I like Linus' videos but....

[mr moose]

16 minutes ago, The_russian said:

I appreciate you finding an article that is actually from a legit source not some random blog, but the problem I have with that article is it was published in 2002. Although most of the data is relevant, like HP saving 50,000 computers for that year, other data like "30 - 50% of electronic failures are due to electrostatic fault (ESD)." is probably outdated. I am sure that the industry has continued to implement more measures to prevent damage from ESD since 2002. Also, I can't seem to find a source for the 30 - 50% figure, do you know where they got that number from?

The 30-50% figure is the total of all failures (ignoring physical damage from dropping or lighting), meaning if we have 5% of CPU's that are DOA, ESD would be responsible for 30-50% of those failures.  Not that 30-50% of all products will fail due to ESD.

 

That is why I said earlier on it is likely to be something in the realm of 2-3% of DOA parts being caused by ESD.   EDIT: and that is not beyond reasonable when we consider a DOA part (or any part that dies in the first few hours of use) can't be diagnosed by most home users.   

[RonnieOP]

1 hour ago, mr moose said:

Yes, For tlike the 3rd time,  in the article I linked HP said they prevented 50,000 pcs a year from being ESD damaged on their production line when they started ESD safe practices.

 

yes I can,  because that is the very definition of anecdotal.   And besides I did provide evidence.  Which everyone wants to ignore.

 

IF you really want to put your head in the sand on this one then by all means, but don't expect anyone to just take your word for it when NASA research has other things to says.

How about something that isnt 2 decades old? You realize that parts have changed in 20 years right?

 

Also the conditions of a factory and the conditions of a home are two totally different things. There is a shit load of factors that change between a 20 year old factory and someones home and desk/work bench.

 

That article literally does nothing for your argument.

 

So again ill ask. Do you have any factual evidence of esd being a major problem for modern parts? Any factual evidence of esd being the cause of doa parts?

[mr moose]

6 minutes ago, RonnieOP said:

How about something that isnt 2 decades old? You realize that parts have changed in 20 years right?

 

Also the conditions of a factory and the conditions of a home are two totally different things. There is a shit load of factors that change between a 20 year old factory and someones home and desk/work bench.

 

That article literally does nothing for your argument.

 

So again ill ask. Do you have any factual evidence of esd being a major problem for modern parts? Any factual evidence of esd being the cause of doa parts?

 

EDIT:  I mean seriously, what are you trying to argue?  what are you hoping to achieve?   All I have said in this whole thread is don't trivialize ESD and tell people not to worry about it,  am speaking from a position of education as well as provided researched evidence and yet you still seem upset at the idea that people should be told to take an easy precaution.  Pardon me if it looks like you want to give people bad advice for no other reason than your ego is hurt.

 

 

[RonnieOP]

So thats a no?

 

You cant provide literally any proof that modern hardware shows up doa because of esd or even that esd is a problem on modern hardware that we need to worry about when building?

 

Its a pretty simple question. Either you have proof or you dont.

 

I dont understand how you could possible think that parts are the same as they were 18 years ago and theres been no change in production/manufacturing.

 

[mr moose]

6 minutes ago, RonnieOP said:

So thats a no?

 

You cant provide literally any proof that modern hardware shows up doa because of esd or even that esd is a problem on modern hardware that we need to worry about when building?

 

Its a pretty simple question. Either you have proof or you dont.

 

I dont understand how you could possible think that parts are the same as they were 18 years ago and theres been no change in production/manufacturing.

 

I suppose you think newtons laws of physic don't apply because they are 300 years old.   I get that many people don't understand the science behind this nor have much experience with EE,  but that is no excuse to outright dismiss the evidence. 

[The_russian]

5 hours ago, mr moose said:

The 30-50% figure is the total of all failures (ignoring physical damage from dropping or lighting), meaning if we have 5% of CPU's that are DOA, ESD would be responsible for 30-50% of those failures.  Not that 30-50% of all products will fail due to ESD.

I understand what the figure means, what I meant was what was their source? I didn’t see any mention if that number is from one product, one company, one type of electronic, or anything like that.

[mr moose]

13 minutes ago, The_russian said:

I understand what the figure means, what I meant was what was their source? I didn’t see any mention if that number is from one product, one company, one type of electronic, or anything like that.

