> From: Ronn Blankenship <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > At 23:12 17-02-02 -0500, "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >On Sun, Feb 17, 2002 at 10:05:33PM -0600, The Fool wrote: > > > Capacitors that can remain charged for Years. > > > > > > Cost-benefit analysis: > > > > > > Possible death vs savings of $25. Hmm. Difficult choice. > > > >That's not a very good analysis. Taking your number of $25 for the > >new supply, you need to compare it to P * life_value, where P is the > >probability of being killed during the replacement, and life_value is > >the value of your life. > > > >If P is low enough, then it makes sense to replace the fuse. There are > >several ways to make P very low. One would be to know exactly what you > >are doing and still take excessive precautions. > > > >But a better way would be for the fuse to be contained in a little > >plastic holder with the opening outside the power supply cage, so that > >you just pop out the old fuse and put in the new without ever opening > >the power supply cage. > > > And the last was my point: Why is the power supply designed where you > cannot just change the 10� fuse instead of having to purchase a whole new > $25 power supply, especially if the circumstances are such that you > estimate P > .99 that a blown fuse is the problem?
Because the profit margin on a fuse is 10c and the profit margin on a power supply is $25.
