Humanities desk
< October 13	<< Sep \| October \| Nov >>	October 15 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

October 14

IRGC

I saw this[1] on the news, but then after further reading I came across this WP article: Controversies_surrounding_Army_of_the_Guardians_of_the_Islamic_Revolution#Labeling_by_the_United_States_as_a_.22Terrorist_Organization.22.

What's going on here? Hasn't the IRGC already been designated a terrorist organization back in 2007? Did they somehow lose the designation sometime between 2007 and 2017 and got re-designated in 2017? Mũeller (talk) 04:15, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The first listing was under Executive Order 13382. The new listing is officially published here and appears to be under Executive Order 13224. The sanctions appear pretty similar on a first read. The difference is the 'offence' that is being 'punished': 13382 deals with proliferators of WMDs and 13224 deals with terrorists. The US interpretation of the JCPOA is explicit that the 13382 sanctions on the IRGC remained in place. So nothing has actually changed. It could be argued that a 13224 listing is slightly more acceptable to other JCPOA signatories because it is further away from the plan's core concerns about proliferation, but a double listing suggests that this is entirely about getting good headlines, not about actually changing the IRGC's alleged behaviour. Matt's talk 13:55, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Test TV Tubes Here Free! at the 7-Eleven (Hooray!)

I love 7-Elevens!

Check this out, the 1950s(?) 7-Eleven in this picture runs a banner that says "(?) Test TV Tubes Here Free!"

Did they really mean that they test CRTs for free in that store? What a wonderful proof of highly advanced ancient civilization! Erich von Däniken is right! -- Toytoy (talk) 05:18, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well into the '70s, tube testers were common, not only at 7-Eleven, but hardware stores, etc. They didn't test CRTs, they tested vacuum tubes from TVs (or radios, etc.). (E.g.) — 2606:A000:4C0C:E200:7595:47BF:7C36:8BA6 (talk) 06:24, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(EC) I doubt this was for testing CRTs. It says tubes, so surely is referring to testing the vacuum tubes in the TV (I'm not sure whether they actually required the vacuum tubes to be from TVs, I don't personally see a reason for that although if you brought a whole computers worth I'm not certain if they'd have been happy with you trying to test them all for free). I doubt people would even take the whole TV since those things were bulky and expensive and cars weren't necessarily that big. See e.g. these [2] [3] which show such tube testers from drug stores etc. The 7-Eleven sign is surely referring to a similar contraption. Nil Einne (talk) 06:31, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Edit should mention the tester would need to support the tube being tested. It may have been tubes used in certain applications not commonly used by home consumers would not be supported. Of course if you actually had a computer, it would probably be worth having your own tester anyway. Nil Einne (talk) 06:41, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A bit of nostalgia! One or more of those smallish tubes would sometimes die, and then you would take the tubes to a store that had one of those machines and find out which one(s) had failed, and buy replacements. No, you didn't bring the CRT in. If it died, you bought a new TV. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 07:21, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Baseball Bugs: Is this from personal experience? Nil Einne (talk) 13:13, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Baseball Bugs: not sure if you received my ping as I just read on the VP they were broken. Nil Einne (talk) 16:13, 18 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I never tested a tube in a 7-11, but as a kid ca. 1970 I was delegated by my parents to test a few tubes in our local supermarket. The machine had lots of different plugs on the top, and you had to look up which plug to put your tube into, and then a light would come on telling you if your tube was good or not. In my childhood, radios were pretty thoroughly transistorized, but tubes were still used in TVs for some reason... AnonMoos (talk) 08:43, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well, did they order the tube for you if you happen to have a failed tube? They can order the tube from the electronic vendor and resell it to you for a nice little profit. -- Toytoy (talk) 09:30, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

At first I imagined there's an engineer testing your CRT using an oscilloscope there. It was too much to ask for. The article tube tester says:

From the late 1920s until the late 1960s, many department stores, drug stores and grocery stores in the U.S. had a self-service tube-vending display. It typically consisted of a tube-tester atop a locked cabinet of tubes, with a flip chart of instructions. One would remove the tubes from a malfunctioning device, such as a radio or television, bring them to the store, and test them all, looking up the instructions from the model number on the tube and the flip chart. If a tube was defective, store personnel would sell a replacement from the cabinet.

