Dual Serial Input for Infrared control? - Page 2

You just don't get it do you?  It's a simple open-collector interface,
try to understand that.  You'd have been a real riot at the Phillips
meetings when they were coming up with I2C.

If you are capable, please present a technical reason that you can't put
two of these in parallel:
http://www.lirc.org/images/schematics.gif

If all you can do is spew filth, then don't bother.

We have all got the fact that you couldnt
bullshit your way out of a wet paper bag, child.



Pathetic, really.

<reams of your puerile shit that any 2 year old
could leave for dead flushed where it belongs>

"Clockmeister"



Honestly, that wasn't the intent.


can

I just don't understand why they can't simply carry on a technical
discussion without vomiting a continuous stream of filth.  Seems such a
simple matter to just present the evidence and let the world court of
USENET decide.

We know why clones like you are so
obsessed about what you claim is 'filth'.



usenet aint anything like a court, fuckwit.

"Rod Speed" wrote:


Hardly obsessed, but it does say allot about your intelligence and your
ability to express yourself.  I can't help wondering that with more than
400,000 words in the English language, why you try to describe
everything using less than fifty.  My cats make themselves better
understood than you.

To get back to the point, this is exactly the kind of thing that I'm
talking about.  You make a blanket statement claiming to know something,
but you don't bother to back it up with anything resembling evidence.
OTOH, if bullying and pejorative statements were the way to make a case,
you'd be the man.

We are all still waiting for one piece of technical evidence backing up
your claims about not being able to connect two copies of the circuit
(that I gave the link to) in parallel.

I usually don't criticize other peoples tinkerings, but I'll make an
exception in this case.  To put it bluntly, you did your PIC project all
wrong.  Because you chose to communicate serially to the PC (using TXD);
you either severely limited the number of remote control transmitters
that your circuit would work with, or you greatly complicated the
software in the PIC.  RECS 80, RC5 and some other odd-balls out there
aren't even remotely similar to each other, not to mention how some
manufacturers take what little bit of "standards" that do exist and then
mangle them up just because.  This is why LIRC and most likely all other
remote-control IR interfaces that connect to a PC use simple hardware
(like the schematic I provided) and complex software on the PC.  The
reasoning is simple, it's allot easier to field upgrade PC software than
to re-flash a PIC.

See....not a curse word in the lot but I bet your smokin' right about
now.



Sadly this is true in at least some respects, as you (and your ilk) have
been put out of our misery long ago.

HTH, HAND.  :-)

Anthony, you're so right. All this person can do is f* or press his
predefined short-cut key that says '***wrong -- as always...' or somesuch.
You're putting him in his place technically. But I protest: couldn't you
have edited his post when replying (as I have) so that you didn't quote and
thus perpetuate his filth? I've killfiled him just to remove this rubbish,
and to see it secondhand is a shame. By the way, the killfiling was
reluctant, because I thought he actually had technical sense to talk; your
debunking here has made me think twice about that too! I never could fathom
why someone with knowledge would find recourse to foul language so
apparently necessary; now I know I was wrong about the knowledge.

short-cut


Clearly a pathological liar.



Only in your pathetic little drug crazed pig ignorant fantasyland.


that you


He's so hyped up that he can't even manage that.



Fat lot of good that will do you, fuckwit.



You could always do the decent thing and top yourself or sumfin.


technical


Not a shred of evidence that you are actually capable of thought.


language so


Only in your pathetic little drug crazed pig ignorant gutless fantasyland.



LIRC and

right about

Never touched a drug in my life.




Familiar style! This fools no-one.


Never had a drug in my life.

Pig ignorant lie, you have ingested plenty of legal drugs.




Wasnt meant to fool anyone, fuckwit.


language


Pig ignorant lie, you have ingested plenty of legal drugs.

<snip egg on face wearing crybaby whining>

Oops, nothing left.

Some gutless car crashing fuckwit desperately cowering behind
excuse for a troll that any 2 year old could leave for dead.

No surprise that it only ever gets to crash cars and
nothing that ever amounts to a hill of beans technically.

You're the one who managed to fuck up ohms law so spectacularly then tried
to wriggle your way out of your predicament with your usual bullshit.

Clearly you haven't a clue when it comes to electronics, or you would have
shut the fuck up by now from embarrassment alone.

I know, Some gutless... etc etc

Some gutless car crashing fuckwit desperately cowering behind
excuse for a troll that any 2 year old could leave for dead.

No surprise that it only ever gets to crash cars and
nothing that ever amounts to a hill of beans technically.

Hmmm! The style is obviously pure Rod Speed!


<and so on very predictably....>

Absolutely agreed. I have now killfiled clockmeister and note Anthony your
kind modification of his completely unnecessary fword. IMO this newsgroup is
ruined by people who, otherwise no doubt (and indeed sometimes obviously)
knowledgable, cannot express themselves without f*ing away. This ng is read
by children who should not exposed all the time to it, and by others who
would like to keep to the subject...

without

present the



Bet that will make him curl up and die for sure.



Pathetic, really.

sometimes


You've got silly hangups about perfectly good anglo saxon words ?

YOUR problem.



So stupid that it hasnt even noticed that they use it more than most.



You get no say what so ever on that or anything else at all, ever.



Can't even manage a viable sentence.

Looks who's crying...

[...]


ROTFLMAO!  Have you heard children talking these days?  It's old
fogies like *me*, not *them*, who feel uncomfortable when "f words"
etc. are bandied around in conversation.  I suspect you must fall into
my category.  :-)



Yeah.  That does seem reasonable enough -- if somewhat optimistic in
the modern version of USENET.  It's amazing to think that as little as
15 years ago we were all happy to broadcast our snail mail addresses,
and even phone numbers, in our dot sigs.  Now it's only Rod and a few
others who even game enough to use their real names.

Cheers, Phred.

I wasnt commenting on what the OP said, I was clearly
JUST commenting on what that fool 'Jansen' said.

Do TRY to keep up.



More fool you.

The only way that could possibly work would be to have the remote photodiode
in parallel with the internal one (Not at the serial port level)