Open Source Hardware - How will this change technology and our lives?

[CanDMan]

Hello everyone! I know we have a lot of people here who love technology. We love the open source nature of Android and I have to wonder, how will our lives change when open source hardware becomes as every day as Linux now has?

Look up the global village construction set from http://opensourceecology.org/index.php to get an idea of what this will look like, then come back and discuss! Pro's Con's and everything in between, especially how it may eventually affect technological hardware.

 

[Bob Maxey]

My post assumes a few things so corrections, as always, are welcome.

I do not get the Open Source Hardware Movement (OSHM). Your link was interesting, but some of it--like the OS CNC Torch Table--can be assembled from kits and components that have been available for some time. I can find plans as well.

If I want to roll my own, I do not need to do much past ordering components that fit my specific needs and requirements and simply build my own custom tools. I can run the tools with freeware or I can likely find open source software and modify/compile on my own.

And once completed, I can build other tools to build other tools and eventually my shop becomes self aware and that is never good. I refer you to Terminator.

If I want laser cutting capability, I can get it through a hundred commercial vendors of laser emitters and component parts; from diode to gas, and then I do not need to build those specialized components from plans and parts. As if I could do so anyway.

What makes OSH better than commercial equipment? Seems to me the only reason I would want OSH is if I wanted to modify it and use it for free in another product, just like I can/could with the Android. Isn't that part of the deal with anything called Open Source? And since there are plans available from many sources, aren't they sortta like OSH?

And isn't the term: Open Source Hardware a catch phrase that really means very little? Again, corrections are welcome.

What am I missing here?

By the way, in my in my dreams dream shop you will find a four axis milling machine, a Water Jet Cutter, perhaps a five axis vertical machining center, and a Holzapfel Ornamental Turing Lathe. Not open source but bloody cool and a girl can dream.

 

[CanDMan]

I do not get the Open Source Hardware Movement (OSHM). Your link was interesting, but some of it--like the OS CNC Torch Table--can be assembled from kits and components that have been available for some time. I can find plans as well.

I don't doubt it. The Factor E Farm is looking to create a global village construction kit. They want to make all the equipment that a small population would need to meet all of their critical needs without having to buy products that are quite often defective/flimsy.

Basically it's to a companies advantage to ensure their products don't last very long. There is a tendency to plan obsolescence of products so that additional income can be generated. Take for example, my printer, which is a multifunction printer but will cease operation if the ink runs out. Can't even scan or fax until I buy ink again!

These folks are comparing the cost of making their own and making the design plan publically available for use and modification. They can reduce the cost of building the equipment by quite a lot! You won't get that kind of deal at retail.

If I want to roll my own, I do not need to do much past ordering components that fit my specific needs and requirements and simply build my own custom tools. I can run the tools with freeware or I can likely find open source software and modify/compile on my own.

The goal is an independent community through collaboration. All the food you need, all the machines you need to build tools, structures, and other machines, in one kit. Basically, it's for the good of all people, no patent claims or permissions needed. Once they have a prototype village, they will help others do the same.

And once completed, I can build other tools to build other tools and eventually my shop becomes self aware and that is never good. I refer you to Terminator.

Yes, automation is a goal. I'm not too concerned with robots turning on us in the near future. Personally I think this could reach a point where most things are automated, freeing up your day for things you really enjoy doing. Why go to work at a job you might hate when you have the necessities of life around you? The creator of that project believes that 2 hours of work a day would be enough to maintain our current lifestyles.

What makes OSH better than commercial equipment?


And isn't the term: Open Source Hardware a catch phrase that really means very little?

Collaboration makes it better. Everyday people think if something breaks you fix it by making it stronger. That's not how things work right now. Companies want things to wear out because you'll buy a replacement when it breaks. I had a watch with an all steel band. Purchased it because I was tired of replacing the rubber/plastic ones which would fall apart rather quickly. I didn't notice when I purchased it that it was actually steel mounted on plastic mounted to steel ...lol, they got me with that one!

If I designed it, I would not have designed it to fail that way. It would have been all metal, to last a lifetime.

