×
Digg’s founders explain how they’re building a site for humans in the AI era | TechCrunch

Digg’s founders explain how they’re building a site for humans in the AI era | TechCrunch

The rebooted version of social site Digg aims to bring back the spirit of the old web at a time when AI-generated content is threatening to overwhelm traditional social media platforms, drowning out the voices of real people.

This presents an opportunity to build a social site for the AI era, where the people who create content and manage online communities are given a bigger stake in a platform’s success, Digg’s founders think.

A Web 2.0-era news aggregation giant, Digg was once valued at $175 million at its height back in 2008 and is now being given new life under the direction of its original founder, Kevin Rose, and Reddit co-founder Alexis Ohanian. The two recently teamed up to announce a new vision for Digg, which will focus on enabling discovery and community, the way that the early internet once allowed for.

Speaking at The Wall Street Journal’s Future of Everything conference on Thursday, the founders offered more insight as to how they plan to accomplish that goal with the Digg reboot.

Initially, the two touched on problems they encountered in the earlier days of social media, with Ohanian recalling how he chose to resign from Reddit’s board over disagreements about the company’s approach to hate speech that he felt was bad for society and the business.

For instance, the company was allowing a forum on Reddit called “r/WatchPeopleDie” to continue operating up until the Christchurch mass shooting, which caught the attention of the media, he said. It was only then that Reddit decided to adjust its policies around violence and gore on the platform.

After Reddit, Ohanian went on to found venture capital firm Seven Seven Six, where he says he’s focused on building businesses that are more “values-aligned.” He said he sees Digg as another step in that direction.

Rose reflected on the early days of machine learning, where the technology was often used to reward posts on which people would rant about the “most obscure, kind of fringe-y weirdness,” he said.

“Sometimes that can be good, but oftentimes it’s pushing really weird agendas. And that’s not even getting into the whole bot and AI side of things that are also pushing those agendas,” Rose said.

With Digg, the founders want to create a new community focused on serving real people, not AI or bots, they said.

Alexis Ohanian.Image Credits:WSJ’s Future of Everything conference

“I’ve long subscribed to the ‘dead internet theory,’” Ohanian said, referencing the idea that much of what we see online is not created by actual humans, but bots. Ten years ago, this was more of a conspiracy theory, but with the rise of AI, that’s changed, he said. “Probably in the last few years — since we’ve blown past the Turing test — [the dead internet theory] is a very real thing.”

“I think the average person has no idea just how much of the content they consume on social media, if it’s not an outright bot, is a human using AI in the loop to generate that content at scale, to manipulate and evade,” he added.

To address the rise of bots, the founders are looking toward new technology, like zero-knowledge proofs (aka zk proofs), a protocol used in cryptography that could be used to prove that someone owns something on a platform. They’re envisioning communities where admins could turn the dials, so to speak, to verify that a poster is human before allowing them to join the conversation.

“The world is going to be flooded with bots, with AI agents,” Rose pointed out, and that could infiltrate communities where people are trying to make genuine human connections. Something like this recently occurred on Reddit, where researchers secretly used AI bots to pose as real people on a forum to test how AI could influence human opinion.

Image Credits:Digg

“We are going to live in a world where the vast, vast majority of the content we’re seeing is in … some shape or form, AI-generated, and it is a terrible user experience if the reason you’re coming to a place is for authentic human connection, and it’s not with humans — or it’s with people masquerading as humans,” Ohanian said.

He explained that there are a number of ways that social sites could test to see if someone is a person. For instance, if someone has owned their device for a longer period of time, that could add more weight to their comment, he suggested.

Rose said that the site could also offer different levels of service, based on how likely someone was to be human.

If you signed up with a throw-away email address and used a VPN, for example, then maybe you would only be able to get recommendations or engage in some simpler ways. Or if you were anonymous and typed in a comment too quickly, the site could then ask you to take an extra step to prove your humanity — like verifying your phone number or even charging you a small fee if the number you provided was disposable, Rose said.

“There’s going to be these tiers that we do, based on how you want to engage and interact with the actual network itself,” he confirmed.

Image Credits:Digg

However, the founders stressed they’re not anti-AI. They expect to use AI to help in areas like site moderation, including de-escalating situations where someone starts to stir up trouble.

