OT: RoHS crap
Hello time-nuts,
Sorry for the off-topic post, but reading my mail this morning I've seen
a few messages go by on this list about bad solder joints due to the
RoHS stupidity, and I have a question about that.
My interest in the matter is from the perspective of a hobbyist hardware
builder -- of the non-commercial, anarchist, screw-all-f***ing-laws
kind. To me the RoHS problem is really two separate problems, of which
only one really matters:
Part one is the lead-free solder. I think this one is easily solved
-- just use normal tin-lead solder in everything I build.
Part two is the lead-free parts. This is the real problem. While
some manufacturers still offer both leaded and lead-free parts at least
on paper, in many cases the leaded part is discontinued or much more
difficult to obtain than the lead-free version.
So here are my questions for those who seem to have more experience with
this whole mess than I do:
-
Are the crappy RoHS solder joints due to the lead-free solder or the
lead-free parts? If it's the solder, will using traditional tin-lead
solder give me traditional good solder joints even if the parts are
lead-free, or are we doomed to live with crappy solder joints until
we can raise an army to march on the part factories and force them to
restart the production of leaded parts? -
What problems should I be on the lookout for when soldering lead-free
parts with the traditional tin-lead solder? Or does this not work
and I would have to use the goddamn lead-free solder if I'm forced to
use lead-free parts? -
Since I want to use leaded parts whenever I can get them and use
lead-free ones only if there is no choice, I'll have a mix of leaded
and lead-free parts on my boards. I've heard that such mixing gives
problems with reflow soldering because the two melt at different
temperatures. What if I use the traditional tin-lead solder
throughout? Any advice?
TIA a lot for any insight.
MS
There are no problems using Pb-free parts, or obtaining them, either, in my
experience. Most of the manufacturers and distributors have done a good job
working the kinks out of the supply chain. (DigiKey was unusable for a few
months, but they seem to have recovered nicely.)
Lead-free parts are just literally "tinned" with lead-free solder. They are
absolutely indistinguishable from the old parts, and once you tin the leads
with conventional solder they are no longer "lead-free." There is no
problem using SnPb solder with Pb-free parts under any conditions I'm aware
of. I imagine your third problem would be solvable by using tin-lead solder
in the reflow process.
Finally, some grades of lead-free solder work pretty well; the
silver-bearing stuff that Radio Shack sells appears to yield decent joints.
You wouldn't want to use it as long as you can still get SnPb solder, but
it's not the end of the world.
-- john, KE5FX
-----Original Message-----
From: time-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-bounces@febo.com]On
Behalf Of Michael Sokolov
Sent: Monday, January 15, 2007 10:52 AM
To: time-nuts@febo.com
Subject: [time-nuts] OT: RoHS crap
Hello time-nuts,
Sorry for the off-topic post, but reading my mail this morning I've seen
a few messages go by on this list about bad solder joints due to the
RoHS stupidity, and I have a question about that.
Hi Michael,
RoHS parts usually solder nicely with normal 63/37 solder. They will
dilute the solder alloy slightly, but that usually is of no concern.
The big problem with RoHS parts is they don't age well on the shelf.
I have found that over time, they will not take solder as quickly as
when they are new. So, new old stock (NOS) RoHS parts will be a much
bigger gamble than NOS tin/lead parts.
Another problem, is their mostly tin plating grows tin whiskers which
can cause shorts out at some point in the future.
It is fun to watch the RoHS parts as they reach soldering temperature.
the shiny finish turns to a mossy crinkle finish, like a wrinkle finish
paint job. What you are seeing is the electroplated finish crystalize.
-Chuck Harris
OBTW, in the irony department, it has been reported that RoHS solders are
actually more toxic (and mobile) when they enter the ground water than lead.
Michael Sokolov wrote:
Hello time-nuts,
Sorry for the off-topic post, but reading my mail this morning I've seen
a few messages go by on this list about bad solder joints due to the
RoHS stupidity, and I have a question about that.
