given a prick of your caliber, I think everything's been pretty justifiable... I don't care what humor you can't or can see in anything here, so spare me. Also, you got ONE PM to both trash you and put you on notice that I had posted here again after months from our last exchange, so falsely reporting it as plural shows, yet again, how you like to play fast and loose with the truth.
kyuusaku wrote:-you've call me a "heckler" about a dozen times, as if you were a stand-up comedian and I'm ruining your act (if this is an act, what exactly are you getting out of it?)
I've called many others hecklers when I felt it appropriate, so don't go thinking it was just you. Your attempt to read further into that was just to set up your insult of a stand-up comedian act as another means of attacking my credibility. Hell, if anybody is the comedian, or rather, the joker here, it'd be YOU, hands down! I mean, aside from all your other antics, you're that one that brought that curious meme into this thread that you're so proud of, aren't ya ?? Heh.
As for what I'm "getting out of this," first off, I never would've had a DAMN thing to say to you. Not a single word. It was YOU that picked a fight with me, and you got one! Secondly, why don't just you finally f--k the hell off then, and not concern yourself with what I am or am not "getting out of this" ? Instead, you chose to once again engage with me further, made more inflammatory responses to provoke me, but then turn around and claim, for me, it's an "act..." You tried to embarrass me, and flaunt or pimp out your "I'm a trained EE, you're not!
" credentials, your "I know better than you,
" but instead the only embarrassed one here wound up being you, and you're butt-hurt about it. I understand, and I'm really sorry about that, but take a good look in the mirror as to why this exchange worked out the way that it did...
kyuusaku wrote:-this board has numerous individuals better educated than myself, who I'm sure also find fault in the circuit and your retorts but are too polite, too entertained, or maybe are too concerned for your mental well-being to join in; there have already been numerous tech-quacks to grace the board with their work and pontifications on binary matters, who breakdown when too many speak out.
Oh, I see, so now we're making assumptions about other people, appealing to them and perhaps hoping they'll join in, huh ? Awwww, poor fella, he had to do this all by himself, for the good of the Internet (or rather, his superiority complex
), but he knows many agree with him in spirit and takes comfort from that...
NightWolve wrote:I do humbly apologize for not noting that the 80 Ohm resistor was actually a "preferred" labeled 82 Ohm type from any general resistor kit
This sounds like revision to me but in any case I've maintained that this isn't the point.
There's no revision, sir. The liar calling me a liar essentially. And it's funny, now that the issue was explained to you, you shift in approach with a, "Uh, well, that wasn't the point anyway, rawr!
" See if you can understand: I bought a standard 500 resistor pack from Radioshack, took an 82 Ohm resistor out of it, measured it with a DMM at 80 Ohms, and so 80 Ohms is what I wrote on my visual schematic, but I didn't get to add a footnote/detail at the bottom, to let the reader know that it's a labeled 82 Ohm resistor. That would create confusion because the labeling on a resistor pack would never show 80 Ohms, so it was an oversight on my part. A footnote that I'm using ACTUAL resistance values on the schematic should've been there in principle, etc. Especially now that I know there are nitpicking nutjobs like you that'll seize upon something like that to attack overall credibility of someone.
And no, YOU are the one revising!
made a point to complain that part of why the circuit doesn't make ANY sense is because 80 Ohms isn't a "preferred value." When I pointed out that SNES engineers put together two 39 Ohm resistors for a total of 78 Ohms, which ultimately equals 79 Ohms when you measure the resistance fully across, you defended that by stating 39 Ohms is a preferred value, and once again continued on attacking 80 Ohms because it wasn't. You even posted Wikipedia links defining "preferred values" emphasizing some sort of importance! And finally, now that an oversight on my part was revealed, that it was in fact a "preferred value" of 82 Ohms, straight from a standard resistor pack, you f--king shift the issue and emphasize that something else was your point! You've made MANY points, never a SINGLE one! You're a f--king piece of work, that's for DAMN sure! Think I can't follow your f--king bullshit ?? Let's recall how you also seemingly suggested to go lower, back down to 75 Ohms, even while emphatically stating 80 Ohms wastes loads of current, etc.!
You get checkmated on one point, then move on to the next, emphasize something else, claim, well, THIS was what was really the main point or problem, etc.! Sure, in this case, part of it was my fault for not somehow noting that issue in the schematic, that the resistor I pulled out of my pack/kit is labeled 82 Ohms, but notice how you use whatever you can, then when it falls apart, you jump around to another issue to continue on with a sustained attack, etc. You're a troll! There would never be a, "Oh, I see, it was a preferred value all along.
" You're far too arrogant, bigoted, and prideful, etc. to make concessions like that. When you could use an appearance of lack of "preferred values" to attack, you did so, but now you're having to STFU about it and de-emphasize it!
Tell me, a$$hole, since you're so smart, does the industry manufacture solid resistors that don't conform to the "preferred value" standard ?? As I said, it was my fault on the schematic (Notice how I am capable of admitting to fault there in sharp contrast to an egotistical monster like you!
