Ever since N&V updated the look of this web space, I can't find the handy technical dictionary. I found it handy to look up geek achronyms.
Does anybody know of another one out here in webland?
Technical Dictionary
- Chris Smith
- Posts: 4325
- Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2001 1:01 am
- Location: Bieber Ca.
- Chris Smith
- Posts: 4325
- Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2001 1:01 am
- Location: Bieber Ca.
I have several 5 pound books full of acronyms, definitions, [literally] etc, but they just keep changing,... so what are we to take serious?
It reminds me of the "Valley Girls",... "gag me with a spoon", but what does tomorrow have to say?
Back then they tried to be scientific, but today they just roll with the punches, way ahead of Webster’s?
It has become a mess, so I think only the web may be able to keep up with the dozens of the SAME usages of the same letters or words.
It was a simpler life back then?
It reminds me of the "Valley Girls",... "gag me with a spoon", but what does tomorrow have to say?
Back then they tried to be scientific, but today they just roll with the punches, way ahead of Webster’s?
It has become a mess, so I think only the web may be able to keep up with the dozens of the SAME usages of the same letters or words.
It was a simpler life back then?
- Michael Kaudze
- Site Admin
- Posts: 16300
- Joined: Fri Nov 22, 2002 1:01 am
- Location: at work
- Contact:
Actually, I find Wikipedia to be increasingly useful to me. I'm sure that will draw some sort of negative comment from some but it's really quite good as an introduction to an area or for looking up a term. It may not be fully authoritative but it's better than a typical dictionary which may be out of date or not have had peer review.
- Dave Dixon
- Posts: 436
- Joined: Thu May 01, 2003 1:01 am
- Location: Wichita, KS
- Contact:
Hi Philba,
I love Wikipedia, BUT, would advise using a few other references as well. After watching a show on how just anyone can edit or add listings to Wikipedia with my wife, I added this line to the biography of David Dixon Porter...."He married Jessica Marie Sanford in 1824". I waited a few days after we watched the broadcast mentioned, and then forwarded the link to her. Jessie just thought it was "So cool" that he had a wife with the same name as hers! She is a smart lady, but sometimes seeing things in print legitimizes them, and she bought it! My little caveat for the group.
Dave
I love Wikipedia, BUT, would advise using a few other references as well. After watching a show on how just anyone can edit or add listings to Wikipedia with my wife, I added this line to the biography of David Dixon Porter...."He married Jessica Marie Sanford in 1824". I waited a few days after we watched the broadcast mentioned, and then forwarded the link to her. Jessie just thought it was "So cool" that he had a wife with the same name as hers! She is a smart lady, but sometimes seeing things in print legitimizes them, and she bought it! My little caveat for the group.
Dave
No question that wikipedia can be gamed. However, a subject such as electronics gets the benefit of continuous peer review. Go and make a nonsense change to an electronics article. You will see that it will get correct fairly quickly. In addition, I too recommend people look beyond the article.
Perfect? No.
Better than some random book? Probably.
Better than some random website? Definitely.
Should you rely on it solely? absolutely not.
Perfect? No.
Better than some random book? Probably.
Better than some random website? Definitely.
Should you rely on it solely? absolutely not.
Here is another electronics dictionary
http://www.electronicdefinitions.com/
http://www.electronicdefinitions.com/
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot] and 4 guests