My interest in the matter is from the perspective of a hobbyist hardware
builder -- of the non-commercial, anarchist, screw-all-f***ing-laws
kind. To me the RoHS problem is really two separate problems, of which
only one really matters:
Part one is the lead-free solder. I think this one is easily solved
-- just use normal tin-lead solder in everything I build.
Part two is the lead-free parts. This is the real problem. While
some manufacturers still offer both leaded and lead-free parts at least
on paper, in many cases the leaded part is discontinued or much more
difficult to obtain than the lead-free version.
Part of the law of "unintended consequences"!
Sometimes it's better to leave things alone.
Daun
-----Original Message-----
From: time-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On Behalf
Of Chuck Harris
Sent: Monday, January 15, 2007 2:24 PM
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] OT: RoHS crap
Hi Michael,
RoHS parts usually solder nicely with normal 63/37 solder. They will
dilute the solder alloy slightly, but that usually is of no concern.
The big problem with RoHS parts is they don't age well on the shelf.
I have found that over time, they will not take solder as quickly as
when they are new. So, new old stock (NOS) RoHS parts will be a much
bigger gamble than NOS tin/lead parts.
Another problem, is their mostly tin plating grows tin whiskers which
can cause shorts out at some point in the future.
It is fun to watch the RoHS parts as they reach soldering temperature.
the shiny finish turns to a mossy crinkle finish, like a wrinkle finish
paint job. What you are seeing is the electroplated finish crystalize.
-Chuck Harris
OBTW, in the irony department, it has been reported that RoHS solders are
actually more toxic (and mobile) when they enter the ground water than lead.
Michael Sokolov wrote:
Hello time-nuts,
Sorry for the off-topic post, but reading my mail this morning I've seen
a few messages go by on this list about bad solder joints due to the
RoHS stupidity, and I have a question about that.
My interest in the matter is from the perspective of a hobbyist hardware
builder -- of the non-commercial, anarchist, screw-all-f***ing-laws
kind. To me the RoHS problem is really two separate problems, of which
only one really matters:
Part one is the lead-free solder. I think this one is easily solved
-- just use normal tin-lead solder in everything I build.
Part two is the lead-free parts. This is the real problem. While
some manufacturers still offer both leaded and lead-free parts at least
on paper, in many cases the leaded part is discontinued or much more
difficult to obtain than the lead-free version.
time-nuts mailing list
time-nuts@febo.com
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
Especially when you consider the amount of lead that will enter
the environment when a single automotive battery (which are not
subject to RoHS, by the way) is improperly dumped. Then consider
how much tin/lead soldered electronics would be needed to release
the same amount of lead.
-Chuck Harris
Daun Yeagley wrote:
Part of the law of "unintended consequences"!
Sometimes it's better to leave things alone.
Daun
-----Original Message-----
From: time-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On Behalf
Of Chuck Harris
Sent: Monday, January 15, 2007 2:24 PM
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] OT: RoHS crap
Hi Michael,
RoHS parts usually solder nicely with normal 63/37 solder. They will
dilute the solder alloy slightly, but that usually is of no concern.
It goes back to something I noticed at an early age, albeit not early
enough: if you're a young kid just entering university and you want to wield
any real power in the world, you should become an environmental scientist,
not a politician or a lawyer or a CEO. There is essentially no burden of
proof in that business, and the only tools you need are sound bites and
guilty feelings. Only a televangelist has a cushier job, intellectually
speaking.
If we applied their methodology to any other field of endeavor, our planes
wouldn't fly, our bridges would collapse, and our computers would still
require their own electrical substations. The trouble with RoHS, of course,
is that it threatens exactly that kind of scenario, as we all discover just
how important those cheap, non-exempt commodity devices are to everyday
life.
-- john, KE5FX
-----Original Message-----
From: time-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-bounces@febo.com]On
Behalf Of Chuck Harris
Sent: Monday, January 15, 2007 11:38 AM
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] OT: RoHS crap
Especially when you consider the amount of lead that will enter
the environment when a single automotive battery (which are not
subject to RoHS, by the way) is improperly dumped. Then consider
how much tin/lead soldered electronics would be needed to release
the same amount of lead.
