Search
589 results for “orangeacme”
-
-
@orangeacme I could not find any specifics on print speed other than the 500 mm/s in the datasheet, in videos they are printing way slower, so I guess it's the max travel speed.
I set up a printer in Prusa Slicer, multiplied the speeds and extrusion widths.
Using 0.3 mm layer height (seen in some videos) it would take around 16 days.
Using 1.3 mm layer height (maximum from specs) it'd take only about 3 days.
That's still a lot!
-
The way you are talking — I suspect you didn't #finger see when it was popular —
(Maybe you were too young. Or you are old enough, but just didn't get exposed to it for some reason.)
So — I can add some information — as not only was I on the Internet when #fingerProtocol was popular — I was a heavy finger user back in the 1990s —
-
One big difference between #finger and #webFinger is —
The output from a #fingerProtocol response is human-legible.
The output from a WebFinger response is — NOT human-legible.
The output from a WebFinger response is — programmer-legible and machine-legible (but not human legible).
-
Some other relevant tags for your thread:
https://fosstodon.org/@orangeacme/109483350342825311
#finger #fingerHole #fingerProtocol #fingerverse
-
#finger has an origin at least going back to 1971.
#IETF #RFC742 was written to document the existing #fingerProtocol , as it was (implicitly) defined by software.
I.e., finger had been around and was evolving AT LEAST 6 years before RFC-742 was published.
-
Remember mobile-friendly m.example.com websites?
-
Enjoyed ComicCon London as ever. Why can’t London be as colourful and fantastical the rest of the year too?
-
Snagged an early #perfnow ticket 🥳 . See you in Amsterdam in November!
-
There’s something about machines with a couch, Cray 1-A from the year I was born
-
The new stable version of rclone (a command-line program to manage files on cloud storage) is out, including a few of my contributions: https://rclone.org/changelog/#v1-74-0-2026-05-01
#rclone -
It was great to meet everyone at performance.now() in Amsterdam last week. Also Stroopwafel.
#perfnow -
The most optimistic take on the future of the web at #perfnow is that we should make the web more delightful
-
Yay on a Eurostar train to Amsterdam for #perfnow. I’m wearing a red Fastly hoodie. Come say hi!
-
This morning I spent some time speeding up my WebPageTest Uncompressed JavaScript bytes per character web performance metric tool and migrated it away from Glitch to https://javascript-bytes-per-character.astray.com/
It calculates something like: "According to this WebPageTest run, https://www.javascript.com/ requires 2,190,868 bytes of JavaScript to show 2,003 characters of text on the page. That's 1,093.8 JavaScript bytes per character."
#webPerf #webPageTest -
This morning I spent some time speeding up my WebPageTest Uncompressed JavaScript bytes per character web performance metric tool and migrated it away from Glitch to https://javascript-bytes-per-character.astray.com/
It calculates something like: "According to this WebPageTest run, https://www.javascript.com/ requires 2,190,868 bytes of JavaScript to show 2,003 characters of text on the page. That's 1,093.8 JavaScript bytes per character."
#webPerf #webPageTest -
This morning I spent some time speeding up my WebPageTest Uncompressed JavaScript bytes per character web performance metric tool and migrated it away from Glitch to https://javascript-bytes-per-character.astray.com/
It calculates something like: "According to this WebPageTest run, https://www.javascript.com/ requires 2,190,868 bytes of JavaScript to show 2,003 characters of text on the page. That's 1,093.8 JavaScript bytes per character."
#webPerf #webPageTest -
This morning I spent some time speeding up my WebPageTest Uncompressed JavaScript bytes per character web performance metric tool and migrated it away from Glitch to https://javascript-bytes-per-character.astray.com/
It calculates something like: "According to this WebPageTest run, https://www.javascript.com/ requires 2,190,868 bytes of JavaScript to show 2,003 characters of text on the page. That's 1,093.8 JavaScript bytes per character."
#webPerf #webPageTest -
This morning I spent some time speeding up my WebPageTest Uncompressed JavaScript bytes per character web performance metric tool and migrated it away from Glitch to https://javascript-bytes-per-character.astray.com/
It calculates something like: "According to this WebPageTest run, https://www.javascript.com/ requires 2,190,868 bytes of JavaScript to show 2,003 characters of text on the page. That's 1,093.8 JavaScript bytes per character."
#webPerf #webPageTest -
What are the longest HTTP header names and values? I dug into the HTTP Archive to find out: https://www.fastly.com/blog/the-lengthiest-http-headers #http #webperf #httpArchive
-
I have finally rested after attending performance.now(), _the_ web performance conference. It was great to meet so many like-minded people, although I do wonder why there aren't more web performance events.
I have a long list of items to dig into.
Thanks to the organisers, speakers and attendees!
#webPerf #perfNow -
How have I never been to the State of the Browser conference before? I attended for the first time on Saturday and loved every talk, from Web Components, Web MIDI, standards processes and browser monopolies. Thanks all! #SotB2024
-
I remember when shiny new JPEG 2000 was going to replace the legacy JPEG format... It didn't happen and on the web only Safari ever supported it https://caniuse.com/jpeg2000
... until now https://webkit.org/blog/15443/news-from-wwdc24-webkit-in-safari-18-beta/:
"WebKit for Safari 18 beta removes support for the JPEG2000 image format. Safari was the only browser to ever provide support."
It's pretty rare to remove support for a format on the web.
#WebPerf #jpeg2000 -
I remember when shiny new JPEG 2000 was going to replace the legacy JPEG format... It didn't happen and on the web only Safari ever supported it https://caniuse.com/jpeg2000
... until now https://webkit.org/blog/15443/news-from-wwdc24-webkit-in-safari-18-beta/:
"WebKit for Safari 18 beta removes support for the JPEG2000 image format. Safari was the only browser to ever provide support."
It's pretty rare to remove support for a format on the web.
#WebPerf #jpeg2000 -
I remember when shiny new JPEG 2000 was going to replace the legacy JPEG format... It didn't happen and on the web only Safari ever supported it https://caniuse.com/jpeg2000
... until now https://webkit.org/blog/15443/news-from-wwdc24-webkit-in-safari-18-beta/:
"WebKit for Safari 18 beta removes support for the JPEG2000 image format. Safari was the only browser to ever provide support."
It's pretty rare to remove support for a format on the web.
#WebPerf #jpeg2000 -
I remember when shiny new JPEG 2000 was going to replace the legacy JPEG format... It didn't happen and on the web only Safari ever supported it https://caniuse.com/jpeg2000
... until now https://webkit.org/blog/15443/news-from-wwdc24-webkit-in-safari-18-beta/:
"WebKit for Safari 18 beta removes support for the JPEG2000 image format. Safari was the only browser to ever provide support."
It's pretty rare to remove support for a format on the web.
#WebPerf #jpeg2000 -
There's a large overlap between the sustainable web and web performance, so I wrote "5 tips for creating speedier, more sustainable websites with Fastly": https://www.fastly.com/blog/5-tips-for-creating-speedier-more-sustainable-websites-with-fastly
#webPerf #sustyweb -
I love that the Web Sustainability Guidelines provide the guidelines in JSON format https://github.com/w3c/sustyweb/blob/main/guidelines.json so I can transform parts of it to fit my needs
#sustyweb