The much much much more concerning part of this bill in my opinion is the part that applies this expectation to CNC machining equipment. This means that there will be some ugly consequences to running real industry out of New York state. Probably heavy import and cross shipping delays (lots of German machining equipment passes through the port at NY/NJ, so could theoretically be subject to this, even if eventual delivery is to Texas, for instance). The reasoning behind things like the old "receiver is the only part of the gun to be serialized and tracked" and "80% AR Lower Receiver" were to prevent impact to non-gun industries. Block of steel with random holes is not a gun is an important concept. My only conclusions are: 1) very glad I don't live in New York, 2) buy my used VMC sooner rather than later to avoid this stupidity. Much like continuing to drive my 2010 Miata a lot longer since it doesn't have all this terrible new technology that prevents maintenance (VIN locked modules, no home programming software to replace things, etc etc).
Readit Newswcunning commented on New York’s budget bill would require “blocking technology” on all 3D printers blog.adafruit.com/2026/02... · Posted by u/ptorrone
It was sad to read that the store has closed (though they still managed to do some seasonal events with the organ).
The Friends of the Wanamaker Organ society is doing work with the new owners towards preservation. I doubt it's going anywhere, but concerts will be sporadic for a while.
Coffee makes me jittery but espresso (or lattes) do not. Is this why?
The biggest thing is what kind of "coffee" you mean by coffee -- cold brew in particular tends to be a much higher extraction % since the bitter notes you get on higher extractions are less noticeable at colder temperatures. The rest is what the sibling responses mention -- time of day and speed of absorption in the digestive system can have big impacts.
> If allocated to caffeinated coffee consumption, patients were encouraged to drink at least 1 cup of caffeinated coffee (or at least 1 espresso shot) and other caffeine-containing products every day as per their usual lifestyle
I tried to skim to figure out how much caffeine/ml was actually in the drinks, but seems the researchers don't know themselves either? Wouldn't there be a huge difference depending on the beans, how it's made and so on? 1 espresso can be made very strong with packed coffee, or it can be made very weak, "1 cup of caffeinated coffee" basically says nothing at all, unless I'm missing the true definition elsewhere in the paper.
James Hoffman did some interesting videos on that -- espresso is a more efficient extraction method than Aeropress, but less complete than a very high water to coffee ratio pour over for the same weight of ground coffee. Extraction of caffeine is very directly tied to contact time and temperature, so two double shots of espresso (40g coffee) can actually be less caffeine extracted than a single large pour over (25g coffee) when the pour over is upwards of 22% extraction (typical of 20:1 water to coffee ratios and modern zero-bypass brewers). Similarly, there are large differences in beans, so 22% extraction on weak caffeine beans might be way less than 18% extraction on much higher caffeine beans. This is most obvious in the fact that Robusta has much higher caffeine on average than Arabica. Also, 22% extraction has a lot more unpleasant bitter compounds, not just more caffeine, so it's not my preference for taste in general.
Location: Detroit, MI
Remote: Yes
Willing to relocate: no
Technologies: Embedded systems, automotive, machine learning, signal processing, data science, real time computing, safety processes (MISRA, ISO26262, etc), MATLAB, FPGA.
Resume: LinkedIn -- https://www.linkedin.com/in/wcunning
Email: wdocunningham \@\ gmail.com
Background: Masters in control theory and signal processing, working in the auto industry for the last 7 years, first on low level powertrain software then the last year or so on LIDAR/computer vision for autonomous vehicles. I've done the most work in C, but I'm now contributing to safety development work with the Rust consortium and Ferrous Systems through my current employer. Recently had to read the Linux kernel source and use the BCC tool suite to find a subtle issue in the network stack causing high latency on sensor data for AV, also coincidentally fixed most of the network timing infrastructure.
Currently doing software defined vehicle software architecture with a focus on fail-safe and fail-operational, loosely coupled, distributed systems. This includes some standards contributions and work with high level suppliers like Nvidia and Renesas for next-generation software/hardware system co-development.
Primary skills include hard real time embedded systems, safety critical applications, firmware development, system integration and complex hardware/software interaction debugging, along with detailed data analysis problems.
Side interests include machining, 3D printing, embedded system development, coffee roasting and furniture making.
wcunning commented on EVs are depreciating faster than gas-powered cars restofworld.org/2025/ev-d... · Posted by u/belter
This is mostly a function of the markets for used EVs and used ICE vehicles being the same and the used EV purchaser is not a target market for EVs in general.
