The Farm Hack River of Activity
Stream of Forum Topics
| In 50 characters or less... | Posted by | Post date | Last comment | Number of Comments | # of Comments new to you | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 |
where are you buying the parts to retro fit the rototiller? | benlyons22 | Saturday, September 21, 2013 - 5:47pm | Saturday, September 21, 2013 - 5:47pm | 0 | |
 |
Farm Hack Davis California | will.greenhorns | Saturday, September 21, 2013 - 12:53am | Saturday, September 21, 2013 - 12:53am | 0 | |
| Farm Hack Teamster | will.greenhorns | Saturday, September 21, 2013 - 12:48am | Sunday, September 22, 2013 - 9:43pm | 2 | ||
|
|
Covering material | pedalingvegetables | Saturday, September 14, 2013 - 10:27am | Saturday, September 14, 2013 - 10:27am | 0 | |
|
|
New Cell Phone Switch for controlling Electric fences | nigelg | Friday, September 6, 2013 - 5:58am | Thursday, January 23, 2014 - 10:19am | 1 | |
 |
New Cell Phone Electric Fence Controller | nigelg | Friday, September 6, 2013 - 5:42am | Friday, September 6, 2013 - 5:42am | 0 | |
 |
Invite to Public Lab 2013 Barnraising October 4-6 in Louisiana | jywarren | Thursday, September 5, 2013 - 2:35pm | Thursday, September 5, 2013 - 2:35pm | 0 | |
|
|
GitHub now shows previews of 3D Models! (STL files) | R.J. Steinert | Thursday, September 5, 2013 - 2:15pm | Thursday, September 5, 2013 - 2:15pm | 0 | |
|
|
No sufficient permissions to edit | Johannes | Thursday, September 5, 2013 - 5:17am | Thursday, September 5, 2013 - 5:17am | 0 | |
|
|
DIY Well Workshop | nvrsummersteve@... | Saturday, August 31, 2013 - 4:10pm | Saturday, August 31, 2013 - 4:10pm | 0 |
Ok, I found what might be a temporary fix. I turned off the "Convert URLs into links" filter for the "Markdown Syntax and HTML" text format. There might be a way to make the "Markdown" filter and the "Convert URLs into links" filter work harmoniously but for now we'll role without the "Convert URLs into links" filter. We'll look into some WYSIWYG like buttons down the road that will help folks create the necessary markup without needing to remember all of the syntax quirks. For example, there could be a button that you press that then prompts the user for a URL and text and then inserts the proper syntax. It's not true WYSIWYG but this technique makes the learning curve for the syntax easier to climb.
If this is the first time you've heard of WYSIWYG, it's a program that sits inside of a text box on a webpage that makes the text box act like Microsoft Word. Unfortunately it creates nightmares when used for documentation. Things like diffing (comparing) versions of a Wiki page become incomprehensible, you can never get what's in the WYSIWYG to look like what it actually spits out, and if you ever change the settings on a WYSIWYG you risk breaking every piece of documentation when you go back to edit it. WYSIWYGs do however work really well for writing blog posts that you only (theoretically) edit once and then is set in stone.
WYSIWYG example using the LATEX syntax from Wikipedia's page on WYSIWYGS:
Right on...An online marketplace to move R&D to a next step could bring together enough folks to both demonstrate need if outside funders (kick starter/foundations/other grant makers) would like validation/documentation, and it would reduce the development cost if the project is funded internally by coordinating orders, doing small production runs etc.... I especially like the idea of tapping into university projects. I could see projects going both ways - some originating at the university and finding legs to get to the next stage on farm hack, and projects that are stuck (eg. technical barrier, documentation, testing, prototype needed etc.) on farm hack moving forward because of assistance from student projects, university machine shops etc.
Many grants require public posting of results, and Farm Hack could be written in as the dissemination method for grant funded projects. It would also be a good place to cruise to get ideas for new projects to work on for funding proposals.
I think we talked at RSDI about something that might be a cross between an etsy type market place for farmhack tools and kickstarter type function for funding R&D? Cool stuff...
Thanks for explaining further Louis. I see there is still an issue with that way of making links at the moment so I'll try to work the kinks out right now.
I included an example on the Tool page of a project that I'm currently working on where I link to a wiki about myself (vain, I know).
I'll try to explain it here though. Currently, you can format your forum posts, wiki entries, and the main body of tools using Markdown Syntax or HTML - those are two common syntax that you may run into in lots of places on the web.
Markdown is especially convenient for links. This is how you do a link for Farmhack: [FarmHack](http://www.farmhack.net)
Now when you're pointing someone to other places on the site, there's an even shorter way to give links! Let's say I want to point you to the tool page like I did above, I wrote: [project](../tools/fido-greenhouse-monitoring-text-message-alerts). The "." prefix is basically a way of telling the browser to go from where I am (farmhack.net/forum) and adding another "." to it backs it up to the parent directory (farmhack.net). Then you continue to write the URL how you normally would.
Could someone do an example of creating a loose wiki and linking it so I can see how its done in the edits?
Tim from Oxbow Farms inspired me to bring it back. It's not the most catchy name (any suggestions?) but I think it's pretty useful. I also added a notice when creating a "loose" Wiki page, "You are creating a loose Wiki page that nothing links to. You will need to link to this Wiki page from somewhere after you save it if you want anyone to find it."
Hackstarter sounds like an excellent idea. Would partnering up with people like Slow Money be helpful? Approaching universities with specific projects might be an easy way to get access to grants or other funding for R and D, especially if Farm Hack could partner with someone doing their master's thesis or other research. Or perhaps a combination of both?
The online market place seems like a necessary step in making products available!
Hope this is helpful!
Ah, you just found a bug. I think I fixed it, go ahead and try that link again.
That's a legit issue on my radar. Thanks for reporting it.
Hi RJ, I think I figured out how to emulate the bill of materials on the Fido tool wiki. I'd love to discuss how to document this further. When I click on the link you gave to contact you it takes me to my own profile?
Hi you two. Ya, I set the upload limit incorrectly. There was also a file upload but no image upload on comments and an image upload but no file upload on Forum topics. All should be fixed now.
it is fixed
Fixed! Thanks for catching that.
Hi Tim, I am so glad that you posted. I think your post is already a valuable contribution. You have just illustrated where we are with the Farm Hack site - you are on the leading edge of helping to develop the standard for documentation and templates. It was on my "to-do" list to try and post a sample template for community review this week, but I think that a good guideline might be that each entry eventually reach a stage where anyone, anywhere would be able to reproduce and operate the tool using the tool wiki and forum. Some standard components will be a bill of materials, cut lists where appropriate, materials sourcing, and as many technical drawings/CAD/sketchup type files as possible, and then use of sequential photos/videos for the "how to" use and build sections which would follow an instructables like format.
I am facing some of the same organization questions as I start to post several projects from my farm- some of which have many sub-components to them. I would recommend that you try to post separate entries for each section of your design - say one for the movable tunnel as a whole, then one for the wheel assembly and another for the hoop bender. The more descriptive you can be in the titles of the tools and entries the better. The movable tunnel as a "meta tool" could then link to the sub-components that you have developed. I think this would enable others to start new threads for other approaches which could also be linked to the original mobile tunnel entry. I hope others jump in on this conversation too - I think it is important.
There is a general discussion going on in the forum discussing how the community wants to handle the approval process, structure, sorting, searches etc. I would encourage you to jump in to the dialog there as well!
http://www.farmhack.net/forums/do-we-want-tool-approval-process
Right now Fido - Greenhouse Monitoring with Text Message Alerts is our most complete example. You can edit Fido's Tool Wiki to see how some of the formatting is achieved. You will also find some good examples over at the Tool section on http://publiclaboratory.com/tools (our #1 influence for the current Tool section). Feel free to ask me questions directly (http://www.farmhack.net/user/8/contact), I would be more than happy to help out and I am working on the website so our discussions may lead to usability improvements for other users as well.
I would welcome some advice on putting together material and construction details. Is there an approved format (examples)? I'm also very interested in feedback and discussion on methods for making the moving process faster/more efficient. Fully anchoring the houses in spring/summer/fall is also a work in progress and I would welcome community input. Also, the wheel assemblies are basically separate units/ although not at all complex. Should they be described as a separate entry? Also#2 we had to build a small bender to create the "Gothic arch" bends at the peaks. This would be best described as a semi-funtional prototype. Should that get it's own entry? Tim
I think that this starts to overlap with the tool sorting/searching function discussion. I think it is important to have really low barriers to posting, and agree that it would be valuable to have a space where people can post and tag tools they find even with very thin documentation - sometimes that is all it takes to spark an idea, and we SHOULD promote that as much as possible. I also think that we need to not lose projects that are active and underway in the the middle.
For example, I think that the Root washer, FIDO, and oat huller are all tools that have users actively involved in farm hack and are projects with activity behind them. I think that these should maybe be in a different category and highlighted. Perhaps we list "tool browsing library" for casual listings and "tool documentation kits", or "tool projects" or something along those lines to indicate that there is member activity moving from concept to some type of action by the community?
There could be no barrier or permissions for posting to the browsing library, but if there are on-going projects then there might be a sponsor for moving the project - which would have the benefits mentioned above. I would suggest not adding any permissions requirements at all at first, but at some point I think the tool wiki should be editable by subscribers to the tool? This should not be not very complicated to manage, but just add one step to commit a little more to the project.
I think just as there are stages of development for tools, we have stages of development for the forum/wiki/site. I agree that as we get a longer list of tools we will likely want to search by function and application, but I think as we are establishing standards for tool documentation that it would be helpful that the first few tools people see are well documented with a lot of activity around them. As we have more to choose from, we will be able to highlight them in the blogs for this purpose, and depend on a more advanced menu/search function later. So I would see sorting/listing by stage and documentation level as an early stage approach as we are building and then moving to something more advanced?
My first shot at a definition of a Tool Wiki:
I like that answer because it describes our collaborative process using Forums and Wikis but it lacks insight on exactly WHAT should bubble up from the Forum to the Wiki.
Before we set any strict guidelines I think we should see what happens, and in doing so, see what works and what doesn't, and I have a feeling that "What a Tool Wiki should be" will depend on the Tool. But, we may be able to start setting a few guidelines as to "What Tool Wiki pages are not." Wikipedia uses a list of "What Wikipedia is not" to help describe what Wikipedia Articles on Wikipedia are http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not.
My first idea on what Tool Wikis are notIt's worth mentioning that the use of Instructables embedded directly on a Tool Wiki as opposed to just a link to an Instructable is at odds with the definition I suggested above. Specifically, an Instructable in not the "collective knowledge of a tool that bubbles up from the Tool's Forum". The Instructable is on another site and the owner of the Instructable may be unaware that there is a forum about their tool on Farm Hack where new information is coming to light. An Instructable is also not a "collaborative document" because only the original author of that Instructable can edit it. I make this sound worse than it it really is :P. In my opinion Instructables should ABSOLUTELY be listed on our Tool Wiki pages but displaying it in a way that makes it look like it's part of our site is confusing as to the nature of that documentation. So for Instructables, I think a simple link would to the Instructable suffices.
This leads me to my first suggestion of what Tool Wiki pages are not:
Post renamed to "Farm Hack Glossary".
In thinking about our default listing / tool organization let's think about who our average user will be and why they are visiting the site.
Hopefully our average user is a farmer who is looking for a solution to an issue on the farm. Ideally that user will also be a contributor to the site in terms of tool development; but the vast majority will be arriving because they are looking for information first-- and hopefully they will be contributing info through forum posts, questions, and maybe tool posts later. Just think about Wikipedia, and what percentage of users arrive to find information vs. to contribute information.
So if I am arriving at Farm Hack because I heard it could be a good place to find a solution to a problem on my farm, the default tool organization that I want to see would be tools by category, so I can find tools that are relevant to my farm or my problem (fruit growing tools aren't much use if I'm a dairy farmer, etc.).
It's also nice to be able to sort to see tools displayed other ways, for example those of us on the Farm Hack development team clearly are interested in seeing tools sorted by level of development, but I think it's not the most relevant thing at all to the average user.
I was thinking the same thing about a search function. Users won’t want to have to search through pages of tools to find any given one. As the list grows it will become far too time consuming to find anything. Perhaps one way to help implement this would be to allow the tool’s creator and editors to add tags to the tool’s profile which can then be used as the basis for the search, along with other characteristics such as its stage and type. I’ve also been thinking about what you mentioned with regard to listing tools by stage. That seems like a good default system to list the tools. Perhaps there can also be some sort of dropdown menu which will allow users to select how they wish the tools to be sorted. Various listing options might include by stage, type, name, and creation date(if any such data exists about a given tool). And if tool usage/participation statistics get implemented which can gauge how much activity each tool has in a given time frame, tools could also be listed based on how much recent activity they have. This way, tools which are receiving a large amount of community support will appear at the top of the list.
I've used a few different trailers over the years and I'm in the process of developing a (welded) farm cart that also has a tongue for hauling with a bike (farmhandcarts.com). If you're looking at something that doesn't require welding check out Bluesky trailer hitches, which use a piece of rubber strapping and a pin to mount to the seat post. Human Powered Machines' Hauler trailer uses a great quick disconnect ball joint that can be purchased. You still need to figure a way to clamp it onto the bike, but it's a great set up. Hitching the trailer at the seatpost isn't optimal for bike geometry in theory, but in practice I've found it to work fine, and it makes it easier to hitch, as well as easier to move the trailer around when it's not hitched to the bike. Without welding the frame I think that following the garden cart concept of bent thin wall EMT and chanel bolted to plywood is probably your best bet.
It's exciting that the Tools section allows for collaborative development of new tools, but I think we limit the depth of our potential tool resource library if we set standards that are too strict for what is and isn't a tool page.
Those who have been actively contributing to the development of Farm Hack are no doubt jazzed on using this platform to comprehensively develop new tools by collaborating online- but not all farmer inventors are going to want to delve in so deeply!
Let's remember to make space for someone who sees an interesting tool on an old timer neighbor's farm and snaps a few cell phone photos of it and gets a good description from the neighbor about how it was made. Keeping our platform open to lower commitment levels of participation is more inviting to new members of the Farm Hack community (who may delve in more deeply later), and will mean more information, even if some of it isn't completely thorough, in our library.
I think that it is important to have someone to sponsor an initial tool posting, hopefully someone who has experience either using, or building it. I think this would lead to better documentation and exploration and improvement. Otherwise we can just have posts that we find around the internet that are cool looking but without the social connection - I think the forum is perfect for that kind of post.
If this discussion for advocating for a new tool is done in the forum, then we can avoid discussions afterwards about why something was posted or having to remove from the wiki incomplete inappropriate, or commercial products that are not documented.
I think that the documentation may be somewhat different with electronic devices needing less CAD type files and more electrical diagrams and posted code snippets, but the level of documentation required to reproduce it should follow the same model (roughly). Every tool should have a bill of materials, functional description, operating details- methods of use, assembly order, techniques etc...
I've noticed this issue too when uploading files although I was able to recover my text when I hit the back button. I tried multiple times until it went through and eventually it worked...
I have no idea what could be causing it but RJ might have an idea when he has a minute!
It seems that this bug has been resolved. Bring all your TXT, PDF, JPG, JPEG, PNG, or GIF that are 100MB or less!
Well, FIDO may end up being the first product of Farm Hack, but I don't expect it to be typical. I imagine most tools will be mechanical thus a mechanical template will no doubt be useful.