[hackerspaces] dossier pattern
makerspace at rbean.users.panix.com
Wed Nov 18 17:37:26 CET 2015
>Without any sense of either grief or superiority towards any of the
>organisational forms - I thought (and probably share this with other
>EU hackers) that's the very difference between what's called a
>hackerspace, or what's not and is then called a makerspace.
This sounds like a "No True Scotsman" argument.
Let's not forget that the term "hacker" predates computers (at least in
the US). And many of the early hackers were strongly apolitical (it was
more mixed later, but still many didn't pay attention to politics).
>To stay on topic, I'd suggest hackerspaces should remain without
>dossiers and tightly-knit (if this means less than X members then
>fine) with no paper trail, while a makerspace/fab lab/shared workshop
>might want something different.
By this definition, I wonder how many "true hackerspaces" exist in the
US. All the ones I know about lean heavily toward the "makerspace"
model, but they call themselves "hackerspaces" because they do both
kinds of activities.
There is a specific subtype of hacker who is very concerned about
privacy and doesn't want any kind of written record or security cameras
in the 'space, as you mentioned. I've suggested to some such folks that
they'd be happier splitting off and forming their own group, which would
be kept smaller for that reason. I'm not sure they saw the connection,
though-- they seemed to think that a big organization can run the same
way as a small one. And I'm not sure they realized how much easier it is
to start such an organization (because they can rent less space, and
therefore have more choices in the market).
More information about the Discuss