Yeah, it's definitely not the most precise thing. It's good to around ±1mm. I tried to measure 1.75mm filament with it, and it just reads 1, not even between 1 and 2, so for critical measurements the physical matches are definitely better.
And yeah, here the vernier effect is not giving very high precision; it's just giving a way to space the marks out enough to be printable, but indicate movements that are as small as a printed line.
Vernier calipers are absolutely ingenious, and it's a shame that more people don't know how to use them.
Sorry, just realized I also had the wrong link for the gallery that included photos of the tool in use! I edited the post, but here's the corrected version of that: https://imgur.com/gallery/moire-vernier-radius-gauge-design-3d-printing-ajy0GBg
Sorry all! I meant to post a video of the moire/vernier effect in action, which is the most eye-catching part of the whole project, as the main image for the post, but it didn't upload. And now when I try to edit in a link, or post a link to it in the comments, it's telling me "blocked URL." But there's a link on the printables page, and the version with the older version is in the imgur gallery which is linked.
It's not just Fox News. Bezo's Washington Post ran an editorial, written by "the editorial board," about how Mamdani would be "bad for New York and bad for the Democratic Party," claiming he would destroy public transit, reduce the number of grocery stores, drive away big businesses, depress low-skill employment, etc., etc., etc. Oh, and of course that this would discredit all the other young candidates across the country. The WaPo's threat earlier this year to make their editorial page aggressively pro-capitalist and anti-public-good was apparently very much in earnest.
I tried this with my Switch, but it turns out the switch version of moonlight is super janky. It can't wake the computer, and the controls don't seem to map right by default, which basically means I have to remap controls every time I start a game (since I go back and forth between the PC and the handheld, and I need to switch them back when I'm at the PC). Plus it sometimes just stops accepting input for a while and makes me run down to the computer. It just has a lot more friction than I thought it would.
I'm doing all that because there's this part of my brain that is convinced that I should get a Deck, even though my problem isn't actually that I don't have a handheld, it's that I can't motivate myself to play the games I already have. So, not actually gonna get a Deck unless the prices come down a lot. The used prices are mostly still over $300, though.
The 2nd amendment just says the government can't take away your guns. It doesn't say anything about it being okay for you to use them against the government.
I mean, hell, police kill people all the time, but the courts treat having a gun on your person as a reason the cops had to shoot you. So they can't take away the gun, but they can take away your life for having it.
Basically you can use it as a security blanket to rock yourself to sleep at night, but get anywhere near the gestapo with it and you die a "terrorist."
So, the EPA sets emissions rules for the country, on the grounds that it would be problematic for industry if there was a patchwork of 50 different sets of rules about this stuff. California got the feds to agree to let them set their own stricter limits, though, and allowed other states to sign on to also use California's rules if they wanted to, which several did.
So I think what's happening here is that the waivers are being rescinded. They've been in place for ages (at least 50 years, I think?) so it's a huge departure from business as usual, but you know how Trump loves stomping on norms.
This article has some of the relevant points: https://www.npr.org/2025/05/22/nx-s1-5387729/senate-california-ev-air-pollution-waiver-revoked
I feel like you're missing a point here. It's significant that this isn't just
It's that the federal government has made a commitment to provide funds to the state (e.g. the broadband construction funds, funds to build EV charging stations, etc.) and the federal government is now refusing to disburse those funds because the current administration has decided it doesn't like paying the bills the previous administration incurred, at least to states Trump feels aren't adequately supportive of his policies. The proposal in this case is to withhold delivery of funds the state is supposed to give the government in order to offset the funds the government is also contractually obligated to deliver.
I agree with you that this specific supreme court would definitely rule in favor of the feds, but I definitely don't think the case is as absurdly one-sided as you seem to find it. I think a different court could probably find precedent for this kind of dispute if they were so inclined.