171–180 of 191 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What a complicated way of saying 'yes' ;)
i thought it was an interesting enough question to merit deeper analysis; perhaps someone else who thinks so will read it
Can't wait for us to start seeing authentic 3d silicon tho. Gimme that 3mm^3 cube of magic. And beyond that, computronium.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
First: don't conflate NRE and tooling with the cost of something. Plastic spoons are close to free, but making a plastic spoon factory would be expensive. Second: you don't need most of that stuff. Dev boards that are a few bucks and debug probes for under $20 are credible and usable; fairly good compilers are free. > But too bad that's not really the standard for old technology and resources laying around the planet…
> Compare to doing all of this ages ago, where you'd have an 8051 with an expensive, crummy compiler and need a lot more tooling to do anything. That depends... back in the day, I could buy an (UV) EPROM programmer for several hundred $$. Or I could study the datasheets, build my own EPROM programmer for a fraction of that, and write some software. Guess which route I took. With uC's it wasn't much different, and sti…
Even in 80's dollars, that's a big opportunity cost as a grownup. Now you can buy a $3 STLink and call it good. It's changed.
He said nearly a thousand dollars, which isn't that hard to get to-- but it means that you're doing a pretty wide variety of stuff.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The post makes no mention of the actual MCU being used, they just note that it's interesting that the pinout matches the often-cloned PIC12. It's one additional piece of evidence hinting that it's probably an MCU die in there, rather than some kind of ASIC.
Matches in shape, yes. Is there any evidence it matches in function?
> There are rectangular regular areas that look like memory, there is a large area in the center with small random looking structure, looking like synthesized logic and some part that look like hand-crafted analog.
And the PIC12 is known to be a source of inspiration for dirt-cheap Chinese microcontrollers, see for example [0].
Hard evidence? No. But if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck...
[0]: https://cpldcpu.wordpress.com/2019/08/12/the-terrible-3-cent...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It could also be programmed during production. Clearly the LED manufacturer has the equipment to do wire bonding, so why not use the occasion to program it too? It'd be a bit comparable to the test and assembly process of the WS2812B, see [0] @ 2:30 or 6:10. [0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMjhJ9kcaU4
Anything is possible, I suppose, but burning EEPROM is an order of magnitude slower than anything these robots are doing.
Chips like these only have 1kB of flash - I'd be surprised if you couldn't program them in less than 100ms.
To whomever: I really, really, REALLY, did I say, "Really" miss the twinkle of old school incandescent blinking Christmas lights. Each light has a metal spring that heats as the light glows. Eventually, the spring warms enough to move and break the circuit, thus turning the lamp off. As the spring cools, eventually the circuit is made again, turning the lamp back on, and the cycle continues. And there is more! At fir…
It's just a panel of self-blinking LEDs. But they're cheap and low quality, so they start off all-on, sort of in sync, then after a while they're blinking "randomly".
So I think you want an LED string built out of lights like these?
I really hate these fake LED candles with a passion. Either put an actual candle on the table, or just put a small cosy light that doesn't flicker.
I like quite them. With LED candles, there's no danger of fires if you forget about the candle, or if you accidentally knocking them over, or if something accidentally goes over the candle. There is no mess to clean up as the candle melts down the wax. There is no worry about wind blowing out the candle. I don't like those small LED candles using disposable watch/button batteries. I use ones using standard AA batteri…
I really hate these fake LED candles with a passion. Either put an actual candle on the table, or just put a small cosy light that doesn't flicker.
My SO trialed a few different LED tealight ones to find some that "flicker right", ie not annoyingly (to her anyway). She then drilled out parts of the core of some large candles using a hole saw, and put these LED candles in there. So now she enjoys candles every evening without the fire risk, poor indoor air quality during winter season and the expense of new candles.
