[HN Gopher] A History of Early Microcontrollers, Part 1: Calcula...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       A History of Early Microcontrollers, Part 1: Calculator Chips Came
       First (2022)
        
       Author : teuobk
       Score  : 77 points
       Date   : 2025-01-04 22:18 UTC (4 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.eejournal.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.eejournal.com)
        
       | colinprince wrote:
       | Also loved this:
       | 
       | https://technicshistory.com/2024/11/03/a-craving-for-calcula...
        
         | uticus wrote:
         | very nice.
         | 
         | > As the number of components in circuits grew, the number of
         | manufacturing steps also grew, and manufacturing error rates
         | multiplied--a device with one thousand components, each of
         | which a skilled worker could connect with 99.9% reliability,
         | had a 63% chance of having at least one defective connection.
         | The search for an end to this "tyranny of numbers" drove many
         | research projects in the late 1950s, most of them funded by the
         | various arms of the United States military, all of whom foresaw
         | an unending appetite for ever-more-sophisticated electronics to
         | control their weaponry and defense systems. The military-funded
         | projects included "micro-modules" (individual components that
         | would snap together like tinkertoys), "microcircuits" (wires
         | and passive components etched onto a ceramic substrate into
         | which active components, like transistors, could be connected),
         | and "molecular electronics" (nanotechnology avant la
         | lettre).[3]
        
       | klelatti wrote:
       | May also be of interest on this topic:
       | 
       | https://thechipletter.substack.com/p/tiny-computers-from-tex...
        
         | jgalt212 wrote:
         | two uses of the word "delve" early on in the essay. ChatGPT?
        
           | klelatti wrote:
           | From the HM guidelines
           | 
           | > Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other
           | people's work.
        
             | jgalt212 wrote:
             | It wasn't shallow, and I took the to read what someone else
             | posted, and I'm reasonably sure it was AI Slop. So if it's
             | AI Slop, is it really another person's work?
        
               | klelatti wrote:
               | I'm genuinely interested in why you think this particular
               | post is 'AI slop'.
        
           | asdefghyk wrote:
           | Its possible to analyze documents or writings to determine if
           | they written by the same person with a reasonable to good
           | accuracy . Would be interesting to compare the suspect
           | article against others by the same author. Unless Chat GPT
           | has been told to write in the same style - not sure how that
           | would work .....
        
           | firesteelrain wrote:
           | not sure if its ChatGPT or not but the author uses
           | "favourite" so I am going to assume it's more common in the
           | UK or proper English country to be using the word.
        
           | Brian_K_White wrote:
           | Implication not substantiated by random insignificant
           | observation. Bot?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-01-08 23:00 UTC)