insomniac_lemon

I just checked, apparently we have a ~16 gallon can (15 7/8ths*) and use 33gal bags. It doesn’t seem that much bigger (bc volume) but an overfilled bag will still have room in it when removed (it’s useful for last-minute additions on garbage day).

I don’t know if you need to go this far, but maybe it is why they still fit the can properly with the not-expected-fit orientation like I described to prevent overfilling. 30gal might work, I guess it seems there isn’t much choice here though (otherwise I’d say try 5-10gal/~20% higher rather than double).

*= Rubbermaid 3541, “Slim Jim” not cheap for plastic but we’ve had it for years so I’m not sure if it was that expensive when it was purchased

In my house we have slightly oversized trashbags, have the bag oriented the other way (so when you pull the bag out it does not get stuck*), make sure the drawstring is over the lip, and this depends on the design of your trash-can but just see the picture. Image link for non-Kbin.

*= this is specific to a larger bag in a tapered container. If the orientation matches closely, lifting causes it to expand at the bottom when you lift so you’re only lifting the bag at first (also this allows it to get stuck when it’s overfilled). Rotated the other way it cannot expand fully until it is out of the container.

Yeah, the only language I’ve seen/tried that actually feels right*.

But for me it falls down when it comes to needing other people and/or the specific engine-level stuff that I want to get started. I was hoping to start out simple with Raylib bindings, but even that I can’t get vertex colors on imported models to work and I tinkered w/my own 2D polygon format but it was too much work for me to finalize.

My part of the fediverse doesn’t seem to work well for asking niche questions at least, I don’t see much talk on Nim and it doesn’t help that it’s hard to find when people don’t say nim-lang. Also there are 2 replies to you that aren’t federated to where I can see them (and my art threads–lowpoly+vertex colors, for instance plant–aren’t federated to your instance).

*= That also may be a mix of my issues plus how some people style their code, though.

My point is, going by the language in what you linked, the manufacturer you went with sells neither electronic devices nor devices that facilitate the use of any liquids/oils. So it does seem like their dumb policy/cautiousness not them being forced, though I am not a lawyer. Even being strict, if there was a device they sold that fell under the law I think it’d be the torches, as you said if someone has a lighter and material+paper or anything else that’s all that’s needed for smoking.

I was pointing out another manufacturer (quite popular/known and they only do electronic stuff, but AFAIK nothing for liquid/oils) and they have not bothered with this policy at all. They do allow the customer to request a signature check, but that’s all I see.

I saw that after posting. I’m not sure if the shipping law depends on the product but I got an Extreme Q from Arizer years ago and just checked: there is no mention of a required signature (though being a desktop unit and twice the price, it is a different product).

So maybe you could’ve just bought from somewhere else, assuming this is the seller being overly cautious and not a wide-sweeping law.

I think it would just burn the tobacco rather than vaporizing it

I mean if the temperature is set low enough (also convection) it should prevent combustion(/harmful byproducts) for most materials. Like under 200C especially.

Although I’m not sure vaporizing tobacco intended for smoking would taste all that great and smokers generally don’t seem to care anyway. Sounds gross to me, then again so does nicotine in general.

I could see it in the specific case of a cheap (steam) vape pen purchased without debit/bank card off of a general store site. They check the mail and pocket it, get vape juice from somebody. Charge+fill and it’s ready in a pocket or backpack etc. Similar for concentrates, portable dry vaporizers (or something like dynavap) maybe a bit less.

A $100+ desktop dry vaporizer purchased from a dedicated website seems like it’d be harder to hide unless parents are really inattentive. Miss the credit/debit record, miss the delivery at the door, then them carrying it in (+branded boxes), a dedicated spot in their room where it’s plugged in, and an almost ritual to properly heat up the glass/material that might give it away (glass clinking, balloon bag filling, fan on/off etc).

KiB, MiB, GiB etc are more clear. It makes a big difference especially 1TB vs 1TiB.

The American way would probably be still using the units you listed but still meaning 1024, just to be confusing.

Either that or maybe something that uses physical measurement of a hard-drive (or CD?) using length. Like that new game is 24.0854 inches of data (maybe it could be 1.467 miles of CD?).

I use Krita for infrequent no-stakes photo editing (and even pixel art at one point), might not be for everyone but there’s a lot of overlap. Also you can use G’MIC with Krita, so that might help.

I used to use GIMP, but I prefer Krita now.

I would say the point is not wanting to buy from a company that’s clearly anti-consumer… particularly with CUDA not being new and then comparing it to something open and hardware-agnostic like FSR this headline also looks petty.

I am not a programmer, but on 2 occasions I was able to improperly fix (1 argument in 1 line stuff) very small bugs without really understanding how. I’ve also made a number converter (dec-bin-hex) at least twice. I know those aren’t a lot but it’s weird that it happened twice twice.

I’d say there’s an issue here with language design having major tradeoffs, but maybe it’s just a paradox*? Though I have found a language I like (even though I’m not learning it because other issues), so I know it’s not impossible at least.

*= Like the people who could make something with less tradeoffs don’t have the need/desire to do that, they just use the existing stuff. Though that is much more fitting for visual programming.

It seems like the old login servers don’t even exist anymore (so I don’t see how it’d actually verify unless it just checks a username’s purchase status), but yeah that launcher does work for offline. (I still have my lastlogin file assuming it can’t overwrite itself easily, but I don’t think anything uses that other than the old launcher which can’t seem to actually download the files because 404).

