RepLab Roadmap WAS Re: [RepLab] Unified Fab Lab Bot

5 views
Skip to first unread message

Sam Putman

unread,
Feb 19, 2010, 12:19:50 PM2/19/10
to rep...@googlegroups.com
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 8:47 AM, John Griessen <jo...@industromatic.com> wrote:
>
>> Having this "unified vision" or long term goal can be used for roadmap
>> creation.
>> Identifying required components for goal situation,
>> distinguishing developed, developing and undeveloped components.
>>
>> So those that fresh members that join the movement can contribute to
>> the long term roadmap.
>>
>> It may benefit from management software,
>>
> Yes.
>

So far, no roadmap, only a bunch of discussion and a few vision
documents, such as:

http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/the-replab-initiative-machines-making-machines/2009/12/04
http://openfarmtech.org/weblog/?p=1254

Interest in this project has raised to a critical mass, but the online
infrastructure is lagging behind that interest. We have a piece of the
RepRap forum, the list, the domain and a twitter/identi.ca account; at
the moment, only the forum and list have activity.

I'm interested in proposals as to how to manage collaboratively
visioning future paths, dependencies etc. for building out the larger
concept of a RepLab suite of tools.

For now, any roadmaps, envisionings, etc. can be posted here; we have
little enough traffic as to prevent an informational black hole.

cheers,
-Sam Putman.

Bryan Bishop

unread,
Feb 19, 2010, 2:57:31 PM2/19/10
to openmanu...@googlegroups.com, kan...@gmail.com, RepLab Discussion List
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 11:51 AM, Sam Putman wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 9:37 AM, Eugen Leitl wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 09:29:08AM -0800, Sam Putman wrote:
>>> I just hit "reply" and edited the subject, neither adding nor removing
>>> recipients. I didn't realize it had political consequences.
>>>
>>> Sort of like you did, Eugen. grrr stop posting only to openmanufacturing!
>>
>> It is a full-time job keeping track of the dozens (and further fragmenting)
>> communities, which also cover different communication cultures.
>>
>> I think we should try to coalesce things, instead of trying birdshot
>> with crossposts.
>
> Respectfully, I disagree. Conceptually distinct projects should have

Sam, this is not conceptually distinct- and we've told you this many,
many times.

> their own list, one is plenty, for project-specific communication.
> Larger, higher-volume lists like Open Manufacturing thrive on the
> crossposting activities of someone like Bryan, but equally many people
> avoid them for this very reason.

The only reason I cross post is because people like you keep running
away. Stop it, please. PLEASE. There has been no discussion on this
list other than your allegations about this.

- Bryan
http://heybryan.org/
1 512 203 0507

Andrii Zvorygin

unread,
Feb 20, 2010, 2:28:10 AM2/20/10
to rep...@googlegroups.com, openmanu...@googlegroups.com

Bryan,
respectfully.

I prefer forums for constructive discussions.

Open Manufacturing's posting so many posting of articles and links,
might be better served on a blog with an rss feed.

How about we can actually merge even more "singularity" efforts together.

KurzweilAI forums are too poor for the Singularity movement nowadays.

You've presented at the HPlus confrence.

How about a move to the Humanity+ Forums?

http://fora.humanityplus.org/

Ben Goertzel's a leader there,
So I'm sure we could integrate open manufacturing with humanity+ forums.
Can negotiate with him at bengo...@gmail.com

Elspru

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages