[HN Gopher] Unihiker, an $80 single-board PC with 2.8" touchscre...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Unihiker, an $80 single-board PC with 2.8" touchscreen, quad-core
       ARM Cortex-A35
        
       Author : nathanasmith
       Score  : 287 points
       Date   : 2023-06-15 14:48 UTC (8 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.unihiker.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.unihiker.com)
        
       | Animats wrote:
       | _" The built-in IoT service on UNIHIKER allows users to store
       | data through the MQTT protocol and provides real-time data access
       | via web browser."_
       | 
       | That reads as "comes with integrated backdoor you may not want."
       | It may or may not be any good from a security standpoint, but
       | it's a risk.
       | 
       | > This is designed as an embeddable component for learning,
       | prototyping, and OEMs.
       | 
       | It's trying to be a lot of things at once. It has connectors on
       | all four sides and no screw holes for mounting, which is a
       | headache when you need to build it into something. That layout
       | started with Arduino, continued into Raspberry Pi, and continues
       | to be a headache. It's fine for desktop prototyping, not good for
       | deployment.
       | 
       | Note how vague the site gets when they talk about applications.
        
         | sbierwagen wrote:
         | >It has connectors on all four sides and no screw holes for
         | mounting
         | 
         | There's three nuts soldered on the back:
         | https://www.unihiker.com/wiki/dimension
         | 
         | >That layout started with Arduino, continued into Raspberry Pi
         | 
         | Pre-2010 Arduino boards had three 1/8 inch mounting holes,
         | post-2010 ones had four:
         | https://blog.adafruit.com/2011/02/28/arduino-hole-dimensions...
         | 
         | The Raspberry Pi 1 had two mounting holes located in stupid
         | places, but the Pi 4 has four: https://www.robot-
         | advance.com/userfiles/www.robot-advance.co...
         | 
         | >Note how vague the site gets when they talk about
         | applications.
         | 
         | It's a DFRobot product. I used to work for a company that
         | distributed DFRobot products in the US, and this is broadly
         | consistent with their corporate philosophy. Their designers
         | crank out _thousands_ of products to keep ahead of other
         | Shenzen companies who are fast-following them. (Notably
         | Seeedstudio) You can view their full catalog here, and it 's
         | quite the sight to see:
         | https://www.dfrobot.com/category-48.html
         | 
         | They generally take the OEM reference design, put it on a pcb,
         | and add connectors. The API will be minimal. Compatibility is a
         | joke. (For instance, they make no effort to avoid I2C address
         | collisions-- how could they, when most of them are hard-coded
         | by the device vendor, and they only make the PCB? You have to
         | be careful when stacking several different Arduino shields,
         | since they'll very often be talking on the same pins. There
         | will be no warning of this on the product page, of course, so
         | the end user must carefully examine the board schematic. Etc
         | etc etc.)
         | 
         | When I was working with them, I had the impression there were
         | maybe three people who spoke English at the company, and they
         | spent most of their time writing product pages. Email support
         | was hopeless, and their forums were the usual mess.
         | 
         | DFRobot products are best thought of as a convenient way to get
         | a sensor or microprocessor without having to design and reflow
         | your PCB. If you don't like reading manufacturer datasheets,
         | then you won't like DFRobot. They're not legos, and they're far
         | from the kind of integrated product family you'd expect from a
         | US company.
         | 
         | The unihiker.com webpage has a California startup website
         | aesthetic, so you might expect a small company built to support
         | this one board, but DFRobot literally has dozens of SBCs just
         | like this: https://www.dfrobot.com/category-184.html I would be
         | surprised if they even have one person dedicated to this
         | product. An easy guess is they're already moving on to the next
         | board launch, with yet another small ARM chip from another
         | vendor.
        
           | Animats wrote:
           | > There's three nuts soldered on the back:
           | https://www.unihiker.com/wiki/dimension
           | 
           | Oh, is that what those round things are. From the picture it
           | looks like they're big pins.
        
       | FlyingSnake wrote:
       | Sigh... one more device to buy and put in my shelf with
       | RaspberryPis, Arduinos, eInk devices and ESP32s.
        
         | hawski wrote:
         | So do not buy it.
         | 
         | Sell the stuff you are not using. It is ok to leave one thing
         | that you wish to tinker with in the future, but it is not
         | advised. While we're at it, a clean up of files on your
         | computer is also way overdue. I should not mention hundreds of
         | opened tabs in your browser.
        
         | GrumpyNl wrote:
         | You missed the pine64, great choice.
        
       | ethanpil wrote:
       | I love to see one of these come with the ability to fit into a
       | gang box on the wall... to use in a place where one would usually
       | have light switches, etc.
        
         | deeesstoronto wrote:
         | Have you looked at the Sonoff nspanel?
        
           | Matsta wrote:
           | This is a good idea. You don't want to have a full-on Linux
           | distro controlling your lights. You want something you can
           | set up and forget.
           | 
           | You will feel a world of pain when there is some bug, and it
           | will take you 8 hours to figure out the issues so that you
           | can turn your lights on. The simplier, the better for these
           | kinds of applications.
        
           | sosodev wrote:
           | Are you able to run your own software on that? It looks fully
           | integrated to me
        
       | vardump wrote:
       | Bluetooth 4.0, insecure enough that they might as well omitted it
       | entirely.
       | 
       | Only 512 MB RAM is a bit limiting in 2023.
        
       | 908B64B197 wrote:
       | So, like all other "raspberry pi killers" this is running a
       | patched kernel released by some company in Shenzhen with no plan
       | to upstream changes or get them into the main kernel tree.
       | 
       | E-Waste in less than three years!
        
         | MartijnBraam wrote:
         | Looks like it's based around the Rockchip RK3308 so it's likely
         | not that bad. I'm sure this ships with some old patched vendor
         | kernel but the SoC is already supported in mainline.
         | 
         | I've not gone through the other components but this probably
         | doesn't take too much time to get to full mainline linux
         | support.
        
       | BlackLotus89 wrote:
       | I remember a few sites that had arm soc comparison lists. This
       | would check none of my boxes...
       | 
       | Basically I'm looking for
       | 
       | 1) a homeserver board with low energy consumption, m.2/sata,
       | maybe a usb3 port and fast ethernet
       | 
       | 2) a lightweight desktop with hdmi/dp, usb c, m.2 and good
       | software support (media codecs anyone?)
       | 
       | 3) something cheap for projects the "cheap" pis, esp32 and so on
       | are my go to option
       | 
       | For 1) and 2) I'm looking at cheap pi4 compute module boards...
       | but tbh is the pi4 always short of being good enough
        
         | anaganisk wrote:
         | Used Lenovo think center I bought off eBay has, Intel 7th gen
         | with vPro, 8GB ram, 256GB nvme, all of that for 76$ including
         | shipping, pi can even beat that price.
        
           | BlackLotus89 wrote:
           | One of the rhings I would like are arm or risc v, but tbh if
           | the power consumption is around pi level it is tempting
        
           | progman32 wrote:
           | What's the power consumption like?
        
       | WhereIsTheTruth wrote:
       | Is it open source? Can't find that information on the website
        
       | xwdv wrote:
       | I've become very cynical of these types of tiny computer
       | products. These computers are like puppies that tech nerds will
       | gush over and buy impulsively, do a couple small things with,
       | then never use again.
       | 
       | It seems like the smaller it is, the crazier people get.
        