-Chuck Harris
In message 45ABD815.2020207@erols.com, Chuck Harris writes:
Sorry, incoming rant:
Especially when you consider the amount of lead that will enter
the environment when a single automotive battery (which are not
subject to RoHS, by the way) is improperly dumped.
Automotive batteries are subject to different and quite tough
regulations for recycling here in europe, and the recycling
frequency was up in the 99.8% range last I heard.
The main problem which RoHS tries to solve is that people throw
electronics in the household waste, which is often incinerated here
in Europe.
People tend to forget that RoHS is about more than lead,
it's also about Cadmium, Mercury, Chromium IV, PBB and PDBE,
most of which are significantly more harmful than metalic lead.
Because of the soldering issues, there exists what is called the
"RoHS5" excemtion where lead permitted in solder for hi-rel and
wide-temperature equipment.
As to the solder issues, the sad fact is that the average age of
consumer electronics these days is less than 3 years and that more
than 10% of it fails within the first two years. Therefore
tin-whiskers and similar is mostly an academic issue in consumer
electronics: it's so shitty quality already that it doesn't make a
measurable difference on reliability. (I'm told that Bang&Olufsen
has spent twice as much money on RoHS research as Sony).
Now, about how it came about...
Before RoHS was ratified, the EC had tried to negotiate voluntary
reductions and eliminations of harmful substances, with the electronics
industry, for most of a decade, but got nowhere because the industry
didn't take it seriously, and gambled that the EC wouldn't either.
After RoHS was ratified, the industry first tried getting it repealed,
while whining loudly. When that failed, the resorted to just
whining, and then finally, when the deadlined loomed, they started
actually working the issues.
If "corporate responsibility" meant anything besides "make money
for the shareholders", then RoHS would never have happened: The
electronics industry would have eliminated lead at the same time
it was eliminated from the gasoline.
As a consumer and a parent, I applaud RoHS, and with my electronics
hat on, I detest the industry which has been so hell bent on not
taking the clue for so many years.
Finally I'll cordially remind you gentlemen that there were similar
dire predictions when gasoline additives where changed from alcohols
to ethyl-lead and again when ethyl-lead was banned.
Regardless, the world spins unabated and cars still clog the arteries
of all major cities.
Poul-Henning
(Who will use SnPb solder until he runs out, probably 10 years from now.)
PS: There is a companion regulation to RoHS called WEEE -
Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment, which requires
consumer electronics to be recylable and recyled.
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/weee_index.htm
--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
RoHS = yet another wacky EU Directive. Why did we ever join this nonsense??
Rob K - (in UK)
-----Original Message-----
From: time-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
Behalf Of Michael Sokolov
Sent: 15 January 2007 18:52
To: time-nuts@febo.com
Subject: [time-nuts] OT: RoHS crap
Hello time-nuts,
Sorry for the off-topic post, but reading my mail this morning I've seen a
few messages go by on this list about bad solder joints due to the RoHS
stupidity, and I have a question about that.
My interest in the matter is from the perspective of a hobbyist hardware
builder -- of the non-commercial, anarchist, screw-all-f***ing-laws kind.
To me the RoHS problem is really two separate problems, of which only one
really matters:
Part one is the lead-free solder. I think this one is easily solved
-- just use normal tin-lead solder in everything I build.
Part two is the lead-free parts. This is the real problem. While some
manufacturers still offer both leaded and lead-free parts at least on paper,
in many cases the leaded part is discontinued or much more difficult to
obtain than the lead-free version.
