▲ 448 ▼ DIY E-Reader Folds Open Like A Book (Diptyx) (hackaday.com) submitted 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) by mesamunefire@piefed.social to c/technology@lemmy.world 66 comments fedilink hide all child comments Another link: https://www.notebookcheck.net/Diptyx-E-reader-A-new-DIY-book-shaped-dual-screen-device-that-s-also-DRM-free.1146189.0.html
[+] natecox@programming.dev 70 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (3 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] tidderuuf@lemmy.world 78 points 7 months ago Welcome to modern astroturfing in the social media age. permalink fedilink source parent [–] mesamunefire@piefed.social [S] 29 points 7 months ago (3 children) There is a build page on the github for the device. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [+] natecox@programming.dev 7 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] MaggiWuerze@feddit.org 6 points 7 months ago There's no such link. Can't even find one through Google permalink fedilink source parent [–] batman0730@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago (1 child) Is there? Mind sharing the link? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mesamunefire@piefed.social [S] 1 point 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 child) I'll find it after Christmas. I got a fork a bit ago when looking at the code. I think its based on https://github.com/atomic14/diy-esp32-epub-reader Build logs: https://hackaday.io/project/204323-diptyx-e-reader permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Fmstrat@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago* Those aren't build logs. Those are "I took an open source software package and put commercial hardware around it." Which is fine, since it's MIT software (and why I push for GPL, personally). What's not fine is a creator calling their commercial product "open" or "DIY" without a BOM or build log. I would revise the post title regardless of what the author calls it, personally. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Fmstrat@lemmy.world 1 point 7 months ago I posted this as a comment on the creator's post. Will have to see if they respond. I see "open" in the title, but no git or Bill of Materials (BOM) links. Is this actually open? Or based on other's open efforts? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] tidderuuf@lemmy.world 78 points 7 months ago Welcome to modern astroturfing in the social media age. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] mesamunefire@piefed.social [S] 29 points 7 months ago (3 children) There is a build page on the github for the device. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [+] natecox@programming.dev 7 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] MaggiWuerze@feddit.org 6 points 7 months ago There's no such link. Can't even find one through Google permalink fedilink source parent [–] batman0730@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago (1 child) Is there? Mind sharing the link? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mesamunefire@piefed.social [S] 1 point 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 child) I'll find it after Christmas. I got a fork a bit ago when looking at the code. I think its based on https://github.com/atomic14/diy-esp32-epub-reader Build logs: https://hackaday.io/project/204323-diptyx-e-reader permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Fmstrat@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago* Those aren't build logs. Those are "I took an open source software package and put commercial hardware around it." Which is fine, since it's MIT software (and why I push for GPL, personally). What's not fine is a creator calling their commercial product "open" or "DIY" without a BOM or build log. I would revise the post title regardless of what the author calls it, personally. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] natecox@programming.dev 7 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] MaggiWuerze@feddit.org 6 points 7 months ago There's no such link. Can't even find one through Google permalink fedilink source parent
[–] batman0730@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago (1 child) Is there? Mind sharing the link? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] mesamunefire@piefed.social [S] 1 point 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 child) I'll find it after Christmas. I got a fork a bit ago when looking at the code. I think its based on https://github.com/atomic14/diy-esp32-epub-reader Build logs: https://hackaday.io/project/204323-diptyx-e-reader permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Fmstrat@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago* Those aren't build logs. Those are "I took an open source software package and put commercial hardware around it." Which is fine, since it's MIT software (and why I push for GPL, personally). What's not fine is a creator calling their commercial product "open" or "DIY" without a BOM or build log. I would revise the post title regardless of what the author calls it, personally. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] mesamunefire@piefed.social [S] 1 point 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 child) I'll find it after Christmas. I got a fork a bit ago when looking at the code. I think its based on https://github.com/atomic14/diy-esp32-epub-reader Build logs: https://hackaday.io/project/204323-diptyx-e-reader permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Fmstrat@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago* Those aren't build logs. Those are "I took an open source software package and put commercial hardware around it." Which is fine, since it's MIT software (and why I push for GPL, personally). What's not fine is a creator calling their commercial product "open" or "DIY" without a BOM or build log. I would revise the post title regardless of what the author calls it, personally. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Fmstrat@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago* Those aren't build logs. Those are "I took an open source software package and put commercial hardware around it." Which is fine, since it's MIT software (and why I push for GPL, personally). What's not fine is a creator calling their commercial product "open" or "DIY" without a BOM or build log. I would revise the post title regardless of what the author calls it, personally. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Fmstrat@lemmy.world 1 point 7 months ago I posted this as a comment on the creator's post. Will have to see if they respond. I see "open" in the title, but no git or Bill of Materials (BOM) links. Is this actually open? Or based on other's open efforts? permalink fedilink source parent