RealityVoid

This scenario is pretty similar to the Azolla event:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azolla_event

Where "event" in this case is something that happened over an 800 000 years interval.

it’s a voluntary industry standard that has no government oversight or regulatory authority.

Yes, hence why I said I'm not sure about enforcement mechanisms how they stack up against the aviation standard. Still, in my limited experience, projects that are ASIL x take the thing pretty seriously and they do get certifications from external bodies. Actually, I am supporting an SEooC external certification right now.

The infotainment system itself may be QM but there has to be assurance that it is in fact separated from higher safety level system.

The separation most likely happens _outside_ the infotainment itself, through a gateway.

don’t have anything like the verification and documentation processes that are mandated by DO-178

ISO 26262? Not sure how the enforcement looks, but automotive is pretty serious about ISO 26262.

Still, the infotainment is most likely QM so it wouldn't apply in this specific situation.

They make many many many more things than just powertools. They have ebike motors, home appliances, industrial machinery, chips (they have a very good division for MEMS as far as I can tell, they make high quality IMU's, they are super popular for airbag usage), protocols (the CAN bus is BOSCH IP and you pay 1 cent royalty I think for each MCU's with CAN on them), automotive components.

Real time control can be like that as long as the computing parts are clearly bound within your performance requirement.

Falcon rockets, starlink, Tesla. They all pushed the envelope in their field. Are the stocks overpriced? Yes. Did they do impressive technical work? Also yes. They might get surpassed by competitors, but that is to be expected for all companies. But they clearly did something special there. And I deff am no Musk fanboy, but you have to give him the credit for establishing those systems.

OP is from Palo Alto, so, obviously, the closest thing to a hellscape you can possibly get. /s

This is obviously an overstatement. Sure, a phone is convenient, but we managed to function just fine without smartphones. I assure you, it's possible to do all those things without a phone.

Can you back this up with any authoritative sources?

This is not a radar, only a receiver.

According to CivDiv's channel about 70% of the drones used are still RC FPV drones. They are cheaper longer range and have a slightly simpler supply chain. Fiber optic cable prices have exploded because of the war.

It's not as easy as plopping a new SW on it. Have you wondered why, despite this conflict dragging on for this long, autonomous targeting is still not common? It's just much harder to do, and doing it reliably is actually super hard.

Hw access is also not as easy as you think. Try getting a Pixel 9 class SoC board that you can actually dev stuff on, you'd be surprised how hard it is to get such a thing. And when you get it, it will probably be 2x as expensive for just the board.

Oh, put the Pixel 9 on it then. Have you tried doing optical flow on rolling shutter cameras?

Then, whatever solution you get, you need sufficient volume and reliable supply of the thing. Oh, you can't find the chip anymore? Good luck porting the stack you have since the pipeline is different.

Whereas these rc FPV drones you can basically build what what you find in the back of your drawer.

It's probably doing a lot of heavy lifting.

I think one way communication should be sufficient together with a shared secret. It's probably less reliable compared to two way communication, but it should satisfy the criteria. IR visual pattern propagation will respect this. You don't have radio spectrum that is too prone to jamming, and if the drones are visual navigation/targeting based, if they can see you to acquire the you as a target, they can identify you as a friend as long as you can ensure emitters are not occluded from your side.

It's not perfect, but it's cheap and it should work.

Give me a couple hundred k and I can probably build the prototype, haha.

I would have expected the right wing parties to be against this, somehow, but... Nope, just checked my country's votes, and nationalists just love cc1.0 it seems.

I think you can do this relatively simply with infrared led lights. Imagine "Please don't kill me" remote controls. You are a bit more visible when broadcasting, but presumably you can be selective when turning it on.

You need hardware for these things. High speed image processing and high precision control and global shutter cameras. You can't just slap a raspi on it with any run of the mill camera and call it a day.

This has an expiration date baked in for 2028 so if no new legislation comes in until then, it will undo itself on its own.

Oh, yes, thankfully the protections for privacy are much better in the US... right? Right?

These kinds of systems are rare or super rare.

Or a 7 byte register, if you really want to get freaky.

A bit amusing. I took Anna Karenina off Gutenberg and used that as test data for some of my flashing algorithms. I called it the "Anna test". I could have used random data, but where's the fun in that? Besides, during dev, structured text showed the kind of error I got much better than random data would have.

Super cool, what did you make? How large was the factory? How did it work out? One observation from my experience, the closer you are to production, the more stressful things are. But probably scale changes experience. For me, working on stuff that entered automotive production lines, anything that made the line stop or go slow was insanely stresful.

I would be a bit more charitable to OP here because it's not their fault, it's the Roborock app's fault. They convey in their UI the information of total surface cleaned in xxKm2 with the K bolded. But the km doesn't mean square kilometer it means thousands of square meters apparently. It's easy to just take the information at face value as OP probably did here. He went in app, saw the number and the very weird unit for the info and just posted it.

I have a car that doesn't have bluetooth, and trust me, when it's not there, you miss it.

On the other hand, you are limited by having CD's which compared to streaming stuff from Spotify is much much less convenient, take up space and you need to create/buy them, your playlist don't synch up with your other devices. CD experience is much less streamlined than a smartphone. Perhaps nostalgia makes them seem cooler for you, but I am not sold.

I personally am somewhere between you and the author. I don't check _all_ the intermediary steps, but I do try to understand what it's doing [1] and follow the process. Mostly I let it do the changes itself without supervision at each step but when a coherent "chunk" of work is done, I go through it really thoroughly. In almost 90% of the cases after a chunk is done some adjustments are needed.

I find broad architectural design to be _better_ if you follow along in the process because you better understand the direction it's going earlier and you can shift the high level direction much earlier. Even if you check its steps, you can ask it for its take on high-level architectural aspects along the way, no problem. I think personal touch matters a lot though, because I naturally ask it and try to get the big picture image.

[1] I actually find it really instructive what tooling it uses to tackle a problem, I got to become a much better console user because of it

I'm not so sure. I think you can, you just need to intentionally drill into what you don't understand and it's exhausting. What I do agree with though is that I can't seem to build the ability to build it myself the same way as I would if I wrote it.

For example, I know my mental model works because I know what change I should do in order to get an effect and when I do the change, I get what I expect. But if I were to build myself something similar, I could not build it because the approach is somewhat out of my reach, I know it sounds weird, but it's hard to explain.

I am a bit confused which part you disagree with specifically. Reading AI responses and reviewing code seems to be what you propose as well.

Your example with MLIP is something that would not be prevented by this approach, during the planing phase, it would surface.

I guess the devil is in the details and the way you prompt it for starting the task matters.

But IMO you absolutely need to check the output, need to engage with what the model is doing, need to probe why something is built the way the model tries to build it.

I don't know why you would say that, my Xiaomi s6's wheel motor died, I was bummed about it. I ordered a replacement motor, and to my surprise, I only had to open one or two screws and the motor module popped right out. The module had a nice slitting connector. I put the new motor back in and I was done. The thing must be at least 8 years old by now and it's still chugging along. I now passed it on to my parents and it's cleaning their house.