In addition to verifying humans, the founders envision a service where moderators and creators financially benefit from their efforts. “I do believe the days of unpaid moderation by the masses — doing all the heavy lifting to create massive, multi-million-person communities — has to go away. I think these people are putting in their life and soul into these communities, and for them not to be compensated in some way is ridiculous to me. And so we have to figure out a way to bring them along for the ride,” Rose said.

As one example, he pointed to how Reddit trademarked the term “WallStreetBets,” which is the name of a forum created by a Reddit user. Instead, Rose thinks a company should help creators like this who add value to a community, not try to take ownership of their work as Reddit did.

With the combination of improved user experience and a model that empowers creators to monetize their work, the founders think Digg itself will benefit. “I want to believe the business model that will make Digg successful is one that aligns all those stakeholders. And I think it is very, very possible,” Ohanian said.

Source link
#Diggs #founders #explain #theyre #building #site #humans #era #TechCrunch

Rivian has finally revealed that the first customers of the company’s new R2 SUV will get their vehicles on June 9.

The automaker has spent the last few months ramping up its efforts to release the R2, which is more affordable and aimed at a larger market than its current R1 lineup. The new SUV will initially be available in a trim that starts just under $60,000, though Rivian has announced plans to release a “standard” version that starts at $48,490 in 2027.

The company has teased an even more affordable version “starting around $45,000” late next year — a price tag Rivian has promoted since the R2 reveal in 2024.

Rivian has high expectations for the R2. Founder and CEO RJ Scaringe has said it is “maybe the most important thing we’ve launched to date.” The company is betting on an extremely fast ramp-up, with as many as 25,000 vehicles delivered by the end of this year. Ultimately, Rivian hopes the R2 and its hatchback sibling, the R3, will help the company turn a profit for the first time since its founding in 2009.

#Rivian #deliver #SUVs #June #TechCrunchelectric vehicles,EVs,Rivian">Rivian will deliver the first R2 SUVs on June 9 | TechCrunch
Rivian has finally revealed that the first customers of the company’s new R2 SUV will get their vehicles on June 9.

The automaker has spent the last few months ramping up its efforts to release the R2, which is more affordable and aimed at a larger market than its current R1 lineup. The new SUV will initially be available in a trim that starts just under ,000, though Rivian has announced plans to release a “standard” version that starts at ,490 in 2027. 







The company has teased an even more affordable version “starting around ,000” late next year — a price tag Rivian has promoted since the R2 reveal in 2024.

Rivian has high expectations for the R2. Founder and CEO RJ Scaringe has said it is “maybe the most important thing we’ve launched to date.” The company is betting on an extremely fast ramp-up, with as many as 25,000 vehicles delivered by the end of this year. Ultimately, Rivian hopes the R2 and its hatchback sibling, the R3, will help the company turn a profit for the first time since its founding in 2009.


#Rivian #deliver #SUVs #June #TechCrunchelectric vehicles,EVs,Rivian

revealed that the first customers of the company’s new R2 SUV will get their vehicles on June 9.

The automaker has spent the last few months ramping up its efforts to release the R2, which is more affordable and aimed at a larger market than its current R1 lineup. The new SUV will initially be available in a trim that starts just under $60,000, though Rivian has announced plans to release a “standard” version that starts at $48,490 in 2027.

The company has teased an even more affordable version “starting around $45,000” late next year — a price tag Rivian has promoted since the R2 reveal in 2024.

Rivian has high expectations for the R2. Founder and CEO RJ Scaringe has said it is “maybe the most important thing we’ve launched to date.” The company is betting on an extremely fast ramp-up, with as many as 25,000 vehicles delivered by the end of this year. Ultimately, Rivian hopes the R2 and its hatchback sibling, the R3, will help the company turn a profit for the first time since its founding in 2009.

#Rivian #deliver #SUVs #June #TechCrunchelectric vehicles,EVs,Rivian">Rivian will deliver the first R2 SUVs on June 9 | TechCrunch

Rivian has finally revealed that the first customers of the company’s new R2 SUV will get their vehicles on June 9.

The automaker has spent the last few months ramping up its efforts to release the R2, which is more affordable and aimed at a larger market than its current R1 lineup. The new SUV will initially be available in a trim that starts just under $60,000, though Rivian has announced plans to release a “standard” version that starts at $48,490 in 2027.

The company has teased an even more affordable version “starting around $45,000” late next year — a price tag Rivian has promoted since the R2 reveal in 2024.

