PorkrollPosadist [he/him, they/them]

Hexbear’s resident machinist, absentee mastodon landlord, jack of all trades

Talk to me about astronomy, photography, electronics, ham radio, programming, the means of production, and how we might expropriate them.>

  • 4 Posts
  • 25 Comments
Joined 4 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 25th, 2020



  • VCs invest in emerging technologies like virtual reality and “artificial intelligence” because there is the potential to become a fixture of a small economy and grow with it. The time to do this with web browsers was in the 90s. The browser market isn’t growing, and it is already cornered by one of the largest monopolies in the world. They can’t be undercut on price (Chrome is effectively a loss-leader to promote Google’s other properties). They can’t be outspent on R&D. If you are seeking VC, you need to produce a return on investment somehow, and there is no way to do that without selling out the end users in an even more devious way than Google. There is no viable capitalist development model for web browsers. It is the kind of infrastructure which needs to be funded with grants or state funding.






  • 4: building a physical mesh network to link nearby computers together over fast links (BATMAN for no se vende mesh here in LA)

    5: developing a mobile adhoc mesh routing protocol that can setup a usable internet using only smartphones that interoperates with the fixed mesh noted in 4 (this will likely replace BATMAN, but is also a research problem and would represent a novel capability)

    I think there is a strong tendency to put the cart before the horse when it comes to mesh networking. People imagine how cool it would be to have widespread mesh networks, but setting up a digital radio doohickey accomplishes nothing if there is nobody listening on the other end. We need social organizations first. Then, communications technology can be built to serve the needs of these organizations. It is very much a local organizing problem. The tech does not circumvent this.


  • There are secondary / tertiary methods of contact. People have accounts on other platforms like Twitter, Matrix, Telegram, Discord, Mastodon, Reddit, etc. There are other watering holes people can regain contact. The community would be utterly fractured, but such was the case when Reddit dropped the hammer on us. I think our past experience served well. Establish a life raft. Gather the troops. Plot a course forward.

    That said, we were relatively lucky last time. The regime of censorship has sharpened significantly in the past four years since then. If the US government were to lean on Hexbear’s ISP (or domain registrar), a life raft on a service like Discord would fold like a house of cards (not to mention being 100% wiretapped). We would need more robust options. There is the Matrix server, but it is tied up with the same infrastructure. The people who use it have accounts distributed among various Matrix servers though.






  • Would be very cool if FreeCAD and LibreCAD became much more mainstream

    IMO, it already has. Not world-domination status, but a great deal of progress has been made compared to 5/10 years ago, and growing. Largely driven by the introduction of affordable 3D printers. As the general problem of 3D modeling is increasingly solved, development of various processes in the Path workbench will likely drive increased small-scale industrial use, in a market which is currently dominated by LUDICROUSLY expensive packages like MasterCAM and Esprit.

    In industry, its use is very marginal, but this is not necessarily a fault of FreeCAD. I know engineers who still use Pro/Engineer (even though we have seats available both in SolidWorks and Creo Parametric). People will use what they are familiar with. A lot of these people will never switch. Not to mention, any engineering work already done in one CAD system will likely be married to that CAD system for its entire product lifecycle. New CAD packages work their way in on the margins, either by providing a very niche / specific workflow where others fall short, or in solving problems the company isn’t willing to pay a license for. FreeCAD adoption is going to be driven mainly by new blood entering into the industry, and this will only become apparent as new product lines are developed.

    As a CNC programmer, I use FreeCAD professionally whenever I can get away with it. I get to practice using it at home, producing models for my 3D printer. I am very familiar with its geometric constraint solver, whereas it is always a fight when I need to use Creo for one reason or another (and I have scrapped large parts because of “soft constraint” shenanigans). For me, FreeCAD is usually the fastest, most reliable option.

    But I am a niche. I am the only person in the shop who uses FreeCAD. I am also the only person in the shop who edits G-Code in Emacs. For the engineers working directly with clients, they need to use whatever CAD systems the clients provide models in. While STEP files are the industry standard compatible format, they lack important contextual information like tolerances (not that many commercial packages incorporate this, but models usually need to be adjusted to the tolerance mean before entering the CAM pipeline). For the work I do, modeling individual components, one-off fixtures, and gages, or even producing prints to send to the toolroom for manual machining, FreeCAD is in a pretty good place. I can export either IGES or STEP, import it in a CAM program, and create toolpaths. For work on complex assemblies, FreeCAD has only embraced an official assembly workflow with this release, and it remains to be seen how this goes. For CAM work, a lot of legwork has been done on 3 axis milling, but in practice there are many processes (4/5 axis milling, turning, swiss screw, grinding, sinker/wire edm, water jet, laser cutting/welding/engraving, FDM/Resin 3D printing, etc.) and many more CNC controllers out there (Fanuc, Mitsubishi, Haas, Citizen, GF, etc.) which need to be nailed down.