As for 3d printing there are other software which is simpler if you need to do simpler things. But you can not go wrong in learning Blender for 3d printing as well.
I'd say that depends a lot on what you want to print. Some people might be able to use Blender for technical parts, but
for most people traditional CAD software would be the better choice here.
CAD is great when you want to make a nice parametric model that you can edit as requirements change. But for a simple one-off part, I can often whip one up in Blender in a third the time it would take me to dimension everything in a CAD sketch.
You and I must make very different parts. Unfortunaley even my one-off 3D prints are never one-offs. I almost always have to go back and tune a dimension or two.
Am I the only one having issues (Win 11)?
- Drag/dropping from the Shapes panel does not work every time
- I can not delete an object on the page
- New page (+ character next to Pages) just clears existing page
My guess is the following:
Every time you talk with the LLM it starts with random 'state' (working weights) and then it reads the input tokens and predicts the followup. If you were to save the 'state' (intermediate weights) after inputing the prompt but before inputing user input your would be getting the same output of the network which might have a bias or similar which you have now just 'baked in' into the model.
In addition, reading the input prompts should be a quick thing ... you are not asking the model to predict the next character until all the input is done ... at which point you do not gain much by saving the state.
No, any randomness is from the temperature setting that just tells mainly tells how much to sample the probability mass of the next output vs choose the exact next most likely (which tends to make them get in repetitive loop like convos).
My take on this is that the developers are costly. A working hour of single developer costs a lot of money. The organization will always try to get the maximum out of that one hour. Spending more money so that the developers are 'better' is not efficient. They just need to be good enough.
That's the magic phrase that really does the heavy lifting here.
Companies and leadership have to define what "good enough" is for them, and in almost every case that comes down to profit and prestige (or power if you take it a step further).
As you said, developers are costly. When a company just wants profit it usually makes sense to hire someone just skilled enough to make the product shippable.
I think this is often the reasoning of management, however, what they don't see is that developer skill often follows a power law and the flow state is a multiplier on top of that. The cost of a midday check-in is not the cost of how much you pay that developer per hour because developers work output per time is nonlinear.
I believe the flow state is why it's so easy to believe the idea of the 10x engineer, we've all experienced the feeling of flying through code without barriers, and we have all felt the below average days where you may be tired and just can't quite load all that complexity into your head to get any real work done. So we believe that there are people out there who are so skilled that they exist in this flow state all the time.
Yes, developers should work on themselves to rely less on a state of flow to be high performers, but even so there will always a benefit to being "in the zone".
You’ve contradicted yourself. Which is it? Will companies try to get the maximum out of each hour of developer time, or do they just need to be good enough?
Perhaps what they meant is that companies will try to get the maximum in terms of development speed, while settling for good enough in terms of quality. And that's why we have so much crap software.
But they so consistently get terrible development speed and crap software. I’ve never been less productive than when I worked in a team that did big-A Agile.
It does not seem to work on my side. I get a blank canvas with 0 on top left and HI 0 on the top right. Everything else is blank.
In developer tools I've noticed that one of the GET on the main.js script is returning 404 so maybe that is the problem?
Seems pretty universal throughout history, and no different with even China themselves. If a country feels threatened, they retaliate/seek to block it.
Our PM asked for an inquiry into the origins of covid, and China banned our beef, wine, barley, and coal imports.
The article stated that this has nothing to do with it and the click would technically not even be necessary. It is just a way to start the procedure where Turnstile verifies your browser.
While the article is technically correct it avoids the most common issue with 'pure' typescript libraries in that you still need a bundler if you have multiple .ts files.
Once you enter that territory you realize how much more complex everything becomes.
I don't see how that changes the problem that OP describes.
TS module resolution looks almost like ESM, but neither the syntax nor the semantics are the same.
And or course you need a compiler to transpile TS, even if you wish to ignore the typings (often wrapped in a bundler like Vite which in turn wraps swc or ESBuild... because tsc is not as practical for large projects)
Really, having dealt with this kind of problem on Friday, it can make you go crazy.
E.g. having to deal with CJS-specific settings for some tool in a project using TS and exporting to ESM JS...
so explain to me again why I have to change my entire toolchain for simply consuming a library? What if I consume a wasm library written in Rust, suddenly I have to add rust into my build script? What is the point of bytecode if people are going to repeat the same build over and over again anyway?
