HN user
I understand the goal, but describing complex geometries with specific tolerances with natural language is much more complex than creating the geometry programmatically. There are geometries that I could not clearly describe with words, but it's clear the operations I need to do to create them. But who knows, maybe I'll be proven wrong.
How can this approach be better than just selecting the edge and click the extrude button/write extrude command? Now you have to start writing a prompt and hope that what you want to do is understood by the LLM. I mean, CAD is really not so complicated with the tools we currently have. You just have to learn how to use them.
When you click the link it will not navigate to a new page, but instead open some kind of pop-up window with the other issue. I have been very annoyed by this behavior for the last couple of days.
Touchscreen is one of those things that sound nice, but in my experience are not so useful. At least not for my typical use (programming, writing, even CAD design). Before having a framework 13 I had a dell xps 13 with touchscreen for about ten years. I never really had a use for it. But hey, the rest of the specs of the screen alone make it still a nice upgrade possibility for the future :)
How is Linux fault that some strange peripherals/input devices don't work?
Not my experience at least. You can go to the forum of archlinux and see the replies. They tend to be quite useful and in a good tone.
I agree that it is very different from other CAD software, but that is also something I like. When I started using SolveSpace for some easy models, I was a bit lost. But then it clicked, and I really enjoyed the different approach. It is not my main CAD software (build123d is), but I really appreciate the workflow.
I don't think that every oss should try the copy what already exists. The best is when new approaches are tried. The same happened to me when I started using tilling window managers. "Professional" Operating systems don't have that, but I am sure that if more people would try them, many would realize that the workflow fits them better. So, my point is that there is no single best solution in terms of user interface or interaction with a program, and the fact that many people explore and share different approaches with their open source software is something I really appreciate.
The accountability part is what makes me more angry. I get to lose so many (maybe hundreds?) of hours a year because of how bad DB works. Meanwhile the executives at DB get their nice boni each year and absurdly high wages for what they do... which is consistently worsening the train experience year after year. Probably none of them even use the train.
I am always a bit annoyed when the root of the problem is not explained. This is the case most of the time (DB of course). I would really like to have a bit more information. Even if there is nothing you can do, it helps to understand how big or small the problem is. Then you can make a decision based on it. Like getting out in the next station or something.
Just got my Framework 13 last week. I really love this computer, and how it is pushing for upgradability and repairability in this segment. Thanks a lot for creating this computer!
Yes, I think that just trying to use services that don't require special mobile apps can get you a long way. It is sometimes difficult, but now I'm beginning to move more in this direction :)
I just bought a second Fairphone 4 just to play a bit with pmOS. I'm really surprised by the state it is. It's not fully usable as a daily driver yet, but with some work it can get there. Waydroid works also pretty good. Of course, the major problem are banking apps and similar. I hope that some progress can be done in this direction. And, who needs working audio, if you can have python and git in your phone!? :P
That sounds interesting. But how can you test these internal binary formats? Do I need to extract that somehow?
I am an engineer, but not a computer scientist or developer. I have been using Linux for 20 years and program a lot at work and at home. I think it should be possible, but find it difficult to interpret the hex code. I do have a general idea of how the format should be organized, as it contains mostly geometric data and associated results.
Thanks. That is kind of what I imagined. But I am not good at understanding the information from the hex editor. Reading the article I was a bit lost with the terms like little-endian and thought that that might be someone important concept to know for the task . I guess that that is what I should learn first.
Sorry, that was a typo (autocorrected). I meant binary format.
I'm always amazed by people doing reverse engineering of some country formats. There's a binary format that I've been wanting to reverse engineer, but I don't know exactly how to start. It's for the result file of a proprietary finite element program. Could anyone point me to some resources and also what are the basics that I need to learn to achieve this?
If you make a lot of slides with latex, then it is definitely worth it to try typst. I have a lot of presentations in latex for lectures and such things, with many animated tikz figures. But the compilation times are huge. At some point it is very time consuming to iterate. With typst, it compiles so fast that you don't have to fear to start a compilation. I finish my presentations much faster now.
Cetz has been working very good for me. I was really unsure that it could replace tikz for my applications. But apparently, as long as you have good geometrical primitives (lines, rectangle, circles, etc) you can do a lot. Also it is much nicer to program and make real functions with typst. It is true, the typst options to replace beamer are still not quite there in comparison, but they are definitely in a very useful state. See for example typst-presentate [1].
I was very surprised that it worked perfectly in my 10-year old notebook. Normally, nothing this fancy is playable in a web browser for me. The CPU was about 20% (I only have two cores, 4 threads).
I think that the tools are not will organized, and I always have problems finding the tool I need in the menu. The concept of having different workbenches does not work good for me, as often I am looking for a tool and then realize I am in the wrong workbench. But it is not always clear why something is in a workbench and not in the other, and there are duplicated functions in some workbenches. Also, the fact that it does not support Wayland makes everything look blurry in hdpi screens. I like that it has a good python API though, but the documentation is a bit lacking. However, the different workbenches also sometimes complicate the use of the Python API. I like e.g. how build123d works.
This looks super nice! That is kind of the interface I wish FreeCAD could have. I am more the type of person who likes to use a python interface to create parametric models, but this is really cool!
Anyone knows what is the status of Truck [1] in this regard. Are they going to implement an open-source CAD program with their CAD-kernel? That also looks like a promising project.
I also hate the youtube "feature" that translates the titles of videos to your setting's language. This is so annoying. I can understand English and don't need these automatic translations.
Yes, the Glulam alternative tends to be a bit more expensive for some applications, but I am surprised that it is 5x more expensive than the steel solution. The reference I have (in Europe at least) is that the cost of Glulam is currently about 350 €/m³. Steel is quite more expensive, but of course, the profiles are slender, so less material is used.
If that is the case, then I don't see any novelty here. This has been done for a long time. In Germany, this is called "Panzerholz" (something like "bulletproof wood")
You can probably do that already without this material. Glued laminated timber is already a pretty good material for such cases.
Nice work. Maybe you could do some preprocessing of the XML data, so that you actually have a diff of the content and not the whole XML block.
I am not sure that Wayland forces you to run all those things. That might be the case if you use Gnome, but e.g. sway is much more minimalistic.
I guess that using Consent-O-Matic [1] has saved me some hours of my life :)
The only thing I need to start writing more serious documents with Typst is an equivalent to latexdiff. But I really think (and hope) that this will replace latex in the future. Alone the compilation time makes it so much nice to use! Meanwhile I am supporting them by having a pro account, which is not even so expensive.
It was fun to read the recommendation to switch from W to X. I guess we are now back to W :P