2026-03-19 01:15:15
Hackaday Europe is approaching, and we’re putting tickets on sale now. “But wait, you haven’t selected the talks yet!” we hear you saying. Indeed! And that’s why we discount the first round of entries for our True Believers
– the hard core who know that it’s going to be a fantastic event and turn up regardless. So if you want to come to Hackaday Europe on the cheap, go snap up your ticket before they’re gone.
Of course, giving a talk is always the best way to attend a hacker gathering like this. And we know that we said that today was the deadline for talk submissions. But we also know that many of you have advanced degrees in procrastineering, so we’re giving you a week’s extension.
Selected speakers get in free, and we’ll reserve you an early-bird ticket for putting together a legit talk proposal either way. So if you’re a first-time presenter or a wizened pro, and you have something that you’d like to say to an audience of like-minded hackers, we’d all like to hear from you. We won’t extend the deadline twice, though, so get your proposal in before March 25.
(A few people have reached out to us, wanting to avoid the Google login that the above form requires. If you’re in the same camp, write to us directly and let us know!)
In case you don’t know, Hackaday Europe started out as a bi-annual event that we first held a decade ago in Belgrade. It has been such a success that we’re now doing it every year, and leap-frogging around Europe to spread the love. The last two events have been in Berlin, and this is our first time in Lecco, Italy. This year, it runs the weekend of May 16th and 17th, with a pre-event on the evening of the 15th, to be announced.
What stays the same? We have a fantastic crowd who bring their passion projects with them, a fun badge to hack on, and of course food, drink, music, and merriment all along. Oh, and the talks. (You are submitting your talk, right?)
We’ll have more details coming your way in the next few weeks, so stay tuned. After March 25th, we’ll get to selecting talks, and let you all know. Get your tickets now – we can’t wait to see you all in eight-and-a-half weeks!
2026-03-18 23:30:46
How often have you pulled out old MCU-based project that still works fine, but you have no idea where the original source code has gone? Having the binary image and the source code as separate things to keep track of usually isn’t a problem, but there’s something to be said for adding the source — and documentation — to this image if you have some flash to spare. This is basically what the Forgetfulino Arduino library by [Nader Al Khatib] does.
Essentially, the library compresses the source files and assigns it to be burned onto the flash alongside the binary. There is also a bit of code added to the firmware so that this code can be retrieved via the serial port at any time, negating the need for a firmware dump and manual disassembly. For ease of use, the library has an Arduino IDE extension that automates the process. The basic idea could also be adapted to different environments should anyone wish to take up the challenge.
You probably wouldn’t want debug builds to feature this additional payload as writing it to flash will eat up time and write cycles. But for a release build that will be put out in the (literal) field for a few years or even decades, it could be very convenient. After all, you never know when that Git repository that you relied on might go AWOL.
2026-03-18 22:00:24
In the early days of the Internet, having a high-speed IP connection in your home or even a small business was, if not impossible, certainly a rarity. Connecting to a computer in those days required you to use your phone. Early modems used acoustic couplers, but by the time most people started trying to connect, modems that plugged into your phone jack were the norm.
The problem was: whose computer did you call? There were commercial dial-up services like DIALOG that offered very expensive services, such as database searches via modem. That could be expensive. You had a fee for the phone. Then you might have a per-minute charge for the phone call, especially if the computer was in another city. Then you had to pay the service provider, which could be very expensive.
Even before the consumer Internet, this wasn’t workable. Tymnet and Telenet were two services that had the answer. They maintained banks of modems practically everywhere. You dialed a local number, which was probably a “free” call included in your monthly bill, and then used a simple command to connect to a remote computer of your choice. There were other competitors, including CompuServe, which would become a major force in the fledgling consumer market.
While some local internet service providers (ISPs) had their own modem banks, when you saw the rise of national ISPs, they were riding on one of several nationwide modem systems and paying by the minute for the privilege. Eventually, some ISPs reached the scale that made dedicated modem banks worthwhile. This made it easier to offer flat-rate pricing, and the presumed likelihood of everyone dialing in at once made it possible to oversubscribe any given number of modems.
