> if a musician plays a piano in a closed room with no one to hear it, does it make a sound?
I get what you're after, but that's not a very good example. If a musician is playing an instrument, then of course the musician hears it.
Now, imagine instead that it's a player piano, and the lone "musician" is not actually playing anything at all, but hears the sound of the tones he/she had randomly generated by a "Whatever" machine, resonating through the actual struck strings, and resonant body of a piano, and the hair on the back of their neck stands on end. Then the music ends, the vibrations stop, and all that is left of the moment is whatever memory the "musician" retains.
Was that music while being heard by the "musician"? Is it music when it's just an melody in the "musician's" head? What if it's wasn't a piano at all, but just birds singing? Is it still music? If it is, is it "good" music?
Yes, the world is changing fast, and no, we humans don't seem to handle it well. I agree with the article in that sense. But I see no use in categorizing technology as dystopian, just because it's been misused. You don't have to misuse it yourself, or even use it at all if you don't want to. Complaining about it though... we humans are great at that.
Aside from the old-man-in-a-wooden-rocking-chair-on-a-porch tone, it seems to me that the author's beef is mainly about back-patting, and how the "Whatever" machines are flooding the pat-me-on-the-back platforms with "Content" that makes their own stick out less, resulting in fewer back-pats.
The last line of the article summarizes it perfectly.:
> Do things. Make things. And then put them on your website so I can see them.
I subscribe fully to the first two sentences, but the last one is bullshit. The gloom in the article is born from the authors attaching the value of "making things" to the recognition received for the effort. Put your stuff out there if you think it is of value to someone else. If it is, cool, and if it's not, well, who cares.
> I can’t remember exactly what they said, but it was something like: “I created a whole album, complete with album art, in 3.5 hours. Why wouldn’t I use the make it easier machine?” This is kind of darkly fascinating to me, because it gives rise to such an obvious question: if anyone can do that, then why listen to your music? It takes a significant chunk of 3.5 hours just to listen to an album, so how much manual work was even done here? Apparently I can just go generate an endless stream of stuff of the same quality! Why would I want your particular brand of Whatever?
This gem implies that the value of the music (or art in general) is partially or even wholly dependent on whether or not someone else thinks it's good. I can't even...
If you eliminate the back-patting requirements, and the stuff we make is genuine, then it's value is intrinsic. The "Whatever" machines are just tools, like the rest of the tools we use, to make things. So, just make your things and get on with it.
This is cool, but still lagging behind VS Code. I still can't the enterprise/premium models in VS (I can in VS Code) so no Claude 4 Sonnet. I even went so far as to try some C# dev in VS Code just to see how the Claude 4 deals with C# - Meh. In comparison, I just wrapped up a C++ microcontroller project in VS Code using agent mode and it was amazing. In retrospect I recognize that Claude will resort to grep and other text based tools. This works well when all the sources are included, less so with Nuget packages. If the models can aim better at intellisense tooling, they'd be more effective. IMO Copilot agents in VS are not quite there, but not far off.
It seems to me that the fundamental tenants of "education" are being disrupted here. I have always found learning in order to do things far less intuitive and interesting than doing things in order to learn. The incentive structures of our education systems are wonky (reflected in this post). Maybe they could use a good shakeup.
One step further. I just installed the Emporia Vue 2 in my distribution box. 16 CTs plus the three mains phases. It's ESP32 based and there is a great ESPHome project that you can flash it with for local only reporting. Add some HA and VictoriaMetrics, and now I can see how the whole house behaves with Grafana. Next up, Zero-Export using this data to steer my little OpenDTU solar plant. We live in such cool times!
I had a close friend with T1D who asked me to help him set up, and dial in a closed loop APS about two years ago. I took a deep dive into it and found it to be much, much more complicated than the PID type regulation I was expecting it to be. Plus, if I made a mistake, he might die. So I declined out of fear.
Unfortunately he did die just last March, alone in his apartment after slipping into a coma. His pump kept right on pumping him straight to his grave because the feedback loop of the system required human intervention, even if the human is incapacitated.
I wish I would have taken the risk, and I do hope this complicated, but solvable problem will be, and the solution made available to those who need it.
Yes, that's the role I'm looking to fill at the moment, but it's a small company, and the horizontal coupling is tight. A SWE here will be confronted with many hands-on EE and ME challenges as well (hence the on-site requirement). People who thrive in such environments are a good fit.
