OSE FAQ - Revision history

Adam Haynes: Redirected page to FAQ

2011-05-09T02:57:51Z

Redirected page to FAQ

Syk0 saje at 16:42, 2 May 2011

2011-05-02T16:42:14Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:42, 2 May 2011
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{mergeto\|FAQ}}

	{{Category=OSE}}		{{Category=OSE}}
	=How would you describe the work of Open Source Ecology (OSE) in one sentence?=		=How would you describe the work of Open Source Ecology (OSE) in one sentence?=

Conor: stylistic overhaul. Try not to use so many gerunds!

2011-03-11T23:56:26Z

stylistic overhaul. Try not to use so many gerunds!

Show changes

MTClark: /* What are these 40 technologies in particular? */

2011-03-11T02:37:25Z

What are these 40 technologies in particular?

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:37, 11 March 2011
Line 149:		Line 149:
	=What are these 40 technologies in particular?=		=What are these 40 technologies in particular?=

	The current list contains multipurpose machinery: (1) LifeTrac, the open source, multipurpose, 4 wheel drive hydraulic tractor; (2) MicroTrac, a smaller version of the above; (3) The Liberator – the automated, Compressed Earth Brick press that can press up to 16 bricks per minute; the automated dimensional (4) Sawmill for high-throughput; (5) Soil Pulverizer (flexible rototiller) for digging-pulverizing-loading soil for CEB construction, and for other agriculture duties; (6) Cement Mixer with automatic loading; (7) Well-Drilling Rig; (8) ~~Univeral~~ Auger – for drilling holes for posts, planting trees, and powering other rotors; (9) Agricultural Combine for harvesting and threshing crops; (10) Agricultural Spader for preparing soil; (11) Universal Seed Drill for planting seeds of all sizes. (12) Backhoe for digging; (13) Bulldozer for earthworks; (14) Baler for hay and straw crop; (15) Mower for clearing brush; (16) Trencher for laying underground wire; (17) Hammer Mill for shredding solids. Next comes transportation – (18) Open Source Car; (19) Hydraulic motors and pumps. Next is energy and fuel – (20) Solar Turbine concentrator electric system; (21) Modern Steam Engine for stationary and mobile power; (22) Heat Exchanger – for generating steam for the steam engine; (23) Gasifier Burner – for fuel pellets and other solid fuel; (24) Pelletizer – for producing fuel and food pellets from hay, wood, or any other solid fuel. Next comes fabrication - (25) MIG Welder for welding; (26) Oxy-hydrogen cutter – steel cutting with hydrogen generated from water; (27) CNC Mill for milling metal; (28) CNC lathe for lathing; (29) Drill Press – heavy duty; (30) CNC torch table; (31) 3D printer – printing in plastic and metal (for circuits); (32) moldless casting with robotic arm; (33) hot rolling of metal; (34) ironworker machine – 150 ton hole punch and metal shear; (35) Induction Furnace for producing metal from scrap; (36) wire extrusion; (37) poultry – intensive grazed poultry with chicken incubator; (38) Bakery – open source gasifier brick oven; (39) dairy – milker and intensive grazing strategy, with butter and cheese production; (40) nursery – propagation of fruits, nuts, berries, other perennials.		The current list contains multipurpose machinery: (1) LifeTrac, the open source, multipurpose, 4 wheel drive hydraulic tractor; (2) MicroTrac, a smaller version of the above; (3) The Liberator – the automated, Compressed Earth Brick press that can press up to 16 bricks per minute; the automated dimensional (4) Sawmill for high-throughput; (5) Soil Pulverizer (flexible rototiller) for digging-pulverizing-loading soil for CEB construction, and for other agriculture duties; (6) Cement Mixer with automatic loading; (7) Well-Drilling Rig; (8) Universal Auger – for drilling holes for posts, planting trees, and powering other rotors; (9) Agricultural Combine for harvesting and threshing crops; (10) Agricultural Spader for preparing soil; (11) Universal Seed Drill for planting seeds of all sizes. (12) Backhoe for digging; (13) Bulldozer for earthworks; (14) Baler for hay and straw crop; (15) Mower for clearing brush; (16) Trencher for laying underground wire; (17) Hammer Mill for shredding solids. Next comes transportation – (18) Open Source Car; (19) Hydraulic motors and pumps. Next is energy and fuel – (20) Solar Turbine concentrator electric system; (21) Modern Steam Engine for stationary and mobile power; (22) Heat Exchanger – for generating steam for the steam engine; (23) Gasifier Burner – for fuel pellets and other solid fuel; (24) Pelletizer – for producing fuel and food pellets from hay, wood, or any other solid fuel. Next comes fabrication - (25) MIG Welder for welding; (26) Oxy-hydrogen cutter – steel cutting with hydrogen generated from water; (27) CNC Mill for milling metal; (28) CNC lathe for lathing; (29) Drill Press – heavy duty; (30) CNC torch table; (31) 3D printer – printing in plastic and metal (for circuits); (32) moldless casting with robotic arm; (33) hot rolling of metal; (34) ironworker machine – 150 ton hole punch and metal shear; (35) Induction Furnace for producing metal from scrap; (36) wire extrusion; (37) poultry – intensive grazed poultry with chicken incubator; (38) Bakery – open source gasifier brick oven; (39) dairy – milker and intensive grazing strategy, with butter and cheese production; (40) nursery – propagation of fruits, nuts, berries, other perennials.