Seems to be that just about no-one are annoyed by continuous lights. And they can be cosy too. Moreover, with fancy new LED technology (sorry for the slight sarcasm) you can even have it in paper lamp shades, or whatever nicely done Art Nouveau creation you like.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Compare to doing all of this ages ago, where you'd have an 8051 with an expensive, crummy compiler and need a lot more tooling to do anything. That depends... back in the day, I could buy an (UV) EPROM programmer for several hundred $$. Or I could study the datasheets, build my own EPROM programmer for a fraction of that, and write some software. Guess which route I took. With uC's it wasn't much different, and sti…
> back in the day, I could buy an (UV) EPROM programmer for several hundred $$. Or I could study the datasheets, build my own EPROM programmer for a fraction of that, and write some software. Guess which route I took. Even in 80's dollars, that's a big opportunity cost as a grownup. Now you can buy a $3 STLink and call it good. It's changed. He said nearly a thousand dollars, which isn't that hard to get to-- but it…
And that's fine.
It's just that for me, on the other end of the spectrum, I prefer a little bit more adventure. Some less constraints. So, I need an "out-of-band" microchip programming solution for my aims.
Outside the kid world, you're required to be more knowledgeable about the way the world really works. You learn a whole lot more with out-of-band computer modifications than if you were to just plug and play some prepackaged handheld programming device into a little chip. You get more intimate with the microchip and its internals. You get concerned about its voltages and current needs, in order to achieve a proper relationship between your curiosity and the microchip's capabilities.
I want to dig into the raw power contained and hidden in unimposing millimeter (or centimeter) wide circuits. The re-programmability of microcontrollers or teeny-tiny computers, specifically.
There is no current documented solution for that. Beyond going your own way in a very long study and practice of electronics engineering and salvaging.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> back in the day, I could buy an (UV) EPROM programmer for several hundred $$. Or I could study the datasheets, build my own EPROM programmer for a fraction of that, and write some software. Guess which route I took. Even in 80's dollars, that's a big opportunity cost as a grownup. Now you can buy a $3 STLink and call it good. It's changed. He said nearly a thousand dollars, which isn't that hard to get to-- but it…
Yeah. There's a small set of prepackaged micro- or teeny- computer programming interfaces. Or the plug-and-play if you will. In fact, that small set of convenience products only serves a market of kids that want to play with toys. They're literally toys. Ten or fifty dollar ARM microprocessors or microcontrollers coming in a box with integrated debugging features and integrated WiFi modules. And their complementary t…
"I've spent a lot on embedded development. In large part, I've done this because I've sought to make things unnecessarily complicated and because I like playing with this stuff. I will deride the typical tools used today by most embedded developers as toys. I will use these views to try and support an assertion that computing isn't effectively 'free' in a monetary sense"
It's not like any of this is that complicated. I've spent plenty of time building my own programmers for things; I've bitbanged SWDIO, programmed EPROMs and micros with a parallel port and shift register or GPIOs on other micros; made pogo pin things, etc. If I were looking to get things done, odds are I can spend a few tens of dollars and just get going, and design in a part that costs a few tens of cents for a whole lot of computing in historical terms.
> I want to dig into the raw power contained and hidden in unimposing millimeter (or centimeter) wide circuits. The re-programmability of microcontrollers or teeny-tiny computers, specifically.
Very little of this is arcane on modern devices. Even a couple of decades ago the "hardest" thing in common use was the need for higher voltages for EEPROM erasure. IMO, where things get interesting is where you abuse peripherals to do things they weren't intended to do, but even that isn't usually equipment intensive-- a 4 channel oscilloscope and a debug probe will get you a long ways.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Matches in shape, yes. Is there any evidence it matches in function?
Read the article: > There are rectangular regular areas that look like memory, there is a large area in the center with small random looking structure, looking like synthesized logic and some part that look like hand-crafted analog. And the PIC12 is known to be a source of inspiration for dirt-cheap Chinese microcontrollers, see for example [0]. Hard evidence? No. But if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and q…
Just seemed like a rather large leap to assert based on pad pattern alone. /shrug. Whatever. Not really that important.