Do you have any preferred guides for getting started wtih BRL-CAD? I've tried a couple of times, but it seems like it's more a large collection of various tools and it's hard to know where to start. Or even what the general design philosophy is. It looks like the core functionality is more a code-driven approach to modeling? With UI driven design (archer) only in the experimental/early-development stage?
For those unfamiliar, Ondsel is just a custom build of FreeCAD, with some different UI/UX and workbench defaults and their cloud oriented plugin/features enabled by default. They also have some features that haven't yet made their way into a stable FreeCAD release, but most likely will eventually.
I've got no qualms with anything Ondsel is doing, except that their "releases" are based off of the dev versions of FreeCAD, which are still in active development where things are rapidly changing and are poorly tested as a whole package. This leads to the situation where, for example, very basic sketches will cause the most recent Ondsel version to puke in odd ways, but it's a problem that's already been fixed in the FreeCAD dev builds.
So certainly give Ondsel a try; there a lot to like, and they're adding some much needed features to FreeCAD, but until their releases are based off FreeCAD stable, treat it like the unstable dev build it is.
While a common sentiment, I think this concept misses the entire purpose of war. The purpose of any war is to impose your will by force on another, and by extension, prevent your enemy from imposing his. A drone-on-drone war may be an opening salvo, but unless drones are the only means available to an aggressor or defender, they will never be the only means being used in warfare no matter how technologically advanced things become. As long as an enemy has the will and capacity to resist force upon him, or still has the ability to impose his will by force on another, the war will continue. Once enough of one side's drones or robots are sufficiently defeated, it will be people that are the means for imposing or resisting force, so they will eventually always be the ones fighting and dying.
I can't imagine if Ukrainians had incredibly advanced drone/robot tech, them throwing all their drones at the Russians, loosing them all, and then saying 'Well, we used up all our drones, I guess we'll give up now.' It always comes down to removing an enemy's capacity or will to resist force, and people will always be part of that equation.
As much as people enjoy grousing about them, CIG [0] has made some really interesting progress in pushing the boundaries in player counts. This article discusses this in a very hypothetical, back-of-the-envelope sort of way, but from what I can tell, CIG are actually making it work today using dynamic server meshing, database-like servers for managing global game state, and intermediate state replication layers for passing players and player actions between servers seamlessly. It's still a work in progress, but it's showing promise. Expensive, and the sort of effort other studios don't seem interested in investing in, but seemingly doable with today's tech, and seemingly no need for a global multicast network as the article suggests.
How much does it cost to repair a carbide toothed blade, and how accessible are shops that can perform those repairs? Is it realistic that most consumers would be able to get a blade repaired rather than just running to the hardware store and getting a new one? Not being snarky; I've just never been under the impression that repairs could really be done for less than the value of a new blade.
One thing I don't see mentioned with any of these discussions is that this massively increases the cost of using different kinds of blades on the saw. If you need to use a specialty blade that's a smaller diameter, it requires a matching special size safety cartridge. Dado stack? Another, even more expensive cartridge. I know most people typically have one blade on the saw and never change it or if they do, it's just another of the same size, but for those of us who do regularly swap out blades that aren't the standard 10" x 1/8", these types of regulations add both significant cost and time/frustration.
I'm all for safety and would love for there to be more options for this kind of tech from other saw makers, but I personally don't think regulation is necessarily the right way to do it. Just like there are legitimate cases for removing the blade guard, there are legitimate cases for running without this safety feature, especially one that would require several hundred dollars more investment even if the safety feature is disabled (On SawStop, you physically can't mount a dado stack unless you buy a special dado stack cartridge).
And if SawStop really wanted to improve safety for everyone... well I find it rather telling that they'll only open their patent if the regulation becomes law. Since they're effectively the only ones with the tech, with the regulation passed, buyers instantly have only one option for however long it takes for competitors to come to market with their own (which they'll be hesitant to do based only on a spoken promise by the patent holder). Instant pseudo-monopoly.
As I understand it, hazardous material loads cannot be transported through tunnels. So having a bridge that allows that (and prevents the need for hazmat loads being routed through the city center) does make some sense. I suspect the cost of a bridge replacement might also be cheaper than both a tunnel and redoing all the roadways and infrastructure leading up to it, but don't know for certain. If anyone has a more informed estimate, please share.
Oh, absolutely. I've spent some time in education as a teacher, tutor, and other things. It's incredibly difficult. Especially with an audience of multiple people. But I'd wager just knowing that this might be a source of difficulty for some people can help. If things just aren't connecting, come at it from a different direction and/or method. But I agree, it's not easy.
One of the most common assumptions people make when dealing with other people is that everyone else thinks like they do. So many problems with communication, instruction/teaching/learning could be better resolved if each person understood that different people process information in different ways and made sure to present information in a way that the receiver is capable of following.
Very little, and rarely, if I understand correctly. The characteristic thwop-thwop noise of many helicopters is from the blade passing through the vortex created by the previous blade. In some circumstances, this might lead to local and intermittent supersonic flow, but it's not typical. I think it also only happens when the vehicle is moving in a particular way, but I don't know how vortices propagate from a rotor blade, so I couldn't say how or when the supersonic flow is most likely to occur.
