6 ms·

I remember watching this video a few months ago. As I write this I am debugging open source electronics I designed for our open source farming robot. It seems

I remember watching this video a few months ago. As I write this I am debugging open source electronics I designed for our open source farming robot. It seems like people see the growth in opaque proprietary electronics and they conclude that we should move back to old mechanical systems. But mechanical systems are not always more reliable. What I really want more people to understand is that electronics are not the issue - proprietary designs are. Open source designs inherently have enough documentation that even if they don't come with some nice service manual, the nerds on the user forum can dig through the schematics and code to sort out what's what. Unfortunately open source hardware just isn't getting enough coverage for people to really see the value in it, despite the entire internet being built on open source software. We need to find ways to communicate the power of open source beyond software. We could have open source modules in cars with open standards. Sure the manufacturers need a rugged PCB that can control lights, read sensors, interact with CAN BUS, etc. But there is no need for that system to be proprietary. We need to build and demonstrate the value of open source hardware to help people understand what is really possible. Because the call to move back to mechanical systems is really just a call to move back to systems that are intuitively understandable, and today's shadetree mechanics can read a forum post as well as anyone else. What we need are open, documented systems. Electronics are not the enemy, proprietary systems are.

artificialLimbs 3y ago
Say what you will about Musk, but he's making an effort in this regard. He has open sourced a number of goodies with Tesla.
- bsder 3y ago
  Um, last I checked, the repository was a bunch of PDF user manuals. Has that changed?
- conradev 3y ago
  Isn't Tesla actively hostile towards charging network interoperability?
  - artificialLimbs 3y ago
    No. They have opened source the schematics for their chargers and welcome other manufacturers to use their charger design. https://www.tesla.com/support/charging/product-guides https://www.tesla.com/support/charging/product-guides
    - conradev 3y ago
      Open source schematics and a closed Supercharger network until this year, at least in the US. It's hard to separate Tesla's intentions in opening up their charging network from the legislation in both the US and EU incentivizing it.
  - vikramkr 3y ago
    No they did actually follow through on the charging stuff to the point where NACS is now the new north American standard, which is kind of wild to see given how they've acted before.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
  - PinguTS 3y ago
    Funfact: NACS ist just CCS with a different physical connector. You just need to read and understand the specs.
- TaylorAlexander 3y ago
  Be careful about that. Just last week he lied about open sourcing the original roadster. Musk very clearly said "all design and engineering for the original roadster is open source" but that statement is false. There's a few PCB designs available and one diagnostic program, but there are zero mechanical designs and I suspect there are missing firmwares, among other things. Given these glaring omissions (and Musk is certainly qualified to understand what "all design and engineering" means), I suspect there is a trove of other "design and engineering" documentation that is missing as well. I believe none of the cars shipping today contain any open source electronics. Teslas are notoriously full of very expensive proprietary electronics. He has indeed released some "goodies" but is nonetheless as bad as every other shipping car manufacturer today. It is honestly hard to say he is making an effort when he is so blatantly lying about the roadster and his other vehicles are completely proprietary. Not saying he is worse than the other companies, but I can't give him credit for something he is not doing.
  - KennyBlanken 3y ago
    > Musk is certainly qualified to understand what "all design and engineering" means I'd say there is a mountain of evidence from SpaceX and Tesla that's not actually true and that he has little to no understanding of anything related to engineering, nor the ability to manage engineering teams effectively; I think he's surrounded by people that are actually talented and do a lot to scrambling to make stuff happen and fix his messes. The huge 'box' his demanded his team put together, to rescue people from a cave with passages so narrow diver could not wear tanks on their backs? To me that demonstrates he has no ability to analyze a problem at high level and correctly apply the engineering resources available to him. Examples: * Dishy, which had basic design flaws, such as a permanently attached power/data cable that if damaged meant you had to purchase an entire new unit * Hyperloop. * SpaceX's repeated failures, which they spin as "it's okay, we meant to fuck up, we got data!", including the disaster where his insistence on launching on 4/20 resulted in substantial vehicle damage (5-8 rockets failed), heavy damage to the facility, a 380 acre wide debris field (so severe you could see debris landing in the ocean from an aerial shot well outside the launch danger zone), a forest fire, and heavy damage to a car (parked within the "hazard area.") * Musk's repeated production-related issues at Tesla, and his insistence on automating as much as possible even when experts in their field who work for him tell him it's not possible * Repeated demonstrations of engineering incompetence at Telsa. The Model S drivetrain units used to be disposable and would be quietly replaced during routine service at anywhere from 10-30k miles. They still can't make a Tesla with proper body panel gaps. People have found bits of wood/wire/duct tape holding their Tesla's guts together. For years Model S's couldn't be driven in heavy rain or through large puddles without water ending up in the drive units. Windows randomly shattering while cars are parked in driveways and garages. Etc
- buildbot 3y ago
  Aren’t they still violating linux’s GPL license?
