Comments by "Scott Franco" (@scottfranco1962) on "Technology Connections"
channel.
-
73
-
36
-
5
-
4
-
@jfbeam Yea, semiconductors tend to fuse closed, unlike most circuit boards, which tend to fuse open, or, as you say, contacts, which tend to fuse closed.
When I worked in ICs we had a failure analysis presentation that showed why, complete with photos. Silicon... well, it melts with enough current. It forms a nice runny, and very conductive, river of molten silicon for an instant. I imagine that is right before it forms a miniature explosion. You kids won't remember, but we used to have UV erasable EPROMs with little windows in them. If you plugged them in backwards, cause, you know, stupid, or on purpose, you got a nice little light show. This probably accounted for the fact that bad ones never got kept around. They were too much fun to plug in backwards.
4
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I have had a Tesla since 2018, and a Bolt since 2017. I have two chargers, one Tesla at 48 amps and one J1772 at 30 amps. They are on individual drops from the panel, so they can both be used at the same time. I rarely use the Tesla charger now, because I get a charge for free at work, so why not. I could do a bunch of calculation to get the best range, or I could do what I do, which is just drive fast and don't worry about it. There are Tesla chargers everywhere in California, so its rare I need to extend range. 275 Kw chargers are common here, and non-Tesla chargers are here at 350 Kw, yes, more than Tesla. You can get a charge in 15 minutes, but frankly I rarely do that. Even just stopping for coffee more than covers 20-30 minutes. Even at my wasteful use of power, it cost $20 for the trip I just made from San Francisco to LA. Try that with a gas car.
The point is, charge fast, drive fast, be happy. EVs at WORST are far better than gas cars at their BEST. And everyone is going to be driving that way in their EVs very soon anyways.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Exabyte was founded to record digital data on videotape for backup in 1985. They went fairly rapidly to 8mm video cartridges, as opposed to full size VHS, in 1987 (dates according to Wikipedia). The 8mm format had been introduced in 1984. DAT tapes were a similar if slightly smaller format, and indeed Exabyte bought my company, R-Byte, which made a DAT tape drive, in 1992.
None of that occurred in a vacuum. QIC tape drives were introduced by 3m in 1972 (again Wikipedia), and although they didn't store Exabyte level densities, they were from 20mb to 400mb in later versions. So video tape as data storage had a competitor.
Tape storage, going back into the open reel computer days, was generally used as computer backup on bigger machines and didn't come to PCs until the QIC days. Writable CDs were supposed to take over as a backup medium, but what actually happened is disc drives became so cheap for unit of storage that it made more sense to just purchase more drives and use them as backup, hence NAS or network attached storage and data vaults. Now, companies are just as likely to ship backup data to cloud companies.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I agree with most of what you said, but in our area, and probably most areas of the USA, the temperature, even on 90 degree days, drops into the 60s. It makes no sense to run air conditioning when the outside is that cold. You get the same effect, including storing cold air in the house, simply by drawing the cold air outside into the house. For that I have a "whole house fan" that actually goes one better. It both draws cold air into the house at night, and expels hot air from the attic at the same time. The result is that the house is considerably cooler by morning, and then you shut the windows to keep it that way. In this way, I usually manage to keep the house in the 70s until about 3pm even on 90 degree days. But then I turn the A/C on.
1
-
1
-
1
-
The "apartment dwellers cannot charge" thing is a canard. Most apartments have assigned spots, and I have never lived in an apartment building that didn't have covered parking and a light above it, meaning that it has electrical runs to the space. In Canada and other cold weather places, you have to have a plug at each space for the simple reason that if you don't plug you car's engine heater in at night, your car will be dead in the morning.