Rivian has high expectations for the R2. Founder and CEO RJ Scaringe has said it is “maybe the most important thing we’ve launched to date.” The company is betting on an extremely fast ramp-up, with as many as 25,000 vehicles delivered by the end of this year. Ultimately, Rivian hopes the R2 and its hatchback sibling, the R3, will help the company turn a profit for the first time since its founding in 2009.

#Rivian #deliver #SUVs #June #TechCrunchelectric vehicles,EVs,Rivian
Smart starts with the circuit board, not the cloud

Most coverage of smart devices jumps straight to AI features and voice assistants. But the foundation is physical. A device is a printed circuit board, a microcontroller, a fistful of sensors, a radio, and a battery, all crammed into a shell that has to survive being dropped, sat on, and left in a hot car.

This is where hardware development does its quiet, unglamorous work. Engineers pick a microcontroller based on how much computing the device needs versus how little power it can afford to burn. They route signal traces on the board so a Wi-Fi radio doesn’t drown out a delicate sensor reading. They run the whole thing through thermal testing, drop testing, and certification for FCC and CE marks before it can legally ship.

Get this layer wrong, and no amount of clever software saves you. A poorly designed board produces flaky sensor data. Bad antenna placement means the device drops off your network the moment you walk to the next room. These aren’t software bugs. You can’t patch your way out of a physics problem.

The companies building good hardware treat the proof-of-concept stage as a real checkpoint. They wire up development boards and modular parts to test the core idea cheaply, before committing to a custom design that costs real money to manufacture. It’s the boring discipline that separates products from expensive paperweights.

Firmware is where the device actually thinks

Sitting on top of the hardware is firmware. This is the low-level code that tells the chip what to do, when to wake up, how to read a sensor, and when to phone home. People mix up firmware and software all the time, so here’s the clean split. Software runs on your phone or in the cloud and handles the screens you tap. Firmware lives inside the device and controls the hardware directly.

Firmware is genuinely hard to write well. The constraints are brutal. A typical IoT microcontroller has a tiny amount of memory, often measured in kilobytes, and it might run on a coin cell that needs to last a year. Every line of code competes for space and power.

Then there’s timing. A lot of devices need deterministic, real-time behavior, meaning a sensor reading has to be processed within a fixed window or the whole thing falls apart. A heart monitor that processes a beat “eventually” is useless. The firmware has to guarantee it happens now.

If you want the deep version of how this gets built in practice, Yalantis published a solid breakdown of firmware development for embedded IoT devices that covers architecture, power management, and the over-the-air update workflows that keep a device current after it ships. The OTA piece matters more than it sounds. A device that can’t safely update its own firmware is frozen in time the day it leaves the factory.

Connectivity is a series of trade-offs

Your smart device has to talk to something. Your phone, your router, a cloud server, or all three. Choosing how it talks is one of the most consequential engineering calls in the whole project, and there’s no single right answer.

Bluetooth Low Energy sips power and works great for a wearable talking to your phone, but its range is short and it can’t reach the internet on its own. Wi-Fi reaches everything but drains batteries fast. LoRaWAN travels for miles on almost no power, which is perfect for a soil sensor in a field, but it carries tiny amounts of data slowly. Cellular options like NB-IoT and LTE-M let a device work anywhere there’s a signal, with the catch of ongoing data costs and bigger power draw.

Engineers usually mix these. A fitness band might use BLE to sync with your phone, and your phone carries the data the rest of the way. An industrial sensor in a remote location might use LoRaWAN to a gateway, which then forwards everything over cellular. The “right” combination depends entirely on power budget, data volume, range, and cost, which is exactly why this decision gets made early and gets revisited often.

Sensors and the messy job of trusting them

A smart device is only as good as the data it collects. And raw sensor data is messy.

Take a simple temperature reading. The sensor drifts over time. It gets warmed by the heat of the chip sitting next to it. It returns noisy values that jitter up and down even when nothing changes. Firmware has to calibrate, filter, and sanity-check all of it before the device acts on a single number.

This gets serious fast in regulated fields. A continuous glucose monitor or a medical wearable can’t ship a reading that’s “close enough.” The sensor design, the calibration, and the firmware that validates the data all have to meet standards that consumer gadgets never face. The engineering bar is much higher, and the cost of getting it wrong is measured in patient safety, not customer reviews.

For everyday devices the stakes are lower, but the principle holds. Good devices spend a lot of hidden effort turning unreliable physical signals into numbers you can actually trust.

