monotremata

joined 1 year ago
[–] monotremata@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 days ago

That was the joke. The link I was replying to was talking about how Trump always says everything will be happening "in two weeks."

[–] monotremata@lemmy.ca 4 points 4 days ago (2 children)

He keeps hearing that fortnights are all the rage with the kids these days.

[–] monotremata@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 week ago

"We know some of you have concerns about whether these headsets will be supported long enough to justify the price. Allow us to set those concerns to rest: they won't be."

[–] monotremata@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 week ago

They weren't pushing for credit card processors to block payments for specific games. They were pushing for the payment processors to block money to Steam entirely, which is why Steam caved and instead removed a small list of games. It was a compromise to allow credit card companies to keep doing business with them. Overall it's pretty small potatoes--a small but vocal group, a small and worthless collection of games. People are understandably worried about the precedent of giving in to censorship at the demand of a group like this, but there are enough things to worry about right now that I'm not going to give it much thought until I hear the slope has slipped further than this.

[–] monotremata@lemmy.ca 7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

It was the Long Island Ice Tea Corp., which changed its name to Long Blockchain Corp.

https://www.ft.com/content/2ef64f85-18b4-3538-b67e-7fe8ccc4e5e5

Edit: Or the SkyPeople Fruit Juice company. https://www.inquisitr.com/two-months-later-whats-happening-in-companies-with-blockchain-name-changes

[–] monotremata@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 week ago

The year is 2060. I'm getting ready to watch my favorite movie. I have no idea what it's about; my NeuraLink prevents me from retaining unlicensed memories of someone else's intellectual property. But Amazon tells me I've watched it over thirty times and given it an average of 4.7 stars over those viewings, which is crazy high; even stuff other people like I tend to rate under 3 stars. Apparently I'm snobby, or maybe some kind of pervert. Without more information about the content, I have no practical way of knowing. If you go on the dark web supposedly you can find forums where people will write descriptions of what they claim the films are like, but folks who have sought that stuff out consistently rate the films lower on subsequent viewings, so it's probably not worth it. At least that's what my AI assistant tells me.

[–] monotremata@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 week ago

Thanks! I haven't actually published these pieces yet. (Well, the slide-glide cyclide thing was published by someone else, but I think it was later taken down--there may be plans for the original mathematician to sell them?) The puzzle box is just a little too kluged together to really publish; I modified a lot of things after the fact to get it together, and I'm not comfortable publishing it in that state, but I also don't really want to put in the work to finish it. The kaleidoscope would actually be okay, but it's limited--it's a bit tricky to actually cut the mirrors, and it really only works to reflect things right up against it. I want to design an adapter for it that will hold an acrylic sphere (which you can get inexpensively from China) so that you can use it to look at scenes as well. But I haven't actually gotten around to that yet either. I'll give some thought to publishing it as-is, though.

[–] monotremata@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I dunno. I agree with this to some extent for sure--I don't print a lot of the meme models that are everywhere on 3d printing forums. But there are toys that would not exist without 3d printing that I think are pretty great.

I designed a kaleidoscope that reflects things not to tile a plane, but instead to tile the surface of a disdyakis triacontahedron: https://imgur.com/gallery/i-made-kaleidoscope-P4atHey I had to cut the mirrors from acrylic by hand, but the templates for them and the shell that holds them in place are all 3d printed. And that thing is a pretty great toy.

This thing: https://imgur.com/gallery/make-of-cyclidial-iris-by-vergo-henry-segerman-XHN4MC0

is a math sculpture that I didn't design, just printed, but it's completely beautiful, and it's had real staying power as both a toy and a decoration. It sits out on our coffee table all the time, but my niece plays with it every time she's over here.

And this puzzle box I designed: https://imgur.com/gallery/i-made-puzzle-box-nieces-birthday-U1q408R

was a big hit with her too. I'm not sure if she'll continue to play with it long-term, but based on my own tendencies as a kid, I think she might end up investigating the mechanisms involved for some time to come.

