It's been a while since I posted my Mission Statement, I've spent that time working towards my ideals though the most important act of purpose one can make; Learning.
Being an accomplished programmer gives you a great deal of understanding about logic, processes, and even data. However it teaches you nothing about the underlying nature of hardware, and the constraints of physicality the universe places on that hardware.
Take for example the basic and fundamental laws of Newtonian motion, they allow me some degree of predictability of movement, enough to design a new 3D printer? No, they are linked and improved upon to create hydrodynamics, oscillatory motion, linear motion, and of course the quantum mechanics of a micro-processor.
It's too much for any single person to learn - that's why we rely on textbooks, tables, and in more modern times, Wikipedia and YouTube - yet even with these tools for ever faster learning; A human mind cannot contain the body of human knowledge.
That means, of course, I will need help. However dear reader, I'd much rather come back to that point in context later.
Having learned all I have over the past months, I now know more accurately the minimum I need to make a 3D printer, Lathe, C&C machines, storage, etc. Some things can be done cheaply, a few 3D printed brackets and some plywood will make strong durable draws and storage. However skimping on the lead-screw of a lathe will cause the design to fail.
However, I can't predict everything - I don't for example know how to use a Lathe correctly, so if I designed my own - it would be wrong! I might 'think' aluminium is strong enough, but quickly checking some numbers lets me 'know' it's not.
And for a project of this immense nature, you cannot be reliant on anything 'common', while steel might be common enough to be considered a waste product by many western nations, in others it's a valuable and rare commodity. Plastic might be viable for a place rich in Oil or landfill-waste, but is far from ideal in the ice-covered mountains of Tibet.
To use a material I must justify it's alternatives - and sometimes I don't know what those are, a mechanic in Africa might know exactly how to turn a soda-can into a hydraulic-seal, but without that knowledge I could spend months testing rubber-bands.
Every engineering project needs a bill of materials, this one will be no different - some can be made from scratch with the right know-how, I'll find what I can in that regard, but often I'll use metric screws - they are inexpensive for me. But I want to know a better way, how hard would it be to make a dedicated screw-turning machine, to make new ones? To know that, I need the specialised knowledge of people, in the same way I need plywood, nails, and a roll of plastic filament.
That means communication, open helpful and critical communication is needed if I wish to make a better tomorrow - that means in turn, I need to expand the project to have a philosophy. How open is open source? If equipment such as this can make weapons, is it right to put some limit on it? or is it wrong to compromise the premise?
What if the person who's knowledge I need is busy, employment and social requirements, or worse they disagree with my philosophy and refuse to share. I cannot see fault in them without finding it in myself, that means there have to be rules - civil discourse, co-operation.
And I don't want anger, violence, oppression, I want unity, harmony - a better future.
Being an accomplished programmer gives you a great deal of understanding about logic, processes, and even data. However it teaches you nothing about the underlying nature of hardware, and the constraints of physicality the universe places on that hardware.
Take for example the basic and fundamental laws of Newtonian motion, they allow me some degree of predictability of movement, enough to design a new 3D printer? No, they are linked and improved upon to create hydrodynamics, oscillatory motion, linear motion, and of course the quantum mechanics of a micro-processor.
It's too much for any single person to learn - that's why we rely on textbooks, tables, and in more modern times, Wikipedia and YouTube - yet even with these tools for ever faster learning; A human mind cannot contain the body of human knowledge.
That means, of course, I will need help. However dear reader, I'd much rather come back to that point in context later.
Having learned all I have over the past months, I now know more accurately the minimum I need to make a 3D printer, Lathe, C&C machines, storage, etc. Some things can be done cheaply, a few 3D printed brackets and some plywood will make strong durable draws and storage. However skimping on the lead-screw of a lathe will cause the design to fail.
However, I can't predict everything - I don't for example know how to use a Lathe correctly, so if I designed my own - it would be wrong! I might 'think' aluminium is strong enough, but quickly checking some numbers lets me 'know' it's not.
And for a project of this immense nature, you cannot be reliant on anything 'common', while steel might be common enough to be considered a waste product by many western nations, in others it's a valuable and rare commodity. Plastic might be viable for a place rich in Oil or landfill-waste, but is far from ideal in the ice-covered mountains of Tibet.
To use a material I must justify it's alternatives - and sometimes I don't know what those are, a mechanic in Africa might know exactly how to turn a soda-can into a hydraulic-seal, but without that knowledge I could spend months testing rubber-bands.
Every engineering project needs a bill of materials, this one will be no different - some can be made from scratch with the right know-how, I'll find what I can in that regard, but often I'll use metric screws - they are inexpensive for me. But I want to know a better way, how hard would it be to make a dedicated screw-turning machine, to make new ones? To know that, I need the specialised knowledge of people, in the same way I need plywood, nails, and a roll of plastic filament.
That means communication, open helpful and critical communication is needed if I wish to make a better tomorrow - that means in turn, I need to expand the project to have a philosophy. How open is open source? If equipment such as this can make weapons, is it right to put some limit on it? or is it wrong to compromise the premise?
What if the person who's knowledge I need is busy, employment and social requirements, or worse they disagree with my philosophy and refuse to share. I cannot see fault in them without finding it in myself, that means there have to be rules - civil discourse, co-operation.
And I don't want anger, violence, oppression, I want unity, harmony - a better future.
Comments
Post a Comment