Hackpads are smart collaborative documents. .

Mayte Schomburg

963 days ago
Unfiled. Edited by Tim Davies , Mayte Schomburg , Nathan Freitas 963 days ago
Tim D Open Source Fellows Hour discussions
 
Presentation
A genealogy of the concept: from free software... to open source. 
From process of creating Free Software License, to process of Open Source Initiative being created as institution.
Then 2010 - Open Source Hardware association
Free software logic goes into other spaces: Free Culture, and set of Creative Commons licenses.
People start thinking about Open Access, also influenced by 'free software logics'...
...then people applying free software logic to physical things.
 
What does it mean to apply the logic / license of free software to physical things?
  • We have the ability to share recipes for these physical things;
  • We have computer aided manufacture;
  • What if we apply this logic to the inputs for these machines.
 
Definition of Open Source Hardware:
Responding to the Open Source Software Definition - http://opensource.org/osd-annotated
 
  • Statement of principles: "Open source hardware is hardware whose design is made publicly available so that anyone can study, modify, distribute, make, and sell the design or hardware based on that design. The hardware’s source, the design from which it is made, is available in the preferred format for making modifications to it. Ideally, open source hardware uses readily-available components and materials, standard processes, open infrastructure, unrestricted content, and open-source design tools to maximize the ability of individuals to make and use hardware. Open source hardware gives people the freedom to control their technology while sharing knowledge and encouraging commerce through the open exchange of designs." http://www.oshwa.org/definition/ 
 
Definition in 12-parts: .
  • 1. Documentation
  • 2. Scope
  • 3. Necessary Software
  • 4. Derived Works
  • 5. Free redistribution
  • 6. Attribution
  • 7. No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups
  • 8. No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor
  • 9. Distribution of License
  • 10. License Must Not Be Specific to a Product
  • 11. License Must Not Restrict Other Hardware or Software
  • 12. License Must Be Technology-Neutral
 
Non-discrimination terms: Issues of open hardware being used in military contexts for example. Have to allow that people could use this to build killer robots, as well as things that help people. 
 
Examples
Low end prototyping platform - Arduino - http://www.arduino.cc/
Started Italy - 2005. Based on a student project for interactive design. Later scaled up: go to communities around the world and you will find someone building with it.  Arduino was originally licensed as Creative Commons, Share-Alike.
 
But - brand recently disputed. Separated:
  • Arduino the company: has the factory, registered in Italy.
  • Arduino LLC: project management, brand in the US
Brand has become important & valuable. 
 
Tons of clones everywhere - all end with uino. SIDuino etc. 
 
Also clones where people clone device directly, and put the brand on it, and sell them locally. 
 
So - developed guideline on spotting a counterfeit arduino http://arduino.cc/en/products/counterfeit like this one...
So - said 'brand belong to us'. Clone if you want, but don't clone the brand.
 
People build Arduino based Geiger Counters. Design and ideas from Tokyo hacker spaces... 
...lots of different designs and products. But someone now producing a product on sale as a kit for building these. 
 
Also has an important role as a tool for learning. 
 
Other trends
Emerging East -> West, rather than West -> East technology transfers.
Ideas & tech from China being reversed engineered and transferred to academic contexts elsewhere and made into commons ideas / resources.
 
Instead of approaching China as place to go and buy components cheap; or seeing as a space stealing ideas and devts; emerging approach to serious engagement with developments in China, and going there to learn from what has been taking place. 
 
Transforming an affordable Chinese platform into open hardware. Take platform, reverse engineer, and release as open hardware. http://events.ccc.de/congress/2014/Fahrplan/events/6156.html
 
  • "We discuss our technical reverse engineering efforts, as well as our methodology to lawfully import IP from the Shanzhai ecosystem into the Maker ecosystem. We hope to establish a repeatable, if not labor-intensive, model for opening up previously closed IP of interest, thereby outlining a path to leveling the playing field for lawful Makers."
 
Questions: is this legal? Will they get sued? Can they get sued? 
  • Discussion: why would they not sue to protect their patents?
  • Raises big questions of IP enforcement in China 
 
Also found 'iPhone' clones in China.
 
Also had http://www.bananapi.org/  (Which might have to be an entry into the next Berkman pie competition....)
 
**QUESTIONS FOR BREAKOUTS**
  • Legal issues - the circulation of hardware design, without observing the patents 
  • Some open source hardware is patented, but is also licensed
  • Hardware world regulated by copyright
  • Hardware that is free, but where the brand isn't
  • Technical issues - how open is, and should be, a hardware platform
  • Questions of security? How can we inspect and modify the hardware we have.
  • Social, economic & political issues: can we create different economic relations around this hardware?
  • How do gift economies operate around this? 
  • Ownership of the physical object, but also digital objects.
  • Can we have a sharing economy in terms of hardware projects that were mentioned above. 
 
Breakout: Legal 
 
Nathan F Talked about what would make this community interesting, and would you get to a place where patents would be possible to enforce. 3D printers or small local factories might get us there. If you have known people to go after, then you can go after them. 
 
This world of local printers can exist, but the printer itself might be a pathway for patent enforcement. State power may counter open-source / World Without Patents (WWP), and the enforcement strategy will evolve.
 
Are companies incentivized to support OSHW through opportunities in their market or for their brand, but may be far off. Are patent holders using open-source - expensive to get a patent so why would you bother? There is a larger and growing set of companies interested in open licensing, with discrimination for certain markets. Less developed, less resourced market might be more open to use of their tech.
 
...
1002 days ago
Adrienne D Ethan suggests one aspect of moderation is structural. This usually begins with the group introducing themselves. In Civic, they do icebreaker questions. Today's icebreaker: What superpower do you wish you have? 
Sands F + e.g. Ice-Breaker
 
Luis R Theories of moderation:
Mayte S Jonathan (doesn't have a theory): Moderation is something one apprentices.
Luis R Ethan has clear guidelines for moderation.
 
