I'm new to embedded systems programming and looked into ROS recently, without using it, while figuring out a minimal software stack for a UAV project (px4 over ArduPilot for the flight controller, but what to run on a "companion" computer is open ended). [my XP is in cloud infra, RESTful microservices, web apps, videogames]
Researchers, hobbyists, and some industry professionals (for prototyping?) seem to love ROS for its big community, logging/debugging/visualisation tools (rosbag, rviz), the pub/sub architecture (easy integration and loose coupling with third party modules), existing support for many sensors/peripherals/hardware components; plus off-the-shelf libs for SLAM, navigation, inverse kinematics, etc.
But ROS is hated by others for its custom build system (on top of CMake), the custom language-agnostic IDL for message types (like Protobuf but worse, esp. for versioning and backwards compatibility), non-determinism and untestability of the pub/sub model (esp. for safety-critical stuff), overengineering and layers of indirection / learning curve, poor performance, and high platform lock-in.
Looking at ROS as a robotics noob, it seems like useful 'muddleware' for toy projects, but where every sub-problem that it abstracts away from you can be solved better by other existing tools. I'm looking more into: Mobile Robot Programming Toolkit [1], Yet Another Robot Platform [2], genom3 [3], and Open Robot Control Software [4] (all C++). Or the Rust ones like RoboPLC [5], Dora-rs [6], Copper-rs [7], and Basis [8] (which supports Protobuf!).
If you're not using ROS for a "serious" project, do you use other middleware offerings or just pick 'n' mix lower-level libs tailored for your use cases?
I read this at a poetry evening recently, to much laughter. From Titus Plautus, a comic playwright, we have an early example of a rant about disruptive technology or - possibly - a satire about technophobia!
I think the alternative to having a social life "dictated by a machine" (a machine which, in this case, encodes the intentions of its programmer) is to have a social life dictated by chance and by other's intentions - coincidences on public transport, social media posts ranked by a black box, the noisy patterns of our recollection, etc... what is so 'authentic' about sacrificing one's attention to these forces, which may only align accidentally with our priorities?
I've kept a spreadsheet for about 5 years of people I know from my hometown, from uni, past jobs, in other countries, family of friends, etc... ranked roughly by how frequently to contact them, and it has been so helpful and fun for me (and them!) to use it. This might not be helpful for everyone, depending on what you care about and the size of your network, but it seems more "sad" to me that people let chance and social media control their patterns of interaction.
I was on a gap year after an MEng in Computing when covid lockdown v1 hit the UK. Unsure what to do with my life I watched Downton Abbey with my parents and baked lots of banana bread. I'd picked up ukulele to de-stress during exam seasons and weeks before starting my first full-time engineering job I decided to make a rap music video with some vfx, animation, and... juggling?
This attitude seems to overlook that there can be a tension between present and future fulfilment. There are things you can do (or avoid doing) now that will make your life a lot less enjoyable later on. Activities that 'make you a better person over time' often require effort, discomfort, or sacrifice of some kind in the present (exercising, studying, therapy, etc...).
I don't think it is a good idea to maximise pleasure in the present - at least not at the expense of future pleasure - but to maximise the total pleasure you get out of your life, which will often mean doing something right now that you don't find intrinsically rewarding.
IMHO, this relates to your own personal way of attributing value.
Future happiness holds more value for you personally for whatever reason - this is great! i am happy for you.
an alternative view point which is also sometimes correct is that future happiness holds zero value as you may never get it.
I don't know whats really going on but i basically agree that laziness is not a thing. whether its explained by different weighting of future values or different weighting of the value of doing nothing (also highly rewarding) i think is a moot point.
The advice given by the original comment to me holds true regardless. Also the way it is stated is especially important (as i think anyone who has benefited from such advice would see): step 1: beating yourself up doesn't work, you need a logical argument against that to help your brain adjust, step 2: find a way into doing things without a set end goal in mind, this is to learn the pleasure of doing the thing, not getting to the goal.. that way you are triggering different value / reward calculations in the brain.
Please note i firmly believe there is no one explanation that will work for everyone, you have to factor in their view points and biases while finding the specific language that will fire the right neurons for that person... we are all hear to share perspectives in the hope that they are of value to someone else.
Any advice on finding a working logical argument? I find myself stuck in unhelpful loops sometimes i.e. Do I enjoy my job? Do I have a sense of purpose in my job?
I realise the answer will be personal and only I can provide it but I'm consistently failing and it's impacting my mood
Yes, ivan_ah is right, that's the book I meant. Free and evidence-based. I'd say active learning is baked into pretty much all the chapters of the book, because the evidence is very strong that this is the best way to go.
Researchers, hobbyists, and some industry professionals (for prototyping?) seem to love ROS for its big community, logging/debugging/visualisation tools (rosbag, rviz), the pub/sub architecture (easy integration and loose coupling with third party modules), existing support for many sensors/peripherals/hardware components; plus off-the-shelf libs for SLAM, navigation, inverse kinematics, etc.
But ROS is hated by others for its custom build system (on top of CMake), the custom language-agnostic IDL for message types (like Protobuf but worse, esp. for versioning and backwards compatibility), non-determinism and untestability of the pub/sub model (esp. for safety-critical stuff), overengineering and layers of indirection / learning curve, poor performance, and high platform lock-in.
Looking at ROS as a robotics noob, it seems like useful 'muddleware' for toy projects, but where every sub-problem that it abstracts away from you can be solved better by other existing tools. I'm looking more into: Mobile Robot Programming Toolkit [1], Yet Another Robot Platform [2], genom3 [3], and Open Robot Control Software [4] (all C++). Or the Rust ones like RoboPLC [5], Dora-rs [6], Copper-rs [7], and Basis [8] (which supports Protobuf!).
If you're not using ROS for a "serious" project, do you use other middleware offerings or just pick 'n' mix lower-level libs tailored for your use cases?
[1] https://mrpt.org
[2] https://www.yarp.it
[3] https://git.openrobots.org/projects/genom3
[4] https://orocos.org/
[5] https://github.com/roboplc/roboplc
[6] https://github.com/dora-rs/dora
[7] https://github.com/copper-project/copper-rs
[8] https://github.com/basis-robotics