Don't bring a homemade stun gun to your school / General Chatting / Forums

Forums

4hv.org :: Forums :: General Chatting

« Previous topic | Next topic »

Don't bring a homemade stun gun to your school

previous 1 2 3 next

Move Thread

LAN_403

ShawnLG

Sat Apr 05 2008, 06:32AM

Registered Member #286 Joined: Mon Mar 06 2006, 04:52AM
Location:
Posts: 399

This reminds me of the MIT student wearing a breadboard with flashing LEDs to an airport. Not the smartess thing to do after 9/11.

ramses

Sun Apr 06 2008, 03:34PM

Registered Member #1208 Joined: Thu Jan 03 2008, 05:30PM
Location: Chesterland, OH
Posts: 154

lol, there wasn't even a capacitor in it.

I took Karate class for 2 years, why don't the feds TAZ (with a real tazer) me every time I go out in public?

how about we ban scissors, they are much more dangerous!. pencils, pens, chairs, desks, books, walls, arms, heads, etc are much better weapons!

you can strangle someone with clothes. I guess clothes should be banned from schools!

sort of stupid of the kid, but i like his attitude about sticking it to "the man."

p.s. do you think they could send me to gitmo (guitamalo bay) for setting a watch to beep occasionally and hiding it somewhere in the school on April fool's day?

ramses

Mads Barnkob

Sun Apr 06 2008, 07:48PM

Registered Member #1403 Joined: Tue Mar 18 2008, 06:05PM
Location: Denmark, Odense C
Posts: 1968

Hahaha, this reminds me of being in the 5th grade, the school had some real synthetic carpets that made it easy to charge up some static energy by dragging your shoes.

we were 3 boys sent to the principal with accusations of poking other students with needles :D

Weston

Sun Apr 06 2008, 09:31PM

Registered Member #1316 Joined: Thu Feb 14 2008, 03:35AM
Location: Cambridge, MA
Posts: 365

They should ban CTR monitors because someone might open one up and show someone that if they touch two wires they get a "small shock".

kalenedrael

Tue Apr 08 2008, 04:25PM

Registered Member #5 Joined: Thu Feb 02 2006, 04:18AM
Location:
Posts: 14

Most of you have probably heard this already, but here it is anyway: arbitrary things are banned primarily because it gives the impression that something is being done about an ephemeral threat. Those of you not inclined toward cynicism will probably have difficulty making sense of the situation.

Conundrum

Tue Apr 15 2008, 07:15AM

Registered Member #96 Joined: Thu Feb 09 2006, 05:37PM
Location: CI, Earth
Posts: 4062

hmm. reminds me of the "cellphone TASER" mod doing the rounds. I actually have one of these phones (!) and the flash works just fine so am not going to dismantle it anytime soon.

I wouldn't be surprised if the Feds actually require phasing out of conventional (i.e. xenon flash) cameras in favour of Luxeon Flash-based ones. Plus they get to reuse the flash module with minimal processing.

-A

#include "$0.02.hex"

Backyard Skunkworks

Wed Apr 16 2008, 05:02AM

Registered Member #1262 Joined: Fri Jan 25 2008, 05:22AM
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 451

Conundrum wrote ...

I wouldn't be surprised if the Feds actually require phasing out of conventional (i.e. xenon flash) cameras in favour of Luxeon Flash-based ones.

You'd think they would sooner or later, all we need are a few more cases like this within a few months of eachother and they might actually consider it. Its really is too bad that nobody does something unless it MIGHT help their re-election chances, in which case they'll do it and not look back. Oh well, stockpile the used cameras now and you'll still have a free source of capacitors, boost regulators and xenon tubes for years to come.

Bjørn

Wed Apr 16 2008, 11:39AM

Registered Member #27 Joined: Fri Feb 03 2006, 02:20AM
Location: Hyperborea
Posts: 2058

If we assume that the energy given off by a small flash is 2 joules and that the longest reasonable exposure time is 1/60 second then we need 60*2 = 120 watts of LEDs to get the same exposure if they are 100% efficient. They are not so you would need a kilowatt array of LEDs to take reasonable pictures.

To light up a room you would need 10 kW or more.

Weston

Fri Apr 18 2008, 11:27PM

Registered Member #1316 Joined: Thu Feb 14 2008, 03:35AM
Location: Cambridge, MA
Posts: 365

That would be cool, free high power LEDs

Conundrum

Sat Apr 19 2008, 08:26AM

Registered Member #96 Joined: Thu Feb 09 2006, 05:37PM
Location: CI, Earth
Posts: 4062

BjÃ¸rn BÃ¦verfjord wrote ...

If we assume that the energy given off by a small flash is 2 joules and that the longest reasonable exposure time is 1/60 second then we need 60*2 = 120 watts of LEDs to get the same exposure if they are 100% efficient. They are not so you would need a kilowatt array of LEDs to take reasonable pictures.

To light up a room you would need 10 kW or more.

Hmm. Well, the phone manufacturers seem to be plugging LF-based camera phones, based on the improved colour gamut of LED's. It actually makes sense to output sharp RGB peaks rather than saturating the entire spectrum- the camera's sensor doesen't care at all.

They do seem to work fairly well, and the other advantage is that a simple boost converter will drive them with virtually no added cost.

I did read someplace that photoflash capacitors use a highly toxic and flammable electrolyte similar to Li-Ion cells.

previous 1 2 3 next

Moderator(s): Chris Russell, Noelle, Alex, Tesladownunder, Dave Marshall, Dave Billington, Bjørn, Steve Conner, Wolfram, Kizmo, Mads Barnkob