I was worried somewhat until it become really apparent that small models that run locally can handle 99% of technical computer crap when given a decent tool set harness and net access.
so, to answer your question more practically, during this outage a luna agent of mine fell back to a local bonsai 2 model hosted on my desktop, and the work still got done just fine, just took longer.
>If it’s not worth writing, it’s not worth reading.
that's why I keep all logging thoroughly disabled across all systems.
Saves a lot of room.
I don't get these new logic statements everyone is coming up with against AI systems.
If the excuse is "I meant literature!" well then I argue that where that line is drawn in the sand is exactly the question these kind of black and white expressions strolling entirely past.
(and that's actually the important question; where does it become neglectful for a human to throw an AI into the drivers seat wrt human read media?)
That’s a funny ad absurdum. But let’s be honest: if a coworker dumps a hundred lines of logs into a Slack channel without contextualization the reaction would understandably be ‘wtf am I supposed to do with this?’ Now what I’ll sometimes get is an accompanying AI-generated analysis of the logs. Out of diligence I’ll read them. To their credit, they usually mention the issue, but it’s buried down deep among so much noise. My time feels wasted. Eight paragraphs of Claudish could have been one sentence. My coworkers could have used AI to reduce it down to that one sentence and then rewrite it in their own words. They chose not to because that would have taken more time for them, not realizing the burden now shifts to me (the more expensive senior engineer).
My personal line in the sand is human-to-human communication. I’m fine with AI use on either end, but keep the channel clean. I see it as a sign of respecting each other’s time.
Btw, there are pre-genAI cases of generated text. Webshop product descriptions and sports news summaries, for instance – both of those are easily templatized. I guess the difference is there is no human name attached to them and they’re fairly short
I prefer the Fran Lebowitz suggestion : a separate plane with no seats for children, they can float round the whole trip from takeoff to landing. also let's option the adult plane with opening windows so we can smoke again.
what's the meaningful distinction now? It isn't all SoC anymore and it has had a linux capable MMU since S3, even if it required a lot of work.
The only real difference at this point is pure numbers, and i'm not that keen on defining microcontrollers as "those things with less ram than an SBC.", and if it's a microcontroller because it requires bare-metal flashes; well then I point to the older S3 MMU boards running busybox.
A single board computer contains an application processor, not a microcontroller. They have very different design goals.
A microcontroller is a type of processor that offers very fast startup, predictable timing and direct access to hardware peripherals. In contrast to application processors that are intended to run an operating system, a microcontroller will not have OoO execution, multiple tiers memory (eg cache and dram). Usually they also lack an mmu and multiple privilege levels of execution (although that seems more common on riscv microcontrollers). All this means microcontrollers aren’t designed to run Linux (even if someone does figure out how to do that) or clock in the gigahertz, but instead provide very predictable low latency execution required for managing real time systems. For example they might need to operate a set of mosfets with microsecond accuracy to efficiently and safely control a motor.
I feel like you are deliberately misunderstanding me. I’m not saying that these define a microcontroller vs application processor, but rather that they stem from differing design goals. Presence or absence of features is illustrative not proof. All you need to do is look up what the A in cortex A stands for, or look at the data sheet of the S31 to see it is classified as an MCU by the manufacturer. I do admit that the feature set of this MCU blurs the lines somewhat at 500mhz with cache hierarchy and psram, but the ability to run from on-chip sram with dedicated performance budget keeps this from losing suitability for true realtime tasks.
SBC is a PCB which includes ports for power, I/O, often other parts like sensors on it. Esp32 is a MCU. You can put an Esp32 on a PCB and call it an SBC. (Although semantically SBC usually refers to something that runs a GPOS, but perhaps that's flexible or changing)
It's much more difficult to buy the ESP32 as an MCU than it is to buy it as a SBC, with ports for power and I/O already on a PCB (often with through pins, to land on another PCB, like the arduino hats). And I don't mean "it's difficult because you have to solder" - I mean "it's difficult to find many places that sell it".
Ex - go check amazon, they're all the "dev kit" versions of ESP32.
Hell - even Alibaba has an overwhelming majority of the kits in the SBC form, rather than the straight MCU (although they at least exist in that form there, unlike amazon).
Even on digikey... there are like 4 listing for the straight MCU, and hundreds of listings for PCB board versions.
So I think for most consumers purchasing these... functionally they end up buying a form factor that is much closer to SBC than MCU.
---
From my perspective... I'm old enough to remember when Arduinos were the hot shit in this space, and now ESP32 is basically the same value prop at 1/10 the price point (or better, if you are actually willing to solder it to the PCB yourself... then you get down to 1/50th the price point).
>It's much more difficult to buy the ESP32 as an MCU than it is to buy it as a SBC, with ports for power and I/O already on a PCB (often with through pins, to land on another PCB, like the arduino hats). And I don't mean "it's difficult because you have to solder" - I mean "it's difficult to find many places that sell it".
1. Go to mouser.com
2. Type ESP32 into the search bar
3. There's your part.
Its difficult to buy a very specific nut or bolt from Amazon (their nut/bolt search interface doing precisely nothing it appears to be intended to do). That doesn't mean McMaster-Carr doesn't exist. You're just going to the wrong store.
If you're in particular referring to how hard it is to find a PDIP package (that is, a through-hole package) for an ATMEGA MCU, that's because they don't make them anymore. Insofar as I'm aware, Espressif has never made a through-hole ESP32 module, but maybe they made one with castellated edges?