       | darkwater wrote:
       | Unrelated but trying the HN wisdom here: any suggestion for a
       | cheap touchscreen with a CPU attached and a battery that can be
       | used as a control panel for Home Assistant? Yeah, probably some
       | Android tablet but something that actually works well for this
       | job and costs as less as possible? I cannot power it properly
       | where I want to put it so it needs battery and then I can charge
       | it as needed. Suggestions?
        
         | youngtaff wrote:
         | Something like a SenseCap from Seeed Studio?
         | 
         | https://www.seeedstudio.com/SenseCAP-Indicator-D1S-p-5645.ht...
        
         | doctorpangloss wrote:
         | You can find used iOS devices that run iOS 15, and therefore
         | modern safari, for like $80.
        
           | Matsta wrote:
           | Agree with this. You want something with the least headaches
           | as possible. You should be able to run the the Home Assistant
           | App as well.
           | 
           | If you get a old iPhone and buy a replacement battery still
           | more than likely be cheaper than buying a Rpi + screen +
           | lipo-hat + battery.
        
           | yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
           | Does it even need to be a current version? If it's _only_
           | used to access the web interface of a local device that you
           | trust, I 've wondered if you couldn't get away with an even
           | older device/OS/browser. The only problem I can think of is
           | if ex. HA ships an update that uses newer browser features,
           | and even that wouldn't be a problem if you did the dashboard
           | custom.
        
         | anigbrowl wrote:
         | m5stack.com
        
           | HeyLaughingBoy wrote:
           | I _love_ M5Stack and in fact just shipped my first project
           | with an M5 Tough. However, those screens are tiny. Even 3 "
           | would be a huge improvement.
        
             | anigbrowl wrote:
             | True that. They do have a phone-size e-reader device which
             | is great, but obviously is subject to the limitations of
             | e-ink. I suggest reaching out to them, they're _very_
             | responsive on Twitter and @lovyan3 has developed a
             | universal graphics library for the ESP32 stack and works
             | closely with them.
        
         | HeyLaughingBoy wrote:
         | I just got a couple of ESP32-S3 devices direct from China
         | (AliExpress), one with a 5" TFT screen and the other with a 7".
         | 
         | I don't know what home assistant is, but these will run C++ or
         | MicroPython just fine. My application is an industrial
         | controller and they are really nice. Dirt cheap at around $30
         | each shipped (arrived in just over 2 weeks) to USA.
         | 
         | [edit] They have very little I/O since the display is driven in
         | parallel mode and that takes up most of the EPS32 pins. There's
         | a SPI connector and a couple other pins that could probably be
         | redirected for I2C. I haven't gotten around to to checking
         | that. I did use one of the available pins for serial input to
         | read a GPS module and that was trivial to setup though.
        
           | nick__m wrote:
           | I use an stm32f103 as an io extender for my esp32-a1s, they
           | cost about 2$ per board and the chip programmer cost about
           | 10$. I use I2C to communicate between the esp32 and the
           | stm32.
           | 
           | I do my development in VSCode using platformio with the
           | Arduino framework and FreeRTOS. It is really convenient to
           | have the same os and framework used for all the MCUs of a
           | project. That's why I use the 2$ stm32 instead of a 1$ stm8.
        
         | lbotos wrote:
         | I mean, You are spot on -- A cheap android tablet sounds like
         | the fastest/best/most aesthetically pleasing option. Otherwise
         | Waveshare screen + some PI board is the "easy hacker-aesthetic
         | way"
        
         | thesh4d0w wrote:
         | Kindle tablets with fully Kiosk browser.
        
         | regularfry wrote:
         | You'd be able to strap something together with a Pimoroni
         | Hyperpixel and a raspberry pi with a lipo hat, if that was a
         | direction you wanted to go in. It's a very nice little screen.
         | No idea about how power efficient it is, though.
        
       | ck2 wrote:
       | Um, it looks like a $20 android phone without the case or
       | battery?
        
         | janoc wrote:
         | Because that's pretty much what it is.
        
       | Hexigonz wrote:
       | I'm sorry this is off topic, but I love the homepage design. Have
       | too many rPIs to justify buying this, but something about a nice,
       | light, internet blue, simplistic design really makes me happy.
       | Too many sites with their dark mode BS trying to be super serious
       | and deep toned today.
        
         | CodeWriter23 wrote:
         | Makes the cards pop really nicely
        
       | theamk wrote:
       | My usual question for small cheap boards is: what will happen to
       | OS support in 3 years? Is it using regular distro or is this a
       | custom fork which will likely be never updated? The website says:
       | 
       | > The UNIHIKER comes with a Linux operating system based on
       | Debian and various built-in features, which will be upgraded from
       | time to time.
       | 
       | ... don't expect OS upgrades here. If you want to play with it
       | for a while then put it away forever, go ahead and do it; but if
       | you want to build something long-term, better find a different
       | board.
        
         | squarefoot wrote:
         | In my opinion the vendor supplied OS distros are to be taken as
         | just a starting point, nothing to rely on more than the time
         | needed for the port of one of the well established distros
         | (Armbian, DietPI, stock, etc) to appear for a given board,
         | which often happens quite fast when driver blobs and lack of
         | documentation don't get in the way (the RK3308 used here is
         | well supported along the WiFi chip). My usual approach when
         | looking for a board is to check first if there's some support
         | from the above distros, or wait. It may seem odd, but it's just
         | the same reasoning we're used to in the PC world translated to
         | the embedded world: whoever would expect Gigabyte, Asus, etc.
         | to create and supply the Linux distribution that runs on their
         | PC mainboard?
        
         | thanatos519 wrote:
         | It's not just small cheap boards. It's small expensive
         | computers, too: I was burned just like this with the Sony VAIO
         | 720P and the PlanetComputers Gemini PDA. Awesome hardware,
         | pretty good drivers for the current kernel/distro, and then ...
         | nothing.
        
         | reaperducer wrote:
         | _If you want to play with it for a while then put it away
         | forever, go ahead and do it; but if you want to build something
         | long-term, better find a different board._
         | 
         | I think it depends on what you want to do with it.
         | 
         | If you're building something that won't access the network, or
         | will be isolated to the LAN, then it's fine.
         | 
         | Not everything needs or wants to be connected to the internet.
        
         | rostakagmfun wrote:
         | Slightly unrelated, but I wonder what is a preferred OS for
         | similar boards: a buildroot or yocto -based system vs a full-
         | blown Debian-based distribution with desktop and package
         | managers?
         | 
         | When I looked into (now deprecated) Jetson Nano I was surprised
         | to find out there was no straightforward and documented way to
         | build your own system and cross-compile for it. Is that because
         | for many people using SBCs means doing everything on the target
         | (e.g. compiling software), or am I missing something?
        
           | Eisenstein wrote:
           | Armbian or DietPi.
        
         | CoastalCoder wrote:
         | I've never done a project using a board like this, so out of
         | ignorance:
         | 
         | Does LTS support usually matter, if you're using the device for
         | a stand-alone application such as a lighting controller or
         | front-door camera?
        
           | idiotsecant wrote:
           | depends on whether you care about vulnerabilities or not, I
           | suppose. Presumably that lighting controller talks to
           | something. If it talks to a local network only and it's
           | impossible for external traffic to reach it, maybe not such a
           | big deal. If that's not true it might be significant. That's
           | also true of all IoT junk anyhow, it's all running some linux
           | variant under the hood and security / updating is rarely a
           | major concern.
        