We designed and built the RIME antenna for this craft. It deploys to 16 meters long and weighs only 1.5 kg! See [1] for some more info.
If you are already in, or are willing to relocate to southern Germany, I'm looking for flexible, multi-domain software engineers to build out our small team here at SpaceTech. Check my profile if you are interested.
I'm a SWE at SpaceTech GmbH trying to get our solar array factory up and running, and I'm looking for another SWE to help me out ASAP.
We're a small company specializing in space projects. We've delivered hundreds of solar panels to help power the OneWeb constellation, and now were building out our solar array factory to produce thousands more. If you:
* feel comfortable in C# and computer vision (HALCON experience would be awesome)
* can think for yourself and work independently
* are not afraid to get close to the metal and move some axes
* are already in the Bodensee region, or are willing to relocate there
For folks interested in a more basic, low level, open source approach to this topic, check out Electrodacus [1]. I built a small system using the SBMS0 in my camper van and have been pretty pleased with the results. If having access to schematics and source code is important to you, have a look.
I just this week shared my Open-Source DIY Eurorack Module [1] with the world, so I can fully relate to the article.
It is a TON of work to pull off what Thea is doing here, and then to execute it all with such exquisit marketing on top. I'm impressed and wish her all the best in this fun (but crowded) market.
Same here, although I find the expense of Eurorack gear (and HP even more so) limits the depth of the rabbit hole a bit. Still, I spend a lot of time reading manuals for modules I don't even own, and even more time tinkering with circuits for my own modules. The notion that getting "out of the box" will make you more productive musically is a farce, a fun farce, but still a farce.
Being an exemplary candidate for this article, and a hobby musician myself, I listen to new music searching for that effect where on the first listen, the hair on the back of my neck stands on end. It's exceedingly rare to find that nexus of musical innovation and recognition which seems to cause it.
I find production and sound design are a good space to innovate in, while letting recognizable melodies, scales and rhythms keep everything digestible.
Eurorack modules are so expensive because they are mostly niche products made by one man shows (like Émilie Gillet). The exotic takes on synthesis and user interfaces are exactly what makes them worth every penny to me. Behringer is using their vertical integration to bring classic and well known synthesis concepts (and UIs) down to attractive price points. I don't think they are in conflict with most of the Eurorack folks (except perhaps Doepfer). I'd be surprised if they start cloning Make Noise modules.
If I might just gush here. The work made available here by Émilie has been just so damn valuable to me over the last few years. From simple but effective circuit design, to very efficient and easy to follow DSP code. I would never have fallen so deep into the eurorack rabbit hole without it. Whatever it is she ends up doing now, I hope she shares it with the world the same way she did with MI!
The village I live in has a "Kloster", with nuns making up about 15% of our population. The article is accurate in that the number of practicing nuns is sinking and certainly not sustainable.
Here they have diversified in a number of directions. There is a school, an old folks home, and a hotel. The picturesque location, combined with the historic buildings makes all these quite competitive, and successful. I'd go so far as to say the church here is thriving despite the declining popularity of dedicating your life to it.
Unequivocally yes. Most of the problems mentioned in the article simply do not apply to the single threaded, and (almost) deterministic nature of microcontrollers. The Teensy 4.0 clocks at 600Mhz with a true double precision FPU. This affords a very comfortable budget for DSP, even at single sample update rates.
Having this allows for straightforward code, not always relying on ARM intrisics - which I personally find much more enjoyable to write, and especially so to read.
The Teensy audio library is already fully featured, well developed, and the community is active. Now with the Teensy 4.0, I expect that to only improve.
I get what you're after, but that's not a very good example. If a musician is playing an instrument, then of course the musician hears it.
Now, imagine instead that it's a player piano, and the lone "musician" is not actually playing anything at all, but hears the sound of the tones he/she had randomly generated by a "Whatever" machine, resonating through the actual struck strings, and resonant body of a piano, and the hair on the back of their neck stands on end. Then the music ends, the vibrations stop, and all that is left of the moment is whatever memory the "musician" retains.
Was that music while being heard by the "musician"? Is it music when it's just an melody in the "musician's" head? What if it's wasn't a piano at all, but just birds singing? Is it still music? If it is, is it "good" music?
Yes, the world is changing fast, and no, we humans don't seem to handle it well. I agree with the article in that sense. But I see no use in categorizing technology as dystopian, just because it's been misused. You don't have to misuse it yourself, or even use it at all if you don't want to. Complaining about it though... we humans are great at that.