This is a fun project to take on. Couple years ago I built an autonomous controlled chassis onto a push reel mower (removed handles of course). It’s not as safe as the typical robot mower given they use tiny blades to trim (and reel mower will take a finger) but it’s relatively low maintenance since the blades need replacing every month or so. I opted for lidar as the reviews on RTK GPS seem pretty hit or miss and didn’t want the base antenna thingy. It works well for me and the cut quality is amazing even just running once a week.
pabs3 · 2h ago
> Open Source
The CC-NC-SA-4.0 license isn't an Open Source Definition compliant license, since it discriminates against a field of use (commercial applications).
It's open source to people and organizations who are not assholes and thieves.
I don't care about my fake internet points, so have at it.
OneDeuxTriSeiGo · 1h ago
It's worth noting that the project is CC-BY-NC-SA-4.0 however it comes with a notice that other licenses are available if you content them directly. So it may not be open source under the strict definition however the project is also not staunchly anti-commercial.
> Feel free to use the design in your private/educational projects, but don't try to sell the design or products based on it without getting my consent first. The idea here is to share knowledge, not to enable others to simply sell my work. Thank you for understanding.
lambda · 1h ago
It's simply not open source. It doesn't meet the definition.
It's co-opting the term to call it open source.
This has been debated and settled. What people mean by open source or free software has a well agreed upon definition, and this isn't it.
echelon · 46m ago
Open source has been turned against us and used to build hyperscalers that effectively control modern computing.
Pure open source is also not a sustainable business model. You have to be open core or non-commercial, otherwise anyone and everyone can steal your lunch.
You're asking for the right to compete when they've given you every other single right there is. That's just not nice.
echelon · 1h ago
I'm sick of open source purism.
These people are giving you code. You can use it, you just can't compete with them using the tool they made and that they're giving you for free.
The reason people want this last freedom is because they want to compete with the authors using the authors' own hard work. That's really lame.
Open source purism - especially for non-viral MIT and BSD licenses - is how Google and Microsoft and Amazon stole from the commons and turned it against us.
Google Chrome fucked up the web. AWS lifted Redis and Elasticsearch and makes hundreds of millions a quarter on managed versions, whereas the authors see none of that upside.
Or WP Engine, which basically lifted WordPress wholesale and gives absolutely nothing back.
We should all adopt FAIR SOURCE [1].
Fair source prevents people from taking your hard work and competing with you, but it enables your audience and your customers to use your software and modify it without restriction EXCEPT that they can't turn around and sell it in a way that competes with you.
The biggest abusers of open source certainly have a metric horse load of unavailable sources.
I 100% commend CC-BY-SA-NC and other fair source licenses. These are sustainable efforts.
If you're going to use open source, at least make it AGPL / GPLv3 so your contribution doesn't get metabolized into a completely non-free product.
> I 100% commend CC-BY-SA-NC and other fair source licenses. These are sustainable efforts.
Funnily enough, the CC BY-SA-NC is not a fair source license, as it doesn’t include a provision for delayed open source publication. It is quite important, actually:
> DOSP ensures that if a Fair Source company goes out of business, or develops its products in an undesired direction, the community or another company can pick up and move forward. Will this be meaningful in practice? Again, time will tell. – https://fair.io/about/
But I do agree with the sentiment otherwise.
pests · 36m ago
> Or WP Engine, which basically lifted WordPress wholesale and gives absolutely nothing back.
I understand (tho not agree with you) up until this point. Don’t forget Wordpress was not originally Wordpress, you would say they “basically lifted b2/cafepress wholesale and gave nothing back”. Wordpress wouldn’t exist otherwise.
paffdragon · 42m ago
When I read the title I remembered how people in the 90s at my place built their lawn mowers. It was a new thing. My father welded the frame from scrap metal with the motor from a washing machine and some tiny wheels from an old baby stroller lol. It was kind of open source, many people copied or he helped build one. Haha, served us surprisingly well for a time :)
sema4hacker · 3h ago
>I'm on the lookout for new challenges.