Where the AI hype meets the silicon

Here’s the part that has changed most recently. A growing share of smart devices now run machine learning models directly on the chip instead of sending everything to the cloud. This is edge computing, and it’s reshaping how devices get built.

The appeal is obvious. Processing data on the device means lower latency, since you’re not waiting on a round trip to a server. It means better privacy, because your data never leaves your hand. And it means the device keeps working when your internet goes down.

The catch is that running a model on a chip with kilobytes of memory is an engineering puzzle. Models have to be shrunk, quantized, and optimized until they fit in the space available without melting the battery. The face-recognition that runs locally on a modern doorbell is a heavily compressed version of what would run on a server. Squeezing it down to fit is real, specialized work, and it’s increasingly where the competitive difference between two similar gadgets actually lives.

Security can’t be the last step

For years, connected devices treated security as an afterthought. Ship the product, patch problems later. That approach has aged badly.

Outdated firmware is now one of the most common ways attackers break into IoT systems. Research from the security firm ONEKEY found that vulnerable firmware accounts for a large majority of successful attacks on connected devices. Once an attacker is inside one poorly secured gadget on your network, they have a foothold to reach everything else.

Building security in from the start means encrypting data both when it’s stored on the device and when it travels to the cloud. It means signing firmware updates so a device only accepts legitimate code, not something an attacker swapped in. And it means designing for recovery, so a compromised device can be safely reset and restored rather than turned into a permanent liability sitting on your shelf.

This is the layer consumers never think about and pay the most for when it’s done badly.

Why the next generation is harder to build

Smart devices are getting more capable, and that capability has a cost that lands squarely on the engineering team. More on-device intelligence. Stricter privacy rules. Longer battery expectations. Tighter security. Regulatory scrutiny that used to apply only to medical gear now creeping toward consumer products too.

None of this shows up in the marketing. The ad shows a person tapping a screen and a light turning on. What it doesn’t show is the year of board revisions, firmware rewrites, connectivity tests, and security audits that made that tap reliable.

So the next time a smart device just works, give a small nod to the invisible stack underneath. The clean experience on the surface is the product of a lot of unglamorous engineering refusing to cut corners. That refusal is the whole difference between a gadget you trust and one you return.

#Smart #Devices #Built #Engineers #Viewengineering,smart devices">How Smart Devices Are Actually Built: An Engineer’s View
	
Pick up any smart device you own. A doorbell that recognizes faces, a watch that reads your heart rhythm, a thermostat that learns when you leave for work. They feel simple. You tap, they respond.



That simplicity is a lie. A useful one, but a lie.



Behind the clean app and the satisfying click is a stack of engineering decisions that most people never see. And the gap between a device that works for five years and one that dies in eight months almost always traces back to those invisible choices. So let’s look at what actually goes into building the connected gadgets shipping in 2026.



Smart starts with the circuit board, not the cloud



Most coverage of smart devices jumps straight to AI features and voice assistants. But the foundation is physical. A device is a printed circuit board, a microcontroller, a fistful of sensors, a radio, and a battery, all crammed into a shell that has to survive being dropped, sat on, and left in a hot car.



This is where hardware development does its quiet, unglamorous work. Engineers pick a microcontroller based on how much computing the device needs versus how little power it can afford to burn. They route signal traces on the board so a Wi-Fi radio doesn’t drown out a delicate sensor reading. They run the whole thing through thermal testing, drop testing, and certification for FCC and CE marks before it can legally ship.



Get this layer wrong, and no amount of clever software saves you. A poorly designed board produces flaky sensor data. Bad antenna placement means the device drops off your network the moment you walk to the next room. These aren’t software bugs. You can’t patch your way out of a physics problem.



The companies building good hardware treat the proof-of-concept stage as a real checkpoint. They wire up development boards and modular parts to test the core idea cheaply, before committing to a custom design that costs real money to manufacture. It’s the boring discipline that separates products from expensive paperweights.



Firmware is where the device actually thinks



Sitting on top of the hardware is firmware. This is the low-level code that tells the chip what to do, when to wake up, how to read a sensor, and when to phone home. People mix up firmware and software all the time, so here’s the clean split. Software runs on your phone or in the cloud and handles the screens you tap. Firmware lives inside the device and controls the hardware directly.



