Feedback: every time I draw a rectangle it asks me to name the object; seems like the wrong default behavior.

yeah this seems insane. The push/pull also doesn't work the way I expect it to. Sketchups main selling point was how easy it was to use and pick up

Every interaction I try on KetchUp has some kind of gotcha. It doesn't snap to grid by default, and as you say, it's insane that I have to name every rectangle. I can't extrude a face with a single click-and-drag of the push/pull tool; instead I've got to select it first with the arrow tool (which strangely does not match how the Move tool behaves), then extrude. Also, clicking and roving through the File/Edit/View/Tools menubar doesn't interact as expected.

Sorry to say, this ain't SketchUp. It seems like yet another flashy vibe-code that has fulfilled an 80% quality level but crumbled on the final 20% of polish that really makes or breaks the user experience. Really feels like the author didn't test-drive it for usability.

Impressive how good that rust UI feels in a browser though. Even the text rendering is impressive. Maybe rust really is the future of cross platform web+mobile apps.

Also in rustlang, but under GPL3.

SketchUp 8 was the easiest software for me to learn, and it just clicks with me. I really wanted to learn FreeCAD, but there's something about the way it works that I just can't get along with, so I keep going back to SketchUp.

Later, I tried all the alternatives: Onshape, Fusion, Tinkercad, and the new SolidCraft, but SketchUp still feels so simple and intuitive to me.

I've had better luck with OpenSCAD for simple things, and I still need to try it out with LLMs. That's on my TODO list!

It's also weirdly good at taking an existing STL file of a functional print and writing some python to modify it.

One example was a badge holder that I liked the design of, but only held 2 badges. I wanted 3, plus a slot on the back for a key. Gave it measurements of the key, it grafted a key slot on the back, and added the third badge slot. In typical 3D printing fashion, of course I had to print like 5 iterations of the thing until the sizing of everything actually worked.

There are literally at least 5 softwares you can still use... As long as you stick to BeOS.

Need a 3D modeler? Use Claude or codex to build the 3D model first, then build the modeler around it as you iterate towards what you want to build

So many times I’ve had to spend hours learning a software, reading docs, doing tutorials, only to later be able to do a small basic idea of what I actually wanted to do in the first place

Now I can just build only the software I need, for the thing I need it for (or, ala REA, maybe either modify or reverse engineer some existing software, to better fit my workflows)

In that sense, it would also be cool to be able to drive KetchUp with an agent. I’m a big fan of what pen.dev has done (although now their tool is not free/open anymore)

I think it comes down to where you want to spend your time and attention.

https://www.winestockwebdesign.com/Essays/Lisp_Curse.html

Like, I have to imagine that 80% of the "quick stuff" people need to do in Blender would be done with:

* create quad * exude like 5 times * done

Maaaybe

* perform boolean operation between object and a circle or 3

---

Like, I have less than 200 hours in Blender and I was pretty functional after like ... 30 minutes to an hour of a single tutorial.

You’ve likely just switched hobbies to your Blender clone instead of what you wanted to make.

A good visualizer might be useful thought! If that part of the work needs to be validated.

I wonder if Claude Code and other similar tools start to maintain their own base apps that everyone keeps asking for? This would be like a "cache" that makes the requests cheaper/easier to deliver?

Then everyone's "own" apps is really just a customization layer on top of a solid base that already does all the heavy lifting.

All these clones of Photoshop and similar tools are mostly dead ends, they are experiments to see if you can do it, but there will be a consolidation around regularly maintained and powerful and complete apps that likely also offer support.

These experiments are dead-ends for the most part long-term. Fun play things, but they will not gain significantly user bases.

Why? Every time someone cripples software in the name of safety it just gets replaced with more capable software that isn't.

For the rest, at least so far, I haven't had the collaboration experience but for word processors I can't go back to local files that can't easily be edited/viewed/commented on by multiple people

I think they all have been post-trained on specific tasks like building sites, apps, etc and that is a large part of the reason they are pretty good at it.

I think the value of adapting full tools to your own workflow far outweighs the maintenance costs nowadays. The tool above for instance took my agent a couple hours and it was good to go. It wasn’t a small slice by any means either: it supports edit/obj mode, extrude, loop cuts, modifiers like subdiv, save/load, undo/redo, bones, auto rig, posing, and more.