SZ:
Adrienne D Socratic dialogue- moderator comes in with a hypothetical and gets participants to react. Moderator must be in charge of the room, and guide to conclusion. The moderator is the host, not the guest on the program. 
 
Strategic use of silence - mod lets a moment play out. Let it settle. Up to Mod to signal it's okay
 
Mayte S Have a thread of interest in mind that does not only interest you but also the audience (to the exclusion of other threads). Audience should feel that an event has a beginning, a middle and an end. 
 
Luis R Anything that happens in the room is the moderator's responsibility. Moderation is a way of dealing with eventful, uncertain, emergent human interaction. As JZ puts it, the "grinding" of human interaction.
 
Mayte S Ethan: 
Moderation is an artform. There's a Berkman style ;) Allen Gunn - Aspiration Collective, anarchist organizers (The Ruckus Society).
 
Adrienne D Berkman style is more performative, Ruckus is more about collaborative conversations 
Sands F Take ownership of the stage and the space. 
Mayte S Moderation requires preparation: who's around the table, what are people's strengths and weaknesses? 
Sands F Ask people ahead of time to prepare 5 minutes and think about what they're going to say.. 
What are the goals: Audience entertainment, fairness, balancing silent people vs. other.
Attention is key. Be the one person in the room that is listening to the speaker. Signal to them you are doing this. Summarize what they just said. "I love the point you just made about this." Signaling to the audience you're getting something worthwhile as well.
 
Nightmare
Backchannel was scandalized about comments by the speaker. Speaker and moderator were not aware of this. As event owner, should have intervened, but had to patch it up later. 
 
Result
Theory of "Total Event Awareness". 
  • Following hashtags on phone. 
  • Having allies in the audience. 
  • You have to own the virtual room as well as the physical.
 
JZ: 
Virtual awareness is difficult / at odds with presence in the room. 
Use tool of humor to diffuse tensions (as the first card). Acknowledged in the official stream. Naming it may be of benefit. 
 
EZ: 
The audience is in the room, in the digital room, and on the stream at the same time. Constructing an event for all of them is a goal.
Terrible mistake to think as moderator "This is great, I don't have to do any preparation!" You have a set of people you have to get the best out of. 
 
JZ:
Difference between speaker and moderator is, not the job as a mod to be an additional speaker. You may feel the urge to weigh in with the best point. If you aren't representing the audience, you are abdicating your real role. Sometimes this means letting good points go. You are representative and liaison to the audience.
 
SW: 
If you're listening/thinking/speaking at the same time, how are you paying attention also to the same room.
 
JZ: Tension between total focus on the conversation, and scattered attention.
 
WEB: Hashmods are used at Theorizing the Web, in cooperation with the 
JZ: Charlie had a bug in his ear for previous moderation talks.
CN: Valuable for when people would feed him jokes. 
 
JZ: I prefer no preparation to a lot. Talking points can come in. Better to have an over dinner style conversation (unless you're working with academics who are presenting their work). 
 
CN: Psychological perspective. 2 things going on:
  • Authority structure
  • You expect an authority in the room.
  • If there is none, there will be a fight and try to take control.
  • Not necessarily in control and talking to much.
  • Argument structure
  • In parallel.
 
SMWAT: Preparation problem. JZ does a lot of preparation in advance to seed the conversation.
 
JZ: Often with help. Nervous about ice-breakers. A bit performative. Everyone thinking of theirs instead of paying attention. 
  • Know the bios of the people in the panel.
  • Try to elicit from them something personal. Prompt them.
  • Ask follow-up question.
  • Go for the delta. What's the set of questions that they're not used to answering. The low-hanging fruit is hanging low for a reason. It's what people want to talk about. But some of the best events keep the speakers on their toes.
 
EZ: What is it you're looking for out of the event. How do I get something out of these speakers no one else has gotten out of them. 
  • You may have professional relationships with people. You want them to look good.
  • Usually you are not a person that set up the panel. Part of prep is understanding the thread the person who did was trying to set up.
Ok with scripting the first half-hour. Second half-hour can be open. Engage with someone directly; reserving the first question and use the remaining half hour for the discussion
 
JZ: I would try to shoe-horn that starting 5 minutes into the intro. Flexibility of a conversation w/out handing the mic to them for x minutes. 
 
WEB: Power dynamics in the room. Being a woman as a moderator is a challenge (e.g. being talked over, etc.)
JZ: Keeping track of who had their hand up is a responsibility.
Having really good acoustics helps. You can have the mic and hand it to people. People want to talk over administrative.
Post-mortem after an event w/out fear of offending the moderator/speaker(s). 
 
EZ: 
  • 'What you want out of this' is a good way to approach moderation. Part of it is a time management job. Can everyone have time to get their point across.
  • 1/n approach to balancing contributions - not necessarily in terms of seconds but in terms of meaningful content. It's an aspiration and you usually don't get there, but it's a good thing to check for. Goal of equal participation.
 
EZ:
  • Reference people's expertise if you know people. 
  • Be explicit and recognize e.g. "I see your hand and I really want to hear from you."
  • Where there is a power struggle, humor can be a good diffuser.
  • Keep score around the table. Who haven't I heard from? Can I serve them something they can respond to?
  • Stage moderation and meeting moderation are different art-forms.
  • Share responsibility with people who aren't as experienced.
 
CN: 
  • If you know where you're going, you gain confidence from this. 
...

Contact Support



Please check out our How-to Guide and FAQ first to see if your question is already answered! :)

If you have a feature request, please add it to this pad. Thanks!


Log in