 

[CanDMan]

Here's a short video of a talk he gave. He does a better job of describing his organization.

Marcin Jakubowski: Open-sourced blueprints for civilization | Video on TED.com

 

[Bob Maxey]

I don't doubt it. The Factor E Farm is looking to create a global village construction kit. They want to make all the equipment that a small population would need to meet all of their critical needs without having to buy products that are quite often defective/flimsy.

Basically it's to a companies advantage to ensure their products don't last very long. There is a tendency to plan obsolescence of products so that additional income can be generated. Take for example, my printer, which is a multifunction printer but will cease operation if the ink runs out. Can't even scan or fax until I buy ink again!

These folks are comparing the cost of making their own and making the design plan publically available for use and modification. They can reduce the cost of building the equipment by quite a lot! You won't get that kind of deal at retail.

The goal is an independent community through collaboration. All the food you need, all the machines you need to build tools, structures, and other machines, in one kit. Basically, it's for the good of all people, no patent claims or permissions needed. Once they have a prototype village, they will help others do the same.

Yes, automation is a goal. I'm not too concerned with robots turning on us in the near future. Personally I think this could reach a point where most things are automated, freeing up your day for things you really enjoy doing. Why go to work at a job you might hate when you have the necessities of life around you? The creator of that project believes that 2 hours of work a day would be enough to maintain our current lifestyles.

Collaboration makes it better. Everyday people think if something breaks you fix it by making it stronger. That's not how things work right now. Companies want things to wear out because you'll buy a replacement when it breaks. I had a watch with an all steel band. Purchased it because I was tired of replacing the rubber/plastic ones which would fall apart rather quickly. I didn't notice when I purchased it that it was actually steel mounted on plastic mounted to steel ...lol, they got me with that one!

If I designed it, I would not have designed it to fail that way. It would have been all metal, to last a lifetime.

I guess I have a problem with the their use of the term "open source." I really can't see any difference between what they are proposing and building something from a set of free plans and assorted scrap and junk parts.

As for working 2 hours per day, not so sure that will fly. This country cannot possibly grow or exist if everyone worked only 2 hours per day. Eventually, parts and materials run out and more materials must be mined and trucked and turned into parts.

Corporations can built better products. I remember the era of the "Fix-it" shop and you could get your radio repaired and tubes replaced. Long gone in most cases and the tech is so high that it takes far more tools and equipment to fix things these days.

And if your printer were manufactured from "better" materials, it would likely be costly and you might have never bought it in the first place. Imagine a printer made from Billet and very little polymers.

Bob

 

[mikedt]

There is plenty open source hardware already all around us, hardware where the patents have expired and designs and ideas are now public domain.

An example is the rotary electric shaver. Originally made and patented by Philips. Any company can now make rotary electric razors, and not have to pay royalties to Philips. Same with aperture-grill CRT TVs, invented by Sony as the Trinitron, patents have expired, any company can now make this type of TV.

There is hardware which has been purposely made as open source, e.g. The Pandora gaming device/laptop. OpenPandora It's rather clunky though and costs a lot of money, because they only hand assemble a few hundred at time.

I'm sure we're not going to be seeing open source hardware produced in large quantities and by large corporations, simply because they want to protect their investments in patents and high tooling costs to mass-produce products in large quantities, to make them cheap enough for consumers to buy.

 

[CanDMan]

1) I guess I have a problem with the their use of the term "open source." I really can't see any difference between what they are proposing and building something from a set of free plans and assorted scrap and junk parts.

2) As for working 2 hours per day, not so sure that will fly. This country cannot possibly grow or exist if everyone worked only 2 hours per day. Eventually, parts and materials run out and more materials must be mined and trucked and turned into parts.

3) Corporations can built better products.

I remember the era of the "Fix-it" shop and you could get your radio repaired and tubes replaced. Long gone in most cases and the tech is so high that it takes far more tools and equipment to fix things these days.

4) And if your printer were manufactured from "better" materials, it would likely be costly and you might have never bought it in the first place. Imagine a printer made from Billet and very little polymers.

