Are there softwares to simulate enough electronics and microcontrollers to learn?

It depends on what you are looking for. For a quick simulation to get a very rough, and more ideal, visual, you can use something like Falstad. But for anything more practical and useful, I'd recommend using SPICE. There's lot's of software out there that implements SPICE [2]. KiCAD offers SPICE simulation [1].

I want to try learning microcontrollers afterwards but I can’t afford to buy any IRL atm

The perceived expensiveness of things is certainly relative, but I would still argue that the hardware for microcontrollers really doesn't have to be that expensive [1][2][3][4].

Looks like a Fractal Node 304?

Yep! I've found that the case is possibly a little too cramped for my liking — I'm not overly fond of the placement of the drive bay hangars — but overall it's been alright. It's definitely a nice form factor.

It wasn't a deliberate choice. It was simply hardware that I already had available at the time. I have had no performance issues of note as a result of the hardware's age, so I've seen no reason to upgrade it just yet.

I would say definitely not Psilocybe cyanescens

Would you by chance have a guess as to what they might actually be?

If the cap cuticle is peelable you could make a case that it’s not Hypholoma but without any blueing it’s gonna be Deconica not Psilocybe.

For clarity, are you saying that all species in the genus deconica have a peelable cap cuticle?

I’m sorry to disappoint you, but even though they look similar to P. cyanescens, they aren’t.

Would you by chance have a guess as to what they actually might be?

Very great report! We need more of those similar to that!

Thank you 😊 I tried to provide as much useful information as possible (that I could think of, anyways) to aid in identification. I would've also provided an image of the spores, but I don't currently have access to a microscope of sufficient magnification to image them.

Do you have any recommendations, for future reference, for other bits of information not mentioned that would aid in identification?

For clarity, do you mean psilocybe cyanescens?

Main Server

Services

• Jellyfin
• FreshRSS
• Borg
• Immich
• Nextcloud AIO
• RSS-Bridge

Hardware

• CPU: Intel Core i5-4460
• GPU: Nvidia GeForce GTX 760
• Memory: Kingston KHX1600C10D3/8G (8GB DDR3-1600)
• Motherboard: ASUS H81I-PLUS

OS

• Ubuntu 22.04.5 LTS

Reverse Proxy

Services

• Caddy

Hardware

• Rasbperry Pi 4 Model B Rev 1.5 (2GB)

OS

• Debian 12

Router

Hardware

• TP-Link Archer C7 AC1750

OS

• OpenWRT 23.05.5

This is likely one of those things that is highly dependent on both genetics and one's own goals. I'm not sure that it's entirely possible for anyone but yourself to answer that question. I'd advise approaching it from angles like "What issues do I have with my skin that I want to improve?", "How do I want my skin to look?", "How do I want my skin to feel?", etc. Once you establish the fundamental problems that you want to solve, you can then try to find solutions and answers.

At any rate, for reference, I personally moisturize twice daily: I moisturize my face in the morning, and then both my entire body and, again, my face at night. If you are curious about the details, I described my skincare routine here.

Do y'all actually read articles or just the headline?

Both. I first read the headline (while taking it with an immense grain of salt due to, by my experience, the commonplace usage of clickbait/misleading headlines) to see if the article may interest me, then, if so, I read the article to either effectively fact-check the article's own headline, or to actually get more detail on what the headline summarized ­— though, it certainly feels like it is more often than not the former. Sometimes, however, the headline, on it's own, is enough, but that seems rare — logically, it is in a news company's best interest to get people to read the article (if it is assumed that they get income from people reading the article's content) so they would be incentivized to make the headline as provoking or nebulous as possible to maximize the probability that one will click on it.

Its just crazy cabinet nominees every time. Wars happening. Nothing I can control.

Personally, I believe that it's, at the very least, important to be peripherally aware of what's happening in the world, but one must be careful to recognize what they can and can't control — what is worth fretting over and what isn't. Inundating oneself with the knowledge of any number of horrible things that may have happened somewhere in the world in a given day is generally of no help to anyone and only serves to degrade one's own mental state.

Y’all actually read all this shit? How does anyone have the energy?

The most tiring thing, personally, is fact checking. It is tiring to feel like the majority of my interactions with news articles that are shared are that of dealing with misleading claims and misdirected or misinformed reactions. It certainly feels like the majority offloads the scrutiny of data onto the minority.

For clarity, I'm not claiming that it would, with any degree of certainty, lead to incurred damage, but the ability to upload unvetted content carries some degree of risk. For there to be no risk, fedi-safety/pictrs-safety would have to be guaranteed to be absolutely 100% free of any possible exploit, as well as the underlying OS (and maybe even the underlying hardware), which seems like an impossible claim to make, but perhaps I'm missing something important.