Mind you, this is a slice of an open source tool which was still outside of what I wanted from it. Cost wasn’t even part of the equation here.

Since Blender is OSS, you could probably use one of the existing VR views for Blender and write a bunch of in-app Python scripts to do what you want, if you wanted to also be able to output to Blender files and work within Blender already.

This looks like a pretty well-trodden area in Blender.

Adding scripts into an existing product does not serve this.

I think we are entering into a new era where we don’t need to accept fully featured software with all of its decisions should they not fit our wants

And you get battle-tested software and a huge collection of existing plugins, operational modes, export formats, all that. Fully bespoke software for everything you want is a way toward losing interoperability between people and platforms.

But building up as opposed to building down is freeing in that I can also pull in ideas from Houdini and mix them in. Not to mention BECAUSE Blender is OSS, i can also use it as reference for implementations of particular things should I need that too.

IMO, this kind of full customization is going to become far more commonplace.

One of the tools (built for me to score options of different assets): https://id-le.com/review/intro-logo-animation

Video: https://youtube.com/shorts/tlI9_XBuqVk

Repo: https://github.com/nicobrenner/id-le

Online: https://id-le.com/

I could start from scratch obviously - but seems a shame.

I think both those apps are great and happy to know folks like you are maintaining them; this one though is simply more of a personal software than a path to an OSS project!

Before that, though, I think you have to learn what the experts do and what can be done and what you should want. And then you can start to make your own opinions.

By then, unless the major players have done it really wrong, you're not going to make something better than what already exists.

Right now, it's different, because we have that experience prior to the ability to just wish up an app and have it happen.

It’s always more work than it looks. You can get to mostly usable tools quickly if your request isn’t too difficult, but every time I use them I run into another thing that needs to be fixed, changed, clarified, or cleaned up.

It’s fun at first, but over time you realize you’re spending more time building the tools than using the tools to build the thing you originally wanted to work on.

I think personal software is best for highly specific tools or for things you need to use repeatedly for a very long time.

For something like a SketchUp competitor, I wouldn’t want to try to maintain my own. The number of edge cases and features is bigger than you imagine up front, and the vibecoded version that might appear a few hours after your prompt is going to be very far from the version you want to use.

My personal projects matter a lot. For some of them I am trusting my private data in the code, so I need to hold it to a high security and privacy standard. For others, I have hundreds or thousands of users (game mods, helper tools for hobbies, etc.), and I don't want to ship low quality to them.

Because I offer no warranty and work on it on my personal time. What use is code nobody uses?

> Also why would your private data leak just because you used AI to reduce time to code?

Because if I don't exercise rigor and review oops you let the security holes in (I had to do like 4-7 separate pentest passes on AI generated code to catch and close the vulnerabilities)

As I said, that is not what I meant by "personal projects that don't matter". And who said about code that nobody uses? 1 person is using that code in my definition, in case it wasn't clear.

So we are just talking semantics here at this point.

If it doesn’t matter then do what you want. By definition, it doesn’t matter.

Some of us actually use these tools, so it does matter. You do have to consider things when it matters.

The second sentence I agree, of course you need to consider things when it matters. Thats the basic definition of importance.

AI can get these done implementation wise but in my experience it needs guidance because it can't guess what features and details I want /don't want.

The difference is that it's now possible at all for me but still requires a few hours every now and then supervising.

It’s amazing that you can get something usable quickly, but then every time you use the software you’re back in the AI working on your tool.

Using AI to build the tool becomes the project, replacing the project that led you to think about vibecoding a tool.

For instance in the context of this SketchUp clone that might mean using AI to generate an addon for Blender.

For some of my recent projects I'm using the community edition of Odoo to serve as that substrate because it already has an established community of modules to draw from, ten years or so of real world use, and I don't have to burn tokens generating a user account system with permissions or the data models / ORM to interface with them.

This seems to be serving me well, but we'll see. It could be that I end up in the same the tool becoming the project scenario that you describe, just a little bit later than if I had started from a blank slate.

The vibecoded apps all rely on an army of users exploring the program and reporting all the bugs and edge cases. You don’t want to be doing that on your own.

it seems like the open-source space is losing some aspects of collaboration. people used to search for already existing projects on some git-hosters, maybe fork them or put effort into the existing thing. now half a dozen people each run their own race using AI, each solution misses 30% of the features and has x-amounts of bugs.

work together ffs :( i mean, 20 people can use AI to vibecode the same project, why does everyone now feel the need to do everything solo. (because they want to be the prolific founder and cool dude who did the most in the project* instead of being one of many contributors, i assume...)

