Yes, that's the point. The nerworking is broken. The issue isn't unique to a specific slicer, their software sucks. Orca ran into the issue because they wanted to make a basic feature that works on every other printer on the market work on a bambu.

And the circularity makes the actual investment numbers fairly meaningless. They don't mind if they end up overpaying for future services, as long as they overpay each other equally.

This makes for a very odd and specific interaction with a 3rd party feature. Security is a hard problem.

Obviously economies that rely largely on second hand technology are going to have old technology. Much of Africa is in this bucket. But looking past the extremes, India is at nearly 80% right alongside Germany. They fall in very different average income brackets. So the correlation isn't tight.

I can't see any value in pointing out vague correlation between income and proliferation of a new technology. It's the most obvious of observations.

This leaves developers to commit locally and comment as much or little as they like.

> Their only advantage...

How are you coming to this conclusion?! Their warmer has very meaningful effects on processing, attention and other visual effects as is the point of the discussion in the first place. It's not clear what makes you so sure that color differentiation is essential and the other effects are irrelevant.

No I absolutely don't know what matters. But it seems neither do you.

People are tired of off topic speculation masquerading as relevant to real world problem solving. It's not a hate boner.

EDIT: expanded to make it clearer why I believe the speculation to be wildly off topic for this particular thread.

You could consider a robotized approach, but for now robots aren't very good at this type of task. Whether the robotized system is in space is irrelevant. It's not a "next five years" type of solution.

How come there's no photos of the before/after? That would be much more useful than the condescension. They treat the reader like they've already whined with the least reasonable complaint. But they don't even bother to make their case properly, just point fingers at who else has done it, as if that's reason enough.

Wikipedia is NOT a good comparison. Their banners are obtrusive, obnoxious and the reason I stopped my $1/mo donation more than a decade ago. Well more specifically the begging/crying prompted me to look into their finances and spending and it turns out they were pretty irresponsible at least then. Lots of highly paid "administrators," software devs working on poorly thought out systems. Lots of interfering with volunteer contributions.

It feels like a very odd test because it's such an unreasonable way to answer this with an LLM. Nothing about the task requires more than a very localized understanding. It's not like a codebase or corporate documentation, where there's a lot of interconectedness and context that's important. It also doesn't seem to poke at the gap between human and AI intelligence.

Why are people excited? What am I missing?

If your traffic volume stays well below server capacity, the network connection is impeccable and throughput isn't a major factor in ISP costs, then the improvement is indeed negligible.

However, if the server or it's network ever experience congestion or disruption, or you simply face sheer volume, that's when CDNs shine.

Regional caches insulate clients from network or performance issues with your server or its connection. If you have high volume, they also drastically reduce traffic through the backbone which can reduce ISP costs, depending on your contract.

Like others say, this really applies to all static content, including static media, css and js.

I hear you ask, "how can you be exceedingly good at this?" Caching itself isn't tricky, but catching efficiently and effectively at such huge scales is. The fact that Cloudflare offers these services for FREE, is a pretty good (perhaps Faustian) deal.

Most projects seek 200-600m. This map doesn't even consider pumped hydro <200m: https://maps.nrel.gov/psh

> And pumped storage is significantly cheaper for seasonal storage than any proposed alternatives.

Based on what? Cost is particularly variable for pumped hydro. It can be one of the cheaper options when stars align. But you need 1) a suitable geography that minimizes the cost of damming or digging a resivoir with sufficient head 2) available for development without too much backlash 3) Near enough grid resources to minimize infrastructure and line losses. I'm surely leaving pieces out.

It can be cheap, but it has far more hoops to jump than alternatives like batteries, hot sand and other "storage-in-a-building" designs which can be built where needed and using fairly standard industrial construction.