I'm a fan of the RP2040 chip. It's a good trade-off between being simple and capable. There are more powerful chips like the STM32's, but frankly there are too many variants and their data-sheets are nightmarish. And there are simpler chips like the Atmel AVRs, but the tooling sucks. ESP chips are also good, but I haven't kept up with them so can't give much advice.
You'll want a dev board, which has the chip plus some supporting components on it. The Raspberry Pi Pico is a good choice because it's so widely used and well documented.
If you care about Rust, you'll also want to get the Debug Probe. Worth the money.
If you don't care about Rust, any Adafruit dev board should run CircuitPython, have good documentation, and likely some projects you can start with. The reason I don't recommend these for Rust is because many of their dev boards do not "break out"/make available the connections for a debug probe.
Edit: Having a project you want to do is good, but just making an LED blink can be magical, too, especially if you haven't done anything with hardware.
I really like the idea... but I have to admit my first visceral reaction was "I hate this". I think it's because the tone and style is quite infantile/childish. A good experiment nonetheless. Maybe there's a middle ground somewhere?
You aren't wrong on either; Germany's tax law is insanely complex but also many people don't want to change the tax law as they can deduct a million and one things.
> NHTSA conducts frontal, side and rollover tests because these types account for the majority of crashes on America's roadways.
> IIHS tests evaluate two aspects of safety: crashworthiness — how well a vehicle protects its occupants in a crash — and crash avoidance and mitigation — technology that can prevent a crash or lessen its severity.
> As well as assessing how well cars protect their occupants, Euro NCAP tests how well they protect those vulnerable road users – pedestrians and cyclists – with whom they might collide.
That's misleading. They don't test for pedestrian safety as part of the normal tests. But they test for it generally, not specific to any model and use those results to inform their rules about what can and can't be sold. Same story with rollover testing.
This is why hood ornaments mostly died and flip up headlights fully died. The NHTSA doesn't write rules that ban specific features. You can do anything it meets the requirements. You can make brake hoses out of woven spaghetti if you want. It'll probably cost you a lot to get them to a performance point where they meet the rules though.
Furthermore, the NHTSA doesn't do most testing. The testing must be done and the testing needs to meet NHTSA standards but the OEMs are free to DIY it or outsource.
Which is why I quoted IIHS and other non-US testing.
> NHTSA standards
Which standards are for e.g. pedestrian safety? The hood ornament thing?
> That's misleading. They don't test for pedestrian safety as part of the normal tests. But they test for it generally
No, it isn't and no they didn't/don't. E.g. GAO report from 2020 [0]:
> NHTSA’s last substantial update of NCAP was in July 2008 (with changes effective for model year 2011 vehicles). This update established additional crash tests and technical standards to protect vehicle occupants, but did not include pedestrian safety tests.
Or from NHTSA itself in 2022 [1], although note this is a "proposal" and "recommendations":
> For the first time ever, NCAP includes technology recommendations not only for drivers and passengers but for road users outside the vehicle, like pedestrians. The proposal [...]. We look forward to reviewing the comments we receive and considering them as we complete this important work.”
They will/might, by adopting Euro NCAP [2]:
> This final decision notice adds a crashworthiness pedestrian protection program to the New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) to evaluate new model year vehicles’ abilities to mitigate pedestrian injuries. Based on its previous research, NHTSA concurs with and adopts most of the European New Car Assessment Programme’s (Euro NCAP) pedestrian crashworthiness assessment methods [...]
> These changes to the New Car Assessment Program are effective for the 2026 model year.
Nice try at guilt-tripping people doing on-call, and doing it for free.
But to parent's points: if you call a plumber or HVAC tech at 3am, you'll pay for the privilege.
And doctors and nurses have shifts/rotas. At some tech places, you are expected to do your day job plus on-call. For no overtime pay. "Salaried" in the US or something like that.
Yup, that is precisely what I did and what I'm encouraging others to do as well.
Edit: On-call is not always disclosed. When it is, it's often understated. And finally, you can never predict being re-orged into a team with oncall.
I agree employees should still have the balls to say "no" but to imply there's no wrongdoing here on companies' parts and that it's totally okay for them to take advantage of employees like this is a bit strange.
Especially for employees that don't know to ask this question (new grads) or can't say "no" as easily (new grads or H1Bs.)
You’re looking for a job in this economy with a ‘he said no to being on call’ in your job history.
This is plainly bad regulation, the market at large discovered the marginal price of oncall is zero, but it’s rather obviously skewed in employer’s favor.
If you or anyone else are doing on-call for no additional pay, precisely nobody is forcing you to do that. Renegotiate, or switch jobs. It was either disclosed up front or you missed your chance to say “sorry, no” when asked to do additional work without additional pay. This is not a problem with on call but a problem with spineless people-pleasers.
Every business will ask you for a better deal for them. If you say “sure” to everything you’re naturally going to lose out. It’s a mistake to do so, obviously.
An employee’s lack of boundaries is not an employer’s fault.
> It is completely normal for staff to have to work 24/7 for critical services.
> Not only is it normal, it is essential and required.
Now you come with the weak "you don't have to take the job" and this gem:
> An employee’s lack of boundaries is not an employer’s fault.
As if there isn't a power imbalance, or employers always disclose everything or chance their mind. But of course, let's blame those entitled employees!
As far as I can tell, the author isn't claiming e.g. all of Usenet or IRC was affected. Only that this issue has been happening to communities for a long time in many different online places.
Sorry, it's not even close to Rust. Or even C# or Java. It can't provide the same "fearless refactoring". It is better than being blind/having to infer everything manually. That's not saying much.
And that's assuming the codebase and all dependencies have correct type annotations.
> I feel like you're defending the system in Germany not because it's a better system as measured by some objective criteria but because it's the system that you identify with. Is there any sort of data to back up the assertion
This thread started by parent telling you how it is in Germany. Meanwhile, you have provided zero data or objective criteria yourself...
You'll want a dev board, which has the chip plus some supporting components on it. The Raspberry Pi Pico is a good choice because it's so widely used and well documented.
If you care about Rust, you'll also want to get the Debug Probe. Worth the money.
If you don't care about Rust, any Adafruit dev board should run CircuitPython, have good documentation, and likely some projects you can start with. The reason I don't recommend these for Rust is because many of their dev boards do not "break out"/make available the connections for a debug probe.
Edit: Having a project you want to do is good, but just making an LED blink can be magical, too, especially if you haven't done anything with hardware.
reply