People don’t like when you punch down. When a 13 year old illegally downloaded a Limp Bizkit album no one cared. When corporations worth billions funded by venture capital systematically harvest the work of small creators (often with appropriate license) to sell a product people tend to care.

1. Do they not like you for things intrinsic to your being or for you actions? If the former their opinion should hold little weight, if the later proceed to step two.

2. Reflect on why someone of their perspective might feel that way about your actions and assess the merits.

3. If you feel after sober contemplation that their critiques of your actions were well founded, adjust yourself going forwards. Otherwise remain as you were.

If it is as low as 5% I’d imagine it reflects more so on where they are in their lives, having little knowledge of the situation.

They get a lot of flack on here but this is definitely a big privacy win from them.

I would put it in the same class as lathes or mills you probably aren’t saving money by buying one but it may open more avenues for you.

I will say though with the price of printers vs mills & etc, a cheap printer will get you much closer to breaking even. You might save more than you spend if you can use an Ender 3 judicially but overall it’s mostly for those odd projects or when a custom part is needed.

There’s a slight but significant difference between being addicted to Starbucks and crack.

Probably the most unique thing is a Garmin watch w/ a built in flashlight. Which as someone not willing to carry an actual flashlight because I know I’ll never both to take it out of my pocket 90% when I need it I find very useful. More smart watches should pick up the feature.

Sharing things you find useful in your everyday life so that others might enjoy them or recommend things that would better suit your needs.

The overturn of Chevron is only significant in that courts, particularly lower appeals courts, won’t be forced to accept agency interpretations on law. They still can if that’s the better of the two. It’s a big development in APA law but it is just on how laws get reviewed when contested.

Having not looked into the drug scheduling system much I can’t say for certain on that particular topic. But I wouldn’t be shocked if something like an interpretation on paraphernalia by the DEA got shot down.

If you want some good from the Loper Bright case keep in mind that it limits new presidents from coming in and appointing biased ‘experts’ to agencies to create new interpretation of law to aid their causes. This is a double edged sword. But I think with time we willl benefit from the end of the practice and we will settle in to a more stable set of administrative rulings that doesn’t shift every 4 years.

They recommended 2 USB C + 1 USB A on their website as the most popular choice. I find myself using Type A more often with peripherals, flashdrives, & etc. So that’s why I was going with 2 USB A. But maybe I’m behind the times on that and aught to move forward.

2x4GB was a path I hadn’t considered, I may have a look at that avenue if not 2x8GB.

Thanks, probably Windows just for the sake of not worrying about being the one guy trying to figure out how to make a specific software work mid-class on Linux.

I’ll definitely make sure to shop around for that SSD. I’m a brief look I’ve found at least a 500GB model for the same FW is billing for 250 GB.

one of the arguments you used.

It decidedly is not.

I don’t think characterizing them as all being far right hacks is very accurate.

I didn’t contend that if you follow a linear political view they’d be on the right side. I argued with the notion that all of the 3 justices were far right.

Wow .26mm of disparity is a lot for such a crucial part. It may not be a high end printer. But seriously? At $280 USD I’d expect the pulley to be tighter tolerance.

My contention was that they are all radicals. Not that the three are conservative leaning.

The fact that it doesn’t always line up left right doesn’t change the fact that these did.

Unless you consider Gorsuch, Thomas, and Roberts left wing those three cases didn’t. Which I consider you don’t given this comment. 30% of the time opinions are 9-0. If you think most of the cases fit a partisan line go through the cases count how many follow partisan lines. They list them all here.

If you group the justices in two partisan groups Thomas and RBG & Roberts and Sotomayor certainly wouldn’t be on the same sides.

I’m not even sure why you’re bringing it up.

I explained this in the first sentence of my comment.

On most of these cases, the left side has voted one way and the right the other.

Inorder as above:

NG, JR, RBG, SB, SS, & EK v SA, CT, & BK

NG, RBG, SB, SS, & EK v JR, SA, BK, & CT

NG, RBG, SB, SS, BK, & CT v SA, JR, & EK

That’d only be true if you consider Gorsuch, Roberts (for him fair), and Thomas as swing votes siding with the left.

I don’t think characterizing them as all being far right hacks is very accurate. Gorsuch for example wrote Bostock v Clayton County (Stopping people from being from being fired for sexual identity or orientation), McGirt v Oklahoma (Upholding a long ignored treaty with the Creek nation), and Ramos v Louisiana (Killing a Jim Crow law designed to disadvantage minorities in criminal trials). They just abide a different judicial doctrine.

I think that case was rightly decided on both a policy and law basis. But after the law was enacted, the agency had interpreted the law to have an understanding on how they should enforce it prior to the judicial interpretation.

So the agency did interpret the law as including bees as fish, correctly. Had the not done so the court case wouldn’t have happened because no one would have been advocating for that interpretation.

I think their alluding to a California Bee interpretation another commenter mentioned and perhaps Sackett v EPA for the one after that. For the switching one I read that probably referring to multiple cases but the BATFE pistol brace interpretation has gone through multiple instances, several implicating hundreds of thousands into felons. For the making up rules I’d guess they were talking about the recent court decision where the agency decided they could hold fishers accountable for compliance officer’s salaries despite the law not state that they could do that.

It absolutely the least democratic, they aren’t representatives they’re judges. They side with the laws enacted by the people, not the people. And all federal judges are appointed.

That power has been with the judicial branch for 180+ years before it was given by the Court to the agency in the 80s to prop up a Reagan interpretation of the Clean Air Act.