So uhhhh no one else read Stephen King’s work or the Child Called It series as a kid huh?

This tells me that you know very little about how in control of designs engineering teams are. 99/100 times it’s not up to the engineers on what the specifications or limitations are for any given design.

Typically, sales says they’ll have something that fits whatever crazy need no matter if a perfectly suitable design already exists if they consulted the engineers or shop, typically to get the sale. Engineering is then forced to adjust the design because nothing existing will fit.

Funny enough, it’s not the engineers that are doing it. Left to their own devices without ridiculous constraints like “someone else is doing it this way so we need you to do something that sets us apart” or “you can’t look at what everyone else is doing”, engineers will do it the laziest way they can… By copying what others are doing and essentially making it standard.

Saw the pics and it honestly looks like over extrusion, especially that top surface

You basically have to retune your profiles to match between the petg and the larger nozzle.

Recommend following this as well as you can: https://ellis3dp.com/Print-Tuning-Guide/

Oh yeah, and you’re going to lose detail with the larger nozzle compared to a 0.4 but it’s a trade-off

I love the tree shadow ones. So trippy.

I don’t use the drive through because I’m lazy. I use it so I can have the most minimal amount of human contact possible

In my area it’s around $3.20

Honestly, get the flux and a hot air station instead, imo. Then again, I prefer being able to have control over where the heat is going instead of reflowing everything at once

Might as well add some picos to scratch that itch. And the rabbit hole that micro controllers bring… next thing you know, your work desk is also a solder station, a hot air station, PCB design, circuit design, and you’ve got two extra diy printers in various state of being built/rebuilt

I don’t have a problem, you have a problem

Depends on how we approach viability, imo

Can we currently see a reason for it with its current abilities/functions? No

But

We can look right at the history of conventional computing to predict a possible timeline for it. Single purpose computational machines that took a lot of power, a lot of room, and were fairly rare. Used for military or research purposes. Multi purpose machines that could run user created calculations and were slightly smaller and efficient. Begins to be used in more academic settings Multipurpose machines capable of being used to aid general office staff, continue to become more compact and efficient Portability becomes possible for select few with a need And so on until we arrive to now where nearly everything and everyone has a computer

I’m more expecting innovations to reduce the need for the super cooling but same

While true, it doesn’t mean we should stop. At worst, we find techniques that improve other areas of technology

Honestly the laws of physics are constantly in flux and there’s no telling what we could create to circumvent the limits we’re currently pushing.

As I mentioned in my example: before the innovations with transistors, there was no way to make a portable computer. It was physically impossible

And digital computers needed tube relays and entire buildings to work. With innovation and time, it’ll become more easily handled

I think it’ll take a new component/circuit design for quantum to be viable for home computing similar to the transformation that happened to computers after the addition of the transistor

Nope. Older than the universe. Can’t weasel your way out of this one science boy

It’s a tool to aid in creating a product, not a tool that magics out a finished product. That’s my point. Too many people use it as the latter instead of the former.

Letting a language model do the work of thinking is like building a house and using a circular saw to put nails in. It will do it but you should not trust the results.

It is not Google. It can, will, and has made up facts as long as it fits the format expected

Not at the very least proof reading and fact checking the output is beyond lazy and a terrible use of a tool. Using it to create the end product instead of as a tool to use in creation of an end product are two very different things.

I’m glad you understand my point. Chatgpt is not Google. It’s a language model that will give you something that looks like the thing you asked for it to provide. It can and will pull facts out of its recycle bin if it fits the cadence of what it expects the answer to look like.