A Critique of 3D Printing as a Critical Technology Republished from Johan Söderberg: “The third industrial revolution might come with personal or digital manufacturing, when what used to be bought in a shop could be made at home with such tools as laser cutters, 3D printers and computer numerical control (CNC) milling machines. They are all based on the same principle, using software to help guide the movements of a machine tool, and the one that has attracted the most media attention is a printer that prints three-dimensional objects, with a nozzle that lays down a plastic material layer by layer. Designs for the printer of such objects as doorknobs or bicycles can be downloaded from the net. The media articles featured one of the many commercial 3D printers, but the technology was developed by a loose network of hobbyists or “makers,” whose homemade 3D printer is called RepRap. At the New York 2011 Faire, I noticed a certain dissonance with the revolutionary ideals. Compliance could be enforced through the design of the machinery.
Repair is a Legacy re·pair v. re·paired, re·pair·ing, re·pairs 1. To restore to sound condition after damage or injury; fix 2. 3. 4. When I was three, I dropped a penny bank: the ear of my beloved ceramic bear sheared right off. I grew up in a D.I.Y. home. As a kid, I didn’t exactly enjoy spending the weekends laying tile and fixing the rototiller. Now that I’m thinking about having children of my own (someday), I’ve realized what an important legacy repair is for a child. Future children will inherit some incredibly scary, global problems. Grassroots digital fabrication | Grassroots Innovations Our investigation consists of two projects. Grassroots innovation in low energy digital fabrication (GI-LEDF) Transformative Social Innovation Theory project (TRANSIT) Click here for a Research Briefing about the projects. Click here for a Working Paper on the topic and that develops a framework for analysing themes of inclusion, creativity and sustainability in grassroots digital fabrication. In both projects we will be working with people involved in FabLabs and Hackerspaces. At the same time as using spaces to make objects, some groups are critically de- signing initiatives that encourage people to explore whether and how grassroots digital fabrication can reconfigure, relocate, and recalibrate innovation capabilities in society. But we are also interested in how these spaces provide sites for social innovation more generally. Please get in touch if you wish to learn more or become involved. Dr Adrian Smith a.g.smith@sussex.ac.uk @smithadrianpaul Dr Sabine Hielscher s.hielscher@sussex.ac.uk
Critical Making I wouldn’t normally review a zine that’s ridiculously hard to get your hands on but the purpose, production and spirit of Critical Making are so meaningful and pertinent to today’s culture that i had to make an exception. Critical Making is series of small booklets that look at the political, social, activist and even historical dimensions of the DIY culture: A handmade book project by Garnet Hertz in the field of critical technical practice and critically-engaged maker culture. Critical making is defined by Ratto as exploring how hands-on productive work – making – can supplement and extend critical reflection on the relations between digital technologies and society. It also can be thought of as an appeal to makers to be critically engaged with culture, history and society. Releasing Critical Making must have been an exhausting experience. Critical Making might look all punky and crafty but the content is solid. But Critical Making is also a courageous project.
Illusoire émancipation par la technologie, par Johan Söderberg Ce serait la révolution industrielle du XXIe siècle : ce qui devait auparavant être acheté en magasin pourrait désormais être fabriqué chez soi grâce à des outils comme une découpeuse laser, une imprimante 3D, une fraiseuse à commande numérique, etc. (1). Ces machines suivent toutes un même principe technologique : guider les mouvements d’un outil mécanique à l’aide d’un logiciel. Les plus célèbres d’entre elles fonctionnent comme des imprimantes, mais en trois dimensions : passage après passage, une buse se déplace sur trois axes et superpose des couches de matière (le plus souvent une résine synthétique) en suivant un modèle numérisé, jusqu’à obtention du volume désiré. Même si cette technologie suscite un foisonnement de petites entreprises créatives, son développement est essentiellement l’œuvre d’amateurs, qui se définissent comme des makers. Il suffit toutefois de se promener dans les allées de ce Salon pour constater une certaine dissonance au sein de la révolution annoncée.
Réflexion sur les FabLabs et les conséquences de l'open-source dans la pratique du design Open Design Now | Why design cannot remain exclusive L'écologie, une éthique de la libération Quelles ont été dans ma vie les grandes rencontres et influences ? Il y a eu Sartre, bien sûr, dont l’œuvre, à partir de 1943, a été formatrice pour moi pendant vingt ans. Il y a eu Illich qui, à partir de 1971, m’a donné à réfléchir pendant cinq ans. Mais les influences les plus importantes ne sont pas nécessairement celles des personnes importantes. La question du sujet est restée centrale pour moi, comme pour Sartre, sous l’angle suivant : nous naissons à nous-mêmes comme sujets, c’est-à-dire comme des êtres irréductibles à ce que les autres et la société nous demandent et permettent d’être. En partant de la critique du capitalisme, on arrive donc immanquablement à l’écologie politique qui, avec son indispensable théorie critique des besoins, conduit en retour à approfondir et radicaliser encore la critique du capitalisme. , sorte de postface à , commençait par cette affirmation : "Le socialisme ne vaut pas mieux que le capitalisme s’il ne change pas d’outils".
Beth Kolko: “Hackademia – Leveraging the conflict between expertise and innovation to create disruptive technologies” Posted by Ethan on Jan 25th, 2012 in Berkman | 1 comment Beth Kolko is the sort of academic who follows her muse from one fascinating topic to another. Colin Maclay traces some of her past work from a doctorate in English through research on use of technology in the developing world, through her current research on human-centered design and engineering at the University of Washington. For the past couple of years, Beth has been focused on research for a book on hackers and makers. There are three major areas her talk – titled “Hackademia” – focuses on. The key to understanding hacking and making, she suggests, is imagination: looking at people as creative problem-solvers. The people Beth studies are functional, rather than accredited engineers. Beth tells us about an experiment in group learning she participated in. She tells us about an independent inventor in Detroit, who created a novel flash heating process for steel. There’s innovating from hacking as well. Why Hackademia?