Firmware is genuinely hard to write well. The constraints are brutal. A typical IoT microcontroller has a tiny amount of memory, often measured in kilobytes, and it might run on a coin cell that needs to last a year. Every line of code competes for space and power.



Then there’s timing. A lot of devices need deterministic, real-time behavior, meaning a sensor reading has to be processed within a fixed window or the whole thing falls apart. A heart monitor that processes a beat “eventually” is useless. The firmware has to guarantee it happens now.



If you want the deep version of how this gets built in practice, Yalantis published a solid breakdown of firmware development for embedded IoT devices that covers architecture, power management, and the over-the-air update workflows that keep a device current after it ships. The OTA piece matters more than it sounds. A device that can’t safely update its own firmware is frozen in time the day it leaves the factory.



Connectivity is a series of trade-offs



Your smart device has to talk to something. Your phone, your router, a cloud server, or all three. Choosing how it talks is one of the most consequential engineering calls in the whole project, and there’s no single right answer.



Bluetooth Low Energy sips power and works great for a wearable talking to your phone, but its range is short and it can’t reach the internet on its own. Wi-Fi reaches everything but drains batteries fast. LoRaWAN travels for miles on almost no power, which is perfect for a soil sensor in a field, but it carries tiny amounts of data slowly. Cellular options like NB-IoT and LTE-M let a device work anywhere there’s a signal, with the catch of ongoing data costs and bigger power draw.



Engineers usually mix these. A fitness band might use BLE to sync with your phone, and your phone carries the data the rest of the way. An industrial sensor in a remote location might use LoRaWAN to a gateway, which then forwards everything over cellular. The “right” combination depends entirely on power budget, data volume, range, and cost, which is exactly why this decision gets made early and gets revisited often.



Sensors and the messy job of trusting them



A smart device is only as good as the data it collects. And raw sensor data is messy.



Take a simple temperature reading. The sensor drifts over time. It gets warmed by the heat of the chip sitting next to it. It returns noisy values that jitter up and down even when nothing changes. Firmware has to calibrate, filter, and sanity-check all of it before the device acts on a single number.



This gets serious fast in regulated fields. A continuous glucose monitor or a medical wearable can’t ship a reading that’s “close enough.” The sensor design, the calibration, and the firmware that validates the data all have to meet standards that consumer gadgets never face. The engineering bar is much higher, and the cost of getting it wrong is measured in patient safety, not customer reviews.



For everyday devices the stakes are lower, but the principle holds. Good devices spend a lot of hidden effort turning unreliable physical signals into numbers you can actually trust.



Where the AI hype meets the silicon



Here’s the part that has changed most recently. A growing share of smart devices now run machine learning models directly on the chip instead of sending everything to the cloud. This is edge computing, and it’s reshaping how devices get built.



The appeal is obvious. Processing data on the device means lower latency, since you’re not waiting on a round trip to a server. It means better privacy, because your data never leaves your hand. And it means the device keeps working when your internet goes down.



The catch is that running a model on a chip with kilobytes of memory is an engineering puzzle. Models have to be shrunk, quantized, and optimized until they fit in the space available without melting the battery. The face-recognition that runs locally on a modern doorbell is a heavily compressed version of what would run on a server. Squeezing it down to fit is real, specialized work, and it’s increasingly where the competitive difference between two similar gadgets actually lives.



Security can’t be the last step



For years, connected devices treated security as an afterthought. Ship the product, patch problems later. That approach has aged badly.



Outdated firmware is now one of the most common ways attackers break into IoT systems. Research from the security firm ONEKEY found that vulnerable firmware accounts for a large majority of successful attacks on connected devices. Once an attacker is inside one poorly secured gadget on your network, they have a foothold to reach everything else.



Building security in from the start means encrypting data both when it’s stored on the device and when it travels to the cloud. It means signing firmware updates so a device only accepts legitimate code, not something an attacker swapped in. And it means designing for recovery, so a compromised device can be safely reset and restored rather than turned into a permanent liability sitting on your shelf.



This is the layer consumers never think about and pay the most for when it’s done badly.



Why the next generation is harder to build



Smart devices are getting more capable, and that capability has a cost that lands squarely on the engineering team. More on-device intelligence. Stricter privacy rules. Longer battery expectations. Tighter security. Regulatory scrutiny that used to apply only to medical gear now creeping toward consumer products too.



None of this shows up in the marketing. The ad shows a person tapping a screen and a light turning on. What it doesn’t show is the year of board revisions, firmware rewrites, connectivity tests, and security audits that made that tap reliable.