So here are my questions for those who seem to have more experience with
this whole mess than I do:
-
Are the crappy RoHS solder joints due to the lead-free solder or the
lead-free parts? If it's the solder, will using traditional tin-lead
solder give me traditional good solder joints even if the parts are
lead-free, or are we doomed to live with crappy solder joints until
we can raise an army to march on the part factories and force them to
restart the production of leaded parts? -
What problems should I be on the lookout for when soldering lead-free
parts with the traditional tin-lead solder? Or does this not work
and I would have to use the goddamn lead-free solder if I'm forced to
use lead-free parts? -
Since I want to use leaded parts whenever I can get them and use
lead-free ones only if there is no choice, I'll have a mix of leaded
and lead-free parts on my boards. I've heard that such mixing gives
problems with reflow soldering because the two melt at different
temperatures. What if I use the traditional tin-lead solder
throughout? Any advice?
TIA a lot for any insight.
MS
time-nuts mailing list
time-nuts@febo.com
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
For those interested, google "tin wiskers" and look up the NASA web site
that has lots of good pictures. It is scary to think people actually
build equipment with that stuff.
Needless to say, in my business (military electronics), nobody wants to
hear about lead free solder. The prime contractors and the military
customers simply don't want it in their planes/ships. They don't care if
it's the law or what not. But, as an equipment manufacturer, we are
stuck very often with lead-free parts, simply because most part
manufacturers and distributors don't want to carry two product lines,
and for those few that still do, they make it very non-attractive to buy
SnPb parts (price and lead time goes up), but that's OK, we get lead
free parts which we solder with SnPb after adjusting the profile. That
seems to work. Interestingly, none of our customers has asked (yet) to
requalify any product because we now use Pb free parts... I expect a
different ball game if we go to Pb free soldering.
It is true that for a lot of the purely commercial stuff, with very
limited life expectancy (think digital camera or cell phone, who is
using one that's more than 2 years old?), lead free will probably not be
a problem, but there is a certain amount of commercial gear that is
expected to last a lot longer, like a television or a stereo, land line
telephone, garage door opener and fridge for instance. These things do
not become obsolete over night (even though HDTV will try to do that)
and people have gotten used to these things lasting a long time. I would
expect a certain amount of backlash is everyone had to replace all
electronic equipment every 2-3 years. So, the industry, after dragging
its feet for a while, will have to adjust and come up with a workable
game plan.
Didier KO4BB
Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
In message 45ABD815.2020207@erols.com, Chuck Harris writes:
Sorry, incoming rant:
Especially when you consider the amount of lead that will enter
the environment when a single automotive battery (which are not
subject to RoHS, by the way) is improperly dumped.
Automotive batteries are subject to different and quite tough
regulations for recycling here in europe, and the recycling
frequency was up in the 99.8% range last I heard.
That's wonderful! So when I don't bring my battery to a recycling
center, they will visit my home and ask me where it is? Do they insist
that I give them a battery when I buy a new one? Are all new batteries
serial numbered, with records tracing them back to the original purchaser?
How about when a used one gets sold, do I have to register the sale?
No?
Oh darn! Another toothless regulation.
The main problem which RoHS tries to solve is that people throw
electronics in the household waste, which is often incinerated here
in Europe.
Incinerators are a perfect place to scrub these metals out of the
waste stream. Perhaps we need to perfect the pollution controls
on incinerators? ...or better still, eliminate incinerators?
...
Because of the soldering issues, there exists what is called the
"RoHS5" excemtion where lead permitted in solder for hi-rel and
wide-temperature equipment.
For which nothing that matters to a consumer qualifies. And since there
are virtually no non RoHS parts made anymore, the exemption is moot.
As to the solder issues, the sad fact is that the average age of
consumer electronics these days is less than 3 years and that more
than 10% of it fails within the first two years. Therefore
tin-whiskers and similar is mostly an academic issue in consumer
electronics: it's so shitty quality already that it doesn't make a
measurable difference on reliability. (I'm told that Bang&Olufsen
has spent twice as much money on RoHS research as Sony).
That is desirable? Maybe RoHS should require electronics be made
more reliable?
...
If "corporate responsibility" meant anything besides "make money
for the shareholders", then RoHS would never have happened: The
electronics industry would have eliminated lead at the same time
it was eliminated from the gasoline.
