Releasing a single image after legal cleared it, is completely different from not doing enough for anyone with a camera renting a helicopter to take snapshots of whatever is left.
from memory I think it’s for example combustion chamber / injector design which is the crux here, none of that is visible, but could be from different angles.
sorry to disagree.
my steam deck does not fit (comfortably, maybe if I were willing to force it more) in the case, with the Nub attached to the back.
I love the Idea, and I’ll keep the parts I printed to use it when I have explicit use to attach the deck somewhere. But I don’t think the attachment will just live there
Will it fit in the case with the nub on the back?
idler tension.
depending on your print, if you want a tiny nozzle it seems likely it is some detailed figurine of some sort. maybe a miniature.
when you print very tiny structures, but retract a lot, your drive gears can chew through your filament pretty quickly, because the retraction happens over the same bit of filament over and over again (because actual extrusion is so little).
Interestingly, at first glance, this may be possible with the nextruder as well.
why can I not install it?
first time i just get the share button on droid-ify
/e: installig directly from github was no issue
Cool, I was wrong when I was sure the next launch would be a starshio, due to months of root-cause analysis and fix determinatiin and documentstion.
incredibly impressive to me.
Yes, the US Government is locked into many monopolies, especially for highly specialized items.
That doesn’t make one more better at all though.
I disagree with his second point. We’ve seen for years now, that when companies act like monopolists, they become a successful monopoly. There is very little checks and balances here. Yeah, they risk antitrust actions, but those happen so incredibly rarely.
And in so far as competition, investment heavy industry like this needs billions in startup capital. Very few, if any, are going to get that.
They’ve propably been in a vacuum chamber before no?
The actual launch will probably take a while, after the launch failure, right?
I’d expect a launch stop of multiple months for now.
Thanks to independent access to space, I think there is a decent chance that starship will dominate and others will still survive
I stumbled over that too.
I think that 3d printing is not food safe because of the layers.
One can decide for themselves if they want to take that risk, but commercially selling medical stuff with those issues would not be my cup of tea.
/e oops, replied to the Not instead of OP.
Seems reasonable for all involved imho.
Yes, Texas Parks and Recreation Wildlife should take time to think about the offer. Document the reasons why they take it etc. Nobody would want Protected wetland to be swapped for a Parking lot that nobody has the money to demolish to return to nature, or any suspicion of anything like it.
SpaceX is not going to withdraw the offer anyway, they can take the time, the Land up north is worth much less to SpaceX than the one adjacent to their Spaceport.
so I’m hoping we’re finally getting close to a version that’s a little more robust.
Well, the Ondsel team which (claims to? I don’t know) work closely with FreeCAD hoped in October 23 to maybe get Topological Naming done by February 2024 (FOSDEM 2024 is 03rd and 4th of February
We think that these goals are within reach and it should be possible to release FreeCAD 1.0 in time for the next FOSDEM. Here’s our thinking behind this goal.
Since FreeCAD still seems to be in the beginning stages of phase 3, I doubt they’ll make that target.
Well, all of these companies intentionally try to lock the users into them, by making their files as unreadable as possible.
No Company wants to lose access to all of their models.
There are also still a lot of QoL issues with the GUI and no real attempt to bring in influences and widgets from direct modeling. FreeCAD is pure of heart and pure of thought, but I’m not sure I’m quite there, though I can at least imagine it now
fyi, there is now ondsel
based on FreeCAD, their release introduction reads:
So our thinking was: we should focus on a polished user experience and features that are essential to professional use. Let’s build something we feel good about recommending it to someone working on a deadline. And let’s build a service for vaulting and collaboration.
…
Our primary objective is to provide polish and sorely missing features — that’s a large part of the added value. We’ve made big and small changes in the upstream project, but the four vital projects for us have been toponaming, integrated assembly workbench, UX/UI, and collaboration.
So working exactly on what most consider FreeCADs weaknesses I’d say
Unfortunately toponaming is still not done for either. That will be a huge leap in usefulness for me.
(fixes models breaking when their topology changes)
Infill has massively diminishing returns. I don’t think 100% is required. Usually it’s much better to increase the number outer layers.
That said, depending on the cost scaling, the possibly positive effects of extra mass, and how much I want to avoid a second attempt, massive objects can make some sense.
PLA becomes brittle with moisture (from your hands and/or air). I would recomment PETG / ASA / ABS (ascending order).
Yes, basically all CAD and slicers (3d-printer software) can mirror. PrusaSlicer for example can mirror and then save to stl again.
A lot of people seem to to think that bedslingers are inherently worse than core xy kinematics.
Core xy is definitely more compact.
In return the belts are longerz tightening them more complex (x and y can become unaligned).
Core xy can be easier for input shaping, as only the z axis mass changes.
The cynic in me still thinks SpaceX is doing this without any indication of a FAA certification before November, and are solely doing this to put pressure on the FAA.