#eta testing

[queenlua]

i wonder if you could make an mtg variant where banding is actually a strong, useful mechanic

i wouldn't necessarily want to make it less *confusing* because, lbr, the utter absurdity and complexity of banding is part of its charm for me

but i just want bigger payoff for bothering to parse all the fiddly damage assignment stuff & also for it to be a more core consideration in combat. y'know. in this hypothetical variant i'm stewing over while waiting for shit to compile

[ohhgingersnaps]

"you have to fast for 12 hours for this bloodwork" is valid but does not mesh particularly well with "you are the release manager, your software release is two weeks late, and it's crunch time"

[lonestarflight]

"Sierra Nevada Corporation’s Dream Chaser full-scale engineering test article has been readied for shipment to NASA’s Armstrong Flight Research Center in California for phase two of the flight test campaign that will be conducted later in 2016 in coordination with Edwards Air Force Base. Dream Chaser program upgrades and initial hardware testing were completed at the Louisville, Colorado spacecraft assembly facility, and within the next several weeks, the same Dream Chaser vehicle that conducted the company’s flight test in 2013 will arrive at Armstrong. SNC and Armstrong will begin a series of pre-flight ground evaluations to verify and validate the vehicle’s system and subsystem designs. After successful completion of all ground testing, Dream Chaser will begin its phase two free-flight test. These activities are being conducted through the company’s Commercial Crew Integrated Capabilities Space Act Agreement with NASA’s Commercial Crew Program."

Date: July 28, 2016

NASA ID: KSC-20160728-PH_SNC01_0001

[passumstars]

Try to keep up please

[winemom-culture]

I finally got my period today 6 whole days late which is the latest I’ve ever been besides well you know. Once.

[spkysxy]

100 lbs of cheek each, minimum--

[arofili]

Me, hubristically: I think I may be turning a corner on this thing

[crimeronan]

Hi, so if this is annoying please ignore it, I have mctd and it took me so long to get diagnosed and taken seriously. I'm glad you're getting care!!! I've just been slightly worried, because as far as I can tell, you haven't had tests for Polymyositis (muscle biopsy, EMG), and if you switch rheumatologists at any point, in my experience these are super necessary for them believing MCTD, so if you aren't currently getting those and can, I'd highly recommend it in order to ensure continuity of care in the future. I just genuinely learned this the hard way and it took so much longer when moving to so if you can get it one go I'd highly recommend it. Sorry for the unsolicited advice, I waffled over it but ultimately my concerns won out. I hope for the best for you and congratulations on getting answers!!!!

oh thank you very much!

i'm okay with unsolicited advice from people who have dealt with the same shit i'm dealing with. in one of hank green's recent videos about his cancer experience he said something along the lines of, "if someone who's been thru my type of chemo says weed helps then i'm like, 'oh, thank you.' if i hear that from someone who just smokes a lotta weed then i don't... really.... care...."

and that TRULY IS THE FEELING.

i need to make some notes about what to ask the rheumatologist about in my follow-up appointment, so i'll put this on the list. i think that if what i have is MCTD then the combined lupus symptoms, morphea patches, cysts, skin inflammation, & characteristic antibodies should HOPEFULLY be enough -- but it's absolutely worth getting as much evidence on paper as possible.

it wasn't until i started having visible symptoms that i was taken seriously by doctors, so i'm Very invested in all the Official Documentation (TM) that i can get.

[theood]

Hrm make it hard I must! Permit you get can not!

[prettyboysdontlookatexplosions]

i appreciated this study: "They Can't Read Very Well: A Study of the Reading Comprehension Skills Of English Majors At Two Midwestern Universities"

[ETA: if you are somehow finding your way here pls note some - not exhaustive!!!! - follow up notes in this reblog. sorry again i mixed up megalodons and megalosaurs]

essentially, a pair of professors set out to test their intuitive sense that students at the college level were struggling with complex text. they recruited 85 students, a mix of english majors and english education majors - so, theoretically, people focusing on literature, and people preparing to teach adolescents how to read literature - and had them read-while-summarizing the first seven paragraphs of dickens's bleak house (or as much as they made it through in the 20 minute session). they provided dictionaries and also said students could use their phones to look up whatever they wanted, including any unfamiliar words or references. they found that the majority of the students - 58%, or 49 out of the 85 students - functionally could not understand dickens at all, and only 5% - a mere 4 out of the 85 students - proved themselves proficient readers (leaving the remaining 38%, or 32 students, as what the study authors deemed "competent" students, most of whom could understand about half the literal meaning - pretty low bar for competence - although a few of whom, they note, did much better than the rest in this group if not quite well enough to be considered proficient).

