2026-04-26 22:00:28
It seems to be becoming a bit of a theme that consumer electronics are dying not due to some critical fault, but due to Cooked Capacitor Syndrome (CCS). Case in point, Dyson handheld vacuums and the capacitors on its driver board. After having his $800 Dyson V15 handheld vacuum die after two and a half years of regular use, [LeftyMaker] found himself elbows-deep in the dusty innards of the vacuum just to replace some capacitors.
After initially trying a new battery and other common troubleshooting steps, he found that lots of people were having the same flaky behavior with their Dyson vacuums, all with the same underlying cause. On the driver board for the DC brushless motor, there are a couple of capacitors that seem to cause issues across models, with the standard response by Dyson being to ‘buy a new body’.
While it’s definitely possible to tear down the vacuum to get to the driver board, you’ll be doing effectively a full disassembly, all to see the capacitors located right next to the hot motor in a very confined space. [LeftyMaker] confirmed a very high ESR on the old capacitors before replacing them with 125℃ rated Rubycon 35PZF270MT810X9 polymer capacitors for $1 a pop.
Unsurprisingly, the vacuum worked fine after that fix, but it shows a trend where CCS has become so commonplace that it’s no wonder that the phrase ‘planned obsolescence’ is being uttered alongside it. For this particular series of Dyson vacuums, the issue is apparently so bad that [Hasan] created a custom driver board that might be superior in multiple ways. Maybe we need an OSHW vacuum cleaner, just to avoid such shenanigans.
2026-04-26 19:00:18
As unloved as IBM’s PCjr was, with only a one-year production run, it’s hard to complain about the documentation available for it. This includes the x86 assembly listing for the BIOS, which [dbalsom] recently used this print version to create an ASM project that can be built into a byte-identical copy of the PCjr BIOS.
In order to build the BIOS image, a ZIP file has been made available that contains the requisite assembler and linker tools, all of which can be run in DOS (or DOSBox) using the provided build.bat file. This creates an executable file, which can then be converted into a BIN file using the provided exe2bin.py Python script, or of course, manually.
This image cannot be used as-is, as the PCjr has its BIOS split across two 32 kB ROMs, so splitting them is required if you intend to burn fresh ROMs. Of note is that the BIOS code is still copyrighted by IBM, so do not take this as some kind of open sourcing, unless you wish to test IBM’s legal take on 1980s BIOS code for a generally unloved system.
With an estimated 240,000 – 275,000 PCjrs sold by January 1985 and reports of hundreds of thousands of unsold PCjrs languishing in warehouses by the end. It’s hard to say how many PCjrs have survived to today, but it’s good to see that keeping this glimpse of a budget, not-quite-IBM-PC-compatible legacy alive has become a little easier again.
Heading image: IBM PCjr internals. (Credit: Binarysequence, Wikimedia)
2026-04-26 16:00:34
If you miss the days when you used Basic on your classic computer or wrote embedded software with a Basic Stamp, then maybe dust off your Arduino UNO or any similar AVR board and try nanoBASIC_UNO from [shachi-lab].
Apparently, the original code was meant for the STM8S, but this port targets the ATmega328P. It is Basic more or less as you remember it. There are enough extensions to deal with GPIO, the analog systems, and so forth. At build time, you can decide if you want 16-bit or 32-bit integers.
One thing that is a little odd is how it handles direct mode. In classic Basic, anything without a line number executes immediately. Line numbers simply store your program line until you type RUN. nanoBASIC_UNO doesn’t force you to use line numbers. To indicate you are programming, you have to start with the PROG keyword. Then you can enter lines into the RAM buffer until you enter a # character. The program is stored in RAM, but there is a way to save programs to flash.
You can also build the code for Windows or Linux if you just want to experiment. Looks like fun.
If you missed the heyday of the Basic Stamp, you missed a lot of fun. If you just want a quick Basic hit, try your browser.
2026-04-26 13:00:41
If you follow [Maker’s Muse] on YouTube, you know he’s as passionate about robot fights these days as he is about the tools he uses to make the robots. Luckily for us, he’s still got fame as a 3D printing YouTuber, as this has given him the platform to share his trade secrets for strong, robot-combat-worthy prints.
