Engineering is the art of trade-offs. There are many versions of the constraint triangle, but here is a common one:
You can only have two of the three corners of the triangle. From your comment above you aren't willing to sacrifice High Quality, so your only options are to either spend more money building something with higher performance, or taking a long time to optimize something that still has high performance.
For this project I am deliberately picking Low Cost and Done Quickly, so I must live with Low Quality as a constraint. Now that I know this, what is the magnitude of my Low Quality?
I know that a flexible coupling will have run-out, and from the video it looks to be about 1/8". The pillow bearing is mounted about an inch from the tip. Using the rule of small angles, the run-out at the tip is approximately 1/8" x 1"/27" = 0.005" or 5 mils. Lets say the bearing has some additional slop, so that the tip deviates around 10 mil while spinning.
This is unacceptable work-piece run-out for a cutting tool on a carriage.
However, the 10 mil is absorbed by the fact that I am using a wooden block wrapped in sand paper as my tool, and holding it with my hands, which is even worse precision than the runout
- Compared to ISO 9001 and expected machine shop quality standards, this won't pass.
- Compared to changing a tip completely by hand like in Dr. Dave's videos, it is an improvement.
So when you encourage people, you also need to understand the context under which they are doing something, and try to avoid assuming that you know best in all engineering cases.
EDIT: This is also one of the reasons machine shop guys complain that engineering doesn't know what they hell they are doing, and that this will never work well. There are usually layers of management and finances demanding all three corners of the triangle at once, and engineers need to cut corners to keep schedules working.