Bob

1) Their plans are licensed to the public essentially. Same as the Android OS. A free plan you find online is no different. It is also open source.

2) The world as we know it can not continue to operate as it currently does. finite resources are exactly that ...limited. They will get used up eventually. Part of this movement is to use what you have locally and used it responsibly. Make tools (not products) that last a lifetime. If they wear, then remake them (recycling should be integral to the initial design).

3) Corporations can, but won't. It would put them out of business. The term for technology that does this is "disruptive technology". Corporation are run by a profit motive. Open source eliminates the profit motive (currently a reduction really). Sure, you could take the plans and make it yourself, or you can get it from someone who has done it before. This requires money now, but money is a fictional device used to regulate people. This will change with the increase in collaborative efforts.

4) I'd say, don't just imagine it. Design it and post the plans online! Every product a corporation makes can be made less expensively by a non-profit entity. Open source reduces corporate barriers to entry and allows people to reintroduce quality which is suppressed by profit motives.

 

[Bob Maxey]

There is plenty open source hardware already all around us, hardware where the patents have expired and designs and ideas are now public domain.

An example is the rotary electric shaver. Originally made and patented by Philips. Any company can now make rotary electric razors, and not have to pay royalties to Philips. Same with aperture-grill CRT TVs, invented by Sony as the Trinitron, patents have expired, any company can now make this type of TV.

Those are not really examples of Open Source Hardware, are they? They are simply expired patents and the products were not designed to be manufactured by others; they were designed to make Phillips and Sony money and they likely do not care if others use them to make money.

Bob

 

[Bob Maxey]

1) I'd say, don't just imagine it. Design it and post the plans online! Every product a corporation makes can be made less expensively by a non-profit entity. Open source reduces corporate barriers to entry and allows people to reintroduce quality which is suppressed by profit motives.

So you think non-profit groups can set up a chip foundry or an facility to make trains, planes, and automobiles for less money than Intel, Siemens, Boeing, and Ford? I seriously doubt it.

I would like to see examples of where a non-priofit entity creates products that are better just because they were made by groups that eschew profits.

I snipped most of your comments because I believe you to be quite naive. We are a great country because we offer anyone a chance to become wealthy, successful, and happy.

 

[CanDMan]

1) There is plenty open source hardware already all around us, hardware where the patents have expired and designs and ideas are now public domain.

2) Any company can now make rotary electric razors, and not have to pay royalties to Philips.

3) There is hardware which has been purposely made as open source, e.g.

It's rather clunky though and costs a lot of money, because they only hand assemble a few hundred at time.

4) Simply because they want to protect their investments

1) Agreed! open source is the belief that a patent is unnecessary. Create for the good of man. To benefit all.

2) Yes, and once a patent expires many do, and the profit margin decreases until there is no 'money' to be made. This leads to something else being invented (and patented) to give a market advantage and increase profits. This is competition. Collaboration would be adding said improvements to the original razor so that anyone could build it in. No reason to throw the old one away.

3) The cost is probably related to buying commercially made components. As open source technology gets better, the performance gap will close. Have you seen 3D printers? Self replicating printers?

4) Protecting an advantage ultimately. That is part of the problem.

A long video worth watching.

YouTube - ZEITGEIST: MOVING FORWARD | OFFICIAL RELEASE | 2011

 

[CanDMan]

So you think non-profit groups can set up a chip foundry or an facility to make trains, planes, and automobiles for less money than Intel, Siemens, Boeing, and Ford? I seriously doubt it.

I would like to see examples of where a non-priofit entity creates products that are better just because they were made by groups that eschew profits.

I snipped most of your comments because I believe you to be quite naive. We are a great country because we offer anyone a chance to become wealthy, successful, and happy.

I think it's a question of what motivates people Bob. A corporation is just a group of regular humans working together. Motivated by money, but to what end? Food, shelter, energy, transportation ...etc. The problem is, even where there is no shortage of food, people are allowed to starve for lack of money. When people can't pay their mortgage, they are forced out of their homes. This IS how things run, yes. This is not how things have to be run. The current system benefits the few over the many. This can be improved upon with collaborative efforts rather than competitive efforts.

