What do you think of the Make movement?
Too_Many_Tools
Posts: 765
I am currently doing some reading on the Make site and have mixed feeling about the content.
Some of it is really good and some of it seems to be not so good.
After growing up with decades of Popular Science/Mechanic mags to drool over, shop classes while they still existed to learn basic skills and growing up in a rural area, I have found it strange that more people don't have on hands experience with "stuff".
Considering that the Internet has brought to our fingertips enormous amounts of information, the times also seem to have a lack of on hands types.
From what I see, it is the rare person who works on or builds anything any more...kind of sad.
And one can see it in the lack of experience in the employees we interview.
One of the reasons why I love robotics....it encompasses many different disciplines and skill sets.
I am interested in your thoughts on the subject...thanks.
Some of it is really good and some of it seems to be not so good.
After growing up with decades of Popular Science/Mechanic mags to drool over, shop classes while they still existed to learn basic skills and growing up in a rural area, I have found it strange that more people don't have on hands experience with "stuff".
Considering that the Internet has brought to our fingertips enormous amounts of information, the times also seem to have a lack of on hands types.
From what I see, it is the rare person who works on or builds anything any more...kind of sad.
And one can see it in the lack of experience in the employees we interview.
One of the reasons why I love robotics....it encompasses many different disciplines and skill sets.
I am interested in your thoughts on the subject...thanks.
Comments
The maker 'movement' is very good I think. The most negative thing is that there is a strong desire to share information, but the information shared is based upon that one persons' very limited experience - and so what is shared is not the correct way to do things but a way that happens to work. Then that person is lauded as an expert.
It's particularly bad when the person calls themselves an expert and removes any comments suggesting otherwise.
To me the poster boy of a self proclaimed expert is the kid who calls himself "The Raspberry Pi Guy". Not only does he give bad advice but he deletes posts pointing out his errors.
In case anyone missed why I have such a low opinion of this kid, you can read about some of his disastrous hubris in this thread.
http://forums.parallax.com/showthread.php/156410-How-To-Use-a-L298N-Dual-H-Bridge-with-a-Microcontroller-(QuickStart-Board)
I'm still looking for things to become even more interchangeable than they are right now so that we some level of "plug and play" (I really hate that description, but it fits) so that the everyday person can "Make" solutions to their needs.
I agree with the bad information part. It should be understood that the term "Maker" is not interchangeable with "Engineer" or "Expert".
There are many actual experts throughout the community at large. Perhaps a system/website could be designed for those experts to volunteer their knowledge to double check Maker instructions upon request.
I've heard of worse things...
Jeff
We built bathroom and kitchen cabinets from scratch. Fixed electrical and plumbing problems all the time. We did not throw anything out, we fixed it - and not because we could go out and buy new, but because we knew how it worked and we fixed / repaired it. We learned how to make and build all kinds of home projects and crafts.
So while the Make movement is ongoing, it seems that the art of design and craftsmanship has been lost. One does not have to be all that technical, but basic shop knowledge and thoughtful design can go a long way in building everyday work and home projects. Some of the Make projects I have seen, are very lacking in this regard, and I would be embarrassed to have them published in a magazine or on-line.
That's to be expected when the contributors vary so widely in experience and expertise. This is somewhat balanced by the well done and broader range of the projects.
I think urbanization and automation has a lot to do with this. It's pretty difficult to find the work space to do a lot of things if you live in an apartment or even the suburbs. Also, automation has brought the cost of things down to the point where it costs less to purchase them than to buy the materials to build them.
True, but it's a two edged sword. A lot of companies have a laundry list of experience they want when they look for a new employee. If you don't have all or most of what is on the list you are not even considered. That deprives the company of new ideas someone with a different outlook could bring to the job.
That's also the reason I enjoy automation and instrumentation field work. I get to work with a wide variety of equipment in many industries.
I'm also a fan, and I agree that we need a way to separate the wheat from the chaff in the maker community.
Make magazine (and its now defunct sister magazine Craft, which failed because it tried to compete in an already overcrowded market) might make it sound like making things is a new phenomenon. I'd say that's only true if you'r talking about making things out of popular microcontrollers, 3D printers, or laser cutters -- that's simply because these technologies are relatively new.