He fights robots in a ‘plastic ant-weight’ division, which restricts not only the weight of the robot but also the materials used. Not only must they be primarily plastic, but only certain plastics are allowed: PLA is in, but engineering filaments, Nylon, and TPU are out. Since necessity is the mother of invention, this has led to strong evolutionary pressure to figure out how to print the most impact-resilient PLA parts for armor and spinners.
He’s using the latest OrcaSlicer and shares the profile as a pay-what-you-want 3MF file. It’s all about solidity: a solid part with solidly fused walls and solidly linked layers. It makes sense: if you’re going to be hammering on or with these parts, you don’t want any internal voids that could either collapse or pull open.
The infill density is obviously 100%, and you’ll want a concentric pattern — this makes it look like you’re just printing walls, but it allows you to use another trick. To make sure those walls don’t all align, creating a potential weakness, OrcaSlicer’s “alternate extra wall” will put one extra wall every second layer. The extra wall causes the infill pattern to stagger and lock together.
Also helping lock it together, he’s playing with extrusion widths, with the suggested rule-of-thumb being the line width on the walls be one-half that of the internal fill — and as wide as possible. In his case, with a 0.4 mm nozzle, that means 0.4 mm wide walls and 0.8 mm for the infill. OrcaSlicer 2.3.2 also lets you play with specific flow ratios, allowing you to overextrude only the internals for strength, without overextruding on the walls and potentially ruining dimensional accuracy. He also irons all top surfaces, but admits that that’s mostly about aesthetics. The iron may make those layers a little bit stronger, though, so why not?
Would brick layers make these parts even stronger? That’s very likely; [Maker’s Muse] mentions them in the video but does not use them because they’re not implemented in-slicer, and he wants something accessible to all. On the other hand, this post-processing script seems accessible enough for our crowd.
This video/profile is exclusively about fully-solid parts. When you want strong parts that aren’t fully solid, it looks like the answer is walls.
,
2026-04-26 10:00:37
A lot has been made about a post-quantum computer future in which traditional encryption methods have suddenly been rendered obsolete. With this terrifying idea in mind, it’s reassuring to see some recent pushback to the idea with some factual evidence. In a recent blog post by [Filippo Valsorda] – a cryptography engineer – the point is raised that 128-bit symmetric keys like AES-128 and SHA-256 are at risk of being obliterated in a post-quantum future.
Rather than just taking [Filippo]’s word for it, he takes us through a detailed explanation of the flawed understanding of Grover’s algorithm that underlies much of the panic. While it’s very true that this quantum search algorithm can decrease the amount of time required to find a solution, the speed-up with a single thread is quadratic, not exponential. While asymmetric cryptography systems like ECDH, RSA, and kin are very much at risk courtesy of Shor’s algorithm, the same is not true for symmetric systems.
An interesting detail with Grover’s is also that you cannot simply run a search in parallel to get a corresponding speed-up, as it’s not a parallel problem. Barring a breakthrough that replaces Grover’s with something that lends itself better to such a parallel search, it would seem that we won’t have to abandon classical encryption any time soon.
Incidentally, even for Shor’s algorithm, there are still some hold-ups. Current quantum computers are not even able to factor 21 yet. Meanwhile, supposed quantum computing breakthroughs are being trolled with a Commodore 64.
2026-04-26 07:00:31
Although 3D printing it a great tool for making all sorts of things, the nature of the plastics used in most desktop FDM printers means it isn’t the first tool most would think of to build an internal combustion engine. [Alexander] is evidently not most people, as he’s on his third generation 3D printed engine.
There are 3D printed pumps to distribute coolant water and oil, plus some clever engineering in the head to make sure they don’t mix — a problem with a previous iteration. As you probably guessed, the engine isn’t fully printed. Assembling it requires add-on hardware for things like bearings, belts, and filters.
But it’s still impressive just how much of this beast is actually made of plastic. Not even fancy engineering plastic, either — there are a few CF-Nylon parts, but most of it is apparently good old ASA and ABS.
If you’re looking for “cheats”, the plastic engine block does get a stainless steel sleeve, and the head is CNC’d aluminum, but we hesitate to call anything that gets a homemade engine running a “cheat”. It’s hard enough using all the ‘right’ materials. Just like another 3D printed engine we featured, the carb is also an off-the-shelf component.
Still, it’s the dancing bear all over again: it’s not how well it runs that impresses, but the fact that it runs at all. We’ve also seen hackers use 3D printing to make steam engines, hot-air Stirling engines, and electric motors— all with varying amounts of non-printed parts.
