It was fixed by removing residue from the print bed which reduced adhesion for the first few layers, pulling the filament up, which gets stuck on the nozzle and is being dragged across the bed.
There certainly would be a market for a network camera ecosystem provided by a company that people can trust. I don't think it has to be all or nothing, plenty of people really are in no position to self-host.
I'm not sure if there is anything out there that regular consumers currently could migrate to in case they want to get away from questionable companies. There are completely local systems (local recorder, no remote access), but those are lacking the home automation features / notifications, and well-respected brands that have been around (let's say, Axis?) that are still closed source, not cross-platform and with pricing often not aimed at end customers.
I didn't check out this project, so I'm certainly not saying this is it and there habe been various criticism of this particular project here, but I'd love if a decent project would emerge in the space.
Would you consider using a managed cloud solution + app if it's open-source and properly end-to-end encrypted? How would a hypothetical company have to behave to be trustworthy, while still being allowed to profit? People here seem to like e. g. tuta.io for encrypted mail, I don't see why a similar model could not work for network cameras.
These are genuine questions btw., I myself am really annoyed at the status quo with its data breaches, blatant lies to customers about encryption, and corporations willfully cooperating with fascist governments by proactively providing video data. I'm not even going to talk about AI training.
If you ever suffered through a bacterial infection and remember how you felt once the antibiotics finally kicked in, and the prolonged suffering resistances would cause, or ever watched a loved one in a hospital die from a bacterial infection just because the were in a weakened state and the stem they caught was already resistant, you'll understand why that sucks so much as it does.
The stylophone is probably not a very good choice if you actually want to make a musical track, it's quite a bit limited.
Also, please don't assume that hardware is simpler than plugins. A lot of hardware has plenty of menu diving or arcane shortcuts due to the limited hardware controls, tiny (or absent) screens etc.
You should be looking at "one knob per function" devices.
If you just want to explore a bit and make tracks, get a groovebox l. If you are looking to dive into synthesis and a bit of sound design, look at the Arturia Microfreak.
I agree, but I'd also like to mention that it's absolutely possible to get great mileage out of a "toy" synth, provided you already know what you're doing.
I'm currently compiling a list of open-source audio streaming solutions and I think Sonobus is not on there yet, so this is a pretty useful comment to me. Thanks.
They are launched sequentially, but run simultaneously, yes - at least some of them. And they run concurrently but not in parallel - using a single execution context, there is only a single thread, so no parallelism exist.
The output is sorted due to the fact that for each number, a timer is started that prints out the number after waiting a number of milliseconds equal to said number.
Therefore, 1 is printed first after delaying for 1 millisecond, 5 is printed second after 5 milliseconds etc.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0001706X2500169X