In chemistry only very simple stuff works the first time you try it. Even skilled chemists usually fail to replicate research papers, especially in organic chemistry. It's very frustrating. Lots of work, lots of cleaning up.
Pretty much all the chemistry you see on youtube can be considered simple. Even the cubane synthesis, which Extractions&Fire epically failed at, was undergrad stuff at my university. Chemiolis nailed it, I think.
Other great chemistry channels that come to my mind are Chemical Force (breathtaking slowmo videos), Thy Labs, Thoisoi, Prussian Blue, Chemdelic, not exhaustive.
I would suggest as the starting point to look at sigrok's supported hardware table[0].
I personally own a bunch of the cheap 8ch 24Msps saleae clones, which are typically below $10. I would recommend the one from muselab as it has open sourced its design.
The next step, the DSLogic, of which I have a 200Msps 16ch model.
Depends on the target audience. Mostly the audience is hand wavy types that just want to point at a beautiful thing in a slide to point out "we have stuff with icons that you might know! Look at how beautiful this is. It almost looks like we know what we are doing!". Exaggerating here but anything that fits on a single slide is completely useless to an expert. Not worth drawing unless the goal is to impress non experts like that. It's a marketing tool in that case. The level of detail required for this is "a power point slide".
In companies/organizations that are large enough you always get a certain amount of project bureaucracy, ass coverage, and other documentation that doesn't technically do anything more than impress easily impressible types. But it's rarely actually useful. I usually just go straight to the code repositories and ignore things like wikis and other crap. Complete waste of time usually. Show me what you really have. I'll figure it out in no time.
Two mistakes people make with these tools:
1. Spending lots of time using them believing that the output is actually useful/valuable to engineers. Your time is more valuable. You should be doing more productive things. Minimize time you spend on drawing pretty pictures. They didn't hire you for your graphical design skills. This is of course subjective and context dependent. Sometimes it's just required to have diagrams. E.g. operations people like having good documentation just as a way to ensure that they can follow strict processes and make good decisions as to what is in their scope and what needs escalating. There's also a certain amount of impressing the customer, senior management, or other stake holders that "we have stuff". The bigger the company, the bigger the need for project bureaucracy like this. But it is bureaucracy and you want to be efficient with it. Quick and easy.
2. Believing that these are design tools. They are not. They are documentation tools. You use them after you build the thing. Before you build the thing, you use something like a white board. Or pen and paper. A napkin. Anything fast and easy that doesn't slow you down. It's transient stuff and when you start building the thing you'll realize half a dozen topics you did not take into account. So, other than as a record of all the design mistakes you are making, such diagrams have no long term value. You document the solution after you found, solved, implemented, and tested all the design problems. Not before.
Friendly reminder that the places where you are least likely to find diagrams:
- Any kind of large open source project. Or any open source project really. Just not a thing. The bigger and more complicated they are, the less likely it is to have diagrams. Reason: they are redundant and absolutely nobody volunteers to sit down and do them. Just ask yourself: "what would Linus Torvalds say when asked to provide diagrams for the linux kernel". I imagine a fair bit of cursing would happen.
- Especially open source projects that are about producing diagram tools. I personally find this highly ironic. People won't eat their own dog food when the dog food is diagramming tools. Diagramming tools are something you build for others to use. Go look for it on Github if you don't believe it. All you will find is toy examples but nothing actually documenting these tools in any level of detail.
- Small startups or other companies that are highly innovative and have a fast pace of change happening all the time. Reason: people have better things to do than mess around with diagrams. The rainy afternoon where you really have nothing more valuable than messing around with boxes and arrows to do never really happen.
Where do you find people messing around with diagrams? Bloated engineering teams in corporate situations. The more boring the company, the more useless types they employ, the more diagrams you will find. People insisting to each other that "somebody" (not them) should do a diagram. I usually just bounce the question when it comes up. "Great idea, when can you have it done?" Usually the implied suggestion is that I should sit down and waste my time doing a diagram for them that they will never even look at for more than a few seconds. It's write only documentation.
But at other companies I’ve been at, it’s not a productivity tool. It’s a management too.
Estimates for planning. Which is fine. Until pointless rules appear. We’ll use standard story points. But not 1, that’s too small. So things start at 2. But after a while that’s too small. So they start at 3. But you can’t go over 8, past that they have to be split. And you shouldn’t probably use 8 anyway. Pretty soon everything will be 5s. No matter how big or small. Good thing we point.
And of course the whole point of pointing is to put things in sprints. That’s fine. But then the rules come. You can’t go over your capacity. You can’t go below your capacity. You have to roll over everything you didn’t do. You can’t roll things over. We committed to finish by Junetober 37th even if we’re not ready so it has to go in the sprint now. So now you put things into the sprint after the sprint started and remove things before it’s over so that the magic numbers look correct even though they are complete BS.
But luckily you can track things.
Except every team is forced to use the same workflow even if they don’t work the same way. Because otherwise it would be “complicated“. So the IT tickets have to look like software development tickets. And the planning tickets have to look like software development tickets. It’s important to have tickets to plan your future plans so you know what tickets to make. After all, if you don’t schedule everything 18 months in advance to the day, are you really doing agile sprints?
But you can link tickets. For example you can choose requires, or needs, or is dependent upon, or can’t be done without, or is waiting on. Wouldn’t one thing do for all of that? No one actually knows. It’s an unanswerable question.
Did I mention there’s Kanban support? You’re not allowed to use that. Because.
And all this gets so complicated you need people whose job it is to wrangle Jira full-time. Make reports, add more fields, etc.
Of course those fields don’t make sense in a lot of cases. But sometimes they required. And other teams want them required but aren’t allowed to because everyone has to work the same way.
So the ZRX team invents their own email gateway to put issues into Jira their way. You didn’t know about that right? Because if you add the issue directly they’ll ignore it. Productivity!
I don’t know if it’s fair to call the thing I used at those companies “Jira”. That’s a bit like calling a battery made out of a box full of potatoes a “vegetable medley”. I mean it’s sort of true but that’s not the point anymore is it?
I like actual Jira. It’s a good product. Too bad almost no company will let you use it, only corruptions. It doesn’t exist to do its real job but to instead generate management reports. Which they don’t read.
Off topic, but I visited the Atlas Obscura-worthy “Wieliczka” Salt Mine which is a short drive from Krakow. Incredible place.
I have been to my share of mines and caves but never to a salt mine. This mine is massive and has entire underground lakes and even a chapel, with a beautiful Last Supper relief and altar and chandeliers all hand-carved from the salt walls - by tradesmen no less, not artists. They actually have mass in the chapel every week.
The massive salt deposits were what enabled the Polish kingdom to even be a thing. It was a huge economic boom.
Four practical "exercises" when writing JDs to help prioritize the knowledge and experiences you expect this person to bring:
1) Pretend you only have 100 words. Simple stuff, but getting ruthless is a good way to prioritize.
2) Write an "anti-JD": the type of person you don't want for the role. A tip: focus on unconscious competencies - things you expect the person to know on day 1.
3) (Similar to Aline's litmus test in the article of "Can most companies say this about the work they’re doing") If you can write "Only an idiot wouldn't ... " in front of the line, it's not a good differentiator.
4) Imagine you were going to ask the person you hire for this role to give 5 lunch and learns their first week on the job. What would the topics be and to what depth would you expect them to go?
Also, at least in my experience, the easiest way to deter "noise" from unqualified applicants is to be clear what the first interview will consist of and how it will be passed/failed.
"We expect you to come prepared to discuss the pros and cons of the following, citing previous work as much as possible: (insert relevant topics from exercises above e.g. computer vision, DevOps, Redux, recent famous papers in your field, etc) Candidates without experience or evaluated below an intermediate level of knowledge will not proceed."
It may be 24 years old, but that doesn't mean the concepts have changed much. After you read those, you could read about AS Path Prepending (you need to know why people do it so that you can decide not to do it):
PCI-e's IB heritage is present in every aspect of the standard, it's electrically the same, signalling and encoding are the same etc.
In the early days of all this there was a few competing standards that all had the same underlying architecture, serial, 8b/10b encoding, etc. The 2 big ones were NGIO and FutureIO. These two were eventually merged and was called ServerIO before being renamed to Infiniband.
Infiniband was going to be the next big thing and a few companies set out to make the silicon, Mellanox, QLogic/Silverstorm, Topspin/Cisco among the main ones.
Sun and Microsoft both committed to building the drivers to make this work. However pretty soon MS ran into issues with their drivers and eventually pulled the plug on shipping IB drivers in NT. This caused Cisco to drop IB and eventually doomed IB in the enterprise datacenter space and settled for Ethernet.
Sun pretty much followed suit for standard enterprise data centers but kept working on IB drivers and IB switches for their HPC and storage units. You can still see it kicking around in stuff like Exadata.
Intel is mainly responsible for making PCI-e happen. They had proposed one of the initial standards that became IB, NGIO. When NGIO was fused with FutureIO to create IB the same group renamed it to Arapahoe which was later renamed 3GIO before being renamed to PCI-e when standardized by the PCI SIG. Design wise little changed it just eschewed some of the switching complexity and focused on being an internal system interconnect.
So in many ways it's not quite PCI-e is descendant from IB but rather PCI-e -is- IB lol.
Unfortunately no. Other options you might look at for GUI solid modeling are FreeCAD (the one I tried before giving up and learning Fusion) and Solvespace (you'll want to build 3.0 from source, the most recent release build is 2.3 from 2016).
Or for code based modeling, OpenSCAD is the big thing, and cadQuery is a newer python-based system that seems very promising. Version 2 of cadQuery is built on Open CASCADE, the same backend as FreeCAD, and I gather it makes some modeling operations like fillets and chamfers much more possible than what you can do in SCAD.
I've been meaning to dig into that but haven't made the time yet.
I think a lot of good ideas out of cybernetics have silently been absorbed within disciplines, but culturally i think the politics and free-market disciples of the 80s onward largely killed it off in general public discourse.
If you look at the application of systems thinking and cybernetics to ecology (Donella H. Meadows; limits to growth etc), or Russ Ackoff (stakeholdership and interdisciplinary management over specialisation and monolithic business goals) I think it's clear why it died off or maybe more accurately, killed off.
In regards to the black and white thinking that seems common on the internet I think it’s very important to understand and have compassion for the volume of people who have experienced some form of emotional abuse in their life.
How you treat other people is scoped by how you are capable of treating yourself. Developmentally we learn how to treat ourselves from how our parents or caregivers treat us. It’s always useful to remember that people who are judgmental also direct that same lack of acceptance inward in some way.
Abuse and developmental trauma are not only the extreme physical or sexual abuse that people might think of. Neglect, inappropriate boundaries and validation being contingent on meeting arbitrary standards has a strong negative impact as well.
Often it is important for people to create an “other” and tear them down in order to somehow increase their own self worth in the moment. This is not a real solution to self-esteem so people who do so may have to increase the volume of their behavior over time to try and maintain some baseline sense of “being ok.”
People are responsible for their behavior regardless of their life experiences and I’m not saying we should excuse bad behavior.
I think it’s very important to remember that the problem is not “dumb people” attacking things because they are “dumb”. Believing this is extremely disempowering and will generate conflicts and alienation between people over time.
The idea of “dumb people” is the biggest cultural red herring ever and extremely toxic because when someone is labeled dumb:
- There is no point talking to them or listening to them
- They are never going to change, they are just a “dumb person”
- There is no point trying to understand them better
- Calling someone dumb and treating them like a “dumb person” is abusive.
That being said people who are stressed out, people who have experienced abuse and are having a flashback (complex ptsd is interesting) have an inhibited pre-frontal cortex. This means reduced “executive function” and basically that it is harder to think. So they might be acting in “dumb” ways. The key is that this inhibition on thinking will go away once their stress levels are better.
>>what kind of controller for PC is the recommended?
Depends on budget and goals:
* If you want to fly something realistic like a Cessna etc, get a yoke. Saitek offers a good combo Yoke/Throttle Quadrant/Rudders, which are a great way to start a fun yet relatively realistic experience. You can then upgrade it with instrument panels etc, but that is if you get quite serious about things. The basic combo is MORE than enough for a long time.
Alternatively, CH has an "All in one" yoke with hand-controlled rudder and attached throttle. Slightly less realistic (as the rudder is not via feet), more space-saving & compact :)
* If you are not looking for realism of that kind, or want something good value, and/or might fly fighter flight games as well, the Thrustmaster 1600 combo (joystick + throttle) are a reasonable "solid entry" pack.
