My dad has been working at TSMC as an engineer for the last 20 years, and he’s been in semiconductors as a whole for the past 30. A few days ago, he gave me one of the textbooks he’s referenced from when he was working at SK Hynix as a design engineer in the late 90’s.
The book (published in 1997) everything to do with CMOS circuit design and simulation, and what I find interesting is that the fundamental math and physics behind it has not changed in the last 30 years. What really has changed, is the simulation technology behind circuit verification that has evolved in the last 50 years, all the way from when SPICE v1 was released in the 70s, to whatever we have now.
It really does feel cool to be working on the next iteration of a technology that has been around for so long, yet is so difficult to use and develop even now.
I just think semiconductors and simulation is so interesting. I’m really happy that I get to work on this full time with my own startup, with others who also believe in the vision.
I am of the opinion that many of the best engineers become the best not due to their academic education but by engaging in these hobby fields early on.
Those that pump out Project for the fun of it will always be better then their peers going in the field for money.
Smarter governments support these hobbys and do not try to restrict them beyond reasonability.
Doing this in Germany lands you in 6 figure fine territorry
@xjet is a channel you should follow btw
Materials banned from F1
Prior to 2026 F1 operated an approved materials list (they refer to this a the materials palette), this meant that the cars had to be manufactured from a shortlist of approved materials.
In 2026 with so many new entrants this was changed to help the new entrants. The materials palette remains in place, except inside the Power Unit where different regulations apply.
There’s a list of materials allowed in F1 cars, but banned from F1 power units, and the FIA gave reasons, so here’s the list.
1. Beryllium in additive manufacture
It has one of the highest stiffness / weight ratios of any metal. In alloy form, especially with aluminium to produce beryllium-aluminium composites or with copper to produce beryllium-copper, it delivers material properties that significantly outperform conventional structural alloys at equivalent weight… it’s banned.
Also horrible stuff to machine, so typically done in gloveboxes which is a whole other issue.
2. Metal matrix composites
They combine a metallic matrix with a reinforcing phase like ceramic particles or short fibres, produce materials that significantly exceed the stiffness and wear resistance of the base metal alone. Wild performance and cost escalator… banned.
3. Shape memory materials
Specifically nickel-titanium alloys such as nitinol. Nitinol can return to a pre-programmed shape when heated above its transition temperature, a property with potential applications in aerodynamic surfaces that could change configuration passively with the temperature variation a car experiences during a race… banned. Too clever.
4. Magnesium and Tungsten alloys
The primary concern here is fire risk, magnesium burns intensely and is extremely difficult to extinguish once ignited.
5. High density materials
Materials with a density exceeding 18,400 kg/m^3 inside the PU, effectively eliminating the densest elemental metals from structural roles within the engine. This is targeted at osmium, iridium, and similar exotics where the motivation for use would be extreme mass concentration in small volumes rather than structural or thermal performance.
So 2 of these are stiffness to weight, one is a shape shifter and the other is mass tricks.
The stiffness materials are just pure performance substitutes with highly non-linear cost escalation, but Nitinol and osmium are where genuinely clever tricks could happen.
If you’re looking at power units or engine technology Nitinol and osmium have a few cool tricks with valves that aren’t really well documented but offer a lot of interesting stuff.
Surprised we don’t see more defense tech companies doing this sort of reverse engineering, or maybe we do and we don’t?
But I don’t think we do, because the audio tells.
Interesting huh?
Phased-array radar used to be something you mostly associated with expensive military systems.
That’s changing.
A few things are coming together:
• GaN (Gallium Nitride) is making RF power devices more efficient and cheaper
• T/R modules (Transmit/Receive modules) are becoming much more integrated
• CMOS / SiGe (Silicon-Germanium) processes are bringing more radar functions onto chips
• Cheaper FPGA, ADC/DAC and SoC chips are cutting the cost of signal processing
• PCB, LTCC and AiP (Antenna-in-Package) are making antenna and RF integration much easier
• Automotive mmWave radar is bringing huge production volumes to the supply chain
The result is pretty simple:
Less custom hardware. More chips. More integration. Much bigger volumes.
Radar is starting to look less like a one-off defense system and more like a semiconductor product.
That’s a big deal for low-cost civilian phased-array radar.
SISTEMA DA DEFESA CIVIL: hackeado ❌
SISTEMAS DA POLÍCIA FEDERAL: hackeada ❌
SERVIDORES DO TSE: hackeado ❌
BASE DE DADOS DO STJ: hackeado ❌
SITE DO STF: hackeado ❌
SITE DO STM: hackeado ❌
URNAS ELETRÔNICAS: 100℅ seguras ✅