*or rather, their AI.

I'm not too sure what the future here looks like and if this is even a problem, but things certainly are changing. These days submitting a well written bug report or feature suggestion, or validating existing reports is more useful than sending a PR.

ArtCraft is definitely a play at selling subscriptions.

The slew of "oh yeah, blah blah blah blah blah, that's why I built [X]." comments on every AI post now?

Click through and many you'll find "Pricing".

It's a gold rush.

2. Click "Fork"

3. Profit

Right, and that's something I already argued for since the very beginning of GenAI, namely that suddenly being very costly, economically and ecologically, is not that bad if you build upon what exists and collaborate on progress.

... except that's exactly WHY vibecoded project exist : they do NOT have to give a shit with existing codebase and agree on weird rules. They just start from "scratch". In fact I'm convinced there is the Ikea effect at play, namely that the PM of the vibe coded project is emotionally attached, even proud, of the result they think they provided somehow, despite them not actually doing it. Obviously for-profit GenAI companies have a big incentive to maximize token use and will never promote workflows and tool that minimize the one thing they monetize.

So even though I agree in theory, in practice I think there is little to no overlap.

To be fair neither is quite as complex as a whole 3D modeller.

> To be fair neither is quite as complex as a whole 3D modeller.

Once you cross a certain complexity in your project, it becomes quite work intensive even using AI to do the coding. All the back and forth and cleaning up, exploring ideas and starting from scratch again takes time and effort and maybe most importantly, extensive human thinking. Just to clarify, I am not against AI and use it extensively myself. But vieb-coding all your tools is just not really a feasable idea for most (time/token-cost constraint) if you tools are of a certain complexity.

But you could easily vibe code, e.g. an H.265 decoder, even though it is super complex.

I have lot of tools that work for me.

When externalities break them, it's usually one prompt to fix them.

https://m.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL3NwjxPeybkLhFjSfFg1iL4...

This is precisely what I'm doing.

Would love to hear advice from people who use CRM tools on the job.

By outsourcing the modeling to Claude or whatever, you don't learn how to build 3d models on your own. You've become dependent on the LLMs, and you're trivially replaceable by someone who can build 3d models on their own...because they can also learn to tell Claude to do all the work.

Their models are horribly topoligized, which will matter for most use cases for models; and if you’re just using it to make a cube, it’d be better to learn the related program to do that.

People tend to ask LLMs to make full art pieces (a decade of specialized knowledge and muscle memory), not “draw me a square”.

In 3d art, there is a gulf between the easy stuff and the hard stuff.

Tl; dr: for 3d art, I agree.

Not necessarily. But only if what you need is not available in open source or not achievable by forking open source. Otherwise it’s a waste of money (token) and attention. This is a significantly smaller pool that “build [all] your own tools”.

Although, AI mega corpos would love if we do constantly re-build everything. You can tell by the tendency of the agents to write everything from scratch instead of importing the code that does the same thing or better.

At least that's my experience.

Small tools with few features is great. a 3D modeler is not that.

It gets so much worse. At some point you start hitting edge cases where there is no clear right answer and you have to come up with a kernel wide coherent approach to things like 1ulp differences. Parasolid is full of decades of kludges on top of kludges and giant switch statements trying to preserve backwards compatibility as they explored the space.

I suspect people saying "everyone will vibe code all their software" have never actually tried to vibe code a meaningfully complex application.

Wat is the point of personal projects if in the end you learned nothing

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50406927

For an example. Lots of people are now vibe coding their tools.

I think people underestimate what a time investment building your own tool that's of at least medium complexity is, though. It might be worth it if it's something you'll use regularly for a long time, but I don't foresee it being the norm. Even assuming no bugs ever or no performance issues ever and all the architectural decisions made were appropriate (pretty far from current reality), merely describing what you want and how it should behave and look like is a long process, and one that isn't all that enjoyable once you go through it once or twice already.

The existing software that has been around for several years and you kinda dislike is probably much more reliable than your own homebrew, too. Doesn't matter in some cases, matters hugely in others. Learning that your custom video gallery organizer just vanished half your family videos probably isn't very enjoyable, but at least it's easy to recognize it happening. Something more abstract like CAD or 3d printing slicer, ehhh...

