MaxMalRichtig
- 6 Posts
- 33 Comments
3·7 months agoIf you need some inspiration on existing boards: https://golem.hu/board/ --> set the filter on “ortholinear” for “matrix style” boards.
First you need to find a board, then we can help you to build it.
(You COULD build a board from scratch, but if you have not built a board yet, or have no background in mech. / electr. engineering, this me a bit too much at first.)
2·7 months agoThe specified currents are:
- USB 2.0 is 500mA,
- USB 3.0 is 900mA
Since most USB hubs in PCs are USB 3, you can guess that they can push 900 mA regardless. Also, PCs are using internal USB hubs nowadays and often they don’t regulate a single USB outlet but the cumulated power the hub is pushing. This isn’t necessarily safe, but this makes a couple of hubs capable of pushing 1000mA or even more on a single outlet, even though it is not specified this way.
All in all: You could be fine by doing this, depending on the overall power draw of your device. But probably working on a USB 3 port.
4·7 months agoWhile the whole world is beeing like
81·7 months agoIs it weird
No. You’re fine.
Well put me in a dress and call me Sheryl. Never knew that the “accepted definitions” were really that close. Thanks!
I knew that some definitions of OSS were really basic (as in “as long as there is source at some point”) but I didn’t know that the OSI definition was so close to the idea of “free software”.
I found the read about the history and similarities & differences quite interesting: https://web.archive.org/web/20180915200609/http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/open-source-misses-the-point.html
I think you got that one wrong.
Open source is not a license. Open source literally just means that the source is openly available. It does not include the right for you to reuse or change any of the source.
That’s why most of the time, people are talking about “Free Open Source Software” (FOSS) when they think of openly licensed source code.
That’s why you can publish your project on e.g. Github (= open source) but if you don’t add a license statement, your work is still protected by an “all rights reserved copyright”. (= not free)
Anyhow, I would not necessarily deem a project OSS, just because the used language is readable by default. To me, OSS needs at least the developers intention to make it openly available.
6·11 months agoSounds awesome!
16·11 months agohttp://motherfuckingwebsite.com/
“Am I a joke to you?”
Personally, I love Bludit as it is really simple, flat-file and perfect for blogging.
However, you could also look into WriteFreely if you want something with ActivityPub (= Fediverse). Feature wise very very plain and simple, but might noch give you most of the bells and whistles as other platforms would do it. Think of it as an alternative to “Medium”.
2·11 months agoTotally! Some cool andvancement in a technology like that would bring us much closer to “easier” renewable energy sources. And I hope they will find solution for our (more distant) future.
However, we can’t just wait for it. We need solutions NOW - and they exist in conventional renewable energy technologies. I mean, we have that massive fusion reactor in a save distance from our planet that delivers huge amounts of energy to us for free. We just have to tap into it. 😇
Afaik, Freecad has an architecture module/plugin.
11·1 year agoEmacs. But honestly, I have no idea what I am doing.
Feature rich and never had an issue with them. Prices are fine imho.
Sing it with me: “Nuclear power is not a solution!” 🎶🎵🎶
Besides that nuclear power is dangerous on so many levels…
Here is the math to consider:
- Nuclear only produces 3.6% of today’s power consumption
- 80% of today’s power consumption is still fossil based
- Recoverable Uranium would last for only ~200 at CURRENT PROD RATE! (Generous estimate)
- If we would want to replace fossil with nuclear, Uranium would only last for 9 YEARS.
I say it again: 9 YEARS ! After that time, you can’t produce any more power with your plants, leaving you with a huge problem. We need an energy system that will serve us good for the foreseeable future.
The median time for building a nuclear plant is 8 years. Getting all the planning and approval done can bring this timeline up to 20 years. Much to slow. We need solutions now!
Guys/Girls, stop reproducing the talking point of plant owners and capitalistic energy providers. Nuclear power is not a solution for the global scale problem of energy production.
SOURCES:
181·1 year agoJust to be clear: Eating bugs is not vegan. Vegans eat plants.
That is kind an off logic. Sounds more like an excuse for not taking action than anything else. I bet you can dismantle your arguments on your own in no time of you try.
Thank you for explaining this so eloquently! Couldn’t have put it better. 👌
The moment I see “web3” it’s a scam in my eyes.
https://www.web3isgoinggreat.com/