I'm not sure what you are hoping from "free", "community owned", and "open source".
They make mills and lathes. They are really nice little machines, great for hobby use. We have one lathe from them in our hackspace for example, and it is a delight. Of course you have to understand the limitations of the tool, but that is true for every machine.
That being said, it is just a lathe. There is nothing particularly complicated about it. At least not at their complexity level. If you can manufacture machine tools you can make one very easily. If you don't have the manufacturing capability you won't.
The reason i'm saying this is because "free as in freedom" and "open source" are properties of plans / source code. If you happen to have a lathe factory, the lack of a lathe plan is not going to stop you. You are just going to design one for yourself. And if you don't have a factory which can make a lathe, then why do you care about plans for a lathe being open source?
I guess the factory itself could be "community owned". If you have a business plan, or a large pile of cash, now is the time to approach them that you want to buy everything from them. But I'm not sure how "community owned" would even work for this use case.
Basically what I'm saying this is hardware, not software. The terms you use don't make much sense in this case.
the sherline designs aren't particularly notable, and they're pretty easy to replicate if you have working machine tools that are larger. any machinist could make a sherline mill or lathe, but without that floorspace and capex and skill, one really can't.
I spent overly long trying to learn on sherline tools and once I gave up and bought a Bridgeport and an old Logan, I realized that I was just banging my head against the limitations of the tools.
the value they had was that they were cheaper than the smaller version of the standard toolroom machines, and they were a way to bootstrap yourself without having the heavy power and the floorspace. so pretty much the storefront, not the IP. I still have their 4" rotary, and its actually not bad. the mill had a huge amount of flex in the column that made it pretty unusable for me unless you took really really tiny passes.
I had an old Unimat for a couple years, and while that was even _more_ dodgy than the sherline the fact that it was all steel and a combined mill/lathe made it a lot more interesting. would rather see some community standards for tooling on a platform like that. maybe a 50% larger so setup isn't so fiddly.
If I was in the market for a lathe that small, I’d probably just buy a slightly larger mill and work on rotating parts vertically, TBH.
If you were committed to wanting a small lathe and CNC, I’d just put linear rails on some of the larger 8020 profiles and rig a spindle from a cartridge spindle. Honestly, though, an 8x16 lathe is kinda bare minimum for steel parts unless you are working VERY slowly. The 7x14 I had worked, but at that scale, I’d be working hard to implement a clough42 ELS conversion so that threading didn’t suck so bad.
If this is genuinely something you want advice/help with, feel free to email me.
EDIT: I don't really have room for a manual mill which would be large enough for this sort of thing to make the parts I want(the Grizzly would be really pushing its limits).
It's more idle speculation at this point in time --- I did save the electric motor from replacing the garbage disposal recently (cracked housing) and I also have a key duplicator I fished out of a dumpster (working!) and really, it should be workable to fabricate something given the tools I have.
If you did a writeup on making a lathe w/ 8020 profiles and a cartridge spindle (source?) I'd be interested --- what would the total landed cost be?
So sad to see that most of the commenters can't even try and visualize this future; and prefer to try and justify the current explotative economic model. And the even saddest part, is that they probably aren't even the ones doing the explotation).
Only a society which doesn't want anything, needs nothing, demands nothing can do without ads. While privacy invading ad tech is obviously a bad thing, ads - namely the thing used to introduce you and others like you to a new idea - is a good thing.
Needlessly reductionist take that doesn't steelman what the OP is after, nor do they need a lesson in definition of the word ad.
Ads in their current form are predominantly a nuisance and malware. Only incidentally do they help the person actually find what they are looking for. This has to change.
There's plenty of other instances running on nitter, some secret/invite only (and as such more chance to fly under the radar). The code is open source: https://github.com/zedeus/nitter albeit X DMCA'd the repo.
No they didn't, or you'd see the text "Repository unavailable due to DMCA takedown." and wouldn't have access to the repo at all. Instead you have full access to it, its author having merely archived it out of caution.
Seems you're right. They have done this in the past though, so wouldn't exactly be a surprise.
Here is what the "free speech" platform have censored previously on GitHub:
> X Corp. employs various technical protection measures to control access to its copyrighted works, including those at issue here (API schemas and platform content): e.g., official X Corp. API key/OAuth authentication, rate-limiting mechanisms, proprietary behavioral pattern detection, TLS fingerprint validation, and x-clienttransaction-id checks. The repository referenced above appears specifically designed to circumvent these measures using browser cookies, curl_cffi TLS impersonation, fake headers, request jitter, and reverse-engineered GraphQL queries.
Does things like that even matter anymore? Lots of things shouldn't be what they are, and vice-versa, yet no one seem to do anything. If Microsoft listens to the demands of XCorp, then that's the reality, regardless of what courts say.
You object to other people deciding how to spend their own money? In that case I object to how you’re spending your money. I now obligate you to donate $50 a month of your own money to GNOME. You can afford it, so you cannot object.
Well I hope you're not expecting a medal from your valiant and tireless defending of these corporations, the medal budget is already spent on this distro.
