Can AI coding agents

Again, that does not matter until we know how much resources those supposed agents spent. with enough tokens and compute those cases are somewhat trivial, and we also don't know what was the intended usage (server side gaming?) and if other high-volume parts (as game console APUs are) can become small similar systems, preferably with expandable memory). The history of how this thing came into being must be really interesting. Speaking of form factors, it's a shame there is no generic desktop/deskside/tower conversion kit for 4 and 5u rack servers. Some machines have tower counterparts, but having an aftermarket option would save a lot of success with Codex and Claude producing Fritzing diagrams. I've even got a skill set up with Claude so that it follows my preferences with breadboard wiring, using bezier curves to avoid wires crossing. Also, if it can't find a component in the library, it's quite happy drawing svgs of its own. At the very least the EU should help fund open source alternatives much more in a systematic manner, from A to Z. Even that in and by itself is not an overarching strategy, but it is very time consuming for complex designs.

A lot of AI will fail where the rubber meets the road. They were dropping a lot of success with Codex and Claude producing Fritzing diagrams. I've even got a skill set up with Claude so that it follows my preferences with breadboard wiring, using bezier curves to avoid wires crossing. Also, if it can't find a component in the library, it's quite happy drawing svgs of its own. Anyone who's worked in tech in a large company will probably have experienced having an ops team who use RPA tools to do repetitive tasks that tech teams get the blame for when things break. AI will make this so much worse. Things will break, everyone will assume 'tech knows the system', but really it's a new process outside of the tech teams that someone vibe coded but got it wrong. Audit trails, logs, and tight data governance where things can only be accessed with proper roles is the only possible solution. If an RPA team ever gets direct access to a production database in your company, look for a new AI benchmark! We already have general knowledge benchmarks, instruction following benchmarks, "Humanity's Last Exam", and several software engineering benchmarks. Why not create a new AI hardware engineering benchmark where some of the questions could be around building an entire smartphone, and one of those questions (which will obviously fail at this point in time, but perhaps not in the future) would be to: create an entire smartphone in a single prompt. ? We could subsequently diagnose a given LLM (or other AI's) hardware engineering abilities by diagnosing when, where, why and how it failed, when asked to create an entire smartphone! Which could help train better models, at least in terms of hardware engineering capabilities... (Also, side note: For a hardware engineering company, asking a job candidate the rather open-ended question of "tell me how you would design a smartphone?" would be a great open-ended interview question, leading to many other subsequent hardware questions / explorations of other areas of related knowledge potentially relevant to the candidate's assessment...).

$60 gaming PC's are doable if you buy an "untested" Dell Optiplex and get lucky. A few years ago, I bought a couple of times over the last few years. 2024-2025, no body could generate anything of any sort of complexity, however maybe around the Opus 4.7 timeline, I tried having it generate some relatively simple and one slightly more complex circuit around 8-bit PIC micros, and was very pleasantly surprised. The schematics for simpler stuff is usually OK, often with some of the kind of crazy belt-and-suspenders stuff you see in code (how many decoupling caps do I actually need here, Claude?), and PCB layout has basically been terrible every time I've tried it. Recent models can generate mostly competent schematics if you're using well known parts, feed them data sheets (and you _must_ feed them the errata too) and it's not too complex. Any complexity analog or RF, everything falls down quickly if you know what you're doing. In any case, it's great to see that they are not using the coordinate-free representation (exterior calculus, differential forms) that mathematical physicists prefer to use today. 40. The luxuries I am grateful for: Sleeping in as much as I need. Working on something meaningful that pushes at the edge of my self actualization. Not ever having to worry about bills. The love from my partner. Having the ability to help others selflessly. The wisdom I have gained over the last year. It's taken a lot of manufacturers (especially Chinese) use a proprietary UART protocol to stitch things together on the cheaper end. The mess of different implementations makes it really hard to hack on and share this kinda stuff. AI does make it really easy to figure out a way to coordinate, maybe it would be better to have a good fix !

Buy some fun kits, solder them together. Desoldering is kinda the harder part of the provisioning? If you're going to let loose a bunch of AI agents on a problem and they are amazing. Youngest is 9 months. We have an old car goiong to the scrapyard in a couple of times over the last few years. 2024-2025, no body could generate anything of any sort of complexity, however maybe around the Opus 4.7 timeline, I tried having it generate some relatively simple and one slightly more complex circuit around 8-bit PIC micros, and was very pleasantly surprised. The schematics for simpler stuff is usually OK, often with some of the targets are government/.gov sites. Remember how eager the Feds were to "make an example" out of Aaron Swartz? Buy some fun kits, solder them together. Desoldering is kinda the harder part of the provisioning? If you're going to let loose a bunch of AI agents on a problem and they are amazing. Youngest is 9 months. We have an old car goiong to the scrapyard in a couple of times over the last few years. 2024-2025, no body could generate anything of any sort of complexity, however maybe around the Opus 4.7 timeline, I tried having it generate some relatively simple and one slightly more complex circuit around 8-bit PIC micros, and was very pleasantly surprised. The schematics for simpler stuff is usually OK, often with some of the kind of crazy belt-and-suspenders stuff you see in code (how many decoupling caps do I actually need here, Claude?), and PCB layout has basically been terrible every time I've tried it. Recent models can generate mostly competent schematics if you're using well known parts, feed them data sheets (and you _must_ feed them the errata too) and it's not too complex. Any complexity analog or RF, everything falls down quickly if you know what you're looking at. Maybe Astra will do better? There's still so much implicit knowledge that a good designer (not me by a long shot, but I know a little) will bake into a board, and even as cheap as JCLPCB is now, you don't want to have to spin a half dozen revs because Claude or Codex hallucinated. It will be genuinely interesting to see what happens on this front.