Many of these tools and techniques are still very useful for woodworkers for laying out cuts and shapes on the timber. I have and use many of these in my workshop.
> You haven't lived until a bug of your own causes a triple-fault exception that causes a literal system shutdown.
On the OS I work on, I deliberately added a triple fault trigger as a fallback method of rebooting the system if the "normal" methods fail, which I have seen before.
To anyone looking to play with writing their own OS, definitely just do it. It's a lot of fun, and there's almost no limit to how much you can learn. With QEMU and bochs, and VirtualBox, etc... it's not that hard getting started. If you want to play around without starting from scratch, but find Linux source too complicated, give OpenBSD a look. Not that Linux is that hard, but it takes some getting used to how they do things. I find OpenBSD considerably more approachable.
One of the things I always wonder about with these massive choirs with 10-30 thousand singers is how do you synchronize everyone so that it doesn't sound like a muddled mess? With such a large group the audio delays due to the speed of sound from the front to back or side to side of the choir start to become non-negligible.
I would go even a bit further. For a good consensus to be had, everyone that cares to should have the opportunity to share their opinion and defend it, to provide stakeholders all the viable options. The "consensus" then isn't that we all agree on the "right" option, but that we all agree that the person in charge, after evaluating the options, makes the final decision and we all move forward with that plan without taking any disagreements personally or getting angry if your option wasn't selected.
I'm lucky enough to work in such a team, and it's been fantastic.
Why do you feel LinkedIn is a necessity these days? What exactly does it provide that makes getting a job without it so difficult? I'm genuinely curious; I ditched LinkedIn a few years ago as I didn't see it providing any value for anything in my professional life and haven't suffered for it (as far as I know). And I've been involved in the hiring several people; linkedin has never been involved.
I didn't read the paper, but judging just from the article, it looks like it requires forcing the humid air through the membrane. I suspect that the energy required to do so is more than it harvests.
I have a theory (with no data to back it up; would be curious to get people's thoughts) that people with a religious or spiritual world-view, who believe that there is such thing as a soul, and that the mind is more than just a collection of neurons in the brain, are much less inclined to think that "AI" will ever reach a sort of singularity or true "human-like" intelligence. And likewise, those who are more atheist/agnostic, or inclined to believe that human consciousness is nothing more than the patterns of neurons firing in response to various stimuli, are more convinced that a human-like machine/programmed intelligence is not only possible, but inevitable given enough resources.
I could be wildly off base, but seeing many of the (often heated) arguments made about what AI is or isn't or should or could be, it makes me wonder.
Not showing the user ads is also only half the problem. As the article said, those who pay not to view them are the more valuable advertising targets. There's nothing about those plans, as far as I've seen, that says they're not still tracking usage patterns, viewing habits, etc... and selling that info on to others who don't have a paid ad-free option.
Nor did they monitor what you looked at on the page, track how you "interacted" with them, and sell all that data about you to anyone who would give them a couple of bucks.
I'm sure you've heard of TrackIR, which can do head tracking with some head-mounted reflectors. But without mounting anything to your head, the tobii eye tracker can do both head and eye tracking completely passively. It seems like adding hand/finger gesture controls, and peripherals like stylus, mouse, etc... would be an obvious next step, but it doesn't look like they or anyone else is doing that.
Isn't that all games though? Especially MMO's. Why do people think it's so much different for star citizen than any other game? At the end of the day, they're all just entertaining ways to waste time.
Do you have some suggestions on what sort of sortiments you like? It seems like many of the common component assortment kits readily available, while having several hundred pieces, only have a handful of any particular value component, which tends to run out rather quickly after only a project or two.
One thing I really wish sponsorblock would add is the ability to mask off some part of the screen with an option to mute. More and more channels are embedding on-screen ads, animations, and interaction "reminders" that are, at best, distracting.
Having been on both sides of this equation, I don't think I'm being unreasonable, and am well aware of the fact that good candidates and the "right" hire will rarely be the ones that check off a list of random attributes plucked from the thin air between the pointy-haired bosses ears. I'm not looking for a purple squirrel, and I'm not looking for someone with 25 years experience in rust or the like. I'm looking for someone who both has an interest in, and a capacity to do a somewhat unique job we need done. We've found plenty of qualified people, and hired some, many of whom tend to be fresh graduates with zero non-academic experience. What I've had a difficult time finding, even figuring out how to look for, are the people that have the interest or desire to work on this particular type of niche problem. Few developers out there seem to, and we've found even less, so the package porting/maintenance/management part of our job continues to be a burden for the whole development team. Thus my question. And thankfully, some insightful replies suggest that I'm mainly looking in the wrong category of candidates. All of which has nothing to do with matching an overly strict list of experience requirements.
I'd not seen that project; definitely something I'll be looking at, thanks. Unfortunately, for what we're doing, it doesn't look like this will work as is... certainly worth some investigation though.
These are both very useful comments; thank you! In your experience, do the devops/sys ops engineers typically have useful coding experience? In our environment, porting a package to our OS may require a little, or sometimes a fair bit of modification to make it work and we often need to be able to read/understand the upstream code in whatever language it's in and change/add to it. Hence our (or at least my) assumption that we'd need a "developer."