But an ESP32 module is as easy to come by as a surface-mount ATMEGA328P. Which is to say, very easy.
A few notes: if you buy non-module package (i.e MCU itself) then you would need to certify it with FCC (or you local FCC alternative) yourself, so most of vendors buy modules. Those vendors don't go to amazon to buy those because these make sense only if they manufacturing their own boards.
Last time I checked digikey had every module version avaiable for every version. You get hundreds of other versions because there are more variations of those.
It's not "difficult" at all if you aren't looking in the wrong places. Espressif has sold billions of them so apparently everyone else is figuring it out just fine.
The tangible hardware difference is the MMU. S3 didn't have a proper one. This new chip does. But the biggest difference is the intent. Microcontrollers focus on peripherals and are used for interfacing, data conversion and signal processing. They're meant to run either bare metal firmware or small RTOS. OTOH microprocessors have in addition to an MMU big caches, high IPC numbers, wide bus lanes, everything you need to run different workloads as fast as possible.
Perhaps the most straightforward difference is right in the name — a single-board computer is a whole board. A microcontroller refers to just the IC itself. The thing that's on the article's picture is a dev board for an MCU, not the MCU alone. That's just the chip at the top with the Espressif branding.
Now, if you want to argue that the difference between a dev board and an SBC is kind of vague, I agree on that front. I'd argue that the distinction is mostly the vendor's intent. E.g. if I sell the ICs in bulk and _also_ sell a board with that IC, it's probably a dev board. If I source the ICs from somebody else, only sell the assembled boards, and ship a general-purpose OS with it, it's probably an SBC. With sufficiently powerful hardware (like this thing seems to be), you could use a dev board as an SBC, and that is basically what this article is all about.
it's not just literary authorship, it's pretty easy to spot LLM driven programming paradigms too, especially if you look at the test suites of a given package.
I want a glasses-with-puck style like this with a great fov and resolution good enough for crisp text work and nothing else. for sound I just want it to be small enough to wear with headphones. It would be fantastic if I could run a real OS on it. I just want it for productivity, I dont care about the latest 3d gimmick movie or VR apps.
The closest thing so far is a Bigscreen Beyond 2 w/ a laptop if it wasn't for the fact that you need a base station for the damn thing.
I know my request is a fantasy right now, but I put this our there in case someone that could make it less of a fantasy reads this.
100% on the same page. I don't want a device to take me on a virtual rollercoaster of half-*ssed entertainment in exchange for my identity, I just want something that can at least substitute my monitors in a more compact way.
Same here. I've been looking for a way to bring my multi-monitor setup with me to work when I travel, VR glasses would be the most portable solution. But I won't buy it while it needs a subscription of any kind, I want it to work like my LG monitor: dumb, doesn't need software to use (drivers would be fine, 'apps' won't), haven't had any sort of mandatory update since I bought it years ago, I just plug it and it works.
I work with Rayneo Air 4 Pro - they have HDR/120fps displays (image quality is top-notch and they're bright enought to work even with direct sunlight). They don't have battery or software, it's plug-in-play USB-C external screen essentially. It's more than enough for travel, or for sitting straight while working cafe, for privacy reasons or working outdoors. I even tried them while walking in the forest (with laptop in the backpack and using voice input).
Drawback - they don't do 3DoF tracking, so the screen just follows where you're looking, you can't change screen size, and no multimonitor setup. They have IMU sensors, though. It's possible to create your own virutal monitor software (or use someone's else like RealWarp), but IMU drift is hard to beat and experience is far from perfect. So I stick with 'just one high-quality screen' for now, and to be honest it was some quality-of-life improvement for me.
PS. Couple of weeks ago there was new release from RayNeo, which supposedly have 3DoF and same quality. Haven't tried those.
How clear and usable is the image for productivity? Is it comparable to a small laptop screen or more like a regular 24 inch screen or something else? Are the optics clear enough?
It's more like 27" screen. Most people (including me) don't see one of the edges clearly (it gets too far into periphery). Like 5% of the right and bottom edge can be hard to see without moving. With 3DoF you would be able to just move your head, but without there 2 options:
- somehow push glasses closer to the eyes (some reported that they replaced nose pads for that)
- just accept it (my case - I just make terminal screen slightly smaller in height from the full height, and it's fine)
Again, the screen is fantastic. Even overkill for text-related stuff (reading, coding, terminal, etc). It's FullHD HDR 10-bit OLED. I do edit videos Davinci with these glasses. They target it for gaming and movies.
ive seen that a lot in recent gpts and bonsai/qwen models when they invoke their vision system/modality , or when they ask their harness to do so for them.
I understand the axe to grind, but what about their spy tech hurts durability or warranty prospects; the thing your comments' parent was talking about?
Do you not think it's relevant to mention to people that the appliance that they have in their house might be listening to everything they're saying and uploading it to LG's servers? A quick Google search shows that LG has WiFi enabled dishwashers/washing machines.
If you can disable the spying, then it's an irrelevant factor in the purchasing decision.
Would you prefer an A-grade quality appliance that can spy but that spying can be disabled, or a B-grade appliance that doesn't spy but needs replaced in three years?
his dads' books didn't give any strong warnings other than we may grow 'overdependent'.
the sentient evermind enslaving millions thing was his sons concept.
reply