<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xml:base="http://ideas.4brad.com" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
 <title>Brad Ideas - Paired lights for lit signs - Comments</title>
 <link>http://ideas.4brad.com/archives/000171.html</link>
 <description>Comments for &quot;Paired lights for lit signs&quot;</description>
 <language>en</language>
<item>
 <title>fnord!</title>
 <link>http://ideas.4brad.com/archives/000171.html#comment-623</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;better than double bulbs (which many use) is LEDs, which are starting&lt;br /&gt;
to be used. Lower power consumption, better MTBF.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jun 2005 00:11:17 -0700</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 623 at http://ideas.4brad.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title></title>
 <link>http://ideas.4brad.com/archives/000171.html#comment-424</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;If I remember my &quot;Illuminatus!&quot; correctly, the missing bulbs are there intentionally.  There was a name for this, something like &quot;Fjnord&quot;?    (If I ever remember who I lent my copy of the trilogy to I&#039;ll ask for it back and re-read it.)&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The &#039;mistake&#039; draws the eye more than having things all OK does.  Somthing to do with perceptual psychology.  That was their story and there&#039;s enough of it about so that either its true or many people running illuminated signs have bought into the theory.  The end result is the same either way.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Tue, 18 Jan 2005 08:55:52 -0800</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Anton Aylward</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 424 at http://ideas.4brad.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title></title>
 <link>http://ideas.4brad.com/archives/000171.html#comment-423</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;Actually, Brad, they already do the double-bulb thing they are just ignorant of the problem until the second one dies.  It&#039;s like all the people that lose RAID systems because the second disk died after running in &quot;degraded&quot; mode for 6 months without knowing it.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;(just kidding, of course!  Wel, not about the RAID thing, that does actually happen.  RAID without notification is baaaaad.)&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <pubDate>Wed, 12 Jan 2005 01:18:16 -0800</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Tom Limoncelli</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">comment 423 at http://ideas.4brad.com</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Paired lights for lit signs</title>
 <link>http://ideas.4brad.com/archives/000171.html</link>
 <description>&lt;p&gt;You see it everywhere -- signs on buildings where a light has gone out.  It is often amusing where a missing letter changes the name of the company in some silly way.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;They spend fortunes on these signs, but bulbs are hard to replace.  So why don&#039;t they make them with a special unit that has sockets for 2 bulbs, and switches over to the backup when the first one burns out?   It&#039;s not actually that much more expensive, as you are going to pay for the 2nd bulb eventually (especially incandescent) though here you pay for it earlier.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;To get fancy, you want a way for it to tell somebody that a bulb went out.  A small data over power chip could constantly squirt simple low-data-rate packets down the power line, &quot;I have a bulb that went out!&quot;   Something like the x10 protocol, which can be transmitted by a chip that costs pennies.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Could use that protocol for remote turn on/off as well if you wanted.  You would wait for a few bulbs to go out before sending a worker out to replace them.  That worker costs more than the spare bulb anyway.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
 <comments>http://ideas.4brad.com/archives/000171.html#comments</comments>
 <category domain="http://ideas.4brad.com/archives/cat_inventions.html">Inventions</category>
 <pubDate>Tue, 11 Jan 2005 17:55:41 -0800</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>brad</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">169 at http://ideas.4brad.com</guid>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
