Chip with simple program for Toy

[Mr. Man-wai Chang]

On 12/12/2016 4:41 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:

Perhaps you don't read too well, but it has already been explained that
it is futile to attempt to demonstrate the human psychology of the game
over Usenet, especially in a technical group, where people will
inevitably analyse the state of the game before every article they post.
People /don't/ do this when playing the game face-to-face.

If an electronic gaming device had firmware, was it still electronics?

 

[George Herold]

On Sunday, December 11, 2016 at 9:08:01 PM UTC-5, Tom Del Rosso wrote:

Ben Bacarisse wrote:
"Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> writes:

On 10/12/2016 11:29 PM, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
You should start in the corner, not the center.

BTW, do you wanna to prove your claim?

If I remember correctly, there are more ways of winning if you start
in the corner (the proof is simply by counting games) and, since you
can't be forced to lose if you start there, you could argue that you
might as well do that.

If you start in the middle there are fewer games that you can win, but
it's also easier to see that you can't be forced to loose and I
suspect it's that which leads people to chose the middle.

I worked out every possible move when I was a kid.

If your first move is in the center, the other player can force a draw
no matter where his second move is.

If your first move is in the corner, the other player can force a draw
if his second move is in the center, but if his second move is anywhere
else you can force a win.

There is this neat mapping of a tic-tac toe, with the a magic square
(rows/ columns/ diagonals add to 15) and a row of numbers from one to nine.
The goal of the number line is to pick numbers alternatively and be the first to
have three number that add to 15.
I think it was in a Martin Gardener book.

George h.

By the way, why the cross post to alt.conspiracy? Do you want to be
taken to be a crank?

He is.

 

[Tom Del Rosso]

George Herold wrote:

On Sunday, December 11, 2016 at 9:08:01 PM UTC-5, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
Ben Bacarisse wrote:
"Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> writes:

On 10/12/2016 11:29 PM, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
You should start in the corner, not the center.

BTW, do you wanna to prove your claim?

If I remember correctly, there are more ways of winning if you start
in the corner (the proof is simply by counting games) and, since you
can't be forced to lose if you start there, you could argue that you
might as well do that.

If you start in the middle there are fewer games that you can win,
but it's also easier to see that you can't be forced to loose and I
suspect it's that which leads people to chose the middle.

I worked out every possible move when I was a kid.

If your first move is in the center, the other player can force a
draw no matter where his second move is.

If your first move is in the corner, the other player can force a
draw if his second move is in the center, but if his second move is
anywhere else you can force a win.

There is this neat mapping of a tic-tac toe, with the a magic square
(rows/ columns/ diagonals add to 15) and a row of numbers from one to
nine.
The goal of the number line is to pick numbers alternatively and be
the first to have three number that add to 15.
I think it was in a Martin Gardener book.

I just tried to play against myself a few times. I don't see how it can
work. To win you have to place the third number of a set, but you can
only do that if your opponent places the second number of that set. You
both have to try to place numbers that can form a set, so you must place
a second number with the intention of adding a third, but then you
enable your opponent to place the third number. Am I misunderstanding
how the game is played?

 

[George Herold]

On Thursday, December 15, 2016 at 1:45:40 AM UTC-5, Tom Del Rosso wrote:

George Herold wrote:
On Sunday, December 11, 2016 at 9:08:01 PM UTC-5, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
Ben Bacarisse wrote:
"Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> writes:

On 10/12/2016 11:29 PM, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
You should start in the corner, not the center.

BTW, do you wanna to prove your claim?

If I remember correctly, there are more ways of winning if you start
in the corner (the proof is simply by counting games) and, since you
can't be forced to lose if you start there, you could argue that you
might as well do that.

If you start in the middle there are fewer games that you can win,
but it's also easier to see that you can't be forced to loose and I
suspect it's that which leads people to chose the middle.

I worked out every possible move when I was a kid.

If your first move is in the center, the other player can force a
draw no matter where his second move is.

If your first move is in the corner, the other player can force a
draw if his second move is in the center, but if his second move is
anywhere else you can force a win.

