[hackerspaces] Hackerspaces Re:Foundation (Was Re: Abuse Of Power)

Bryan Bishop kanzure at gmail.com
Sat Apr 13 21:51:14 CEST 2013

On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 2:32 PM, Randall G. Arnold wrote:
> In the case of Makerspaces there is no real product, which actually benefits
> us.  There is no corporate entity, really, to which we are beholden.  On the
> surface, though, that means  the absence of a single guiding force that
> identifies purpose.  Some can say that in our world O'Reilly is or means to
> be that force... but as noted, they have a financial agenda of their own

Could you be more specific about how O'Reilly gets in the way? Of
course, the general argument that a commercial entity is biased
towards itself is totally valid in this case, but I think there have
been specific incidents with O'Reilly (or other commercial entities)
that are worth mentioning. Using specific examples helps us to account
for those cases in whatever proposals we fling around at each other.

> that may often get in the way of maker/hacker goals.

Besides insurance bargaining, what else would you put in a list of
hacker goals for a foundation?

If I was to make up the rules on my own, then the rules or goals would
end up being something related to funding activities- such as finding
funding, raising money, franchising products or whatever, to pay for
and fund excellent hackers in hackerspaces working on excellent open
source projects throughout hackerspaces, including lesson plans,
circuits, schematics, biology projects, chemistry projects, or any
other hacker activity.

But that might not be what you guys have in mind. Honestly I have no clue.

- Bryan
1 512 203 0507

More information about the Discuss mailing list