16:17 <DocScrutinizer05> Ist nur ein Zahlendreher: statt 23.03. sollte es heißen 32.03. , also 1.April

16:18 <DocScrutinizer05> wpwrak: it's like injet printers: the printer is for almost free, while the liquids cost more than gold

16:32 <DocScrutinizer05> also I really doubt they can do proper exact printing from a smartphone display, the distance to the light emitting surface is too high and the directivity of the emitted light too low

16:33 <DocScrutinizer05> just place a sheet of paper on top of your smartphone display and see what you can read

16:34 <DocScrutinizer05> that's pretty much fake, it can produce stuff but it's useless nevertheless, due to lack of resolution and precision

16:37 <wpwrak> all those STL printers use expensive liquids. so that far it would be normal.

16:38 <DocScrutinizer05> sure

16:38 <wpwrak> good point about blur. they would need a directional filter, further reducing light output.

16:39 <DocScrutinizer05> I got a good misconception as example that you constantly see in movies, where the display of a monitor in front of the actor supposedly gets reflected on his face. Mere idiocy

16:41 <DocScrutinizer05> you physically can't get a resolution much better than thickness of the display glass

16:41 <DocScrutinizer05> unless you'd use a lens

16:42 <DocScrutinizer05> or a parabolic mirror

16:43 <DocScrutinizer05> and without such focusing element you have the problem of a fairly thick layer of half-cured material on the surface. Well you can finish curing at daylight I guess

16:45 <DocScrutinizer05> nah, it's a scam like those 60ct plastic calipers or the 10cm^2 solar panels to charge your phone

16:46 <DocScrutinizer05> it *theoretically* works *somehow*, but in RL it's mostly useless for the purpose you thought it was meant for

16:47 <wpwrak> yeah, i guess we'll have to see what crawls out of this. chances do indeed seem rather high that whatever it does won't be overly convincing.

16:47 <DocScrutinizer05> yep

16:48 <wpwrak> one problem is that all the examples you usually see are "art". so it's hard to tell how good the reproduction of the CAD model actually is.

16:48 <DocScrutinizer05> they do that on purpose ;-)

16:49 <wpwrak> of course :)

16:50 <DocScrutinizer05> honestly, putty is cheaper, faster, and yields better more precise results

18:46 <wpwrak> microsoft dabbling at AI (comments are worth reading too, especially the one about the japanese competition): http://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/03/24/microsoft_ai_goes_troll/

18:47 <wpwrak> i kinda wonder what they fed that poor both with to make such statements. i don't think even old simpleton eliza could be made to say such things

18:52 <wpwrak> i would love to be a fly on the wall in their next project meeting :) here is more: http://uk.businessinsider.com/microsoft-deletes-racist-genocidal-tweets-from-ai-chatbot-tay-2016-3

19:12 <larsc> twitter as usual I guess

19:54 <DocScrutinizer05> AI made by fools

19:55 <DocScrutinizer05> "hey, let's mix this flu virus with a hepatitis virus and see what happens"

19:58 <DocScrutinizer05> or "I got a great idea we should see how that pans out: control the 747 in autopilot mode by random signals through a neuronal network and the pilots give feedback to train the NN"

20:00 <DocScrutinizer05> pretty much symptomatic for M$ developments

20:01 <DocScrutinizer05> develop some arbitrary crap without clear design rules or goals, and as soon as it doesn't segfault once every 5 minutes, roll it out as giveaway and see what's the feedback

20:01 <wpwrak> the engineers that blew up chernobyl must feel pretty good about themselves when reading such stories :)

20:02 <DocScrutinizer05> yeah, sure, that was simple human failure, not utter idiocy like found at M$

20:05 <DocScrutinizer05> WOW, >> <p>Damit Sie Ihren Benutzeraccount weiterhin nutzen können, bitten wir Sie darum Ihre Daten erneut zu verifizieren.</p> <p><a href="http://paypal.de-ll.cc/deutschland/sicherheit/kunde=237846/" <<

20:06 <DocScrutinizer05> a pity many users will actually not recognize this as the phishing it is

20:08 <DocScrutinizer05> LOL, check the https cert

20:36 <DocScrutinizer05> Police (phonecall): "our internet crime team doesn't work on weekends" ROTFL - PayPal at least thanked me for forwarding the mail to spoof@pp

20:37 <DocScrutinizer05> wondering how to take down paypal.de-ll.cc immediately

20:38 <DocScrutinizer05> abuse@de-ll.cc ?