I thought these cheap testers are only testing for dead filaments. -- Toytoy (talk) 09:47, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The video I linked to above shows the operation of one such device. I think the device is a little newer than the 1950s and it's from Sears, but I don't see the ones in 7-Eleven would be very different. Nil Einne (talk) 13:05, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Those tubes were fairly robust, with only two typical failure modes. The tube testers simply tested for continuity between pins. Each type of tube was supposed to have continuity between certain pins and to NOT have continuity between other pins. The tester declared a tube to be bad if it had incorrect continuity. The store mad money by selling replacement tubes. In most cases, the stores stock of tubes was kept in drawers under the tester. The number of different common tube types was fairly small, so the store probably had your replacement in stock. If you had a strange tube, you probably had a strange TV, the tester probably did not have a test for it, and the store probably did not stock it. -Arch dude (talk) 20:31, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I remember, with our TV it was almost always the 5U4 tube that failed, which was the low-voltage rectifier. If not that, it was probably the 6AU6, which the TV had two of. As I recall there were about 15 tubes in the TV altogether and you could buy a troubleshooting guide that would say, if the TV fails this way then you need to find whichever one of this list of tubes is in your TV and test that one. Things were very different back then from "No user-serviceable parts inside" as you see now! --69.159.60.147 (talk) 02:19, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with Arch dude. Maybe somewhere there was a mere continuity tester, but in general they did more. And the filament/heater was the only part of the tube where it made much sense to test for a lack of continuity. The tube testers in stores had several settings and tested for filament continuity, but the also tested for transconductance or emission and possibly gassiness and shorts. I used them many times. (Now I own my own vintage tube tester). Edison (talk) 22:14, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I got the same feeling from watching the video I linked to. (But wasn't confident enough to say so.) Notably the need to check that the number was what was expected for your tube seems to be beyond a simple continuity test. My impression from what the commentator said it the lights are all that's needed for shorts and I presume continuity. Nil Einne (talk) 09:15, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, look, Wikipedia has an article on it. See Tube tester and in particular Tube tester#Self-service tube testers. --69.159.60.147 (talk) 09:34, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tube testers in places like 7-11 would have been used for radio and TV tubes, plus tubes from hi-fi or musical instrument amplifiers etc. I can't offhand think of other common household devices that would have had tubes in them. Computers with tubes were made in the 1940s-50s and some probably stayed in service into the 1970s, with occasional relics maybe persisting even longer. But it doesn't seem plausible to me that their users/maintainers would test tubes from them at 7-11. 173.228.123.121 (talk) 20:54, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Competency based interviews

Are competency based interviews generally scored, with the highest scoring candidate getting the job? 82.132.233.187 (talk) 14:14, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Are you talking about Competency-based recruitment? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:03, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ones I have been involved with have been scored - though we recognise that scores are inevitably subjective, and may not always feel that the candidate with the highest score will be the best person for the job. The score is therefore one thing which will be taken into consideration when making a decision - but not the only thing. 2A00:23C5:2265:2E00:C098:EB4F:7C52:1E8D (talk) 15:35, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think some companies (especially larger ones) have a policy to go only by the score though. I think that's particularly true in engineering and construction. 94.10.251.123 (talk) 16:29, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No idea about construction or maybe related areas like civil engineering. These days in the tech sector, collaboration and team skills are at least as important as technical skills. Interviewers take all these factors into account. Notice that Travis Kalanick didn't do that, so he himself no longer has a job. 173.228.123.121 (talk) 08:10, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

California Public School ADA % Rate

Is there a way to find the specific Average Daily Attendance (ADA) percentage for a single public school? The district does not list this information on their website. --2601:642:C301:119A:4179:86F0:B761:E757 (talk) 16:44, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Did you try here: "Data & Statistics (CA Dept of Education)". www.cde.ca.gov. — 2606:A000:4C0C:E200:7595:47BF:7C36:8BA6 (talk) 19:30, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]