what i really appreciated about this study was its qualitative descriptions of the challenges and reading behaviors of what the authors call "problematic readers" (that bottom 58%), which resonated strongly with my own experiences of students who struggle with reading. here's their blunt big picture overview of these 49 students:

The majority of these subjects could understand very little of Bleak House and did not have effective reading tactics. All had so much trouble comprehending concrete detail in consecutive clauses and phrases that they could not link the meaning of one sentence to the next. Although it was clear that these subjects did try to use various tactics while they read the passage, they were not able to use those tactics successfully. For example, 43 percent of the problematic readers tried to look up words they did not understand, but only five percent were able to look up the meaning of a word and place it back correctly into a sentence. The subjects frequently looked up a word they did not know, realized that they did not understand the sentence the word had come from, and skipped translating the sentence altogether.

the idea that they had so much trouble with every small piece of a text that they could not connect ideas on a sentence by sentence basis is very familiar to me from teaching and tutoring, as was the habit of thought seen in the example of the student who gloms on to the word "whiskers" in a sea of confusion and guesses incorrectly that a cat is present - struggling readers, in my experience, seem to use familiar nouns as stepping stones in a flood of overwhelm, hopping as best they can from one seemingly familiar image to the next. so was this observation, building off the example of a student who misses the fact that dickens is being figurative when he imagines a megalodon stalking the streets of london:

She first guesses that the dinosaur is just “bones” and then is stuck stating that the bones are “waddling, um, all up the hill” because she can see that Dickens has the dinosaur moving. Because she cannot logically tie the ideas together, she just leaves her interpretation as is and goes on to the next sentence. Like this subject, most of the problematic readers were not concerned if their literal translations of Bleak House were not coherent, so obvious logical errors never seemed to affect them. In fact, none of the readers in this category ever questioned their own interpretations of figures of speech, no matter how irrational the results. Worse, their inability to understand figurative language was constant, even though most of the subjects had spent at least two years in literature classes that discussed figures of speech. Some could correctly identify a figure of speech, and even explain its use in a sentence, but correct responses were inconsistent and haphazard. None of the problematic readers showed any evidence that they could read recursively or fix previous errors in comprehension. They would stick to their reading tactics even if they were unhappy with the results.

i have seen this repeatedly, too - actually i was particularly taken with how similar this is to the behavior of struggling readers at much younger ages - and would summarize the hypothesis i have forged over time as: struggling readers do not expect what they read to make sense. my hypothesis for why this is the case is that their reading deficits were not attended to or remediated adequately early enough, and so, in their formative years - the early to mid elementary grades - they spent a lot of time "reading" things that did not make sense to them - in fact they spent much more time doing this than they ever did reading things that did make sense to them - and so they did not internalize a meaningful subjective sense of what it feels like to actually read things.

like, i've said this before, but the year i taught third grade i had multiple students who told me they loved reading and then when i asked them about a book they were reading revealed that they had absolutely no idea what was going on - on a really basic literal level like "didn't know who said which lines of dialogue" and "couldn't identify which things or characters given pronouns referred to" - and were as best as i could tell sort of constructing their own story along the way using these little bits of things they thought they understood. that's what "reading" was, in their heads. and they were, in the curriculum/model that we used at the private school where i taught, receiving basically no support to clarify that that was not what reading was, nor any instruction that would actually help them with what they needed to do to improve (understand sentences) - and i realized over the course of that year that the master's program that had certified me in teaching elementary school had provided me with very little understanding of how to help these kids (with perhaps the sole exception of the class i took on communications disorders, not because these kids had communications disorders but because that was the only class where we ever talked, even briefly, about things like sentence structures that students may need instruction in and practice with to comprehend independently). when it comes to the literal, basic understanding of a text, the model of reading pedagogy i was taught has about 6 million little "tools" that all boil down to telling kids who functionally can't read to try harder to read. this is not productive, in my experience and opinion, for kids whose maximum effort persistently yields confusion. but things are so dysfunctional all the way up and down the ladder that you can be a senior in college majoring in english without anyone but a pair of professors with a strong work ethic noticing that you can't actually read.