             | CoastalCoder wrote:
             | That's what I was thinking.
             | 
             | I was assuming that e.g. the lighting controller would only
             | have 3 modes of access enabled:
             | 
             | (1) USB commections
             | 
             | (2) wired ethernet during admin
             | 
             | (3) ZWave via a USB adapter
        
               | yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
               | This is actually one of the reasons I like
               | bluetooth/zigbee/z-wave/IR/etc. so much - it puts a
               | significant barrier to attacking devices even if they
               | don't get patches. Of course, you still _should_ pay
               | attention to security and update them if possible because
               | local and /or proxied attacks are still a thing, but it's
               | much less likely to get hit.
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | oneplane wrote:
         | It's dead on arrival; currently runs Debian 10 with custom
         | patches and binary blobs. It's an RK3308 so not entirely
         | impossible to run on a normal distro, but you'd have to bring
         | your own firmware and device tree etc.
        
           | anigbrowl wrote:
           | This is designed as an embeddable component for learning,
           | prototyping, and OEMs. A lot of people here are just sniffily
           | dismissing it as 'DOA' when what they mean is 'I would not
           | want to maintain this.'
        
             | ilyt wrote:
             | Dude, Debian 10 goes out of support in a year. Debian 12
             | already released.
             | 
             | It's 4 years out of date at release, why would you want
             | that for "learning and prototyping", let alone start a OEM
             | device with soon unsupported software versions.
        
             | oneplane wrote:
             | No, it's DOA. Embeddable components need support too. As do
             | OEMs and prototyping scenarios.
             | 
             | It is presented as a viable commercial product, but it
             | actually is an old SoC with no ecosystem. If anything, it
             | teaches people not to use this type of thing.
             | 
             | The only way it would not be e-waste is if it had a future,
             | and it doesn't and that's why it's bad. At this price point
             | there are so many community and commercial alternatives
             | that do have an ecosystem and support it's just pointless
             | and most likely an attempt to dump overstocked Rockchip
             | parts. Even an ancient i.MX 6 is a better choice.
        
         | snarfy wrote:
         | Why does it need continuous, perpetual support? Most devices
         | like this get built, software installed, and never updated
         | again. When is the last time you updated the ECU software in
         | your car? I built a small arcade cabinet using an old raspberry
         | pi 2b. Once I built it I've never needed to upgrade anything on
         | it. It works fine and plays all the old games. I have backups
         | of the SD card in case anything craps out.
        
           | ilyt wrote:
           | If it is not connected to the internet in any way, sure.
           | 
           | But we got of TVs that are now useless because originally
           | they just needed to "display a simple web page" but:
           | 
           | * no new TLS support, near-everything dropped old TLS
           | 
           | * sites that did not, use CA that's not on the device's list
        
           | scheeseman486 wrote:
           | If there's a vulnerability in any of the software or firmware
           | that connects and interfaces with anything over a network,
           | there's the possibility of something worming it's way in or
           | out of it.
           | 
           | For something intermittently used like a game box that might
           | not matter. For IoT-focused hardware that is connected to the
           | internet continuously by design where, say, a malformed TCP
           | packet could cause a buffer overflow in the network stack
           | that wiggles it's way into root code execution by chaining
           | through a bunch of unpatched vulnerabilities on a "never
           | updated again" system? That's a problem.
        
             | kristopolous wrote:
             | Network updates are an amazing trainwreck.
             | 
             | No matter how elegant you seem to be, you'll always be
             | running like half a dozen versions in the wild.
             | 
             | For any large deployment that kind of work will be on your
             | shoulders anyways. Stuffing in security updates or whatever
             | to that isn't crazy
             | 
             | Unless you're saying you want multichannel overlapping
             | upgrade schedules where you have some NxM cadence matrix to
             | test and support (as in ssh x+/-{1,2,3} AND your software
             | x+/-{1,2,3} etc).
             | 
             | I've had to make and manage automated test rigs for those
             | types of deployment as well.
             | 
             | That's an entire room full of whatever machines your
             | deploying and a full time job.
             | 
             | Anyways, this stuff is hard for the out in the wild
             | devices. Putting security updates in a monolithic release
             | package is really the easier way to go and at that point
             | it's on you.
        
           | dotnet00 wrote:
           | If it can connect to the internet, it will need security
           | updates.
        
             | RobotToaster wrote:
             | Won't the firewall on most domestic routers stop any
             | incoming connections?
        
               | ianburrell wrote:
               | Connections are only part of the danger. Browsers need to
               | access the internet and they can have security bugs.
               | Also, people download files and the programs that process
               | them have bugs. People download programs and those can be
               | dangerous.
               | 
               | For the kernel, it is important that it protect against
               | dangerous programs running on the system to keep them
               | isolated.
        
               | ilyt wrote:
               | It will also need update of CA lists, and if any
               | vulnerability will be found in TLS1.3 it will need to
               | update SSL libs to even _access_ anythign
        
               | piyh wrote:
               | In most cases, yes, in all cases, no. There's a lot of
               | variants of "enumerate all devices on a private network
               | if you visit a malicious webpage" exploits.
               | 
               | https://medium.com/@brannondorsey/attacking-private-
               | networks...
        
             | kyberias wrote:
             | Why would a connection to internet need security updates?
        
               | bee_rider wrote:
               | This question doesn't really make sense, did you forget a
               | couple words?
        
               | gizmo686 wrote:
               | Because as an industry, we are bad at our jobs. The
               | network facing software has critical security
               | vulnerabilities. Even security folks accept that as the
               | way of the world.
               | 
               | At the point the software is released it has (hopefully)
               | no known security vulnerabilities, which is a reasonably
               | secure situation to be in.
               | 
               | However, eventually some of them will become known, and
               | that is not safe.
        
               | VyseofArcadia wrote:
               | But a "critical security vulnerability " depends on the
               | use. My daily driver? Yes, I want all of the security
               | updates. A raspberry pi for playing arcade games that I
               | occasionally scp a ROM over to? I really don't care if
               | someone hacks in.
               | 
               | We, as an industry, are bad about pushing "every device
               | that is on the internet needs to be as up to date as
               | possible all the time" when it reality there is a lot of
               | unimportant stuff on the internet.
               | 
               | It's like locks. I wouldn't secure my house with a bike
               | lock, but it's fine for my bike. My bike is less full of
               | important stuff.
        
               | dotnet00 wrote:
               | Well, a common thing with open computing resources these
               | days is cryptominers. Sure, you don't care about updates,
               | until someone puts a miner on it and you have to go in
               | and try to fix it. It wouldn't matter that your single
               | device doesn't have enough processing power when there
               | are tens of thousands of similarly vulnerable devices to
               | hijack.
        
               | yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
               | > I really don't care if someone hacks in.
               | 
               | At _best_ , that means you're externalizing the costs,
               | i.e. now your device is part of a botnet and becomes a
               | problem for other people. But of course that assumes that
               | it doesn't become a problem for you as well; a
               | compromised device on your network is a great launching
               | point for local attacks and a way to send illegal traffic
               | out through your internet connection.
        
               | reaperducer wrote:
               | People like to shout "cryptobotnet!" every time someone
               | questions the need for absolute security with devices
               | connected to the internet.
               | 
               | You _might_ get 2C/ in about 40 years mining with my IoT
               | light bulb. Good luck with that.
        