), but, I'm just wondering since, you know, you're so smart, how come it didn't occur to you that it was probably NOT possible for me to be in possession of a mal-sized resistor that doesn't conform to sizing standards of some type ? Where do I get resistor packs that don't conform to the "preferred value" standard because I looked around (not much, admittedly), but I'm not finding them ??
kyuusaku wrote:80 or 82 ohms, the value doesn't make any engineering sense.
Um, we've been over this... It's 80 Ohms, reality-wise, and SNES engineers wound-up using 79 Ohms reality-wise for the Luma/Y signal, so close enough you f--king lunatic!!!! I'm tired of repeating myself! If 79 Ohms made engineering sense for the Luma/Y, that range, to get started with for the layman, would seem good enough. Your attack still appears to be from a position sort of demanding that only trained engineers should be attempting this. That's what it would seem like. You're judging me from a high standard as if I was pretending to be a fully trained engineer and this was THE *perfect* circuit that was offered, etc.
kyuusaku wrote:You chose/found this value because the result appealed to your eyes, upon your TV set, calibrated to your settings, when paired with your SNES and your transistor + accoutrements. If the value made for a repeatable driver circuit faithfully delivering the signal to the load with fair conformance and even moderate efficiency I wouldn't care; but it doesn't, and that's the bottom line.
No actually, I didn't! Wrong again, surprised ? I chose it because general resistor packs don't include a 75 Ohm resistor and so I was left with the choice between 68 Ohms and 82 Ohms, all following your precious "preferred value" standard, so I took the 82 Ohm one (which is 80 Ohms in reality). Simple enough. And since 79 Ohms is what SNES engineers used, your insistence that it's just wrong has little merit, and speaks of your troll nature, I think. Still wanting to pretend you had a point and showing more of your arrogance! So yeah, I was looking for a 75 Ohm resistor just because of some general knowledge as a layman about the 75 Ohm standard for video signals, but my resistor pack didn't offer that value as a solid resistor, and then after seeing more video circuits for this situation, I concluded it wasn't a great offense to go a little higher.
Correction: What I chose, and what everyone must choose, based on the appeal to their eyes, upon their TV sets, is the final output resistance after the emitter and preferably after a capacitor if you're "respecting the science" and caring about filtering out the DC offset. And given all the motherboard revisions, and other factors, etc. you're gonna want a 0-100 Ohm pot for that aspect. You have also revealed more of your lack of hands-on, even though it appears you're formally book-trained in EE. If you knew what the f--k you were talking about exactly, you would know that the exact purpose of that pull-down resistor is so that the video signal will go through the DC-filter capacitor! This situation is practically binary, that is, with no pull-down resistor, the signal doesn't go through the capacitor, so you get nothing on the output! You wouldn't be able to tell the difference visually with 80, 100, 500, (of course if you short it, by going too low, way under 75, you'll weaken/kill it altogether) etc. The signal either goes through or it doesn't, in general! Now, if you don't care to filter out the DC-offset, after you remove the capacitor, you don't need that pull-down resistor anymore, but you would need a bigger resistor in series because now there would be less attenuation. The point IS my eyes couldn't have led to this exact choice via tweaking, something that applies to the final output resistor (which is what you were thinking of), dumbass!
Now, notice the difference between you and me when I made a guess versus your guess about the 80 Ohm resistor and how I came to choose it. In my case, I simply posed the possibility, it made me wonder when it came to your meme and your overall harassment of me, my circuit, I wondered, did this nutjob have some prior grudge with me. It appears now you just have a general chip on your shoulders and I was a random target that came into your cross-hairs. Fair enough. No further dispute there even though you seized upon my wrong guess to make a speech. On the other hand, you arrogantly declared the reasons for my choice as fact, as part of a list of things that you "know to be true and that can be substantiated." Heh. There are no qualifiers like "probably," as in, "You probably chose this value because of x, y, or z, etc."
So yeah, just thought I'd point that out. You still haven't decided to be a little more careful when you make your "proclamations" against someone, etc. Somebody has to kick you off that high horse, cause clearly, you'll never get off of it.
The other thing I would say about this attack is, repeating myself again, it goes without saying that since I'm not a trained electrical engineer, that my circuit wasn't designed with a scope and/or with deep knowledge about video signals, etc. and so I can't offer anything more than some general starter circuit for fiddling that works, but isn't professional, so your harassment is selective since a few other circuits here are by people who are not trained engineers as well. But as was eventually and repeatedly pointed out, that 80 Ohms for a pulldown value didn't turn out to be the great offense that you claimed that it was and still do! You wanna still cry about the 1K Ohm resistor or diode between the base of the transistor and the video chip, be my guest, but I'm still gonna use it up to and until, a professional EE with hands-on experience cracks open their SNES and works out designing a basic transistor amp given all the available knowledge now present.
kyuusaku wrote:I can't say it was a pleasure, but it's been educational for me as well.
I guess the sarcasm wasn't obvious. Heh.