I have no doubt as a newcomer you can make software that will do what you want, but most likely the outcome will no be good, not because of yourself or the tool, but rather because the expertise to map the problem space to the solution space is not trivial, and that's precisely what requires a new way to think, and thus tools that aren't so easy to learn. It's not poor UX.

"So many times I’ve had to spend hours learning a software, reading docs, doing tutorials, only to later be able to do a small basic idea of what I actually wanted to do in the first place

Now I can just build only the software I need, for the thing I need it for"

So, I guess yes, if there is someone's hard work you can copy and steal and make your own, I guess that's true. But try to create something that no one has ever built yet.

I host it here: https://vibe3d.spoerri.dev - my partner enjoys it because she can bring an idea to print pretty fast.

Maybe a similar idea could be interesting for KetchUp as well.

Omg why is rust relevant to the question whether this is free or not.

PS. I think you might also want to review the comment guidelines on this site... e.g. "Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something. "

ChatGPT: Rust's biggest advantage is that it provides C/C++-level performance with much stronger memory safety guarantees, without requiring a garbage collector.

i directed pi to their documentation + github repo and created a pretty awesome skill that allows me to take measurements on paper, snap a pic, and then have it generate the drawing. can also snap a general pic and then provide a model number of an item in the pic, and it will maintain scale. this stuff used to take me an hour+!

Gained a huge user base quickly then sold to Google who wanted it apparently to help people toy around in Google earth, then they did little with it and eventually sold to Trimble, mostly a surveying company, who similarly had hopes it would help expand their users and market reach, which it hasnt really its mostly still evades commercial revenues and continues to be used by the same kind of users as originally

I'm a very casual user of SketchUp (I use it once every few months), but I have a single file which is a detailed model of my house, which I have invested many hours in creating, and that only works on the full Desktop app. So the free web app is not an option for me. And a subscription doesn't make financial sense so I have to ask for a new trial every time I have a home renovation project and I need to modify my model. I'm aware that eventually they might refuse a new trial (they haven't yet) and that day I will just stop using it and learn Blender.

However, I'm now realizing that at least for home renovation projects, an essential feature is the SketchUp 3D Warehouse, where you can download user shared models of a TV, a toaster, a chair, etc. Specially for a casual user, you don't need to have the exact model of your real chair, just a chair will do. So the warehouse is an essential part of the value.

I'm sure there are alternatives for free models other than SketchUp 3D Warehouse, but having it directly in SketchUp is super convenient.

When I was first getting started with Unity I made all my early models in Sketchup. Thanks for sharing.

No point filing a bug report; if the AI can't write it right, the AI probably can't fix it, and no one is willing to do the work.

This doesn't match my experience at all. Frontier models are quite good at finding the cause of and fixing bugs, if they have access to the right tooling. LLMs can easily fix bugs that they introduced with the level of detail in the average bug report.

This is great for small scale STL design too

The kinds of large scale projects I like to make in SketchUp really began to feel constrained at a certain point. A modeler with SketchUp's incredible UI that can take full advantage of any computer's available graphics hardware to render large amounts of geometry more efficiently would be a wonderful thing.

I'm very possessive of my SketchUp models, and so the idea of storing them on any kind of cloud server I don't have control over is abhorrent to me. I was not happy to see Trimble putting so much effort into making a web-based modeler.

My exit has been FreeCAD with an MCP-bridge, letting me talk to an agent that implements my requests directly in the FreeCAD file I have open. Works super well with FreeCAD which has all the features I need, but where they can be hard to discover.

You can set up a digital twin of your actual workshop, with config-driven models of table/band/miter/hand saws, router tables, drill press, chisels and rasps, all sorts of fun.

I recently added a jig system too, so you can build jigs that you can actually use, both in your shop and in the tool. It's all drivable by a human or an MCP, and has video and plan authoring and sharing built in.

I've been building this as a labor of love since getting laid off in April, it's all completely free to use and people have made some really damn cool plans with it.