boznz 3y ago
Totally nailed it. Without the information on proprietary systems to repair them or effect the cars re-use (if say doing an EV conversion), the car or anything becomes either a massive reverse engineering problem or landfill once the manufacturer stops supporting it.
jacquesm 3y ago
Is there a way to support your effort?
- TaylorAlexander 3y ago
  Thank you, yes. Here is a blog post with more information about what we are doing [1] and a direct link to our funding page [2]. We are working on moving to a fully donation supported engineering model so our work can be freely available for everyone the world over, and your monthly contributions make a big difference. Also here is our github with our electronics, software, and hardware designs all permissively licensed. [3] Notably our open source dual brushless motor controller design is coming along nicely. [4] [1] https://community.twistedfields.com/t/join-the-solar-farming-revolution-support-acorn-and-empower-farmers-worldwide/370 https://community.twistedfields.com/t/join-the-solar-farming... [2] https://opencollective.com/twisted-fields-research-collective https://opencollective.com/twisted-fields-research-collectiv... [3] https://github.com/Twisted-Fields https://github.com/Twisted-Fields [4] https://github.com/Twisted-Fields/rp2040-motor-controller https://github.com/Twisted-Fields/rp2040-motor-controller
  - jacquesm 3y ago
    Very neat! Electric goat :) How weather resistant is it? Is it aware of its surroundings yet (for instance: irrigation installations)? Are any of these in use outside of the people that develop them? (sorry for the questions barrage but if I didn't live on another continent I'd hop over to help). Nice Al welding btw.
    - TaylorAlexander 3y ago
      It is very weather resistant, our prototypes all live outdoors 100% of the time so it is developed in the rain. We don't get snow where we are so we will need to do more testing in snow as things develop. It is not yet aware of its surroundings. We are still finalizing the first version to ship, so currently no other machines are in use outside of our farm. We are working on getting there! > Nice Al welding btw. Thank you, though I don't understand. I do all the welding myself by hand. We also have a CNC plasma cutter for cutting parts. It doesn't use AI, just Gcode. :)
hommelix 3y ago
You are right on openness. This is key to understand and fix broken machines. Mechanical designs used to be more open too. We bought tractors in the 1980's and these would come with a workshop manual with parts list and disassembly / assembly instructions, with tools list and torque requirement.
- TaylorAlexander 3y ago
  You're right. Televisions used to be more repairable too. I found a microfiche reader by a dumpster and for fun ordered a lot of 100+ microfiche cards from an old TV repair shop on ebay. Zenith for example published detailed repair manuals including detailed steps for recalibration, parts lists, schematics, annotated PCB layouts, and more. These were for repair shops not the average person, but modern TV companies don't even produce those materials anymore.
  - trilbyglens 3y ago
    Nope they are far cheaper to just throw away and replace. It's a terrible system.
    - TaylorAlexander 3y ago
      Honestly I only think it’s cheaper to replace because we’ve made repair more expensive than it needs to be. I’ve fixed two TVs that stopped working with a few dollars of capacitors and my own time. That’s much cheaper than buying a new TV! But I had to go digging through forums when manufacturers could have provided this information. Instead they refuse ti share info and charge extreme prices for repairs where they will just throw out an entire board with one bad component which would cost 20 cents on its own. I agree it’s a terrible system I just wanted to clarify that the “it costs less to throw it out and replace” narrative is only true so long as we make it true.
    - benj111 3y ago
      Even within a non repairable system, it could be improved so much. Why can't we have dumb screens that I can plug my Amazon stick or whatever into. My girlfriend's TV actually crashes and randomly resets. Presumably because they cram a load of functionality in, and don't test (not so) edge cases. Just give me a dumb screen, if I want $fancy new streaming app I can just buy a single or whatever, if the dongle breaks, I replace just that.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
schiffern 3y ago
>they conclude that we should move back to old mechanical systems. But mechanical systems are not always more reliable. In general I agree, but I worry this glosses over the subtle cases in the middle. In a non-zero number of cases, the only reason electronics are "superior" to mechanical solutions is precisely because it's easy to enforce proprietary restrictions. In this subset of cases, it is proper to replace the electronic solution with a (here, superior) mechanical one. .
- seanmcdirmid 3y ago
  Actually the lack of minimization of moving parts makes them superior. Friction’s effect on wear and tear is real.
  - schiffern 3y ago
    I agree with the general principle. My point is, we should acknowledge that there are some cases "right on the edge" that would naturally favor mechanical instead of electronic solutions, but the ability to cheaply enforce proprietary restrictions pushed them "over the edge" to using an electronic solution instead. In these cases we should indeed consider replacing electronics with mechanical solutions — if not for retrofit, at least for later product iterations.
    - eternityforest 3y ago
      The cases right on the edge are real, but not common. All the examples I can think of are hundreds of years old and have no serious competition from digital stuff, like eating utensils (for abled people, stabilized spoons seem to be a great invention for those who need them). What do you consider an edge case that should be mechanical?
      - schiffern 3y ago
        We don't disagree. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38509700 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38509700
coldtea 3y ago
>But mechanical systems are not always more reliable. They are however always more sustainable, more easily (and often locally) repairable, and so on...

