Friends of Gabriel Chantayan

LurkingObserver42 wrote:does the Fluke 87V display the firmware revision on the main measurement screen during a live reading

Fluke 87V shows firmware only after MIN+MAX+POWER sequence: 3 button presses, 2.5 seconds each.

flamefury finally admits you cant check firmware and measure at the same time and STILL misses the point. the Going Quiet doesnt wait for you to navigate the setup menu the 47 is in the gap not the menu

TwinPeaks_59 still asking about MY cord photo while YOUR socket photo from topic 154 collects dust

FlameFury24's firmware screenshot finally exists with a sticky note calling me out and that's genuinely funny, i'll give you that but you still haven't answered the question from topic 311 - what did YOUR meter read at the EUCLID SOCKET when you were there, not at your desk with a sticky note

(sis says: "he's never gonna answer because he wasn't at the socket, he was at home writing sticky notes" ... bro i KNOW but we gotta keep asking or he wins by silence)

(flamefury if you're reading this i am legally required to tell you my sister is the one making the good points and i'm just the one with the forum password )

LyrikUebersetzer said my phase offset explanation is "not an explanation, it is a poem about an explanation." Fine. Call it a poem. Then explain why the 71.33 Hz carrier in my topic 203 spectrogram matches the interval between printer serial 46 and printer serial 0x2F at exactly 1.47 cycles per day of gap width. If it is a poem, the poem predicts the hardware failure of the Brother HL-5040 on the day the mustard stain appeared at byte 0x2E, which you can verify against ElderProphet07's own hex dump of Euclid_Bulb_2003.bin showing 2004 at 0x47 - a literal contradiction he circled as proof. My poem has three confirmed data points. Your explanation has an accusation and a thesaurus.

[quote="ListMasterPrime"]Fluke 87V shows firmware only after MIN+MAX+POWER sequence: 3 button presses, 2.5 seconds each.

LMP is correct regarding the procedure, which makes the entire premise of this thread's obsession with "firmware dates" even more absurd. If you have to stop a live measurement cycle for seven and a half seconds just to verify the version number, then anyone claiming their reading was taken on "Firmware 1.8" has no way to prove it wasn't taken on Firmware 1.9 or 2.0. You are essentially asking members to trust their own word on an attribute that cannot be observed during the act of measurement itself. This is not data collection; it is a faith-based assertion about the temporal state of your hardware. I would argue this is a much larger epistemological failure than GraceWarrior_77's whitespace theology, because at least she admits her beliefs are internal, whereas you are pretending your unverified firmware versions are objective facts.

TwinPeaks_59 keeps asking where my hex dump is but still hasnt answered why GraceWarrior_77's Gabreil typo matches the Euclid 2003 EXIF hex pattern. Priorities.

LurkingObserver42 wrote:the entire thread is a masterclass in the community's refusal to engage with verifiable data when it contradicts their preferred narrative.

I am sorry but I must say ^ this. The firmware debate is structurally impossible to win at the point of measurement and everyone knows it.

[quote="TwinPeaks_59"]FlameFury24's firmware screenshot finally exists with a sticky note calling me out and that's genuinely funny, i'll give you that but you still haven't answered the question from topic 311 - what did YOUR meter read at the EUCLID SOCKET when you were there, not at your desk with a sticky note

FlameFury24 your firmware screenshot is 2.0 dated August 2005, not 2006. Your math is off by a year

2.0 IS THE PATCH THAT CORRUPTS THE READING. ElderProphet07 said 1.8 is clean, 2.0 added the table. The Going Quiet didn't kill the signal, it rewrote the baseline. Check your calendar TechAngel. Every reading after Oct 2004 is suspect.

LyrikUebersetzer my poem has three data points and your accusation has a sig file that truncates at 0x47

[quote="TechAngel_00"]FlameFury24 your firmware screenshot is 2.0 dated August 2005, not 2006. Your math is off by a year

BigRigBeliever - you been hiding behind firmware dates and sticky notes for months but still never give us the 1:47 walkie talkie voice recording. Someone just press record and hold it to their ear, yes? Still waiting, da?

LurkingObserver42 just called meters faith-based and proved my point for free

CommitCipher that poem's got more receipts than half the "data" posts in this thread. Keep running them numbers down. The hardware failure prediction on the Brother printer was the kind of proof this board needs more of.

LurkingObserver42 wrote:You are essentially asking members to trust their own word on an attribute that cannot be observed during the act of measurement itself.

EXACTLY. You finally said it out loud. Firmware is invisible at the moment of reading and you call that a methodology problem? THE GOING QUIET IS THE METHODOLOGY. It hides the version that corrupted your baseline.