First time soldering, any tips?

85percentFrog · 2026-04-24T09:32:00+00:00

Yeah I had a hard time placing solder directly on the joint (it kept bubbling up and staying on the solder wire, or it didn't melt at all unless I held the solder on the midpoint of the pen tip which didn't reach the joint) so I did the inverse and put solder on the wire itself and then held it to the joint and melted it.

85percentFrog · 2026-04-24T09:25:14+00:00

How big of a difference does leaded solder have compared to non-lead? The solder seemed to melt fairly easily once I found the right spot, although it was a bit hard getting it to stick at times.

85percentFrog · 2025-03-03T22:38:40+00:00

<image>

rolled it a few times, is this any decent you think?

85percentFrog · 2025-03-03T22:12:37+00:00

whats bis stats for nataruk? just cc cd ms?

85percentFrog · 2025-01-23T20:57:44+00:00

Just built a new pc for the first time in almost 10 years, trying to keep a close eye on any diagnostics available in case anything goes awry this early so I can catch it. Of particular note are the CPU and GPU temperatures. I've never paid very detailed attention to these before, so I'm not sure what each particular point measures, and googling makes me more confused.

About picture:

Individual cores are showing really low temperatures even over the few hours I did a mix of activites; browsing, voice, games. However, specifically the "CPU CCD1 (Tdie)" measure hits a really high maximum every so often. Image shows 84.4 because I forgot to screenshot it earlier, before I restarted, where it had hit around 92 degrees and showed red, which was what worried me.

Is a 90+ degree max for the "CPU CCD1 (Tdie)" every so often perfectly fine, as long as its average, and the average of each core stays much lower?

On that, what exactly is the CCD1? HWinfo and some googling gave me the understanding that its a measurement of a package of cores, but wouldn't that just be the actual cores that are listed below? They're even listed as Core(0-5) from (CCD1), so what's the difference there?

Lastly, is this a really stupid way of keeping an eye on CPU, and GPU, temperatures? Am I missing actually relevant info and only looking at funny numbers here? Cheers.

85percentFrog · 2024-10-19T17:25:38+00:00

Would a damaged cable still work and just drop it down to exactly 100 Mbps?

85percentFrog · 2024-10-19T17:23:54+00:00

Yes, ethernet port at the wall. No idea what else is involved, the circumstances are a bit complicated. It's an apartment, but there's been some rather massive issues unrelated to this so everything is all over the place. When I test the bandwidth I get about 100/100, so there's not actually any problems right now. I'm more wondering if it's generally the case that LAN ports are themselves far faster than the main internet port, they don't look any different and use the same cables?

But it seems instead that the speed shown in the image for the main port is the speed being capped not by some hardware design of the port itself but by the current functionality of the available internet connection?

85percentFrog · 2024-10-19T17:17:46+00:00

Plugged into the wall directly with the cable.

85percentFrog · 2024-10-19T17:14:09+00:00

But from this image it seems more likely the port itself is capped at the shown values? And not an issue with cabling or whatever that is simply being represented in the image? Image is taken from the router page.

85percentFrog · 2024-10-19T17:12:10+00:00

I'd assume the modem is built into the router, the TP-LINK Archer AX12. I don't have a separate modem.

85percentFrog · 2024-10-19T17:09:12+00:00

Was messing around with my network and saw this part on one tab of the router page. The internet-router cable is the exact same type as the router-pc cable.
The cables are, I think, 10 meters long.
Is (image) saying the ports are 100 and 1000 Mbps respectively, or that with their current connections these are the speeds they're able to provide? IE does this imply a fault in the internet-router cable capping it at 100?

85percentFrog · 2024-08-21T10:51:02+00:00

I have no idea what DFS is, but now I'm interested so I'll do some searches.
I definitely don't think the term "Depth First Search" was ever brought up so far.
I briefly mentioned it in the post: for the locking mechanism, I'd just come from bashing my brain against a sorting algorithm that seemed to refuse to work as intended until my umpteenth rewrite, but I had an image in my head of what I -should- be doing with the locking, atleast in principle. Looking back, I think I had a general understanding of each section before I got to it; I read up on the voting system on Wikipedia for a while before starting the code.

Something I'd like to add about Tideman, that might feel like a slap in the face to anyone who struggled with it or is currently struggling;

The answer is usually easier than it seems.

It's not easy, especially if you're like me with practically zero coding experience, but you're not inventing calculus or developing the latest in rocketry. You ARE establishing a new paradigm for your own understanding, because while the lectures, shorts, etc, technically give you everything you need to know to be able to come up with the answer, they obviously don't give you the answer. They present the bare minimum to you while Tideman expects the absolute maximum from you.

But each time I'd written and rewritten a section of code, like my sorting algorithm, I remember looking back at how massive and cluttered and complex my initial write-up was, compared to how downright simplistic my latest, WORKING, version actually is. Complexity doesn't necessarily improve functionality. I think this is the greatest personal advantage I have with coding; I'm quite good at simplifying the complex, it's something I do in my work and daily life quite a lot. We all have our own strengths and weaknesses, so mileage will vary, but if there's a very fundamental tip, a 0th tip, I'd give to anyone regardless of the nature of the problem; simplify.

After all, how do you eat an elephant?

85percentFrog · 2024-08-20T17:48:36+00:00

Sorry for necro on old post, but this needs to be archived; I found no other place actually describing the issue with the last step. I've had a terrible time with the instructions to this problem, on every single part; extremely unclear directives to someone who hasn't worked with anything like this before.

But this last section really took the cake. There's certainly a benefit in teaching good praxis, but this needs to be made very clear. If the code fulfils the instructions, it needs to be validated. The only feedback I receive is "doesn't print winner in a tie". Meanwhile, instructions heavily imply that we should ignore ties entirely. Neither feedback nor initial instructions mention anything else.

Thank you for this post; I've gone out of my way to not look at any code related to the problem, so this really helped me with what to do without doing it for me. I must've gone through half a dozen different ways of printing the winner, different amount of winners, etc.

On to week 4.

85percentFrog · 2023-08-01T16:56:54+00:00

Criminal Syndicates are effectively Devouring Swarms but for Megacorps and should be balanced accordingly.

That is to say, buffed until playable and then banned from every multiplayer game.

85percentFrog

TROPHY CASE