The Dark Ages of Open Source: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
MJ: Yes, we are unfortunately in 2023 in the dark ages of open-collaborative enterprise. This has been the case - in my mind - ever since Makerbot made the clear proposition that 'open source hardware business models do not work'. But it is also baked into the [[Open Hardware Definition]], which does not require collaboration, just openness. I have observed that we must always make the distinction of not only open, but open-collaborative - to capture the essence of higher virtues that are possible with [[The Promise of Open Source]] | MJ: Yes, we are unfortunately in 2023 in the dark ages of open-collaborative enterprise. This has been the case - in my mind - ever since Makerbot made the clear proposition that 'open source hardware business models do not work'. But it is also baked into the [[Open Hardware Definition]], which does not require collaboration, just openness. I have observed that we must always make the distinction of not only open, but open-collaborative - to capture the essence of higher virtues that are possible with [[The Promise of Open Source]] | ||
The fact is, nobody to date has yet created a replicable, open source business model around hardware. OSE and Precious Plastic are the 2 closest that I am aware of. The distress-sale of Lulzbot in 2019 cemented the sad state of affairs. And in 2023, [[Shuttleworth Foundation]] shut down. OSE, having watched this history unfold since 2003 - is committed to showing the first case of open-collaborative business model scalability. We are working on this with the [[Seed Eco-Home 4]] right now, creating the necessary conditions that allow open collaborative innovation to flourish. The goal is lofty - [[Distributed Market Substitution]] (80% market share of open-collaborative production) of the house construction space within 10 years of proof of concept of the revenue model. We are a few months away from such proof at present. See more at [[The Economic Advantage of Open]]. | |||
Revision as of 00:09, 17 July 2023
This is the best summary so far on the lack of imagination that has to date prevented viable open source business models from being replicated widely in the 3D printer space.
From Jonathan Quesnel:
hello marcin what would be your answer to this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68FkIwCc_eo
This is a very important subject I think.
MJ: Yes, we are unfortunately in 2023 in the dark ages of open-collaborative enterprise. This has been the case - in my mind - ever since Makerbot made the clear proposition that 'open source hardware business models do not work'. But it is also baked into the Open Hardware Definition, which does not require collaboration, just openness. I have observed that we must always make the distinction of not only open, but open-collaborative - to capture the essence of higher virtues that are possible with The Promise of Open Source
The fact is, nobody to date has yet created a replicable, open source business model around hardware. OSE and Precious Plastic are the 2 closest that I am aware of. The distress-sale of Lulzbot in 2019 cemented the sad state of affairs. And in 2023, Shuttleworth Foundation shut down. OSE, having watched this history unfold since 2003 - is committed to showing the first case of open-collaborative business model scalability. We are working on this with the Seed Eco-Home 4 right now, creating the necessary conditions that allow open collaborative innovation to flourish. The goal is lofty - Distributed Market Substitution (80% market share of open-collaborative production) of the house construction space within 10 years of proof of concept of the revenue model. We are a few months away from such proof at present. See more at The Economic Advantage of Open.