There is this neat mapping of a tic-tac toe, with the a magic square
(rows/ columns/ diagonals add to 15) and a row of numbers from one to
nine.
The goal of the number line is to pick numbers alternatively and be
the first to have three number that add to 15.
I think it was in a Martin Gardener book.

I just tried to play against myself a few times. I don't see how it can
work. To win you have to place the third number of a set, but you can
only do that if your opponent places the second number of that set. You
both have to try to place numbers that can form a set, so you must place
a second number with the intention of adding a third, but then you
enable your opponent to place the third number. Am I misunderstanding
how the game is played?

OK found this on the web... (easier than trying to write it myself.)
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/an-isomorphism-tic-tac-toe-on-magic-square.134281/

It's really just a game of tic tac toe in a different guise.
(You have to hold the picture of the magic square in your head as you play.)

George H.

 

[Mr. Man-wai Chang]

On 15/12/2016 2:45 PM, Tom Del Rosso wrote:

I just tried to play against myself a few times. I don't see how it can
work. To win you have to place the third number of a set, but you can
only do that if your opponent places the second number of that set. You
both have to try to place numbers that can form a set, so you must place
a second number with the intention of adding a third, but then you
enable your opponent to place the third number. Am I misunderstanding
how the game is played?

There is a factor that's totally irrelevant to the rules of the game:
psychology if not psychiatry.

Imagine a T.T.T. game played between a King/Queen and one of his/her
employee. Should the employee win?

 

[Jasen Betts]

On 2016-12-15, Tom Del Rosso <fizzbintuesday@that-google-mail-domain.com> wrote:

George Herold wrote:
On Sunday, December 11, 2016 at 9:08:01 PM UTC-5, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
Ben Bacarisse wrote:
"Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> writes:

On 10/12/2016 11:29 PM, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
You should start in the corner, not the center.

BTW, do you wanna to prove your claim?

If I remember correctly, there are more ways of winning if you start
in the corner (the proof is simply by counting games) and, since you
can't be forced to lose if you start there, you could argue that you
might as well do that.

If you start in the middle there are fewer games that you can win,
but it's also easier to see that you can't be forced to loose and I
suspect it's that which leads people to chose the middle.

I worked out every possible move when I was a kid.

If your first move is in the center, the other player can force a
draw no matter where his second move is.

If your first move is in the corner, the other player can force a
draw if his second move is in the center, but if his second move is
anywhere else you can force a win.

There is this neat mapping of a tic-tac toe, with the a magic square
(rows/ columns/ diagonals add to 15) and a row of numbers from one to
nine.
The goal of the number line is to pick numbers alternatively and be
the first to have three number that add to 15.
I think it was in a Martin Gardener book.

I just tried to play against myself a few times. I don't see how it can
work. To win you have to place the third number of a set, but you can
only do that if your opponent places the second number of that set. You
both have to try to place numbers that can form a set, so you must place
a second number with the intention of adding a third, but then you
enable your opponent to place the third number. Am I misunderstanding
how the game is played?

Each player compiles their own set which cannot contain numbers chosen
by the other player. the winner is the first who has a set which has a
subset with three elements that add to 15. By numbering a
tic-tac-toe board as a magic square this game translates directly to
tic-tac-toe

6 7 2
1 5 9
8 3 4







--
This email has not been checked by half-arsed antivirus software

 

[Mr. Man-wai Chang]

On 16/12/2016 11:36 AM, Jasen Betts wrote:

Each player compiles their own set which cannot contain numbers chosen
by the other player. the winner is the first who has a set which has a
subset with three elements that add to 15. By numbering a
tic-tac-toe board as a magic square this game translates directly to
tic-tac-toe

6 7 2
1 5 9
8 3 4

Sodoku?

 

[Tom Del Rosso]

George Herold wrote:

On Thursday, December 15, 2016 at 1:45:40 AM UTC-5, Tom Del Rosso
wrote:
George Herold wrote:

There is this neat mapping of a tic-tac toe, with the a magic square
(rows/ columns/ diagonals add to 15) and a row of numbers from one
to nine.
The goal of the number line is to pick numbers alternatively and be
the first to have three number that add to 15.
I think it was in a Martin Gardener book.