               | elabajaba wrote:
               | If it has a camera, it can be used to steal your security
               | keys if it can see the power LED on your device (or
               | potentially even just if something connected to your
               | device has a power LED).
               | 
               | https://www.nassiben.com/video-based-crypta
        
               | reaperducer wrote:
               | Fortunately, none of my computers have power LEDs. Also,
               | I don't live in a nuclear weapons facility where I need
               | "security keys."
        
               | margalabargala wrote:
               | There are plenty of reasons not to want your IOT bulb to
               | be insecure that are unrelated to people mining crypto.
               | 
               | A pwned IOT lightbulb can be used to help DDOS sites. It
               | can relay DDOS traffic, eating your own bandwidth. It can
               | be constantly probing the other devices on your network
               | looking for vulnerabilities, until it pwns something else
               | and is able to slurp down your passwords and credit card
               | numbers.
               | 
               | Are you seriously suggesting that having an actively
               | malicious computing device inside your home network is no
               | big deal?
        
           | TheMode wrote:
           | All software have many dependencies (IMO for very wrong
           | reason), if you can find a way to build a static system where
           | nothing need to be updated good for you, but I doubt that
           | this is the majority of use-case.
           | 
           | Will this device be able to load any web page in one or two
           | decades? It would likely be slow, but the impossibility would
           | be a pure software limitation.
        
           | dmitrygr wrote:
           | > Why does it need continuous, perpetual support?
           | 
           | Because there are no schematics or data sheets posted on that
           | page. Good luck bring up anything else on it...
        
           | imtringued wrote:
           | Because that is the nature of these SBCs. They aren't some
           | generic queryable platform running UEFI. Instead you have a
           | bespoke OS fork for each individual board. This means that
           | vendors need to give a lot of attention to the software
           | because there isn't a foundation or company taking care of
           | all SBCs at once. The device becomes obsolete very quickly if
           | you can't install recent software. SBC performance hasn't
           | increased much. There are still plenty of boards with A53
           | cores that have been used for more than a decade.
        
           | ianburrell wrote:
           | First, this advertises this as a PC which have longer
           | lifetime and higher security requirements than embedded.
           | 
           | Second, embedded systems have reliability requirements.
           | Something will not work and will need support and updating to
           | fix. The big advantage of normal distribution is that
           | somebody has probably already fixed it.
           | 
           | Third, devices get repurposed. My five year old Raspberry Pi
           | has had multiple jobs, and when it is done running Home
           | Assistant, I'll find some other use. Plus, with normal
           | distribution, I can easily install the packages I need.
        
           | theamk wrote:
           | Few years ago, you built your arcade cabinet, and decided to
           | put some nice launcher like RetroPie. It works fine for a few
           | years, and then your friends tell you about Pico8 support..
           | nice, it is supported by RetroPie release! not nice: retropie
           | requires ubuntu 18.04 or later.. let's hope your device
           | supports it.
           | 
           | Few years ago, you built a weather station. Sadly, the
           | weather backend you had was discontinued. You found a great
           | new one, and it even comes with SDK and sample code! Sadly,
           | the SDK requires python 3.8 or later. Does your device
           | support it?
           | 
           | Few years ago, you built the home automation server. But
           | recently, you got the set of remotely-controllable disco
           | balls for each room which use FOOBAR protocol. Good news:
           | Linux kernel supports FOOBAR protocol since 5.14. Bad news:
           | your device kernel is much older.
           | 
           | Few years ago, you built the smart controller. You don't want
           | to manage your infra, so you decided to go with AWS IOT, it
           | is super each if you only have a few devices. But AWS
           | announced they are dropping AWS IOT.. does your OS support
           | newer system?
           | 
           | There are definitely cases when you set up the device once
           | and never have to touch it again, but there are also a lot of
           | networked things out there, and you often want to control
           | them..
        
             | snowAbstraction wrote:
             | Some boards have decent support. I've got an odroid C1
             | released in 2015 and I saw there is at least an Ubuntu 20
             | image for it!
        
       | Dnguyen wrote:
       | I wish the RAM could be a bit more, at least 1G or 2G, so I can
       | have a database on there without having to ship my data to the
       | cloud. Then the system can really run isolated as much as
       | possible, for security and privacy.
        
         | wongarsu wrote:
         | SQLite would still be a good option. It's incredibly
         | lightweight, and if you set the database to WAL mode it also
         | works well for a database file accessed by multiple
         | applications on the same device.
        
         | Narishma wrote:
         | It has 16GB of flash. Can't you put your database there?
        
           | lostgame wrote:
           | This. Back in the day when we lacked RAM, especially on *nix
           | based systems, it's absolutely normal to use the disk/flash
           | as pseudo-RAM. This was just...a normal part of computing at
           | the time, heh.
           | 
           | Of course, applications would respond shit slow this way, but
           | in the case of a DB it'd be more than fine, no?
        
       | amelius wrote:
       | Since when is _less_ modularity a good thing?
        
       | CobrastanJorji wrote:
       | To nit pick on the website itself, the caption "Black and white,
       | it's colorful" is a terrible way to convey information.
        
       | dmitrygr wrote:
       | The "documentation" page is a joke. I cannot eve find if the
       | touch screen is resistive or capacitive. I see no schematics,
       | making bring up if your own OS in it unlikely. I see no data
       | sheets either. Just another piece of e-trash waiting to end up on
       | a landfill..
        
         | ytjohn wrote:
         | Nothing special, it's touchable.
        
       | samstave wrote:
       | [flagged]
        
         | anigbrowl wrote:
         | Please get treatment. Just because a thing can be used that way
         | doesn't mean that's its sole valid purpose. You are like a
         | person looking at a metal tube and yelling that a mass shooting
         | is imminent.
        
           | samstave wrote:
           | [flagged]
        
           | samstave wrote:
           | [flagged]
        
         | anaganisk wrote:
         | Ugh, u may not like the following but the devices you are using
         | to get on the internet, are used to collect a treasure trove of
         | information, to conduct information warfare. And regardless of
         | whatever your bullshit political specrum is.... this is a
         | platform for stalking, propaganda, tracking and killing Human
         | Beings.
         | 
         | Period.
         | 
         | Street Cred: I have common sense.
         | 
         | There is only one outcome: Defense spending, Military Death.
        
       | jedberg wrote:
       | This seems like a somewhat related place to ask this: Does anyone
       | know where I can get a 3" _round_ screen?
       | 
       | I have a Star Wars clock from the 1970s that has a ton of empty
       | space in the base. I want to put a small computer in it and
       | replace the 3" clock face with a round screen, so it can show the
       | time and maybe some fun Star Wars animations.
       | 
       | But I just don't know how to find a 3" round screen without
       | buying 1000 of them from China.
       | 
       | How do I get just one 3" screen that I can attach to a Raspberry
       | Pi or equivalent linux computer?
        
         | joshmarinacci wrote:
         | I think Waveshare has some. I've been messing with their 1.28
         | in round ones and I like it. Just be aware that they will use
         | SPI (think Arduino level) for the connection, not something
         | video oriented like HDMI. Thus they can be used on a Raspberry
         | Pi with a custom driver, but you won't be getting 60fps.
        
         | HeyLaughingBoy wrote:
         | LilyGo has an ESP32 with an attached round TFT screen that's (I
         | think) 2.8" diameter. You can buy single units on Amazon.
         | 
         | One of the demo applications is a clock, but it shouldn't be
         | difficult to load a bitmap.
        