	=What is Open Source Ecology?=		=What is Open Source Ecology?=

MTClark: /* Does open source ecology provide any solutions to the various conflict hotspots scattered throughout the globe? */

2011-03-11T02:34:03Z

Does open source ecology provide any solutions to the various conflict hotspots scattered throughout the globe?

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:34, 11 March 2011
Line 139:		Line 139:
	We're basing our entire design on economically-proven technologies, so the challenge is not the technology itself. The challenge is human consciousness – the lack of awareness of the index of possibilities regarding a better future – which translates to a limited amount of support for our work. This is particularly exacerbated because most people are specialists - overspecialized and generally technologically-illiterate. The era of the integrated human and generalist has not yet arrived as the dominant paradigm – but this is likely to change due to increasing access to rapid, integrated learning opportunities.		We're basing our entire design on economically-proven technologies, so the challenge is not the technology itself. The challenge is human consciousness – the lack of awareness of the index of possibilities regarding a better future – which translates to a limited amount of support for our work. This is particularly exacerbated because most people are specialists - overspecialized and generally technologically-illiterate. The era of the integrated human and generalist has not yet arrived as the dominant paradigm – but this is likely to change due to increasing access to rapid, integrated learning opportunities.

	=Does open source ecology provide any solutions to the various conflict ~~hotspots~~ scattered throughout the globe?=		=Does open source ecology provide any solutions to the various conflict hot-spots scattered throughout the globe?=

	While armed conflicts are complex in their origin, they typically have at least some origin in the material security of the parties in question. On many occasions, population issues exacerbate such struggles. We see no other solutions than creating solid infrastructures within the afflicted areas whereby the sustainable, regenerative, equitable, and ~~disributive~~ use of abundant natural resources can happen – as enabled by universal access to modern material productivity. Population issues are addressed naturally via the open source ecology paradigm – ie, when communities rely on local resources for their survival, immediate feedback loops of regenerative resource use keep populations in balance with their natural life support systems. Thus, we believe that a paradigm of open source ecology cam start to chip away at permanent conflict at the very least – and at best, it can put a stop to it all together.		While armed conflicts are complex in their origin, they typically have at least some origin in the material security of the parties in question. On many occasions, population issues exacerbate such struggles. We see no other solutions than creating solid infrastructures within the afflicted areas whereby the sustainable, regenerative, equitable, and distributive use of abundant natural resources can happen – as enabled by universal access to modern material productivity. Population issues are addressed naturally via the open source ecology paradigm – ie, when communities rely on local resources for their survival, immediate feedback loops of regenerative resource use keep populations in balance with their natural life support systems. Thus, we believe that a paradigm of open source ecology cam start to chip away at permanent conflict at the very least – and at best, it can put a stop to it all together.

