*Colonel Wiedenman is managing both the grant for the high school program and a $3.5 million grant to the retail start-up TechShop<http://www.techshop.ws/> (it is a bit like a Kinko’s, but instead of copiers, members pay to use laser cutters). As part of that contract, Darpa employees will have access to TechShop’s tools after midnight, when the doors are closed to the public, since Darpa has no lab space of its own.*
*
*
That is funny as hell. The DARPA kids don't have their own toys to play with so they made arrangements to use the hackerspaces'.
Ok. So here is a lovely hypothetical for us - DARPA comes a callin with cash on hand. Do we accept it? And for arguments sake lets say they have no influence on whatever projects are being worked on, but they do ask for at least access to whatever it is we come up with.
I was just talking to the friend who has some first hand knowledge of DARPA
and this sort of program is to; 1) Encourage lateral thinking in the more
conventional design groups. Stuck on a problem? Some high school kids in
Moline solved a similar problem so go and look at their solution. 2)
Discover, who are the people who have the skills we need but don't show up
on the conventional education radar. How many of us were not the most
exemplary students? 3) Encourage science, math engineering skills while
bypassing the conventional education structure. Trig is
BOOOOOORRRIIINNNGG!!! But, it is fun to make a robot that uses trig
functions.
On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 1:47 AM, Ed Hagopian <edhagop...@gmail.com> wrote:
> *Colonel Wiedenman is managing both the grant for the high school program
> and a $3.5 million grant to the retail start-up TechShop<http://www.techshop.ws/> (it
> is a bit like a Kinko’s, but instead of copiers, members pay to use laser
> cutters). As part of that contract, Darpa employees will have access to
> TechShop’s tools after midnight, when the doors are closed to the public,
> since Darpa has no lab space of its own.*
> *
> *
> That is funny as hell. The DARPA kids don't have their own toys to play
> with so they made arrangements to use the hackerspaces'.
> Ok. So here is a lovely hypothetical for us - DARPA comes a callin with
> cash on hand. Do we accept it? And for arguments sake lets say they have no
> influence on whatever projects are being worked on, but they do ask for at
> least access to whatever it is we come up with.
> On Saturday, October 6, 2012 4:11:01 PM UTC-5, neeboy wrote:
On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 11:10 AM, Ed Hagopian <edhagop...@gmail.com> wrote:
> And then blow shit up.. I kid I kid. I'd actually be ok with a gig at
> DARPA.
On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 9:24 PM, Have Blue <haveb...@airsoldier.com> wrote:
> Hey Ed - tell us again about 60g of Sr(NO3)2 and Mg powder during your
> freshman year of high school!
> On 10/7/2012 8:45 PM, Ed Hagopian wrote:
>> Remind me to tell you about my freshman year of high school and 60 grams
>> of strontium nitrate and magnesium powder... Good times.
On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 1:47 AM, Ed Hagopian <edhagop...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ok. So here is a lovely hypothetical for us - DARPA comes a callin with
> cash on hand. Do we accept it? And for arguments sake lets say they have no
> influence on whatever projects are being worked on, but they do ask for at
> least access to whatever it is we come up with.
so this kind of situation may not be a hypothetical. If we switch to a
non-profit organization structure, how does the background of anyone
willing to make donations or grants to the space come into the board's
decision to accept or reject? It certainly is an interesting hypothetical
question...
I think it would depend on any conditions applied as a result of
donations/grants.
I know DARPA doesn't give a damn about my artwork, but if they made it
a stipulation that they get access to anything the 'Space does, does
that apply to every member? Or would it be the case that only certain
member projects that interest them get direct funding? If that's the
case, wouldn't they just use the Makerspace to funnel grants to things
that interest them, as opposed to funding the Makerspace as a whole?
To simplify, though it seems like a stupid question, if they gave us
funding, would all of us be affected by any blanket-stipulations put
on said funding? Without wanting to start a war of words here, that
would be enough for me to leave.
On Oct 7, 10:57 pm, jason gessner <ja...@multiply.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 1:47 AM, Ed Hagopian <edhagop...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Ok. So here is a lovely hypothetical for us - DARPA comes a callin with
> > cash on hand. Do we accept it? And for arguments sake lets say they have no
> > influence on whatever projects are being worked on, but they do ask for at
> > least access to whatever it is we come up with.
