Few years ago I made a custom RGB LED rope light controller using ESP32 C3 DevKit and Rust embedded, connecting light to homeassistant via MQTT auto discovery. Was surprisingly easy to get started as someone who had limited experience with embedded programming, and only hobby Rust experience.
But the supported hardware in Rust crates was limited at the time and C3 dev kits weren’t widely available, so I never used it for anything. HAL support has only gotten better since then.
I may try to resurrect that project now with Pico 2 and Matter.
Perhaps related? My main fiber WAN went out few hrs ago, failing over to Starlink backup. Discovered it’s a cloudflare issue, as my multi-wan setup tests against 1.1.1.1, which suddenly stopped responding (but only from my fiber ISP). Switched to testing 8.8.8.8 to restore.
If it weren’t for recent cloudflare outages, never would have considered this was the problem.
Even until I saw this, I assumed it was an ISP issue, since Starlink still worked using 1.1.1.1. Now I’m thinking it’s a cloudflare routing problem?
Steam machine so close to perfect, but 1x USBC and 1GB Ethernet are huge misses for a 2026 device. Also needs more VRAM. May be better to just do custom SFF build.
I'm confused about language, as "loans" to me do not equal "bailout". The equating of the two seems odd, as many government incentives use loans that pay back with high interest, so governments MAKE money on those kinds of deals.
Also clear that the 1.4T figure includes some accounting for spend that does not come directly from OpenAI (grid/power/data infra for example). Obviously some government involvement is needed, but more at EPA/State/Local level to fast track construction permits, more-so than financial help from Treasury.
I'm confused why this generates such sensational headlines.
I'm with you on that - people use the wrong terms. Bailouts are supporting things like GM or failing banks because the government is worried about GM workers losing jobs or bank depositors losing money.
Altman's 1.4T isn't like that - it's a proposed new investment in stuff that doesn't exist yet and there would be no job losses or the like if it fails to exist. They have been talking about potential government support for the new ventures, partly to keep up with China which uses similar government support. I'm not sure if it's a good idea but it would not be a bailout, more a subsidy.
This is the same kind of bullshit rationalization they used to say that the bank bailouts of 2009 weren't really bank bailouts.
They were bank bailouts.
Unsecured government loans are either bailouts, entitlements in disguise, or (usually misguided) attempts at broad economic stimulus. This definitely isn't either of the latter two.
How can Tesla advertise a “more accurate” number if they are required by regulation to use EPA estimate?
EPA range estimates being inaccurate is a real problem. They do not, and are not designed to, give actual expected range. It’s meant to be an “average” of “mixed” driving.
Take latest Model Y as example. If you compare EPA range vs WLTP (commonly used in EU)
327mi EPA est. (526km) US version (long range) /
586km WLTP est. (364mi) EU version (long range)
The WLTP is “average” as well, so which of these is more accurate?
This problem is not unique to Teslas, and actually not unique to EVs either. It’s just more noticeable, as ICE vehicles usually advertise MPG and tank size, not total range. So EVs suffer from their own advertisement highlighting numbers that will never be accurate.
They are allowed to advertise lower numbers than the EPA, and are also allowed to use different tests. Tesla typically uses the test that is most favorible to their own range rating.
Some other manufacturers go to a lot of effort to make sure that they aren't overstating things (eg, Porsche), but you are right that this isn't the norm.
> How can Tesla advertise a “more accurate” number if they are required by regulation to use EPA estimate?
By also providing the worst case scenario numbers in addition to the EPA numbers. Tesla could simply do a highway range test at 70mph, ideally in Winter:
There's nothing stopping Tesla showing these things.
The one time Tesla did a towing demonstration those numbers turned out to be lies. Tesla never ran the quarter mile that they claimed to. When even your engineers lack basic honesty you've got a sick company culture:
The worst case scenario is pretty much unbounded. 80mph range will be worse than 70mph. But it's still better than range at 90mph or 100mph.
I guess you could use the highest legal speed limit in the US alongside the lowest temp and fastest headwinds ever recorded in Texas. In conjunction with the heaviest, least aerodynamic thing that the vehicle can physically tow.
But that may be annoying to replicate in a controlled setting and will be even less relevant to most people than the EPA distance.
> EPA range estimates being inaccurate is a real problem. They do not, and are not designed to, give actual expected range. It’s meant to be an “average” of “mixed” driving.
Also, EPA ranges expect mostly constant speed and driving within the speed limit, neither of which matches real world driving
reply