In the 1980s and 90s, home DIY was all the rage, and even inspired a popular television comedy show. Home DIY is still there, but just not getting the "ink" it once did. Go into any Home Depot on a weekend and you know that market hasn't gone anywhere.
While I applaud all the attention to electronics DIY, it's not new or unique. Aspects have merely shifted from things like homebuilt circuits to making projects by connecting together premade modules. Sparkfun owes a lot of their success to the breakout board, and they may in fact have hastened this change. While it's true merely plugging in boards doesn't teach electronics, it's a foot in the water that might spawn further interest in learning more. It's not like everyone that ever soldered a circuit actually understood where all the electrons were going. People learn when they want to learn.
All in all I'm very happy to see a Maker movement. Sure a lot of Make output is rude and crude. So what? As long as people are having fun learning and doing something and getting together with other like minded souls that is a lot better than they waste away their lives watching TV as has been the habit for decades now. Or disappearing into the fantasy land of video games.
Importantly, for every million bungling Makers there will be some young kid somewhere exposed to things he may not otherwise have been and thinking about it in a deep way. Inspiring them to become serious engineers and problem solvers.
I completely agree with Heater!
Yes, there may still be lots of people visiting the DIY stores on saturdays...
But the fact is that if they're visiting on saturdays it means they're busy the rest of the week, probably with work.
Where are the youths?
Probably mostly at home playing with their PS3, 4 or whatever number is hot right now...
One problem today is that kids are taught to 'consume' rather than to create, even from early on.
Just look at how many 'toys' only have a pushbutton and is just to entertain the kid, instead of actually getting him to do something with it.
Start them early with LEGO, Meccano or similar. Then add on with scale models, kit-built RC models...
Or even H0 trains.
(Not just the model trains. Give the kid a big plywood table with a cutout in the middle, a large heap of Plywood cutoffs, wood screws, papier mache - or teach him to make it - green felt, paints, model trees and buildings... )
Start them early with toys they can CREATE with!
Then, as they begin to run into limitations of the kits...
Locally, where I live, one of my colleagues is working to start a Code School, to teach kids to program. This may become the beginning of a local Hackerspace.
If that happens I'll probably loan some of my stuff to the Hackerspace and teach others how to use it.
LEGO. What a shameful thing that has become. Buy a box of bits to make whatever is on the picture on the box. Done. Whatever happened to the idea of "here is a bucket of bricks, build yourself a house or a skyscraper or a dinosaur or a time machine"?
Meccano. Is that still available anywhere? I'd be using it still today if it were. I notice recently that someone raised a pile of money on kickstarter to produce a meccano like thing, but modern aluminium extrusions with sets of joining plates and screws. Obviously struck a chord with a lot of people. Sadly I can't find the link now.
That's not to mention the chemistry sets and electronics kit's I had before the age of 10.
Did you say "wood screws"? No, no, we can't have that. The poor dears might cut themselves with those...
Oh yeah...they are still around.
http://www.meccano.com/
Why? These seem to be someone else's idea of what makes a DIY project. Like I said, some creative marketers found a way to promote a specific type of DIY that favors new technology (MCUs, laser cutters, 3D printers, etc.). Now everyone thinks DIY had left, but is now back. That's nonsense.
It's a narrow view to say any one kind of maker project is the kind everyone should be doing. Some kids and teens prefer to create with drawn art, ceramics, or food. Some of these may develop this interest into lifelong profitable vocations. These types of "making" aren't in the news because they don't involve some new-fangled machine or device But they're every bit as valid as a creative manual endeavor, and have been for hundreds of years.
It's not called Hackerspace precisely because that defines a specific DIY in a specific narrow sphere. What's the point in that? Shouldn't we be receptive to makers of all interests?
Over a stop for coffee I found myself talking to two 20 something year old brothers. Less than half my age. The subject of computers came up and the younger brother said something to the effect of "Oh, old folks don't know anything about computers". I bit my lip. The conversation went on and eventually the older brother mentioned Arduino. At that point I had to pull out the Propeller ASC board that just happened to be in my pocket (Why do I carry stuff like that around all the time?). Oh boy, were they fascinated by that. We must have spent an hour discussing what one can do with a Propeller. Or indeed any micro-controller. They had no idea about programming or what an MCU could do but seemed to grasp a lot of what I said about driving servos, communicating with your PC and so on. They had a lot of enthusiastic questions about it.