           | jedberg wrote:
           | Looks like it's 2.1", but thanks for the tip!
        
         | gadgetoid wrote:
         | Our (Pi compatible) HyperPixel Round is just shy of 3" if you
         | count the thick, black border around the edges. Actual screen
         | is 2.1" but diameter is 71.8mm.
        
           | jedberg wrote:
           | Ok wait, so when it says 2.1" that doesn't include the bezel?
           | So the problem all along has been me reading it wrong? Thank
           | you!
        
             | gadgetoid wrote:
             | Bear in mind I'm just reading the product page specs here
             | but if you want me to measure mine I can dig it up!
        
       | Tepix wrote:
       | This device is similar to many hacker festival badges from the
       | recent years. Just a bit more expensive.
       | 
       | For example:
       | 
       | - the Camp 2023 flow3r badge
       | https://events.ccc.de/2023/06/05/camp23-the-flow3r-badge/
       | 
       | - the MCH2022 badge https://wiki.mch2022.org/Badge
       | 
       | - the SHA2017 badge with E-Ink
       | https://wiki.sha2017.org/w/Projects:Badge
       | 
       | - the Camp 2011 badge R0ket
       | https://events.ccc.de/camp/2011/wiki/R0ket
       | 
       | The first three have ESP32 CPUs, not sure how it compares to the
       | ARM Cortex-A35
        
         | dmayle wrote:
         | "If your badge has been hit by ransomware, see how to enter
         | Safe mode."
         | 
         | What a world we live in...
        
           | lostgame wrote:
           | It was a joke and part of the actual hacker festival.
        
           | solardev wrote:
           | Wait till your brain integration gets malware and your
           | thoughts are locked away...
        
             | RobotToaster wrote:
             | Never gonna give you up
             | 
             | Never gonna let you down....
        
           | dcow wrote:
           | I'm pretty sure that was a game/gimmick and part of the
           | conference badge challenge. But maybe not. Regardless it is a
           | security conference after all and I'd totally expect people
           | to be playing around like that. I don't think it would have
           | been seen as malicious.
        
         | spicyjpeg wrote:
         | The ESP32s belong to a completely different category of
         | processors, they are microcontrollers optimized first and
         | foremost for cost and power efficiency rather than raw
         | performance or the ability to run Linux. The Rockchip SoC used
         | here, on the other hand, is more akin to what you would find in
         | a cheap Android tablet or set-top box: it has Cortex-A cores, a
         | proper GPU and can use far more memory than the mere hundreds
         | of kilobytes of SRAM built into ESP32 chips. Of course it also
         | requires far more external components and draws significantly
         | more power when running at full speed, so it's in no way a
         | drop-in replacement for microcontrollers in products where
         | Linux is not a hard requirement but BOM cost and battery life
         | are.
        
           | shadowpho wrote:
           | One small addition...
           | 
           | > they are microcontrollers optimized first and foremost for
           | cost and power efficiency
           | 
           | ESP32 is only optimized for cost. Other wireless MCU are
           | significantly lower power... they are just more expensive
           | (and tend to have worse docs then ESP32).
        
             | lelanthran wrote:
             | > ESP32 is only optimized for cost.
             | 
             | Are you sure? I'm plaing around with the deep-sleep mode of
             | an ESP32-3C and it appears to sip _almost_ negligible
             | current.
        
             | anigbrowl wrote:
             | ESP32 is great for low power apps, you can switch off most
             | of the chip subsystems, rely on watchdog timers etc.
        
               | steve918 wrote:
               | Compared to what?
        
         | __void wrote:
         | they are very different, esp32 is an advanced microcontroller
         | (with wifi/bt) and is comparable to an arduino on steroids,
         | whereas this board uses cortex a35 and is more comparable to a
         | raspberry
         | 
         | esp32 has 520 Kb of ram, while this board has 512 Mb!
        
           | StillBored wrote:
           | "comparable to a raspberry"
           | 
           | Well, slightly worse, as A35's are smaller and lower power
           | than the A53's in something like the pi zero-2, but also
           | slower. The devices slight clock advantage probably doesn't
           | make up the difference.
           | 
           | So, its probably a great embedded system, but it should be
           | running something lighter weight than a normal linux distro.
           | Otherwise it becomes like all these gas station pumps, point
           | of sale terminals that all seem to take 10+ seconds to do
           | things that older devices didn't lag and pause with.
        
         | Gys wrote:
         | This thing runs full linux and requires 3.3V, 2000mA (max). A
         | badge is probably not the best use case.
        
       | kevin_thibedeau wrote:
       | This definitely puts the STM32F429 Discovery board to shame with
       | its now inflated $80 price tag.
        
         | LeifCarrotson wrote:
         | The STM32F4 is a Cortex-M4 microcontroller. You have direct
         | access to optimally do whatever you want with the CubeIDE and
         | GCC libraries.
         | 
         | This is a platform, if the things you want to do are possible
         | with the entire stack of Debian, the pre-existing touchscreen
         | menus, the PinPong Python libraries, etc. then sure, use
         | this...but that's a lot of wasted efficiency and a very large
         | dependency.
         | 
         | The STM32F4, for example, can be configured to enter deep sleep
         | and run for a long time on a battery. This likely cannot.
        
         | dmitrygr wrote:
         | That dev board has a schematic and data sheets for all parts.
         | This one has a flashy website with no such thing. That's what
         | you pay your $80 for
        
       | isoprophlex wrote:
       | You flash the OS (okay, admittedly, debian which is nice) onto it
       | from windows with some lugubrious .exe
       | 
       | https://www.unihiker.com/wiki/burner
       | 
       | No linux/macos tool available. No thanks.
        
         | squarefoot wrote:
         | Holy crap, I totally missed that requirement. This product now
         | goes straight in my do-not-buy list. Yes, one could install a
         | Windows VM, set up a passthrough USB port and do everything
         | from there, but seriously, what's the logic behind requiring
         | Windows for a board that runs only Linux?
        
         | lostgame wrote:
         | Hah. Way too misread the room, are they serious?
         | 
         | Who even develops Windows-exclusive apps these days, anyway?
         | Even the average user these days seems to find it simply
         | abhorrent.
         | 
         | It's so simple to create cross-platform applications these
         | days, there's literally no excuse.
         | 
         | I can't imagine the thought process that went behind this
         | beyond greed and profit, a little mind-numbing.
        
           | WheatMillington wrote:
           | Greed and profit? You can't honestly believe these were the
           | motivation behind this decision, can you? That is honestly
           | your most generous take?
        
           | mynameisvlad wrote:
           | Image burning is certainly more involved than your run of the
           | mill cross-platform Electron app. It likely uses lower-level
           | system calls that might not even be possible in most cross-
           | platform frameworks. Additionally, the screenshots make clear
           | mention of a driver, something that would _certainly_ be
           | different depending on the OS.
           | 
           | You simply assumed there is "no excuse" because you couldn't
           | think of one, but you weren't in the room when the decision
           | was made, and don't know the reasonings behind it. My blurb
           | above could certainly have been one of several reasons
           | brought up.
           | 
           | You can choose not to agree with the decision, that's fine,
           | but you're attributing a whole lot of malice to what is
           | ultimately a decision they made based on factors which you
           | are not privy to.
        