Not that many people can afford a new car now at all, and of those who can, they're getting luxury end cars, generally. Luxury vehicles depreciate faster than non-luxury vehicles, generally. People who want used cars are frequently people who can't afford new cars, thus they want something that works in their area in their situation with their stuff as it stands. Many of these people live in places with poor charging networks or rent and cannot install a charger. Used EVs don't come with a free charger like new ones often do. EVs were also being priced and purchased based on the tax credit for quite a while, which meant that price was a little... soft? On top of that, many EVs that fit into this data are selling for less for real reasons, like the uninsurability of Cybertrucks and the range loss on the Bolt EV. This all drives demand down or shifts the curves and lowers prices. It's just a small market for now.
That seems absurdly low, I would expect a skilled mechanic to make at least $50 an hour.
$20/hour is starting pay around here at McDonalds, In-N-Out Burger, etc.
Thus the starting out part. Certifications, years of experience, skills in terms of welding exhaust or the like all raise that, but mechanics get screwed on their rate regularly, which is why they're dropping out. See one of the other top level comments about "shortage -> low wages."
This seems like a pretty fair system, they do get to do it on unrealistic practically new vehicles, but they also can’t take any practical shortcuts whatsoever.
Is there any proposal for some alternate way determining it?
The impression I got from seeing the demonstration was that this was the result of years of negotiating and arguing to get to something fair. Ford doesn't love it, dealers don't love it, but no one can really come up with a major improvement.
> The dealership then pays mechanics an hourly wage ($20+, fairly high for well certified master mechanics)
Maybe in Ohio.
I'm not sure that your comment is even directionally correct. TFA is clickbait for blue collar pseudo-car-guys. The example given in the article paints the mechanic as the hero, losing money on every job. In reality book time is insanely exaggerated in the median, and the problem is likely more that mechanics don't like earning a dime for every dollar the boss makes.
Many mechanics (seems that is what the article example is) get paid on book time, not hourly. That is what the guy in the article is complaining about. That their book rate is both too aggressive, and far less than the "customer book time" / rate. The reason mechanics are often paid this way is so that they stay efficient. Warranty jobs are especially aggressive on the mechanic book rate, because cars under warranty are newer with few unexpected problems like rusty parts, stripped bolts, age related issues, etc.
$20 is starting as I understand, and goes up quite high for master mechanics with certifications. That's how I meant that to be read.
I started out my automotive software career with Ford, and as part of the new college hire training program, I actually got to see the process of how "book rate" is determined. They take a brand new car, straight off the assembly line and give a master mechanic a process sheet (head gasket remove and replace, for instance). He has a tool cart with a computer next to it, about 6 feet away from the vehicle. For each step he starts a timer on the computer for that step, picks up the necessary ratchet and socket or whatever, loosens the next bolt, walks the ratchet and socket back to the tool box, puts it away and then finally stops the timer. He probably practices the procedure a few times before the timed run, but basically this prevents the company from setting the time to do a job super crazy low.
He's also not allowed to take any shortcuts from the book procedure, which there frequently are a few available (use a long wobble extension bar and a universal joint and you can get in without taking off all of the stuff above that bolt, whatever). On the other hand, this is the warranty rate (meaning new cars, largely less rust, etc). Independent/non-dealer mechanics will typically charge more time than the warranty time estimate from the manufacturer to account for things like rusty vehicles with harder to remove bolts and such, though this is usually in the rate book they subscribe to from whatever information source they pay for (warranty + 20% or so).
The issue is that the estimated time for a job is probably a high estimate for a brand new car and probably a low estimate for a several year old car, and the risk of that is on the dealership. The dealership then pays mechanics an hourly wage ($20+, fairly high for well certified master mechanics) and assumes that the hours listed on the job from the manufacturer are accurate, leaving the mechanic to take the risk if it goes over. Generally, the dealership loses on this proposition too, since they lose out on business/bay/electric/heat/etc for the lost time, so they don't like warranty work. They can upcharge/charge for more time/etc on a job for a customer, not for warranty repair due to contractual obligations to the OEM. This is particularly bad for Ford, since they currently lead the industry in recalls and warranty spend, meaning that their dealership networks are getting a lot more of that kind of work with limited profit and no ability to turn it down.