I don’t know. That was a long time ago.

When I was a young man, I worked in the call center of a telecommunications giant. We provided customer support for television, including some technical assistance like helping an elder find the source button on their remote. We had strict QoS rules, and my supervisor told us that this was mandated by the CRTC. We answered most phone calls within 30s, and a hold time over 2m was an emergency. We had screens all over the office where we could watch our queue and, although it was extremely rarely used, a system of overflow call centres to switch on to in the case of a truly wicked rush.

That all went out the window. Now, the job consists of trying to end the call as soon as possible because the new metric is not how long your customer waited to speak to you, but how much of the company’s money they burned wasting its time with their question.

I like the nostalgia of a free remote shell account.

You know why

Stephen Amell wouldn’t even want to stand next to Stephen Amell after that appalling shit.

What kind of rent-seeking on media is ethical? In what situations do you think it is OK to restrict non-destructive copying?

To me, your top layer looks underextruded, specifically where your solid layer meets the perimeter. This might be acceleration, and if it’s newish Marlin, my guess would be you use Linear Advance and it isn’t calibrated correctly. Your filament drive and the motion of your x/y axis are not synchronized. If I saw this, I would run a Linear Advance calibration print and set the correct k value. I would then run a test print and while it was running, Id ensure the k value was what I’d set. If it wasn’t, I’d look at my starting gcode and otherwise try to figure out why it was being reset or another value set when I started to print. I think you can set classic jerk values in slic3r, so you might just ensure that acceleration is set to use the default printer values. Hope that helps. If you still have trouble, I’d recommend Teaching Tech’s calibration steps. Your filament drive may be skipping or the tension may be inadequate or inconsistent.

deleted by creator

Why would I talk person to person with reasonable people? Even if they check all your boxes and don’t hate anyone, if they’re not about moving us forward already, why would I be so egotistical as to think I’ll be the one to change that? If pigs want to wallow, let them. I am not the servant of any man, be it a boss or a dumbass.

I should like to spank his little bottom for such childish thinking.

Oh brother. If it’s nature that starves us, why is it a cop that arrests a hungry thief?

We could attempt a more complicated maneuver as I have seen described once in a magazine in the library: a somersault.

I don’t think it’s needlessly overthinking as you put it to ask that people work toward sustainable long term changes that can not only alleviate current problems but improve conditions and systems resiliency and fairness long term. The unfortunate truth is that going part of the way also helps the people who don’t want to reduce global inequality. If people are satisfied with a world in which the equilibrium is reached between poverty that is so destructive and impossible to tolerate that global unrest increases as predicted, and a poverty only slightly more tolerable, that is not, in my humble opinion, anything to strive for. It would in fact be the least optimal result, since it maximizes suffering and precludes change.

You mean the kind of economists someone with money would, at a respectable arm’s length, choose to pay to be an economist.

A man is a man, a woman is a woman, and an invisible sky daddy controls the weather. You see something unhinged about that?

When did mandatory state education ever serve people’s needs? School has always taught only what was needed to serve our masters.

The TV show or the film? Zack Snyder’s The Watchmen clocks in at 2h42. His previous film, 300, 1h57m, and his debut, Dawn of the Dead (2004), 1h40m, so I would say he was definitely pushing the boundary of what the studio was willing to let him shoot and release, and the directors cut brings it to 3h. The Watchmen film is an adaptation, and it is already as long as it is. It’s possible to just calculate how long it would take actors to say every line of existing dialogue, and my guess is that it’s longer than the film was.

As the other poster said, there are dessicant products that are at the very least advertised in a way that suggests this works. You can buy them from the marine section of a hardware store.

If you look further back, I think you’ll see that films are just returning to a natural length of between 1.5 - 3h that hit an equilibrium by the 1970s. Films with niche appeal or marketed at young crowds maxed out at 90m in the 80s I think due to pressure from theatres and new home video and pay tv markets. A really marketable film needed to be 90m, short for many showings but still have enough room to sell ads when it an on tv at 2h broadcast length.

Many things have changed. Streaming content can be any length and divided however the creator chooses, provided they don’t want a theatrical run for awards purposes. Theatre business is way down, and the cost theatres pay is way up, but more than ever they rely on blockbusters so if an auteur like Reeves wants to do a 6h batman, as long as it sells tickets it’s fine.

The Godfather and Apocalypse Now were long movies that primarily made money from the box office because FFC could push back when studios looked to cut his films. They knew people would see his films because they were good. Today, Christopher Nolan or Jordan Peele have the kind of instant box office/streaming credibility to make long films again, and Hollywood is much more focused on extravagant showstopping spectacle than it was in the 80s and 90s when a lot of more dramatic story-driven films won awards and even made a lot of money, so you see more expensive blockbuster films with huge marketing being action films like marvel, dc, john wick. Some are still 90m, but up to 2h15m isn’t uncommon. I guess what I’m saying is, directors won the right to make long films in the 60s and 70s when people like Hitchcock and Kubrick showed that filmmakers that were artists could also make studios a lot of money. But, the 80s and the 90s cut down the appetite for those sorts of films both by the studios and the public. There were so many pressures that made studios balk at long runtimes. It’s not that people haven’t always had 3h films to make, it’s just that many of them ended up shot as 2h30m films, edited down to 90m for theatrical release, and then put out on DVD at 1h10m with deleted scenes in the extras. It was a wild time.

I see what you’re asking now. I think we can look back to the French revolution and the national assembly. I definitely consider each candidate, but first I take a quick glance to see if they sit on the side that supports the King or not. Unfortunately, there are no parties left on the side that doesn’t.

Edited to remove some ambiguity