I want to build a simple computer desk with a traditional timber framed style. I've got some overall dimensions laid out as to the finished size of the desk, but I'm stuck now on sizing the mortice & tenon joints that will hold everything together. Sticking with the traditional methodology, I'd like to avoid using any metal fasteners if possible, and I'm willing to go the extra mile to accomplish it. I'm eyeballing a big Maple log to cut all of my material for this desk, but if that plan falls through I've got Oak 4x4's and some 4/4 Cherry lumber. I've read and seen traditional timber framing done with green wood, and heard talk that it's easier to work with that way. I'm not entirely sure about the practice because it seems like the main principle of furniture making is well dried wood. Back to the maple log, if I can do it green I will, and if I can't then I'll let it dry for a little while or just use something else.
Here is a rough sketch of what I want the finished desk to look like, (sorry in advance for quality) including dimensions. From the picture you can see the side view containing an "I" shape with two upward pointing knees supporting the upper horizontal beam. The beams will be 4x4 (actual dimension) and will probably have 3 horizontal 2x4's spanning between the two "bents" supporting the desktop surface. The surface will be 2" thick and have a 4" breadboard end attached by mortise and tenons with dowels. I am very interested in using hand tools as much as possible, and this would be my first full project not incorporating the typical countersunk and plugged screws. A side note on the sketch is a possible 2x4 cross brace connecting the two bents somewhere below the midline to prevent them from spreading. I'm not sure if that's necessary considering they're only ~35" apart but it's a consideration I've got, and would put one either half way up the bent or down on the floor.
So my plan for the joints are drawbored mortise and tenons. The beams will be joined with mortise and tenons then drawbored with dowels to hold them snug. I would really like to be able to dissassemble the desk if I ever want to move in the future but that's not a necessity. Some things I need to figure out still: how to attach the desk surface to the bents and cross beams, how to attach the cross beams to the bents. Something I've read about breadboard ends that are a concern to me is wood movement. The tenons and the dowel holes are sized in a certain way that allows for the seasonal wood movement. I am not sure how to do that properly and hopefully someone out there does! That also is a bit of a concern with the bents and cross beams but I'm not really sure how big of an issue it would be. Hopefully one of you out there can help me or point me in the right direction to get these joints properly sized so that my desk will be stable and sturdy! If there's any books or blogs or YouTube channels out there that you guys know about please let me know.
Sorry for the long post but I want to put as much information out there for you all to use. Additionally if you were wondering why the surface of the desk is so low (29" off the floor) it's a computer desk. The height is perfect for a mouse and keyboard to be ergonomically placed, and I'll make an additional shelf to lift the monitors up off of the desktop so they are at a proper height.
When you think of a loud jobsite and hearing protection what do you think of? Loud ambient noise and lots of yelling? When you're wearing ear muffs and trying to talk to someone you inevitably yell, and they typically can't hear you if they're wearing ear protection as well.
That's not a difficult problem, as you can just throw a microphone on there and find some way to link up the headsets, like bluetooth to your phone, or some type of two way radio system. This has already been done of course, but that's not the whole package I'm proposing here. Now what about if you're working a job where you like to have a radio nearby, but you also have coworkers and loud noise? I think the endgame solution to job-site woes is a pair of "noise cancelling" (not sure of the right terminology) headphones with both a microphone and dedicated music speakers in addition to the active-suppression system.
I think all the necessary technology is already available, and wouldn't be too much of a hurdle to combine them. So, how would this work? You're working a job and you flip on a loud machine, and your headphones do their active suppression thing, filtering out that noise to protect your ears. Now your coworker wants to talk to you so he just talks normally into his mic and it's broadcast right into your headset clear as day. But how does the music playing fit in? It's not much different really, you're listening to music and your headset is actively monitoring and filtering background noise so your hearing is not being damaged by either loud music or loud work sounds. When you or your coworker talk, your music is muted or the volume is turned down so you can hear some feedback that you're talking and your conversation is not over amplified to compete with music. It's really just a simple addition. Computers can do this very easily with built-in microphone software, so why not throw that technology into a pair of headphones?