Once consumer services like CompuServe, The Source, and AOL started operations, the cost was less, but still not inexpensive. Some early services charged higher rates during business hours, for example. There was also the cost of a phone line, and if you didn’t want to tie up your home phone, you needed a second line dedicated to the modem. It all added up.
By the late 1990s, a dial-up provider might cost you $25 a month or less, not counting your phone line. That’s about $60 in today’s money, just for reference. But the Internet was also booming as a place to sell advertising.
Today, a few large companies dominate online advertising. However, in 1990, the field was crowded, and everyone was rushing to find a way to effectively advertise to Internet users.
A company called FreeInet thought it had the answer. Give people free dial-up service and make them watch ads to generate revenue. NetZero bought the company in 1998 and helped it grow explosively. You could argue that FreeInet was the first successful free dial-up company.
There were other companies in the space, too, such as Juno (which started out offering only e-mail) and BlueLight, which was run by retailer K-Mart, hoping that people would use their free Internet access to shop at K-Mart (spoiler: they didn’t). K-Mart actually cobranded with a free ISP called Spinway, and it was widely reported that people who used the service were not more likely to buy from K-Mart. Instead, they went where everyone went: chat rooms, music download sites, and, of course, adult sites.
But the free market was mostly NetZero and Juno. NetZero even advertised on TV, as you can see below. NetZero even had a patent. They sued Juno over that patent, although the two companies would eventually merge.
At least the ad wasn’t as suggestive as the one we remember from Juno.
Of course, this is all in the US. In the UK, where, at the time, there were no free local calls, Freeserve became a big player in free Internet access in conjunction with a major British electronics retailer.
Some free providers showed ads in a window or otherwise inserted them into your browsing experience. They could gather demographic data on where and how you were browsing, and that was also a viable product. If nothing else, if you were at a car website, the service could show you ads for cars, for example, and either charge the advertiser more or, at least, expect a better result.
There were other earlier schemes like Bigger.net, which promised lifetime access for $59. What could go wrong? There were limited tests of ad-supported access, and even a company that wanted to give you network access bundled with long-distance service. That lasted a month.
Of course, there were hacks. You could move the ad window off-screen, for example. There were programs that would keep the connection alive since most would time out rather quickly.
While Internet ad rates were artificially high, the concept made sense. At the time, people were trying to map traditional print ads’ costs to the Internet. Not only was this too high, but it also overlooks the fact that the Internet is perfect for paying on performance. Just showing an ad to 1,000 people (some of whom have it blocked, anyway) isn’t worth much. You want clicks or, even better, conversions.
But the dot-com crash around 2000, along with a glut of online advertising venues, saw a collapse of the ad market. Even K-Mart started offering a limited amount of free service with a cheap plan if you needed more or wanted extra features. United Online, the fusion of NetZero and Juno, also switched to a “freemium” model.
The death knell of dial-up ISPs, including the free ones, came as broadband penetrated more and more households. Why tie up a phone line and dial up at 56K when you could have a connection “always on” and with speeds at least 20 times higher? Apparently, NetZero didn’t get the message, judging by the ad below.
NetZero does still exist, or at least, they have a home page. We couldn’t get any of the links to work.
However, these innovative free ISPs were trailblazers on ad-supported Internet services. They were also among the first to adopt freemium pricing. Even more, we suspect it drove more people towards the Internet. Everyone loves something for free, and while you might not want to pay AOL $22 a month just to see if you would like being online, you certainly would grab a free CD and get online.
Dial-up still hangs on, though. Even AOL offered it until recently.
2026-03-18 19:00:12
You may not have noticed, but so-called “artificial intelligence” is slightly controversial in the arts world. Illustrators, graphics artists, visual effects (VFX) professionals — anybody who pushes pixels around are the sort of people you’d expect to hate and fear the machines that trained on stolen work to replace them. So, when we heard in a recent video that [Niko] of Corridor Digital had released an AI VFX tool, we were interested. What does it look like when the artist is the one coding the AI?