That logic doesn't follow: The lead in gasoline was by design destined
to enter the atmosphere. The lead in electronics isn't designed for
that fate. The only reason lead was taken out of gasoline was to
facilitate catalytic converters, and smog reduction. The environmental
benefits of lead removal were invented much later.
As a consumer and a parent, I applaud RoHS, and with my electronics
hat on, I detest the industry which has been so hell bent on not
taking the clue for so many years.
Finally I'll cordially remind you gentlemen that there were similar
dire predictions when gasoline additives where changed from alcohols
to ethyl-lead and again when ethyl-lead was banned.
Of course cars now cost 5 to 10 times as much as they did in 1976 when
lead was banned from gasoline in the US. In the US, this fact keeps a
lot of very old, and marginally safe cars on the road.
Regardless, the world spins unabated and cars still clog the arteries
of all major cities.
Poul-Henning
(Who will use SnPb solder until he runs out, probably 10 years from now.)
I'm sorry Poul, if you use that Sn/Pb solder, knowing what you know,
then you are a hypocrite.
-Chuck Harris
I forgot to mention that in our products, we use 100% MIL-SPEC conformal
coating, which seems to slow the growth of tin wiskers to the point of
not being a significant concern (at least from the people knowledgeable
in the process,) and our customers are buying it.
As Chuck pointed out, simply using SnPb solder will not prevent wiskers
from growing on the upper parts of the component leads which are not
immersed in the Pb solder and therefore remain plated with 100% tin. It
is less of a problem with surface mount parts simply because many don't
really have leads, but still too many have enough of the leads exposed
that if left unprotected could grow wiskers. For commercial
applications, where conformal coating is too expensive, I am not sure
what the fix will be.
Didier KO4BB
Didier Juges wrote:
For those interested, google "tin wiskers" and look up the NASA web site
that has lots of good pictures. It is scary to think people actually
build equipment with that stuff.
Needless to say, in my business (military electronics), nobody wants to
hear about lead free solder. The prime contractors and the military
customers simply don't want it in their planes/ships. They don't care if
it's the law or what not. But, as an equipment manufacturer, we are
stuck very often with lead-free parts, simply because most part
manufacturers and distributors don't want to carry two product lines,
and for those few that still do, they make it very non-attractive to buy
SnPb parts (price and lead time goes up), but that's OK, we get lead
free parts which we solder with SnPb after adjusting the profile. That
seems to work. Interestingly, none of our customers has asked (yet) to
requalify any product because we now use Pb free parts... I expect a
different ball game if we go to Pb free soldering.
In message 45AC324E.9070102@erols.com, Chuck Harris writes:
Chuck, you are entitled to your opinions, but some of your
assumptions indicate that you havn't been in Europe for
any amount of time, so I'll just correct those of of your
mistakes that applies to over here:
Oh darn! Another toothless regulation.
Calling anything with a 99.9% success rate toothless is stupid.
Incinerators are a perfect place to scrub these metals out of the
waste stream. Perhaps we need to perfect the pollution controls
on incinerators? ...or better still, eliminate incinerators?
Europe does not have vast tracts of land we can use for landfills,
and we care enough about the oceans to not just dump our shit
unfiltered into them.
That logic doesn't follow: The lead in gasoline was by design destined
to enter the atmosphere.
No. Originally it was argued that it would deposit inside the
exhaust and be eliminated/recycled along with the car.
Then much later on, independent researches found lots of lead in
city smog and only after they directly proved its heritage did Ethyl
Corp admit that "could be a possibility" and that they never really
researched it in the first place.
The only reason lead was taken out of gasoline was to
facilitate catalytic converters, and smog reduction.
No. The reason lead was taken out of gasoline was to reduce
the amount of lead in childrens blood.
Finally I'll cordially remind you gentlemen that there were similar
dire predictions when gasoline additives where changed from alcohols
to ethyl-lead and again when ethyl-lead was banned.
Of course cars now cost 5 to 10 times as much as they did in 1976 when
lead was banned from gasoline in the US. In the US, this fact keeps a
lot of very old, and marginally safe cars on the road.