20:41 <DocScrutinizer05> Sponsoring Registrar: BIZCN.COM, INC. ohmy

20:42 <DocScrutinizer05> https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/correspondence/serad-to-guanghui-08may14-en.pdf

20:52 <DocScrutinizer05> I wish ICANN would force .cc top level DNS to nuke all URLs granted to/by BIZCN

20:55 <DocScrutinizer05> actually the URL is at cludflare.com

20:55 <DocScrutinizer05> cloudflare even

21:00 <DocScrutinizer05> >>Two of ISIS' top three online chat forums are guarded by CloudFlare but U.S. law enforcement has not asked them to discontinue the service<<

21:00 <DocScrutinizer05> >>An October 2015 report found that CloudFlare provisioned 40% of SSL certificates used by phishing sites with deceptive domain names resembling those of banks and payment processors<<

21:02 <DocScrutinizer05> >>On November 2015, Anonymous discouraged the use of CloudFlare's services, following the ISIS attacks in Paris and renewed accusation of providing help to terrorists.[37] CloudFlare responded by calling their accusers "15-year-old kids in Guy Fawkes masks" and saying that they consult "actual anti-terrorism experts" and that they "abide by the law"<< ok, maybe they are at the edge to doom now, let's hope so

21:13 <wpwrak> DocScrutinizer05: how about this ? http://downloads.qi-hardware.com/people/werner/anelok/tmp/time-backup-draft-20160324.pdf

21:15 <wpwrak> values subject to more detailed calculation. the 680 kOhm are a common high resistance value in the design, so i try to reuse this

21:17 <wpwrak> large R3 (you suggested 100 kOhm) is to keep the current through the circuit low. needs experimental verification

21:19 <wpwrak> btw, i had another idea: if VDD decays quickly, an RC between GND and VDD might be an even simpler and much more efficient solution: decaying VDD would "switch automatically" between charging (rather, holding), and discharging

21:21 <wpwrak> (decays quickly) or, rather, reasonably predictably

21:26 <DocScrutinizer05> yes, but predictability is possibly low

21:28 <DocScrutinizer05> and you can't control the moment of timestamp and writing it to persistent storage - which I'd suggest to do *before* VDD drops

21:32 <DocScrutinizer05> the pdf looks good. I don't get what's Tp or why it comes in there

21:34 <DocScrutinizer05> or rather, Td and Tc are not really needed

21:36 <DocScrutinizer05> yes, when you want to do this calibrate-at-activation-time scheme, you need to store the Vh/Vl/delta-T calculation result and Vs and the timestamp of Vs

21:36 <DocScrutinizer05> and I'd use exponetial curved instead linear charge / discharge

21:36 <DocScrutinizer05> in diagram

21:38 <DocScrutinizer05> this will cause Td to be very short in comparison to Tc

21:40 <DocScrutinizer05> ooh, Charge: ADC H

21:40 <DocScrutinizer05> :-)

21:41 <DocScrutinizer05> yes, the circuit looks decent

21:44 <DocScrutinizer05> ((which I'd suggest to do *before* VDD drops)) maybe you got some pre-fail contact that opens a 100mS *before* the battery loses connection?

21:45 <DocScrutinizer05> ideally you use a bayonet peg to close the battery bay, and the pre-fail contact gets engaged as soon as bayonet is turned out of "lock" position

21:47 <DocScrutinizer05> or simply use a metal screw with a spring for minus battery contact in the middle, and a non springloaded pre-fail contact that closes when screw is completely seated

21:48 <DocScrutinizer05> so you have 4 or 5 turns of the screw between pre-fail and loss of Vbatt

21:48 <DocScrutinizer05> plenty of time for doing the charge&timestamp dance

22:07 <DocScrutinizer05> I got a procedure simplification: at pre-fail probe voltage [1] of capacitor and take timestamp1. Then do cyclic ADC until voltage dropped a exactly N (e.g. 10) digits on ADC (should take some 20 to 50ms, adjust N accordingly), then take timestamp2 and store [1] and timestamp1 and timestamp2 (or exact diff to ts1) to storage, keep capacitor discharging

22:10 <DocScrutinizer05> or you assume Vmax to be sufficiently precise after long charging, and you simply take timestamp and stop charging at pre-fail, and the whole calibration thing is a one-time process done at device setup

22:17 <DocScrutinizer05> after all VDD is regulated by the booster, no?

22:18 <DocScrutinizer05> you want a ADC on battery, to find out about remaining capacity