I just wanted to shout out TRMNL.

They have an interesting product, and they’re trying to build a business that includes a lot of open source aspects.

The device that they sell is proprietary, but it’s also just an ESP32, screen, enclosure, and battery, with a custom PCB for convenience. They plan to add instructions to build your own device, and their firmware is open source under a GPLv3 license.

By default, their device connects to their servers, and they have a slick web configuration tool for people who don’t care about having smart devices call home, but you can easily modify the firmware to connect to your own self-hosted server instead. As of this evening, both the Phoenix and Sinatra server implementations are open source under an MIT license after I pointed out that they had no license in an issue, and they pretty much immediately updated the repositories.

There are two other repositories that they have not added a license to, but given their swift response, I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt, and I would expect them to be updated shortly.

They have not shared all of the plugins that are available on their hosted service for use on a self-hosted instance, but a few are available for use and there are many plugins made by others available as well!

As soon as they update those last two repositories, I plan to pre-order one (unlike the conceptually cool VU Dials who’s creators still have not added a license even after being called out by the co-creator of Rocky Linux).

  • irotsoma
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    11 hours ago

    $20 to unlock the API killed it for me. If it has a built in way yo lock it down, it’s not an open platform and is a great way for bugs to brick a device.

    • Dessalines@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Damn. I would really love one of these, to show off books, show my daily tasks, etc. Really unfortunate its locked down.

    • Midnitte@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Charging a one time fee for the API seems like a decent way to ensure continued operation.

      But if you don’t like it, you can run your own server

      • unwarlikeExtortion@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 minutes ago

        Checked the site quickly and didn’t find the information, but judging by the top-level comment, they don’t charge you if you want to use their cloud service, but if you want to “unlock” the ability to use someone else’s.

    • jevans ⁂@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      This is very similar to what Home Assistant offers as a paid service. I don’t see this complaint thrown at them, though. Also, any system that uses authentication has “a built in way to lock it down”.