I use OpenSCAD as my primary design tool for 3D modeling. I get things done, but it isn't easy, and it's hard to recommend it to other people. OpenSCAD really requires the user to mathematics, trigonometry, mental visualization, and programming beforehand as prerequisites - unlike mainstream CAD programs which are more point-and-click friendly. Performing fillets and chamfers on corners is quite tedious, and describing a screw thread as a polyhedron is a nightmare, but I overcame these challenges.
On the plus side, I like these things about OpenSCAD:
* The software is open source, so price or pirating are not barriers, you can use it as much as you want on any computer you want for as long as you want, and it can never be taken away from you.
* The program is small and easy to download, not some multi-gigabyte sprawling software package.
* I think you learn to declare variables for parameters very early on, and it feels natural to make every design parametric from the start.
* The textual nature of 3D models means that I can use Git version control, diff between versions, and leverage similar developer-oriented tools that I use for general programming. I suspect that CAD programs that use binary file formats will have to come with their own diff tool and version control system.
* By reading source code, it's possible to follow the thought process of how a 3D model is constructed, and carefully make modifications in the middle of a chain of operations that later operations depend on. In point-and-click CAD, it's not clear to me if it's possible to change things in the middle of a chain.
* The Manifold renderer is so much faster than the old CGAL, resulting in reasonable human-interactive cycle times.
* I ended up writing my own library to cover a bunch of common shapes / use-cases. It does take some effort the first time, but then I keep reusing the results.
Oh my, I forgot to add him into the credits for this one! The Beam Engine article has this: "Thanks to Bartosz Ciechanowski, whose exceptionally well written and designed articles inspired this one."
This project looks extremely ambitious. Are these applications coded by AI by any chance? I can't find any easy documentation about the development process.
There's a difference between "vibe coding" and incorporating AI into a software development process. Hobbyists vibe code for shits and giggles on the weekends.
These guys incorporated dozens of pre-existing Rust packages into their codebases, made sure the apps ran on macOS, Windows and Linux and in modern web browsers. That’s not vibe coding.
Did they use coding agents to assist them? Of course! No different than teams at Microsoft, Google, Adobe, etc. Re-creating Photoshop, Illustrator, Lightroom, InDesign, etc. from scratch in Rust is a huge undertaking; one that would have been impossible just a couple of years ago.
> my superannuation fund (401k, ROTH, IRA, hard to know what people call this in other economies)
In Canada, the comparable funds are: Canada Pension Plan (CPP, mandatory contribution for all employees), employer-managed pensions (not all companies have one; policies vary such as defined benefit vs. defined contribution), personal RRSP (you make the contribution and you select the investments).
I guess the comparable funds in the USA are: Social Security (mandatory contribution for all employees), employer-managed pensions (not all companies have one; policies vary such as DB vs. DC), personal IRA such as traditional/Roth.
> Uber is another key villain in Gouged. Per Owens, Uber’s “greatest innovation wasn’t ‘disrupting’ the taxi industry—it was socializing and normalizing the very idea of dynamic pricing. They made us comfortable with the notion that prices could change at any moment.”
In my opinion, Uber has several key innovations over traditional taxi services:
* An accurate machine-provided fare quote that you can review at your leisure before agreeing to take a trip. (Instead of, like, calling a human dispatcher to ask for a quote.)
* The fact that the passenger can't screw over the driver by making fake requests and not showing up, or running off at the end of a trip - because the online platform is in charge of the payment collection.
* The fact that the driver can't screw the passenger over by driving extra distance, because the price is set ahead of time.
> roughly 75 percent of the items in identical Instacart baskets purchased at the same time varied in price from one shopper to the next
If the price differential is large enough, it sets up an opportunity for arbitrage. Maybe if 10 people cooperate and compare notes on each of their Instacart account's product prices, and then make group purchases using the account with the lowest prices...
In general, it's harder (though not impossible) to price-discriminate on goods rather than services. If seniors get a grocery discount for example, then it might be worthwhile to hire a senior to purchase things on your behalf.
On the plus side, I like these things about OpenSCAD:
* The software is open source, so price or pirating are not barriers, you can use it as much as you want on any computer you want for as long as you want, and it can never be taken away from you.
* The program is small and easy to download, not some multi-gigabyte sprawling software package.
* I think you learn to declare variables for parameters very early on, and it feels natural to make every design parametric from the start.
* The textual nature of 3D models means that I can use Git version control, diff between versions, and leverage similar developer-oriented tools that I use for general programming. I suspect that CAD programs that use binary file formats will have to come with their own diff tool and version control system.
* By reading source code, it's possible to follow the thought process of how a 3D model is constructed, and carefully make modifications in the middle of a chain of operations that later operations depend on. In point-and-click CAD, it's not clear to me if it's possible to change things in the middle of a chain.
* The Manifold renderer is so much faster than the old CGAL, resulting in reasonable human-interactive cycle times.
* I ended up writing my own library to cover a bunch of common shapes / use-cases. It does take some effort the first time, but then I keep reusing the results.
reply