> so this kind of situation may not be a hypothetical. If we switch to a
> non-profit organization structure, how does the background of anyone
> willing to make donations or grants to the space come into the board's
> decision to accept or reject? It certainly is an interesting hypothetical
> question...
Shane <Impe...@hotmail.com> writes:
>I think it would depend on any conditions applied as a result of
>donations/grants.
Yes. Read anything carefully before you sign it.
Some random comments about government funding:
For several decades after WWII, the only way to get *anything* funded
was to attach the word "Defense" to it, regardless of whether that made
any sense or not. For example, the Interstate Highway System was
officially called the "Defense Interstate Highway System", but I don't
think anyone outside the Washington beltway ever actually believed it
had anything to do with defense (it was more about "Autobahn Envy").
Also, Arpa (later renamed Darpa) was established to do research that the private sector wasn't interested in financing. Again, attaching it to the Pentagon was a handy way of getting it past Congress. It had all kinds of civilian applications, because anything that's not actually a weapon will have both civilian and military uses. (This proves that Government is evil. Or something.)
IMHO, any kind of grant money (government or otherwise) should only be
used for one-time expenses, and never for ongoing expenses (eg, rent).
>...if they made it
>a stipulation that they get access to anything the 'Space does,
I'm not sure what "access" means in this context, since we (try to) blog
about pretty much everything we do.
I suppose that I read too much into the "access" comment because I was
assuming it meant a form of ownership or, rather, the ability to "own"
something that was created or designed at the 'Space or with the
'Space's funding/equipment/etc.
There's also the idea of how far this extends. If DARPA financed our
acquisition of computer programs and those were used to create
something which was then manufactured outside of the 'Space, what
"access" would they have?
In short, there are far too many questions that we would be unable to
answer without reading a contract...but speculation can be fun sport,
occassionally. :)
On Oct 8, 3:24 pm, Ron Bean <makersp...@rbean.users.panix.com> wrote:
> Shane <Impe...@hotmail.com> writes:
> >I think it would depend on any conditions applied as a result of
> >donations/grants.
> Yes. Read anything carefully before you sign it.
> Some random comments about government funding:
> For several decades after WWII, the only way to get *anything* funded
> was to attach the word "Defense" to it, regardless of whether that made
> any sense or not. For example, the Interstate Highway System was
> officially called the "Defense Interstate Highway System", but I don't
> think anyone outside the Washington beltway ever actually believed it
> had anything to do with defense (it was more about "Autobahn Envy").
> Also, Arpa (later renamed Darpa) was established to do research that the
> private sector wasn't interested in financing. Again, attaching it to
> the Pentagon was a handy way of getting it past Congress. It had all
> kinds of civilian applications, because anything that's not actually a
> weapon will have both civilian and military uses. (This proves that
> Government is evil. Or something.)
> IMHO, any kind of grant money (government or otherwise) should only be
> used for one-time expenses, and never for ongoing expenses (eg, rent).
> >...if they made it
> >a stipulation that they get access to anything the 'Space does,
> I'm not sure what "access" means in this context, since we (try to) blog
> about pretty much everything we do.
*TechShop <http://www.techshop.ws/>* memberships are $125/mo with discounts
for paying yearly. They say they have plans for more locations. I didn't
see a complete listing of equipment offered for these premium priced
memberships
On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 1:47 AM, Ed Hagopian <edhagop...@gmail.com> wrote:
> *Colonel Wiedenman is managing both the grant for the high school program
> and a $3.5 million grant to the retail start-up TechShop<http://www.techshop.ws/> (it
> is a bit like a Kinko’s, but instead of copiers, members pay to use laser
> cutters). As part of that contract, Darpa employees will have access to
> TechShop’s tools after midnight, when the doors are closed to the public,
> since Darpa has no lab space of its own.*
> *
> *
> That is funny as hell. The DARPA kids don't have their own toys to play
> with so they made arrangements to use the hackerspaces'.
> Ok. So here is a lovely hypothetical for us - DARPA comes a callin with
> cash on hand. Do we accept it? And for arguments sake lets say they have no
> influence on whatever projects are being worked on, but they do ask for at
> least access to whatever it is we come up with.
> On Saturday, October 6, 2012 4:11:01 PM UTC-5, neeboy wrote:
