This is a read only archive of pad.okfn.org. See the
Here is your notepad for Day 2 - enjoy :)
Pictures of result charts from "quality sharing best practice" and "Impact" sessions here:
dusjagr is sad to have missed the role of OSH for education :-(
but has this to share: J'aime
Notes from "Hacking Institutions and Governments" Session: [Juergen]
=> What is the Government Role in OpenEverything?
=> Open Source Approach Buzz is useful PR.
=> Lack of governence made it possible to self govern.
=> Political backing can help to get into the institutions.
=> The "OpenWashing" is creating a false support. Counter-Counter-Hacking!
=> A smart and trustful idea (win win)
=> Shifting/Expanding success from former successors (e.g. OpenAccess)
=> Revealing the problems with existing systems (What problems do we solve with that?)
=> Working with good designers ot communicate your ideas?
=> How do you create a meaning for the change outside the acting community?
=> What are the benficials for whom? What is the profit/cost for society?
=> Making good showcases and success stories.
=> Fake it until you make it.
=> Success is good advocate.
=> Doesn't need to be success, but just good communication.
=> Hacking their criteria of success
=> Understand the other side! Communication!
=> Custumor is not the stakeholder? Users vs. funding institutions.
=> Being open meens to open to closed systems, too.
=> Working together as a transdisciplinary community helping and supporting each other.
=> Use your personal contacts and friends.
=> Hacking an institution as part of the lifecycle of becoming an intitution.
=> Doing a changelling milestone project to proofe your abilities.
=> Insiders vs outsiders? How to hack the institutions
=> Timing: New social contract when institutions have been failing so much.
=> GOSH being at CERN, we hacked the institution -> network (using the PR potential of events and initiatives)
=> How to make institutions more permeable in their education tools
=> How to built mutually beneficial relationships.
=> What is the government's role in this? Policy makers, how can they help?
=> Extend funding bodies policies from Open Access and Open Data to Open Source.
=> The hack is to find a niche/void of governance that we can fill
=> Beware "open washing" or counter-hacking by institution PR, using our naratives to reach their goals!
=> Practical hack by actually realeasing data that was "open" but not really.
=> Setting an example, working against the government by making something it should be doing, or doing it better, and wait for it to pay attention.
=> Practical hack, by blowing up the importance of the international network and provoke "me-too"
=> behaviours in local governments/institutions based on other places' inititiatives.
=> Insiders can invite outsiders in a hacking spirit.
=> Use concrete examples, as well as speculation to describe impact?
=> Research is not always market driven
=> Moonshot projects to raise awareness? -> Impact by examples
=> Hack the success/impact criteria from institutions/customer/client (publications, etc..)
=> How to understand institutions/customer/client language?
Notes from "Scaling in Open Source" [Luc Henry]
François says strong signals needed to flag real issues about open science to funders.
Manifesto -> why is open source better than alternatives. Why it is good for the world, and for the users, and for the funding agencies.
Do we need to brand Open Source to sell? Use Trade Mark law to associate conditions (open source and documentation) to products -> labels.
Labels can introduce scarcity. Truthworthy is scarcity. Potential for modification is scarcity.
Means: How to get to open source as a philosophy?
People who give the grant have the power to change the mentality.
=> Top -> down approach needed? -> lobby and advocacy strategy? Impact by examples?
-> "Manifesto to promote" OSH to funding agencies needed (example of successful examples).
-> Definition of Open Hardware needed!
-> Definition of success needed!
-> Open source: added value or marketing edge?
Use open access/open data as examples and clone for hardware?
Grading needed? Different levels of complexity for reproducibility
Diversity PROJECTS/USERS requires diverse scaling strategies.
Diversity in people means different motivations/goals -> reflect this in "manifesto"
x-axis: Documentation -> Sustainability -> Scale
y-axis: Educate -> Tweak -> Product
y=0: Experience -> Educate -> Impact (student)
y=1/2: Inventor -> Modifier -> Power user (scientific community)
Most people are not interested in creating the device -> high usability and operability.
There is a large difference between "becoming" open source and "starting" open source -> different strategy and different roadblocks.
Business is all along y axis.
2 levels of sustainability/scale: 1 for the project, 1 for the people involved
Making a business has not much to do with IP rights, but rather with quality work.
Is open source hardware a commodity?
Space as a product: how to brand hackerspaces to society? What value the spaces bring (in contrast with the value projects and products bring).
Best practices for quality sharing of open source hardware
DOCUMENTATION is key. Best practices to ensure reproducibility:
DESIGN FILES best practices to ensure usefulness:
- Think about your audience - tailor documentation and design to them (e.g. education, DIY, peer scientists, professtional)
- Indicate purpose of documentation to manage expectations (e.g. prof of principle vs easy to make in educational workshop)
- document along functionality and include meta information about design decisions
- connect all pieces of information well (using documentation tools like DocuBricks or linking them)
- include design files
- name files intuitively and in detail
- instruction stepps should be minute and explicit
- include a lot of media (explanatory diagrams (prooved very useful!), videos and pictures)
- include calibration and testing instructions at modular points
- test your instructions without giving additional information - peer review
- optional: include thoughts on possible improvemts and modifications
- provide design files in an open formate wherever possible (as indicated in open source harware definition)
- share modifiable design files in addition to build files (provide more than only STL, PDF, DXF files or similar)
- design the project to be easily adaptable for comon differences (metric vs imperial) and adaptions, ideally make parametric
- utilise asymmetric design to make parts fit together uniquely and avoid miss-assemblies
- name files with a clear name, material specs and number of pieces
How to measure impact in open science?
· Top-down requirement is that value is communicated bottom-up. Trouble with communicating the method.
· Howdo you add value in the same way that organic agriculture/open source licenses?
· Europeanorgs show interest in supporting open science but policymakers often don’t knowwhat that means. ‘Stamp of approval’ for projects to indicate that they arewell documented, reproducible. Can this be communicated up?
· Socialpeer review, academic peer review, activist peer review as ways of validatingknowledge. Circulates more openly instead of being less open.
· Dependson what you think the point of open science is. Certain things are quantifiable; others are qualifiable. If you don’t reach yourgoal, have you made an impact?
· Collaborationsthat come out of a conference, things that get retweeted.
· Whogets to decide what gets measured? Who are we measuring impact for?
o Grantsand funding agencies
o Communities,specific publics
o Historyof social movements
· Metrics(and for whom)
o Mediaclips – for some people
o #times the publication has been cited
o #community members
o sustainability,transfer of project ownership
o thenext generation that joins the movement
o replicationof previous work
o “Didit change the conversation?”
o learning/understandingnew things
o changingscientific standards
o feedbackfrom users
o derivatives,add-ons, upgrades
o inspirationfor people to DIY
o affecton price baseline in commercial market/standards
§ loweringof competitor prices
o #of speaking engagements
o #of successful replications based on documentation
· Whyis impact hard to measure, and what can we do to make it easier to measure?What tools/systems/meta-information is needed to measure?
o Waysto get people to contribute, incentives
§ Incentivefor data uploading
o Away to compare impact metrics with other similar OSH
§ Tools,standards for measuring quant + qual data
§ Instructions+ tips
§ Anorganization that takes on measuring impact for OSH?
o Taskforce on how you do this. Create the method for how to measure impact.
· Evaluatingimpact can be a method to get feedback.
· “Openscience is the larger pie and citizen science is a tranche in it. Opening upknowledge to itself.”
· Alternativepaths for scientists – we can inject confidence into these pathways.