So the next time a smart device just works, give a small nod to the invisible stack underneath. The clean experience on the surface is the product of a lot of unglamorous engineering refusing to cut corners. That refusal is the whole difference between a gadget you trust and one you return.

#Smart #Devices #Built #Engineers #Viewengineering,smart devices

hardware development does its quiet, unglamorous work. Engineers pick a microcontroller based on how much computing the device needs versus how little power it can afford to burn. They route signal traces on the board so a Wi-Fi radio doesn’t drown out a delicate sensor reading. They run the whole thing through thermal testing, drop testing, and certification for FCC and CE marks before it can legally ship.

Get this layer wrong, and no amount of clever software saves you. A poorly designed board produces flaky sensor data. Bad antenna placement means the device drops off your network the moment you walk to the next room. These aren’t software bugs. You can’t patch your way out of a physics problem.

The companies building good hardware treat the proof-of-concept stage as a real checkpoint. They wire up development boards and modular parts to test the core idea cheaply, before committing to a custom design that costs real money to manufacture. It’s the boring discipline that separates products from expensive paperweights.

Firmware is where the device actually thinks

Sitting on top of the hardware is firmware. This is the low-level code that tells the chip what to do, when to wake up, how to read a sensor, and when to phone home. People mix up firmware and software all the time, so here’s the clean split. Software runs on your phone or in the cloud and handles the screens you tap. Firmware lives inside the device and controls the hardware directly.

Firmware is genuinely hard to write well. The constraints are brutal. A typical IoT microcontroller has a tiny amount of memory, often measured in kilobytes, and it might run on a coin cell that needs to last a year. Every line of code competes for space and power.

Then there’s timing. A lot of devices need deterministic, real-time behavior, meaning a sensor reading has to be processed within a fixed window or the whole thing falls apart. A heart monitor that processes a beat “eventually” is useless. The firmware has to guarantee it happens now.

If you want the deep version of how this gets built in practice, Yalantis published a solid breakdown of firmware development for embedded IoT devices that covers architecture, power management, and the over-the-air update workflows that keep a device current after it ships. The OTA piece matters more than it sounds. A device that can’t safely update its own firmware is frozen in time the day it leaves the factory.

Connectivity is a series of trade-offs

Your smart device has to talk to something. Your phone, your router, a cloud server, or all three. Choosing how it talks is one of the most consequential engineering calls in the whole project, and there’s no single right answer.

Bluetooth Low Energy sips power and works great for a wearable talking to your phone, but its range is short and it can’t reach the internet on its own. Wi-Fi reaches everything but drains batteries fast. LoRaWAN travels for miles on almost no power, which is perfect for a soil sensor in a field, but it carries tiny amounts of data slowly. Cellular options like NB-IoT and LTE-M let a device work anywhere there’s a signal, with the catch of ongoing data costs and bigger power draw.

Engineers usually mix these. A fitness band might use BLE to sync with your phone, and your phone carries the data the rest of the way. An industrial sensor in a remote location might use LoRaWAN to a gateway, which then forwards everything over cellular. The “right” combination depends entirely on power budget, data volume, range, and cost, which is exactly why this decision gets made early and gets revisited often.

Sensors and the messy job of trusting them

A smart device is only as good as the data it collects. And raw sensor data is messy.

Take a simple temperature reading. The sensor drifts over time. It gets warmed by the heat of the chip sitting next to it. It returns noisy values that jitter up and down even when nothing changes. Firmware has to calibrate, filter, and sanity-check all of it before the device acts on a single number.

This gets serious fast in regulated fields. A continuous glucose monitor or a medical wearable can’t ship a reading that’s “close enough.” The sensor design, the calibration, and the firmware that validates the data all have to meet standards that consumer gadgets never face. The engineering bar is much higher, and the cost of getting it wrong is measured in patient safety, not customer reviews.

For everyday devices the stakes are lower, but the principle holds. Good devices spend a lot of hidden effort turning unreliable physical signals into numbers you can actually trust.

Where the AI hype meets the silicon

Here’s the part that has changed most recently. A growing share of smart devices now run machine learning models directly on the chip instead of sending everything to the cloud. This is edge computing, and it’s reshaping how devices get built.

The appeal is obvious. Processing data on the device means lower latency, since you’re not waiting on a round trip to a server. It means better privacy, because your data never leaves your hand. And it means the device keeps working when your internet goes down.