And ? Would it have been better to keep polluting our kids with lead ?
Or are you saying that cars are 5 to 10 times as expensive because
of the catalytic converter ?
Anyway, it's hard to take seriously any complaint about cars from
a country where the most asked for extra feature is the roof mounted
machine-gun for the hummer :-)
(Who will use SnPb solder until he runs out, probably 10 years from now.)
I'm sorry Poul, if you use that Sn/Pb solder, knowing what you know,
then you are a hypocrite.
No it isn't.
I bought my current roll of solder four years ago and you can still
barely see that I've used any of it, so the amount of lead we are
talking about is vanishing small (hence the 10 years). Furthermore
the resulting constructions only leave my lab for certified electronics
recycling.
There is such a thing like personal responsibility, even without
a constitutional right to bear guns :-)
--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Hi Poul,
I think your point of view is correct.
I manufacture Fibre based GE + TDM Telecommunications products sold to the
European and Asia market with exceptional reliability to operate within the
Power industry. They demand 99.999% availability end to end and devices with
time deterministic parameters for operating fail safe and protection
signalling systems.
As we speak/type, much of the old generation equipment is being replaced by
very new cutting edge electronics with endless functionality. This causes
massive disposal problems in Europe, Australia and many other countries that
are just starting to realise the impact hazardous waste has on the ground
water, irrespective if you have a large land mass or not.
Our business has to-date spent a small fortune changing all our design &
production facilities to meet with RoHS 5 and by the end of the year RoHS 6.
However I can not say the same for many first world Countries, who wish to
continue to dump their so called compliant stock on the market.
Actually we are so far ahead, we are winning business because of the leap in
compliance and further more it has made us realise that RoHS is a perfect
opportunity to totally enhance our products using the latest semies, thus
future proofing them for the next 5 years, 2 to 3 years ahead of our
competitors. It is amazing what one can do when pushed.
RoHS 5 is an interesting mandate, Lead based solder can still be used as
long as the components are a mixture of RoHS and not, RoHS 6 must comply
will 100% lead free components and solder process. Both work well, infact we
have GE fibre based system in place operating to +60 Degrees C, these items
have been in service for 2 years +. A recent Audit did not show any yield
issues.
I think it is time that all first world Countries cleans up their act,
hopefully this will leave a better place for our children and children's
children, I am all for it.
Please take a moment to review the following:-
http://www.rohsguide.com/?gg=us&kw=rohs%20compliance&gclid=COayjM_k5IkCFQloYAodqWjeGw
Happy soldering.
Gerald
----- Original Message -----
From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" phk@phk.freebsd.dk
To: "Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement"
time-nuts@febo.com
Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2007 5:49 PM
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] OT: RoHS crap
In message 45AC324E.9070102@erols.com, Chuck Harris writes:
Chuck, you are entitled to your opinions, but some of your
assumptions indicate that you havn't been in Europe for
any amount of time, so I'll just correct those of of your
mistakes that applies to over here:
Oh darn! Another toothless regulation.
Calling anything with a 99.9% success rate toothless is stupid.
Incinerators are a perfect place to scrub these metals out of the
waste stream. Perhaps we need to perfect the pollution controls
on incinerators? ...or better still, eliminate incinerators?
Europe does not have vast tracts of land we can use for landfills,
and we care enough about the oceans to not just dump our shit
unfiltered into them.
That logic doesn't follow: The lead in gasoline was by design destined
to enter the atmosphere.
No. Originally it was argued that it would deposit inside the
exhaust and be eliminated/recycled along with the car.
Then much later on, independent researches found lots of lead in
city smog and only after they directly proved its heritage did Ethyl
Corp admit that "could be a possibility" and that they never really
researched it in the first place.
The only reason lead was taken out of gasoline was to
facilitate catalytic converters, and smog reduction.
No. The reason lead was taken out of gasoline was to reduce
the amount of lead in childrens blood.
Finally I'll cordially remind you gentlemen that there were similar
dire predictions when gasoline additives where changed from alcohols
to ethyl-lead and again when ethyl-lead was banned.