[0] https://sawdust.diy

- Flatten aboard: https://studio.flet.dev/run/46tp8GPq9g/

- Make rabbeted box w/ optional sliding lid: https://community.carbide3d.com/t/rabbet-box-designer-on-fle... (working on a hinged option now)

drawing on what I learned putting together: https://github.com/WillAdams/gcodepreview and https://willadams.gitbook.io/design-into-3d

Sawdust has support for laser cutters [0] and has procedures for generating finger joint boxes, with svg export. It can also do more advanced forms via mcp, like this arcade cabinet design [1]. G-code is high on my to-do list because LightWorks isn't getting updates on linux any more would be great to send a design straight to my diode machine.

Sawdust also has support for 3d printing, both for including printable components in designs as well as printing scale models of your build [2]. No slicing built in, but full .step output for any slicer you like, with build volume aware scaling so you can print it on your machine.

[0] https://sawdust.diy/knowledge-base/how-to-use-the-laser-work...

[1] https://sawdust.diy/whats-new/laser-fabrication-enclosures-a...

[2] https://sawdust.diy/whats-new/woodworking-models-can-be-expo...

I signed up inside a minute of opening it :)

If you ever have/get any, a photo of any of the things on your site, actually built, would be a cool addition—make it real.

I have a few projects that are in progress while continuing to build out ShopSpec. This is so that I can address any rough edges as they come up. For instance, material handling and safety during sheet breakdown.

If you go to the plans section in the 'my shop' tab [0] and click a plan, e.g. this Pinocchio puppet [1] that someone requested via the public feature/plan request board, you can upload photos of anything you build and share a comment about how it went. Credit where due, I modeled this on Instructables and Thingiverse and similar project sharing sites. I for one cannot wait to see some pics of what people build!

[0] https://sawdust.diy/myshop

[1] https://sawdust.diy/plans/8088707d-db0a-4d2a-a73a-686f2c5e2c...

I'm embarrassed that "drag to orbit. The page scrolls past." has escaped my notice til now, yikes. I have an entire skill [0] devoted to eliminating this kind of ui slop, sadly it missed this one.

The landing page is very old at this point and definitely needs a freshen-up. The exploded view feature was built before fastener support, so you are absolutely right about that. Sawdust already can do much better, here's the same Sawhorse project's guide [1], take a look at the video there to see the fasteners driven in with respect for actual physical collisions :)

If you do try the product out you can easily submit feedback through the MCP or via the ui chat, I get paged for every feature request and love working on things users actually want. Would highly value any additional feedback.

[0] https://gist.githubusercontent.com/birep/bb865b2799d3f86d55f...

[1] https://sawdust.diy/share/882f2473-d283-46d0-8f38-7b289253d6...

https://developer.apple.com/news/?id=w5ngl9k2

There is a name for it: "enshitification" is the strategy of maximizing short term gains, even if that results in product suicide on the long run.

Trimble bought Sketchup 14 years ago. In the world of commercial software, that's a decent run and they seem to be going strong. They just aren't interested in the nickel-and-dime world of selling to and dealing with consumers.

Unfortunately, that's not a problem with the strategy. That was taken into account by the business when the pivot was made, and it was determined to be an insignificant amount of users. The strategy worked without any problems, given the increase in sales. Anyone who used it during the consumer period is no longer the intended customer.

I used it since the first demo version came out on CDs, and I disagree with that. It was definitely not fully featured and professional enough for professional use in the AEC market. It was a tool easy to use for tinkerers who wanted to CAD something simple at home without the cost and steep learning curve of AutoCAD.

The big problem for architects is it never got to be able to do architectural drawings while other software came in with easier 3d modelling and visualisation (revit which autodesk bought and built out fully for industry use, rhino etc. Even blender).

Google did very little with it and Trimble too. Google i can understand ignoring it after Google earth stopped being a focus. Trimble I dont really understand what they want it for

Also it was notable for being a major commercial success for the ruby programming language, outside ruby on rails.

Monopoly rent extraction targeting a captive audience

Business customers don't pay for "having more buttons than mere consumers". Their business depending on such a crucial tool makes them reliant on swift and extensive support, negligible down times and so on. They are being cornered by ecosystem lock-in and workflow dependencies.

You could sell the same software at low prices to both "classes" of customers and charge extra for the services relevant for businesses. But then the fiction of "professional" whatever would be gone on the business side. And more importantly, companies like SketchUp would have to admit, they are merely SaaS with bad scaling prospects.

The point here is, the actually largest share of consumers doesn't get served by the "market".

It's a systemic failure and people fail to grasp the exemplary nature of it.

https://occupysaas.com/

Going to have to try this!