             | lelanthran wrote:
             | > It likely uses lower-level system calls that might not
             | even be possible in most cross-platform frameworks.
             | 
             | So? I made a Qt-based low-level flashing utility at a
             | previous job. Or do you consider C++ callign C functions
             | not low-level enough?
        
               | mynameisvlad wrote:
               | I mean, my "so" was quite clearly outlined.
               | 
               | > You simply assumed there is "no excuse" because you
               | couldn't think of one, but you weren't in the room when
               | the decision was made, and don't know the reasonings
               | behind it. My blurb above could certainly have been one
               | of several reasons brought up.
               | 
               | Just because you did it doesn't mean everyone knows how
               | to do it. And that was my entire point.
               | 
               | Maybe you should offer your services to them.
        
         | wepple wrote:
         | Lugubrious: adjective
         | 
         | looking or sounding sad and dismal.
         | 
         | "his face looked even more lugubrious than usual"
        
       | markstos wrote:
       | The video says "No coding skills? No worries. Just write your
       | code with ChatGPT."
        
         | ape4 wrote:
         | Hey ChatGPT, hire me a programmer
        
         | Retr0id wrote:
         | I'm incredibly curious what the experience of trying to write
         | code with ChatGPT is like, if you have no prior knowledge.
         | Obviously, it's impossible for me (and most others reading
         | this) to un-know everything and approach it with fresh eyes.
         | Are there any good real-time videos of non-programmers using
         | ChatGPT to write code? (seems like the best way to understand
         | what it's like)
        
           | joshuakogut wrote:
           | Well, it is helpful for learning new frameworks and stuff
           | when you already have a grasp of general programming.
        
             | Retr0id wrote:
             | Right, but what's it like if you know nothing about
             | programming?
        
               | willcipriano wrote:
               | Sort of like using Google translate for a language you
               | don't speak a word of I'd imagine. "I just said what the
               | computer said to say and now the computer/waiter is mad
               | at me"
        
           | Ireallyapart wrote:
           | [dead]
        
           | idiotsecant wrote:
           | I am an engineer, but not a software engineer. I write python
           | sometimes to help me do engineer-y things in my domain but I
           | am absolutely not very fluent, just enough to get by. chatGPT
           | often transforms a frustrating multi-hour stack overflow
           | session into a 5 minute query.
           | 
           | The result is definitely not something you'd want to maintain
           | and probably has built in inefficiencies and edge cases I
           | don't know about but it did it's job, which was to do the
           | thing I wanted it to do so I can go on with my work.
        
             | advantager wrote:
             | Similar situation here. I usually can hack something
             | together in python, but end up spending a couple hours
             | reading stack overflow posts, and often meeting with co-
             | workers to debug my code. Chat-GPT can often write simple
             | code for me and honestly saves some time.
        
             | circuit10 wrote:
             | Honestly for tasks it's able to do easily ChatGPT code is
             | probably more maintainable because it's more well-
             | commented, formatted etc. than code a human would write if
             | they're just trying to quickly hack something together
             | 
             | Sometimes I think "you can tell this part of my code was
             | generated by ChatGPT because it's actually good, unlike the
             | rest of it"
             | 
             | Of course it's likely to make subtle mistakes that are hard
             | to debug if you ask it to do anything complicated because
             | it can't test its own code (well, I've heard something
             | about a code interpreter in the Plus version but I don't
             | know how well that works)
        
           | Beached wrote:
           | it's hell, I have been trying it for a couple.months, and you
           | can't really get anything of note built. it's buggy AF, and
           | gets stuck in loops and can't debug itself.
           | 
           | it works ok as a starting point of " I have no freaking clue
           | how to approach this" to "ahh I can see how that will work"
           | and then you go write your own code with the lead.
        
           | markstos wrote:
           | I don't know Rust well and was having trouble the finding the
           | docs I needed, so I asked AI for help. Google Bard, I think.
           | It had real difficulty producing code that ran and worked.
           | 
           | The problem was that there were breaking API changes across
           | versions of the library, but it was just using probabilities
           | of method names being correct, and it didn't ask me or tell
           | me which version of the library it was targeting, so it was
           | just a mismash of incompatible code.
           | 
           | But the code LOOKED good and the AI was confident it was a
           | good answer. Overall, it felt like wasted time sifting
           | through confidently-wrong answers.
        
             | cooljacob204 wrote:
             | Google Bard isn't the best when it comes to writing code in
             | my experience. Try GPT, you should get very different
             | results.
        
           | NhanH wrote:
           | Hard to image OpenAI not at least trying that out, so if we
           | haven't heard any thing from them, it's safe to say it
           | doesn't work.
        
           | iamflimflam1 wrote:
           | I suspect that people would fail at the first hurdle and not
           | even be able to run the code.
           | 
           | I also wonder if they'd even know what to ask.
        
             | specproc wrote:
             | I've got a colleague who's been doing it with some success.
             | Nothing fancy, just a bit of doodling around in Python for
             | fun.
             | 
             | He's been leaning heavily on the repl.it Copilot thingy, so
             | it's more autocomplete than code blocks. He uses ChatGPT
             | for working out error messages.
        
             | Retr0id wrote:
             | Reminds me of a (perhaps fake) screenshot of a conversation
             | I saw that went:
             | 
             | Person A: I just used AI to make my own website, you're
             | gonna be out of a job soon.
             | 
             | Person B: Oh? Let me see it.
             | 
             | Person A: Here it is C:\Users\Bob\Desktop\index.html
        
           | asimovfan wrote:
           | You can ask ChatGPT to explain pieces of code.
        
           | djbusby wrote:
           | I'm helping another fella who's new to coding, he's using GPT
           | to make some code. Most of what it produces won't even
           | compile. Building for sensors on an ESP32 platform. BUT! GPT
           | will get a good way there, a main with some sub-routines,
           | stuff like that. I don't think it's good enough to teach.
           | 
           | If you can already code, then GPT can ramp you up on a new
           | project faster, or accelerate and existing project
        
           | anonzzzies wrote:
           | It's pretty good depending on what you are doing. With Python
           | and JS/TS, the last checkpoint for training datasets really
           | matters. These api's for no reason at all to me, rot
           | incredibly fast, so the code it generates was valid in
           | September 2020, but now it is almost completely incompatible.
           | 
           | I was raised with (80s/90s); never break the public api
           | unless you have to and make a migration path if you do; now
           | it is 'let's definitely break the public api, with any minor
           | version change and just waste everyone's life fixing it, we
           | don't care'. And gpt doesn't know this. It usually does make
           | up code that's close to correct and relatively easy to fix
           | though, but you need to know how to read the docs and not
           | panic that actually everything is spitting errors.
           | 
           | If you ask it for C, Java or vanilla js it fares better but
           | there you suffer from the memory window; now with 16k tokens,
           | we are seeing massive improvements. The api deprecation
           | (read; we just throw away or change without warning) issue
           | remains and is a huge issue; I cannot even see how they would
           | properly fix that in LLMs. They are going to have outdated
           | versions in their search space; how do they know to ignore
           | them? And next to that there are the hallucinations.
        
             | [deleted]
        
           | cmrdporcupine wrote:
           | I am wondering why people seem to think it's so great for
           | this. It's fine for I guess boiler plate code construction
           | but totally falls over when I give it e.g. complicated Rust
           | borrow checker problems. And if you tell it a mistake it's
           | made, it just buries itself deeper branching off into spirals
           | of more and more incorrent solutions.
           | 
           | To me, it's like a junior developer I have to coach
           | constantly.
        