I just tried to play against myself a few times. I don't see how it
can work. To win you have to place the third number of a set, but
you can only do that if your opponent places the second number of
that set. You both have to try to place numbers that can form a
set, so you must place a second number with the intention of adding
a third, but then you enable your opponent to place the third
number. Am I misunderstanding how the game is played?

OK found this on the web... (easier than trying to write it myself.)
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/an-isomorphism-tic-tac-toe-on-magic-square.134281/

It's really just a game of tic tac toe in a different guise.
(You have to hold the picture of the magic square in your head as you
play.)

That makes sense, but it's no more winable than tic tac toe.

I think you could modify tic tac toe to be winable if each player is
limited to 4 squares, and if he has to erase one before choosing
another.

 

[Mr. Man-wai Chang]

On 31/12/2016 4:44 PM, Bill wrote:

I propose that, in the new year, we more proactively discourage posts
from, or replies to, anyone who wishes to act like less than a
gentle-person (and you know the folks I'm talking about). What do you
think, can we take (back) control together?

As long as it's mathematical ....

This music video reminded me of the movie The Mask!

Against All Odds by Phil Collins
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVjEcIANv1o

The Mask Trailer
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pmainxd74ac


--
@~@ Remain silent! Drink, Blink, Stretch! Live long and prosper!!
/ v \ Simplicity is Beauty!
/( _ )\ May the Force and farces be with you!
^ ^ (x86_64 Ubuntu 9.10) Linux 2.6.39.3
不借貸! 不詐騙! 不援交! 不打交! 不打劫! 不自殺! 請考慮綜援 (CSSA):
http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_pubsvc/page_socsecu/sub_addressesa

 

[default]

On Fri, 10 Feb 2017 23:53:33 -0500, RoddyMcCorley
<Roddy.McCorley@verizon.net> wrote:

On 12/4/2016 5:15 PM, rickman wrote:
On 7/19/2015 10:13 PM, John Larkin wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jul 2015 18:45:27 -0400, krw <krw@nowhere.com> wrote:

On Sun, 19 Jul 2015 14:32:59 -0700, John Larkin
jlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:

On Sun, 19 Jul 2015 14:00:55 -0700, m.dimanche <dimanche@gmail¸com
wrote:

http://townhall.com/columnists/douggiles/2015/07/19/chattanooga-happens-when-we-have-nutless-leaders-who-wont-name-our-enemy-n2027262/page/full


That rant doesn't make a lot of sense. Who should we declare war on?

Our nutless leader?

I really think there is something wrong with him, in the sense of a
clinical mental problem.

Pot... kettle...

Are you trying to say he is a churlish jackass? That would be unkind of you.

Much too kind IMO... I'd append misogynist, megalomaniac,
narcissistic, mindlessly blustering, sociopathic idiot, and then look
for some rude, but accurate, descriptors.

 

>""In my erudition, I say a man not mince words in order
to spare the sensibilities of the thin-skinned and the
ignorant." "

In that light, what are you fucking stupid ?

I can understand people ordering drugs online, normally with a prescription.. But there are no prescriptions for LSD. Hey, can you get me some real PCP ? That is a damn fun drug. Some people can't handle it, and in fact it is the reason cops have hingecuffs now. People on PCP were known to break regular handcuffs. In fact a few were shot in the chest several times and still kept on coming.

While I still believe all drugs should be legal, that comes with full disclosure. The PCP thing, well there were two ways to get that, one was from people who figured out how to make it in their basement. But actually PCP is a horse tranquilizer, or was. It could be stolen from the office of an animal husbandry professional. That was the good shit, liquid and in one those vials they stuck a needle into. You dipped a joint into it and watched it soak all the way up. It has very low viscosity, and is also quite flammable so you cannot light that joint with an open flame. That was the truly good shit.

