Open Source Farming Robot

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Overall impressions and use cases

  • Many find FarmBot an interesting, well-presented open-source engineering project, especially appealing to “robot people” and education/research settings.
  • Several commenters say it’s better viewed as a gardening gadget or teaching tool than as a serious farming solution.
  • Some hobbyists would rather build a similar system themselves than buy the commercial kit.

Cost, scalability, and ROI

  • Repeated criticism that the hardware is very expensive for the area covered (e.g., ~$3–4.5k per bed, 4.5–18 m²).
  • Yield analysis link suggests ~549 m² to feed a family of four; commenters calculate this would require ~31 XL bots and over $130k, plus maintenance.
  • Many argue that simple drip/soaker hoses with timers handle watering for a tiny fraction of the cost.

Gardening vs. farming / target users

  • Farmers and serious gardeners say the system doesn’t address real labor bottlenecks (bed prep, mulching, pest control, large-scale weeding, harvest).
  • Viewed as unsuitable for commercial farms or even small market gardens; better for tech hobbyists, students, or niche research.

Watering approach and plant health

  • Strong debate over spraying leaves vs. watering soil:
    • Some insist overhead leaf-watering encourages fungi and is poor practice for vegetables; drip irrigation and soil-level watering are preferred.
    • Others note rain naturally wets leaves and overhead irrigation is common at scale; “water droplets burn leaves via magnifying-glass effect” is called a myth.
  • Consensus that FarmBot’s current watering approach is suboptimal but could, in principle, be adapted.

Weeding and capabilities

  • Many see lack of robust autonomous weeding as a major flaw; existing “rotary tool” attachment is seen as too manual or light-duty.
  • System can’t cope with tall crops (tomatoes, corn), tree crops, livestock, or large areas; gantry design doesn’t scale well.

Tech stack, openness, and design

  • Software runs on the BEAM (Erlang/Elixir) with Nerves; some praise this for robustness and unified app/ops model.
  • Hardware and software are open source, but plant data sources are noted as unmaintained.
  • Gantry choice is questioned; some suggest mobile rovers, circular/center-pivot-like systems, cable-bots, or hydroponic towers as more scalable architectures.

Broader critiques

  • Several call it “Juicero for gardening” or “nerds solving non-problems,” arguing that gardening effort is low at this scale and often enjoyable.
  • Concerns about durability outdoors, maintenance burden, web-app dependency for a “self-sufficiency” product, and slick, dramatic marketing.