couple other notes:

obviously it's a small study but i'm not sure i see a reason to believe these are particularly outlierish results (ACT scores - an imperfect metric but not a meritless one IMO for reading specifically, where the task mostly really is to read a set of texts written for the educated layperson and answer factual questions about them - were a little bit above the national average)

the study was published last year, but the research was conducted january to april 2015. so there's no pandemic influence, no AI issue - these are millennials who now would span roughly ages 28-32 (i guess it's possible one of the four first-year students was one of the very first members of gen z lol). if you're in your late 20s or early 30s, we are talking about people your age, and whatever the culprit is here, it was happening when you were in school.

i think some people might want to blame this on NCLB but i find this unconvincing for a variety of reasons. first of all, NCLB did not pass because everyone in 2001 agreed that education was super hunky-dory; in fact, the sold a story podcast outlines how an explicit goal of NCLB was to train teachers in systematic phonics instruction, because that was not the norm when NCLB was passed, and an unfortunate outcome was that phonics became politicized in ed world. second, anyone who understands anything about reading should need about ten minutes max to spend some time on standardized test prep and recognize that if your goal is truly to maximize scores... then the vast majority of your instructional time should be spent on improving actual reading skills because you actually can't meaningfully game these tests by "practicing main idea questions" (timothy shanahan addresses this briefly near the top of this post). so i find it very difficult to believe that any school that pivoted to multiple choice drill time in an attempt to boost reading scores was teaching reading effectively pre-NCLB, because no set of competent literacy professionals would think that would work even for the goal of raising test scores. third, NCLB mandated yearly testing in grades 3-8 but only one test year in high school; kansas set its reading and math test year in high school as tenth grade. so theoretically these kids all had two years of sweet sweet freedom from NCLB in which their teachers could have done whatever the fuck they wanted to teach these kids to actually read. the fact that they didn't suggests perhaps there were other problems afoot. fourth, and maybe most saliently for this particular study, the sample text was the first seven paragraphs of a novel - in other words, the exact kind of short incomplete text that NCLB allegedly demanded excessive time spent on. i'm not really sure what universe it makes sense in that students who can't read the first seven paragraphs of a novel would have become much better reader if everything else had been the same but they had been making completely wack associations based on nonsense guesses for all 300 pages instead. (if you read the study it's really clear that for problematic readers, things go off the rails immediately, in a way that a good program targeted at teaching mastery of text of 500 words or less would have done something about.)

all but 3 of the students reported A's and B's in their english classes and, again, 69% of them are juniors and seniors, so like... i mean idk kudos to these professors for being like "hold up can these kids actually read?" but clearly something is wack at the college level too [in 2015] if you can make your way through nearly an entire english major without being able to read the first seven paragraphs of a dickens novel. (once again i really do encourage you to look at the qualitative samples in the study, lest you think i am being uncharitable by summarizing understandable misunderstandings or areas of confusion that may resolve themselves with further exposure to the text as "can't read.") not to mention the fact that most students could not what they had learned in previous or current english classes and when asked to name british and american authors and/or works of the nineteenth century, roughly half the sample at each college could name at most one.

the authors of the study are struck by the fact that students who cannot parse the first 3 sentences of bleak house feel very confident about their ability to read the entire novel, and discover that this seeming disconnect is resolved by the fact that these students seem to conceptualize "reading" as "skimming and then reading sparknotes." i think it's really tempting to Kids These Days this phenomenon (although again these are people who in some cases have now been in the workforce for a decade) and categorize it as laziness or a lack of effort, but i think that there is, as i described above, a real and sincere confusion over what "reading" is in which this makes a certain logical sense because it's not like they have some store of actual reading experiences to compare it to. i also think it's pretty obvious looking at just how wildly severed from actual textual comprehension their readings are that these are not - or at least not entirely - students who could just work harder and master the entirety of bleak house all on their own. like i don't think you get from "charles dickens is describing a bunch of dinosaur bones actually walking the streets of london" to comfortably reading nineteenth century literature by just trying harder. i really just don't (and i say that acknowledging i personally have had students who like... were good readers if i was forcing them to work at it constantly... but i have also had students, including ones getting ready to enter college, who were clearly giving me everything they had and what they had was at the present moment insufficient). i think that speaks to a missing skillset that they don't know are missing, because they don't have any other experience of "reading" to compare it to.

