emcrazyone

ha, you don't sound like you have kids. My kids love Roblox... You're birthday is coming up, what do you want? Roblox gift card. Grandma wants to get you a birthday, xmas, ____ gift, what do you want? Get me a roblox gift card or robucks as they are called. My kids now design shrits and sell them online and take the money and spend it on roblocks. Roblocks is also a way for kids to connect online. For example, mine talk to their cousins that live in another state and their friends from a neighborhood we moved away from.

just to complete the story, SCSI does have ATA command pass through. That is ATA commands over SCSI interface. In Linux, the libata library provides this implementation.

There are SATA drives that understand SCSI over ATAPI albeit in a limited way just to be clear.

you forgot 9 weeks off every summer, paid holidays, no contributions into social security, and some get classroom aids, they don't design curriculum (it's purchased), throw in common core for good measure....

why stop with YC? There are other VCs that might pull the trigger, no?

I'm a senior software develop & architect with two degrees. Does that make me over qualified for Apple software jobs?

funny that they have power down to the milli-watt and it's so stable. Anyone know what the update rate is? Is it with every second?

Cool looking web site

just out of curiosity...

if it's an eval board, then do they provide schematics which are typical of other eval board producers?

Having the schematic might aid in getting things working assuming the MAC <-> PHY circuitry supports what you want to do.

hmm, sounds suspicious, in that the seat sensor was disabled? Even our vehicles won't move, when in gear if no one is in the seat. Seat senors cut the drive train. Even my 15 year old el-cheap-o Sears garden tractor does the same thing: cuts the engine off if I stand up out of the seat while in gear.

"Someone has to do it. What makes John Deere's embedded software engineers more qualified..."

Simple, John Deere, probably like us, has spent more testing the software than you could ever do on your own.

You can't judge complex software just by looking at it. It must be tested. People who fail to understand this wind up making these uneducated comments. Go study ISO26262 and the MTB calculations required to pass it and maybe you'll change your tune.

Tested software runs on real vehicles and simulators at large companies, as I stated, running into the multi-million dollar price range. There is zero amount of code inspection the general public can do that would give the same assurances you get through testing.

Bottom line: just looking at code is not enough. You must test it. This is unit tests, simulations, field tests, harsh temperature, vibration, power cycle, high side/low side power distribution, code coverage, etc... None of this is possible by you inspecting code.

I actually agree with this statement and to your credit, a lot of the design work I do follows some of this.

Keep in mind that these are factories on wheels which means not only do we consume a tremendous amount of data, we also generate it. For example, 3D maps are built on the fly to show the customer where product has been sprayed, seeds planted, etc... On these vehicles, it's quite typical to see 1GB Data/hour generated which for an embedded device with no traditional hard drive, that's a lot. Flash memory is susceptible to extreme heat/cold so we have to be creative in this regard too (I can't talk much about this but suffice to say it's challenging).

That being a case of many, there is always a trade-off between performance and what you can reasonable keep separated either within the same PCB or between separate modules.

Thus, as much as I would like to keep separated, you simply can't sometimes. Current state of the art only allows for so much.

The non-computer people comment refers to the folks in the video; not this forum.

You also seem to be conflating right to repair vs. right to inspect code because you feel you have the right to do so for some reason (safety, don't like how it works, etc...). You don't have that right just like you don't have the right to walk into an assembly plant to see how your vehicle is assembled.

"The code, safety critical code especially, should be clear and should itself document the quirks of whatever it interacts with"

Agree and it does and we are audited by a 3rd party trained to looked at code written according to functional safety guidelines (ISO26262). Companies, like mine, don't have resources to respond to folks untrained on such matters. And for the non-safety aspects of the code, that's our intellectual property and our competitive advantage.

"Embedded has a culture of punting on abstractions due to the pervasiveness of cross cutting and global concerns"

You have data or proof of this or are you just talking from your personal experience? I assure you we take safety very seriously. Multiple millions are spent, as I said above, on testing to make sure code performs as expected; especially when a 3rd party audit and billions are on the line and, more importantly, the safety of our customers. You're inspection of the same code simply can't compete with the level of testing & auditing. You're really kidding yourself if you think otherwise.

"but 32-bit devices with dynamic allocation performing high level logical processing" Certain ASIL ratings dictate thou shall not perform dynamic allocations. You don't appear to be up to speed on functional safety matters.

"unreasonable is to force purchasers and users of heavy equipment to blindly trust the software controlling those devices."

Not true, disagree. It's unreasonable to assume we don't take safety seriously and demand to see our code when you can look at any company's functional safety audit records (they are public). To presume a right to change the code because you're not happy with some aspect of some functionality or you're concerned about safety is not your right and no company has the resources to support these requests from the general customer or public base. Moreover, as I already pointed out, it's our IP.

IP type code in this field is heavily guarded. Swath generation, swath acquisition, path planning are all very interesting algorithms that represent a company's IP.

perhaps, but if you sold the equipment without telling the new owner they were running your code and they got hurt or killed, as I said above, companies don't want tie up their resources fighting these claims or dealing with it in the first place.