Turn your Rigol DS1052E Oscilloscope into a 100MHz DS1102E

[[email protected]]

No, I defined pricing, not profit,

Not really (pricing is what the market will bear). You still didn't answer his
question, in any case.

 

[markp]

At best ? You don't seem to have been following this thread...
It is bleedingly obvious that it was IDENTICAL from the
simplicity of the hack that has been explained in detail, and the
fact that Rigol THEMSELVES have conceded it is only firmware.
And if there are any warranty problems, you can always revert to the
original setup data anyway. Nobody at Rigol will ever know!

Really? How do you know the firmware doesn't keep a count of the number of
times this has been done, or log the fact that someone hasn't 'logged in'
with an unknown passphrase and keep a record of serial commands sent when no
such login passphrase has been sent? Either way Rigol could check whether it
has been modified. These are unknowns. As for Rogol themselves conceeding
this, the only evidence we have is hearsay without a formal announcement
from Rigol. I'm not going to bet that this is actually bleedinly obvious.

<snip - rest is snipped due to profanity>

Mark.

 

[Fred Abse]

Again, what they get when modifying it is *not* a guaranteed 100MHz scope.
What they may have bought instead of the 50MHz version is not the same, they
would need to pay for a guaranteed scope. They are quite entitled to buy a
50MHz scope and run it out of scec.

I wouldn't dispute that. It's not what is at issue.

But at no point does anyone say that this mod equals the real thing, only
that it 'appears' to be the same thing.

You've already said that, twice. I have no disagreement with that.

If you're saying that it is OK for someone to discover how to modify their
own equipment and then run out of spec but not OK to tell others how to do
it, then surely all those websites that provide financial information as to
how to move their money around with credit cards and hence pay less interest
are also wrong, after all you could discover how to do that yourself. In
either case the results are legal.

I was making a moral, not a legal point. Maybe you don't distinguish.

 

[fritz]

<snip - rest is snipped due to profanity>

You poor little pissweak arse-licker.
You will go through life being a slave to your stupid religion, if you don't
wake up now !

 

[fritz]

I wonder if that includes altering "Subject:" headers.

Tough shit, it got you in didn't it !

 

[markp]

I wouldn't dispute that. It's not what is at issue.


You've already said that, twice. I have no disagreement with that.


I was making a moral, not a legal point. Maybe you don't distinguish.

OK, I understand. However I assume you also think these websites that
publish these less well known financial tricks are also ammoral. I conceed
that your point was a moral one though not a legal one.

Mark.

 

[Fred Abse]

Tough shit, it got you in didn't it !

No it didn't This thread is marked "watched", and bodies get downloaded
automatically.

This news client threads on reference, not subject.

 

[Fred Abse]

OK, I understand. However I assume you also think these websites that
publish these less well known financial tricks are also ammoral. I conceed
that your point was a moral one though not a legal one.

AIUI, most financial sites are acting as brokers, hence get commission,

Caveat emptor!

 

[[email protected]]

What people are willing to pay, of course.

That's my answer, but I thought you were asking Fred.

If you had a rusty VW beetle up on blocks in your back yard, and
somebody offered you $200 for it, and somebody else offered you
$24,000, would you sell it to the $200 guy because that's a fair
price?

Me? Nope. Because $200 obviously isn't a fair price ($24,000 is now the fair
price). OTOH, if I had sold it for $200, whether or not someone came by
tomorrow willing to pay $24,000, $200 was a fair price.

 

[David L. Jones]

At best ? You don't seem to have been following this thread...
It is bleedingly obvious that it was IDENTICAL from the
simplicity of the hack that has been explained in detail, and the
fact that Rigol THEMSELVES have conceded it is only firmware.
And if there are any warranty problems, you can always revert to the
original setup data anyway. Nobody at Rigol will ever know!



I hope you are also protesting that against that fuckwit religious
nutter Conroy
who is trying to impose his own idea of Sharia law i.e. cripple the
Internet
for Aussie users.

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2138157.htm
Conroy is a buffoon propped up by the religious right (wrong!),
you don't have to look too far to see that his stupid method
of 100% religious censorship is a fucking joke. A complete failure.

Amen!
http://www.eevblog.com/2010/01/10/ot-the-australian-mandatory-internet-filter-folly/

Dave.

 

[Jan Panteltje]

*** ** ***
** * * ** *
* * * * *
* * * * * *
* **
* * * *
* * * *
* * *
* *
* * * *
* * *
* * *
* *
*
* * * *
* * *

* *
* * * *

* * * *
* *

* * * *
* *

* * * * *
*
* *
* * *
*
* * * * * *

* * * *
* * *
* * * *
* * * * * **
** * * * *
* *** **



*** *** *** *** ****
* * * * * * * * * *
* * ** * ** * ** * * *
** * * * * * * * * * * * ***
* ** * ** * ** * * * *
* * * * * * * * ** * *
***** *** *** *** ** * ****
X-User-ID: I63pC/V6Dmk2P8sM3Pv+fELTnHgojtwjm88haJHj0x8=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:f+RA87rCxKZcK8ZC877bsnkTRfs=
X-Newsreader-location: NewsFleX-1.5.7.4 (c) 'LIGHTSPEED' off line news reader for the Linux platform
NewsFleX homepage: http://panteltje.com/panteltje/newsflex/ and ftp download ftp://sunsite.unc.edu/pub/linux/system/news/readers/
User-Agent: NewsFleX-1.5.7.4 (Linux-2.6.21)
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: fAMvbg0nrqAgD29FmiL97kb1NfpXGyo3Y2qJiZaykJ4=
Bytes: 11559
Xref: number.nntp.dca.giganews.com sci.electronics.design:1084837 aus.electronics:165864

 

[Andrew]

They would have to send bandits or use whatever other non-economic means
of competition. Problem is not in the patents, problem is with the people.