I am all for people who are dependent on drugs to live to be able to shop around for the best price. That includes from China, with or without the free lead added. But some of the substances mentioned are tightly controlled. Here, it takes to move heaven and hell to get a prescription for dilaud. It is usually only administered in a medical facility. To take some home would be about like them letting you take a bunch of morphine home.

You gotta be fucking stupid to openly advertise this on Usenet. So you win the award for the day. Might even be a Darwin, because of the way the US government is it might be an international incident. I mean they are so fucking crazy they might bomb you back to the stone age. And that still applies even if you are in Kansas.

 

[Mr. Man-wai Chang]

On 7/03/2017 12:27 AM, Jim Thompson wrote:

Beware, Mr. Man-wai Chang is a known troll.

I am stubborn and persistent, not trolling!

--
@~@ Remain silent! Drink, Blink, Stretch! Live long and prosper!!
/ v \ Simplicity is Beauty!
/( _ )\ May the Force and farces be with you!
^ ^ (x86_64 Ubuntu 9.10) Linux 2.6.39.3
不借貸! 不詐騙! 不援交! 不打交! 不打劫! 不自殺! 請考慮綜援 (CSSA):
http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_pubsvc/page_socsecu/sub_addressesa

 

[The Peeler]

On Thu, 09 Mar 2017 16:45:25 -0000, Birdbrain Macaw (now "James Wilkinson"),
the pathological attention whore of all the uk ngs, blathered again:

It was news because Verizontal refused to pay; saying it
was the contractor's fault not theirs.

Which it was. But the contractor should have to pay, and Verizon has to
pay in the interim, just as if you order something online and it's lost
in the post, it's the postal company's fault, but you still claim from
the seller, and the seller from the postal company.

Drivelling idiot!

--
More from Birdbrain Macaw's (now "James Wilkinson" LOL) strange sociopathic
world:
"People who need to take courses should be banned from driving. If it
doesn't come naturally, get the fuck out of my way."
MID: <op.ywh3x6pgjs98qf@red.lan>

 

[The Peeler]

On Sun, 12 Mar 2017 19:35:28 -0000, Birdbrain Macaw (now "James Wilkinson"),
the pathological attention whore of all the uk ngs, blathered again:

Have you ever won an argument with Verizontal?

I'm not in the same country as them.

Good for that country, Birdbrain!

--
More from Birdbrain Macaw's (now "James Wilkinson" LOL) strange sociopathic
world:
"People who need to take courses should be banned from driving. If it
doesn't come naturally, get the fuck out of my way."
MID: <op.ywh3x6pgjs98qf@red.lan>

 

On Thursday, March 23, 2017 at 4:47:15 PM UTC-10, Tom Biasi wrote:
> Your second picture clearly shows 7103C

I actually didn't see that. I should've looked at the photos. I really need a magnifying glass.

 

The article shows a true lack of understanding of electricity by the author.. This is the problem with "experts" these days, they are not.

If ground is at eight volts then eight volts IS ground. And to what is he referencing this ?

What's more there are and always have been "ground gradients". These can kill you if lightning strikes but there are natural ones, yes due to the use of electricity, but it has been going on for some time.

A customer had two ground rods at his house, and in fact was an electrician.. We sold him a video projector that had a three prong grounded cord. He came back saying that whenever he connected the cable box he got a hum bar in the picture. On all sources in fact, if the cable box was connected he got the hum bar even on the DVD player.

This was because the cable ground was the OTHER ground.

This is not news, and the NEC is very unlikely to adopt such a code because it is too ridiculous to implement and enforce. Maybe if we got a liberal government in 2020 that is stupid as a box of rocks maybe.

There is actually current available between ground and the atmosphere. Tesla intended to take advantage of it, and actually transmit power to houses somehow. But there was no way to meter it. We are not even sure he was right, or if the method would have provided enough power for people's air conditioners, car chargers and so forth.

Ground has never been ground. It is simply a reference point. In most places there is already AC riding on it.