artificialLimbs 3y ago

Say what you will about Musk, but he's making an effort in this regard. He has open sourced a number of goodies with Tesla.

bsder 3y ago
Um, last I checked, the repository was a bunch of PDF user manuals. Has that changed?
conradev 3y ago
Isn't Tesla actively hostile towards charging network interoperability?
- artificialLimbs 3y ago
  No. They have opened source the schematics for their chargers and welcome other manufacturers to use their charger design. https://www.tesla.com/support/charging/product-guides https://www.tesla.com/support/charging/product-guides
  - conradev 3y ago
    Open source schematics and a closed Supercharger network until this year, at least in the US. It's hard to separate Tesla's intentions in opening up their charging network from the legislation in both the US and EU incentivizing it.
- vikramkr 3y ago
  No they did actually follow through on the charging stuff to the point where NACS is now the new north American standard, which is kind of wild to see given how they've acted before.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- PinguTS 3y ago
  Funfact: NACS ist just CCS with a different physical connector. You just need to read and understand the specs.
TaylorAlexander 3y ago
Be careful about that. Just last week he lied about open sourcing the original roadster. Musk very clearly said "all design and engineering for the original roadster is open source" but that statement is false. There's a few PCB designs available and one diagnostic program, but there are zero mechanical designs and I suspect there are missing firmwares, among other things. Given these glaring omissions (and Musk is certainly qualified to understand what "all design and engineering" means), I suspect there is a trove of other "design and engineering" documentation that is missing as well. I believe none of the cars shipping today contain any open source electronics. Teslas are notoriously full of very expensive proprietary electronics. He has indeed released some "goodies" but is nonetheless as bad as every other shipping car manufacturer today. It is honestly hard to say he is making an effort when he is so blatantly lying about the roadster and his other vehicles are completely proprietary. Not saying he is worse than the other companies, but I can't give him credit for something he is not doing.
- KennyBlanken 3y ago
  > Musk is certainly qualified to understand what "all design and engineering" means I'd say there is a mountain of evidence from SpaceX and Tesla that's not actually true and that he has little to no understanding of anything related to engineering, nor the ability to manage engineering teams effectively; I think he's surrounded by people that are actually talented and do a lot to scrambling to make stuff happen and fix his messes. The huge 'box' his demanded his team put together, to rescue people from a cave with passages so narrow diver could not wear tanks on their backs? To me that demonstrates he has no ability to analyze a problem at high level and correctly apply the engineering resources available to him. Examples: * Dishy, which had basic design flaws, such as a permanently attached power/data cable that if damaged meant you had to purchase an entire new unit * Hyperloop. * SpaceX's repeated failures, which they spin as "it's okay, we meant to fuck up, we got data!", including the disaster where his insistence on launching on 4/20 resulted in substantial vehicle damage (5-8 rockets failed), heavy damage to the facility, a 380 acre wide debris field (so severe you could see debris landing in the ocean from an aerial shot well outside the launch danger zone), a forest fire, and heavy damage to a car (parked within the "hazard area.") * Musk's repeated production-related issues at Tesla, and his insistence on automating as much as possible even when experts in their field who work for him tell him it's not possible * Repeated demonstrations of engineering incompetence at Telsa. The Model S drivetrain units used to be disposable and would be quietly replaced during routine service at anywhere from 10-30k miles. They still can't make a Tesla with proper body panel gaps. People have found bits of wood/wire/duct tape holding their Tesla's guts together. For years Model S's couldn't be driven in heavy rain or through large puddles without water ending up in the drive units. Windows randomly shattering while cars are parked in driveways and garages. Etc
buildbot 3y ago
Aren’t they still violating linux’s GPL license?

boznz 3y ago

Totally nailed it. Without the information on proprietary systems to repair them or effect the cars re-use (if say doing an EV conversion), the car or anything becomes either a massive reverse engineering problem or landfill once the manufacturer stops supporting it.

jacquesm 3y ago

Is there a way to support your effort?

