Pinned Tweet
Replying to @quilterai
@quilterai just hit a milestone we've been working toward for years:
An AI-designed, 843-component Linux computer… that booted on the first try.
This is Project Speedrun — the hardest test we’ve ever thrown at Quilter.
👇
Sergiy Nesterenko retweeted
At 3 ps of skew per inch, a 15 to 20 inch differential pair arrives at the receiver with 45 to 60 ps of skew, about half the unit interval of a 10 Gbps signal.
In the final part of his fiber weave series, Dr. Steve Arar compares the ways to reduce it, from spread glass and NE-glass to matching your pair's pitch to the glass weave, and what each one costs you. Bill Hargin of Z-zero peer reviewed it.
quilter.ai/blog/fiber-weave-…
Sergiy Nesterenko retweeted
The U.S. share of global PCB production has fallen from 30% to 4%. Most federal funding, including tens of billions through the CHIPS Act, has gone to chip manufacturing. A chip is just an expensive piece of silicon until it's mounted on a PCB that connects it to power, memory, and the rest of the system. The engineers who design those boards are retiring faster than new ones replace them. Read our CEO @sergiynest new article in Electronic Design on why PCB design is the bottleneck U.S. reshoring efforts haven't addressed
electronicdesign.com/technol…
Sergiy Nesterenko retweeted
When we published this graph a few months ago, it drew a lot of comments from our community. Some of you said it matched what you see when you hire EE/PCB design roles. Others disagreed entirely.
So we invited four engineering leaders who hire electrical and PCB layout engineers to join our webinar panel and take on the question: is there really a shortage of electrical engineers?
All four either hire electrical and PCB layout engineers or are directly impacted by the hiring trends:
Milton Santos, Engineering Manager at Allient
Akshay Budhiraja, Head Engineer at Agility Technologies Corporation
Chris Denney, CTO at Worthington Assembly
Frank Monaco, VP of Engineering at Simulator Product Solutions
They'll talk about which roles are hardest to fill, how the talent gap shows up on a contract manufacturer's floor, and what their teams are doing about hiring.
We are cohosting this webinar with our friends from @hardwarefyi.
October 8, 9 AM ET/12 PM ET
luma.com/9rs2line
Sergiy Nesterenko retweeted
We're proud to announce that Dr. Eric Bogatin has joined Quilter as a Technical Fellow.
Dr. Bogatin is a professor in the Department of Electrical, Computer, and Energy Engineering at the University of Colorado Boulder, former technical editor of Signal Integrity Journal, and the author of 18 technical books, including Signal and Power Integrity: Simplified, widely regarded as the standard reference text for practicing engineers. His career spans more than four decades, including senior positions at Bell Labs, Raychem, Sun Microsystems, and Ansoft.
As a Technical Fellow, Dr Bogatin will advise Quilter's physics and engineering teams and publish original technical content on Quilter's platform.
In the words of @sergiynest, our founder and CEO: "Eric wrote the textbook that most engineers in our field learned from. Having him engage with what we're building is both an honor and a proof that Quilter is on the right path toward solving one of the oldest industry problems."
Sergiy Nesterenko retweeted
Quilter’s Project Speedrun is a finalist in the Artificial Intelligence category of Fast Company’s 2026 Innovation by Design Awards.
We’re honored and a little stunned.
See the full list here fastcompany.com/innovation-b…
Super proud to be working with an absolute legend in the field - welcome to Dr. Eric Bogatin!
We're proud to announce that Dr. Eric Bogatin has joined Quilter as a Technical Fellow.
Dr. Bogatin is a professor in the Department of Electrical, Computer, and Energy Engineering at the University of Colorado Boulder, former technical editor of Signal Integrity Journal, and the author of 18 technical books, including Signal and Power Integrity: Simplified, widely regarded as the standard reference text for practicing engineers. His career spans more than four decades, including senior positions at Bell Labs, Raychem, Sun Microsystems, and Ansoft.
As a Technical Fellow, Dr Bogatin will advise Quilter's physics and engineering teams and publish original technical content on Quilter's platform.
In the words of @sergiynest, our founder and CEO: "Eric wrote the textbook that most engineers in our field learned from. Having him engage with what we're building is both an honor and a proof that Quilter is on the right path toward solving one of the oldest industry problems."
Sergiy Nesterenko retweeted
Let me show you how far Twitter’s hype is from reality.
A year ago @quilterai showed case a linux board that is laid out by their model.
