[Discuss] Open Source Lab, with forward by Alicia Gibb

[Michael Turner]

I'm somewhat of a skeptic of the claims for 3D printing as a
revolution - after all, most of the technology dates back 20 years and
the recent vogue seems to be very much a matter of expirations of
patents from that period. Some of the more interesting uses of
additive manufacturing are inherently metallurgical, which raises the
stakes: more power required, more expense, more risks. But I have to
admit that in the sciences it's got some real advantages. One of them
is reducing the barriers to repeating an experiment. You can not only
publish your results, you can publish ways to get them: designs of
your custom-engineered parts. It's in the nature of scientific
research that it creates demand for very low-volume custom component
manufacturing. Of course, a great deal can be done with cheap graduate
student labor and the sunk capital investment of conventional shop
equipment. But even those cost something, in wages and floor space.


Regards,
Michael Turner
Executive Director
Project Persephone
K-1 bldg 3F
7-2-6 Nishishinjuku
Shinjuku-ku Tokyo 160-0023
Tel: +81 (3) 6890-1140
Fax: +81 (3) 6890-1158
Mobile: +81 (90) 5203-8682
turner at projectpersephone.org
http://www.projectpersephone.org/

"Love does not consist in gazing at each other, but in looking outward
together in the same direction." -- Antoine de Saint-Exupéry


On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 1:10 AM, Matt Maier <blueback09 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Dr. Pearce is putting out a book about how to create a science lab with open
> source hardware.
> http://www.mtu.edu/news/stories/2013/november/story99310.html
>
> This is the forward by Alicia Gibb:
>
> "At the heart of open-source hardware is the freedom of information. We are
> inherently free to open our devices as we wish and poke around. There are no
> laws inhibiting a consumer to unscrew their household items and take the lid
> off—though it most likely voids the warranty. But the freedom to repair,
> freedom to study, and freedom to understand needs to be accompanied with a
> freedom of accessible information: schematics, diagrams, code, and in short
> source files. Open-source hardware includes the previous freedoms and also
> grants the freedom to remix, remanufacture and resell an item, provided that
> the hardware remains open source. History points to a multitude of repair
> manuals from cars to washing machines; patterns to follow from model
> airplanes to dresses; and recipes shared through friends and families for
> generations. Historically DIY (Do-It-Yourself) was not a fad but a way of
> life. Access to information coupled with a basic knowledge of tinkering has
> given consumers the power to fix more, waste less, and understand the
> physical world around them. But technologies are becoming more opaque, as
> their size gets smaller, making them more difficult to open and tinker.
> Historically, an important factor for understanding the physical world was
> that items were built on a human scale.Human scale is the one that humans
> can relate to and can visibly see with the naked eye. The scale of most
> objects previous to computing has been on the human scale. Items in our
> daily lives now include minuscule chip sets and tiny form factors that
> require schematics and code to diagnose, repair,or even understand. Perhaps
> no one understands this better than researchers themselves. With closed
> source and patented devices, there is no requirement to include source files
> so that people may understand the hardware. In many cases, steps are taken
> to obfuscate information from the consumer. In addition to documentation,
> many new inventions require special equipment and tools, such as laser
> cutters, PCR machines for DNA sequencing, environmental chambers and other
> lab equipment described in Pearce’s work. These tools are beginning to see
> open source versions so that consumers may build their own, often at a lower
> cost. Even more standard tools, such as tractors and CNC machines are being
> open sourced so that others may have the benefit of access to these basic
> tools. If history has favored open source, why are we entering a new
> movement of open-source hardware? Patents have become problematic to
> innovation. Basic building blocks of new technologies are being closed off
> with patents, causing further innovation to become increasingly expensive or
> halt altogether. While patenting the building blocks of technology may
> benefit one company, it fails to advance society. Today Intellectual
> Property can be sold as a good. The idea  is the commodity rather than the
> physical object itself. Selling ideas rather than goods does not create a
> sustainable market for the common consumer. Patents were created to
> incentivize inventors and spur innovation in exchange for 20 years of
> exclusive rights in the form of a monopoly. The patentee had to submit a
> prototype and disclose how their innovation was created to the public. But
> the rules on patents have changed over time and there are many schools of
> thought that the patent system is broken and no longer reflects the reasons
> why the patent system was created in the first place. In today’s patent
> system, prototypes are no longer required, money made from patents is going
> to lawyers rather than the inventor, and a 20 years monopoly is not a
> rational time frame for the pace of technology in the digital era. Inventors
> are finding different incentives to innovate. The barriers and frustrations
> the patent system, has created are turning inventors toward a new
> alternative to patents: open-source hardware. Open-source hardware creates
> products driven by capitalism rather than monopolies, an open environment
> for sharing information, and a powerful opportunity for companies and
> individuals to learn from each other. Open-source hardware is a growing
> movement with a lucrative business model. It has spread into many areas of
> innovation, as Pearce has done with his work in scientific hardware, others
> do in electronics, mechanical designs, space programs, farm equipment,
> fashion, and materials science to name a few. We are at a crucial point in
> the history of technology which will determine if we hoard information or
> share it with others; sell information or sell goods; educate with open
> documentation or let everyone reinvent the wheel for themselves."
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Open Source Spaceflight Export Control" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to oss-export-control+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.