Cars can be charged from 110v, but 220v is obviously better. Although apartment owners will moan about the costs, running 220v drops to each space isn't going to break them. I'm amazed sometimes about how really useful a 220v/30 amp L2 charger really is. I have two long range cars, a Bolt at 238 miles and a Tesla M3 at 320 miles, and typically they charge up in 4 hours on a 6.6kW L2 charger, because I don't run them all the way to zero, nor is that a good idea. Both of my cars need charging perhaps once or twice a week even with my 40 mile round trip commute. Its not even necessary to purchase a $400 charger. My Tesla comes with a 220v charger free with the car, and its a reasonable cost with the Bolt. With that and a 220v outlet, you are there for at least a 3.3kW charge.
I will say that 130kW supercharging is amazing on the road (Tesla). I typically think about charging when the miles left goes to 2 digits (<100), and I see the 100kW+ charge for only about 20 minutes. But that charger takes the Tesla from less than 100 to over 200 miles in that 20 minutes, which is rocket fast compared to other cars, and makes highway travel amazing.
1
-
1
-
I think you need to be careful here. I worked for a charger company. There are two main elements of the Tesla plug that are desirable. The first is that it is a better engineering design. The second, and perhaps more important element is that Tesla is a plug and go standard. Ie, you roll up, plug in, and get charged to charge (pun intended) automatically. No screen, no card swipe, etc.
The first part is not going to change with other makers adopting the plug. However, that second part could have happened at ANY TIME for the J1772 plug. Its true the J1772 plug was and is braindamaged in that it didn't have a digital communications port built in to the connector, and thus was inherntly incapable of "plug to charge" automatic debt payment. However, that got fixed with PLC or "power line communication" a means of high bandwidth communication with the car.
The problem is that Tesla does and will own that automatic payment network. I expect the other car makers to sign on to that network *for a while*. However, for rthe NACS standard to go forward, eventually other networks besides Tesla will have to start up. This happens naturally as, say, chargepoint adapts the NACS standard.
The point is, the networks f**ked up the current payment system, even though J1772 is well capable of an automatic payment system, and they *will f**k up the NACS system as well if they are not held accountable.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
So in response to "Tesla should join the existing standards" IE., j1772, no, sorry there is NOT in fact one standard outside of Tesla. For DC high power charging there are two in common use, CCS and Chademo, which with Tesla makes THREE different DC fast charge standards. And Tesla is the ONLY standard that integrated all forms of charging, slow, medium and fast, on a single connector.
Thus, the better standard does not have to adapt to the crappy standard (the betamax/VHS is another story). And Tesla fast charging (at 100kW and better) is already higher level than the vast majority of DC fast chargers at 50kW.
Should there be a single standard? Of course. But there is plenty of precedence that introducing standards on early, fast moving technology does not end well. Look at all of the iterations standard wall plugs went through, from light socket adapters, to blade plugs, to the modern three prong grounded (and in the USA it is still quite unsafe!).
And keep in mind that I make my living off J1772 chargers and I am saying this!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The war over color TV standards got repeated with the advent of HDTV. The FCC had already signed off on an analog, backwards compatible system when a small silicon company called general instrument showed that by using a digital carrier based system with mpeg, the amount of bandwidth needed by the (very wasteful) analog TV system could be reduced significantly, while at the same time dramatically increasing the reception reliability. GI had already done this for digital cable systems, so over the air systems had fallen behind. The FCC did another about face, and the broadcasters suddenly did as well. Cynics said that the true underlying cause was the broadcasters realization that the very same digital technology that could give an HDTV signal in the same 6mhz channel as analog TV could very well be used to compress existing TV into 1mhz or less, and result in broadcasters losing up to 5/6ths of their very valuable spectrum real estate if the FCC (and the public) woke up to this fact. Thus HDTV was born, and the broadcasters used the technology to split up into multiple channels anyway... but under their control.
The true result of all of the nonsense is that mpeg-2, and later mpeg-4, took over TV broadcasting by storm, rendering the actual method used to broadcast TV increasingly irrelevant. The broadcasters kept their spectrum allocations, but the number of over the air users decreases daily. And the FCC increasingly puts pressure on broadcasters to give up that real estate to other uses.
1