There might be something like this out there, and I'd love to see how it's been done. But if it's not out there (I can't find it) then I think it would be a real interesting invention to introduce to the world.
What I mean by "truly" in the title is a shooter that encompasses the typical classes you'd find in a battlefield-like shooter, where you actually need all the classes and teamwork to win. These classes could include a medic, short range engineer or tactician, medium range grenadier or assault gunner, and a long range sniper or marksman.
This question is inspired by what I think would be the ideal Battlefield playing scenario, where a small squad plays together to win the match. My justification for this post is that I've never really seen or heard of a competitive shooter like this where the victors are a small squad, and everyone contributed with their own class and abilities. There's PUBG which has a squad mechanic, but no real classes or skills that enable this type of play, as in a game could be won by a lone wolf or a squad with not much of a difficulty jump between the two. Please note that I'm not saying it would be easy to one-man-squad your way through a PUBG tournament, I'm just saying that there is no functionality built-in to provide that traditional squad gameplay.
So are there any games out there like that? I know R6: Seige is a team-based arena-esque shooter, where often times teams will choose certain operators to help eachother out, and thats probably the closest game to what I'm thinking of.
Do you think we could ever see a squad/team-based shooter where a squad would need to have all their bases covered to win? I think it would be really interesting to watch a really good team play together. A medic knows when to heal the team, and the team knows how to cover the medic and clear a room to get to a downed team member so the medic can revive him. Or a sniper could take overwatch on a nearby bluff while the other members of the squad push into a compound of enemies with his cover fire and spotting from his location.
I'm not really sure at the moment how this could translate into an E-Sports title, but nonetheless by itself would be a very fun game to play.
Load more comments
With the new GT 1030 memory scandal going on, it makes me curious to see the extreme performance differences between DDR4 and GDDR5. If the Ryzen APU somehow had access to GDDR5 or even HBM vs. the standard DDR4 system memory, would we see more performance? Obviously memory bandwidth plays a huge part, as we can see in this video by Gamers' Nexus with the 1030 debacle, and at the moment it's an interesting thought experiment to consider what the APU could have been with even one module of HBM somehow squeezed onto the 2400G.
Edit: Naturally it would have thrown everything out of whack to include HBM or any other type of memory onto the chip, so please treat this as a thought experiment. It would be interesting to see a napkin calculation of what the vega cores can do with GDDR5 or HBM2 or whatever it is that they use in the Vega 56 & 64, and then what they're getting with DDR4 on the Ryzen APUs.
Load more comments
Load more comments
I have a growing backlog of (supposedly) great single player, story driven games that I keep pushing off playing. Games like the Metro series, the Fallout and the Elder Scrolls series I have started playing, but I don't make it much farther than an hour or two in before I stop. I can't pinpoint the reason why exactly, but it sucks because they are all great games to play, and I dont get to experience the full game.
When I was younger in the PS2 era, the games were mostly all single player, and I had no problem playing them from start to finish, even multiple times. The Ratchet & Clank and the Jak series' were (and still are) my favorite games of all time. It could be because back in those days, I only had a few games, and when I wanted to play something it was either those or nothing. But I truly love those games, and I could still play them over and over again to this day.
Back to my main point, I would love to get back into single player games, and with some sequels that were shown at E3 like Metro: Exodus and TLOU: Part 2, I'd love to replay (or play for the first time) the predeccessors.
In the age of multiplayer games, I almost feel lonely playing games by myself, and wonder if that could be why I don't play them. I've tried streaming some gameplay of FO4, and that definitely helps (when I have viewers), although it seems like everyone on twitch wants to watch Shroud or whoever else play PUBG. I'm not knocking this, as that's their culture and that's fine.
Final Points and/or TL;DR: Does anyone else struggle playing single player games but find relief when you're playing with some people who are also interested in the game? Streaming games these days reminds me of playing games on the couch in the old days, when you had friends who were interested but would rather watch and enjoy while you played. Are there any communities or would anyone be interested in some group "let's plays" where people play single player games and enjoy the stories together?
