@AugmentedPath
Account based inUnited States
About this account
- Account based in
- United States
- Connected via
- United States App Store
Account-level information from X, not a live location or the device used for a specific post.
Carpenter running local models on a Mac Mini beside a 6x12 CNC. Helping shops own their stack instead of renting it. Named machines, named failures.
Boston, MA
Joined February 2026
- Tweets1.6K
- Following967
- Followers1.6K
- Likes3.8K
A production file does not leave this shop until somebody records the machine: all twelve positions in the tool rack, and the thickness of the sheet actually on the bench. Nominal three quarters and what the calipers read are two different numbers, and the file only knows the one somebody typed. That gap is a scrap pile, not a rounding error.
The demo is the easy half. Our generator stops at DXF and hands the toolpath back to the shop, so the post processor stays on the machine where a person owns the cut. No G-code comes out of it, by policy.
One number on a slat wall is not on the drawing: the finished face thickness. Ours gets laminated up from three to twelve layers of the same stock, and that face plus the gap you set fixes the spacing for the whole run. Ask for fourteen layers and the software hands back twelve and says it changed the count. A wrong face is not one wrong slat, it is the same error repeated down the wall.
One tapered cutter has three paper trails here: a kit list, a manufacturer sheet, and a decoder sheet somebody posted. Two of them give different small end diameters and the third gives none at all. Nothing on that stack resolves it. The measurement that would have to come off calipers, and nobody has run it yet.
nitter.cf/AugmentedPath/article/…
The Augmented Path retweeted
Roon already told us their plans btw
Whatever disasters we see in the future, it’s made by them to serve their narrative period
The playbook here is regulatory capture.
Create a bunch of manufactured hacks or hazards and demand the government step in to regulate the industry with a large regulatory burden that requires a lot of capital that only the incumbents can afford.
The reason they are doing this is the secret is out that the models intelligence can be subpar as long as the agentic capabilities/harness are strong. That creates a disruptive opening for new players like Muse & Instinct who may have decent models but are still much more valuable because of how well the agents are integrated into tools/web.
If anyone can put me in touch with anyone in the U.S. congress or senate so i can advise them on this it would be greatly appreciated.
The Augmented Path retweeted
YOU SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO ‘BRICK’ A FRIDGE
YOU SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO ‘BRICK’ A FRIDGE
YOU SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO ‘BRICK’ A FRIDGE
YOU SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO ‘BRICK’ A FRIDGE
YOU SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO ‘BRICK’ A FRIDGE
YOU SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO ‘BRICK’ A FRIDGE
YOU SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO ‘BRICK’ A FRIDGE
Owners mourn spoiled food after firmware update bricks Samsung smart fridges arstechnica.com/gadgets/2026…
The cutter kit came off a quotation dated in April. Four months on it is still a quotation, and those entries still read quoted rather than received. Age does not upgrade a document. What upgrades it is a delivery slip and then a caliper, and neither has happened for most of the names on that list yet.
nitter.cf/AugmentedPath/article/…
Right number, wrong scale, and the part is scrap: the oldest bug in a shop, fixed by one line in the file. Every DXF my software writes names its units in the header, inches or millimeters, so the importer has nothing to guess.
An AI can identify the right button and still click the wrong place.
Holo4's documentation gives a concrete example. The model returns screen coordinates on a scale from 0 to 1,000. The software controlling the computer must convert those numbers into actual pixels.
On a 1920 × 1080 screenshot, the point (500, 500) means pixel (960, 540). If the software gets the scaling wrong, the click lands somewhere else.
That helps explain how H Company's new computer-use model works.
Holo4 chooses actions across screens, code and connected tools. A surrounding software loop, called a harness, executes those actions and sends the results back for the next decision.
Imagine downloading a spreadsheet through a browser, calculating totals with Python, then updating a business system through its API. That's the kind of workflow this combination could support.
But each connection introduces a possible failure.
→ A screenshot and the click coordinates can use different scales.
→ Important details can disappear when the conversation is shortened.
→ Code can run on a different machine from the desktop, where the downloaded file doesn't exist.
→ A poorly designed loop can stop before the task is finished.
H says it rebuilt its harness with better memory and a shell on the desktop machine itself.
The hardware has a separate role. Compute runs the model, the target computer runs the apps and executes actions. Those can be separate machines when using a hosted model.
For self-hosting, H documents vLLM and llama.cpp options. Hardware and memory requirements depend on the model, precision and context length.
The engineering question is whether the whole loop stays consistent across hundreds of steps. What the agent sees, what it remembers, what it executes and what actually changed.
Two Becker pumps pulling 24 inches of mercury will pin a cabinet side on that vacuum bed with no clamps at all, and a bracket a few square inches wide sits there looking just as safe until the cut frees it and the last pass throws it. Small parts with no shop-set minimum area get a flag asking for that number, measured on your own table, so the retention question gets settled at the desk instead of on the floor.
An invoice is a narrow document. Mine proves brand, part number and quantity for nine cutters, which is enough to count them and not enough to cut with. It says nothing about where the transition point sits on a compression bit, and no invoice ever will. Knowing exactly how much a piece of paper proves is most of the work.
nitter.cf/AugmentedPath/article/…
Nine cutters in my catalog can be settled by walking to the machine, pulling the drawer and counting them with a hand. The rest are paper that agrees with itself. Those are two different levels of knowing, and only one of them survives a Monday morning when the question is whether the tool you need is actually in the rack.
nitter.cf/AugmentedPath/article/…
Twelve pockets in the rack on the 6x12. Ten of them are named in the map before the sheet goes on: 1/2, 3/8 and 1/4 compression, a downcut pair for laminate, a 60 degree V-point, two brad-points for shelf pins. T11 and T12 stay open so a job can bring its own cutter. That map follows the operations this shop runs, not the order the vendor lists them in.
In my catalog a number goes in with the paper behind it, or it does not go in, and the grade stays written next to it. What turns a catalog number into a cutting number is one measured cut in our own stock with the feed and depth written down. Nine of the forty-four have that. The other thirty-five are waiting on a cut.
nitter.cf/AugmentedPath/article/…
The Augmented Path retweeted
AI is a big W for 40-somethings. Old enough to have learned how to do things the right way, young enough to learn some new tricks.
A feed chart printed for a router was run on somebody else's stock, their hold-down, their spindle bearings. Same cutter, different shop. Push a compression bit past the depth where it does its job and the sheet you were cutting becomes a template for the sheet you have to cut again.
nitter.cf/AugmentedPath/article/…
Dimensions are the easy half. A part can measure right and still be scrap if the grain runs the wrong way, so every cut sheet my software writes carries the grain the part wants next to the grain axis of the actual board, and until somebody confirms the board it prints unconfirmed rather than a guess. Cheap to write down once. Expensive to find out after the cut.
🧵1/2-The Presentation Board-Drawings
I just made the presentation board, then I made the drawings for it. I do that a lot.
Here are the drawings-have at it, and give a shout if there is dimension missing.
To make the legs efficiently and safely
I find myself thinking about the process of making woodworking parts and pieces when things quiet down. I don't have a lot of patience, so I want to figure out how to do it quickly and safely.
Here is how I made the legs for the floating boards.
1-Started with a 3/8" x 1 3/8" board that was 18" long
2-To make the tenon I ran them on a table saw to a width of 1/4". I then ripped the pieces to 1" wide (the feet are 3/4" and tenon 1/4"
3-I taped them together and traced the pattern on them.
The shop ticket for a slat wall tells the operator to write each part ID on the concealed rear edge by hand, because the software will not engrave one on the face. A part number cut into the show face is permanent, so it is a mark the customer has to look at for the life of the wall. The number lives on the card and the edge, and the face stays clean.
This shop's tool catalog is not allowed to hold a speed or a feed. A test in the software fails if an entry ever grows a chip load, a cutting data record or a confirmed flag. What that buys is an honest answer: ask it for a feed and it names what is missing and hands the decision back, instead of producing a confident number out of whatever was lying around.
nitter.cf/AugmentedPath/article/…