	=What do you suggest as a progressive legal structure for OSE communities?=		=What do you suggest as a progressive legal structure for OSE communities?=

MTClark: /* Can you begin to break down the labor requirements for handling all the productivity of the initial GVCS 40 technology set? */

2011-03-11T02:07:35Z

Can you begin to break down the labor requirements for handling all the productivity of the initial GVCS 40 technology set?

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:07, 11 March 2011
Line 96:		Line 96:
	=Can you begin to break down the labor requirements for handling all the productivity of the initial GVCS 40 technology set?=		=Can you begin to break down the labor requirements for handling all the productivity of the initial GVCS 40 technology set?=

	Assume a 20 person prototype community, prior to the creation of a 200 member one – as an example. One custom fabricator can produce for the community, and have ample time for market production all the mechanical tools (covers 18 of them, including cars and bulldozers) – at about 40 hours of production per machine. Thus, one person could make the entire heavy equipment, agriculture, construction, and utility tools from open source plans. The total number of items may have to be 22 – say 5 cars, or one car per 4 people. One Builder/Architect would cover construction needs. One Engineer would cover the Solar Turbine, Steam Engine, Heat Exchanger, gasifier burner, and pellet production with the pelletizer (covers 23 of the tools now) – at the cost of no more than a month of labor per year. One agriculture person would cover orchard, garden, nursery, field crop, dairy, chicken, and bakery production (now 27 technologies)– at a 50% time requirement per year using mechanized agriculture for 20 people, year round. The next person is the digital craftsman – running the CNC torch table, lathe, mill, drill, ironworker, oxy-hydrogen cutter, 3D printer, and welder – (now having covered 35 technologies). This person could now make hydraulic motors (36 tools now) and steam engines, including replication of the tools themselves – starting from raw metal – at a cost of about 2 ~~month~~ of production time (about 1/6th of a full time commitment). The last person is the digital metalsmith – with the capacity to run an induction furnace, hot rolling of steel, moldless robotic arm casting, wire extrusion – the last of the set for a total of 40 tools – that enable production of virgin metal from scrap.		Assume a 20 person prototype community, prior to the creation of a 200 member one – as an example. One custom fabricator can produce for the community, and have ample time for market production of all the mechanical tools (covers 18 of them, including cars and bulldozers) – at about 40 hours of production per machine. Thus, one person could make the entire heavy equipment, agriculture, construction, and utility tools from open source plans. The total number of items may have to be 22 – say 5 cars, or one car per 4 people. One Builder/Architect would cover construction needs. One Engineer would cover the Solar Turbine, Steam Engine, Heat Exchanger, gasifier burner, and pellet production with the pelletizer (covers 23 of the tools now) – at the cost of no more than a month of labor per year. One agriculture person would cover orchard, garden, nursery, field crop, dairy, chicken, and bakery production (now 27 technologies)– at a 50% time requirement per year using mechanized agriculture for 20 people, year round. The next person is the digital craftsman – running the CNC torch table, lathe, mill, drill, ironworker, oxy-hydrogen cutter, 3D printer, and welder – (now having covered 35 technologies). This person could now make hydraulic motors (36 tools now) and steam engines, including replication of the tools themselves – starting from raw metal – at a cost of about 2 months of production time (about 1/6th of a full time commitment). The last person is the digital metalsmith – with the capacity to run an induction furnace, hot rolling of steel, moldless robotic arm casting, wire extrusion – the last of the set for a total of 40 tools – that enable production of virgin metal from scrap.