just wanna highlight again that although they don't give the breakdown some of these students are not just english majors but english education majors a.k.a. the high school english teachers of tomorrow. some of them may be teaching high school english right now, in case anyone wishes to consider whether "maybe some high school english teachers can't read the first seven paragraphs of bleak house?" should be kept in mind when we discuss present-day educational ills.

[accuratetestsolutions]

WPC ETA Testing Lab in Noida – Your Trusted Partner for Wireless Equipment Approval

WPC ETA Testing Lab in Noida

Are you looking for a reliable WPC ETA Testing Lab in Noida to get your wireless and RF equipment approved for use in India? You're in the right place. With the rapid advancement in wireless technologies and IoT, ensuring compliance with the regulatory framework is critical. That’s where WPC ETA testing comes into play, and finding the right testing lab in Noida can save you time, cost, and hassle.

In this article, we will explore what WPC ETA certification is, why it's essential, and why our Noida-based lab is the best choice for your testing needs.

What is WPC ETA Certification?

WPC stands for Wireless Planning and Coordination, a wing under the Department of Telecommunications (DoT), Government of India. It regulates and monitors the use of radio frequency (RF) spectrum across the country.

ETA, or Equipment Type Approval, is a mandatory certification for all wireless and RF-based equipment that operates on de-licensed frequency bands (like Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, ZigBee, etc.) before being imported, marketed, or sold in India.

Without ETA, businesses risk regulatory penalties and confiscation of non-compliant devices.

Why Do You Need ETA Testing?

Before applying for ETA from WPC, the equipment must undergo RF testing in a WPC-authorized lab. The testing ensures that the device conforms to prescribed power output, frequency, and bandwidth norms defined by Indian standards.

Here’s why ETA testing is crucial:

✅ Regulatory Compliance: It’s a legal requirement for import and sale.

✅ Market Access: Enables smooth entry into the Indian market.

✅ Customer Confidence: Ensures that your product meets safety and performance standards.

✅ Avoid Penalties: Prevents legal consequences, shipment delays, and import rejections.

Our WPC ETA Testing Lab in Noida

Located in the heart of Noida’s industrial and tech hub, our WPC ETA Testing Lab is a government-recognized facility equipped with cutting-edge testing instruments, experienced RF engineers, and efficient customer support.

We specialize in end-to-end ETA testing and certification services for various wireless products, including:

Wi-Fi Routers

Bluetooth Speakers

Smart Watches

Wireless Earphones

ZigBee & LoRa Devices

RF Modules and Transceivers

IoT and Smart Home Devices

Wireless Surveillance Cameras

Why Choose Our ETA Testing Lab in Noida?

There are several reasons why startups, importers, OEMs, and manufacturers across India and abroad trust us for WPC ETA testing:

1. Accredited & Authorized

Our lab is authorized by the WPC and NABL-accredited (ISO/IEC 17025:2017) for RF testing. That means the results we generate are accepted directly by WPC without additional verification.

2. Fast Turnaround Time

Time is money in business. Our streamlined testing process and in-house certification experts ensure that your ETA application is completed in the shortest time possible – usually within 5–7 working days.

3. Experienced Team

Our engineers have over a decade of hands-on experience in RF testing and WPC compliance. Accuratetestsolutions Whether you’re launching a new product or modifying an existing one, we provide the right guidance at every step.

4. Cost-Effective Packages

We believe in offering value. Our WPC ETA testing packages are competitively priced without compromising on quality or accuracy.

5. Hassle-Free Documentation

From test report preparation to online submission on the Saral Sanchar portal, we handle everything, so you can focus on your core business.

6. Support for Foreign Manufacturers

If you’re a global brand looking to enter the Indian market, we assist in testing and filing ETA on your behalf through an Indian Authorized Representative (IAR).

Step-by-Step ETA Certification Process

Here’s how the typical ETA certification journey works:

🔹 Step 1: Submit Product Details

Share the product datasheet, RF specifications, and internal photos for our evaluation.

