I try to, when I have the time, but I don’t sweat it if I don’t, I just try to avoid forming too many opinions about the topic.

Also, a good chunk of the time I try, I get paywalled. Which I can usually bypass if I’m on PC, but that’s not really feasible on mobile.

Props to all the heroes copying the article into the post, or pointing out when the headline is misleading.

TL;DR, I would do the following:

• Build a a 3->2 balancer across those 3 belts on the left. These 2 outputs, together, will be your feed of 2000.
• Split a belt off of each of the other 4, and merge them together.
• Split that into 2, and merge each of those into one of the 2 belts of the 2000 line.

The long version:

In my experience (and this may well be a product of my build style, and may bot quite be applicable to you) belt balancing is not an issue that needs to be addressed. Belt capacity and throttling leads naturally to self-balancing.

Example: in the Steelworks build I did recently, I had two different sets of machines needing to consume Steel Ingot: Constructors for Steel Pipe and Constructors for Steel Beam. Currently, the factory is clocked for a max belt of Mk1, since I can’t really afford the power for more, right now. My foundries produce 90 Steel Ingot/min, so that means I need 2 belts worth of Steel Ingot transport. I ended up building 12 Foundries, in 2 groups of 6, each outputting to a separate Mk1 manifold, so I’ve got 2 belts of 45/min each.

On the consumption side, I need 21.068/min to make Steel Pipe and 68.932/min to make Steel Beam. So, I still need 2 belts of bandwidth for Steel Beam, but only 1 for Steel Pipe. To make this happen, I split each of the Steel Ingot lines into 2, let 1 from each split go onward to Steel Beam, and took the other from each split and merged them, for Steel Pipe. All dumb splitters.

Now, you might say "well, that just gives you 45/min going to both Steel Pipe and Steel Beam, you just made it that the two separate Foundry lines can now mix. But this doesn’t account for (what I call) “back-pressure”.

The magic of back-pressure is that it makes dumb splitting (splitting evenly, instead of with ratios) irrelevant. With my setup, the Steel Pipe constructors only need 21.068/min but are getting 45/min. However, as long as the clock rates are set correctly on those machines, they will only consume 21.068/min, and the extra 23.932/min will eventually back up, and flow over to Steel Beam anyway.

Essentially, it’s the balancer vs manifold debate. Upside is, you don’t have to deal with crazy balancing calculations, when you’ve got odd ratios like you have. Downside is, the system doesn’t reach full efficiency until it “primes” up all the back-pressure.

The one caveat to back-pressure is if you have “re-combination” farther down the line. In my example, if I were going to take those Steel Beams and Steel Pipes and combine them together in some other recipe, then it might be impossible to build up enough back-pressure to balance everything out. Sort of like having an air-bubble in the system. You can solve this by either manually priming the back-pressure, or just swapping to a Smart Splitter with an Overflow output, in the right spot, to allow the “bubble” to bleed out.

Nope, no trains in this playthrough. Everything forbthis facility is mined one-site.

It does indeed do something! ;)

What graphics API are you using? DX11? DX12? Vulcan? I suspect maybe this affects which file is applicable? I’m actually running DX11asba workaround to a crashing issue that came up in 1.0, and doesn’t seem to be fixed yet.

If there’s no Engine.ini file in /Windows, I’d say you’re safe to just create one, and see if that works. If the file’s there, but empty, that really shouldn’t matter, just drop the settings in there.

Even if they do, it’s still a win for Musk. He got what he wanted out of the deal. He got the ability to rewrite the feed algorithms as he saw fit, and steer a large portion of online public discourse towards getting Trump re-elected. Tough to say how much of a factor this was, but it definitely contributed. The money he lost on Twitter, he’ll make back.

We all laughed at him for setting the platform on a course of destruction, and that may yet still happen, but he got the last laugh out of it. Props to him, I guess.

If only it were that easy to snap your fingers and magically transform your code base from C to Rust. Spoiler alert: It’s not.

How utterly disingenuous. That’s not what the CISA recommendation says, at all.

That’s the first blocky build I caught you doing, ha!

Hey, now, it’s still a work-in-progress. ;)

Sooooo, you can “fix” this, you just have to get into the weeds of Unreal Engine a bit.

Firstly, of course, you have to have Lumen enabled, which is a normal setting in the Graphics section (or whatever it’s called) of the game menu.

However, to get the illumination to be actually meaningful, like it used to be, you need to change an engine setting to increase the illumination radius. THEN you need to adjust a bunch of other engine settings to get rid of the terrible graininess that generates. Or, more accurately, tone it way down.

Gimme a minute to go look up the settings I’m running with…

EDIT:

So, here’s the settings I’m running with. I got this set in particular out of a reddit thread. Out of a handful of different sets I tried, this is the one that worked the best, for me.

r.Lumen.Reflections.Allow=1
r.Lumen.Reflections.SmoothBias=0.8
r.Lumen.ScreenProbeGather.TracingOctahedronResolution=10
r.AOGlobalDistanceField.MinMeshSDFRadius=10
r.LumenScene.SurfaceCache.CardTexelDensityScale=2500
r.SupportReversedIndexBuffers=1
FX.BatchAsync=1
r.OneFrameThreadLag=0
r.Lumen.TraceMeshSDFs=1
r.LumenScene.SurfaceCache.CardMaxTexelDensity=0.5
r.Lumen.DiffuseIndirect.SSAO=1

The important one is r.AOGlobalDistanceField.MinMeshSDFRadius that’s what drives the brightness. The rest, feel free to play with, until you find a combination that works.

To apply these settings, you can do one of two things.

A) use the in-game console, triggered with the "" (back-tick) key. In the console, you change one of these settings by typing the name, a space, and then the desired value, I.E. r.AOGlobalDistanceField.MinMeshSDFRadius 10`. These changes aren’t saved, so you’ll lose them when restarting the game, but it does enable quicker testing. Although, they ALSO don’t take effect right away. Only “new” renders will use the settings, stuff that’s already rendered will stay the same. I.E. you have to walk a decent bit away from the thing you’re wanting to look at, then back.

B) Head to %localappdata%/FactoryGame/Saved/Config/WindowsNoEditor/Editor.ini and paste the settings in at the end of the file, after adding the line “[SystemSettings]”. Within the .ini file, the format for a setting is different, instead of a space between the name and value, you use an =, like I have above. There’s also an Engine.ini file within a Windows folder, instead of WindowsNoEditor and I honestly have no idea which one serves which purpose, so I just made the edits in both.

As if the new notepad wasn’t already enough of a downgrade.

I dunno, I still think this is on YT. There’s a reason it’s stupid easy to bypass geolocked content on basically any other platform, and it’s because of what you say: the platforms don’t actually care. They BENEFIT from having more content to give you. YouTube is making a distinct effort to go detect geolock bypassing here, where other platforms choose not to.

If I had to guess, it’s really that they want to discourage VPNs entirely, as it fucks with their primary business of data collection.

It actually took me multiple trues to get into Stardew. The whole “track down everyone” quest is intimidating for a lot of people.

Up to you if you think it’s worth keeping at it, for the possibility of getting hooked later.

I mean, the book of Revelations is indeed a prophecy.

I’m 34 and don’t have $10,000 in savings.

Congrats on the milestone, friend.

Did you like the subplot about how slaves who are freed against their will turn to alcoholism?

Yeah, I thought it was really interesting how there were two characters who gained freedom and handled it in completely opposite ways. I thought it was a great way to highlight that simply ending an injustice often isn’t enough. It takes effort beyond that to truly reach justice/equity.

Or how when they celebrated Christmas at Grimmauld place, they put little santa hats and beards on the severed slave heads?

The severed heads themselves were clearly established as one of many things that made everyone being forced to live there uncomfortable. So, yes, I liked the touch of the characters decorating them, and the rest of the house, to try and make it less of a reminder of the shitstain of a family that it used to belong to. The characters make quite a few such attempts, throughout the book, often unsuccessfully.

Did you like the HIV allegory character who deliberately tries to infect young boys with his disease?

Yeah, it’s a pretty terrifying concept, and a great lesson about how being a victim doesn’t make someone good. Anyone can be evil. In fact, victimization often becomes the SEED of future evil.

