I haven’t used ondsel myself but can’t you configure modernui to look similar?

I think if you install enough plugins you can get that similar experience from freecad

Yes, it can be pretty impressively good. It ‘just works’ and can print at amazing speeds. Note the small bed size and lack of ability to tinker though.

Ender 3 IMO is mostly obsolete now, nowadays you can easily get something for a similar price with better features across the board. Yes, an ender 3 will work, but why get one if you can get something better for the same price? (video on the topic)

Do not get a base ender 3. Get something direct drive with input shaping and auto bed leveling if you can. If you want a printer that “just works” where (after some setup) you can just press a button and get a print, auto bed leveling is a must-have IMO. I don’t have one myself, but I think the neptune 4 for ~$220 is a good option, anything else with similar specs would also work. Look at some reviews on youtube.

If you install it locally, it will be as secure as any other thing you do on your computer.

Birds are dinosaurs in the way tomatoes are fruits

after being delayed for so long, while costing significantly more than SpaceX’s offering, this is really just a very bad look

and, its coming at a time when everyone is already suspicious of Boeing from their aircraft manufacturing practices

Are a wiki and a discord mutually exclusive? They seem to fill very different roles.

Rotated, not flipped.

The current standard seems to be an upside down 2 and 3

In every base, a 1 in the second spot corresponds to the name of the base.

Time machines don’t exist and (as far as we know) cannot exist. Therefore, we can say they work however we want. If you can travel back in time, surely you can do that while remaining close to an arbitrary point of reference.

It had no payload on any of its flights. Rockets that have enough time/money put into development to have a reasonable expectation of working on the first try (and don’t have such an ambitious design) normally launch with a payload on their first flight. Sometimes, even those fail on the first few flights. Having the first few of a new rocket design fail before reliability is achieved is common (ex: Astra) and SpaceX’s other rocket, the Falcon 9, is known as the most reliable rocket, I even suspect it achieves landings more often lately than most others do launches.

Starship’s last launch went decently well, reaching orbit (which is as far as most rockets go!) but failing during reentry. It is also supposed to be the rocket with the largest payload capacity to low earth orbit, with 100-150 tons when reused and likely 200-300 when expended.

I think everything works in windows but the old windows media player. You can test it by setting the time in a windows VM to 2039.

The funny thing is that NASA contracts the same companies as the military anyways (in the modern day, at least)

NASA Prime Contractors Aerojet Rocketdyne, Boeing, Jacobs, Lockheed Martin, and Northrop Grumman currently have over 3,800 suppliers contributing to Orion, the SLS rocket, and the lunar spaceport at Kennedy.

It gets slightly less funny when you realize that that’s the reason Nasa’s latest rocket made primarily from Space Shuttle parts is way more expensive than basically any commercial rocket. Essentially Congress only agrees to fund NASA if it means they also get to fund these military contractors.

not peer reviewed, so doesn’t really count.

I heard that it was just the angle of the wings redirecting the air downwards as reaction mass, like how a rocket engine shoots air downwards.