Things that you could buy at the store you're generally better off buying at the store. But there are things it's not economical to mass produce, and it never used to be possible to design and make your own toys. Both ideosyncratic toys and bespoke toys are pretty great uses of 3d printing in my opinion.

[–] monotremata@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 weeks ago

But physical games that doesn’t require online would work fine.

Do we know this for sure? On the original Switch, when new games came out, they often would refuse to play until you updated the firmware on the console. So depending on whether they allow banned consoles to update their firmware, offline games might not work either.

[–] monotremata@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I use an emulated version of my old calculator. Once you get used to RPN, nothing else really seems fit for purpose.

[–] monotremata@lemmy.ca 46 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

"If only I'd programmed the robot to be more careful what I wished for. Robot, experience this tragic irony for me!"

70
Moire/Vernier Radius Gauge (www.printables.com)
submitted 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by monotremata@lemmy.ca to c/3dprinting@lemmy.world
 

I previously posted this on Reddit, since it reaches more people there (and I didn't want to post everywhere at once, as it makes it harder to keep up with the comments). Sorry about that.

This is a tool for measuring the radius of a circle or fillet from the outside; it uses a moire pattern of slots and lines to enable a direct reading of the values from a vernier scale.

A video of a broken-open version makes it a little easier to see how the moire and vernier features operate: https://i.imgur.com/Ku2nBkq.mp4

More photos of a slightly earlier version are here, including the tool being used for actual readings: https://imgur.com/gallery/moire-vernier-radius-gauge-design-3d-printing-ajy0GBg

I was inspired by this post: https://makerworld.com/en/models/1505553-adjustable-chamfer-gauge#profileId-1575605

which is a gauge which measures chamfers using a sliding probe. The same user had also posted a radius gauge, which worked similarly, but it was much larger, using gears and two racks in it to amplify the motion, which I didn't initially understand. I asked about it, and he pointed out that, because of the geometry of the probing, the slider only moves a small proportion of the length of the actual radius being measured--about (sqrt(2)-1), or 0.414mm per mm of radius. Since we're drawing the marks with a 0.4mm nozzle, it's not really possible to make marks that close together and still have them readable.

So I thought, I bet you could fix that with a vernier scale. And then I had several thoughts all at once--that a lot of people are kind of scared off by vernier scales, and also that I bet you could fix that with 3d printing using the relationship between moire patterns and vernier scales. I don't think I've seen this done before, but it probably wasn't really practical before 3d printing. Arguably it's not entirely practical now, as the deep slots and parallax effects can make it a little hard to actually see the markings. But it was a fun experiment, and I think the result is eye-catching enough that it's probably got some educational value in getting people to actually think about how it is that vernier scales work. (It might even have educational value for things like number theory...e.g., it's important that the vernier factor involve relatively prime numbers, in this case 9 and 10. Can you see why?)

Anyway, hope folks here find it interesting too.

 

Bear with me for a moment, because I'm not sure how to describe this problem without just describing a part I'm trying to print.

I was designing a part today, and it's basically a box; for various reasons I wanted to print it with all the sides flat on the print bed, but have bridges between the sides and the bottom to act as living hinges so it would be easy to fold into shape after it came off the bed. But when I got it into PrusaSlicer, by default, Prusa slices all bridges in a single uniform direction--which on this print meant that two of the bridges were across the shortest distance, and the other two were parallel to the gap they were supposed to span. Which, y'know, is obviously not a good way to try to bridge the gap.

I was able to manually adjust the bridge direction to fix this, but I'm kinda surprised that the slicer doesn't automatically choose paths for bridging gaps to try to make them as printable as possible. I don't remember having this issue in the past, but I haven't designed with bridges in quite a while--it's possible that I've just never noticed before, or it could be that a previous slicer (I used to use Cura) or previous version of PrusaSlicer did this differently.

Is there a term for this? Are there slicers that do a better job of it? Is there an open feature request about this?

Basically just wondering if anyone has insight into this, or any suggestions for reading on the subject.

Thanks!

view more: next ›