My router is called Jupiter, everything connected to it is named after a moon. Callisto, Ganymede, Thelxinoe, Kallichore are what I’m currently using.
My router is called Jupiter, everything connected to it is named after a moon. Callisto, Ganymede, Thelxinoe, Kallichore are what I’m currently using.
You can host a Firefox sync server yourself. You could run that on something like a Raspberry Pi in your local network. If you need remote access, use something like cloudflare tunnels (although I guess that’s something else to be paranoid about).
Windows is clearly superior. If you’ve had enough of the settings app, you can just switch to the control center!
Reminds me of this: Falsehoods Programmers Believe About Names
It is more efficient to have a ship moving with cargo than without, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t additional emissions. The ratio of profit to effort is just higher because there is some profit as opposed to none. You wouldn’t load a ship up with useless mass you can’t sell just so you’re shipping something.
Your argument is like always running the heater in your car because that way the engine heat is at least used for something. Yes, technically the efficiency goes up because more of the energy in the fuel is harnessed. But that doesn’t mean the fuel usage or emissions are any lower, and in the summer the heater doesn’t do you any good either.
That’s why I don’t let every device decide individually. I know my router (FritzBox) prioritizes the pi-hole (it’s even called “preferred” and “alternative” DNS-Server in the UI)
I have my pi-hole setup as the upstream DNS in my router, with cloudflare as a secondary DNS. That way, all my devices always use the router for DNS (since that’s what is advertised in my DHCP) and the router then uses pi-hole if it’s available, or cloudflare if it isn’t. But the individual device doesn’t get to choose between different servers.
That study states that brain damage can cause more conservative views, but the reverse isn’t true. Not everyone with conservative views has brain damage.
Tightening the belts seems to have helped, but I will have to do some more printing to be sure. Thanks for your help!
The belts are parallel to the axis, but I will try tightening them some more.
This is a 40x40 cube printed in vase mode:
The corners look pretty okay on that:
But I don’t see these kind of results on real-world parts. I guess I have to print some more test parts to narrow down the problem.
That might be part of it, my filament is probably pretty wet. I’ll try some other rolls of filament.
The part is just pretty small, I have the EW set to 0.45 mm withe 0.4 nozzle. But I will try turning it down further.
The rounding looks much more extreme than what I would expect or have seen on other printers I worked with (mostly Ultimakers).
It’s a printer of my own design running marlin. I’m going to try disabling input shaping, but if I remember correctly the problem was already there before I ever enabled it.
Good point, see my edit
I’m guessing it’s about documenting the assembly of safety-critical components. If some part of, let’s say an airplane fails because a bolt comes loose, the manufacturer wants to have a paper trail attached to it to prove that this specific bolt was indeed torqued to the correct spec. Connecting the wrench to the network could make this documentation much easier.
You can try to disable software End-Stops with this gcode:
M211 S0
Be aware though, if you do that, there is nothing preventing your printer from trying to move beyond the hardware limits and possibly destroying itself. You can enable the end-stops again with:
M211 S1
Matlab
I remove the chain and let it soak in WD-40 for a while. Then I spray it down with degreaser and rinse with a power washer. As long as the chain is well lubricated, I don’t have any issues with corrosion.
Also, some quick-links are reusable. You should check with the manufacturer. KMC has a type that can be reused 5 times. With a bit of practice and a good chain breaker it is also pretty easy to remove and reconnect a chain with no quick-link at all.
Unfortunately, this might not be easy to find a solution for. The larger thread size doesn’t seem to be a standard bike pedal thread, so finding a specific adapter is probably not possible.
Another solution might be to use some kind of threaded inserts in the cranks (this would probably require drilling the cranks out for a larger thread). But the standard pedal thread of 9/16-20 is not widely used anywhere else, so finding the inserts (let alone a left-handed ones is probably next to impossible.