It's a manufacutred and working board which is a lot more complicated than the slop CAD that is flodding your timeline these days.
It's obviously a lot more capable than what Astra can do and it's almost a year old!
We are in a echo chamber on Twitter.
Sergiy Nesterenko retweeted
(trending #3 on alphaXiv) Why does CLAUDE.md just keep growing?
Appending to CLAUDE.md costs O(1); deleting without risking a regression costs O(2ⁿ), so it grows without bound.
The fix? (Prompt) comments! -99.3% prompt bloat, +23.1% instruction-following.
Sergiy Nesterenko retweeted
AIに基板作らせる件、何故かLLMでやりがちだけど、専用のやつありますよ。自分が使ってるのはQuilter。
KiCADで大事なところだけやってQuilterに任せる。
ネット毎にパスコン()やインピーダンスマッチの設定もできるよ。
これはEurorackの基板↓
We have amazing customers who keep finding new creative ways to use Quilter.
Link the full episode of Altium academy - youtube.com/watch?v=YJTbsoxP…
Sergiy Nesterenko retweeted
“Whether or not a PCB layout or design is good is computable.”
Our CEO @sergiynest joined the AI and Design podcast from CMU Human-Computer Interaction Institute hosted by Nikolas Martelaro to talk about why Quilter is taking a different path from most AI tools.
Here are key highlights when it pertains to PCBs design:
1. Imitation of existing designs has a ceiling, physics does not.
A lot of AI tools learn by mimicking human behavior. We all know how powerful it can be for text. For printed circuit boards, if a PCB layout is 99% right, the remaining 1% can still kill your whole board. Moreover, if a model learns from existing expert layouts, how do we know that all of those layouts were optimal?
Quilter starts from physics instead. Whether a layout works can be computed from electromagnetics and thermodynamics. So we optimize against that directly.
2. "Vibe coding" hardware has a hard limit.
For simple boards, yes, hobbyists are experimenting with vibe engineering. We've seen a mechanical engineer with no EE background ship a PCB after a few hours with KiCAD and Quilter. That works when the board is simple and the stakes are low. But for anything with real complexity nobody serious is prompting their way to a validated layout.
3. Constraints are at the heart of layout automation.
Before you can automate anything, you have to capture what "good" means for this specific board. Across a real design, that can be tens of thousands of constraints. No engineer is going to manually capture all of them. Sergiy talked about 3 possible approaches: a chatbot that interrogates you, tables you fill in and verify, or direct selection on the schematic you already know by heart. The truth is nobody has solved how to design the best human-AI interface for that yet, including us.
The discussion went beyond the traditional PCB topics and touched on how to hire engineers in an era where AI tools are expected, why deleting from your design until things break is a better practice than adding features, how to stay focused on one problem when agentic tools make it cheap to build anything.
Take a listen:
podcasts.apple.com/us/podcas…
open.spotify.com/episode/5aw…
Sergiy Nesterenko retweeted
Replying to @CNBC
@CNBC mentioned Quilter in their recent report on PCB manufacturing in the U.S.
CNBC's piece focuses on how central boards are to the AI and defense supply chains. Chips have been getting most of the headlines, but without a printed circuit board a chip is just an expensive piece of silicon. It's great to see that PCBs are starting to get the public and policy attention they deserve.
Most of the policy response in the U.S. focuses on fabrication: a proposed 25% tax credit and $3 billion in funding for domestic board makers like TTM. That addresses where boards get manufactured.
The other constraint is how they get designed. PCB layout is still weeks to months of manual work. Quilter was mentioned as a solution to accelerate the PCB layout process with AI.
cnbc.com/2026/06/03/beneath-…
Sergiy Nesterenko retweeted
"When I do layout, the very first layout, I know I'm going to trash it. Because I'm using it to see where there's space and where there isn't."
Robert Feranec is describing a workflow most layout designers know well: a throwaway first pass to understand the physical reality of the board.
One use case for Quilter is exactly this: design exploration.
When generating a first-pass layout is cheap, you stop committing prematurely to one floorplan. You can compare a different placement strategy or a different region assignment, and see what each looks like before investing days of manual work in one direction.
Robert framed it as time savings. It's also about making better decisions earlier.
Watch the original video here youtube.com/watch?v=aXjcSAsH…
Sergiy Nesterenko retweeted
Most conversations about AI in hardware swing between two extremes: it's useless, or it's about to replace everyone in the building.
