Yeah it sucks, but when we rise it’s like strawberry fields.

Yeah… All the tools in Linux are going to do this weird thing where they expect it to behave like a normal key. So you’d have to do all the hacks mentioned to make it work. For example, GNOME keybind stops detecting the key bind when you release. Etc. Maybe the kernel will accept a “broken copilot key hack“ that implements it but it’s not good.

Even with hacks, it still won’t work like a modifier like most people use alt/ctrl/win because those rely on knowing the key up to see multiple keys pressed together before release. So… Broken.

As a Linux gamer, nvidia was already on thin ice.

Also I had past them up on recentish purchases since they only really controlled the highest end of the market which I don’t have the budget for. So honestly I have no intention of welcoming them back unless there is literally no other option. You made your bed.

Kind of makes sense really when you think about it. The vast majority of consumers have had all their wealth eroded over decades to the point no one can buy anything. Better to let the AIs buy everything now.

2 points to consider.

1. Humans can’t digest the entirety of the internet
2. Humans transform through lived experience. At worst current ai is just the statistical correlation of existing information at best you could say a model is trained by a humans experience. Neither are the same.

I don’t think llms are without value, but treating them like they think or create new things is the problem imho.

Yeah, I think that was not the case during their recent lawsuit with Apple. So relatively recently that changed and was limited for a “good” reason.

No Linux support though so whatever. Useless to me.

Not normal for me but I recently opted in to Firefox’s telemetry so they could see all the trouble I’m going through to turn off their new features in their reporting.

Will it change their mind? Probably not. But at least it’ll be there in the numbers

That’s a tough one. Those small points hanging ledges pose a lot of problems for printers and petg is not a forgiving filament type.

As others have said, petg can be a harder filament to print. Even dry it tends to be more viscous leading to oozing, stringing. I’m not convinced that’s the problem but it could be part of it as build up from stinging or over extrusion can cause collisions leading to something like this.

The damage looks like it’s happening on one side. That hints at either a cooling problem or some movement or seam placement problem.

Looking at pictures of your printer it looks like it has too fans so I suspect that side had direct cooling and the openness means it’s probably not getting a wall that would affect it.

Related to movement, speed/acceleration could be an issue. You might have heard scratching while printing in this area. If so slight warping during cooling or from over extrusion could lead the nuzzle colliding. On a more solid print you could probably get away with ignoring it as it wouldn’t affect the print but with such small parts small impacts over time will lead to knocking parts off or distorting them. Try slowing down the print. Most of the print here is delecate but you can do that in modifiers if you want other parts of the print to be fast.

Not sure how much that adds or helps but good luck.

I cut the drivers (not the company) slack for some of this sort of stuff. I had a friends dad that delivered for UPS apparently the expectations are impossible. You don’t leave till deliveries are done but it’s not possible to do in a normal day. Marking things delivered that weren’t was apparently the only way to see his family sometimes.

I assumed you would understand I meant the short part of your statement describing the LLM. Not your slight dig at me, your setting up the question, and your clarification on your perspective.

So you be more clear, I meant “The IIm doesn’t consider a negative response to its actions due to its training and context being limited”

In fact, what you said is not much different from the statement in question. And you could argue on top of being more brief, if you remove “top of mind” it’s actually more clear. Implying training and prompt context instead of the bot understanding and being mindful of the context it was operating in.

I think you did a fine job right there explaining it without personifying it. You also captured the nuance without implying the machine could apply empathy, reasoning, or be held accountable the same way a human could.

Well, since you asked I’d basically do what you said. Something like “so ‘humans might hate hearing from me’ probably wasn’t part of the context it was using."

Mind?