For me this culminated to a deep belief that technology =/= progress. This has shaken my core to re-evaluate who will ever be allowed to benefit from my skills and time, but ruined a lot of my genuine enjoyment and enthusiasm.
> For me this culminated to a deep belief that technology =/= progress.
I landed on the opposite conclusion. People don't progress in any domain if technology doesn't force them. Sometimes the ride might be bumpy and it might be taking them forwards kicking and screaming, but without new technology no progress happens on any issue.
Science drives technology, technology drives economy and technology and economy drive culture and science. That's the virtuous feedback loop that drives itself and everything human as a side effect.
I agree that both individual and progress of humanity relies on technology. Considering the state of the planet currently, it's essential to support the population count.
To clarify, "=/=" is to denote "not equivalent", in that not all technology or advancement is progress.
I used to be naive and use/recommend things I now wish never existed. Not because they aren't useful or a potential future, but because of who owns and controls them now.
As time goes on, it's clear how dangerous certain tools can be in the wrong hands. If we aren't careful, the feedback loop can end up destroying us and/or limiting our freedoms. Unfortunately it appears this is the current road we are on.
On this forum, it's likely that the power we have starts with careful analysis of what we are building and who can use it in (unintended) negative ways.
Recording the game start and end time server-side to perform a plausibility check of submitted score vs. time played would help, but this would require tracking individual users games, and still doesn't solve the problem entirely.
Fantastic game! I miss the old iOS version. My suggestions:
The predictable congestion gets a bit tedious and makes the game impossibly difficult quite quickly. It guarantees needing to keep readjusting almost every plane, otherwise a crash happens while trying to select the correct plane to move. It's a great mechanic earlier on and as a tutorial, because collisions happen rarely, but knowing that so many planes spawning or taking off on a calculated crash path when it's already chaotic seems to actually take skill out of the game as it progresses.
Planes that land should turn gray as it's confusing vs. planes taking off (especially consecutive takeoffs).
Volume slider rather than just on/off.
Drawing paths to the landing area should be more forgiving. If there's a short section of weird path at the end, it messes up timing for the planes landing and causes crashes.
Baby monitors fundamentally need to be safe and allow parents peace of mind. Knowing they can constantly hear the baby and communicate verbally to soothe, as if you were in the room with them, allows this. It already means you only have to respond and/or get up to tend if they are still unsettled after a period of time. Monitors also have volume control so you can stay alert without being constantly disturbed.
The traditional baby monitor system had three states (ON and functional, ON and non-functional, OFF). It provides a constantly available and instantaneous test for "functional" - as long as you can hear sound from the other unit, it's almost guaranteed to currently be in a safe condition. Monitoring is constant, human-first, and all human. The system is relatively fail-safe.
Your design replaces this with a multi-state system and algorithms (adding ON in listening mode, ON in delay mode with output off, ON and partially-functional etc.). It removes any reliable method to prove an obviously "functional" state at any given time. Monitoring is non-constant (for the human), machine-first, and human as last resort (like corporate customer services). The system is not fail-safe despite being machine-first and at higher risk of error or malfunction due to complexity.
The risks include a few failed notifications or incorrect delay timing leading to early developmental trauma, such as fear of abandonment. It doesn't take much. We are still learning to deal with this human-human, before adding invisible unknowns.
If nothing else, what are babies likely to learn in a pre-verbal state where the days are spent sensing and observing their environment to develop the brain? It'll probably be how to game the baby monitor algorithm.
> Also during the day it's really handy to be notified when baby has woken up from her nap. Let's us be out of the house, or in a distant room, and still keep track of what's going on.
If you are going out of earshot of the baby by doing this, you are fully relying on the technology being functional. That would seem unnecessarily risky, and not nice for the baby (they can sense this stuff). The odds of a catastrophe are low in a singular environment, but still enough to worry. Almost inevitably it would end badly if this were scaled to a mass consumer product.
The idea is interesting from an engineering view, but from a human one it feels dystopian to insert a machine between parent and baby to this extent. It removes/replaces a layer of human-human connection. Where does engineering the natural human experience out of life end? Automated feeding? AI nannies and teachers? Then onto AI therapist?
My suggestion would be to do a lighter version of the features in a system which focuses on safety (always being able to monitor no matter what, for example on the ESP32, you could have the second core independent and direct-output the feed if the first core hangs or crashes). Feature-wise, rather than not alerting for 10 minutes, you could apply a DSP algorithm which reduces harsh frequencies for this period, whilst slowly increasing the output volume of the monitor.
I like the idea of alerts because it expands the base features without risk, and crucially makes the babies life better, as alerts could be sooner for important things that do need attention quickly. As an experiment, you could add an SD card and record snippets of cries which ended up in alerts, tag them with an ordered list of what you did to soothe or what was wrong, and see if AI can make anything of the data. Maybe certain cries can trigger alerts sooner, or cries over an extended period may indicate fever.
Thank you for engaging with this thoughtfully. You've highlighted the HUGE difference between "bespoke just for me/us" and "product that works for everyone". I've been struggling with this myself, since its value to my family is such that I immediately think "how can I share/sell this to everyone?"
In my case, I have a separate heartbeat check process (running on another machine) which ensures that the monitor is correctly working (no silent fails). I also wired up a SECOND esp32-box-3 as a receiver, and it will complain loudly if the transmitter one isn't sending (much like most normal baby monitors do). The monitor (web ui) has an option of directly listening to the raw non-gated audio, which I use every now and then to confirm what's going on. I also record the streams sometimes for algorithmic improvement.
My aim is not to replace human connection with machines, it's to allow the parents a bit more sanity so as to be better carers for our children. So far we've gained in sleep, piece of mind, and reduced stress. The last one is important - listening to your baby yell for 10 minutes, even if you know they're just annoyed because they don't want to sleep, can be really draining (especially for mom). The notifications allow us to keep tabs on things without the direct audio line to the limbic system.
Yes, raw PCBs that size are usually closer to 1EUR/unit. DHL shipping on these slightly larger than average boards would be 3EUR/unit.
Are you talking about fully assembled (pcb + components + solder mask + pnp + soldering + test) at 17EUR/unit? If so, that's incredible cheap for a finished product delivered to your door. If not, you're doing something wrong.
Considering the brain functioning as prediction machine, we are constantly correcting the error between sensory perception and our inner reality. This is classic (closed) control loop[1] with self-correcting characteristics updated by adaptation through learning and experience.
At first the process is subconscious, then chaos enters as our conscious awareness develops, morphing the control loop into second or third order states of "correcting corrections" as we perform inner tasks such as ruminating, or external tasks such as group discussion and logical planning.
The perfect prediction machine would be a simulation running an entire up-to-date universe model, but between our limited physical resources and available energy in reality, our evolved aim is efficiency, by creating a state of awareness and reactive patterns with minimal information (lowest entropy). We do this by making assumptions, testing the world, then processing the response and updating our control loop. The tradeoff is lack of precision, as a model without complete information has guaranteed errors.
Children who form a more realistic core worldview through guidance, opportunities and experience are best set up to create solid foundations which are more adaptable to future unexpected situations. Whether this is learning emotional response in social settings or math, the ability to integrate future conscious experience depends on early neuronal structures formed by subconscious expectations of the world. If measurement error is too great from expectations and our current loop/wavelength, our options are to discard this information or learn from it by reflecting on sources of inevitable prediction error through reasoning.