It's from internal reports from HP, 3M, Desco, Monroe electronics and a whole heap more.  It's basically an industry wide statistic.  You can find industry numbers all over the net, some range from 8 to 33% others from 15 - 40%.  It really depends on the companies specific product. 

 

 

 

http://www.messung.com/blog/overcoming-esd-in-electronics-production-areas/

http://www.descoindustries.com/pdf/CostofESDDamage.pdf

https://www.rs-online.com/designspark/what-is-esd-and-what-damages-can-it-cause

 

But this is starting to stray rather far from my original point, which is that it is indeed a thing and is something that we should outright claim as nothing to worry about.

 

[Godlygamer23]

On 3/17/2020 at 5:58 AM, WereCatf said:

Guess your education hasn't done you much good, then. It's pretty easy to tell when a PC-component dies from ESD.

Components don't necessarily die from ESD. They can simply become damaged, having a reduced lifespan. I'd almost claim that it's pretty basic conceptually with regards to ESD, when you have a high voltage and high current being expelled through small components. Something _will_ be affected - not necessarily killed, depending on different factors. 

[RonnieOP]

17 hours ago, mr moose said:

I suppose you think newtons laws of physic don't apply because they are 300 years old.   I get that many people don't understand the science behind this nor have much experience with EE,  but that is no excuse to outright dismiss the evidence. 

Now you are comparing scientific laws to pc hardware?

 

And that makes sense to you?

 

 

[skiilaa]

5 minutes ago, RonnieOP said:

Now you are comparing scientific laws to pc hardware?

 

And that makes sense to you?

 

 

https://superuser.com/questions/1097402/is-esd-a-serious-risk-on-modern-machines

 

Just because you don't experience it anymore doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.

[RonnieOP]

33 minutes ago, skiilaa said:

https://superuser.com/questions/1097402/is-esd-a-serious-risk-on-modern-machines

 

Just because you don't experience it anymore doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.

Nobody claimed it doesnt exist.

 

We are claiming that thhe risk is low and its not a huge issue to worry about when building your pc.

 

 

[Godlygamer23]

2 minutes ago, RonnieOP said:

Nobody claimed it doesnt exist.

 

We are claiming that thhe risk is low and its not a huge issue to worry about when building your pc.

The risk is dependent on the environment. Blanket statements like that help no one. 

 

Besides, don't think short term necessarily. Think long term. I'm not saying modern electronics don't have mitigations built in, but you give some components many small shocks over the course of many months, and you may end up with a malfunctioning part. Long term, you can give a good shock to an IC, and now the component's dead. We can argue about this all day, but as far as I'm concerned, it ain't worth the risk of damaging a part that costs hundreds of dollars. 

[skiilaa]

6 minutes ago, RonnieOP said:

Nobody claimed it doesnt exist.

 

We are claiming that thhe risk is low and its not a huge issue to worry about when building your pc.

 

 

That's not the point. Did you even read the link?

[Godlygamer23]

1 minute ago, skiilaa said:

That's not the point. Did you even read the link?

Good link you posted. 

[mr moose]

7 hours ago, RonnieOP said:

Now you are comparing scientific laws to pc hardware?

 

And that makes sense to you?

 

 

No I'm showing you how silly it is to dismiss a scientific fact because of when it was written up.

 

Now I have asked before and I am asking again, what is your point?  it seems you are fighting tooth and nail to dismiss what I have said.  Which is rather foolish given the large body of evidence for what I said.

[mr moose]

6 hours ago, RonnieOP said:

Nobody claimed it doesnt exist.

 

We are claiming that thhe risk is low and its not a huge issue to worry about when building your pc.

 

 

There are about 2-3 people in this thread who have tried hard to claim it doesn't. And you are still arguing flat out like it doesn't.  Do I need to quote them again or are you going to ignore that too?

 

If you believe it does and you know there is a risk that can be mitigated why do you keep arguing?

[keskparane]

23 hours ago, Godlygamer23 said:

The risk is dependent on the environment. Blanket statements like that help no one. 

 

Besides, don't think short term necessarily. Think long term. I'm not saying modern electronics don't have mitigations built in, but you give some components many small shocks over the course of many months, and you may end up with a malfunctioning part. Long term, you can give a good shock to an IC, and now the component's dead. We can argue about this all day, but as far as I'm concerned, it ain't worth the risk of damaging a part that costs hundreds of dollars. 

How do you compare many small shocks over the course of months, or long term, to a single install instance?

[keskparane]

On 3/20/2020 at 12:42 PM, mr moose said:

It's from internal reports from HP, 3M, Desco, Monroe electronics and a whole heap more.  It's basically an industry wide statistic.  You can find industry numbers all over the net, some range from 8 to 33% others from 15 - 40%.  It really depends on the companies specific product. 

 

 

 

http://www.messung.com/blog/overcoming-esd-in-electronics-production-areas/

http://www.descoindustries.com/pdf/CostofESDDamage.pdf

https://www.rs-online.com/designspark/what-is-esd-and-what-damages-can-it-cause

 

But this is starting to stray rather far from my original point, which is that it is indeed a thing and is something that we should outright claim as nothing to worry about.

 

Wouldn't these figures be coming from high volume plants though? Where there is a lot of moving machinery and parts combined in the same space? Does that even compare to an end user scenario?

[Godlygamer23]

3 hours ago, keskparane said:

How do you compare many small shocks over the course of months, or long term, to a single install instance?

It's illustrating how static electricity can affect the components. A small shock that's not perceivable to the user can cause damage at the microscopic level that reduces its lifespan. 

 

Depending on the user, if they frequently mess with their components directly without taking any precautions whatsoever, they will inevitably destroy the part. 

[Wintyr]

You forget though they have those special pads you can stand on and linus has in the past mentioned if he using one he attach it to his ankle and the metal around the leg of the table.  oddly all you have to do is touch the metal on the case every once and a while and it will discarge you as well.  my poor dog got tagged in the face the other day as i discarge into his eyebrow and i went to pet him.  even hurt my hand lol

[Kilrah]

Nice to see you here, like your videos

 

I agree that on the videos that are "how tos" they tend to mention it, but on those that focus on entertainment they don't bother and I understand, that's not why you watch those, especially you don't want it mentioned in every video, it would be a waste of time and annoying as a viewer.

 

I know the theory as an EE, but I don't know anyone who has ever had ESD-related damage, and neither have I whether for PC components or any of the open / in development devices I've been working on for years, without precautions.

 

I've actually worked on 2 development projects with devices that were subjected to ESD discharges that caused issues in the form of lockups and resets, repeatedly until the cause was found, but there was never any permanent damage.

 

So yes I understand that when you work on servers costing multi tens of thousands of $ and more importantly made for high reliability applications it's important to not take the risk - but in practice for consumer applications and parts the risk is really really low.

[keskparane]

Also I wonder just how much anyone would want to see Linus go through the same ESD precautions every single video. That's just dead air time that I'm pretty sure most viewers would be sick of by the time they've seen it twice. And of course you would have to spell it out and do the same for each person in the video or someone might think they were being irresponsible.

[mr moose]

7 hours ago, keskparane said:

Wouldn't these figures be coming from high volume plants though? Where there is a lot of moving machinery and parts combined in the same space? Does that even compare to an end user scenario?

They are both high and low volume, they are all concentrating on human work at work stations.  The results scale and the point is not so much about the number of failures in a factory because if we scaled up home builders to 15 Million pc's a year you'd easily get 50K failures,  but the fact that failures occur and the only measurable predictor is to take precautions.

[mr moose]

38 minutes ago, keskparane said:

Also I wonder just how much anyone would want to see Linus go through the same ESD precautions every single video. That's just dead air time that I'm pretty sure most viewers would be sick of by the time they've seen it twice. And of course you would have to spell it out and do the same for each person in the video or someone might think they were being irresponsible.

 

I don't see how wearing a strap or touching a grounded case would equate to dead air time.  It's not likes he signing for the deaf.

[PineyCreek]

I think my only problem with Linus's videos is seeing what random goofy face he (or his editors) choose for the video thumbnail.  Then again, if I ever get annoyed at it, I just rewatch the Linus Roast...now THAT was quality content.