[hackerspaces] Hackerspaces talk at BIL? and... definitions/words

Harv S. harv at subsignal.org
Mon Jan 5 23:35:52 CET 2009

On Mon, 5 Jan 2009 21:24:11 +0100
Philippe Langlois <philippe.langlois at gmail.com> wrote this:

With modest self-permission ..

> Core Members....

> The definition of "core members" sounds elitist to me, and to  
> numerous others who expressed astonishment each time this concept has  
> been said relating to the hackerspaces "movement".

I had few problems there hearing this term "core" and "movement" at your
respective panel on 25c3..so I have few questions and remarks however
spaced, demented or out of which and what ever context they might be..: 

Is there sudden hacker or hacker spaces "movement" going on which is so
new in its embodiment that I am not aware of?  

So.. I only see web portal where one might or might not participate in or

Freedom of choice is the Alpha and Omega of a human existence.

further on..

> As you may have heard, Jaromil expressed strongly that no hackerspace  
> in the world should be left out of something that wishes to be as  
> comprehensive as possible as the book on hackerspaces. This issue is  
> related.

Didn't hear long time from Jaromil, but i would agree there, adding
question that naturally pops up..:

"Or is it more of an attempt on how to organize chaos of a "hackerdom(s)"
under common umbrella of Web 2.0 style social networking while being
led to be described in non-digital form with one possible and a permanent
entry defined by ink - a book?"

Which is one difficult task.

> Another thing was about opening jabber conferences and then,  
> suddenly, "oh wow, wait, before we must check with the other core  
> members". This sounds to me too much like a cathedral, and i think  
> hackers prefer bazaar ;-)

I think that creating institutions creates hierarchies - by default..

..so let us address that issue in the future. I see danger in not
recognizing that in "new hacker structures and spaces" as they develop.

> So I think here a less "core" and a more "decentralized" approach is  
> good. Otherwise people will look at the "stars" of hackerspaces.net  
> and maybe think "Oh... _they_ did it. Wow!" and not see the point  
> that hackerspaces can be started anywhere by anybody.

..and have been long time before term was coined.
What is important is to educate each younger generation not to repeat
mistakes of the previous one and see how to decentralize it and randomize
system that connects us all ..that can only lead to creation of more places
and spaces. Without "stars". Or even names.

>To clarify this, I do not believe in a centralized orga team, although I
>feel very passionate about certain people that dedicate a whole lot of
>time and effort in all stuff to do with hackerspaces.org obviously.

Full respect there and its really important that such ppl exist, but we all
dedicate a whole lot of time to do all kind of stuff from writing free
code, soldering resistor, making cofee, maintaining website, plotting next
world revolution up to whatever else we do. Giving my free time to someone
or something  is not supposed to make me special or extrapolated.

More information about the Discuss mailing list