Lower latency, easier to place cells in public places due to a broader range of frequencies, better bandwidth. The lower latency part is what’s going to enable edge computing for AR/VR, autonomous driving (separate via V2V but related), and other functions that need low latency. Cell phones are just a bonus.
Also, a lot of telecoms are kind of ignoring 4g/lte deadspots in favor of just putting new NSA 5G cells it seems. I’m excited, but I’m also biased because I work in the industry.
a lot of telecoms are kind of ignoring 4g/lte deadspots in favor of just putting new NSA 5G cells
That just emphasizes what marketing bullshit 5G is. Telecoms won't properly build out infrastructure to avoid LTE deadspots, and yet are pushing 5G. But ... people say that proper 5G needs many many more cells than LTE!
> Telecoms won't properly build out infrastructure to avoid LTE deadspots, and yet are pushing 5G
Its not entirely irrational - if your customers spend 99% of their time in some given area, it could make sense to improve capacity in those areas instead of chasing that last 1% of coverage.
> Also, a lot of telecoms are kind of ignoring 4g/lte deadspots in favor of just putting new NSA 5G cells it seems. I’m excited, but I’m also biased because I work in the industry.
T-Mobile has actively reduced coverage these last few years where I live. Went from having almost full bars to almost nothing and calls never being put through and dropping. Just a mile or two from at least three different towers. Even with their lte hotspot placed inside my house, their network doesn't work well. I see commercials about 5g and I think, how about implementing 1g first and getting basic phone service before pretending to deploy some bullshit 5g that likely won't be around for years and no one gives a fuck about? Anyway, I have no delusions about fixing this. Unfortunately Verizon is cdma so the only real competitor is att. Tried Google fi but it wasn't great and Comcast can go fuck themselves. So either I switch to a carrier that is more expensive and likely just as bad or I stay with the shit service because the telecom idiots decided to downgrade their network ten miles outside one of the biggest cities on the west coast.
You'll have to excuse me for being skeptical about a technology pushed by telcos that in 2020 still can't get a basic cellphone voice call to connect or text messages to send reliably even with an lte hotspot literally inches away from a phone they claim 100% support for.
I work for a defense contractor and we’ve been using these in R&D for a little over a year. They seem promising and SiFive has been working to fix every bug we find. I’m encouraged about the future of RISC-V in aerospace.
This is one of the more encouraging things I've heard about this space recently. Obviously no worries if not, but is there any more detail you can provide about the (I'm assuming) niches you're using it in?
We’ve been using chisel, but SiFive’s creation tools mean you don’t have to write anything. Before we went the SiFive route, we were generating CPUs with rocket and getting frustrated when there was no documentation.
Imo there’s not really a best book or resource other than buying a microcontroller and doing it yourself! Pick up a ARM Cortex-M4 development board either from TI or STM and reimplement their example code or driver code in assembly! You can look at the ISA to see what assembly instructions are supported, or the disassembly of a running program (probably with no optimizations so you can see what they are doing)
There’s definitely something to be said about poking a physical pin in assembly. It makes me feel like I actually have control of the computer, and that I’m not just along for the ride.
Let me be a little more explicit, software engineering is more than code. Software developers live, breathe, and puke software development. Software engineers, usually accredited, are systems engineers as well as software developers.
Software engineering is a relatively new field and segregates from computer science in the sense that software engineers typically are involved in interface design (electronic and software), architecture, documentation, and various other aspects of typical engineering. I feel like I’m being an ass but I find the use of the term “Software Engineer” in this case is erroneous. In the same way you wouldn’t consider someone who tinkers with an arduino an electrical engineer, I don’t think we can consider someone who knows full-Stack web development a software engineer.
> software engineering is more than code. Software developers live, breathe, and puke software development.
100% agree. Which is why its important that students are working together on projects so they can write specs, documentation, tests and structure code in a way that the next engineer can take over easily. Our weekly sprint planning helps facilitate that.
I think your are thinking of a curriculum that just teaches students how to code and then have them build side projects by themselves and show it off. And I agree, that is not software engineering, it is just code.
On the one hand, I have some evidence that my job is hard: I have spent ten years learning to be proficient at it, still know only a narrow slice of it, and find it challenging every day. I have a solid degree from a world-renowned university, so I know I am not stupid. I also interview candidates, and know that many applicants simply cannot do the job.
But on the other hand, there is such a sheer volume of resources like this, which imply very clearly that becoming a programmer is a trivial thing. So many in fact that I am starting to doubt the evidence of my eyes and ears.
So which is it? Is there a weird drive to constantly undersell our skills, a knowing wink to the managers who have always secretly suspected us of being nothing more than glorified typists? Or are the bootcamps right, and I've spent a decade learning replaceable trivia? And why is making statement #2 seen as positive and inclusive?
There's space for everybody. I do programming ( not full time) at work: usually it's simple queries against the database and business logic around the returned collection. Sometimes it's a bit more complicated and then I have to do an integration with an external system. Would I be able to write some traffic optimization algorithm for Netflix? Not a chance. Would I be able to help an average SMB by automating some of their processes? Absolutely. Someone is sitting in a fancy office on the 50th floor in Manhattan writing some heavily optimized code for a bank making $1M/year, while some other is doing simple PHP plugins for WordPress in some sweatshop. Both are called programmers. Same with bankers: one you meet at your local bank branch who doesn't even know what nostro account is, while other is doing some M&A trying to pull billion dollar companies together.
It doesn't matter how many schools, bootcamps,or even leet universities will open,the fact that probably less than 0.01% of general population could barely become mediocre developers won't change any time soon.
Programming is hard, and it’s only getting harder.
Managers don’t like this. They want to be able to hire programmers off the street with no experience and pay them a cheap salary. They want programmers to be plentiful and interchangeable. That is the dream.
But that’s all it is, just a dream that will never be realized no matter how many bootcamps and websites like this one come about.
The reason for this is there is no substitute for experience. Real experience. There are no shortcuts to becoming a developer. So don’t undersell yourself, your knowledge, or your experience.
> But on the other hand, there is such a sheer volume of resources like this, which imply very clearly that becoming a programmer is a trivial thing.
It takes a few weeks to get to the first level. None of the people coming out of these bootcamps are building secure software at scale.
Imagine if you wanted to become a house builder. Coding bootcamps teach you to build a doghouse, which is easy to learn within a few weeks. People will pay for doghouses, so you may as well start there.
Over time, you build sheds, barns, and then move on to homes.
>there is such a sheer volume of resources like this, which imply very clearly that becoming a programmer is a trivial thing
I think they imply that becoming a programmer is a matter of hard work and the right explanations. I'm 100% sure of the hard work part and maybe 60% sure of the right explanations part.
