3 ms·
Electronics can certainly be made to have appliance-like reliability and consistency. I'm a firmware dev, I'd know. My design philosophy is this: if I'm doing m
by ryukoposting 2y ago
Electronics can certainly be made to have appliance-like reliability and consistency. I'm a firmware dev, I'd know. My design philosophy is this: if I'm doing my job right, the customer should never know I exist.
That being said, there's a time and a place for software. Software is a solution to a problem, and I'm not clear on what problem this system is solving. Sure, Bosch's product makes the brake system smaller and lighter. Cool. To what extent does that make the car smaller and lighter? Amdahl's law applies to more than computers. Are we really optimizing the right thing here?
- metaphor 2y ago> Electronics can certainly be made to have appliance-like reliability and consistency. To be sure, when measured against prevailing market trends, this is objectively not a good thing. For safety-critical systems like a vehicle's brakes, I fully expect much more than the superficial considerations I would normally give to appliances.
- ryukoposting 2y agoYour words hurt, but only because I know you're right.
- Brian_K_White 2y agoIt doesn't matter how bulletproof the software is. It's already a huge downgrade that it must run on a chip. A mechanical linkage of cables or rods or a hydraulic system all have their failure points also, but the differences are the infrastructure required to manufacture a stick or a tube vs a chip and solenoids, motors, sensors, the fact that a cable or linkage or hydraulic piston usually fails gradually over a long time while still functioning, while a chip dies without warning and completely, and is not repairable in the field except by replacement, while you can repair a mechanical device essentially indefinitely with essentially any tools and materials that are available.