TaylorAlexander 3y ago
Thank you, yes. Here is a blog post with more information about what we are doing [1] and a direct link to our funding page [2]. We are working on moving to a fully donation supported engineering model so our work can be freely available for everyone the world over, and your monthly contributions make a big difference. Also here is our github with our electronics, software, and hardware designs all permissively licensed. [3] Notably our open source dual brushless motor controller design is coming along nicely. [4] [1] https://community.twistedfields.com/t/join-the-solar-farming-revolution-support-acorn-and-empower-farmers-worldwide/370 https://community.twistedfields.com/t/join-the-solar-farming... [2] https://opencollective.com/twisted-fields-research-collective https://opencollective.com/twisted-fields-research-collectiv... [3] https://github.com/Twisted-Fields https://github.com/Twisted-Fields [4] https://github.com/Twisted-Fields/rp2040-motor-controller https://github.com/Twisted-Fields/rp2040-motor-controller
- jacquesm 3y ago
  Very neat! Electric goat :) How weather resistant is it? Is it aware of its surroundings yet (for instance: irrigation installations)? Are any of these in use outside of the people that develop them? (sorry for the questions barrage but if I didn't live on another continent I'd hop over to help). Nice Al welding btw.
  - TaylorAlexander 3y ago
    It is very weather resistant, our prototypes all live outdoors 100% of the time so it is developed in the rain. We don't get snow where we are so we will need to do more testing in snow as things develop. It is not yet aware of its surroundings. We are still finalizing the first version to ship, so currently no other machines are in use outside of our farm. We are working on getting there! > Nice Al welding btw. Thank you, though I don't understand. I do all the welding myself by hand. We also have a CNC plasma cutter for cutting parts. It doesn't use AI, just Gcode. :)

hommelix 3y ago

You are right on openness. This is key to understand and fix broken machines. Mechanical designs used to be more open too. We bought tractors in the 1980's and these would come with a workshop manual with parts list and disassembly / assembly instructions, with tools list and torque requirement.

TaylorAlexander 3y ago
You're right. Televisions used to be more repairable too. I found a microfiche reader by a dumpster and for fun ordered a lot of 100+ microfiche cards from an old TV repair shop on ebay. Zenith for example published detailed repair manuals including detailed steps for recalibration, parts lists, schematics, annotated PCB layouts, and more. These were for repair shops not the average person, but modern TV companies don't even produce those materials anymore.
- trilbyglens 3y ago
  Nope they are far cheaper to just throw away and replace. It's a terrible system.
  - TaylorAlexander 3y ago
    Honestly I only think it’s cheaper to replace because we’ve made repair more expensive than it needs to be. I’ve fixed two TVs that stopped working with a few dollars of capacitors and my own time. That’s much cheaper than buying a new TV! But I had to go digging through forums when manufacturers could have provided this information. Instead they refuse ti share info and charge extreme prices for repairs where they will just throw out an entire board with one bad component which would cost 20 cents on its own. I agree it’s a terrible system I just wanted to clarify that the “it costs less to throw it out and replace” narrative is only true so long as we make it true.
  - benj111 3y ago
    Even within a non repairable system, it could be improved so much. Why can't we have dumb screens that I can plug my Amazon stick or whatever into. My girlfriend's TV actually crashes and randomly resets. Presumably because they cram a load of functionality in, and don't test (not so) edge cases. Just give me a dumb screen, if I want $fancy new streaming app I can just buy a single or whatever, if the dongle breaks, I replace just that.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

schiffern 3y ago

>they conclude that we should move back to old mechanical systems. But mechanical systems are not always more reliable. In general I agree, but I worry this glosses over the subtle cases in the middle. In a non-zero number of cases, the only reason electronics are "superior" to mechanical solutions is precisely because it's easy to enforce proprietary restrictions. In this subset of cases, it is proper to replace the electronic solution with a (here, superior) mechanical one. .

seanmcdirmid 3y ago
Actually the lack of minimization of moving parts makes them superior. Friction’s effect on wear and tear is real.
- schiffern 3y ago
  I agree with the general principle. My point is, we should acknowledge that there are some cases "right on the edge" that would naturally favor mechanical instead of electronic solutions, but the ability to cheaply enforce proprietary restrictions pushed them "over the edge" to using an electronic solution instead. In these cases we should indeed consider replacing electronics with mechanical solutions — if not for retrofit, at least for later product iterations.
  - eternityforest 3y ago
    The cases right on the edge are real, but not common. All the examples I can think of are hundreds of years old and have no serious competition from digital stuff, like eating utensils (for abled people, stabilized spoons seem to be a great invention for those who need them). What do you consider an edge case that should be mechanical?
    - schiffern 3y ago
      We don't disagree. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38509700 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38509700

coldtea 3y ago

>But mechanical systems are not always more reliable. They are however always more sustainable, more easily (and often locally) repairable, and so on...