Connect with us

So what's the truth about lead-free solder ?

Discussion in 'Electronic Repair' started by Eeyore, Jul 24, 2007.

  1. David Harmon

    David Harmon Guest

    On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 18:14:20 -0400 in sci.electronics.design, "Leonard
    Lead Fluoride???
     
  2. Chris Jones

    Chris Jones Guest

    As I understand it, you can be extradited from the UK to the US *without*
    anything being proven in a UK court first. For some reason, the US has
    forgotten to sign their half of the "reciprocal" agreement, so it only
    works one way.
    http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2006/07/uk-mps-protest-lopsided-extradition.php

    Chris
     
  3. clifto

    clifto Guest

    It's for brushing your mercury fillings.
     
  4. Arfa Daily

    Arfa Daily Guest

    Yes, that's my thought too. Now Universal might be a big organisation, but
    they are not stupid. Nor, I'm sure, are their corporate law department, and
    any externally retained law experts. Which then begs the question of why
    they would pursue this with such apparent vigour, given the negative
    publicity which it would - and seemingly *is* - bringing down on their
    heads. Which brings us back round to the question of is there more to this
    than we are being told.

    All of which is a very long way from bad joints on lead-free joints ...

    Arfa
     
  5. Arfa Daily

    Arfa Daily Guest

    Yep, sounds like a lawyer-driven test case to me. As soon as I see the words
    "fair", "free" and "speech", and "rights" in a sentence that also contains
    the word "lawyer", I'm immediately thinking that way ...

    Arfa
     
  6. Liggett

    Liggett Guest


    Shut up you lying fucktard.
     
  7. JackShephard

    JackShephard Guest

    Liggett wrote in
    You tell him sweet thing.
     

  8. More proof of your 100% juvenile mental maturity.
     

  9. The suit will fail miserably on the very point I made.
     

  10. **** off, yap dog.
     

  11. Wrong. Single frames of video, as well as short clips are 100%
    allowable.

    You are an apparently assuming nitwit.

    You infringe on those of us that are intelligent.
     
  12. "cram it in and go" gives real insight into your failed personality.

    All your posts are kind of "cram it(abuse) in and go"

    The trouble for the electronic groups is you invariably come back
    like a bad smell.

    All that can be hoped for is the brief respite your drinking bouts
    provide.
     
  13. Is there ANYTHING that you don't make up as you go along, you total
    fucking retard?
     
  14. Lamey

    Lamey Guest

    More abuse from the drunken prongboi.

    --
    Join irc.exilenet.org
    #southpark_radio

    Usenet lits score:

    GIT-R-DONE!
    alt.usenet.legends.lamey
    http://blu05.port5.com
    AUK Offishal Tinfoil Sombrero award 05/07
    #20 Usenet asshole
    #6 Lits Slut
    #9 Cog in the AUK Hate Machine
    <approved by Lionel>
    #11 Most posting trolls/hunters/flonkers 2007
    #1 Disenfranchised AUK Kookologist.
    #1 AUK Galactic Killfile Award
    < we all know how well that works...LOL >
    #33 on Teh Buzzard lits o lub.
    #4 miguel's pest list, rev 1.1:
    Co-inventer of the "Prongtard Yap-Dog Award"

    <working on one of them specheel AUK awards>
    http://www.dino-soft.org/microsoft/security/updates/doitBST.html
     
  15. I do not know if the term "amusingly" is appropriate.

    I don't know if I would ever describe a failure of any kind as being
    "spectacular" either.

    The term miserably comes to mind in both instances, as that is exactly
    what it has caused nearly all involved.

    Hopefully, said misery will come full circle, and bite the politicians
    that started this CRAP right in the ass. It will certainly have an
    economic impact, and they will likely find some way to squirm clear of
    any blame, but the fact remains, that there was no science involved, and
    that technically we already knew about this decades ago when our REAL
    scientists formulated the solders we now know for a fact to be superior
    in all respects.
     
  16. PeteS

    PeteS Guest

    Got to agree. My view is it was pushed for a political agenda rather
    than a scientific one (duh) and a reduction in hazardous substances has
    not and will not be achieved from the directive. There are more
    hazardous chemicals used (by volume) for the replacement processes than
    is removed by the RoHS directive, amusingly. Another issue is because of
    the suspect reliability of equipment (there definitely seems to be more
    failures in RoHS compliant products), more equipment is actually made.
    With the WEEE directive it simply means that more parts are used, and
    the costs go up due to the cost of dealing with / recycling defective
    equipment. Doesn't make much sense, really.

    On the refinishing front, if we could buy SnPb finished parts, we would.
    These are still available directly from manufacturers of some parts for
    the aerospace industry, but not from others. Having two processes drives
    up their costs, so we either pay the manufacturer for it or pay our own
    facilities for it. Either way, the end product cost increases.

    If the object of the exercise was to reduce hazardous substances, it has
    failed spectacularly.

    Cheers

    PeteS
     
  17. Thank you for proving another text book example of "cram it in and
    go"!
     
  18. Eeyore

    Eeyore Guest

    **** off you stupid fucking ****.

    Graham
     
  19. Eeyore

    Eeyore Guest

    What part of " within their rights to ask" did you misunderstand ?

    Graham
     
Ask a Question
Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?
You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.
Electronics Point Logo
Continue to site
Quote of the day

-