Our founder @sergiynest sat down with Zachariah Peterson on the @altium OnTrack podcast for a more grounded discussion on the subject.
A few highlights:
- PCB layout is not a language problem. LLMs are good at reading datasheets and writing firmware. They are not the right tool for deciding where a component goes and how a net routes. That's geometry, physics, and manufacturing, which is why Quilter trains its own models with reinforcement learning rather than wrapping a language model.
- The realistic goal isn't a magic box. When we talk to VPs of engineering, nobody is asking for a perfect board out of a one-sentence prompt. They're asking whether a three-week layout can become one. That's a more achievable problem to solve than nailing a simple board to production perfection.
- Being honest about our limits is a feature. Customers tell us we're a breath of fresh air, mostly because we're willing to say "no, we can't do that yet." Engineers see through hype immediately, and we are tired of AI hype as much as everyone else.
Check out the conversation here -> youtube.com/watch?v=YJTbsoxP…
Sergiy Nesterenko retweeted
There's a common misconception about Quilter that we have a magic button you just push to do your PCB layout.
We don't. In this clip from our recent conversation with Robert Feranec, @sergiynest says it plainly: there's no magic button.
Quilter is a tool. A useful mental model is to treat it like a junior engineer on your team, correcting it every few iterations.
Robert makes a good point: on a 50-component board, doing layout by hand is fast enough that the value of a "junior engineer" isn't obvious. On a 3,000-component board with thousands of nets and vias, where each component can take 20 seconds to place by hand, Quilter can save you a lot of time.
You can watch the original video here youtube.com/watch?v=aXjcSAsH…
"I can design everything down to the component level—but I can't get it to the board."
That's what a hardware founder told me last week.
He's building multiple IoT products. Has detailed BOMs. Knows exactly what goes on each board.
But to actually lay out the PCB? He has to send everything to China.
Not because he wants to. Because there's no other option.
He's a one-person hardware team at a funded startup, shipping 4 new designs in a single month. The knowledge is there. The speed isn't.
This is the quiet bottleneck nobody talks about in hardware.
Founders and system architects understand their products deeply. They can specify every component, every net, every constraint. But PCB layout requires a different skillset entirely—and hiring for it is brutal.
So they outsource. They wait. They lose control of iteration speed right when it matters most.
If you've ever had the architecture in your head but couldn't get it onto a board without outside help, I'd love to hear how you handled it.
"Our challenge isn't verifying the design electrically. It's cramming what you want in the space that you have."
I heard this from a senior electrical engineer last week. He's been doing board layout since the DOS versions of ORCAD.
He's tried every auto router out there. His conclusion? They've been more of a problem than anything else.
Why? Because auto routers take shortcuts. They "simplify" the problem by adding layers. But when you're designing ultra-thin flex circuits at 15-50 microns—credit card form factor stuff—there's nowhere to hide.
His team routes BGAs with 0.3mm ball pitch using 1.2 mil traces. On two layers. By hand.
Not because they want to. Because no tool can understand the physical constraints they're working within.
This is the real challenge in miniaturized electronics: the electrical engineering is often the easy part. The hard part is physics—cramming radios, displays, and flexible batteries into spaces where every micron matters and every extra layer breaks the product.
The engineers who've been doing this the longest are often the most skeptical of automation. They've seen too many tools promise the world and deliver more problems than solutions.
I think that skepticism is earned. And it's exactly what we need to overcome.
What's the hardest physical constraint you've had to design around?
"Let's just make a quick board to test this."
That's where the rabbit hole begins.
A principal at a product development consultancy told me this week how a "quick PCB" for internal testing became a weeks-long distraction.
"Resources just disappear. Scope blows up really fast."
The board wasn't complicated. No DDR buses. No high-speed constraints. Nothing that required real engineering judgment.
And yet it sucked weeks of his double E's time.
That's what gets me. Your most experienced engineers—the ones who should be solving the hard problems, the ones who make the difference between a product that ships and one that doesn't—end up gardening routine layouts because there's no other option.
We treat PCB layout like it's indivisible. Either you hand it to an expert for weeks, or you wire up Arduinos with a rats nest of cables and call it a prototype.
But there's a middle ground emerging. Boards that don't require human creativity shouldn't consume human capacity.
The question isn't whether AI can replace your best layout engineers on the complex stuff. It's whether you should keep burning their time on boards that don't need them.
What's your threshold? At what point does a "quick board" become worth protecting your team from?

















