That’s interesting. I’d be a little concerned that widespread use of that might create more legal issues for Archive.org that wouldn’t be problems if it never caught on much. On that basis, I’d probably not use it.

But I’d imagine ideological opposition to such a thing wouldn’t be enough to keep it from catching on either.

It depends on your specific case, of course. That 0.4mm is indeed a good rule of thumb. But also, assuming you’re dealing with FFF-printed parts, generally if the two parts slide together along the layer lines, it’ll feel just a little looser than if they slide together perpendicular to layer lines. That’s just due to the ribbed texture inherent to FFF printing. Though printing at smaller layer heights will reduce that effect and also make the parts fit just a little looser over all.

Aside from that, probably the best advice I can give is:

1. Measure/calibrate for dimensional accuracy. [Here]'s a random article on the topic that looks pretty good to me.
2. Prototype. Print once, if it doesn’t fit right, adjust the model(s) and print again. Filament is pretty cheap, really. Also, depending on your situation, you might benefit from doing quick test prints just to see how well it fits. If the whole print is going to take 8 hours but by spending 30 minutes printing just part of the final product you can prove you’ve got the dimensions right, it’s probably worth it to do the 30 minute print.
3. Use elasticity to your advantage. Make latches or attachments that snap into place. That’s useful whether the parts are meant to go together once and never come apart or connect and disconnect repeatedly. Another use for elasticity is if you need two arms of one piece to friction-grip another rectangulat piece, angle the arms inward just a degree or two. One word of caution, though. It can be really easy to overestimate the flexibility of PLA. I’ve ended up once or twice with some pretty hard to open latches.

I don’t think the lemmy.ml admins have been coy about it.

If you go to the lemmy.ml home page, at the bottom of the right column is a list of admins.

The first admin’s profile banner is a picture of Mao. And the second’s profile pic is a photo of Fidel Castro. The other two don’t have profile pics that are explicitly authoritarian communist and I haven’t had the patience to look through a whole lot of their posts or anything.

Just a couple of Reddit threads (via libreddit.hu) on the topic: one and two. Unfortunately what they link do doesn’t appear to be in the wayback machine as far as I’ve been able to tell.

We might be able to answer the question better if you named the “other platforms” you’re referring to. It doesn’t seem like an unusual amount compared to, for instance, how much communist/transgender content Reddit had back when Reddit wasn’t as evil as it is now. (Who knows what Reddit’s like now. I haven’t been back since the two-day boycott over the API pricing.)

All that said, some of the communist content here is tankies. (That is, authoritarian communists who spout CCP or other authoritarian communist regimes’ propaganda.) Some of the Lemmy instances (like latte.isnot.coffe and lemmy.ml) are run by tankies.

That said, a lot of the communist content here is grass-roots anarcho-communist advocacy by people like me who ideologically lean that way.

I love OpenSCAD. I use it very frequently to make designs for home 3D printing.

Wait, do people who are counting calories cook, for instance, spaghetti with meat sauce, cheese, and meatballs and only count the calories in the spaghetti? That’s got to be kindof a denial and/or self-deception kind of phenomenon rather than legitimately thinking that the calories in, say, sauce are negligible or “cook off” somehow, right?

I’ve got a smart TV on which the Wifi broke very shortly after I got it. I just use a Chromecast and it works nicely.

I interpreted it the same way devexxis did, but on rereading, I think you’re right.

Wow. I couldn’t possibly be any more your opposite in this regard. I try very hard not to run proprietary software. For safety reasons. And when I do run proprietary software, I do my best to sandbox it. I don’t let my Nintendo Switch talk to my home network often. I hacked my robotic vacuum cleaner not to phone home. I do my (U.S.) taxes on stupid paper because there aren’t pure-FOSS options for filing electronically.

“Given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow.” - Linus Torvalds

Open Source software is (caveat, qualifier) safer than proprietary software. (And I’ll get to the caveats and qualifiers later.)

Software exploits are possible only because of mistakes, oversights, negligence, or mistaken assumptions on the part of the developer of user of the code. More eyes on the code help suss out those mistakes, oversights, negligence, and mistaken assumptions, creating a more secure (and bug-free) piece of software.

Besides that, companies that make proprietary software have incentives to put evil things into said proprietary software that endanger you to enrich them. (For instance, phone apps collecting personal data about you only to sell to advertising companies.) Companies that contribute to open source software also have incentives to put evil things into open source software, but when everyone has access to view the source code, it’s a lot harder to get away with that. (Not to say it’s never happened that purposeful vulnerabilities have gotten into open source software, but it’s a lot easier to catch such vulnerabilities in open source software than proprietary software.)

As others have said, the way algorithms related to security are designed, the security doesn’t depend on keeping the algorithm secret. (But rather, keeping a “key” – a bit of data generated by the algorithm – secret.)

Now, caveats.

I do believe there is some extent to which open source software is trusted to be safe even when the “chain of custody” is questionable. There are ways to ensure integrity, but there are repositories such as NPM that carry large amounts of open source software that is used by huge numbers of people on a regular basis that don’t utilize sufficient integrity checking techniques. As a result, there have been a few cases where malicious code has sneaked into NPM and then into codebases.

There are also cases where governments have gotten malicious code into open source projects. (Though, I’d expect that’s more of a problem with proprietary software, not less.)

Actually, the answer turns out to be pretty interesting.

The short version is that what colors are considered “distinct” are heavily influenced by culture and Newton, from whom we get ROYGBIV, came from a culture which valued the dye called “indego.”

Edit: It also seems Newton thought the number 7 had cosmic significance and thought there ought to be 7 colors.

More info in this short video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bf7WT6TLy8s