* Finally, if you are really on a budget, OR play in living/family room on a couch but don't want to fly with gamepad, Thrustmaster HOTAS/Ace allows you to physically connect throttle and joystick, so you can hold it on your lap or similar and play from anywhere :)
* Note also, TrackIR adds a huge amount of reality and fun, if you don't go the full VR route. It LOOKS like it'd be gimmicky, but once you put it on, it's quite natural and huge amount of fun. I was honestly giggling first time I've put it on and looked to the side and below my plane just by moving my head around :)
I'm always annoyed by the fact that no spec exists for a `intermediate CA for a particular domain`. If it exists, multiple level wildcard pain disappears and Subject Alternative Names stuff is not needed.
My workstation is set up like this, with one giant LVM pool for storage and two GPUs, it gives a few advantages:
* Can run two OS at one time, each with half the resources
* Can run one with full resources if needed
* Can have multiple linux and windows installs
* Can have snapshots of installs
* Takes around 5-10 seconds to swap one of the running installs for a different install
* Can run headless VMs on a core or two while doing all the above, ie a test runner or similar service if needed
I use a 49" ultrawide with PBP, have one GPU connected to each side, so the booted installs automatically appear side to side, and Synergy to make mouse movement seamless, etc, etc
It took a little work to set up, but I've worked this way for ~ 3 years now and never had to think about the setup after the initial time investment, and during upgrades. Highly recommend it.
I definitely can see the advantage for a small team for having a single large machine with multiple GPUs, and letting them sit at a thin workspace and "Check out" whatever install they want to use, how much CPU power and RAM they need, etc, clone and duplicate installs and get a copy with their personal files in home, ready to go, and can check out larger slices of the machine when they have more CPU/GPU intensive tasks, that's probably my ideal office machine, after using my solo workstation for a while
Realtek has the RTL8710, which is a lot like the ESP8266 but with an ARM Cortex-M3 (while Espressif uses the rather obscure Xtensa architecture), which has the advantage of getting an LLVM toolchain for it, which means you can program it in Rust (while the ESPs are mostly limited to C).
The real advantage of the ESP8266 however is its raw popularity. It has an Arduino environment, tons of ready to run sketches, Basic, Javascript, Lua and Python interpreter environments and lots of interesting projects already done with it.
The ESP32 follows right in its foot steps with even more features, power and power saving features. Espressif really saw the market the DIY community means and did some minor tweaks to its policies to cater to it, which probably helped its popularity with commercial hardware makers as well.
A few weeks of consistent resistance training with bodyweight exercises has worked like magic for me after years of chronic wrist pain. I’ve been gradually working my way into this routine: https://www.reddit.com/r/bodyweightfitness/wiki/kb/recommend...
Pull ups/chin ups, ring rows, and push ups (or their easier/harder variations) all seem to help a lot, though I suspect the pull ups and chin ups are having the most impact.
I personally find it a lot more fun and easier to motivate myself to do these kinds of exercises compared to weightlifting, but I’m sure that works too.
Returning from the holiday meant you had avoided your usual procrastination cues -couch, TV, phone, schedule.
The key to defeating your procrastination may be to progressively build up a habit of doing work you prefer to avoid by setting up regular cues.
Eg to build a gym habit I set out my gym clothes each night. Then after a week of that I began to put them on before getting in the car to work. Then after a few days I drove past the gym in the way to work. Then went in for 1 minute and so forth. I know this sounds absurd. With these tiny steps I built a habit of the gym that is now 1 hour five times a week. Now I am building a habit of keeping my kitchen clean with the same progression of micro cues. You could imagine similar steps involving preparing your desk, later just sitting down at it, and so forth,all with cues like your first coffee, or you finished dinner etc. The formula is regular cue + micro progression to build a habit. Eventually it is mentally easier to maintain the habit than to break it.
Another tip, if you absolutely do not want to fulfill the habit on a particular cue, complete as many micro steps as you can, eg if I have an injury I will still go into the gym for a shower and to change before work.
After the hours in the initial estimate were used, I would have renegotiated and charged a nonrefundable retainer in order to be on call to deliver the project as soon as the assets were ready. This retainer would be my normal rate, and the hours would not carry over to another billing period. I would not be driving to their office every day.
Pretty much all the chemistry you see on youtube can be considered simple. Even the cubane synthesis, which Extractions&Fire epically failed at, was undergrad stuff at my university. Chemiolis nailed it, I think.
Other great chemistry channels that come to my mind are Chemical Force (breathtaking slowmo videos), Thy Labs, Thoisoi, Prussian Blue, Chemdelic, not exhaustive.