• 6 Posts
  • 410 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 23rd, 2024

help-circle


  • Probably also new enough to have a non-point-focusing Fresnel lens. Which is enough to focus sunlight into a pot and heat it up decently fast, but not to make a sharp death-beam to liquify metal. That’s the most valuable part of a projection TV nowadays, and although you could get a sizeable trapezoidal mirror and some lenses, plus dichroic glass out of LCD ones, those are not nearly as fun.

    I think that by removing the mirror, screen and case, a working one could be made into a half-decent projector but very limited in where it can be placed in the room to focus (about 1 diagonal away from the screen and dead center because of no keystone) plus you’d have to make a fire-resistant electrically safe case for the unshapely thing that blocks any light from the lamp/CRTs but isn’t too big as to block your view any more than the bare device already does.







  • ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.orgto196@lemmy.blahaj.zoneRule
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    8 days ago

    What is possible depends on your definition of “number”, for example the Unicode digits mentioned only match \d (digit) in some Regex implementations. And some cultures don’t have digits, for example Roman “Ⅴ” and old Italic “𐌡” (both mean 5 and look like an incoming flying goose) are numerals and never pass as \d. And Egyptian hieroglyphs 𓆏 (frog) or 𓆐 (tadpole but looks more like a parrot to me) can mean 100,000 but I haven’t seen them called numerals or digits. Neither the eel-like 𔗄 Anatolian hieroglyph for 1000.

    I focused on strings that a computer might spit out when asked to print a float but that might include “-Inf” (rooster in grass?), which mathematicians don’t consider a number. However, they consider √7̅ (flying swan) a number, also “φ” (flamingo) aka golden ratio, equal to (√5̅+1)/2, and even complex numbers like -5+7i (flying bird with ornate tail). If you imagine a proper vertical fraction, ¼𝑒 (approx. 0.67957) could be a more detailed, wading flamingo. Coders will know what number -0xD7 (yet another sideways nesting/flying bird) is. And in some electrical engineering software, 1M7 (ostrich showing off its wings) means 1.7 million, 1p7 means 1.7 trillionths and 87j (rotate 90° right to see a chicken pecking at a seed) is the standard way to write “amplitude 87, phase 90°” - “j” is used for √-̅1̅ because “i” means current. However, most software, and likely this form, won’t accept non-Latin numbers, math symbols and engineers’ shortcuts (maybe the e/E for ⏨-exponent).



  • ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.orgto196@lemmy.blahaj.zoneRule
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    8 days ago

    2 is a swan
    817 is an open-beaked screaming hatchling
    -2 is a seahorse
    .5 is a sitting bird
    6.6 is an owl
    -5e7 is a nesting chicken
    -5.43 is a peacock
    8008 is a tit

    0 is an egg. Bird, fish, amphibian, reptile, who can tell? Truly a neutral answer - neither positive nor negative.

    To help you visualize:

    Also, number 4 in different scripts looks quite fishy ૪ or quite birdy ۴.

    Edit: Aaaaaa, I fell into the rabbit hole of Unicode digits looking like swans and flamingos ᪇᪄ ᮳ ᱁᱆ ᱒᱙ ꘥ ꣙ ꤃ 𑑘𑑕 𑱗𑱕 𑱕𑱔 𖩢










  • Tap into the button wiring in the control panel (if you’re qualified!). Maybe you’ll be able to type FF (hexadecimal) seconds, resulting in cooking time of 150+15=165 seconds!

    Now seriously, a big portion of BCD (binary-counting-decimal) equipment is actually binary-to-hexadecimal but the counter is expected to reset before reaching A. Sometimes it doesn’t:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MvZgfj0_hJU&t=86

    Another video, super compressed, by me, shot on a feature phone:

    You also see it go to 3 st 14 lb, which should not be possible because it’s suppoded to show 4 st 0 lb at that point. (I use kilograms, I was just wondering what the switch in the battery compartment does.) I originally thought the ASIC inside would be a kind of microcontroller stripped down to what’s needed: CPU (8- or even 4-bit, likely von Neumann) with a few registers (hard to call that RAM), (EE?)PROM for the program and calibration data (there’s a pair of pins labeled “CAL” for a jumper or serial interface; I won’t mess with them), 1:4 multiplexed LCD driver, digital input (not even GPIO) pins for the unit switch and calibration interface, differential amplifier and A/D converter, plus some support circuitry like an RC oscillator for the CPU clock, charge pump for the LCD, low battery voltage detector and sleep/wake circuit for power saving. This could enable the same ASIC to be used in personal and kitchen scales, maybe even pressure gauges, thermometers or more, just with a different program, LCD and external components. However, now I see that there is likely no CPU because doing the math in software would make such errors impossible. So there’s most likely a hardwired logic system with hardware counters (just a little more complex than those cheap 3½-digit multimeters), binary-to-hex-7seg-digit converters and a flaky analog threshold system in the st:lb mode (the kg mode is a robust 1500-count decimal counter).