My worst was a botched repair on a $900 plasma TV. A bead of solder had rolled around one of the power MOSFET pins and connected the heatsink to ground. Made a bunch of cool spark fountains, but also fried the power supply, control board, Z-sus, and Y-sus boards.

snip

Actually, due to all the regulation here, the difference is more than a few dollars. If an iPad 2 were made in America, it would cost $1,144.02 USD, instead of $400 USD.

The funny thing is, we keep increasing wages so that people can afford to buy this crap, but the wage increases jack up the prices of things (that are made in America) that people want to buy.

I remember when there was electronic stores

You either paid out the arse for a limited selection, much like SF and Radio shack, or you drove across town to find out they didnt have what you needed it but could order it.

It really was a big pain in the butt, back in high school I had a semi complicated project I wanted to do and ended up spending an entire day running around chasing parts

now its just mouser/digikey/whatever and 20 min later I am done. The stuff is in my mailbox 2-3 days later, and its cheap.

I actually found a small parts store in an industrial park near my house, along with a 2-way radio store. The owner is awesome and helpful. He does have consumer electronics like HDMI cables and UPSes that are all more expensive than online sources, but the prices on small parts are close, if not better. He has 10mm low-power, but brite, LEDs for $1 (that I cannot find equivalents for anywhere) and 4x4 matrix keypads for $8. I havn't been able to find either of those parts online for similar prices. The student discount helps too...

I do a lot of building projects in-my-head and on-the-fly, so it's nice to be able to grab all the switches and sockets I need, and check them for fit by actually putting them in the project box I want.

I decided I didn't understand grown-ups.
It's an opinion I still hold.

ditto.

*

I was also quite surprised at all the negativity towards the curiosity mission - especially from "environmentalists" saying, that it was money ill spent. I recently saw some numbers on how much Verizon spent on improving network coverage in the US ... its no longer fresh in my memory but I remember thinking "wow. thats more than curiosity cost"

The US government spent more on air-conditioning military tents in Iraq, per year, than we did on NASA. NASA was never a huge part of our budget, even during the Apollo days. It peaked at 4.41%. Now its half a percent, not entirely because the cuts (~$4B), but because we spend so much more everywhere else. Kinda makes you wonder, are we really getting 8 times more utility out of our government, than we were 30 years ago?

Could you use a variable resistor instead of a servo? That way you don't have to dissemble the gauges.

Looks good so far. One of my computer science professors made a similar setup for an old text-based flight simulator.

It was just saying on the UK news that response in the States has been very muted. The reporter says that he was too modest for many modern Americans. Is that what you see is happening?

Apparently the news was overshadowed by some TV star having a child or something? I don't know. I know he liked his privacy, and did not give many interviews. He was the kind of person that spoke only when he had something important and well thought out to say. The History Channel changed their programming to show a documentary on the US moon missions, but I didn't see much from the mainstream media. A lot of it probably has to do with the election as well. Theres a large portion of the US that sees NASA as a huge waste of taxpayer money, making a favorable comment about the US Space program would be bad PR.

The first man to walk on the moon lived long enough to see us put a lander-sized robot on mars.

And the first man (according to American history  ) to make a powered flight lived to see middle-class people flying cross-country.  And even owning personal airplanes 

I don't remember whether Armstrong was among them, but I know several of the Apollo astronauts have been pretty outspoken about their disappointment at the near-abandonment of manned space exploration.

He was among them.

“When President Obama recently released his budget for NASA, he proposed a slight increase in total funding…the accompanying decision to cancel the Constellation program, its Ares 1 and Ares V rockets, and the Orion spacecraft, is devastating. . . . It appears that we will have wasted our current $10+ billion dollar investment in Constellation and, equally importantly, we will have lost the many years required to recreate the equivalent of what we will have discarded. . . For The United States, the leading space faring nation for nearly half a century, to be without carriage to low Earth orbit and with no human exploration capability to go beyond Earth orbit for an indeterminate time into the future, destinies our nation to become one of second or even third rate stature. While the President’s plan envisages humans traveling away from Earth and perhaps toward Mars at some time in the future, the lack of developed rockets and spacecraft will assure that ability will not be available for many years.”

Then again, we have gotten to a point where current technology allows civilians to put Arduinos in low orbit. Maybe there is hope after all. Looking at the comments on NASA stories is depressing. The general public seems content to just stop scientific exploration all together.

I'm "fixing" the wiring in my truck for the electronic locks and windows. Currently, it uses spade connectors to connect the door wiring to the wires inside the truck. The wire is 10gauge, and the load is around 3 - 5 amps, in short bursts. I want to find some kind of connector, similar to the Molex connectors you find in desktop computers. I need 9 pins total, but I could break that up if I have to.