It’s also interesting for the built-in modding, though it doesn’t seem to be perfect. Also added an edit to my original comment mentioning parallel timeline mods. Though I’ll just check out some classic(/revived) mods if I can get them to work.

@Stelus42

Yeah, one of the things I liked in old versions was having just one type of planks (not having multiple variants of everything wood, particularly). And I’ve never cared about the bosses or searching for something 50K blocks away from spawn or whatever. The other annoyance is hunger, though eating to insta-heal isn’t much better either.

One issue for me is that I really liked the block model system of newer versions (release 1.8), particularly as a resource pack creator. A ladder looks so much better as a few cuboids than it does as a flat texture, and my models (which I made in a text editor) looked a lot nicer than my textures.

Also, never migrated my account. Are the servers to download the old versions from the old launcher even still up?

Minetest could be a solution here, but it seems like most Minetest games are either following new MC’s footsteps or are doing something completely different. At least I’ve never played one that made me want to keep going, something good enough to start my own thing with (I would like chaining sticky pistons or similar things that are powerful in single-player, blocks that look cool but offer specific benefits like an iron grate floor/ceiling).

Parallel timeline mods are interesting, though I am not having luck with trying them thus far and I also doubt the modding tools are there enough especially for me who doesn’t want to code in Java. I could also see it interesting if there were an easy way to just disable a large amount of blocks/items/mobs etc and then just add in new stuff… maybe even with data packs especially for this sort of thing.

I am thinking about game mechanics that interact (has anyone tried liquid-like gravel/coal piles yet?) or that just connect simply/are instant (rather than high-throughput automation). Or different systems for healing/buffs/food. Maybe alternate tools/transportation/skybridges etc.

EDIT: So they really added data packs without the ability to make “true” blocks/items (instead still dependent on entities and commands, data overridden not data driven), huh? Guess I shouldn’t be surprised.

It’s something like that, but way beyond me so I couldn’t get something manually let-alone full bindings. I was making a polygon loader+text format for Raylib and didn’t even finish that somewhat due to it not being straightforward to properly implement/use (beyond what I had already that is, and that I’d probably need to make an editor too). And a big reason for wanting Godot is to create and animate polygons in-engine eye example with an editor so yeah I’d rather wait.

The truth about programming is that the language isn’t really that important

I have had the thought that many languages have bindings for Raylib, so that lowers the bar a lot.

Beyond that, I can see a lot of problems. I already could use Raylib and a few other types of frameworks/libraries (UI, webui, TUI, fantasy console, scripting, microcontroller stuff) potentially, so any other language has to allow more/better options than that. Particularly as I don’t really have ideas for those (with few-or-no tools) right now to start there.

Alternatively, it’s a dirty language, but PHP is supremely usable.

For your consideration, a moment of Master Shake to represent me (alternate 1, alternate 2)

Right off the bat no Godot 4 bindings at least that I’m seeing in search, so that problem persists.

I’m not quite sure on style but I want a jack-of-all-trades language (speed, ease, capability, options, platform options etc) and that’s a high bar. Nim seems like an outlier from everything I can see.

Actually no, some of the Haskell syntax stuff I’m seeing it making me mad.

I’m like that because:

• I need a hobby
• weird history with programming, but never actually liked any programming language enough to have a real project.
• now I found a niche language* that I like but so far it’s just not where I want get started (one example, still no bindings for Godot 4)
• Ray almost tricked me into making a framework for a framework but I saw right through that
• personal issues

*=Nim

As someone who wanted to use an engine, I tinkered with a framework for a bit and immediately found myself in the beginnings of creating a framework for said framework.

And they almost got away with this obvious scam, but unluckily for them I didn’t want to do stuff like that. They might’ve pulled it off if the particular thing I wanted was more straightforward.

If it served no purpose then it wouldn’t be done. Companies don’t throw resources around for no reason

I’m guessing the point is that it’s diminishing returns and maybe a solution looking for a problem. Like how companies often spend a bunch of money/resources on special effects just for the spectacle of it. Just because they spent all that money doesn’t mean it is worthy of doing so in the first place.

Their point on sales is similar, it’s not that they’re selling something but that they’re selling something that people don’t need. Like fast fashion, it’s manipulation and the only purpose is money. You can look good without following a trend, and looking good (or status) should not be the only point of purchasing something anyway.

I am not sure this is something other engines even offered at this level, but my issue is bindings support.

3.X had (3rd-party) production-ready bindings, even for niche languages.

4.X, with hopes of improving support for compiled languages, has a new bindings system meaning that all bindings need to be redone as a new effort. This happened with the language that I’m interested in, the group that made the production-ready 3.X bindings abdicated the crown and there have been splintered efforts by individuals to work on 4.X bindings.

So it (3.X vs 4.X) is language vs engine features. When/if 4.X bindings do come out, it is not known how similar they will be so (aside from non-Godot-specific code) that will likely add complication to it as well.

I don’t really care about consoles (needing to jump through hoops to develop for it is one reason) so a different potential issue would web export limitations. Both for different languages and for visual quality (AA). Those were issues in the past, though I’m not actually sure where they’re at now (the 4.1 docs do say you can’t have C# web exports in 4.X).