blipcast

u/blipcast@lemmy.world
0 posts · 72 comments

Recent posts

No posts.

Recent comments

If things are working for you without glue, there's no need to mess with it. Personally, I like having an extra barrier between my model and build plate to make removal easier, plus I'm paranoid about damaging the plate. What was the reasoning for never using glue stick?

When I see first layer issues like this, my go to steps are:

  1. Wash the build plate with hot water and soap to remove any built up glue, dry, and reapply a thin layer of glue stick
  2. Turn the initial layer speed way down, like 10mm/sec, and 20mm/sec for infill.
on *Permanently Deleted* · c/math · 3 pts · 85d

So let me get this straight, you're setting your moral compass based on... old YouTube comments?

I did this one not too long ago! One thing that helped was recognizing that there's no "roar" delay like when the first one shows up. You can just attacking as they fall down from the ceiling. Second was trying to optimize for damage to take one out asap, and reduce the amount of time you need to dodge both of them simultaneously. For me that looked like Barbed Bracelet, Flintsteel, and Beast Crest. Good luck!

If this is meant to be an example of the superior writing quality that's possible with AI assistance, I'm not seeing it. This whole post is difficult to read:

  • It adds paragraph breaks after single sentences, sometimes mid sentence.
  • Some appear to be meant as headings, but there's no clear organization going on.
  • It expounds over and over about letting the AI do the "heavy lifting" and "final polishing" without ever giving examples of how it helped or what the original input was.
  • It awkwardly jumps to second person several times, which makes me wonder if these were part of the author's "collaboration" with the AI that got left in by mistake.
  • Despite the many words spilled, it never gets around to having a point beyond: save time, make more articles faster

All of these things are hallmarks of slop. It makes me think the author is doing such a shoddy job reviewing it that they didn't actually care about the quality of the work. And if that's the case, then why should I bother reading it?

I'm not super into retro tech, but It's become clear how advancements in technology aren't strictly positive. The things that get taken away aren't obvious and they aren't advertised. Things like ad-free interfaces, fewer privacy concerns, faster loading times because it isn't running dozens of background requests, less UI friction from popups, modals, and elements shifting on the page, no barrages of notifications, no perverse incentives where the user is the product.

Retro tech isn't immune to any of those things, but it is refreshing when you return to one of these devices and discover it has features you didn't realize had been taken from you.

That's awesome! I'm glad work is already being done to allow for alternate launchers. I stick to just Steam, so I haven't even used Lutris up until now and I was surprised how much it's baked in to the OS. Trying to uninstall it just leads to its flatpak entry in the Discovery store, where it appears to be not installed. That looked like buggy behavior, and it took some research to learn what was actually going on.

Yup! Replace the word "fork" with "branch" and that basically matches the workflow. Forking implies you are copying the code in its current state and going off to do your own thing, never to return (but maybe grabbing updates from time to time).

One would hope that the users submitting these PRs vetted to LLM's output before submitting, but instead all of that work is getting shifted onto the maintainers.