       | Hextinium wrote:
       | Link to the pin out of the bottom connector:
       | 
       | https://www.unihiker.com/wiki/board-overview
       | 
       | Looks like a neat board, I could see making expansion modules
       | that plug into the bottom and running like a IR blaster or other
       | stuff off the SPI/UART bus.
        
         | BeefySwain wrote:
         | > The UNIHIKER's pins are compatible with micro:bit
         | 
         | They really bury the lede here, awesome that there is already
         | an ecosystem that exists for the edge connector.
        
           | Tepix wrote:
           | Hey, that's really cool!
        
           | tmaly wrote:
           | Aside from pins, does this mean you can program with this
           | MakeCode ?
        
           | DWakefield wrote:
           | It's the same connector as on the BBC Micro:bit, right?
        
             | adolph wrote:
             | I was thinking the same, and it is!
             | 
             |  _Edge Connectors Pin numbers are compatible with
             | micro:bit, 19 independent I /O (Support 1 xI2C, 1xUART,
             | 2xSPI, 6x12-bit ADC, 5x10-bit PWM)_
             | 
             | https://www.unihiker.com/wiki/specification
             | 
             |  _Note: The edge connector on the back has no electrical
             | connection._
             | 
             | https://www.unihiker.com/wiki/board-overview
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | LeifCarrotson wrote:
       | Where's the schematic?
       | 
       | If I want to program and debug real-time routines in the
       | coprocessor, rather than using the built-in userspace drivers,
       | how do I do that?
        
         | zihotki wrote:
         | Just like with many other RPi "killers" from China - you don't.
         | They all suffer from the same issue with software :(
        
       | driggs wrote:
       | With "hiker" in the name, I had hoped to see onboard GPS. Nope!
        
       | sbr464 wrote:
       | [flagged]
        
       | nashashmi wrote:
       | The next iteration of RPi. Finally.
        
       | oneplane wrote:
       | As usual, looks good on papier but no ecosystem and the current
       | stack that it comes with is dead on arrival.
       | 
       | Boards need to come with mainstream distro support or with an
       | ecosystem (or both), otherwise it will just die. And with
       | internet connected devices, you can't set-and-forget, so it needs
       | to have live support.
       | 
       | Edit: a RockPi S (same SoC) can be had for $35 and a touch LCD
       | for $11... Granted, it doesn't come with the same integration and
       | headers, and doesn't have a microphone by default, and no RISC-V
       | MCU. But the point of integration is a useful product that stays
       | useful, and it doesn't if there is no ecosystem.
       | 
       | As for 'adding' mainstream support, it takes quite some effort
       | and active ownership. Out of the many rockchip boards and add-ons
       | this is the set that made it to some level of standard inclusion:
       | http://ftp.debian.org/debian/dists/stable/main/installer-arm...
        
         | ano-ther wrote:
         | The bottom connector looks like a BBC micro:bit so there is an
         | ecosystem at least on the hardware side
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | CommanderData wrote:
         | I purchased a few ARM boards in the past and won't do it again.
         | All became e-waste.
         | 
         | Rockchip notably, great hardware on paper. Try developing
         | something that needs hardware acceleration and it's a paper
         | weight.
         | 
         | It's a common cycle of broken promises to provide drivers by
         | manufactures, rinse and repeat. The exception being raspberry
         | pi or expressif. Depending on the application.
        
           | sosodev wrote:
           | I've had the same experience with non Raspberry Pi boards.
           | They've become useless thanks to endlessly broken software
           | and zero support. My rpi's have been useful for years and are
           | still getting regular updates.
           | 
           | I think I too was drawn in by the performance claims made by
           | those other manufacturers. I realized though that raspberry
           | pi are very powerful computers. We just take the scale of
           | modern computing for granted and our software is the real
           | problem.
        
             | Klinky wrote:
             | Even Raspberry Pi has struggled with GPU/HW acceleration,
             | but at least its distro is maintained & updated.
        
               | sosodev wrote:
               | The pi4's GPU at least supports OpenGL ES 3.1 and Vulkan
               | 1.2 now. That's decent even if not powerful.
        
             | joshmarinacci wrote:
             | Yup. It's RPi or nothing. It's the software that makes
             | these valuable, not hardware specs. If I wanted to sell an
             | ARM board I'd make it as Pi compatible as possible.
        
               | Eisenstein wrote:
               | The problem is that Broadcom won't sell you the chips
               | they use so you can't.
        
             | ignoramous wrote:
             | > _...just take the scale of modern computing for granted
             | and our software is the real problem._
             | 
             | I was thinking how I constantly find myself using GPT and
             | Bard to prettify source code. Surely, not the most
             | efficient use of compute.
             | 
             | Like some crude Parkinson's Law joke on more proficient
             | algorithms.
        
           | ttymck wrote:
           | Excuse my ignorance, but what sort of applications benefit
           | from hardware acceleration on limited SoC resources?
        
             | sosodev wrote:
             | Inferencing neural networks is a big one. It's hard to get
             | near real-time performance without it. Depending on the use
             | case of course.
        
               | chaxor wrote:
               | Why on earth would you run ML on a potato?
        
               | microtherion wrote:
               | To give one example, Raspberry Pi are often used to
               | control 3D printers and attached webcams, and there are
               | ML systems that supervise the webcam feed for evidence of
               | a print failure. Being able to run these systems on the
               | SBC would be an advantage, but that's typically not
               | realistic today.
        
               | bkirkby wrote:
               | _inference_ , object detection for one.
        
               | schreiaj wrote:
               | What should we run it on if we want to deploy it on
               | mobile systems with limited access to network and
               | extremely restricted power budgets?
               | 
               | For a hobby project I'm trying to find a solution - Power
               | budget for multiple is sub 200w. Need to run inference on
               | a lower resolution video stream (or multiple, that be
               | nice) to do object detection. Cost is a factor because I
               | need to have multiple angles to determine where in
               | relation to a mobile platform the target object is. I'm
               | looking at the Coral.ai board because RPi like boards
               | lack the ability to do ML tasks at reasonable FPS and
               | NVidia seems to have abandoned the lower cost side of the
               | market since the Jetson Nanos seem to be less and less
               | available. (Not that Coral.ai boards are available at
               | all...)
        
               | Eisenstein wrote:
               | Check out the Luxonis Oak products. I use an Oak-1 Lite
               | to do real time 2 stage object detection and recognition
               | (~23FPS at 1080P inference on device with two custom
               | yolov5n models). With a bit of python and a Pi (or a
               | Rock64 or similar) you can get it up and running in a
               | day. They also have a decent community and are actively
               | developing the API/SDK and hardware.
        
               | schreiaj wrote:
               | Thanks, I've got one of their depth cameras that's been
               | ok. I didn't realize they'd expanded their line so much.
               | Glad to hear about the API/SDK improving, last time I
               | mucked with it a year or so ago it seemed like it was
               | underdeveloped.
               | 
               | Going to have to dig into the sensors they use - had
               | passable luck with non ML tasks using dirt cheap camera
               | modules from laptops running at low resolutions right up
               | until I started moving the cameras at all and then it
               | became a blurry mess because they were so small their
               | exposure times were high. (I'm trying to also avoid
               | having to put a bunch of illumination near the cameras so
               | it doesn't entirely look like a biblically accurate
               | angel)
        
               | Eisenstein wrote:
               | Well, you can control the camera ISP and they use very
               | decent IMX modules, so it really shouldn't an issue like
               | it was with the cheapos, as long as you can do the coding
               | to your needs.
               | 
               | EDIT:
               | 
               | * https://docs.luxonis.com/projects/api/en/latest/samples
               | /Colo...
        
