January 2015: Difference between revisions

From Open Source Ecology
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Redirected page to True Fans Hangout - January 2015)
 
Line 1: Line 1:
=Audio File Download=
#Redirect [[True Fans Hangout - January 2015]]
 
[[Image:ogg.png]]
 
Download [[File:January_2015_True_Fans_Hangout.ogg]] - 1 hr 35 min - 19MB [[Ogg]] file. (how to resize to smaller without loss of quality?)
 
=Introduction to Sesssion=
 
 
OSE's goal is to create the open source economy. To get there, OSE is designing and building critical production machines - the [[Global Village Construction Set]]. As of January 2015, the OSE community has built a total of about 100 machines around the world. See [[Replication]].
 
The dust has settled as of the 2011 [[TED Talk]].
 
At this time, viral replication has not yet happened within the Global Village Construction Set. It may perhaps be said that in the overall world of open source hardware, no single project has shown a transformation of some sector of the economy. The closest is the open source 3D printer, RepRap. However, the biggest producer of consumer 3D printers, Makerbot - has turned proprietary in 2013. This showed to the world a notion that as an open source company 'matures,' it has to go proprietary. Unfortunately, the world does not yet know a great example of a significant open source hardware tool that has dominated a marketplace, outside of electronics.
 
Why is this important to stop and consider this? Because the whole promise of open source is that open source products become superior to their proprietary counterparts - and this is a promise not delivered.
 
3D printing is interesting in this point. While open source has spawned the largest manufacturer of 3D printers - that industry is dominated by proprietary product.
 
The true promise is that open wins hands down. The time of this promise is yet to come.
 
We would like to begin moving OSE in that direction - after observing that none of our products have dominated the marketplace yet. We think there are reasons for that - and the bottom line is performance, access, and documentation. We think that we can show a good example with the Brick Press - the most evolved OSE product to date. We will be taking the CEB Press to the finish line this year.
 
What have we achieved so far?
 
See the main milestones from 2011-2014 - 2 pages here - https://docs.google.com/a/opensourceecology.org/presentation/d/1iE-kXfVWHk39-Y4iDCpRJX8G-RWGnF5QoSjYGcf1V3E/edit#slide=id.g5d8fba772_228 ('''Disclaimer:''' note that this document is work in progress, it is raw thoughts not yet packaged well for public consumption for sake of early feedback, with understanding .that the document is agile and will change. The public facing Strategy document will be published around April, 2015 after it is approved by the OSE [[Board of Directors]].)
 
Where do we go from here?
 
Main results are: Realtime documentation. One Day Build, One Day Prototype, 5 Day House Build. Successful Revenue Model. But why is that important?
 
All point to the promise of open source, accelerated development.
 
==Viral Replicability Criteria==
 
Can these be reached?
 
An implicit premise of the endpoint of any successful open source hardware project is that the quality of the hardware becomes superior to any proprietary counterpart. This is a strong statement, but it is also a simple natural result of an open, collaborative process attracting more development effort than any proprietary, closed-system effort. In other words, a better product means natural dissemination of that product worldwide. But it does not mean homogenization of options as in the standard mass production model, because the affordances of open technology make open hardware flexible and adaptable to any local setting.
 
We should explore the claim of open development attracting more effort than proprietary efforts. This in general is true, but if appropriate coordination of effort is not secured, then even if more effort is spent, results are not produced. The internet provided a large measure of coordination to open efforts. However, sophisticated mechanisms of Time-Binding are still missing.
 
Caveat: The market domination of open source product does assume a rational marketplace. This is not generally available - as special interests and agents of centralization tend to monopolize. Solution: It is theorized here that specific aspects of VRC bypass the irrationality of the marketplace. That critical aspect that allows the bypass is the drastically-reduced barriers to entry. It is theorized here that these reduced barriers to entry override the irrationality of the marketplace.
 
The irrationality of the marketplace is brought about by deprivation, attachment, scarcity, human psychology, social conditioning, fear and anger, secular ponerological and Soteriological factors, and other phenomena.
 
These factors indeed are grave issues, and may dictate that many people would choose, for example, Coca Cola over organic freeze-dried fruit juices - or, for example, insist that one manufacturer's automobile is fundamentally different from another's.
 
However, given that 50% of the world lives at under $1000/year of income, there may be a wide market for viral replication.
 
This does not address viral replicability in the First World. In the first world, lifecycle assessment and environmental issues, combined with 50x lower lifetime costs, and and open enterprise acceleration, just might contribute to viral uptake.
 
