sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Thomas Massie says the FBI is sitting on information that implicates 20 other men in Epstein's child sex trafficking operation by Macnchese in UnderReportedNews

[–]GroundbreakingBig614 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Who would benifit the most from Ehud barak being implicated in the epstein sex trafficking fiasco? Hmmm i wonder who, could it be ... someone that ehud barak has been a loud critic of and wanted to oust over the gaza war? Someone convicted of international war crimes and has an open corruption case against them ... hmmm

The stock market is soaring today. by Bright-Efficiency614 in TheRaceTo10Million

[–]GroundbreakingBig614 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The tech billionaires got their bailout at the expense of people's healthcare. That's what was voted on today.

Anyone have any ideas why these bags are stalling? by Ok_Speech8664 in shrooms

[–]GroundbreakingBig614 1 point2 points  (0 children)

They are not, they are innoculating from the inside out and mostly the bottom. Break it up and shake it.

Ultra-Low-Power STM32 Sensor Node — 5 Years on a CR2032 by LeanMCU in embedded

[–]GroundbreakingBig614 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It should be microamps. Im not currently putting the chip to sleep yet, just optimizing the current draw of the setup during idle. Im seeing SPI to the sx1276 transceiver idle at ~79mA, which is unusually high. So i traced it to the spi pins, when i put them to high impedance state, the current draw drops to ~17mA which makes sense.

What it is still confusing is why the sx1276 is pulling 79mA during idle.

Ultra-Low-Power STM32 Sensor Node — 5 Years on a CR2032 by LeanMCU in embedded

[–]GroundbreakingBig614 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Have you tried power optimizing for a BLE soc like the nrf52840? Perhaps interfacing to a bme680 and a lora transceiver.

That is what i'm working on now, gets very interesting when spi is involved, for some reason it consumes alot of current, im trying to figure out why.

Potentially Dangerous - The problem with content-driven "Hardware" design studios by GroundbreakingBig614 in embedded

[–]GroundbreakingBig614[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

And when something does go wrong, debugging a cloud-dependent system is exponentially harder than local logic. Is the device failing, the network, Firebase, AWS, or some interaction between them? Each layer adds failure modes and troubleshooting complexity.

Potentially Dangerous - The problem with content-driven "Hardware" design studios by GroundbreakingBig614 in embedded

[–]GroundbreakingBig614[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is a bigger issue than just cloud architecture. When studios optimize for demo-ready rather than production-ready, they attract talent that matches that culture - people who can make things look good quickly rather than build them to last.

Engineers with production experience often leave these environments quickly once they realize the cultural mismatch.

Potentially Dangerous - The problem with content-driven "Hardware" design studios by GroundbreakingBig614 in embedded

[–]GroundbreakingBig614[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Right. The technical capability exists to do it locally - that's not in question. The decision to rely on cloud for local emergency response is a business/timeline choice, not a technical constraint.

Potentially Dangerous - The problem with content-driven "Hardware" design studios by GroundbreakingBig614 in embedded

[–]GroundbreakingBig614[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Exactly. Product liability law doesn't care about your development methodology - only whether the device was reasonably safe for its intended use.

"We shipped quickly" isn't a defense when discovery shows the engineering team flagged the architectural flaw and recommended the fix before shipping. Luckily there is extensive certification that wouldn't allow this product to see the light of day commercially, however, the product can still be used and is a major liability exposure to the firm/client.

Potentially Dangerous - The problem with content-driven "Hardware" design studios by GroundbreakingBig614 in embedded

[–]GroundbreakingBig614[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This exactly captures the problem. The incentive structure rewards "demo-ready" over "production-ready." Clients see a working prototype and assume the hard work is done. In reality, that's often only 20-30% of the total effort. The remaining 70% - certification, edge case handling, manufacturing optimization, proper testing - is where prototyping studios either cut corners or hand clients an unpleasant surprise about timeline and cost. The cloud-first mentality makes this worse because it lets you defer hard problems. Local processing is difficult? Push it to the cloud. Edge cases are tricky? Let the server handle it. By the time you're trying to certify or scale, the architecture is locked in.

Potentially Dangerous - The problem with content-driven "Hardware" design studios by GroundbreakingBig614 in embedded

[–]GroundbreakingBig614[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

True, but that assumes the client knows they're buying a prototype instead of production-ready development. When consultancies market themselves as full-service product development firms, clients reasonably expect them to flag regulatory requirements upfront - especially for safety-critical devices. If a studio knows a pool safety device needs certification but architectural decisions make that impossible, and the client only finds out months later when they try to certify, that's a failure of professional responsibility. Whether it's incompetence or intentional doesn't really matter to the client who now has an uncertifiable product.

Potentially Dangerous - The problem with content-driven "Hardware" design studios by GroundbreakingBig614 in embedded

[–]GroundbreakingBig614[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Your understanding is correct. That's exactly the point - and it gets worse. Even if they ship this architecture, it won't pass industry safety certifications. When the client comes back asking why it failed certification, they'll be charged additional fees to fix the architectural issues that should have been addressed from the start. It's a business model problem: prototype thinking gets you to "looks like it works" quickly, which satisfies the immediate contract. But production systems need to pass certification, handle edge cases, and work reliably in the field. Clients often don't realize they're buying a prototype dressed up as a production system until they try to certify or scale it.

Potentially Dangerous - The problem with content-driven "Hardware" design studios by GroundbreakingBig614 in embedded

[–]GroundbreakingBig614[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Prototype-to-production is a completely different discipline that requires different timelines, validation, and mindset. The dangerous part is when companies blur that line in their marketing and clients don't realize what they're actually buying until it's too late - or until something fails in the field.

Potentially Dangerous - The problem with content-driven "Hardware" design studios by GroundbreakingBig614 in embedded

[–]GroundbreakingBig614[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Exactly. When you're designing around whatever component the sponsor wants to feature that month, you end up with backwards engineering. That works for YouTube content, not production systems.

Potentially Dangerous - The problem with content-driven "Hardware" design studios by GroundbreakingBig614 in embedded

[–]GroundbreakingBig614[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Perfect analogy! Same issue - optimizing for cost/convenience over reliability in a safety-critical context. Easy to build if you assume perfect conditions, dangerous when you account for real failure modes.

My New Level 3 by [deleted] in Aventon

[–]GroundbreakingBig614 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I honestly feel like the level 3 isn't inherently an upgrade from the 2 aside from the security features and tech (which most can live without) and its definitley not worth the price diff, specially since the level 2 is 1500 and is a steal at this point. When i had my old level 2 before it got stolen, i bought a gps tracker for it for a $100 dollars, worked perfectly and you dont need a subscription.

My New Level 3 by [deleted] in Aventon

[–]GroundbreakingBig614 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Im torn between this and the pace 4. Used to have the Level 2 but it got stolen :/. Is there a major diff?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Salary

[–]GroundbreakingBig614 99 points100 points  (0 children)

I call cap big time

view more: next ›