For my writing courses, about 5% of students will come to me prior to deadlines asking for help with their paper. I see no problem advising students, as I often similarly came for help when I was an undergraduate. Recently, though, I found an increase in students who apparently just want to abuse this:


Students will bring me some plagiarized work, showing it to me early, as a sort of test if I will notice. It seems difficult to punish plagiarism when the paper is not yet submitted.
Students will bring in papers again and again, with little changes put in at each stage, hoping their minimal effort each time will be sufficient to reach their goal of a "D".


I've tried stopping students, but then they are angry when they see the "F" that they hoped I would help them get away from. While most of these students are probably just incredibly lazy, there is a chance that some among them are genuinely trying to improve, but just struggling a great deal, and I can't see it.

How might I go about blocking such abuses?


Question: Why was a resistor and capacitor used in this IR receiver circuit
Answer: As the datasheet clearly says, the TSOP output is open collector.  This means it needs a passive pullup to go high.

However, the circuit you show is messed up in several ways.  Assuming whatever you find on the internet to be good coupled with not reading the datasheet leads to trouble.  Specifically, problems with this circuit are:

100 &Omega; is a really low value for the pullup.  The TSOP would have to sink 50 mA to bring that low.  That's so much that I would not assume the TSOP can do that unless the datasheet explicitly says so.  In any case, that much current is totally unnecessary.  10 k&Omega; would be a much better pullup value.

100&micro;F on the output line is excessive, and totally unnecessary.  The circuitry inside the TSOP already produces a clear digital output that does not bounce.  There is no point in filtering that output further.  Perhaps that cap was intended to be between power and ground, but that's not what the schematic shows.

There is no decoupling cap.  Again, read the TSOP datahseet.  If I remember right, this even specifies a minimum decoupling capacitance.  C1 may have been intended to be between power and ground, which would make a lot more sense than where it is shown.  Even if so, a 1 to 10 &micro;F ceramic would be more approriate than a 100 &micro;F electrolytic.



All in all, this circuit is a mess.  Delete it, don't trust anything else you find on that website, and move on.