One thing I've noticed: my self hosted services are rarley, if ever, hounding me to check out features. I cannot emphasise enough how much I loathe a program fighting for my attention.
batmaniam
joined 2 years ago
Maybe? It was/is on an old win10 I keep around (and came with it).
There's a million better options, but I was glad it was there. Good way to get some kid fooling around early the way paint did. You used to be able to scan things with your surface and import them into builder (this was a good while back).
I'm going to toss out Microsoft 3D builder, strictly to dip your toe in the water. It's bare bones and basically MS Paint but when I was getting started I used it for very simple stuff. I still use it if I'm making dead simple modifications/combinations of existing .STL files.
Microsoft actually had some cool ideas in the early/mid 2010s. Still had all the proprietary bullshit but there was at least nifty stuff going on.
Small Soldiers
This is a great conversation because I'm one of those people who's terrible at arithmetic, but quite good at math. As in: I can look at a function, visualize it in 3D space, see what different max, mins and surfaces are dominated by what terms etc, but don't ask me to tally a meal check. I'd be useless at applying any math without a calculator.
Similarly, there's a lot of engineers out there that use CAD extensively that would probably not be engineers if they had to do drafting by hand.
The oatmeal did a comic that distilled this for me where they talked about why they didn't like AI "art". They made the point that in making a drawing, there are a million little choices made reconciling what's in your head with what you can do on the page. Either from the medium, what you're good at drawing, whatever, it's those choices that give the work "soul". Same thing for writing. Those choices are where learning, development, and style happen, and what generative AI takes away.
That helped crystalize for me the difference between a tool and autocomplete on steroids.
Edit: to add: you're statement "I claim to understand but don't" hits it on the head and is similar to why you have to be careful if plagiarism in citing academic review papers. If you write YOUR paper in a way that agrees with the review but discuss the paper the review was referencing, and, even accidentally, skip over that the conclusion you're putting forward is from the review, not the paper you're both citing, that's plagiarism. Notion being you misrepresented their thoughts as your own. That is basically ALL generative AI.
this makes me feel much better. I'm debating spooling it up on wifi after disconnecting it and piecing it back together.
That makes sense but also it seems like you just like adding extra round characters to the end of things.
thank you! I had looked at the documentation but was unable to find that. I think to be safe I'm going to follow what @autriyo@feddit.org said as well. There's no reason not to label them.
Which means, sorry future people stumbling on this, I will not be providing definitive evidence one way or the other on this.
This. I'm smack in the middle of prepping for this. A friend came out and visited and helped me start boxing. I have another who's coming out to drive the truck. I could but he's got his CDL and is willing to do it.
Getting movers that drive the truck out of town is expensive, but in town, or just some big dudes to load/unload is much less. Everyone's financial situation is different but I was shocked at how different the price of those two categories was.
Something like 98% of what you see in the night sky is already out of our reach. If you left right now, at the speed of light, you would never, ever, reach them.
Another consequence of that is that some day the light from those stars will also be unable to reach us. They'll still be there, same as the day before, but not one shred of information from them will be attainable.
If you could go to this future, you would have no way of convincing people, except say, the ancient texts. To some extent it would not even matter because again, existing or not, there is no way for them to interact.
98% of what's in the night sky would just have to be taken on faith.
Im not advocating religion here I just always thought there was some poetry in that.
Hi All,
I have a somewhat ridiculous setup where I have:
- 4 monitors all fully adjustable arms
- 2 totally separate PCs (one running windows for mostly work, the other debian for sanity)
- all monitors going through switches so any can be either machine with the push of a button (in any combination)
- A M&K switch that swaps my M&K from one machine to the other by double clicking the scroll wheel.
As you can imagine this takes some space. I have both boxes under my desk towards the edge, and have a three section cabinet in front of my desk to neaten everything up/hide cables. It's kind of like the one in the picture, except mine would be an isosceles trapezoid from a top view.
It works well, but I don't really use the cabinet as, well a cabinet. What I'd like to do is mount each computer in the left and right area of the cabinet. At some point, I'd get around to getting an old electric fireplace (preferably a craigslist or garage sale on that didn't work as a heater), take the door off the center cabinet, mount the fireplace in there and tie brightness to fan speed (that part I can do). As a bonus I'd put a mechanical vent switch that let me output heat to the front, or behind, where my feet are under the desk.
My question is: what do I need to do to ensure proper grounding? Also, are there any rules of thumb for air circulation? Any other pitfalls you might be able to think of?
I am also considering putting the guts of both PC's in the center section of the cabinet, but I think that would make it a bit crowded for the fireplace insert.
view more: next ›
I spun it up it up in may to fool around. Today I opened a brand new air purifier and imeaditley disassembled it to flash ESPHome firmware on it. It never once ran stock.