 

COLOR 2-PLACE 3-PLACE

CLEAR CL CLR

BLACK BK BLK

BROWN BN BRN

RED RD RED

ORANGE OR ORN

YELLOW YE YEL

GREEN GN GRN

BLUE BU BLU

VIOLET VI VIO

GREY GY GRY

WHITE WT WHT

PINK PK PNK

TAN TN TAN

 

[default]

On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 16:54:00 -0700 (PDT), russell@machmotion.com wrote:

Underwriters lab:
http://industries.ul.com/plastics-and-components/plastics/color-codes-and-abbreviations

Abbreviation Color
AL Aluminum
ALL Any color
AM Amber
AO All opaque
AT All transparent
BG Beige
BK Black
BL Blue
BN Brown
BZ Bronze
CH Charcoal
CL Clear
CT Clear transparent
DK Dark
GD Gold
GN Green
GY Gray
GT Granite
IV Ivory
LT Light
NC Natural (no pigmentation)
OL Olive
OP Opaque
OR Orange
PK Pink
RD Red
SM Smoke
TL Translucent
TN Tan
TP Transparent
VT Violet
WT White
YL Yellow

 

On Thursday, October 28, 1999 at 2:00:00 AM UTC-5, Michael wrote:

HamTronics (search the Web) sells a 10 MHz AM receiver specifically for
receiving NIST broadcasts. Cost something like $65 the last time I
looked.

As another reader here suggested, the Heath "Most Accurate Clock" was
indeed model GC-1000. A schematic for it would not help you with the
most difficult hardware, however, because decoding was done by a
pre-programmed microcontroller.

The GC-1000 had several design flaws, not the least of which was the
power supply. It runs hotter than a two-dollar pistol. I think this
contributed to - or caused - the demise of the oscillator in my clock.

Contact NIST for a copy of NIST Special Publication 432 "NIST Time And
Frequency Services". The address is broadcatsed on the hour by WWV.
Interesting reading, and it gives you all the information you need about
NIST's time format to design hardware to decode it. I did this myself a
few years ago ... used a Motorola MC68705 microcontroller.

Chris wrote:

I've been trying to find schematics for an atomic clock radio receiver
and LCD display that I can work on and eventually build in my
electronics classes. I haven't been able to find anything useful on the
Internet. Anybody know where I can look or go?

* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!

--
---
NOTE: Reply_To has been forged to foil SPAM.
Please reply via this NewsGroup.

Looking for some one to repair my GC-1000 Healthkit atomic clock

 

[rickman]

rpsec911@gmail.com wrote on 7/13/2017 5:39 PM:

On Thursday, October 28, 1999 at 2:00:00 AM UTC-5, Michael wrote:
HamTronics (search the Web) sells a 10 MHz AM receiver specifically for
receiving NIST broadcasts. Cost something like $65 the last time I
looked.

As another reader here suggested, the Heath "Most Accurate Clock" was
indeed model GC-1000. A schematic for it would not help you with the
most difficult hardware, however, because decoding was done by a
pre-programmed microcontroller.

The GC-1000 had several design flaws, not the least of which was the
power supply. It runs hotter than a two-dollar pistol. I think this
contributed to - or caused - the demise of the oscillator in my clock.

Contact NIST for a copy of NIST Special Publication 432 "NIST Time And
Frequency Services". The address is broadcatsed on the hour by WWV.
Interesting reading, and it gives you all the information you need about
NIST's time format to design hardware to decode it. I did this myself a
few years ago ... used a Motorola MC68705 microcontroller.

Chris wrote:

I've been trying to find schematics for an atomic clock radio receiver
and LCD display that I can work on and eventually build in my
electronics classes. I haven't been able to find anything useful on the
Internet. Anybody know where I can look or go?

* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!

--
---
NOTE: Reply_To has been forged to foil SPAM.
Please reply via this NewsGroup.

Looking for some one to repair my GC-1000 Healthkit atomic clock

What are the symptoms? Does the unit power up and display light but with
the wrong time or does it not appear to power up at all? I'm sure I can fix
it as long as the problem isn't the MCU, but that is not likely. I bet it's
a power supply problem, likely a bad cap.

--

Rick C