Larok00

8 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by Larok00 3y ago

   OpenSCAD will definitely be more efficient but not as many people speak it fluently. When we learn or talk about objects, we do it in English, even if we have to resort to very technical jargon. I think this is a case of opening it up to mo
2. 2.▲
   by Larok00 3y ago

   I haven't thought it through completely, but it could start out as basically dall-E but for 3d meshes. Then what would be really useful if it could faithfully represent some specs you give it. Dimensions, shape, etc. Imagine all the sp
3. 3.▲
   by Larok00 3y ago

   I think this is putting the cart before the horse. In my experience, the reason many 3d prints are useless trinkets (NOT functional parts) is because it takes a lot of effort to design your own custom piece. Most 3d prints that are actually
4. 4.▲
   by Larok00 3y ago

   There is not a lot of advantage to releasing this on Azure where you are directly competing with GPT-4, which will beat you on most tasks.
5. 5.▲
   by Larok00 3y ago

   I wish there was more progress in text-to-3D mesh for creating basic but very specific and functional shapes. With the last few years of progress, it really feels like it should be possible, but none of the big players are finding it worthw
6. 6.▲
   by Larok00 3y ago

   I still have my original PSP with its discs, and it works like a charm. The build quality is very impressive. I can use it as a plug-in controller for my PC.
7. 7.▲
   by Larok00 5y ago

   To me it seems like not starting down that path is the only surefire way of drawing a distinction between what is acceptable and what isn't. Also from a user's perspective, I would undoubtedly choose the one without ads of the two