"They" could do it right now. It is not related to the patents.

Write a complaint to the World League for sexual reforms?

Patent laws is not the biggest problem US is facing right now.

As for the options:

- Use technical means to keep trade secrets rather than legal and sell you
product outside of US.
- Elect someone with at least a crude understanding of the economy.
- Write a complaint to <put one's favorite place here> if it makes one feel
better.
- Wrap oneself in white sheets and slowly crawl to the graveyard.

 

[Andrew]

--
Andrew

That's their *purpose*. For a legal monopoly the inventor trades
education in
the art. Without something to gain there would be no reason to publish
details, rather keep them as trade secrets. This approach didn't work out
so
well in the early industrial revolution. It's a good idea to research the
alternatives before condemning the existing.

Yes, it would be a good idea to research alternatives.

http://blog.mises.org/7880/patents-and-innovation/
===
In Industrialisation without National Patents, published in 1971, the
economic historian Eric Schiff tells the story of the emergence of some of
Europe's biggest corporations. They came into being in Switzerland and the
Netherlands during the period (1850-1907 in Switzerland; 1869-1912 in the
Netherlands) in which neither country recognised patents. Some of them
appear to owe their very existence to this exemption.
In the Netherlands the old patent laws were clumsy and poorly drafted. The
government decided they were unreformable, and simply scrapped them. In
Switzerland, the confederation developed without them, and decided to keep
it that way. Contrary to all current predictions of what the impact of such
abrogations would be, in both nations they appear to have contributed to
massive economic growth and innovation.
---



See also Petra Moser, How Do Patent Laws Influence Innovation? Evidence from
Nineteenth-Century World Fairs (SSRN copy). Its Abstract states:


This paper introduces a new internationally comparable data set that
permits an empirical investigation of the effects of patent law on
innovation. The data have been constructed from the catalogues of two 19th
century world fairs: the Crystal Palace Exhibition in London, 1851, and the
Centennial Exhibition in Philadelphia, 1876. They include innovations that
were not patented, as well as those that were, and innovations from
countries both with and without patent laws. I find no evidence that patent
laws increased levels of innovative activity but strong evidence that patent
systems influenced the distribution of innovative activity across
industries. Inventors in countries without patent laws concentrated in
industries where secrecy was effective relative to patents, e.g., food
processing and scientific instruments. These results suggest that
introducing strong and effective patent laws in countries without patents
may have stronger effects on changing the direction of innovative activity
than on raising the number of innovations.


===

 

[[email protected]]

Clueless.

 

[Andrew]

Clueless.

I am humbled by the depth of your arguments.

8=)

 

[Phil Allison]

"Fred Abse"

That's the crux of the issue.

** It is a pile of absolute bollocks.

Dave has simply exposed a scam and there is nothing Rigol can do legally.



...... Phil

 

[Phil Allison]

"Fred Abse"

Read John's post again. The economic harm is done when someone buys the
50MHz version, intending to modify it, when in the absence of the
disseminated information, they would have bought the more expensive
instrument.

** Rigol were keeping customers in the dark about the real situation and
exploiting it for profit - otherwise known as PULLING A SCAM !!

Now that customers are informed they can make a choice based on knowledge.

Rigol were obtaining benefit from a deception and that is criminal behaviour
in any place outside China.

The moral thing would be to have announced that "We have discovered that
the two instruments are electrically identical, and it is possible to
modify the 50MHz version, in firmware, to behave identically to the 100MHz
version. We are not disclosing how to do this. We invite comments from the
manufacturer."

** Absolute drivel.

The moral thing to do when one uncovers a scam going on is to blow it wide
open.

Been there and done that many times.



...... Phil

 

[[email protected]]

I am humbled by the depth of your arguments.

Maybe if you could figure out how your Usenet thingy works...

 

[Jon Kirwan]

Too bad that, with all this ranting, this thread is missing a couple
of interesting technical issues re: the varicap bandwidth limiter and
the compromises it forces.

I think that _is_ interesting. Discuss it, please.

Jon

 

[David L. Jones]

Too bad that, with all this ranting, this thread is missing a couple
of interesting technical issues re: the varicap bandwidth limiter and
the compromises it forces.

I find that funny considering it was you who started the ranting and also
continued it ad nauseam.
So why don't you just stop ranting and actually discuss that technical
aspect if it interests you?
Or is this just your way of trying to weasel out of the rather silly hole
you found yourself in? :->

Dave.