The catch is that running a model on a chip with kilobytes of memory is an engineering puzzle. Models have to be shrunk, quantized, and optimized until they fit in the space available without melting the battery. The face-recognition that runs locally on a modern doorbell is a heavily compressed version of what would run on a server. Squeezing it down to fit is real, specialized work, and it’s increasingly where the competitive difference between two similar gadgets actually lives.

Security can’t be the last step

For years, connected devices treated security as an afterthought. Ship the product, patch problems later. That approach has aged badly.

Outdated firmware is now one of the most common ways attackers break into IoT systems. Research from the security firm ONEKEY found that vulnerable firmware accounts for a large majority of successful attacks on connected devices. Once an attacker is inside one poorly secured gadget on your network, they have a foothold to reach everything else.

Building security in from the start means encrypting data both when it’s stored on the device and when it travels to the cloud. It means signing firmware updates so a device only accepts legitimate code, not something an attacker swapped in. And it means designing for recovery, so a compromised device can be safely reset and restored rather than turned into a permanent liability sitting on your shelf.

This is the layer consumers never think about and pay the most for when it’s done badly.

Why the next generation is harder to build

Smart devices are getting more capable, and that capability has a cost that lands squarely on the engineering team. More on-device intelligence. Stricter privacy rules. Longer battery expectations. Tighter security. Regulatory scrutiny that used to apply only to medical gear now creeping toward consumer products too.

None of this shows up in the marketing. The ad shows a person tapping a screen and a light turning on. What it doesn’t show is the year of board revisions, firmware rewrites, connectivity tests, and security audits that made that tap reliable.

So the next time a smart device just works, give a small nod to the invisible stack underneath. The clean experience on the surface is the product of a lot of unglamorous engineering refusing to cut corners. That refusal is the whole difference between a gadget you trust and one you return.

#Smart #Devices #Built #Engineers #Viewengineering,smart devices">How Smart Devices Are Actually Built: An Engineer’s View

Pick up any smart device you own. A doorbell that recognizes faces, a watch that reads your heart rhythm, a thermostat that learns when you leave for work. They feel simple. You tap, they respond.

That simplicity is a lie. A useful one, but a lie.

Behind the clean app and the satisfying click is a stack of engineering decisions that most people never see. And the gap between a device that works for five years and one that dies in eight months almost always traces back to those invisible choices. So let’s look at what actually goes into building the connected gadgets shipping in 2026.

Smart starts with the circuit board, not the cloud

Most coverage of smart devices jumps straight to AI features and voice assistants. But the foundation is physical. A device is a printed circuit board, a microcontroller, a fistful of sensors, a radio, and a battery, all crammed into a shell that has to survive being dropped, sat on, and left in a hot car.

This is where hardware development does its quiet, unglamorous work. Engineers pick a microcontroller based on how much computing the device needs versus how little power it can afford to burn. They route signal traces on the board so a Wi-Fi radio doesn’t drown out a delicate sensor reading. They run the whole thing through thermal testing, drop testing, and certification for FCC and CE marks before it can legally ship.

Get this layer wrong, and no amount of clever software saves you. A poorly designed board produces flaky sensor data. Bad antenna placement means the device drops off your network the moment you walk to the next room. These aren’t software bugs. You can’t patch your way out of a physics problem.

The companies building good hardware treat the proof-of-concept stage as a real checkpoint. They wire up development boards and modular parts to test the core idea cheaply, before committing to a custom design that costs real money to manufacture. It’s the boring discipline that separates products from expensive paperweights.

Firmware is where the device actually thinks

Sitting on top of the hardware is firmware. This is the low-level code that tells the chip what to do, when to wake up, how to read a sensor, and when to phone home. People mix up firmware and software all the time, so here’s the clean split. Software runs on your phone or in the cloud and handles the screens you tap. Firmware lives inside the device and controls the hardware directly.

Firmware is genuinely hard to write well. The constraints are brutal. A typical IoT microcontroller has a tiny amount of memory, often measured in kilobytes, and it might run on a coin cell that needs to last a year. Every line of code competes for space and power.

Then there’s timing. A lot of devices need deterministic, real-time behavior, meaning a sensor reading has to be processed within a fixed window or the whole thing falls apart. A heart monitor that processes a beat “eventually” is useless. The firmware has to guarantee it happens now.

