oscillonoscope

This is what I mean by only listening to polemical takes on waterfall. Do you think that anyone advocating for waterfall would actually claim that you never incorporate feedback? That's why you have prototype phases

As someone from the hardware world, I feel like very few of the agile evangelists have actually worked on a waterfall project. Everything they say about waterfall seems to come from hearing polemical takes on it. I have never been part of a waterfall project where the team didn't adapt partway through the project as requirements or understanding about the project shifted.

I think there's a wide difference between actual effective communication and what people call effective communication. The former is characterized by getting to the heart of the problem and finding a resolution quickly while the latter is usually characterized by following social conventions to show deference to titles and individuals. I'm a bit biased here but I find autistic people tend to be competent at actual effective by saying the quiet part loud or addressing the elephant in the room even if people find it a little off-putting. That's not to say that's a good thing in every situation

I just started using nim but the glue aspect was the biggest draw for me. It was pretty easy to hook up a socket interface to a systemVerilog simulation & provide a simple device interface to expose to the SW and systems teams. Previously, I would have done it in python but it always ended up with a short lifespan due to its slow speed.

The alternative is that you could also just plan around the lunar cycle by turning machinery off during the lunar night and only having moon landings during the day.

Most people don't eat per calorie. They eat to fulfillment which is some combination of volume & weight.

ASICs are cheaper and better than most people believe. Companies are unnecessarily scared of them due to costs associated with the newest processes.

Embedded linux is more trouble than its worth 6.5/10 times

A lot of PCB developrs pretty much refuse to perform proper V&V on their designs because they're allowed to push it off on firmware engineers.

In my experience, it depends wildly on how much of the special sauce is in hardware vs. software. Companies that work on mature technology (ex. ECG) but have to continuously improve the signal processing tend to view software as the hard part. Companies where you're building fundamentally new hardware tend to view software as the trivial part.

I've used plantUML for state/timing/sequence diagrams in the digital logic space

I agree that it's worse than email but for different reasons. I've found that when writing an email, people will put more time and effort into giving a complete picture in the initial email. In Slack/Teams, people give very brief descriptions that you have to ask half a dozen questions in chat or call them to figure out what they actually mean.

My workplace still uses SVN. Easy to colocate code & hardware/mechanical files. For the kind of work I do, the advanced features in Git wouldn't really provide any benefit but changing would be a pain.

In the books, there is the 'champion of light' which has infinitely many incarnations and 'The Dragon' which was LTT and one incarnation of the champion of light. The show just combines these two terms. In my opinion, it's actually less confusing that way

I work in a related field (digital logic for embedded systems) and identify with the description you gave. I find it's best to do analysis on the potential benefits/drawbacks and prioritize. Over time, you get a bunch of ideas and the pet ones fall to the wayside as it's clear that there are other features you could be working on that provide better value for less effort.

I think it's better to treat the author's definition as separate from the traditional understanding of pop culture. It seems like they really want to talk about an idea they have and are assigning a new definition to an old term.

How would you determine if the toughness of an exam from a hundred years ago matched a modern day one? The pedagogy, tools, and knowledge base differed dramatically in the past century. A question might look difficult but be intended as a take-home, be graded differently than binary right-wrong, rely on a trick of an outdated tool (ex. slide rule).

Nice idea but it's not very useful without net names or a schematic view. A nice looking UI isn't good if it's not functional