Load more comments
I love simulators; driving and flying are both a blast, and with the invention and polishing of todays simulators, you can experience these two activities in nearly their full glory with a fraction of the price. However, I'm not sure that the younger market has a product geared towards them in a serious manner. I think a couple of games, one that teaches flight, the other that teaches driving, would go over very well for the 8+ age group.
I'm imagining a game that's fun and arcadey when it needs to be but has the power to function as a full fledged flight sim. Yet at its core is designed with the purpose of teaching younger audiences about being a pilot and all the things that encompasses. This concept of learning could be extended to a driving sim as well.
Hey guys, I'd like to do a little sleeving for my PC, but I can't tell if the price is right. If I can get the same or better quality sleeved cables for the same price without doing the work, it's a no brainer to go that route, right? Basically I just want to make extensions at this point, since I don't have a fully modular power supply. Can someone give me a breakdown on the prices or a good resource to look for price comparisons to the pre-made products?
Load more comments
Let me preface this post by saying; I do not want to come off as egotistic, selfish, self-centered, etc,. I am not that type of person, and I believe that everyone has their place on the team. I also want to say up front that I'm a college student attending university online which saps a lot of my time, energy, motivation, and commitment.
I love game development, I love the process of creating games, the process of manifesting something out of the mind, and sharing it with others. However, I get the feeling that I wasn't cut out to be a developer. I have the desire to make games, and I have tons of great ideas for games that would be super fun to play. I want to create games and share them with the world, but I struggle with the ability to commit to a project. Even something as simple as pong, I tend to get in my own way, and I might work on a project for one, two, maybe three days before I just don't want to work on it anymore. I struggle getting over the humps and I want to work on more complicated and involved projects. Big, lofty games with open worlds and fancy animations, yet I barely know the basics of game development.
On the flip side, I love thinking about game development and programming. I love thinking about the possibilities of what can be done, and it's all like a thought experiment to me. I want to break a game down into its parts and think about how to implement all the parts in the best, most efficient way possible. I think I have a strength in breaking a project down, working from the top down and then building it back up. When it comes to actually building what I thought of, then it gets hairy. I lose interest, motivation, I put the project down and don't pick it back up.
Hopefully I've gotten the point across here, without bagging on myself anymore, I want to move on to the point of this post. I feel that I'm a good thinker, and would be a great asset to a team where my sole position was the project lead. I would lead the team, provide milestones and project management, work through blocks and think about new ways to apply things to the design process. In this way, I could liken my position as a theoretical computer scientist vs. a traditional computer scientist. I want to be in charge of research, and I would partner with a developer in charge of development. I would research the best data structures, the best algorithms, the best implementations of parallel shader programming, and my partner would implement them. Of course he wouldn't do all the work, as I would be in charge of breaking it down and translating the ideas so that he understands them and can implement them and tie it all together? Is this thinker-doer relationship possible/feasible/useful/real in the world?
Is that wrong of me to feel that way? I understand that in small team game development it's often not possible to be only one thing, especially when I'm not doing any tangible work. Or at least it seems like I wouldn't do any tangible work, being the thinker. My dream job is to be the head of a game development team where I've got artists, developers, programmers, every part of the team working on my idea. To me, that last sentence sounds really selfish, like "oh my idea is the best and you all are working for me to get my idea done", but I see it like "I've got this vision for a fantastic game, and if we can all work together sharing our mutual skills we can make a masterpiece". Also note I'm not saying that my idea is set in stone and wouldn't take input from the team. I know that I have faults and my ideas aren't bulletproof, so if the team has a great idea and would work better than mine, I would go out of the way to get that done just like it was my own idea.
Is it possible that I'm struggling with motivation because I'm already burnt out from school? Is it possible that once I'm free from the school grind I'll reignite my passion and find some new commitments? Or is it the case that I truly am meant to be the team thinker?
What do you guys think? Feel free to share your thoughts with me.
Thanks for reading!
Load more comments