Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | more sgu999's commentslogin

The uninhabited ones? Aside from politicians, does anyone care really?


Not much more than reviewing the code of any average dev who doesn't bother doing their due diligence. At least with an AI I immediately get an answer with "Oh yes, you're right, sorry for the oversight" and a fix. Instead of some bullshit explanation to try to convince me that their crappy code is following the specs and has no issues.

That said, I'm deeply saddened by the fact that I won't be passing on a craft I spent two decades refining.


How is that relevant?


Illustrating that part of the parent comment:

> And those kind of people have difficulty believing this.


Any reason to believe they don't use one of the standard industrial protocols like the poorly named EtherNet/IP?


Licensing probably?

CAN (or one of its more modern variants) are historically more common in automotive. However with 2-wire Ethernet connections becoming more commonplace I do think you're right that more and more cars will be moving to ethernet fieldbus.

EtherNet/IP is not as robust for many applications as its competitors (PROFINET, EtherCAT) since it is not fully deterministic. EtherCAT is my personal favorite.


+1 - ethercat and profinet are the way.

Random guessing - Ethercat seems more likely to take over for CAN because CoE (canopen over ethercat) is so common.

It's very easy to turn CAN devices into ethercat ones.

Harder to turn them into profinet ones.

Seems like a more incremental path for car makers.

otherwise the main advantage of profinet is that you can treat it like regular ethernet (IE switches, etc), but not sure anyone cares in a car.


Please no EIP, its utter crap and designed by an OOP huffing committee. The only serious protocol is EtherCAT with honorable mentions for Sercos 3 and Ethernet Powerlink (CANopen over Ethernet).


Of all the (current) industrial protocols they could have picked, Ethernet/IP would be the worst.

Its only advantage is that it can coexist with other TCP traffic and run over standard switches, but that just results in unreliable fieldbus performance.


I really don't see why we should refrain from judging a corporation on its values. Morality applies to people, and corporations are (still) entirely driven by people. If Apple's C-suite and a couple activist shareholders wanted to make it an eco-friendly company, they surely could. Instead, Apple has spend many years lobbying against any kind of regulations around repairability.

> Apple had higher priorities such as miniaturization, performance, battery life, and ease of manufacture.

You forgot profit at the head of that list!


> If Apple's C-suite and a couple activist shareholders wanted to make it an eco-friendly company, they surely could.

They’re trying.

https://www.apple.com/environment/

> By focusing on recycled and renewable materials, clean electricity, and low-carbon shipping, we’re working to bring our net emissions to zero across our entire carbon footprint.

I agree that repairability is another avenue to help with eco-friendliness, but I also see the argument on some decisions (not all) that make Apple devices less attractive to theft if they can’t be used for parts. That bit is also partially consumer facing.

I don’t want to defend Apple too much, there’s a lot I dislike about Tim Cook’s tenure. But they deserve some credit (or at least moral incentive) for attempting an environmentally friendly future. The fact they’re being vocal about it means we can call them out when they do wrong too.

Microsoft, in comparison, blew its environmental goals with AI and just said “fuck it”. They pledged in 2020 to be carbon negative by 2030, and by 2024 they’re emitting 30% more than when they made the pledge. That shows how much their promises are worth: less than nothing.


I really don't see why we should refrain from judging a corporation on its values

We can judge them all we like for any reason we like. We just can’t expect a corporation to change its behaviour until it is incentivized to do so. Whether that’s through market forces or regulation, it does not matter. It’s all about incentives and disincentives.

I’m glad you brought up eco-friendly companies. Many people think this is an example of businesses behaving morally. It is not. Advertising your own morality is not a moral act. Eco-friendliness is just a marketing strategy aimed at eco-conscious consumers.

As for Apple’s lobbying efforts: they were a response to an incentive. We can’t expect the response from a corporation to always be exactly what we want. We should expect them to follow the path of least resistance. Apple likely calculated that it would be cheaper to lobby against and attempt to delay the regulation rather re-tool immediately. Perhaps they were even carrying out the R&D that enabled the iPhone 16’s repair scores at that time, and it wasn’t ready at the time.


> Perhaps they were even carrying out the R&D that enabled the iPhone 16’s repair scores at that time, and it wasn’t ready at the time.

That’s almost certain. These things are not designed overnight.


Honestly you can only judge private companies based on values, when the power is in the hands of shareholders a company become more a phisical phenomena than a human construct


Some dubious marketing choices on their landing page:

> Finding the Truth – Surprisingly, my iZYREC revealed more than I anticipated. I had placed it in my husband's car, aiming to capture some fun moments, but it instead recorded intimate encounters between my husband and my close friend. Heartbreaking yet crucial, it unveiled a hidden truth, helping me confront reality.

> A Voice for the Voiceless – We suspected that a relative's child was living in an abusive home. I slipped the device into the child's backpack, and it recorded the entire day. The sound quality was excellent, and unfortunately, the results confirmed our suspicions. Thanks iZYREC, giving a voice to those who need it most.


Hahaha yes, a Chinese idea of marketing. However has good battery, good mic, and you can use if offline as mass storage so nothing lost


I had a quick glance at it but for someone unfamiliar with Ros it's really not obvious how much this does. I'm building CV pipelines and I'm always looking for friendlier alternatives to gstreamer-rs for the bulk of the plumbing... Is it coming with synchronisation primitives in-between inputs for each node?


I'm not very familiar with gstreamer-rs so this comment might not be super useful, but NComm doesn't currently have any streaming capabilities. If everything is Rust though, the local publishers and subscribers use `Arc` shared pointers to send data between Nodes so sending large amounts of data between Nodes has very little overhead.


What are you doing with these 70TB of storage? I was meant to ask the other day when you reached the front page, but someone asked me a question during the meeting I was in.

(Your comment made me giggle so I went looking for more banter on a potential blog, sorry for creeping up)


I've answered that question here below the picture: https://louwrentius.com/71-tib-diy-nas-based-on-zfs-on-linux...


> most of those expensive high-end chips will just be shipped to Asia for assembly

I get the first part of your comment, but why wouldn't all the missing components be imported for assembly in the US? SMT lines in particular don't need that much cheap labour to operate. Even Brits can assemble PCBs!


Either you ship one component to Asia where it'll be combined with thousands of parts made by factories literally in the same city, or you're shipping all those thousands of parts over the US for assembly. Even with zero labor cost for assembly it's not hard to guess which option is cheaper and easier to manage.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: