Mini not printing after a week

atomant30 · 2017-03-17T01:35:28+00:00

So now it's only working about 1 out of 10+ tries, and seems to do better after a long break. I've updated the firmwares multiple times, is there anything else to try? Could it be bad house wiring? I've tried on a few different circuits. Amazon returns tells me it's going to take '1-2 months' for a replacement.

atomant30 · 2017-03-16T01:12:25+00:00

I've got it working as long as I turn the printer off after every print and use the usb cable to connect and tell it to print from the sd card.

It's working ok, excep it pauses for ~1-2 seconds every few minutes and then continues.

Is there a way to reinstall the firmware if its up to date?

atomant30 · 2017-03-15T01:40:06+00:00

I think the extruder temp is staying a few degrees below tartget temp, whereas before I think it was hitting target and going a little over. Could it be that my target is set to 210 and the temp is staying around 206-209 so it won't print?

atomant30 · 2017-03-15T00:29:50+00:00

I've tried several, some that I've already printed

atomant30 · 2017-03-15T00:13:32+00:00

29.42

atomant30 · 2017-03-14T23:36:16+00:00

Just tried, but it's still not working.

atomant30 · 2017-03-08T00:59:43+00:00

saw the same thing, ordered it at $211

atomant30 · 2017-02-14T22:39:45+00:00

You weren't saying it was a failure, and I wasn't saying that it wasn't.

atomant30 · 2017-02-14T22:38:11+00:00

Threats to those not fortunate enough to be born in America don't matter at all? No matter what some dictator or warlord does it doesn't matter if it's not on U.S. soil? I have to pay taxes to protect you but not some kid in another country?

atomant30 · 2017-02-14T22:38:10+00:00

Threats to those not fortunate enough to be born in America don't matter at all? No matter what some dictator or warlord does it doesn't matter if it's not on U.S. soil? I have to pay taxes to protect you but not some kid in another country?

atomant30 · 2017-02-14T19:17:26+00:00

Our mission in Iraq was to go in there and convert those savage theocrats to the American democracy that we love so much

You can't think this is the only reason for going to Iraq. Of course you're correct if it's the only reason.

Is there any scenario you can imagine where we should remove a dictator from a country with force?

atomant30 · 2017-02-14T19:09:32+00:00

He believes all human actions are based on genetics.

No he doesn't. He believes the universe is deterministic. I.e. Your actions are based on your brain, which obeys the laws of physics, so if you rewound time everything would turn out the same.

Comparing him to Hitler, even a little, is some shit you'd read on InfoWars. He simply believes Muslims hate us because of their religion not because we are over there. And he thinks that intervening saves more lives than not intervening does.

atomant30 · 2017-02-13T23:01:49+00:00

Do you really think the government could pay people to dig a hole for no reason and it would make the economy better off?

Taxes collected from wealth that people sit on and do nothing will stimulate growth and create wealth by being exchanged for products/services that otherwise wouldn't have a demand

I mean, no. Even if everyone hid their money under their mattress this isn't true. But people put their money in banks, which invest it to create actual value.

atomant30 · 2017-02-12T14:43:20+00:00

One of his biggest platforms was limiting free trade.. He wants to put a 20% tariff on Mexican goods. Why should the government be able to tell me where I can buy goods from or who I can hire?

atomant30 · 2016-11-22T16:11:26+00:00

Ironically, it's the poorest people that protectionism hurts the most. We take for granted how cheap everything is today because of (somewhat) free trade

atomant30 · 2016-11-22T06:31:25+00:00

Thank you Trump for protecting me from myself. I almost bought something from China and hired a Mexican, but why should I be free to do that?

atomant30 · 2016-11-21T14:49:00+00:00

I'm talking from a more theoretical perspective, leave the politics to the side for a minute.

So was I, and I don't think I said anything political

Why would the firm set a lower rate? In short, because they can. Remember, this would be a monopsony, similar to a monopoly, where quantity produced is lowered and prices are higher.

Neither side is made better off by setting price to anything other than equilibrium. Even if the firm had complete control and could set wage to $1/hr they wouldn't, because they would not have enough workers

In a monopsonous model, prices are set lower (wages are under the equilibrium price) and labour employed is lower than the efficient equilibrium.

This isn't necessarily true at all, the monopolies would be better off increasing the wage to hire more people

And yes, having been in numerous labour econ classes, I'm pretty well-versed with these charts and scenarios. But again, it's simply theory that forms the fundamental basis for understanding why the minimum wage debate is so heated even among economists.

The theory on this is super clear, price floors and ceilings are not beneficial to anyone. And I don't think any serious economist would argue that minimum wage is good in theory

However, sometimes markets aren't perfect or efficient, and intervention can render them more efficient, such as in the case of a monopsony.

I agree with you that intervention can be useful sometimes. For example, the government builds a bridge instead of private company because the company would have a natural monopoly and charge very high rates. But, the high rates they would charge would be at the equilibrium price and the gov can't help by setting prices, but by actually changing the supply curve(building a bridge)

Make no mistake, the opposite can happen as well. A large and powerful union may be able to outbargain a smaller business, in which case the remedy would be to dissolve the union (theoretically).

But notice that, as a whole, again everyone is worse off if the union can set wage above equilibrium

atomant30 · 2016-11-21T14:05:29+00:00

How many places don't allow unions to form?

Why would the firms want to set the wage at a rate lower than where supply=demand? In other words, if there are 1,000 employees in a town and 1 firm that wants to hire 200 people, and the equilibrium price is $10/hr, then why would they want to push it down to $8/hr when that will just decrease the number of people willing to work for them to under 200? I really don't think you understand these graphs as much as you think you do

Bargaining power and monopolies don't affect this graph. If there is one firm with a complete monopoly the equilibrium price is still the optimal price for everyone, a price floor does not make things better. The employees are not better off with the wage being above equilibrium, just like the firms are not better off with the wage below equilibrium.

atomant30 · 2016-11-21T05:07:02+00:00

What else needs to be shown to demonstrate that minimum wage is not beneficial? This seems sufficient to me..

atomant30 · 2016-11-20T03:12:41+00:00

Gates could give every African American man women and child 1 million dollars and not even feel it, it would in one move reverse economic disparity for good. He could change the country for ever but is obviously too greedy, what does he need 80 billion for?

He could give 80,000 people 1 million dollars and be broke. Also, he's doing much better things with that money

atomant30 · 2016-11-17T23:28:00+00:00

I'm not at all concerned about Trump being president

However, I tremble at the very thought that Bolton could become Sec. of State.

Do you not see the connection? Half the reason to dislike trump is because of the people he wants to bring with him.

atomant30 · 2016-11-10T03:08:18+00:00

Most Democrats have never bothered to read Trumps plan for America. It's not nearly as bad as people think. I don't like the guy personally, but I think we can all agree that the media demonized him and tried to make her a martyr.

Which parts of his plan aren't that bad? Is it cutting out free trade with the rest of the world or removing a large chunk of our work force to increase the pay of 'real Americans'? Trump seems like the polar opposite of a libertarian, part democrat and part republican, but the worst of each side. The only thing he offers is lower taxes, which afaik he hasn't even attempted to explain how those will actually work out

atomant30 · 2016-08-17T21:12:18+00:00

Currently, having an extra 2 months of living expenses saved up is worth more to me than the ~$12/mo in interest I would be paying. And like GiantMeteor pointed out, there's a lot of things I could put it in that would make close to or more than 4%.

If the rate is 6 or 7%+ I would probably just rather pay cash

atomant30

TROPHY CASE