The last point is critical: open hardware accelerators spreading enterprise with minimum effort.
 
==Summary Brief==
Summary: all out on Development Technique to allow 2 week design cycle via crowd swarm method (think full CNC torch table design in 2 weeks, or about 1000 full development items worked out (10 modules with 100 dev items each), about 10000 human hours, equivalent of 125 full time people for 2 weeks, about $100k value - or annual value of $2.5M. Then taking the Brick Press to 100%, right now it's 95% or 50%, depending on how you look at it. So that for example you can produce the brick press on demand, including quality control and marketing - basically, a simple production model of brick press for a [[Distributive Enterprise]]. So the entire community can build, say 1000 brick presses on a 2 week or so turnaround if needed. This applies to mass production by the masses, and eventual transition to the open source economy within 20 years.
 
=Notes from Etherpad=
 
Friday, January 30, 2015
 
 
Create the Open Source Economy - Where people collaborate - Creating a platform simliar to wikipedia. 
The promise - open source hardware can be better than any other products - The implication is this is due to the larger numbers of developers than a closed system can muster
 
Delivery on that promise -
Viral replication would signify success of the project -
History and Overview
http://opensourceecology.org/wiki/Replication
 
Viral replication criteria - Quanitifying success -
Process and Methodology
Day scale prototyping
Modular for reuse
 
Milestones - economics can be achieved, but distributive enterprise - self-funding
Shuttleworth Foundation provided $360,000 per year, which ended last year.
Weekend workshop model - admission fee plus sale of the equipment.  People want to learn.
$5000 from tuition, $10,000 for sale less $5,000 for parts total $10,000 for workshop.
Swarm build - extremely rapid parallel build using a social production model.
 
Overall goals;
Demonstrate that the techniques to design can be reduced to two-weeks cycle.  Break each machine into sub-units.  Use a radically efficient development model.
    Get the brick press to the level of viral replicability -- the world's first distributive enterprise in practice.  Is this possible in the real world?
        Possible questions for CEB practicality/replication: research with end users what challenges were encountered and what are perceived barriers to adoption of open source hardware? Product without a market (or in an irrational market) may call for some adjustment to match expectations and address "marketability" concerns
 
Lower the barriers to production and distribution
Education, production, and social production
Workshop model addresses multiple goals of education, production and social awareness. Want to increase volume of production to increase awareness, similar to current large scale production by commercial companies but distributed among small groups/individuals.
This increase can be achieved by having efficient designs and education of people.
Scalability -
 
Brick press -  Build and Design Cycle -
Documentation - Perfecting blueprints - Explainer videos, and other assets.
Techniques -
Credibility
Is viral replicability possible with an irrational market?
 
%95 Progress on Brick Press
1. Fabricator - Outsourced - Complete manual via OSE blueprints - Revenue opportunity
2. Global Development & Distribution Model - Internet/Outernet - Quality control issues - Free CAD - Cloud CAD Solution - Goal & Milestone
3. Immersion/Workshop Model -
 
100 Replications in the next 6 to 12 months - Higher Quality Blueprints - Publish multple versions - Hot Work and CNC Work
2015 - Publish the Integrated Strategic Plan
Accelerator Program
OSE Role - Experiment with various economic models
Virtual & Tangible products - Staying true to lower the barriers to materials
Feedback from the community on specific challenges and problems
Stackover flow upvoting and rating feedback
Google Form - Surveys & polls -
Contacting existing R&D prototypes in the field - Defining interests -
 
Brick Press 95% needs perfect instructionals.
    Single production model  Go to fabricator.  Use a manual to assemble the parts.
    Swarming build, the collaborative production model is harder to put together - highly orchestrated parallel build - lots of people, everything together. 
   
    OSE pressing towards a model where they generate revenue from workshops and teach people to build CBE, to help drive viral replication.
    CEB designs: revising to older v4 plan. version 6 called for CNC and added $1k to build price, as well as concerns about access to CNC. OSE is publishing older v4 spec again to address this concern. The difference isn't just cost- older version also requires 10 additonal hours of labor that CNC eliminates.
        Issues to explore about design: CNC versions of plans vs. non-CNC? Cost sensitivity of open source manufacturers? Overall, design/cost/tool availability drives adoption/replication- do we need/have clear cases built for each tool to increase # builds?
   