🔹 Step 2: Sample Testing

Send your product sample to our Noida lab for testing on designated frequency bands and power limits.

🔹 Step 3: Generate Test Report

We issue an RF test report confirming your device complies with WPC norms.

🔹 Step 4: Online Submission

Our experts submit your application on the Saral Sanchar portal using the official Digital Signature Certificate (DSC).

🔹 Step 5: Get ETA Certificate

Once approved by WPC, your ETA certificate is issued and sent to your registered email.

Devices That Need ETA in India

Here are some common product categories that need ETA certification before entering the Indian market:

Device Type

Example Brands

Wi-Fi Routers

TP-Link, Netgear, Asus

Bluetooth Earbuds

boAt, Sony, OnePlus

Wireless Cameras

Hikvision, Dahua, CP Plus

Smartwatches

Apple, Samsung, Fire-Boltt

Wireless Keyboards

Logitech, Dell, HP

IoT Devices

Google Nest, Amazon Alexa

If your product operates in de-licensed frequency bands (e.g., 2.4 GHz, 5 GHz), WPC ETA is mandatory.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

Q1. How long does it take to get WPC ETA certification?

Typically, it takes 7–10 working days including testing and approval.

Q2. Do I need ETA if my device has already been certified abroad?

Yes. Even if your product is FCC or CE certified, WPC ETA is still required for use in India.

[pridetestingservices]

Comprehensive Drop Test Procedure for Product Durability

Ensure your products withstand impact and handling stress with our precise drop test procedure. We conduct controlled drop testing to evaluate structural integrity, packaging effectiveness, and overall durability. Our testing meets international quality standards, helping manufacturers improve product reliability and reduce damage risks. With our detailed drop test procedure, you can enhance consumer confidence and ensure your products perform well in real-world conditions. Contact us today to schedule your drop test assessment.

[wild-at-mind]

People: we're boycotting Starbucks because of Palestine.

Someone else: it's not on the BDS list

A 3rd person: yeah but they are firing people because of Palestine. And union busting.

?????? Goalpost moved. I am tired.

[asterdeer]

havent been weird about them in a good while but i've been thinking about how when you come down to it. in a lot of ways. steveloki is interesting because loki presents himself as being very mysterious and complicated but he's really got very simple desires and motivations when you like, get to the core of him. whereas steve presents himself as very straightforward and determinedly uncomplicated but there is so much contradiction in him, so much about himself that even he doesn't understand. in a lot of ways i think the draw of their utterly hypothetical relationship is the way they would draw their true selves out of each other just from simple curiosity and recognition of some camera obscura reflection each casts against the other

[internetdaddy98]

The Opening Gambit

Previous | Next [Series Masterlist]

Pairing: Dr. Michael “Robby” Robinavitch x F!SeniorResident!Reader Summary: From the first subtle brush of your shoulder to the featherlight graze of your thumb, you don’t flirt, you control, cool and calculated. Every touch, every murmur, every glance is measured and deliberate. You work seamlessly beside him, professional and sharp, but just close enough to fray his composure.

Word Count: 1 K Content Warning: Medical procedures, blood, will most likely be medically inaccurate at times

The shift started like any other: chaos thinly veiled by protocol. A multi-car pileup on I-279 had half the ER running on caffeine and adrenaline before noon. Trauma teams rotated like gears, syncing movement with muscle memory.

But you weren’t here just to keep up.

You were here to test gravity.

And Robby? He didn’t know it yet, but he was already falling.

You saw him the moment you walked in. Standing at the board, stylus pen between his fingers, brown locks glinting at his temples under the harsh light. His scrub top was wrinkled, his jaw shadowed with a salt and pepper beard, and you had never seen anything more devastating in your life.

“Morning, Dr. Robby,” you said, soft and rhythmical as you passed him, your shoulder brushing his ever so slightly.

You weren’t just being polite.

You were starting something.

He didn’t look at you right away, but his hand paused. You saw the twitch of a muscle in his cheek. Heard the shift of his weight.

“Morning, Sheri,” he replied, low and even. But his voice had a rasp in it that hadn’t been there yesterday.

The trauma pager went off before either could say another word.

Room Four. Level One. Blunt trauma. Male. GCS 8. ETA three minutes.

