OSEwatch

"The current Open Source Hardware Draft Definition is intended to help provide guidelines for the development and evaluation of licenses for Open Source Hardware and it says that Open Hardware is "a term for tangible artifacts - machines, devices, or other physical things - whose design has been released to the public in such a way that anyone can make, modify, distribute, and use those things". The main difference with Open Source Software is that Open Source Software is collaborative, while Open Hardware is derivative:"

The key of values, by FSF : "The fundamental difference between the two movements is in their values, their ways of looking at the world. For the Open Source movement, the issue of whether software should be open source is a practical question, not an ethical one. As one person put it, "Open source is a development methodology; free software is a social movement." For the Open Source movement, non-free software is a suboptimal solution. For the Free Software movement, non-free software is a social problem and free software is the solution."

Raphael Rousseau, our co-founder and the most in free culture of Ynternet.org team, is pointing this definition as THE key. Situations can change, sometimes even licenses can update version and become less or more appropriate, but what is interesting is the definition, then it is easy to rely it to a license that suits the specific situation.

Here we can see that Opensource Hardware" is a n expression mostly used for computer-related hardware. It is intersting to evaluate if OSE and wikispeed should relate to other branches of opensources, non-computerized ones ?

"Open hardware companies are experimenting with different business models. Arduino, for example, makes money largely through design consulting. By creating a design community around their products, they stay in touch with the latest developments. They have also registered their name as a trademark."

I don't know if he's right, but he is pointing some intersting existing debates

"Unfortunately, mature markets tend eventually toward oligopoly or monopoly. In these real-world markets, "normal" profit is too low because it forces firms to concentrate on minimizing costs, which is hard to do when workers demand higher wages, managers want bigger salaries and bonuses, suppliers increase their prices, taxes and regulatory expenses rise, and investors and lenders seek higher returns. It's much easier-and more rewarding to all concerned-for private guardians to create market conditions that support higher-than-normal profits."

the film seems interesting, although typically NOT understdning the opensource culture, theerefore partly promoting an "old paradigm" approach while saying it's a new paradigm apporach

"What is Sociocracy? Sociocracy is a method of designing harmonious organizations, workplaces and associations in which each member is valued equally. It is based on creating self-optimizing systems that are effective and productive. The principles and practices were developed by Gerard Endenburg based on: Modern management theory and practices Quaker traditions of peace education and the valuing of each person Cybernetics, the science of communications and control"

"Meritocracy, in the first, most administrative sense, is a system of government or other administration (such as business administration) wherein appointments and responsibilities are objectively assigned to individuals based upon their "merits", namely intelligence, credentials, and education,[1] determined through evaluations or examinations. The "most common definition of meritocracy conceptualizes merit in terms of tested competency and ability, and most likely as measured by IQ or standardized achievement tests."[2] Supporters of meritocracies do not necessarily agree on the nature of "merit", however they tend to agree that "merit" itself should be a primary consideration during evaluation. In a more general sense, meritocracy can refer to any form of government based on achievement. Like "utilitarian" and "pragmatic", the word "meritocratic" has also developed a broader definition, and can be used to refer to any government run by "a ruling or influential class of educated or able people.""

"Democracy is a contact sport that everyone should play. Contrary to what we've been taught, it is not a spectator sport. It was specifically designed for amateurs and when professionals take over, they only ruin the game."

"Consensus Democracy focuses on the need to reengineer the approach to local decision making in the 21st Century. It assumes the present system which emphasizes political parties and simple ideology is unable to be effective in a fast-paced age in which constant change creates a new level of interdependency and complexity. It assumes that the old idea of checks and balances will create tremendous gridlock in a society increasingly diverse. "

"The assessment of gross national happiness (GNH; Wylie: rgyal-yongs dga'a-skyid dpal-'dzoms) was designed in an attempt to define an indicator that measures quality of life or social progress in more holistic and psychological terms than only the economic indicator of gross domestic product (GDP)."

"E-democracy is a combination of the words electronic and democracy. In an evolving political and technological landscape here on Earth, many are fighting over the definition of this term. But a logical definition adheres to the word itself: a democracy that has "electronic" characteristics. E-democracy does not equal e-government, but is a form of it. It does not equal "wikigovernment" but is a form of it. Of course, defining "e-democracy" can be just as difficult as defining democracy when you get down to brass tacks. But because the Internet connects millions of people and can be a tool for governance, e-democracy has the potential to become one of the first forms of large-scale direct democracy on Earth. Canada and Sweden are now both trying to enact forms of this system of government, by working within the traditional political process to elect e-democracy friendly politicians, with the ultimate goal of overhauling the entire system of their nations' governments. Sweden's party Aktiv Demokrati aims to build a genuine direct democracy; Canada's Online Party has taken a milder approach with citizens in a more advisory capacity."

"Collaborative governance is a process and a form of governance in which participants (parties, agencies, stakeholders) representing different interests are collectively empowered to make a policy decision or make recommendations to a final decision-maker who will not substantially change consensus recommendations from the group.[citation needed] Governance can employ different degrees of public consultation and participation,[1] ranging from non-participation (the community is unaware of any decisions taken), informing (telling the community what is planned and to understand problems, alternatives and solutions), consultation (to obtain public feedback on analysis, alternatives and/or decisions), collaboration (to partner with the public to develop alternatives, identify preferred solutions, and make decisions), to empowerment (placing final decision-making into the hands of the public). Collaborative governance is governance with characteristics of both collaboration and empowerment.[citation needed] Some models of collaborative governance have been criticized as allowing ad hoc deliberation to drown out minority opposition.[2] "

"Open-source governance is a political philosophy which advocates the application of the philosophies of the open source and open content movements to democratic principles in order to enable any interested citizen to add to the creation of policy, as with a wiki document. Legislation is democratically opened to the general citizenry, employing their collective wisdom to benefit to the decision-making process and improve democracy.[1]"

"Nonviolent Communication (NVC) (also called Compassionate Communication or Collaborative Communication[1][2]) is a communication process developed by Marshall Rosenberg beginning in the 1960s.[3] NVC often functions as a conflict resolution process. It focuses on three aspects of communication: self-empathy (defined as a deep and compassionate awareness of one's own inner experience), empathy (defined as listening to another with deep compassion), and honest self-expression (defined as expressing oneself authentically in a way that is likely to inspire compassion in others). NVC is based on the idea that all human beings have the capacity for compassion and only resort to violence or behavior that harms others when they don't recognize more effective strategies for meeting needs"

"Consensus decision-making is a group decision making process that seeks the consent, not necessarily the agreement of participants and the resolution of objections. Consensus is defined by Merriam-Webster as, first, general agreement, and second, group solidarity of belief or sentiment. It has its origin in the Latin word cōnsēnsus (agreement), which is from cōnsentiō meaning literally feel together."

"Consensus democracy is the application of consensus decision-making to the process of legislation in a democracy. It is characterised by a decision-making structure which involves and takes into account as broad a range of opinions as possible, as opposed to systems where minority opinions can potentially be ignored by vote-winning majorities.[1]"