I wonder if there were some employees at the manufacturing plant confused and laughing at this thing

This is pretty funny

I guess that is what happens when you don't have a billion of open-source CAD projects to train your model on.
I hope the post is satire, because it's funny as hell.

Did the fab house call up like "uh.. are you sure?"

They did that for me when I made my traces too thin one time lol

It is a pastiche of [thing], more than an actual [thing] itself.

This is exactly what "AI" does, this is precisely what it's for

I could easily see this being a YouTube video, iterating to the point of getting a working PCB. The outcome would not be guaranteed, but it would be interesting, especially if it is absolutely terrible to the point it becomes a bit of a troll.

Of course they're a Project Manager.

I would love to see the looks on the faces of the Chinese laborers making this stupid thing.

Skynet v1.0 doesnt make functioning machines. At least when a person asks...

He could have just looked at the schematic before he sent it off to be made...

Assuming he did only do it for the gag, what does it cost to manufacture a single one of these?

Update V2: "Well, my house burned down"

I can see at least one innovation there. Diodes make current go one direction. D1 ensures current goes neither direction.

Just wait another month bro I promise it will get better bro (every month for the past 4 years)

I like how ever capacitor expect c1 is useless. R3 isn't connected.

The design acts like it there a common ground instead of insulation.

also the trace patterns don't look like they're conductive

Like Will Smith eating spaghetti in the early days

C2 also looks useless. Itnlooks like the trace goes in and out on the same side.

FYI, the actual circuit properly designed is stupidly simple:

• The 5V and Ground power lines come in from USB on dedicated pins
• Since that's a USB-C connector you need 2x resistors for it CC lines (they let the USB Host on the other side know that something is connected to it and wants power of a certain maximum current, and to figure out the orientation of the cable since it can be plugged in two orientations)
• To light the LED you need the actual LED and a resistor that limits the current that goes to the LED (since LEDs themselves don't limit it and without external current limitation they'll just light up very brightly and then release some "magic smoke" and stop working)

That's it.

Now, assuming R3 and R4 are properly connect CC line resistors (though WHY THE FUCK are the two lines of R3 routed on the other side of the board!!?), the only two other things needed are R1 and D1, nothing else.

Instead, there are way too many extra components, most notably this thing on the middle, supposedly a microchip (judging by the "U" code, can't see the actual writting in the device), maybe a voltage regulator but what would be the point!?

Worse, all 3 legs of that U1 device are wired together. If we're really really lucky, they go nowhere. Otherwise at least one ends up connected to a Ground line (ultimatelly coming from USB) and the other to a power (most likely the 5V from USB) - in other words, it's a short circuit of the power from USB. Not, just not good, but actually a seriously bad "I've never touched electronics in my life" mistake: there is literally no topology where the 3 pins of a 3-pin component are wired together like that, since electrically that's the same as not having it there at all (so even if connected to something else than 5V + GND, at best that component would never do anything). This is like something you figure out in the first hour of learning Electronics.

This shit is not just a little bad, it's incredibly bad and probably a danger to connect to anything over USB.

Push AI button, don’t check, complain about AI, problem is human

This is kind of a neat novelty thing I guess but I would have made sure it was functional before printing it

First thing I noticed is the type c port is backwards

Am I missing it? Or is there not even an LED to light up?

Nothing a little bodge-wiring and a Pi compute-module can't fix.

It may take away jobs from loyal workers, be less efficient, require an AI subscription, be environmentally devastating, but at least the end product also doesn't work at all.

This reminds me of the people who trained neural networks on stuff before ChatGPT and uploaded YouTube videos with titles like, "I FORCED an AI to read ALL of twilight, and THIS is what it wrote!" and then they laugh at the garbage that comes out of the model. Like... yeah, the model is not good at this task that it was not designed to do. Some of the text is funny, but in the same way people don't really emotionally respond to AI art because there was no human intent behind it, I don't respond to AI "humour". It's using a tool wrong and then laughing that the outcome is bad.

There's satirical comedy to be had here, but it needs to be grounded in what actual people are doing. Personally I haven't seen anyone seriously expect a language model to be able to assemble a functioning PCB, so I can't enjoy this as satire either.

Or could it be genuine curiosity, just seeing what happens? Always possible but such a predictable outcome doesn't tickle my curiosity either.

So, there are all the reasons I didn't find this interesting. Why did I reply it all? I dunno man.

Wow, he's using those new invisible inductors!

Live stream plugging it in to your computer, whoever you are. And then in to your phone and then your router.

(Switches is it on) Boom, time machine!

AI is, in the end, designed to subjugate us further. It's intention and utilization is innately corrupt. That said, it's important to understand how it works. This is badly enough done that it reflects more on the user than the tool.