ckemere

I hit my weekly limit in 2 days for the first time yesterday. I suspect that this is slight of hand.

We're off the front page, so I don't know if you're still responding here. I just put in a fairly trivial project to evaluate pricing - a half dozen passives and two transistors on a ~1x1in pcb. My JLC quote is $74 (incl tariff) and yours is $599/$923. JLC will ship Nov. 1 via DHL, you ship either Nov. 19 or Nov. 9. So the summary is that China is 1 week faster and 10x cheaper. Maybe the bottom line is that there's a set up fee that's dominating this price. If that's the case, it would be really valuable to be up-front about it because that would help identify use cases where y'all's service could be economical.

I've been tracking PCB manufacturing in the US for some time (I think I opened my CircuitHub account ~10 years ago) because I love the idea of bringing manufacturing back to the US. But some mild negative feedback - I'm unimpressed by the over promising about pricing and timing that I've seen in this thread; it DID cause me to look at you guys again, but at the same time reduced my trust level. I recognize that there are economies of scale to be had here and maybe things will get better with more business so I wish you the best!

I’ve had really good results recently with Fable 5.1. The typical process that it uses for routing is to pin a few key traces (using the kicad python api) and then use freerouting for the others. I’ve also noticed that if I push hard for “carefully designed” routes, eg for a 38 pin connector, it will write code and make much better looking results.

I’d say that at the moment it still requires you to look at its results and point out their weaknesses and/or route a couple of traces yourself and then hand it back.

This project from a couple of weeks ago is a great example. I’m new to ST MCUs: in addition to the PCB, Claude brought up the firmware and driver. https://github.com/ckemere/hub-imu

I’ve always been impressed with Deisseroth. Since the early optogenetics days he always was excited to share materials. (I have fond memories of driving back from a visit to Stanford with vectors plucked from their freezer, what MTA!?) And he was eager to promote young scientists not only in his own lab but also in others (like myself) that were innovating in these spaces. And in every talk I’ve heard, he’s shared credit really openly.

There’s a big contrast there to how some scientists operate - hoarding ideas, being cautious in collaboration, demanding credit. I’m so pleased for him!

I suspect some people would still focus more of their time on winning the superbowl.

Can we call these the “Make America Better” faction? Or just “Make America Great”?

Any news since January???

Has anyone seen broader reporting on the rest of the science budget?

Please post - I’d like to upvote a twitter alternative

And extra extra credit for NGOs (and startups) that openly advertise "competitors".

"The river interceptor design was clearly based on existing solutions" like Mr. Trash Wheel, Dr. Richards says. "Rather than work with the organizations who had successfully been removing trash from rivers for years, they ‘reinvented’ a similar design, at a much higher cost, and claimed to be innovators."

This is a great summary of lots of flashy commercial and non-profit work. Proposal for a product: AI-assisted "Who is already doing this?" database. Extra credit for linking to audited annual reports.

But what about the later "Repeat previous question" prompts???

Perhaps a huge tell about national strategy is the fact that the owner has $10s of millions to loan to the company? US economic structure in post WWII era has increasingly focused on return on capital (and value extraction). How can that compete in long term with an economy which prioritizes reinvestment *in industry*?

Voice of American *capitalists* used to the idea of investing capital to generate rent. Maybe AI can rebalance the market of capital and individual labor.

I found this article frustrating. In my experience, the students who participate in the “co-creation of a contract” would likely also have done their best to comply with Professor induced rules. The challenge is the 10-20% who, stressed and overworked, will be just as likely to ignore this contract as any other. I would have liked to understand how the situation is changed compared to no rules at all…

Comparing with China, I’d be curious about whether their companies face the same return-on-capital forces that US (and to a lesser extent western) companies do. So when we outsource to them, it’s to a vendor who is not needing to promised 10%+ returns. As I understand it, this is because the central government exerts pressure on banks to make loans at low rates, so that capital can be raised more easily for targeted industries.

I agree that onshoring is likely impossible without some sort of contextual reimagining of US industry.

Amazon warehouses still have a huge number of ununionized workers doing manual labor

Training data of task completion. See, e.g., robots doing backflips. Presumably there’s an optimal robot for gymnastics but if you start with humanoid form you can train based on many videos of human movement. The alternative - world model sim with physics and loss functions- perhaps ends up being too unconstrained when you add in optimization of the robot form…

Upvoted them both. I’m an ECE prof, and the video summed up why working with students is so rewarding.

Lots of complaints about corruption. It’s worth imagining how you would run a very low income developing country. Remittances and tariffs are the easiest items to tax for revenue. I’d love suggestions for better alternatives…

Curious about the design choice. Why not use the TI parts with integrated microcontrollers rather than two separate chips? Or even a FPGA with integrated ARM9 like the Zynq family?

The obvious question I would have asked: given the concern that this may not be ethical if the brains are still “alive” AND the concern that a brain separated from the body probably doesn’t function these same, why wouldn’t we test things in living monkeys (instead of mice)???

It seems that the likelihood is high that the right animal model would yield superior data???

Further counter argument- It seems that (elite) undergraduate students care about their professors research (versus just teaching). Else Harvey Mudd would be much much harder to get into compared with MIT?

> and both sides want it to a degree

Is "it" the propaganda (useful to politicians for achieving political power) or reunification? My sense is that the number of Taiwanese that are enthusiastic about reunification has probably bottomed out in recent decade(s)???

To the people who are thinking about other languages, "Lexical decoding" - recognition of a word during reading was the strongest predictor of reading compression (as opposed to phonological).

Restating the highlighted result: Gc ("Comprehension-Knowledge") had the strongest effect on both lexical and phonological decoding. Knowing a word makes it easiest to comprehend when reading. This is probably completely obvious, but the broader point is that rich conversations with students that involve teaching them lots of words will improve their reading.

Only partially supported interpretation/application - All this business about phonics will only take you so far if the adults in a kids life (including their teachers) are not talking to them richly about a lot of stuff. Asking teachers to do a lot of rote repetition risks cutting out the really important part of school where students are actually building vocabulary. Teachers that use/teach large vocabularies may be unexpectedly more effective at teaching reading.

I’d love to take that bet. My deed (in Texas) states that my lot is subject to the rules of the subdivision which include a number of zoning style restrictions. (They’re called “deed restrictions” and are very common AFAIK.)

The subdivision rules are changeable only with a supermajority vote. I believe the city (Houston in my case) is prohibited by the state from unilaterally changing them.

(I wouldn’t mind more free property rights!!! I find TX “liberty” is often biased towards $$$)

Why can’t the markets just forbid transactions that happen within 48 hours of resolution?

The title really should specify “to teach remotely”. And I think more broadly the context is the dream that widespread internet would make it easier to educate people “at scale” (meaning for less money per student).

So maybe the real question is why we ever expected “teaching at scale” to be effective.

I think that it’s quite clear that for an individual, curious student, the ability to use modern LLMs probably makes the ability to be 1-1 tutored (by a human!) cheaper/better. But I don’t think anyone claims that watching random videos on the internet will be as effective for LeBron James as having a personal trainer focused on him.

It seems like the overriding issue is to understand whether students need to take courses they’re not interested in. If the answer is yes, perhaps we need find ways of having these topics be taught by tutorial…

Wasn’t great. Would love a second attempt focused on distilling not individualist v collectivist or immigration.

(Except for relevant connections around sharing your creations with neighbors and/or internationally inspired novel spirits.)