[1] https://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=version&iI...

And it uses a project called openskp [1] to work with SketchUp files, also AI coded to some extend, but looks reasonable at a glance.

[1] - https://github.com/iamahsanmehmood/openskp

I will still continue to pay for the things i truly get value out of and are in my opinion reasonably priced. To support the creators.

If it was crocheting, I would get it, but woodworking is not an inexpensive hobby where the software becomes the top line item.

This here I would also use at my job whera I am a bit of a Jack of all trades so once a quarter I need to sketch some model of something to see if it would fit or not. Example would be right now i need to sketch a simple collision protection for a outdoor cable tray (for Solar Pannel Strings). Gonna not take me longer than an hour. I do not use it enough to justify spending 40 Bucks a Month 4 times a year.

Its just that often times, even us programmers seem reticent to pay for software even though we happily throw dollars across the counter for a sugary coffee somewhere.

I know of sketch up primarily from DYI magazines, hence the assumption.

KetchUp/BenchUp seems promising -- I was able to import a file from Sketchup Free and navigate around, but the polish just isn't quite there yet. This should improve quickly I think.

Seems unlikely that people are going to spend their Claude sub every month maintaining the thing either. They'll move onto the next cheap LLM project and dedicate their tokens to that.

Im sure that's not every project, but Id rather just have something reliable with a reputation. AI clones are killing open source's reputation for me, I just dont trust anything now.

Not to mention how easy it would be to get a malicious PR request approved into a public repo who's maintainer relies solely on the competency of a cheap llm.

ArtCraft is also pretty cool but I have my Affinity Photo 2 Licenses so I do not realy need these currently.

;-)

Been using Solidcraft which is another great example. Lower memory usage and better performance than Fusion 360 and improving quickly.

The power agentic development gives to a single person with love for the craft of software development creates better products than a large team with corporate steering.

This was always the case but types of software like advanced CAD modelling was outside the scope of what a single developer could accomplish. Now it isn't and it's a great thing that will create a lot of high quality new tools for humanity.

Seriously, the subscription frontier models scratch my control freak nerves and lets me build my computing set up just the way I want and not a single bit more. I’m currently making a minimal Linux distribution for myself based on Gentoo with the idea to develop any and all graphical applications except Firefox _for_ myself using LLMs. Nothing on my system I don’t need.. It sounds absurd but is still possible in 2026 with these subsidised LLMs. They are not my private data, so I don’t mind having the agents build it, test it, and automate it. If they want to train on my calculator app and CAD built upon other code from the Internet they are already trained on, they are welcome to :-)

This right here is a new age of personal computing.

https://github.com/egeozcan/ketchup

Problem existed even before AI, with framework names. Headlines like "Planecrash in Ohio gains 50% in one year", "ShowHN: I use car accident to get new customers", "Made my wife happy with broken arm"

I wanted to have that data model and SketchUp had this amazing cool thing where all plugins (which were written in Ruby) used to be running in the same space and so I could access the runtime of any other plugin. Here the team of OpenStudio were kind enough to share some of their internal APIs with me and so I could take their model and append my own data on top and let my users reuse all of their models from OpenStudio.

And then SketchUp web came and that whole plugin world was crashed. This forced me to go down the path of using a union-of-all-industry-file-formats (like TIFF for pictures) for building energy called gbXML, back then no one supported the file and so it was hopeless (and hard to implement) and eventually trying to create a CAD, which given the state of tech at 2016~2017 was hopeless too, and so it failed miserably.

Seeing this now, I was wondering how hard would it be to recreate that project with its own full CAD from KetchUp...

Would be worth trying with AI to help you develop it. Probably not too hard if you could spend a few weekends on it.

It's like Bootstrap, then React all over again in terms of all web sites looking the same and the "Claude look" is much more suitable for a literary site than a software product.

I just want to measure 3d simple blocks. And rest of the features are ADDITIONAL instead being forced on me. Love it.

There are good and bad slops.

Vibed out project has already gone through a rename and it's 2 weeks old?

Also, serious question, why would I trust this software?

https://github.com/MojzisekJan/rysmo

1. https://github.com/sawhorse3d/sawhorse

1) how do I make a thing exactly N units long? like, a 10cm long stick

2) can I just put dovetails in random places, and have them make the object split in two? Would be wonderful for 3d printing