What about the constant descriptions of “mannish hands” and general authorial misogyny against women who the reader isn’t supposed to like?

I don’t see how one instance of the phrase “mannish hands” across seven books equates to “constant descriptions”. I can’t say that I liked it or disliked it, because I don’t ever remember reading it. It wasn’t a significant enough detail to remember, just descriptive flavor of what the author was picturing. In retrospect today, yeah, that seems like anti-trans bias subconsciously leaking out, to have a “bad” woman character have masculine qualities. But it definitely doesn’t read that way, on its own.

Did you like how Harry was supposed to be the saviour of magical england from a fascist movement, and yet he’s a moderate liberal who never makes an effort to fundamentally change any of the systems of the world, and who wants Hermione to stop campaigning against slavery because it’s annoying?

Given that the books actually give zero picture of how much magical society has changed, after Voldemort’s death, I don’t see how I can answer that. The only thing we know for sure about the world is that Hogwarts and Platform 9 3/4 still exist. I could give a fuck about what Rowling’s expanded on in interviews and musings on Twitter.

I don’t recall Harry ever once being against SPEW, that was pretty much all Ron, who does eventually change his mind. What Harry DOES have is the fantastic story arc with Kreacher, where he explicitly recognizes how wrong he was to not see the barbarity of the system sooner.

10/min is pretty freakin’ impressive, as far as HMFs go. The one I have planned won’t be hitting that mark until I get Mk5 belts.

The biggest hole in WASM right now is being able to DO anything really useful in it, natively. The only thing you can do natively right now is use the CPU. Can’t manipulate the DOM. Can’t access local storage or cookies or networking APIs, etc. You can call out to arbitrary JS code, but that’s it.

This is great for some of the big JS libraries that have very CPU-heavy workloads they can optimize in WASM and call to from JS. Like frequently parsing and re-parsing HTML. Or doing game physics calculations.

I haven’t heard word one about WHEN any of this will be available. Which is particularly troubling, given how long people have been begging for it.

Of course, none of this stops you from using WASM in the real world, to do quite a lot of things. You’re just gonna have to deal with JS interop, still, do do anything really useful.

I saw the plastic, yeah. Couldn’t tell if the other was caterium or copper. That definitely will give a higher yield.

Nice!

Is that running on just plastic and copper? Intuitively, I would’ve expected you to need more machines than that for 9/min. Or are we heavily overclocking?

This really reads to me like the perspective of a business major whose only concept of productivity is about what looks good on paper. He seems to think it’s a desirable goal for EVERY project to be completed with 0 latency. That’s absurd. If every single incoming requirement is a “top priority, this needs to go out as soon as possible” that’s a management failure. They either need to ACTUALLY prioritize requirements properly, or they need to bring in more people.

For the Chuck and Patty example, he describes Chuck finishing a task and sending it to Patty for review, and Patty not picking it up because she’s “busy.” Busy with what? If this task is the higher priority, why is she not switching to it as soon as it’s ready? Do either Chuck or Patty not know that this task is the current highest priority? Sounds like management failure. Is there not a system in place (whether automatic or not) for notifying people when high priority tasks are assigned? Also sounds like management failure. Is Patty just incapable of switching tasks within 30-60 minutes? She needs to work on her organization skills, or that management isn’t providing sufficient tooling for multitasking.

When a top-priority “this needs to go out ASAP” task is in play on my team, I’m either working on it, or I know it’s coming my way soon, and who it’s coming from, because my Project Lead has already coordinated that among all of us. Because that’s her job.

From the article…

Project A should take around 2 weeks

Project B should take around 2 weeks

That’s 4 weeks to complete them both

But only if they’re done in sequence!

If you try to do them at the same time, with the same team, don’t be surprised if it ends up taking 6 weeks!

Nonsense. If these are both top priorities, and the team has proper leadership, (and the 2 week estimate is actually accurate) 4 weeks is entirely achievable. If these are not top priorities, and the team has other work as well, then yeah, no shit it might be 6 weeks. You can’t just ignore the 2 weeks from Project C if it’s prioritized similarly to A and B. If A and B NEED to go out in 4 weeks, then prioritize them higher, and coordinate your team to make that happen.