	Here we have covered:		Here we have covered:

MTClark: /* You must be kidding. If you make all of your feedstocks from scratch, you will never be profitable, because that takes too much time and complexity, not? */

2011-03-11T02:03:37Z

You must be kidding. If you make all of your feedstocks from scratch, you will never be profitable, because that takes too much time and complexity, not?

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:03, 11 March 2011
Line 82:		Line 82:
	Our economic model involves substitution of labor for materials, since the model involves that we produce our materials from natural resources, and these natural resources are free if they come from our premises. This assumes that we have the technical capacity to convert raw feedstocks to the high-value products – which is one of the basic goals of our experiment. We are in the initial stages of testing this hypothesis.		Our economic model involves substitution of labor for materials, since the model involves that we produce our materials from natural resources, and these natural resources are free if they come from our premises. This assumes that we have the technical capacity to convert raw feedstocks to the high-value products – which is one of the basic goals of our experiment. We are in the initial stages of testing this hypothesis.

	=You must be kidding. If you make all of your feedstocks from scratch, you will never be profitable, because that takes too much time and complexity, ~~not~~?=		=You must be kidding. If you make all of your feedstocks from scratch, you will never be profitable, because that takes too much time and complexity, no?=

	We have shown some calculations and have shown initial data that indicates that if we produce our own materials – then it will cost us about 30% less compared to buying those materials off-the-shelf. We've done this for the case of an induction furnace producing our own virgin steel from scrap compared to buying this steel from a vendor. See Technological Recursion - http://openfarmtech.org/index.php?title=Technological_Recursion on the wiki. For us, this is a start, as we can go one level deeper to smelting metals from minerals – and we expect further cost reduction over off-the-shelf purchasing. The economics are even more favorable to us when we are using our own products, where we do not incur the costs of sales and marketing.		We have shown some calculations and have shown initial data that indicates that if we produce our own materials – then it will cost us about 30% less compared to buying those materials off-the-shelf. We've done this for the case of an induction furnace producing our own virgin steel from scrap compared to buying this steel from a vendor. See Technological Recursion - http://openfarmtech.org/index.php?title=Technological_Recursion on the wiki. For us, this is a start, as we can go one level deeper to smelting metals from minerals – and we expect further cost reduction over off-the-shelf purchasing. The economics are even more favorable to us when we are using our own products, where we do not incur the costs of sales and marketing.

MTClark: /* What are the basic productivity specifications for your tools? */

2011-03-11T02:01:24Z

What are the basic productivity specifications for your tools?

← Older revision		Revision as of 02:01, 11 March 2011
Line 72:		Line 72:
	=What are the basic productivity specifications for your tools?=		=What are the basic productivity specifications for your tools?=

	The open source tools must be competitive in productivity with their industry standard counterparts. that are used to provide the same service to assure a high productivity-to-labor ratio – which is is a prerequisite for generating economic surplus. To give some round numbers, a one or two person operation producing lumber, fuel, metal, foodstuffs, or any other product should produce a minimum of $1k worth of product per day.		The open source tools must be competitive in productivity with their industry standard counterparts that are used to provide the same service to assure a high productivity-to-labor ratio – which is is a prerequisite for generating economic surplus. To give some round numbers, a one or two person operation producing lumber, fuel, metal, foodstuffs, or any other product should produce a minimum of $1k worth of product per day.

	=If you are to compete with mainstream industry, wouldn't you have to make millions of dollars per day from a given operation?=		=If you are to compete with mainstream industry, wouldn't you have to make millions of dollars per day from a given operation?=

MTClark: /* Are you not afraid of others stealing your ideas and business models? */

2011-03-11T01:59:39Z

Are you not afraid of others stealing your ideas and business models?

