CNC Machinist

$80–120/hrrate as listed

micro1 is contracting experienced CNC machinists to supply setup, troubleshooting, and inspection expertise that trains AI models on real machining work. You'll write and review detailed process explanations covering Haas industrial and desktop platforms, GD&T interpretation, and failure diagnosis — pay observed in the $50–100/hr range.

Summary, eligibility guidance and screening preparation are prepared by Sidequest from the platform's posting. Check the source listing before applying.

What the work involves

This is not shop-floor labor. You're translating hands-on machining judgment into structured training data: writing step-by-step setup narratives, diagnosing a described chatter or dimensional-drift scenario and explaining your reasoning, or reviewing a model's answer about work-offset procedure and marking exactly where it goes wrong. Tasks are typically drawn from real production situations — a first-article that came in 0.003" oversize, a thin-wall aluminum part deflecting under a roughing pass, a tool change that shifted Z on a Carvera.

A typical block of work might include:

Writing detailed process walkthroughs for a part given a drawing with GD&T callouts
Comparing two model-generated machining approaches and justifying which is manufacturable
Flagging answers that are technically plausible but would scrap a part or damage a spindle
Documenting inspection method choice — when a caliper is adequate versus when you need a micrometer, indicator, or CMM

What the platform screens for

micro1's screen is AI-led and conversational. It probes depth: expect follow-ups that go a layer past your first answer, asking for specific machines, controls, materials, tolerances, and what actually happened. Vague experience claims collapse quickly. Reviewers care that you can distinguish a real cause from a superficially similar one, and that you can write clearly enough that a non-machinist annotator could follow your logic. No AI or ML background is expected or required.

Logistics

Fully remote and largely asynchronous. Contributors generally set their own hours against task batches, with volume varying by customer demand — some weeks are steady, others are thin. Engagements are contractor-based, and the $50–100/hr band reflects rates observed on similar micro1 listings rather than a guaranteed offer; actual rate depends on screening outcome and task tier.

What they look for

Machine set-up & Operation
Haas + hobbyist crossover
Precision measurement & blueprint interpretation
Troubleshooting

Before you apply

Would you pass this screen?

Drawn from what this listing actually requires. Answered in your browser — nothing is sent to us, and we do not store your answers.

Do you have at least 5 years of hands-on experience setting up and operating CNC machines?
5+ years hands-on CNC machining · required
Do you have direct experience operating Haas control systems (such as VF-2 or similar platforms)?
Haas control systems experience · required
Are you proficient in reading engineering drawings, interpreting GD&T callouts, and using precision measurement instruments (calipers, micrometers, indicators, or CMM)?
Blueprint and GD&T proficiency · required
Have you machined both metals and plastics, and do you understand the setup and process differences between them?
Multi-material machining · preferred
Have you worked with hobbyist or desktop CNC platforms such as Makera Carvera or similar small-format machines?
Desktop CNC familiarity · preferred
Are your written and verbal English skills strong enough to provide clear documentation and technical feedback?
Strong English communication · required

0 of 6 answered

Included with this listing

Interview prep — 13 questions

Matched to what this platform's screening actually measures. Answer each out loud in 60–90 seconds: claim → concrete example → implication.

What it tests: Whether candidate has hands-on setup experience and understands the sequence of work-holding, tooling, offsets, and inspection—not just machine operation.
A strong answer: Candidate names specific setup steps (clamping method, tool offset entry, work offset zeroing, runout check) and describes a concrete verification method (dial indicator, first-piece run, comparison to drawing), showing they've done this repeatedly and know when a setup is safe to cut.
Where people lose it: Candidate describes running pre-written programs without owning the setup process, or mentions only the cutting phase—suggesting they run loaded jobs but don't actually set up machines independently.