    How do you assure quality and quality control.  Testing. 
 
http://opensourceecology.org/wiki/Development_Template
 
Design Sprints - work flow, systems integration questions. 
Document what we have already done. 
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1n9-GRTjclrUSEljuYXpZqGnOABEeYL09N1yKtbpbICo/edit#slide=id.g34b05bfb3_2_18
 
Open Enterprise Plan - publish
We don't have the numbers of people for any single machine.
The blueprints for the house may need to be released in order to show how a brick press can provide building material for a house.  People aren't likely to build a brick press without having a use for the bricks. 
 
Perhaps the house should be the product rather than the brick press which would be a part of the house construction.
 
Armies of prototypers using 3D printing or laser cutting cardboard may create excitement.
 
Take one thing to 100%.  Note that the brick press also requires a power cube. 
 
Question: If someone were to remotely design and prototype one of the 50 GVCS machines that have not yet been built, which machine do you think would provide the most utility to FeF or another enterprise doing something similar i.e. restoration agriculture, local manufacturing etc? Obviously the needs between even those two enterprises are very different, but the GVCS machines are also pretty flexible. My mind goes to the electric/motor generator as being a high value candidate and I'm wondering what you think Marcin
 
Marcin's answer:
Hydrafabber  - CNC circuit mill part plus laser cutter plus 3D printer.  There is revenue in that and it could create an army of prototypers.  Sourcing may be the most difficult part. 
 
Workshops should become a highly replicable profit source. 
 
http://opensourceecology.org/wiki/IKEA
 
Notes from Hangout:
Benjamin Kirkup
12:06 PM
I'm not doing this by voice. Yes I can hear
Jonathan Kocurek joined group chat.
Nathanael Wettstein joined group chat.
 
Nathanael Wettstein
12:09 PM
hi everybody
 
Jonathan Kocurek
12:10 PM
Hello
 
Benjamin Kirkup
12:10 PM
Hello Nathanael, Jonathan.
Cody Harrison joined group chat.
eric calman joined group chat.
eric calman left group chat.
 
Jonathan Kocurek
12:41 PM
Hello
 
Benjamin Kirkup
12:45 PM
I admit to not having looked very hard, but do we have service manuals/repair guides?
 
Nathanael Wettstein
12:45 PM
is somebody talking? I only hear marcin
 
Cody Harrison
12:46 PM
Are you on the conference call or just listening via google hangouts?
 
Benjamin Kirkup
12:46 PM
Nathanael: so far, I've only heard M. even when others talk.
 
Nathanael Wettstein
12:48 PM
I'm using hangout
 
Cody Harrison
12:50 PM
Bernie just asked a question via the conference call and he's not on the hangout so that's why you didn't hear
 
Nathanael Wettstein
12:50 PM
In my understanding, Stackoverflow is a Q&A site. It's a great idea to have an OpenSource stackoverflow instance, but it's not really suited for processing feedback in my opinion
 
me
12:53 PM
http://opensourceecology.org/wiki/Development_Template
 
Benjamin Kirkup
1:14 PM
hello
 
Nathanael Wettstein
1:14 PM
in hangout, we don't hear people from the conference calls. but we hear all your answers.
 
Benjamin Kirkup
1:14 PM
I was asking about maintenance manuals
I see that the biggest issue driving my neighbor's purchases in tractors
is the ability to maintain/repair
 
Nathanael Wettstein
1:16 PM
IKEA manuals for OSE machines
 
Benjamin Kirkup
1:16 PM
I think that if the manual includes details like which tools are required, etc, that will be very helpful.
 
me
1:17 PM
http://opensourceecology.org/wiki/IKEA
 
Nathanael Wettstein
1:17 PM
they often do
 
Benjamin Kirkup
1:18 PM
Yes, I know for build you do this; I'm emphasizing maintenance.
Most of the people I know probably won't build; esp. if, as you say, they use a fab facility
 
me
1:18 PM
http://opensourceecology.org/wiki/Collaboration_Ecology
Jonathan Kocurek left group chat.
 
me
1:19 PM
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1n9-GRTjclrUSEljuYXpZqGnOABEeYL09N1yKtbpbICo/edit#slide=id.g34b05bfb3_2_18
Cody Harrison left group chat.
 
Nathanael Wettstein
1:22 PM
i am still here
Jonathan Kocurek joined group chat.
WAYNE ADAMS joined group chat.
Benjamin Kirkup left group chat.
 
Nathanael Wettstein
1:43 PM
Goodbye
WAYNE ADAMS left group chat.
 
Nathanael Wettstein
1:43 PM
(next time we do our low-level task in a separate hangout session)

Latest revision as of 05:57, 31 January 2015

Redirect to:

Retrieved from "https://wiki.opensourceecology.org/index.php?title=January_2015&oldid=125539"