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:59, 11 March 2011
Line 64:		Line 64:
	=Are you not afraid of others stealing your ideas and business models?=		=Are you not afraid of others stealing your ideas and business models?=

	We believe that the more people who use and produce goods according to OSE Specifications, the better the world will be, and we want to help them succeed – especially if they contribute further product development back to the community. Even the work of those who acquire patents after ~~buildign~~ on our work are overall a positive contribution – since patents expire after some time. Regarding patents, we publish openly – so that it is not possible for someone else to prevent us from using our own designs, since all of our information is prior art that can therefore not be enclosed – as patents require originality.		We believe that the more people who use and produce goods according to OSE Specifications, the better the world will be, and we want to help them succeed – especially if they contribute further product development back to the community. Even the work of those who acquire patents after building on our work are overall a positive contribution – since patents expire after some time. Regarding patents, we publish openly – so that it is not possible for someone else to prevent us from using our own designs, since all of our information is prior art that can therefore not be enclosed – as patents require originality.

	=If you publish your business models openly and give your information away freely, how do you still maintain competitive advantage?=		=If you publish your business models openly and give your information away freely, how do you still maintain competitive advantage?=

MTClark: /* OSE is talking about ecological integrity and prosperity, but why do we hear so much about inevitable envinronmental destruction and dieoff? */

2011-03-11T01:56:11Z

OSE is talking about ecological integrity and prosperity, but why do we hear so much about inevitable envinronmental destruction and dieoff?

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:56, 11 March 2011
Line 42:		Line 42:


	=OSE is talking about ecological integrity and prosperity, but why do we hear so much about inevitable ~~envinronmental~~ destruction and ~~dieoff~~?=		=OSE is talking about ecological integrity and prosperity, but why do we hear so much about inevitable environmental destruction and die-off?=

	Constant change is indeed happening, and without question, humans have caused much destruction to the planet and to each other. However, we don't believe that the public discourse is helping to provide solutions, because they were – then the problems would have been fixed a long time ago. That is a politicized message used by the media to gather political support for various political schemes – for people to look to some leader for a solution. We are calling instead for people to look at themselves as the leader to break out of this cycle – by gaining increased awareness and responsibility for their global footprint. We don't like to use scare tactics – knowing that if humans disappeared from the face of the earth, nature would swallow up and overgrow the human presence within years – and things would be just fine. Or, if humans just ~~wisened~~ up a bit - everything would also be fine. Our message is for everybody to take responsibility for the world around them. We believe that energy is abundant, and we are nowhere near the earth's carrying capacity, and a full range of enabling technology can be created ~~readiliy~~ – so we are calling people out to take the personal responsibility to make a transition to sound living – where the dollars that we spend are not funding destruction. As a solution, we are simply promoting that people accept the principle of open source ecology – ie, taking full accountability for one's global footprint by learning to thrive in a modern lifestyle based on abundant, local resources – fueled by open knowledge and distributive economics.		Constant change is indeed happening, and without question, humans have caused much destruction to the planet and to each other. However, we don't believe that the public discourse is helping to provide solutions, because if they were – then the problems would have been fixed a long time ago. That is a politicized message used by the media to gather political support for various political schemes – for people to look to some leader for a solution. We are calling instead for people to look at themselves as the leader to break out of this cycle – by gaining increased awareness and responsibility for their global footprint. We don't like to use scare tactics – knowing that if humans disappeared from the face of the earth, nature would swallow up and overgrow the human presence within years – and things would be just fine. Or, if humans just wizened up a bit - everything would also be fine. Our message is for everybody to take responsibility for the world around them. We believe that energy is abundant, and we are nowhere near the earth's carrying capacity, and a full range of enabling technology can be created readily – so we are calling people out to take the personal responsibility to make a transition to sound living – where the dollars that we spend are not funding destruction. As a solution, we are simply promoting that people accept the principle of open source ecology – ie, taking full accountability for one's global footprint by learning to thrive in a modern lifestyle based on abundant, local resources – fueled by open knowledge and distributive economics.

	=How can we hope for future prosperity if we are currently in an energy crisis?=		=How can we hope for future prosperity if we are currently in an energy crisis?=