I just wanted to make something new, I have a similar project on my github called pc anatomy that blew up, basically dissecting an entire computer to the smallest cuda core.

I got to many messages from teachers wanting to use it to teacher their students, and the thought of something like that actually being useful got me excited. So I decided to make another open source but this time for students in the medical field, I felt like doing the entire anatomy of the body is too ambitious to start so I decided to start with the oral field.

I hope that answers your question, it all just kinda boils down to me wanting to help people and make something free and open-source, sort of to start a community around it.

Just to clarify the 3 days part though, that is the implementation period currently visible in the GitHub history. The research, planning and architecture work started roughly 2 weeks before that.

But I agree with the broader point. The useful part is whether the tool actually helps someone understand the anatomy better, and that is what I care most about improving now.

I did go back over 'your' work to see why I incorrectly concluded that your model had 38 teeth. It turns out that the mandibular left third molar has a label of "38" when you hover on that tooth. That led me to believe that your jaw somehow fit 38 teeth into the picture. At my dentist, they track oral health of the teeth in the jaw during exams, noting which teeth have fillings or other restorative processes applied so that the dentist can focus on the exact tooth. Their numbering is always 1-32 so when I saw that 38, and other numbers that seemed out of sequence with those I have noted on my own charts, I figured that it had to be wrong. I counted teeth and did not come up with 38 though I also couldn't figure out why a tooth in your model would be labeled "38" unless that is merely an identifier of the specific element displayed.

I see now that your teeth use numbering 21-28 for upper left teeth; 31-38 for lower left teeth; 41-48 for lower right teeth; and 11-18 for upper right teeth. That makes 32 total.

I should've counted. I didn't do that. I made an incorrect assumption that there might be a standard numbering system in place for teeth so that any dentist anywhere could look at a number and know exactly which tooth it referenced. Evidently that is not the case since your model splits a jaw based on right/left and numbers front to back from incisors to molars. That is not the numbering scheme used on my own dental charts which use 1-16 for upper jaw and 17-32 for lower jaw. There is no 38 in that system. This has to be a software issue. My dentist still uses Windows 10 so perhaps they are locked into a different oral health package.

>The rest is just a long rant based...

LOL. This is correct. Too bad. I offer an apology which you can accept or reject. The rant is not terribly out of line for submissions to HN, many of which draw the same criticisms. In this case it appears to be invalid.

>Sounds like an old grump that is falling behind to AI

Actually the old grump part probably fits since I had just made it to my desk and your submission was the first thing that I checked out since it looked interesting. I had not had coffee until after I submitted that post so perhaps my mental capacity was significantly diminished by caffeine depletion.

I'm not falling behind to AI and AI is not threatening to make my job obsolete. There is no part of my work that uses AI so there is no way for me to fall behind.