It looks amazing, both visually and conceptually. Conceptually, because it takes one of the most annoying parts of the VFX pipeline — cleaning up chroma key footage — and automates it so the artists in front of the screen can get to the fun parts of the job. That’s exactly what a tool should do: not do the job for them, but enable them to enjoy doing it, or do it better. It looks amazing visually, because as you can see in the embedded video, it works very, very well.
For the uninitiated, chroma keying removes one specific ‘key’ color from images, hence the green or blue screens you always see in behind-the-scenes footage. The chroma key is set to remove the selected color, and all the fancy CGI effects can show through instead. If you’ve never played with the technology before, you might not see the appeal of this new AI tool, after all, green screen seems like it should be a pretty automated process already. You tell the computer what counts as green, and it eliminates it, right?
Theoretically, yes, but in practice that’s very often not good enough. A great deal of very tedious frame-by-frame touch-up is often needed to get a truly professional result.
Unless, that is, you can harness a neural network to do it for you. Which [Niko] has. Even better, he’s released the software under a modified Creative Commons BY-NC-SA 4.0 license so we can all benefit from his work. The project documentation goes a good job of explaining what the software does and how it works, and the video below more-or-less defines the problem and demonstrates the solution.
Interestingly, [Niko] is part of the crew who recreated Disney’s lost sodium-light keying a couple of years back. Evidently they went back to regular green screen if this tool was needed. Something about the way green screen enables virtual set making must have given it an edge over the old sodium process. Feel free to chime in below if you know the full details.
Thanks to [piachoo] for the tip!
2026-03-18 16:00:35
Although it dates back to the early days of the Marconi Company in the 1920s, the Franklin oscillator has remained a relatively obscure circuit, its memory mostly kept alive by ham radio operators who prize its high stability at higher frequencies. At the core of the circuit is an LC tank circuit, a fact which [nobcha] used to build quite a precise LC meter.
The meter is built around two parts: the Franklin oscillator, which resonates at a frequency defined by its inductance and capacitance, and an Arduino which counts the frequency of the signal. In operation, the Arduino measures the frequency of the original LC circuit, then measures again after another element (capacitor or inductor) has been added to the circuit. By measuring how much the resonant frequency changes, it’s possible to determine the value of the new element.
Before operation, the meter must be calibrated with a known reference capacitor to determine the values of the base LC circuit. In one iteration of the design, this was done automatically using a relay, while in a later version a manual switch connects the reference capacitor. Because the meter measures frequency differences and not absolute values, it minimizes parasitic effects. In testing, it was capable of measuring inductances as low as 0.1 µH.
We’ve seen a few homebrew LC meters here, some battery-powered and some rather professional.
2026-03-18 13:00:47
Some FDM filaments are pretty brittle even if properly dried and stored, especially those which contain carbon fiber (CF) or similar additives like glass fiber (GF). This poses a problem in that these filaments can snap even within the PTFE tube as they’re being guided towards the extruder. Here a community theory is that having an actively heated chamber can help prevent this scenario, but is it actually true? [Dr. Igor Gaspar] of the My Tech Fun YouTube channel gave this myth a try to either confirm or bust it.
The comments suggested that heating the chamber to 65°C will help, but there’s little information online to support this theorem. To test the claim, a heated chamber was used along with a bending rig to see at which angle the filament would snap. In total five different filaments from three manufacturers (Polymaker, Qidi and YXPolyer) were tested, including Qidi’s PET-GF and PAHT-GF as the sole non-CF filaments.
A big question is how long exactly the filament will spend inside the heated chamber after making its way from the spool, which would be about 2.5 minutes with a 500 mm tube. For the test 5 minutes was used for the best possible result. Despite this, the results show that even with the standard deviation kept in mind, the heating actually seems to make the filaments even more brittle.
Considering that in general CF seems to simply weaken the polymer matrix after printing, this finding adds to the question of whether these CF and GF-infused filaments make any sense at all.