Keep "fighting the good fight" for free I guess...
It is perfectly reasonable to object to the social causes that large powerful companies decide to support. It's telling that a company decides to fund millions of dollars to an ideologically motivated right wing influence campaign targeting open source communities, which by the way mainly profits off other people's work, while pulling far more smaller amounts of funding from projects that do the actual work.
You must be one of those “useful idiots” we so often hear about. It doesn’t even matter if Omarchy was some kind of sekret “right–wing influence campaign” as you say, instead of just a Linux distrubution, because half the population of the US is right wing! It is no stain on DigitalOcean to support a cause embraced by half of the population of the country.
You are just upset about it because you’re not “right wing”. You wouldn’t complain at all if they supported a left–wing influence campaign. On the contrary, you would laud them for it!
And basically everything else you said was just sour grapes.
> You are just upset about it because you’re not “right wing”.
Huh? Yes, I am appalled by someone who literally compared brown people to wolves that should be shot for the protection of the "human" population, which is to mean, white people. That's an ideology that neither deserves respect nor equal protection under the law.
> It doesn’t even matter if Omarchy was some kind of sekret “right–wing influence campaign” as you say
I didn't claim it was "sekret." On the contrary, it's playing out in the open for everyone to see. Wealthy companies and individuals are pouring obscene amounts of money into a fund centered around someone's personal dotfiles with hotkeys for launching a bunch of commercial software. DHH claims to support other projects with that money, where most of the actual work is done, but projects that have any shred of conscience are avoiding their money like the plague. In effect, it's funding projects that don't have an issue with ethnic cleansing. Digital Ocean even withdrew funding from projects that didn't take DHH money, effectively punishing them for their stance. If something quacks like a duck, it's a duck. That fund is, for all intents and purposes, a right wing influence campaign.
I know you won't be changing your behavior over this, but despite your attempt at putting together a debate-me-bro response, you couldn't even resist the urge to resort to crude name-calling. And no, adding "useful" before "idiot" doesn't hide your petty emotions. It's embarrassing.
You display a common lack of reading comprehension. He didn’t say that immigrants should be shot, he said that immigrants whose culture is incompatible with the Danish way of life should be deported. There’s nothing racist about it; “brown” and “white” are words that you read into the text so that you could be angry.
> You display a common lack of reading comprehension.
Nah, my reading comprehension is fine. If anything, you should go look up the definition for "compare" before you start grading other people.
> There’s nothing racist about it
If comparing people to wolves that should be killed based on their race isn't racist for you, what is?
> “brown” and “white” are words that you read into the text
No, it's very clear what DHH means. The Romanis (paraphrasing since DHH only referred to them by a slur) vs. the "native" Danish, the "native Brits" vs. the other 2/3 of the London population. DHH is discriminating based on skin color, that's an unambiguous fact.
> so that you could be angry
I'm not angry, just appalled at you and DHH's racism. I'm not the one angrily hurling crude insults and incoherent rants repeatedly.
He did not even refer to literal Romani. The immigrants he is talking about hail from entirely different parts of the world, and notice the plural. He used that analogy because of their behavior, not because of their ethnicity. Deporting people because of their deplorable behavior is not racist, and people who say that it is devalue the word racism.
Despite it being so common, I'm still bewildered by people wearing their racism like a badge of honor, while at the same time trying to discredit the term so that no action can ever be described as such. Like, pick one, not both.
The only thing wrong in the world is leftists believing they should be financially supported for vomiting their ideologies all over their projects.
The day that GNOME goes bankrupt could not come fast enough.
I like codeberg approach. If you're a small project that doesn't spam ( a commit a day, a few PR a day) you can be as vibe-coded as you want despite their 'guidelines'.
Right but it doesn't answer my question about what you don't consider a slop TUI though.
> Slop is slop when the author could not have done it without the AI.
For Vim (1.) and Linux's AI adoption policies, there are some contributors who couldn't have made a PR / patch without AI. Are Vim and Linux now considered slop because they allow AI contributions?
I would say this is a fair question, and that slop can be laundered when there are multiple collaborators and at least one of them knows what they are doing. Whereas a monograph written entirely by Claude is always just slop.
> I would say this is a fair question, and that slop can be laundered when there are multiple collaborators and at least one of them knows what they are doing.
Sounds like you consider Vim and Linux to be slop by your definition. As an example:
> The download button doesn't even work properly. Clicking download in the top right gives me a .dmg, the other download button in the hero gives me the .exe, the one in the footer gives me a .dmg
I mean, it works for me?
The site is clearly not ready and maybe they didn't expect people to find it, but that doesn't mean the site is bad.
It is just a work in progress.
I'm not even interested in the site anyway the software and the source interests me more.
In actuality, successful open source projects recruit developers by providing value to them. If there's a failure before you even install the product, there's 0 reason for someone to start contributing right away, why not start their own project at that point? Contributing 1 to something that has 0 value is a donation in exchange for nothing, not how Open Source usually works.
Is there a free alternative to this ideally community owned and open source?