The RepRap project is a thriving community that develops an open source 3D printer that fabricates not only arbitrary objects, but also the parts to make more 3D printers. Besides being interesting in itself, the project provides valuable indications of the impact of affordable digital production tools. I will show how a distributed community is enabled to collaboratively develop not only the software but also physical innovations and content, independent of manufacturers. I will also show how a commons of open source 3D content can emerge and how this further lowers the barriers for individuals to innovate and express themselves. It is exciting to see more and more individuals empowered to participate in this expanded scope of open source. Possibly, projects like the RepRap will revolutionize "making" not entirely unlike the PC and Linux have done for computing.
In addition to proliferation of digital fabrication tools such as RepRaps, there are important trends that hint at the significance of this emerging trend. Development of open source development toolchains, easy-to-use and/or free CAD software and cheap MaaS (Manufacturing as a Service) are unleashing the creative potential of eventually every person on this planet. I argue for more broad recognition of the positive welfare implication of this open and distributed mode of production. I will speculate that further emergence of the phenomenon may have far reaching implications for the meaning of property when even physical matter can be copied or shared as easily as software.
2. Impact
Freedom to copy software is an
important right because it is easy
now – any computer can do it.
Freedom to copy hardware is not
as important, because copying
hardware is hard to do.
– Richard Stallman on Linux Today,
1999
3. It is important
“Easy, anyone can do it”
1. Any computer can copy software 2. Anyone has a computer
FOR SOFTWARE:
4. It is important
“Easy, anyone can do it”
1. Any fabricator can copy hardware 2. Anyone has a fabricator
FOR HARDWARE:
Driven by:
Low cost
Ease of use
Capabilities
Discovery of applications
Word-of-mouth
Etc.
5. Open source in hardware
● Increasingly important as more people can
have fabrication resources,
● as there are more motives to actually adopt
these resources,
● as collaboration becomes easier
(partly endogenous to the community's
ecosystem)
6. Viability of Open Design
● Motives
● Benefits
● Other incentives
● Means / Opportunity
● Community
● Infrastructure
7. Motives
● Intellectual challenge & achievement
“Technically challenging, fun potentially useful, developing skills.”
● Autonomy
● Benefits
● Relatedness / community
● Meaning
”Hope to change the world by democratizing design and manufacture of material
goods. good for freedom, good for planet.”
8. What would you make?
iPhone Dock? A replacement buckle? A tiny violin?
A whistle?
(with pea inside)
Art, gifts? Caps for
LED-candles?
21. Intrinsic motivations
● Intrinsic motivation creates more creative
results
● People requires no monitoring, and informal
governance can be enough
● People like to share!
22. The means to do Open Design
● Money?
● Community
– Access to knowledge, spreading workload, etc.
● Infrastructure
– Fabricators
– Sharing platforms
– A commons of physical designs
23. • Online proposal for an open
source standard construction kit
• Extruded aluminum beam
• Suitable for mass production:
high up-front costs
• Crowdfunded by 132 people
• > 17k in pledges received in
months
24. The means to do Open Design
✔ Money?
● Community
– Access to knowledge, spreading workload, etc.
● Infrastructure
– Fabricators
– Sharing platforms
– A commons of physical designs
27. Proliferation of OS Fab. Equip.
RepRap & derivatives Industry Giant (Stratasys)
R&D manpower > 1000 people
(145-182 FTE R&D)
100 people
~100 FTE R&D
R&D expenditure $ 384,000 – 478,000 ~ $ 7.5 mln.
Yearly growth
2005-2010:
400–600%
Yearly growth & decline
2006-2009:
-17%–17%
28. The means to do Open Design
✔ Money?
✔ Community
– Access to knowledge, spreading workload, etc.
● Infrastructure
– Fabricators
– Sharing platforms
– A commons of physical designs
35. A commons of components
Robot modules or even complete robots
Micro 'factories' and complete 3D printers
Personal 3D
Printer
36. The means to do Open Design
✔ Money?
✔ Community
– Access to knowledge, spreading workload, etc.
✔ Infrastructure
✔ Fabricators
✔ Sharing platforms
✔ A commons of physical designs
37. Main take away
● You can participate in creating the open source
revolution in physical designs!
39. References
• Discussion
• Further infomation
o My blog: http://erikdebruijn.nl
o p2pfoundation.org
o RepRap project: www.RepRap.org
o RepLab.org - creating open replicable FabLab's
o Democratizing Innovation (By Eric von Hippel) and user
innovation literature
o Thingiverse objects:
Personal 3D printer (thing:815)
mail-me@ErikDeBruijn.nl
My vCard:
Editor's Notes
For hardware, if the same conditions were satisfied, the four freedoms would be equally important.
0 = use
1 = study
2 = distribute
3 = improve
Not just a lot of toys.
Amateurs play with it.
Amateurs do different things with it and will experiment more.
Manufacturer would say, this could never be a product. The quality is awful.
Resourceful user: I can now open the door, and this will do until the weekend when I buy a new door handle.
Incomplete voorwerpen gaan weer langer mee.
Batterijklepjes van de afstandsbedieningen.
Kapotte voorwerpen repareren.
Comparing Mendel's Law ;) and Moore's Law is comparing apples and oranges, or 3D printers and transistors. Still, the technologies are both transformative.
Comparing Mendel's Law ;) and Moore's Law is comparing apples and oranges, or 3D printers and transistors. Still, the technologies are both transformative.
It usually is a blend of art, science or contains things that are just useful to print instead of going to the store.
It usually is a blend of art, science or contains things that are just useful to print instead of going to the store.