Any recommendations for high-amp connectors?

I found the mx150l line of Molex connectors, but those are a little too pricey, and overkill for what I need.

  Perhaps after a few more such thieves are made destitute, the practice of such piracy will cease...

Thats the plan. Doesn't seem to be working. Apparently suing college students and single moms for millions of dollars doesn't win you many fans.

My proof is the lawsuit. If they could have sued him for more than 31 songs, they would have. Thankfully, our court system still has to at least make it look like they care about justice.

[previously presented evidence]

"The record labels claimed that Tenenbaum’s acts were willful and they previously presented evidence that he shared thousands of files and continued to illegally download and share music despite warnings from record labels.  " http://www.ipbrief.net/2011/04/08/sony-v-tenenbaum-saga-file-sharing-case-makes-its-way-to-first-circuit/  It was the highlighted evidence of his behavior that was used to classify Tennebaum's behavior as willful, thereby allowing the higher statutory damages the law allowed.  Since Joe and his lawyers never argued the basic facts of the case--only whether the punishment was excessive/fair I see no reason to doubt the quote.

You also failed to show where you got the idea that he continued to break the law after being extorted. Seems like you are making up "facts" to support your hatred.

Sorry, but perhaps you didn't read the highlighted quotes.  The record label provided that evidence in court, and the court used that evidence as the basis for ruling Tenenbaum's conduct 'willful', thereby opening him to the more severe fines (of which he was only given about 50% of the maximum the law allows).  Since Tenenbaum didn't contest that claim, only attempting to claim the fines were unfair, it is reasonable to accept the claim as valid.  He and his attorney's would have been much better served arguing the facts that classified his conduct as willful, since refuting those facts would have significantly reduced the fines to which he could be legally subject...

Uhh, thats not how it works. They asked him to settle prior to going to court, not pay fair market value. In the US, copyright law allows for fines up to $150,000 per track. He downloaded 31 songs. The RIAA told him to pay $3,500, or risk getting nailed for $4,650,000. Thats the extortion I keep talking about (there are many, many cases of the RIAA sending these letters to dead people, people that don't own computers, random civilians, etc.).

Sorry, but while there might be a penalty in the opening demand, everything I have read on the subject indicates that those requests are only to cover the actual thefts.  The reasons apparently are varied, but among others the demonstrate the reasonableness of the plaintiff when the original criminal continues to break the law (and hence open themselves up to the additional fines associated with 'willful conduct').  If you actually have some reliable evidence to the contrary please provide it--but claims by the criminals in question are not reliable evidence.

BTW, that is not extortion.  It is called a reasonable consequence of committing the crime in the first place.  None of those who have received such letters are innocent--they chose to commit their crimes.  They just thought they could get away with it.

The RIAA claimed he continued downloading music (so apparently third party corporations are free to monitor citizens 100% of the time now...). They can claim anything they like, the fact is, they never proved it.

"Everything you have read" is wrong. How is paying fair market value a punishment? Its a pre-settlement, based on magic numbers.I can't show you where they get the numbers, because they wont tell anyone. If they knew he downloaded 4000 songs, why were they only able to sue for 31?

The RIAA has sent these letters to dead people, people that don't own computers, people that lack internet access, people that don't understand how to turn on a computer, etc. Many innocent people receive these letters. Many more receive them and just pay up, rather than lose their life savings in a court battle.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trade_group_efforts_against_file_sharing#Criticism

So in my opinion, the long-term solution to piracy is making the content conveniently and legally available at a reasonable price. But what that price should be is good question...

I'm not sure if you are familiar with the Steam gaming platform, but they have done some testing of this in the video game industry. Basically, they found that if you take 25% off the price, your sales increase by 300%, you take 50% off, they increase by 600%, you take 75% off, you see a 900% increase in sales, and lastly, you reduce the price by 95% and see a sales increase of over 1,250%. They are also taking advantage of the social aspect of games. They sell 4 packs of games, at a 25% off discount, knowing that people are more likely to want a game if all their friends have it. They also allow gifts and guest passes

Steam games are locked down with DRM, but it does not get in the way, and is actually useful. Games a registered to accounts, not computers. So my friends can log into my computer, and play the games that we both own, without having to re-download or install. Since the games themselves aren't locked down, I can back up all my downloaded games, without having to break any copy protection.

I'd like to see something like this for movies, as well. Amazon Prime Instant Videos is coming quite close.

Being only 22, I feel left out....

The first man to walk on the moon lived long enough to see us put a lander-sized robot on mars.