As we parted company, I could not resist looking the younger brother in the eye and saying "It seems the old folks know more about computing than the young ones now a days".
My point in all this? I don't know. I'm constantly amazed how little youngsters know about computers, despite the fact we have been saturated with them for three decades.
Eben Upton was also bemused by this phenomena. That is why he made the Raspberry Pi.
So, if the Maker movement and the Raspberry Pi Foundation and others can light a fire under the youth of today it all sounds good to me.
Of course there is more to life than computers. So I was pleased to see the emergence of the Bio Hackers and the Biohackspaces http://biohackspace.org/
It's like the schools are telling them working with your hands is a bad thing. It's not, it's empowering for a youngster to be able build something with their own hands.
Yes, Maker craftsmanship is nothing to write home about but that's because most young makers are learning without formal instruction or coming from home backgrounds where they would have learned the basics of craftsmanship along with working with wood, metal and plastic.They're learning from scratch what was common knowledge among young adults of 50 years ago. And they will improve.
I agree with Heater, start them early with a box of LEGOS(how can one not have fun with them?), mechanno, model kit building(and dioramas, remember AirFix and Tamiya model kits), casting my own lead Army soldiers from homemade molds,then progress to building R/C aircraft(which is what I did) helped form a nice foundation of skills for a kid. Besides it's fun.
One other thing, not all kids are cut out to be hackers some will naturally gravitate towards old school stuff like wood and metalworking, artwork, etc. Even now I find myself more attracted to metal working and metal casting than to whats the latest and greatest offering from Silicon Valley.
Oh well, I still use them in that sense, and if it comes up, there is a great time to have a chat about it all in general. Usually plays out well.
The Maker movement is a good thing.
I personally don't worry about the variance in quality, information sharing and so forth. People do what they do and they learn what and when they want to learn. It's not reasonable to expect to maximize this due to how people generally perform. It is perfectly reasonable to maximize one's own contributions. For every person doing that, it's just better overall.
Good as it gets, if you ask me.
In general, the move toward a spend to solve type culture is something I feel is a net negative. Now that we are moving back toward a more make or build to solve type culture, it's positive.
I think people need to be empowered in this way. Sure, some of them aren't going to do the right things, or they will do more harm than good, or really break something, get hurt, and so forth. But a whole lot of them will do more of the right things, or do good, or do something pretty great too.
That too is as good as it gets.
When the doors open for this kind of thing to be more acceptable, we all benefit.
One basic benefit I find worth the entire effort goes right to that information sharing. If you can't open it, you don't own it. Right now, there are a lot of IP related concerns playing out, and it's us, here, right now, who will resolve these for the longer term. The same is true for being networked together.
Having this movement rise to a more popular status means we get the benefit of more ordinary people used to thinking about these kinds of things, meaning we may well see better law, or at the least, support for better law. And norms. We are already moving toward much better norms in this regard. Makers are driving that, and we need to encourage them to continue.
To me, that's all very important.
I grew up poor. I've written that here before, and for me it was overall a really high value experience. There is a dynamic surrounding a scenario like that and it gets right down to one's perspective, boundaries and what the perception of empowerment really is. "I can do it" as opposed to, "I should do it", or "maybe I'm not supposed to do it", etc... Having this perspective can mean everything. Seriously. When the spark gets snuffed out, it sometimes never, ever returns for people.
For me personally, a good few friends and I resolved this to, "what is supposed to be possible" vs "what is actually possible?" And that turned out to be very interesting! Real human limits are different from the safe ones we get taught and are accustomed to. The same goes for tech, machinery, etc... Yeah we broke some stuff, but we did some really great stuff too. Good times man. Damn good times.
I was lucky because the general culture and people I grew up with basically put few boundaries on these things. We were quite free to give most anything a go, and we did! People caught on, and would just bring us stuff. Lots of stuff. And we took it and we did stuff with it. Nobody cared what, only that we did, and they liked that we were doing it too. Powerful.