They moved like a unit, you at his side, anticipating his decisions before he made them. In the resus bay, the air was dense with urgency, but your focus never wavered. Not on the patient. And not on him.

“Needle decompression,” you said confidently, your gloves snapping on. “Right side. You want to confirm, or do you trust me?”

You didn’t say it flirtatiously. That was the genius of it. You said it with that steady, cool voice you knew he liked, that made him respect you.

And you meant it. But still, your eyes flicked up to meet his as you said it. And you held them there.

He paused for half a second too long.

“I trust you,” he said finally and you nodded with a smile.

You worked like clockwork and when it was over and the patient stabilized, you stayed behind to clean up, letting the others filter out.

He lingered near the supply cabinet, reorganizing gauze.

You slipped beside him, close enough he could smell your skin, lavender and antiseptic.

“I like it when you let me take the lead,” you murmured, quiet enough that it was for him and only him. “It suits you.”

He didn’t move. Didn’t speak.

But you saw the way his fingers curled around the shelf. Saw the tight line of his jaw. The heat in his eyes when he finally turned to face you.

“That wasn’t the time to flirt,” he said gruffly.

“Oh,” you said, lips quirking, “was I flirting?”

And you left him there, too stunned to answer.

You moved through the ER with controlled grace, your expression calm but unreadable. Except he could read you. He’d known you long enough now to sense when you were holding something back. When you were leaning in instead of away.

You didn’t linger when you handed him chart updates. But your fingers always brushed his, and once, only once, your thumb skimmed his knuckle, deliberate and featherlight.

Long that he’d felt it for hours.

Later, you stood beside him as he dictated notes at the computer. You leaned in slightly, not touching, but close. He could smell the soft, clean hint of your shampoo, lavender and something warmer beneath it.

“Good phrasing,” you murmured under your breath when he dictated a particularly precise differential. The words were harmless. But your tone wasn’t.

You said it like a secret. Like a confession meant for him alone. His fingers hesitated on the keys. A flicker of heat curled low in his abdomen.

He didn’t turn. Didn’t look at you. Couldn’t.

Another trauma came in, motorcycle, late thirties, open femur fracture with significant blood loss. The room was loud, packed with motion, but Robby still felt your presence behind him as you prepped the surgical tray.

“IV established,” you said, then added softly, “I’ve got you covered.”

It should’ve been nothing. A reassurance. A common phrase.

But your voice lowered just enough that the words twisted into something else entirely, subtly charged. Personal.

He didn’t look at you then either. He couldn’t afford to. Not with blood on the floor and adrenaline humming through his veins.

But later, when the room emptied and he was washing his hands at the sink, he realized he was gripping the faucet too hard. Water too hot. Skin flushed.

And not just from the trauma.

The rest of the shift passed in a haze of carefully orchestrated tension.

You stood a little closer than necessary when reviewing imaging with him. Let your hand brush his forearm as you reached past for a chart. Tilted your head and gave that slight smile when he caught you watching him.

“You okay?” Mel asked once, nudging you while you reviewed a pelvic fracture.

“Yeah,” you said, eyes flicking toward Robby down the hall. “Just...trying something.”

Santos caught your look and grinned knowingly. “Poor man never stood a chance.”

You stood behind him again as you both reviewed a CT scan on the monitor. This time, your hand ghosted over the small of his back, not quite a touch. Just… there.

His breath caught. Brief, sharp. He said nothing.

But every nerve in his body lit like a flare.

At 7:02 p.m., as the shift wound down, Robby cornered you by the lockers. The hallway was empty, residents already changing, nurses clocking out. He stood close. Too close for it to be professional.

“You’ve been testing me all day,” he said, voice low and tight. “Why?”

You looked up at him, all wide eyes and innocent calm. “Testing you? I thought I was just doing my job.”

“Don’t play coy.”

“Who’s playing?”

He stepped closer. The tension coiled so tight between them it could’ve shattered.

But you only smiled. Tugged your pink hoodie from the locker. Brushed past him, one last slow, deliberate drag of your fingers across his hand.

And with a whisper in his ear, said, “But if I was playing, I think I’m winning.”

Then you left.

And Robby stood alone, fists clenched, heart racing, one breath away from forgetting every line he ever swore not to cross.