               | oneplane wrote:
               | It would probably not run on this potato directly, but on
               | an accelerator (be it in-SoC or a separate thing like a
               | Google Coral). The management and control of a Coral
               | needs to happen on a CPU somewhere, but the actual work
               | doesn't involve the CPU much, if at all.
               | 
               | So if you have a thing that has all the data and all the
               | work done on an engine elsewhere and you just need to
               | have a SoC to turn the thing on and off and get the data
               | in and out, that's where a potato-SoC could work. Of
               | course, the potato would need good distro support with
               | up-to-date kernel, drivers, python, libraries etc. and if
               | you're connecting it to the network, best make sure it's
               | also getting patched consistently.
               | 
               | So, as far as ML Potatoes go, that's about it. It is a
               | totally valid question by the way, even if asked in jest.
        
             | oneplane wrote:
             | You're actually answering your own question here ;-)
             | 
             | Because a SoC with limited CPU-core resources can't do
             | everything in software, the chip contains many system
             | components (hence System-on-Chip or System-on-a-Chip) that
             | handle things the CPU cores then no longer need to do.
             | 
             | Think protocol handling or memory; instead of spending many
             | clock cycles on handling the USB bus, you can leave that to
             | the USB controller and only deal with what is actually
             | relevant to your USB device. Same with the VOP (Video
             | Output Processor) block, instead of spending many clock
             | cycles on putting the right bits in the frame buffer you
             | tell the VOP that you'd like the background to be orange
             | and then only spend time setting the right bits for black
             | text (for example). So instead of having to deal with many
             | millions of bits, you only have to deal with less than 1%
             | of them because every bit you don't set becomes orange. For
             | other things like I2C, I2S, DMA, networking, cryptography,
             | SD-IO, GPIO, PWM etc. the same applies. Instead of
             | constantly spending time setting the right bit at the right
             | time many times each second, you just tell a dedicated
             | block on the SoC to do a thing in a certain pattern and it
             | will do it for you, consuming on CPU core resources.
             | 
             | This also allows slow CPU cores that wouldn't be able to
             | decode video in real time to offload the entire decoding to
             | a video decoder block, and then tell the GPU part of the
             | SoC that you're drawing a green rectangle somewhere and
             | that's where it has to put the decoded video frames. Why
             | would one do all of this? Because it's cheap and power-
             | efficient, and that's how you make a big pile of money.
             | 
             | I have no idea how accurate or up-to-date this PDF is, but
             | it should at least give you some idea as to what a SoC can
             | do without bogging down the CPU cores: https://dl.radxa.com
             | /rockpis/docs/hw/datasheets/Rockchip%20R... Check chapter 9
             | for example, all of those boxes are things you don't have
             | to spend CPU cycles on. If you did use the CPU, it would be
             | super slow.
        
               | jancsika wrote:
               | Is this in the purview of the panfrost driver stack?
        
               | oneplane wrote:
               | I think that's only for ARM's own GPU IP, not for the VOP
               | (it's more of a LCD driver than an actual GPU -- I'd
               | compare the VOP to say, GameBoy-color level of graphics
               | capabilities, which is cool but not even close to a bare-
               | bones VESA or UEFI framebuffer).
        
           | gadgetoid wrote:
           | I'm still trying to get a Rock 5B to boot from NVMe. By all
           | appearances they included a USB Type-C port that doesn't
           | work, so the system never pulls sufficient power not to boot
           | loop. Apparently even after a firmware update.
           | 
           | To be totally fair to the up-and-coming boards, the Pi was
           | pretty poorly supported on day 1 and the community did (and
           | still does) a lot of heavy lifting. I'm still waiting for a
           | contender, but I don't have the time or energy to devote to
           | another SBC.
           | 
           | Despite being a super prolific maintainer of Pi-stuff and
           | related projects I haven't had a single SBC manufacturer
           | reach out to me and say "hey what do you need to support
           | this?" They just don't seem to care beyond shoving product
           | out the door and hoping for the best.
        
             | death_syn wrote:
             | You need to get a dumb brick for that Rock 5B. Looks like
             | you got one of the ones with a bad firmware. When it
             | negotiates the power drops out. There're tons of forum
             | posts.
        
             | Rediscover wrote:
             | If You have not tried what the other reply-post suggests
             | (dumb brick), I have a 5V 4A dumb brick I can loan for a
             | quick test. Seattle area. It has worked on quite a few
             | boards here. Or purchase one from where-ever, they are
             | really useful outside of SBCs (though they are usually 5.3V
             | and 4.xA, so watch out with sensitive parts).
        
           | 3np wrote:
           | Armbian is a saving grace for boards that it supports.
        
         | MisterTea wrote:
         | > As usual, looks good on papier but no ecosystem and the
         | current stack that it comes with is dead on arrival.
         | 
         | There is no standard Arm ecosystem to boot on which is the real
         | issue - every board needs a custom kernel and booting.
         | 
         | I blame Arm for never cooking up a PC like spec that defines
         | hardware configuration, firmware and booting. This is why x86
         | is going to stick around for a while - its dead simple to
         | bootstrap a random x86 machine (well, almost).
        
           | Retr0id wrote:
           | I naively assumed that device trees had solved this problem,
           | but clearly they haven't in practice. How come?
        
             | Teknoman117 wrote:
             | For one, you have to provide one specifically for your
             | board to boot at all. There is no "common" one that'll get
             | you to a shell on any board.
             | 
             | The main issue is that most SoC vendors just dump a heavily
             | hacked up Linux kernel source intended for Android on you,
             | along with binary blobs (firmware, android hal services,
             | etc.). The drivers aren't in the kernel per se, just enough
             | of a stub for the proprietary blobs to talk to the
             | hardware.
             | 
             | So if the goal is to run a standard Linux distro on the
             | board, you're pretty screwed unless you have the time and
             | resources (or a community) to reverse engineer the android
             | bsp into drivers for the mainline kernel.
             | 
             | The thing that makes the RPi great is that there's actually
             | an entity paying for this development to happen, along with
             | the community. It's certainly far from the fastest ARM
             | board, but even the decade old RPi 1 still gets kernel
             | updates.
        
         | cosmojg wrote:
         | Assuming it's small enough for your needs, a used Intel NUC can
         | get you loads more mileage than pretty much any ARM SoC at an
         | equivalent price.
         | 
         | Currently available on eBay:
         | 
         | * $49.95 for an i5-5300U at 2.3GHz, 4GB of RAM, and 128GB of
         | SSD storage
         | 
         | * $89.00 for an i3-7100U at 2.4GHz, 8GB of RAM, and 256GB of
         | SSD storage
         | 
         | * $135.00 for an i7-5557U at 3.1GHz, 16GB of RAM, and 256GB of
         | SSD storage
         | 
         | ...all loaded with ample driver support, extensive connectivity
         | options, and bog-standard x86-64 instructions.
        
       | StayTrue wrote:
       | Most people seem concerned about software, ecosystem and
       | community. After my experience with Raspberry Pi, my top concern
       | is investing in a platform that may leave me hanging for supply
       | reasons.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-06-15 23:00 UTC)