The "makers" in my town ended up with a ton of skills even before graduating high school. Potent people, and I still know a lot of them, and not a one of us ever really stopped. This was late 70's through late 80's. As mentioned, some went farther into tech, some centered in on crafts, and some centered in on tools, working with wood, metals, machinery, whatever. They did what ended up resonating well with them and adding value to their lives.
Fast forward to the late 90's through 00's with my own kids. A lot had changed. I pushed against this as a parent, and I did not see the success I would have liked. Some parents actually got spooked over "doing stuff, hacking..." Crazy!
Schools were very different, often omitting the kinds of hands on programs that cultivate and gestate "makers" and we end up sort of losing them. Peer pressure, status, and the overall pressure of consumerism really pushed people away from doing it themselves. I could feel it acutely throughout that time, often directly. "You fixed your own car??" This followed by, "why not use a shop and enjoy your weekend?" We all know why, so I'll leave it there.
...until now.
What we've done is bring it back out and we've somehow made it accessible to people in new ways. Those who would be makers are making, and it's good. They pick up right where they left off, or they start where they maybe wanted to, but didn't seem empowered to do so.
Given these economic times and the very significant changes we are seeing ripple through our economy, jobs, and so forth, the idea that people can spend to solve or build really isn't a viable one for an awful lot of people.
Of course, going farther down that road is a politics discussion. Let's just say we could use significantly more focused and productive discussion on that front and cite the current state of policy as one that is very favorable to a growing maker movement as unfavorable as it may be to continuing a consumer movement. We may be able to fix this, or we might not.
Fine by me. Any maker is going to find their way. And that's just what I and I'm sure quite a few of you did too. Maybe we need an awful lot of makers. Maybe they will fix it. Maybe we need them to help fix it.
Empowered people tend to find a way. They get stuff done, and they learn, and they grow, do, build, play, help. Doesn't matter too much how they get there, only that they do and that they care. From there, friends get made, community forms, things get made, they get improved, they get remade and the overall capacity to improve grows. The set of skills and perspective that you find in a maker type are the skills they need in a lot of contexts. It's high value even if their "makings" aren't model projects.
We want this.
So I'm a fan. Too much emphasis on the little things, or form, etc... can turn some people away. People who may well advance on their own motives once they've seen some success.
As I mentioned above, that's as good as it gets. What we can do is make ourselves available, encourage, mentor, donate, help, whatever and however it makes sense for us.
Re: Computing
I've mentored some people, and am still working with one now who is advancing rapidly.
We got access to the tech on a basic, very accessible, hackable, understandable level denied to most people today. This is very highly valuable and something we can pass on, while picking up the things young people may see as obvious, the whole thing resonant so long as there is an open dialog about it all.
And the makers have those dialogs, and it's great.
Many of us here could make our own computers. Some of us have. One thing I've noted is a consistent interest in that aspect. People made CPU's in Minecraft, and they follow retro projects, or they build a machine, or they emulate old ones. And they want to pick things apart more and often they won't know how, or they need a nudge. Often we can provide that, and often it doesn't take much for them to go forth and just learn a lot. Same as we did.
I've got somebody under my wing right now wanting to be a sysadmin. She values the perspective, and it's really interesting to watch how she learns and what resources she seeks. Sometimes I'm quite surprised and I pick up a new trick. Sometimes she's amazed at what typing a few things can actually do. I'm having a really great time with this. Lots to share, lots to learn. I think she's going to make a fine sysadmin. Suits me. I need a good one.
Dialog. That's most likely the core contribution makers bring to the table. It's just more possible to have more dialog in more contexts.
Edit: One other thing about overall culture and this "free information exchange" type concept...
Where possible, making a dialog low friction is the primary thing of importance to do. The up and coming generations have an acute sense of this friction and they shy away from it. They are growing up connected and in a complex world many of us did not inhabit. They talk together a lot, they have a lot of information available to them we did not, and they will frequently explore looking for resonance and when they find it, they will explore and seek to maximize it. This is a different mode from what most of us have experienced, and it's still quite different from what most formal / academic and professional education / training scenarios put out there.
It is what differentiates the maker movement from what I can tell.
When the door is open, good info can be put out there. If it's low friction and a peer exchange more than a lecture, or some other more authoritarian thing, that is a good exchange and they get something from it. The door will open again, and that's good, and it can become resonant over time. Very good.
