Re: The Chinese have a full page of mine published in a discussion forum..

On Mar 30, 10:10 pm, "Ian Iveson" <IanIveson.h...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Patrick Turner wrote:

Here is a link to a Chinese discussion group where they
obviously wanted
some info on how the hell to work out choke details in
their audio amp
designs.

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=zh-CN&u=http://bbs.hif...

Ethnic Chinese, but not proper China by the looks, unless
you count Hong Kong which wouldn't be fair. Taiwan and Hong
Kong are where loads of malcontents with enough money and
influence fled to, under the coat-tails of the US and
Britain, respectively. Taiwan doggedly called itself China,
ha ha, until quite recently. The Taiwanese I worked for
hadn't a scruple between them, and their underlings, having
short nails and therefore no choice, were pathetic
arse-lickers.

And the mainlanders did? I'd find that a little fantastic.


But of course when I tried to subscribe to the group, and
tell them
where and how the page someone quoted came to be, there
wasn't any way I
could seem to register and join up.  Seems like they have
no qualms
about regurgitation of western nation published material
within what
appears to be a forum closed to outsiders. But I could see
the pictures
of the guys in the group and most appeared under 21 years
old so what
the hell would they know.....

Well, they can read English but you can't read Chinese,
apparently. Other than that, and given Google's poor grasp
of Chinese writing, I see no indication of how much they
know. Both places have a long history of engineering, and
education is universal, very disciplined, and very serious.

Creativity though is none of the above. There is no original,
indigenous engineering in anything from China. Even Japan lacks
originality in concept, though they are superb at perfecting basic
ideas the West comes up with and sometimes abandons, like the Wankel
engine and the oxygen torpedo. They are big on rote memorization. As
a group they have higher levels of some forms of cognition than we do,
and less of others-such that they score on average well above 100 on
all Western IQ tests.

Do you read Chinese? Very few Westerners are capable of learning to
read Chinese or Japanese very well. I don't have the ambition to start
down that road myself.




I did a search on calculation of air gaps for choke input
supplies and
my site was the only one which seemed to say more than the
standard
bull*** line of "..an air gap is required to stop the
choke saturating
with DC..." This is true of course, but much more needs
saying if you
want to build an optimised choke input supply.

Choke inputs are disused for good reasons, like weight. Also the
radiated M-field is considerable and the only really good choke input
filter audio gear has its power supply on a second chassis,
communicating only DC with the signal chassis. Much like broadcast
transmitters with separate chassis.


I doubt the Chinese who have taken all I have said about
choke use and
design to their hearts would ever analyse or scrutinise
sufficiently to
to become provoked by what appears to be a mathematical
nonsense
somewhere.

Why, exactly, do you feel this way about ethnic Chinese
people?

Maybe one of them came across your page, saw some nonsense,
and decided to share it for a laugh. Maybe it's a "spot the
Australian nonsense" quiz page. Who knows?

Now I'll ask you guys, where's the nonsense?

There you are, you like a quiz yourself. Where's the harm in
that? Maybe now they'll come here and demand to know why
you've stolen their quiz question.


The Chinese proper have in fact a great shortage of good engineers,
which is why (or rather one reason why) they have so many Western-
designed, Western financed and Western built plants over there. Very
few of the H-1B Chinese coming over here to take Silicon Valley jobs
would have went to engineering school if they, and/or their parents,
had had no reasonable expectation of coming to the US.

They invented gunpowder and movable type three millennia ago-and used
them for trivial uses only for 2400+ of those.

The term "Chinese copy" once in widespread use came from their
penchant for making watches and guns, to Western pattern, but unusable
or unreliable. The broom handle Mauser pistol was quite common as a
Chinese copy in the US from the early 1920s until 1934, when most were
turned in to the government and destroyed as most were full auto and
had shoulder stock holsters-and the government would not allow them
simply to be converted to semiautomatic. They were crudely built and
made out of low carbon steel of indeterminate alloy and heat
treatment. The ATF in the US receives several each year found in
estates and drawers to this day. The watches were usually discarded
and today are quite rare.

If the Chinese had any engineering skills, would they have simply
copied Russian weapons designs from the immediate postwar period to
the 1980s, including the SKS rifle, the RPG, and almost all their
aircraft designs? They can't design a light aircraft or a modern
sidearm on their own, nor a vehicle engine. What's more telling, they
don't want to.
.

Loading