One thing that helped was stopping to think about why I wanted to do each thing.

Boom. This was big for me too. Usually my issue is holding myself to non-existent time constraints, like “I want to do X but I have to get Y done or I can’t until next weekend.” Ok, why is it a problem that Y can’t be done next weekend? Obviously if it’s something like a chore or errand it doesn’t apply, but if it’s just a little side project I’ve been working on, Y can wait if I’d rather do X, especially if I’m just going to sit and wallow over not doing either instead.

Ahhhh. That makes sense. Thanks

I don’t see what you’re talking about, zip tie or poorly parked SUV

Is that your guess, or are you puzzled by the concept?

Close, I DM’ed a short-lived DnD campaign a year ago.

I remember having a thought one day as a young kid while interacting with a DVD main menu (the kind that had clips from the movie playing in the background, and would play a specific clip depending on what menu you went in to).

“This is basically how video games work, there’s a bunch of options you can choose from and depending on what you do it shows you something. Videogames are just DVD menus with way more options.”

I grew up to not be a programmer.

Can’t you just check your bank account?

I have “saved” a lot of money over the years … yet my bank account doesn’t reflect that.

What the hell was the point of your original question 😂

I recommended this on the first post, surprised they didn’t try it.

I see 3 options.

1, adjust your z-offset. I’m not familiar with prusa’s firmware, but if your first layer is bulging, it could mean your z-offset needs adjusting.

2, see if your first layer line thickness is set above 100%. By default some slicers lay an extra thick first layer; you might try decreasing this.

3, get rid of the white on the first layer, and just make the second layer white. This is how I do multi-color lettering/ designs and it works incredibly well. I can show you pictures if my description doesn’t make sense.

It doesn’t really. It’s a T-intersection, where the top of the T has stop signs, and the bottom leg does not. If you are on one side of the T, you must enter the intersection, such that you are in the path of the bottom leg, before you can see if there is anyone coming from that direction.

The people coming from the bottom leg (with no sign) have no reason to stop or slow down, and would generally not have reason to look in the direction the fence is blocking visibility. I don’t think traffic coming from that direction even recognizes the obstruction. All they see is someone suddenly creeping into the intersection in front of them, when they can be mere yards from them.

They’re building a school near where I live and they’ve got these things all around the site. Problem is, there’s an awkward intersection at one of the corners of the site, and traffic coming from the street that is 95% blocked by the fence does not have a stop/yield sign. So now everyone has to slowly approach the intersection, and slowly creep forward until you’re halfway in the intersection to see clearly, and hope a car isn’t barreling towards you at 30MPH.

God, I used to bike around here.

Damn, Scott Manley. Haven’t heard that name since the Kerbal Space Program days.

Reading the article, it seems like the intent of this technology is much more geared toward manufacturing supply chains, rather than saying “this part came from John Doe’s Ender 3”. As many people have pointed out, consumer/ hobbyist grade 3D printers aren’t nearly consistent enough to produce anything resembling something as unique as a true “fingerprint”, and when you consider that most printers are modified in some way… There’s just zero possibility of it being used in that way.

The only way I could see it being used in that way is trying to prove that this printer printed this part; if they have the printed part, and it hasn’t been post-processed at all (sanded, treated, etc), they could reprint the same part on the printer in question and see if it’s “fingerprint” is the same. But I’d be pretty surprised if this tech could even reliably say, “this part came from an Ender, this part came from a Neptune, and this one from came from a P1”.

I don’t think we’re really getting anywhere with this, but that’s kinda my point.

Take a large pan and set it off-center on the smallest burner on your stove top. The entire pan will get warm, yes, but the part directly over the flame is going to get the hottest.

The cpu is the flame, the pan is the phone. If you have to wrap the pan in some sort of protective coat, but want to effectively dissipate heat with the smallest hole possible, the smartest design would be to place the opening over the source of the heat, not the center of heat sink.

If the cpu is in the top corner of the phone, the top corner of the phone is going to get significantly warmer than the rest of the phone (in terms of thermal dissipation). Putting a vent hole in the center where there’s less heat while having the warm part covered makes no sense.

More than just your cpu, gpu, and psu generate heat in a desktop, but they’re the only units that normally have giant heat sinks with dedicated fans for cooling them.

If there was a hole in the center, but the main producer of heat was still covered, that’d be a pretty bad design for heat dissipation.

Lots of phones use the aluminum body as a heat sink, so it kind of is how it works.

I didn’t look super closely at first and thought this was one of those full build plate adhesion tests and was getting ready to say how it was a waste of time to get it that dialed in. Yeah, melting heat mat is definitely a problem.

I like how it’s:

If you love America and are pissed about … please contact me.

… and not, “if you’re a good bassist looking for a band”. Tells you all you need to know about the quality of music they’re gonna put out.

But who was phone?

Double check the settings in your printer and slicer that “screen brightness”, “screen power”, “max power” or something to that effect is set to 100%. I’ve seen some default to 70%-80%, the theoretical reason being that reducing power to the screen can lengthen its lifespan… however, afaik these claims have not been backed up by data, and the logical counterargument is that any lifespan gains will be offset by the increased length of time the screen is on. Even if you can squeeze a few extra prints out of the screen before it dies, you’re making all your prints take way longer than necessary.

For reference, this is the recommended printing settings chart provided by anycubic for their standard gray resin; the recommended exposure time for your printer at default layer height is 2.5 seconds. If you’re using 100% power, you’re more than doubling the normalexposure.