Countries are also a human created construct. We are all people globally. We should simply collaborate to ensure the survival of the species. The rest of it is dysfunction based on beliefs.

I don't take offense at hearing your point of view. It is the current mantra. The money system requires a cycle of consumption to 'grow'. This has limits in a finite world. Imagine that the US could no longer pay it's debts. What happens to a bankrupt country? Do all the resources just disappear? no, just the value of money does.

It's quite literally a game of monopoly. The Federal Reserve (a private corporation, just as federal as federal expess) creates notes that are provided to the US government (as an interest bearing loan). The government provides the Fed with treasury notes in return. The money is deposited into banks and loaned to corporations to create jobs. This means that the debt is greater than the supply of money. Always. Since it's inception. This debt can never be repaid with money. This requires growth to keep interest payments covered. Which increases consumption. It's all rather silly.

 

[Bob Maxey]

I think it's a question of what motivates people Bob. A corporation is just a group of regular humans working together. Motivated by money, but to what end? Food, shelter, energy, transportation ...etc. The problem is, even where there is no shortage of food, people are allowed to starve for lack of money. When people can't pay their mortgage, they are forced out of their homes. This IS how things run, yes. This is not how things have to be run. The current system benefits the few over the many. This can be improved upon with collaborative efforts rather than competitive efforts.

Countries are also a human created construct. We are all people globally. We should simply collaborate to ensure the survival of the species. The rest of it is dysfunction based on beliefs.

I don't take offense at hearing your point of view. It is the current mantra. The money system requires a cycle of consumption to 'grow'. This has limits in a finite world. Imagine that the US could no longer pay it's debts. What happens to a bankrupt country? Do all the resources just disappear? no, just the value of money does.

It's quite literally a game of monopoly. The Federal Reserve (a private corporation, just as federal as federal expess) creates notes that are provided to the US government (as an interest bearing loan). The government provides the Fed with treasury notes in return. The money is deposited into banks and loaned to corporations to create jobs. This means that the debt is greater than the supply of money. Always. Since it's inception. This debt can never be repaid with money. This requires growth to keep interest payments covered. Which increases consumption. It's all rather silly.

Yes, we are motivated by money because there is no workable solutions available on a large scale. I like the system: work hard and work smart and eventually you will likely win.

People are not allowed to starve in this country. People are allowed to abuse a system that gives them free stuff like food and in many cases, money. Given a chance, many people would rather not work and get things for free.

Fortunately, there is still a work ethic in this country that people use to build corporations to make money to live a better life.

As for people being forced out of their homes, it is true. But it is largely fair, too. You agree to make payments and you do not so you start gathering boxes for your stuff.

 

[CanDMan]

Yes, we are motivated by money because there is no workable solutions available on a large scale. I like the system: work hard and work smart and eventually you will likely win.

People are not allowed to starve in this country. People are allowed to abuse a system that gives them free stuff like food and in many cases, money. Given a chance, many people would rather not work and get things for free.

Fortunately, there is still a work ethic in this country that people use to build corporations to make money to live a better life.

As for people being forced out of their homes, it is true. But it is largely fair, too. You agree to make payments and you do not so you start gathering boxes for your stuff.

I think food is every persons right. If there is plenty of food to go around then everyone should get to eat. It's when there is scarcity that people will fight to survive, but in the absence of scarcity, why would we do so?

The problems faced in the world can be solved. I don't believe that this is done by corporations. Corporations merely collect the efforts of the people and control them and trade them back for labor.

One of the projects the Factor E Farm is working on is a compressed earth brick maker. So, Should you pay $250,000 for a home? materials for said home if you build it yourself? Or labor on your land to compress the soil into bricks and build it yourself? ...It's merely a different option. Not a lazy option. A free-er option. Sure, bricks are only one component, but when you learn to use the land, life itself can be much more free.

It's a grass roots change, bottom up. Change will never come from the other direction.