I bounce between Windows 7, CentOS, and Fedora. I have an Ubuntu VM, but I don't use it for much.

[and continued to break the law for another two years]

"Distributing copyrighted material" is RIAA speak for "he downloaded music using P2P software, and partial files were downloaded from him".

He downloaded 31 songs, decided not to be extorted by the RIAA, and went to court. That is all. He admitted that he broke the law (he did that in the initial phone call, sending a $500 MO, and in the trial). The RIAA claimed he downloaded $4000 worth of music (they also claim that piracy has cost them $72 Trillion USD per year, making numbers up is fun), but the court found that not to be the case.

He shared the songs he actually purchased, thereby facilitating theft.

He downloaded many additional songs (approximately 4000), which he was given a bill for and warned to stop his illegal practice.  He responded to that bill with a check for $500 saying that was 'all he could afford' and continued to break the law for another two years.  I would love to see a cite for the courts response to say that it didn't find him responsible for that theft, since the offered payment would be considered acceptance that the bill was valid...

Was this individual made an example of?  Of course.  Doesn't change the simple fact that he never contested his guilt (at least until he had already lost) and his only complaint was that the fines were not fair.  Considering the penalties were levied by a jury and not a 'corporation' or judge, I find it unlikely the penalties were excessive.  Indeed according to the articles I have read on the subject the jury fined him well below the minimums mandated by the laws...

Where are you getting this 4000 number, and the information that he continued breaking the law after the RIAA tried to extort $5000 from him? I can't find that in any related articles, or court documents.

"the average price of a song from a major record company that is sold to a company such as Apple through its iTunes program or the current fee-based Napster is 70 to 80 cents per song. ", http://ipjournal.law.wfu.edu/2010/10/a-675000-damages-award-for-illegal-file-sharing-joel-tenenbaums-ferocious-battle-against-the-music-industry/

And Joe's website for the defense provides the first piece of evidence I used: "In 2003, Joel received a notice accusing him of downloading music through the P2P service, and told him that he could settle the case for $3,500.  He called the payment hotline, offered $500, and sent a money order in that amount.  That offer was denied."  3500/0.75 ~ 4600 songs
http://joelfightsback.com/#/about-the-case/overview/

"The record labels claimed that Tenenbaum’s acts were willful and they previously presented evidence that he shared thousands of files and continued to illegally download and share music despite warnings from record labels.  " http://www.ipbrief.net/2011/04/08/sony-v-tenenbaum-saga-file-sharing-case-makes-its-way-to-first-circuit/  It was the highlighted evidence of his behavior that was used to classify Tennebaum's behavior as willful, thereby allowing the higher statutory damages the law allowed.  Since Joe and his lawyers never argued the basic facts of the case--only whether the punishment was excessive/fair I see no reason to doubt the quote.

Uhh, thats not how it works. They asked him to settle prior to going to court, not pay fair market value. In the US, copyright law allows for fines up to $150,000 per track. He downloaded 31 songs. The RIAA told him to pay $3,500, or risk getting nailed for $4,650,000. Thats the extortion I keep talking about (there are many, many cases of the RIAA sending these letters to dead people, people that don't own computers, random civilians, etc.).

You also failed to show where you got the idea that he continued to break the law after being extorted. Seems like you are making up "facts" to support your hatred.

[and continued to break the law for another two years]

"Distributing copyrighted material" is RIAA speak for "he downloaded music using P2P software, and partial files were downloaded from him".

He downloaded 31 songs, decided not to be extorted by the RIAA, and went to court. That is all. He admitted that he broke the law (he did that in the initial phone call, sending a $500 MO, and in the trial). The RIAA claimed he downloaded $4000 worth of music (they also claim that piracy has cost them $72 Trillion USD per year, making numbers up is fun), but the court found that not to be the case.

He shared the songs he actually purchased, thereby facilitating theft.

He downloaded many additional songs (approximately 4000), which he was given a bill for and warned to stop his illegal practice.  He responded to that bill with a check for $500 saying that was 'all he could afford' and continued to break the law for another two years.  I would love to see a cite for the courts response to say that it didn't find him responsible for that theft, since the offered payment would be considered acceptance that the bill was valid...

Was this individual made an example of?  Of course.  Doesn't change the simple fact that he never contested his guilt (at least until he had already lost) and his only complaint was that the fines were not fair.  Considering the penalties were levied by a jury and not a 'corporation' or judge, I find it unlikely the penalties were excessive.  Indeed according to the articles I have read on the subject the jury fined him well below the minimums mandated by the laws...

Where are you getting this 4000 number, and the information that he continued breaking the law after the RIAA tried to extort $5000 from him? I can't find that in any related articles, or court documents.