Of course cars now cost 5 to 10 times as much as they did in 1976 when
lead was banned from gasoline in the US. In the US, this fact keeps a
lot of very old, and marginally safe cars on the road.
And ? Would it have been better to keep polluting our kids with lead ?
Or are you saying that cars are 5 to 10 times as expensive because
of the catalytic converter ?
Anyway, it's hard to take seriously any complaint about cars from
a country where the most asked for extra feature is the roof mounted
machine-gun for the hummer :-)
(Who will use SnPb solder until he runs out, probably 10 years from
now.)
I'm sorry Poul, if you use that Sn/Pb solder, knowing what you know,
then you are a hypocrite.
No it isn't.
I bought my current roll of solder four years ago and you can still
barely see that I've used any of it, so the amount of lead we are
talking about is vanishing small (hence the 10 years). Furthermore
the resulting constructions only leave my lab for certified electronics
recycling.
There is such a thing like personal responsibility, even without
a constitutional right to bear guns :-)
--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by
incompetence.
time-nuts mailing list
time-nuts@febo.com
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
There is such a thing like personal responsibility, even without
a constitutional right to bear guns :-)
Actually, it is a constitutional Right to bare Arms.
This has been much missunderstood. The constitution
was being hammered out during a very hot summer. The
conservatives where insisting on a strict dress code,
including long sleeved shirts and jackets. But cooler
heads prevailed and costume tolerance was put into law.
/b
Need a quick answer? Get one in minutes from people who know.
Ask your question on www.Answers.yahoo.com
Rasputin Novgorod wrote:
There is such a thing like personal responsibility, even without
a constitutional right to bear guns :-)
Actually, it is a constitutional Right to bare Arms.
This has been much missunderstood. The constitution
was being hammered out during a very hot summer. The
conservatives where insisting on a strict dress code,
including long sleeved shirts and jackets. But cooler
heads prevailed and costume tolerance was put into law.
Anyone who has spent even a small amount of time reading
the writings of the folks that wrote the US constitution
would have no doubt that they were talking about guns
in the hands of the people. Thomas Jefferson, as a private
individual, owned canon! A period equivalent of owning an
atomic bomb today.
But seriously, why are you dragging your misinformed opinions
into time-nuts (even if you intended it as a joke)?
-Chuck Harris
In message 45AE8518.8090504@erols.com, Chuck Harris writes:
Rasputin Novgorod wrote:
But seriously, why are you dragging your misinformed opinions
into time-nuts (even if you intended it as a joke)?
Taking fun
as simply fun
and earnestness
in earnest
shows how thoroughly
thou none
of the two
discernest.
-- Piet Hein
--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
:-)
Rob K
-----Original Message-----
From: time-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On
Behalf Of Poul-Henning Kamp
Sent: 17 January 2007 20:49
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] OT: RoHS crap
In message 45AE8518.8090504@erols.com, Chuck Harris writes:
Rasputin Novgorod wrote:
But seriously, why are you dragging your misinformed opinions into
time-nuts (even if you intended it as a joke)?
Taking fun
as simply fun
and earnestness
in earnest
shows how thoroughly
thou none
of the two
discernest.
-- Piet Hein
--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
time-nuts mailing list
time-nuts@febo.com
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
Sounds like; "It's all fun and games until someone gets hurt... then it's just
fun".
-----Original Message-----
From: time-nuts-bounces@febo.com [mailto:time-nuts-bounces@febo.com] On Behalf
Of Poul-Henning Kamp
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2007 2:49 PM
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] OT: RoHS crap
In message 45AE8518.8090504@erols.com, Chuck Harris writes:
Rasputin Novgorod wrote:
But seriously, why are you dragging your misinformed opinions
into time-nuts (even if you intended it as a joke)?
Taking fun
as simply fun
and earnestness
in earnest
shows how thoroughly
thou none
of the two
discernest.
-- Piet Hein
--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
time-nuts mailing list
time-nuts@febo.com
https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts