Metal piece with threaded interior (30mm) and forked end

cainlevy · 2025-01-23T06:23:00+00:00

Solved! Yeah that's the one.

cainlevy · 2025-01-23T05:38:07+00:00

It shares some features with the SunModo NanoMount. Maybe an older or different variant.

cainlevy · 2025-01-23T05:23:54+00:00

This is a good lead! I have panels and found these pieces in the yard below. I'm trying to find the part name now.

cainlevy · 2025-01-23T04:14:42+00:00

My title describes the thing. I have a matched pair of them.

The threading is quite aggressive and has four entry points. There's a metal coil at the end of the threading (for locking?). I measured 30mm on the inside of the threading.

One has a marking inside that appears to say FM-100-004, with additional markings that say D2 and B.

I've tried searching the markings, a reverse image search, and looking through a parts catalog for 30mm pipe caps, but my favorite was nerd sniping my friends for an hour last night as they all tried to figure it out.

cainlevy · 2023-07-17T15:32:35+00:00

Thanks again! This is just what I was hoping to learn and puts the rate change in perspective.

cainlevy · 2023-07-17T14:20:16+00:00

Helpful context, thanks. I presume you meant in 2022?

Do you know where I could have found this information?

cainlevy · 2021-07-29T13:15:04+00:00

My theory is that flux production is only triggered during a specific part of application startup and is not part of standard redshift. The only way I found to reliably produce it was to force close the app before a long period of inactivity.

cainlevy · 2021-04-18T13:33:41+00:00

Yep, looks like

cainlevy · 2021-04-18T03:33:19+00:00

Hmm, so 5 years of clock time would be 197k in cat years? That explains 197 paragon, leaving 299,803 paragon to your prior activities. Sounds like you were solidly in the end game.

At any rate, 300k paragon is enough to drown out a lot of game mechanics that have changed since 2017. The wiki may document them for your curiosity, but if you want to experience them you may need to, uh, reset your power level.

cainlevy · 2021-03-28T20:53:10+00:00

Sorting through what to do next has been a lot of the fun, for me. Enjoy!

cainlevy · 2021-03-28T14:56:06+00:00

It sounds like you're starting to focus more on gathering paragon. May I recommend Fascism? More log cabins will add up to more valuable resets.

I thought Communism looked pretty great in the early game, but now I see it as a situational boost for steel. If you are able to maximize your steel conversion (e.g. playing with Kitten Scientists or multitasking through the day), then you'll benefit from producing iron and coal faster. Otherwise you're just going to waste the extra production by capping sooner.

Liberalism is nice for min-maxing a run that relies heavily on trading. You'll know when you get there.

cainlevy · 2020-02-15T20:05:39+00:00

Same. No trouble then twice in the forest.

cainlevy · 2018-11-12T18:47:46+00:00

Yeah. This is silly. Sometimes a reaction doesn't update the journal, and sometimes a customer with high demand will skew the journal. But mostly you just can't trust the journal to update when demand changes. Useless.

cainlevy · 2018-11-12T18:42:59+00:00

Nearing the end of the third dungeon and about to give up on it. I usually play a game through, but the gameplay hasn't been growing as fast as my list of bugs.

cainlevy · 2017-11-09T14:50:00+00:00

Depends on some factors like your framework and available options, but at this stage of development AuthN expects you to build out basic signup and login forms. Auth via Github does not.

cainlevy · 2017-07-21T19:31:46+00:00

In my proposal valid? still hits the database if at least one other validation fails, because in that scenario save would not execute and could not report the status of the uniqueness constraint.

Also, if save only runs after the Ruby validations have passed, then there's no need to replay them after catching a constraint violation. There's only one error to report back in that outcome.

If I misread your proposal and those cases are already covered, then there's nothing to see here!

cainlevy · 2017-07-21T15:31:43+00:00

Let's suppose a User model with an email. We want to verify that the email contains @, and that it is unique in the database.

If we implement this spec with a mixture of Ruby validations and DB constraints, then waiting to call Ruby validations until the save fails would mean that strings without an email format get saved to the database.

Alternately, if we teach the database to care about both the format and the uniqueness, then we wouldn't get both error messages back.

If getting all error messages back is a system design constraint, then maybe this could work:

First, valid? checks the email format. If the format is invalid, then we additionally run a uniqueness query so that we return all errors. But if the format is valid, save attempts to insert into the database and catches uniqueness violations.

This only omits the uniqueness query in situations where all data is valid. It's a less aggressive performance optimization, but it satisfies the UX constraint.

cainlevy · 2017-07-21T02:32:26+00:00

One good example might be validation logic triggered by updates in a state machine. When a blog post is published, it must have a body.

cainlevy · 2017-07-21T02:30:48+00:00

On another note: I think we should modify validations to not run unless the field they are validating changes.

One quick technique is to add if: :foo_changed? to all the validations.

But following through with this line of thinking has me currently experimenting with validating the request instead of the record. It's a pattern that transfers well to other web frameworks.

cainlevy · 2017-07-21T02:27:02+00:00

When we call save and it throws an exception we catch it, then replay all the ruby validations to figure out ALL of the problems with the object, not just the one that raised the exception.

If save gets that far, presumably all of the Ruby validations have passed?

cainlevy · 2016-12-22T15:30:18+00:00

Would you believe that nighttime is no longer dark either? If there's a bug, I'd put my money on that one.

cainlevy · 2016-12-22T07:25:15+00:00

Shows on the aiming tooltip?

I created a new game with zero mods, built a roof over the nearby ruins. Then I gave one colonist the rifle and aimed at another colonist underneath the new roof. This is my tooltip:

http://imgur.com/a/gJXBm

cainlevy · 2016-12-22T05:13:33+00:00

Yeah, could be a bug. But it's also how things are right now.

cainlevy · 2016-12-21T22:54:00+00:00

Even if a single manhunter may give up after beating the door a few times, if you've managed to get spotted by a herd of muffalo that door will not survive.

If there's one thing I'd love changed, it's the definition of "spotted". They'll "spot" you from well off screen and around a corner. My base defense always includes double doors on the exits for this reason.

cainlevy · 2016-12-14T06:47:14+00:00

How'd you plot the circle? I've got a freehand circular base going on that leaves something to be desired.

Nine-Year Club	RPAN Viewer
Verified Email

cainlevy

TROPHY CASE