kale

I'm a mech E in the medical field. We're consistently understaffed. If I validate an Excel worksheet in Excel '08 or a Python program in 3.5 with a specific version of NumPy, we're probably sticking with those versions for a while. Every time I bring up re-validating with the latest version, keeping one old system running the old software requires fewer resources than me or a colleague re-validating.

My whole department is stuck on one version of Python because that was the most recent version when I had an emergency project and developed a data analysis algorithm. We validated it, then as new members were added to my team, they needed a copy, so we had to keep using it. I'll probably re-validate it to the next Python release. It's not only unit tests, or we could automate validation. Unit tests are a tiny part of validating software for making medical decisions. And software that directly runs a medical device (like firmware on an insulin pump) is an order of magnitude more rigorous than what I do.

Side note: there are people who somehow root their insulin pumps and run algorithms on them. There's a group that can get a PID control loop on an insulin pump that has a more simple control scheme on it (because that's how the FDA approved it). The company has been trying to get approval to use PID control in the US for years.

The business strategy decisions behind CPU fab is really interesting over the past 15 years.

AMD made a budget clone of Intel two decades ago. Then Intel made a misstep and released Northwood Pentium 4. AMD used less power and was faster. And AMD decided to go with DDR memory, while Intel went RDRAM. Then AMD was king when they went AMDx86-64 for 64 bit and Intel went Itanium.

Then AMD made a huge miscalculation on the future of multicore computing and designed Bulldozer, while Intel got their shit together and went down the hyperthreading route and released CORE/Core2/Core2Duo chips. And Intel was king for a decade.

I don't know the exact timing, but AMD needed cash and sold their fabs to raise money, which became ~~TSMC~~ GlobalFoundries, sorry. GF learned how to make stuff small since smartphones became a huge market. Then AMD let an engineer run the company and she invested in the Zen architecture, which could be made by GF with their lessons from the mobile world.

This is my take. By AMD turning GF loose, GF could ~~date other people~~ work on mobile projects, which helped them learn.

It's a side note now, but Intel hung on to their fabs and lagged behind GF. AMD let their fab go and benefitted from it. EDIT: I had some facts wrong. It's possible Intel fabs are ahead of GF.

As a side note, Intel did try fairly hard to get into mobile like GF. They had the Atom chips and went for tablet, Ultrabook, netbook, and mobile. I had an ASUS Android phone with an Intel SOC. So it's not like they ignored mobile, but it didn't benefit them as much as TSMC.

I love MPFC, but some of the sketches are "meh". For every "Battle of Pearl Harbor", there's a "Confuse-a-cat".

Fawlty Towers is great. Mildly racist against the Spanish and Irish.

It takes 4 episodes to really build into the complexity. Then season 2 turns it on its head.

Red Dwarf is pretty good. Fawlty Towers is great. Someone recommended "Yes Minister" and the first season is awesome. The Hallmark of great comedy writing is if it holds up, and Yes Minister still is hilarious 40 years later.

Dark is a German Netflix show. It unfolds into something akin to "Lost" over the first four episodes. The ending doesn't suck, and they set up the end to where it's almost impossible to get it right. It's not an amazing ending, but it's impressive that they managed to make it not terrible, since it builds up to a near-impossible ending.

Squid Game is pretty great but gory. Letterkenny and Trailer Park Boys are quirky comedies with some rough language throughout.

The typical cause of this is a biomarker sticks to one side of an embryo, marking it as left (or right, I don't remember), but a twin embryo that is too close will see that marker on the other side and develop mirror imaged to the first embryo, right?

Look at Sovol or Anycubic in that price range. I don't have direct experience with either. A good friend of mine had two Anycubics at one point last year and he said they were easier than his Creality.

My third printer, I paid $70 for, used (ender 3 pro return). It was missing several small components, one big part (top aluminum extrusion) that required some machining with a drill press, and had a bad thermistor.

I don't think you can get a beginning printer for $100 unfortunately. Sovol and Anycubic make printers among the cheapest that are more beginner friendly (I think) than Ender, for roughly the same price. I have a friend with a Creality and an Anycubic Vyper, and the Vyper seems to be more beginner-friendly. I have two Crealitys and I love them, but both required a ton of modifications to become reliable.

Can you check your area for a local maker space? My local library has 3D printers for anyone under 18. Universities typically have a few of different technologies (SLS, SLA, FDM)

There are methodical ways of valuating a private (and public) company. Some are pessimistic and some are wildly optimistic. Your can legally use whichever one you want, only you must only use that valuation method for everything. It's illegal to value the company low for taxes and high for loan collateral. And if you sell it, you can owe back taxes if your valuation was off (sale price is the new valuation).

This is overly-simplified US accounting rules (from finance class 10 years ago)

He took it private so, although there can be shares, they aren't traded on the open market. So no positions to short.

If you have a filament runout sensor, the klipper default settings aren't great. If the sensor activates, the printer shuts down after about an hour, losing your home position. With a part on the bed, you can't re-home, so it's a wasted print.

The mesh leveling isn't automatic either. You might want to add either auto-load your default mesh leveling if you always use the same print surface, or put mesh leveling codes in the starting G-code section of your slicer.

I ran the pressure advance tuning and found that I needed a ton of pressure advance. My prints turned out much better.

I also got improvements by reducing the allowable deviation in the slicer (G-code files get much bigger, though), and I load files as STEP files directly in Prusaslicer. STL doesn't have curves, it's a series of planes. STEP files have geometric primitives and can have curves.

I also would like to know. My Moto G 5G suddenly lost fingerprint reader (as in, it's not even an option in settings anymore) and I think I need to reflash it.