Please mod your mower to automatically pick up litter along road edges, and sell it to Caltrans at dot.ca.gov
Daub · 14m ago
Some titles I upvote without first following the link.
WalterBright · 2h ago
My dad's solution was simple: "Mow the lawn!" directed at me.
WillAdams · 2h ago
My solution has been even simpler --- I just use a reel mower (on an admittedly small lawn, ~1/3rd of an acre) --- it's a decent workout, esp. when I strive to finish quickly.
(the one time I asked my son to cut the grass he broke the reel mower)
aidenn0 · 42m ago
So this includes a CC licensed RTK base and remote? That's pretty cool.
DonHopkins · 2h ago
Two discussions about Larry Ellison battling it out for 14th and 15th place:
14. An IRC-Enabled Lawn Mower (idlerpg.net)
15. OpenMower – An Open Source Lawn Mower (github.com/clemenselflein)
sitkack · 1h ago
You wouldn't anthropomorphize a lawn mower would you?
The CC-NC-SA-4.0 license isn't an Open Source Definition compliant license, since it discriminates against a field of use (commercial applications).
https://github.com/ClemensElflein/OpenMower/blob/main/LICENS... https://opensourcedefinition.org/
A reminder, open source means surrendering your monopoly over commercial exploitation:
https://drewdevault.com/2021/01/20/FOSS-is-to-surrender-your...
I don't care about my fake internet points, so have at it.
> Feel free to use the design in your private/educational projects, but don't try to sell the design or products based on it without getting my consent first. The idea here is to share knowledge, not to enable others to simply sell my work. Thank you for understanding.
It's co-opting the term to call it open source.
This has been debated and settled. What people mean by open source or free software has a well agreed upon definition, and this isn't it.
Pure open source is also not a sustainable business model. You have to be open core or non-commercial, otherwise anyone and everyone can steal your lunch.
You're asking for the right to compete when they've given you every other single right there is. That's just not nice.
These people are giving you code. You can use it, you just can't compete with them using the tool they made and that they're giving you for free.
The reason people want this last freedom is because they want to compete with the authors using the authors' own hard work. That's really lame.
Open source purism - especially for non-viral MIT and BSD licenses - is how Google and Microsoft and Amazon stole from the commons and turned it against us.
Google Chrome fucked up the web. AWS lifted Redis and Elasticsearch and makes hundreds of millions a quarter on managed versions, whereas the authors see none of that upside.
Or WP Engine, which basically lifted WordPress wholesale and gives absolutely nothing back.
We should all adopt FAIR SOURCE [1].
Fair source prevents people from taking your hard work and competing with you, but it enables your audience and your customers to use your software and modify it without restriction EXCEPT that they can't turn around and sell it in a way that competes with you.
The biggest abusers of open source certainly have a metric horse load of unavailable sources.
I 100% commend CC-BY-SA-NC and other fair source licenses. These are sustainable efforts.
If you're going to use open source, at least make it AGPL / GPLv3 so your contribution doesn't get metabolized into a completely non-free product.
[1] https://fair.io/
Funnily enough, the CC BY-SA-NC is not a fair source license, as it doesn’t include a provision for delayed open source publication. It is quite important, actually:
> DOSP ensures that if a Fair Source company goes out of business, or develops its products in an undesired direction, the community or another company can pick up and move forward. Will this be meaningful in practice? Again, time will tell. – https://fair.io/about/
But I do agree with the sentiment otherwise.
I understand (tho not agree with you) up until this point. Don’t forget Wordpress was not originally Wordpress, you would say they “basically lifted b2/cafepress wholesale and gave nothing back”. Wordpress wouldn’t exist otherwise.
Please mod your mower to automatically pick up litter along road edges, and sell it to Caltrans at dot.ca.gov
(the one time I asked my son to cut the grass he broke the reel mower)
14. An IRC-Enabled Lawn Mower (idlerpg.net)
15. OpenMower – An Open Source Lawn Mower (github.com/clemenselflein)