If you want the deep version of how this gets built in practice, Yalantis published a solid breakdown of firmware development for embedded IoT devices that covers architecture, power management, and the over-the-air update workflows that keep a device current after it ships. The OTA piece matters more than it sounds. A device that can’t safely update its own firmware is frozen in time the day it leaves the factory.

Connectivity is a series of trade-offs

Your smart device has to talk to something. Your phone, your router, a cloud server, or all three. Choosing how it talks is one of the most consequential engineering calls in the whole project, and there’s no single right answer.

Bluetooth Low Energy sips power and works great for a wearable talking to your phone, but its range is short and it can’t reach the internet on its own. Wi-Fi reaches everything but drains batteries fast. LoRaWAN travels for miles on almost no power, which is perfect for a soil sensor in a field, but it carries tiny amounts of data slowly. Cellular options like NB-IoT and LTE-M let a device work anywhere there’s a signal, with the catch of ongoing data costs and bigger power draw.

Engineers usually mix these. A fitness band might use BLE to sync with your phone, and your phone carries the data the rest of the way. An industrial sensor in a remote location might use LoRaWAN to a gateway, which then forwards everything over cellular. The “right” combination depends entirely on power budget, data volume, range, and cost, which is exactly why this decision gets made early and gets revisited often.

Sensors and the messy job of trusting them

A smart device is only as good as the data it collects. And raw sensor data is messy.

Take a simple temperature reading. The sensor drifts over time. It gets warmed by the heat of the chip sitting next to it. It returns noisy values that jitter up and down even when nothing changes. Firmware has to calibrate, filter, and sanity-check all of it before the device acts on a single number.

This gets serious fast in regulated fields. A continuous glucose monitor or a medical wearable can’t ship a reading that’s “close enough.” The sensor design, the calibration, and the firmware that validates the data all have to meet standards that consumer gadgets never face. The engineering bar is much higher, and the cost of getting it wrong is measured in patient safety, not customer reviews.

For everyday devices the stakes are lower, but the principle holds. Good devices spend a lot of hidden effort turning unreliable physical signals into numbers you can actually trust.

Where the AI hype meets the silicon

Here’s the part that has changed most recently. A growing share of smart devices now run machine learning models directly on the chip instead of sending everything to the cloud. This is edge computing, and it’s reshaping how devices get built.

The appeal is obvious. Processing data on the device means lower latency, since you’re not waiting on a round trip to a server. It means better privacy, because your data never leaves your hand. And it means the device keeps working when your internet goes down.

The catch is that running a model on a chip with kilobytes of memory is an engineering puzzle. Models have to be shrunk, quantized, and optimized until they fit in the space available without melting the battery. The face-recognition that runs locally on a modern doorbell is a heavily compressed version of what would run on a server. Squeezing it down to fit is real, specialized work, and it’s increasingly where the competitive difference between two similar gadgets actually lives.

Security can’t be the last step

For years, connected devices treated security as an afterthought. Ship the product, patch problems later. That approach has aged badly.

Outdated firmware is now one of the most common ways attackers break into IoT systems. Research from the security firm ONEKEY found that vulnerable firmware accounts for a large majority of successful attacks on connected devices. Once an attacker is inside one poorly secured gadget on your network, they have a foothold to reach everything else.

Building security in from the start means encrypting data both when it’s stored on the device and when it travels to the cloud. It means signing firmware updates so a device only accepts legitimate code, not something an attacker swapped in. And it means designing for recovery, so a compromised device can be safely reset and restored rather than turned into a permanent liability sitting on your shelf.

This is the layer consumers never think about and pay the most for when it’s done badly.

Why the next generation is harder to build

Smart devices are getting more capable, and that capability has a cost that lands squarely on the engineering team. More on-device intelligence. Stricter privacy rules. Longer battery expectations. Tighter security. Regulatory scrutiny that used to apply only to medical gear now creeping toward consumer products too.

None of this shows up in the marketing. The ad shows a person tapping a screen and a light turning on. What it doesn’t show is the year of board revisions, firmware rewrites, connectivity tests, and security audits that made that tap reliable.

So the next time a smart device just works, give a small nod to the invisible stack underneath. The clean experience on the surface is the product of a lot of unglamorous engineering refusing to cut corners. That refusal is the whole difference between a gadget you trust and one you return.

#Smart #Devices #Built #Engineers #Viewengineering,smart devices

Post Comment