In the Wikipedia page there's this formula
Just plug in values for the fence voltage and led. You can just set vswitch to 0 and Vled to 2V. It should be fairly insignificant compared to the fence voltage. It should be 10-20mA (0.01-0.02) to not kill the led.
The root of this is Ohms law: V=IR. Diodes cause a voltage drop rather than directly acting like a resistor which is why it's subtracted from the input voltage.
Just put them in series. Make 2x, one in each direction to account for AC and DC
I think he meant to reply to the main thread (which he did with the same comment) but didnt delete this (or maybe it didnt federate?)
Thats not even accounting for all the bots, alts and inactive accounts; it wouldnt surprise me in the least if the majority of those were bots or throwaways. Another benefit of lemmy's setup is that individual servers will be fairly small so theres tons of space for smaller communities with higher quality discussion, even if it does end up causing duplicate communities across instances.
A public/private key pair is more effective. Thats how "https" sites work. SSL/TLS uses certificates to authenticate who is who. Every site with https has a SSL certificate which basically contains the public key of the site. The site can then use its private key to sign all data it sends to you, and you can verify that it actually came from them by trying to decrypt it with their public key. Certificates are granted by a certificate authority, which are basically the identity service you are talking about. Certificates are usually themselves signed by the certificate authority so that you can tell that someone didnt just man-in-the-middle-attack you and swap out the certificate, and the site can still directly serve you the certificate instead of you needing to go elsewhere to find the certificate
The problem with this is severalfold. You would need some kind of digital identity organization(s) to be handling sensitive user data. This organization would need to
-
Be trusted. Trust is the key to having these things work. Certificate authorities are often large companies with a vested interest in having people keep business with them, so they are highly unlikely to mess with people's data. If you can't trust the organization, you can't trust any certificate issued or signed by them.
-
Be secure. Leaking data or being compromised is completely unnaceptable for this type of service
-
Know your identity. The ONLY way to be 100% sure that it isnt someone just making a new account and a new key or certificate (e.g. bots) would be to verify someone's details through some kind of identification. This is pretty bad for several reasons. Firstly it puts more data at risk in the event of a security breach. Secondly there is the risk of doxxing or connecting your real identity to your online identity should your data be leaked. Thirdly it could allow impersonation using leaked keys (though im sure theres a way to cryptographically timestamp things and then just mark the key as invalid). Fourth, you could allow one person to make multiple certificates for various accounts to keep them separately identifiable, but this would also potentially enable making many alts.
There may be less agressive ways of verifying individual humanness of a user, or just preventing bots as in that 3rd point may be better. For example, a simple sign up with questions to weed out bots, which generates an identity (certificate / key) which you can then add to your account. That would then move the bot target from various lemmy instances, solely to the certificate authorities. Certificate authorities would probably need to be a smaller number of trusted sources, as making them "spin up your own" means that anyone could do just that, with less pure intentions or modified code that lets them impersonate other users as bots. That sucks because it goes against the fundamental idea that anyone should be able to do it themselves and the open source ideology. Additionally, you would need to invest in tools to prevent DDOS attacks and chatgpt bots.
There most certainly exists user authentication authorities, however it wouldn't surprise me a bit if there were no suitable drop in solutions for this. This in and of itself is a fairly difficult project because of the scale needed to start as well as the effort put into verifying users are human. It's also a service that would have to be completly free to be accepted, yet cannot just shut down at risk of preventing further users from signing up. I considered perhaps charging instances a small fee (e.g. $1/mo) if they have over a certain threshold of users to allow issuing further certificates to their instance, but its the kind of thing I think would need to be decoupled from Lemmy to have a chance of surviving through more widespread use.
Can you? Yes
Should you? Probably not. High resistance and bad contact
Ah. It's not going to be possible to size it because the bulb is then acting as a resistor essentially. Unless you know what the equivalent resistance of the circuit you're testing is, and it draws a fixed current, you aren't going to be able to cap the current; Adding a resistor (or bulb) is just going to drop the input voltage and you will probably end up having other issues
For this application you should be using a bench power supply with current limiting, not a "serial bulb" (I assume you mean a fuse, which is designed to break at a low current, however these are most typically rated for several amps, not typically in the mA range). You can set the voltage and a current limit. If the current goes beyond the limit, then the power supply will drop the voltage to keep the current below the limit or latch off. You can get a fairly cheap one for about $50-60 off of eBay, which won't be the best but is sufficient for hobby use
🤔 Here
kbin.social might not work because they enabled cloudflare ddos protection during the large migration due to the blackout. This broke federation because the site would hit a landing page with a captcha instead of the actual site when trying to poll the api. Not sure if that's been fixed since.
In any case, it should work either way if federation is enabled and working.
Lemmy.ml admins are most definitely in agreement with lemmygrad views. They've deleted posts and comments if it could be in any way conceivably anti china, yet allow denial of the Uygur genocide
People are worried because the tankie ideology they thought would be contained to lemmygrad is spilling over into the enforcement on lemmy.ml
Freedom of speech is from consequences from the government. That means you cannot be prosecuted for insulting politicians for example. But you can certainly be sued in civil court for the same thing.
Oh man, I forgot to add that to the list
I sunk so many hours just into the train system
I dont like battle royales
Most of the time is spent just trying to get equipment or running from point A to point B, and by the time you've spent 15-20 minutes just running, one encounter means you lose
I play CS:GO. I like it because its more constant decision making, and the shorter rounds means less time investment into a single round. But it has gotten so bad with cheaters. I have played CS for over 15 years and yet I constantly run into brand new accounts or accounts that were clearly boosted (500+ commends in each category), bought, and used by cheaters who said that "it was cheaper than rust..." The matchmaking is so atrocious, I have people at the bottom of the ranks on my team and top of the ranks on theirs; the averages arent even close. I'm not playing CS:GO anymore and if CS2 doesnt fix the cheating problem, I'm not going back.
Hmm, Im in dark mode but it might be because of OS settings
ETA: settings on the left, look and feel, theme
No dedicated toggle button but I personally always use dark mode
I joined this sub on a whim and now I want to make bread