[embedding-shape]

Hook it up so it can experiment away by itself with tools, provide a end goal and ask it to iterate until it reached it. What the "AI can do vs not" becomes more about how long you can let it do inference in such loop, with local hardware it gets really cheap (granted you have the hardware already), with remote inference cost is probably the limiter.

[nerdsniper]

> Hook it up so it can experiment away by itself with tools, provide a end goal and ask it to iterate until it reached it

Those "tools" you throw out so cavalierly cost around $50,000 to $300,000 per annual seat license with all the optional packages needed for 40GHz signals (like Cadence Allegro + Sigrity X Speed / SystemSI). Even if AI could do it it'd be much cheaper ($3-8k) to get someone in China to use their license and knowledge to do it.

[embedding-shape]

But how is cost related to "AI's ability to do X"? Of course if you can't afford the required tools, or inference for that part, remote or local, then you can't do any of that stuff. The same if you don't speak/know the language the specifications/manuals/guides are done in, and you can't afford a translator, but kind of besides the point when we're trying to discuss AI's ability to do something.

[nerdsniper]

For hobby stuff, I'd like to create some boards that involve a bit more than the usual MCU. Things like PCIe or USB4 or HDMI. If AI can't do those things for <$2,000 it doesn't make a difference to my life.

At some point the cost makes it irrelevant. If you drive a Bugatti Chiron, you don't care about the price of petrol. Humans or AI, there's not really a difference if the capital costs vastly outweigh the labor costs.