Think, "Indicate areas you are interested in" as opposed to, "Rate your skill in the following areas." in the context of a skills assessment, for example.
While subtle, the difference between these two increasingly matters. The first one isn't making a judgement of any kind. They are free to open the door and the assumption is they open it when they see value in improving. And it's about improving, not so much where they are.
The second one requires a judgement, and they may feel obligated to open that door, and or feel like they lack some status or other, which builds friction and where there is friction there is simply less making overall and that's bad.
I can tell you the day I changed that one question is the day I saw a much better dialog and success with people under 30.
I've made that observation through many adult education scenarios and the change happened somewhere in the late '00's. Take that for what it's worth. Picking up on the subtle friction aspect of things has served me very well in both the mentor and adult trainer / instructor role.
Couple this desire for low friction with the concurrent desire for some quick gratification, and at first, it seems shallow, but if you think about the concept of resonance, it begins to make a lot of sense. Low friction, frequent feedback loops = skill building. It's more free form than many of us are used to, but it can yield some great results, while at the same time not really turning anybody away. Neat.
There you go, my .02 on makers.
Who said "metal casting"? We were doing sand casting in aluminium at school, aged 14 or so. I've wish I had some place to do that again ever since. The safety conscious school inspectors of today would have seizures if they saw what we used to get up to back then.
Make Magazine = - 1
I will always support anything that influences "true" creativity. I agree with many things people have said in regards to people posting their projects that are just tossed together from other internet scraps and show a lack of craftsmanship. However, when I see a basic idea turned into something clever because of a little bit of out of the box thinking and then executed with quality craftsmanship, I smile every time.
Err, in most parts of the world, Hacker actually means breaking into and that meaning predates the localised USA subversion into Coding Stuff.
So far from a modern idea, it is an older and more widely understood use of the world.
Maker is still cringe-worthy, but it at least is not a miss-use of a word. - the sooner the USA-local mangling of Hacker dies off, the better.
In my most parts of the world "hacker" was all about hacking things to fit, getting stuff done. Making stuff do what it was perhaps not designed to do. It was not about software. The hacker was no expert but he was making do with what he had. He just hacked it. Later of course that was the perfect term to describe a lot of software people. Many of whom became experts by virtue of their hacking on code.
Now that I check it, this kind of usage goes back to the 14th century! See here: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hacker.
An old, but still, current use of the word "hacking" is all about riding horses for fun, trail riding : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hack_%28horse%29
So there we have it "hacker" and "hacking" following trails for fun. Of course some of that may actually involve breaking into computers
I really do not know what to say about that comment.
Hmmmm....
Sand casting is..... delightfully dangerous
Let the word stay murky. Fine by me as it is a great excuse to share positive culture and experiences.
Nay sayers will just have to deal.
'
A hard head will make for a soft butt...!!!
There's nothing that's as effective in killing creativity as theoretical classes full of generalities.
That they should consider holding a few classes with 'alternative tools', though, goes without saying.
What is important is that they get people to start thinking creatively.
Then do more and better stuff.
Turn no one away.
http://thethinkmovement.com/
Isn't Make a for profit corporation? There is the Make Magazine. There are the Maker Faires. Then there are the Maker Spaces.
As far as I can tell a bunch of makers cannot just have a "Maker Faire" of their own because the term is a trade mark. Similarly you can't just set up a Maker Space of your own. You have to be some how affiliated to this Make pyramid scheme.
So rather than being a "movement" by the people for the people it is actually a world wide show, a circus, run by somebody.
This is perhaps why it is not the "Hacker Movement".
Of course I am probably way off the mark here. Just now I cannot find any links to follow the trail back to the master minds of all this.
Anyone know more?
But, there is a lot of parallel activity that is just people doing stuff, gathering, etc...
The movement is more like a bunch of coalitions all having some interactions, but not necessarily direction. Think lots of centers of gravity. A person who finds they have some affinity toward the stuff going on may find themselves more strongly identifying with one or more scenes or coalitions, but isn't really locked in either.
Some of those centers of gravity lead right to specific entities and their profits and pyramids. Others really don't, or may lead away and into something else, like the hacker scene and it's hacker spaces. Both of which work just like maker scenes and maker spaces.