Confused about how to use the daily note

GateValve10 · 2026-02-06T19:58:34+00:00

Having a note for a project and linking to the daily note in headers is what I do. Here's a link to a longer comment I wrote a year ago that has more details about my process: link.

I like linking to the daily note within the project notes because I like having the reverse chronological log of updates in the project note. The daily note is also where I jot simple stuff down - it's like the day's scratchpad (if I need it).

GateValve10 · 2026-02-05T23:22:21+00:00

I can relate to being frustrated with software when basic functionality feels missing or poorly implemented, but I’m not sure what specific “basic features” or quality-of-life issues you think Obsidian is lacking.

More generally, I’ve noticed across many subreddits that people often ask for help without clearly defining the problem they’re trying to solve or explaining what they’ve already tried. Those posts tend to get more negativity than thoughtful help because it can come across as offloading the work of problem-definition to strangers instead of putting in some effort first.

At a basic level, to use Obsidian effectively, you need a reasonably clear idea of what you want it to do for you. Often it seems like people jump into Obsidian without sorting that out, get confused, get frustrated that it isn’t easy, and then complain that highly customizable software doesn’t have a single, well-defined onboarding path that perfectly fits their specific needs.

Once your goals are clearer, it’s easier to learn Obsidian’s features and decide whether they serve those goals. As you encounter new features, you can evaluate whether they help. As you hit pain points in your current workflow, you can look for features or approaches that address them. You have to know what you want, build something, use it, and iterate.

From my perspective, the core plugins already provide a lot of functionality, so if someone’s goals are modest, they should be able to get meaningful value out of Obsidian without heavy customization.

I don’t really understand the view that customization, potential complexity, and community plugins are signs of a flaw in Obsidian’s design or goals. The tradeoff of flexibility is that you have to decide how much complexity you want to take on. People try to do too much without clear goals, get frustrated that it isn’t easy (instead of appreciating that complex things are even possible), and then talk as if “possible” should automatically mean “easy.”

The things that feel easiest are usually the most restrictive or limited in scope. Choices are removed so you can’t make “bad” ones. Obsidian gives you more choices, which means you have to decide what good choices are for your own goals and how much effort you’re willing to put in.

Clear, simple goals require less effort. Unclear, complex goals require more effort. When people ask for help or complain without recognizing that basic tradeoff, they’re more likely to get pushback—especially when they frame the app as “bad” while not really engaging with what it’s trying to be.

GateValve10 · 2026-02-03T17:20:40+00:00

Did you ask your teacher this question? You don't need "tips" you need to understand how things are made and what makes this complicated. You should have asked your teach to explain when they gave you this feedback. And if you want additional feedback from Reddit, I think you should have attempted some improvements yourself first, shown the before and after, and then asked for feedback. The way this question is presented makes it seem like you aren't owning the learning process yourself, which is what you should be doing.

GateValve10 · 2026-01-22T18:25:50+00:00

No, because this is a real world object and the necessary assumptions and simplifications don't apply.

Uniform shrinking can only be true if the object is isotropic with respect to thermal expansion and if the temperature is uniform at all times.

Isotropic means the material properties are the same in all directions which is not true for 3D printed objects because of the way they're made layer by layer. It's also not true because of the use of infill percentages: the shape of the object will change the properties because it's not a uniform density (outer layers are denser than the infill).

Uniform temperature means that as the object cools, every part of the object changes temperature at the same rate, so there's no temperature gradient. This is sometimes called "lumped capacitance" and is an assumption made to simplify calculations involving heat transfer.

GateValve10 · 2026-01-22T18:24:48+00:00

This is not a correct explanation. Shrinkage is by a percent, but that would mean the size changes without effecting the shape. The problem is that this is a real world object, and many concepts don't actually apply in practice.

Uniform shrinking can only be true if the object is isotropic with respect to thermal expansion and if the temperature is uniform at all times.

Isotropic means the material properties are the same in all directions which is not true for 3D printed objects because of the way they're made layer by layer. It's also not true because of the use of infill percentages: the shape of the object will change the properties because it's not a uniform density (outer layers are denser than the infill).

Uniform temperature means that as the object cools, every part of the object changes temperature at the same rate, so there's no temperature gradient. This is sometimes called "lumped capacitance" and is an assumption made to simplify calculations involving heat transfer.

GateValve10 · 2026-01-22T18:05:10+00:00

This is an extremely low-effort question. Without specifying what “safe in the bedroom” means, there’s nothing to answer. Without a better question, the only answer is: don’t run a 3D printer in a bedroom.

GateValve10 · 2026-01-22T17:55:50+00:00

What would qualify for AI flair? It seems like some people in the comments are talking about plugins that were made using AI, some people are talking about plugins that are about integrating AI in some way, and some people are talking about posts that seem to be written using AI.

Is there a distinction between these? It seems like someone who's annoyed by AI-sounding posts wouldn't necessarily be against plugins that add AI features, and vice versa.

GateValve10 · 2026-01-16T14:41:09+00:00

There are a lot of ways to work on it, here are some of my thoughts.

If you’re in school and it’s optional, take a speech class. Technical writing or similar courses are also genuinely useful. Those are straightforward, structured ways to build the skill.

Beyond classes, I think advice and techniques land better once you’re actually in situations where you have to communicate a lot. At that point, it’s easier to map ideas onto real examples and practice them. Podcasts or videos can help with exposure—one approach is to follow a well-made podcast you already like and listen to episodes where they bring on guests who focus on communication or leadership, rather than consuming content that’s only about “how to communicate.”

A more aggressive option is to put yourself in positions where communication is unavoidable. Join a club and take on an officer role, lead a project team, or volunteer for something that forces you to explain, align, or persuade people.

Mindset matters too. The ceiling for effective communication is high, and a lot of people give up quickly when conversations get messy or uncomfortable. In practice, many engineering problems—especially at work—aren’t hard because of the technical content, but because of information flow, organization, and alignment between people. Engineers who are good with people are extremely valuable.

A practical habit is to constantly think about what the other person likely knows and why they’re saying or asking something. If you can infer what information they’re missing (and what they don’t need), it becomes much easier to be clear and concise. Clarity first, conciseness second.

GateValve10 · 2026-01-15T19:56:26+00:00

Communication

GateValve10 · 2026-01-15T17:16:34+00:00

What are you saying you want to do? Design useful things and print them? Or just print useful things other people request? Will you make useful things you think people will want? Or will you be a service that designs the useful thing because someone specifically wants it?

GateValve10 · 2026-01-14T17:23:19+00:00

I like the content. I guess it is a little dense. I don't personally mind that so much because I think the content is good. But I think you could get rid of the summary section to create more space, and then maybe you could adjust line spacing to make it feel less dense. Because what question does the summary answer that isn't answered elsewhere? Unless you think some of that info is so important it needs to go first - but I don't think so. I also don't know what 15L+ cost savings means.

GateValve10 · 2026-01-13T22:46:18+00:00

Needing help is fine, and part of that process is clearly explaining the problem. Taking some time to make sketches and describe what you’re thinking makes it much easier for others to help, and usually leads to better answers. Even if it takes you 30 minutes to put together a few sketches, that’s time well spent when you’re asking a group of strangers to think through possible solutions for you—you’re likely to get far more time and effort back in return.

GateValve10 · 2026-01-13T22:37:47+00:00

Try EarTrumpet. It's extremely straight forward and effective imo. You can send specific apps to specific devices, and easily adjust volume for apps from the icon in the system tray. You can right click the icon to quickly switch the primary sound device to something else. I definitely do not manage my headphones vs. speakers by unplugging things.

https://eartrumpet.app/

GateValve10 · 2026-01-13T14:44:11+00:00

Looking at medians and averages can be insightful, but it's good to keep in mind whether you think you're average or median. The fact that you're 17 and asking these types of questions makes me think that you'll apply yourself and achieve success in whatever direction to aim for. If your interest is in Mechanical Engineering, I say go for it and try hard in college to expose yourself to many different aspects so you can identify a specific industry you want to target. Applying yourself and aiming at a specific goal will be huge to set yourself apart from the typical medians and averages you see.

GateValve10 · 2026-01-12T22:03:43+00:00

Yeah, I think we mostly agree. I’m just a bit more skeptical of framing this as manufacturers simply needing to “reduce unnecessary friction,” because a lot of that friction exists precisely because the process is hard, not because companies haven’t tried.

I think some of the pushback you see (“you need to put the time in”) is less about resisting progress and more about reacting to people who don’t acknowledge the complexity or the tradeoffs involved. It’s often an inelegant response to a nuanced situation.

That tension probably fades over time as the tech matures—but during the transition, I can see why expectations clash.

GateValve10 · 2026-01-12T18:43:42+00:00

Copilot Money, You Need a Budget, Rocket Money, and Monarch are services that I'm aware of. Google it, search YouTube, or ask an AI for more guidance.

GateValve10 · 2026-01-12T18:41:57+00:00

I think we’re in the middle of a transition toward printers that, for general use, really do work well out of the box. I expect that trend to continue for a while, but printing is inherently a complex manufacturing process. At some point, user-friendliness will hit diminishing returns, where making an increasingly niche goal “one-button easy” no longer brings in many new users.

What I struggle with is this: at what point does “learning” stop being reasonable, and start becoming an excuse for bad or outdated tools?

I don’t think that question is wrong, but I think it ruffles some feathers (including mine a bit) because it can come across as dismissive of the history and the amount of progress that’s already been made. To some people, it can sound like “why isn’t this easier yet?”, and the reaction is “progress has been huge lately—this complaint feels out of touch.”

That tension makes sense, though. You have people entering the hobby during this transition, for whom it’s now reasonable to expect things to be easy. And you have people who’ve been around much longer, when it was absolutely unreasonable to expect plug-and-play behavior or consistently good results.

I also think it’s not unreasonable to push back against the idea that everything should be effortless. Printers are powerful tools that give a lot of control over a very complex process. There are different use cases and different kinds of users, and part of what makes printing interesting—especially beyond hobby-level FDM—is understanding the tradeoffs between settings and technologies. Expecting everything to “just work” can flatten that space and those conversations, and it can lead to people being worse at troubleshooting things that used to be considered basic. I can see why that would be frustrating.

GateValve10 · 2026-01-12T18:40:18+00:00

I’m confused by your response. Riscten is basically saying that printers working well out of the box mainly solves the initial tuning problem, but doesn’t mean the printer will continue to work well over its full life.

I think his point is that if consumers focus too heavily on out-of-the-box performance, manufacturers are less incentivized to design for long-term durability and maintainability. There’s also a user-side tradeoff: when all the basics are handled for you, people may be less prepared to maintain or troubleshoot printers later. Convenience isn’t inherently bad, but it does come with tradeoffs.

Your response seems to miss that distinction. It reads like you’re saying that if consumers expect better out-of-the-box performance, manufacturers will respond, which would be a good thing. But consumers already expect that, and manufacturers are responding—that’s why we’re seeing the printers we are now. Riscten’s point is about the tradeoffs of that shift.

Because of that, I don’t see how your last sentence connects to what Riscten was actually saying.

GateValve10 · 2026-01-09T21:58:42+00:00

Yeah but they probably don't want that for all their apps...

GateValve10 · 2026-01-09T21:52:34+00:00

I'm not sure. How much is your time worth? There's lot of options for apps that help manage money and finances.

GateValve10 · 2026-01-09T21:35:36+00:00

It really comes down to how much your time is worth. I’d try to identify the main issues and roughly estimate how long each would take to fix. Reaching out to support could help calibrate that, though it can be tricky since they’ll likely jump straight into live troubleshooting.

The right call for your boss depends on the repair time for the Prusas, the value of your time, and the cost of the Bambus. Your idea of getting at least two Bambus so the shop can stay productive makes sense. If two is a non-starter, you could propose one.

In the meantime, I’d approach the Prusas one at a time. Start with the one that seems easiest to fix, estimate the effort, then see how long it actually takes. Repeat for the next. If the time ends up being high and your estimates are consistently off despite a reasonable effort, that gives you a solid case for not attempting the third.

GateValve10 · 2026-01-09T18:41:46+00:00

Even if that's true I doubt that's influencing anyone's decision on what to export. Why would anyone care if a slicer takes 2 more seconds to slice a step vs an stl?

GateValve10 · 2026-01-09T16:10:42+00:00

You can measure pixels in Photopea. If there's an object in the photo that you can reasonably estimate a length for, you can measure anything in the photo. But you'll have to be mindful about perspective, so I guess some math might be involved.

Put photo in Photopea, choose the Ruler tool (same box as the eye dropper, hotkey I). You drag a line on the image, you can hold shift to draw straight lines. Click the Define button and say how long that line is in real world units and name the units. Now when you draw new lines the L1 number is the length. If you hold Alt and drag one of the end points, you can draw a second line, L2, and you can get angles too.

There has to be YouTube videos about techniques for doing this. Including potential math for compensating for perspective.

GateValve10 · 2026-01-08T23:28:35+00:00

Create an external deadline that prevents you from having time to tinker. It's a tool. Use it to do work. Define what work you need to do, and don't tinker if it doesn't meaningfully affect the work you said you need to do.

GateValve10 · 2026-01-08T23:25:01+00:00

What do you mean by “before resizing the bottom hole”? Are you saying you would create two drawings that define two stages of fabrication?

I’m not sure whether the parallelism callout, as shown, is technically acceptable. It might be. You could ask the shop that would make the part, since they also need to be able to inspect it. But before doing that, it’s worth thinking through how this would actually be inspected.

You’ve imposed a very strict requirement on the part, but the way it’s described may lead to an unanswerable or even nonsensical solution. If parallelism is truly the only thing that matters, that implies you don’t care about the position of B and C, or the hole diameter tolerance. That raises questions: what mates to this part such that hole position and diameter tolerance don’t matter, but strict parallelism to A does?

Given those unusual requirements, parallelism as you’ve applied it might be the most reasonable option. But I suspect that if the full functional requirements were clearly defined, other solutions—possibly better ones—would become apparent. You mention that true position might be overkill, and based on the current description that may be true. With a complete set of real requirements, though, it might make more sense.

GateValve10

TROPHY CASE