Compopoly - a fairer reward system for value creators?

Compopoly - a fairer reward system for value creators? As someone who has tried a number of 'old school' (IP) based ways to commercialise innovations (setting up a manufacturing company, licencing to big manufacturers) and who is on the verge of trying the open source/crowd source approach, I believe that there is a better alternative - a 'compopoly'. If [b]consumers[/b] rather than '[b]distributors[/b]' (retailers, marketeers and lawyers) decided what reward value 'producers' (innovators, staff, asset owners and investors) in the supply chain got, then: 1. Creators would get a fairer share of financial rewards and recognition for delivering value adding innovation. 2. This would incentivise more incremental innovation. 3. More people would focus on creative and productive activities rather than distributive ones. 4. The open source benefits of minimising wasteful re-learning of lessons would be minimised leading to the adoption of best practice solutions. 5. Intense competition would be focused at the cutting edge. 6. Publishing of the solution would secure the share of revenue that consumers decided to award for the added value. 7. Details of all innovations would be made widely available and put to good use - rather than being hidden away in an obscure corner of the patents database - thus minimising duplication. So how do we make this happen? Ideally, we consumers would need to make market information - their everyday needs, wants and importantly problems available FREE to as large an audience as possible. The existing main online channels - Google, Amazon and EBay - already empower suppliers large and small to reach the market, but charge for the privilege in different ways. If they - or another group of forward thinking consumers - came together to provide a platform where people could list their needs, allow everyone to bid to fulfil them, collect payment and distribute the proceeds to those involved in the creation and distribution of the product or service, we would have a fairer, more productive environment where less of our collective potential was wasted. I would love to hear what you - as a community of forward thinking creators, entrepreneurs and observers - think of this idea. https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,250832#msg-250832 Mon, 10 Aug 2026 16:28:42 -0400 Phorum 5.2.23 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,428723#msg-428723 Re: Compopoly - a fairer reward system for value creators? https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,428723#msg-428723

Quote
Traumflug

Quote
KalleP
Perhaps there is a bit of lull in the evolution of hardware at the moment while a whole flock of commercial desktop machines come onto the emarket.

Commercial developments become more commercial, that's true. This will undoubtly make the number of self-built printers smaller.

I think this is a very good thing, imagine finding scrap $500 machines in a dumpster every other day when an inexperienced consumer jams a nozzle and the machine is out of warrantee, now this is a gold mine of bits for a next generation DIY machine. The number of hacks wll be huge because the hacking technology is freely available.

A bit like people used to take old cars and upgrade them to race cars.]]> KalleP General Thu, 06 Nov 2014 08:10:17 -0500 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,428355#msg-428355 Re: Compopoly - a fairer reward system for value creators? https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,428355#msg-428355

Quote
Ohmarinus
I have been looking on the site and I couldn't find much about things 'not programming'. Why is this?

Wherever I look, developments are either with commercial intention or not open sourced. The latter with a few pictures for compliments fishing at best. Development happens, collaboration not.

Quote
KalleP
Perhaps there is a bit of lull in the evolution of hardware at the moment while a whole flock of commercial desktop machines come onto the emarket.

Commercial developments become more commercial, that's true. This will undoubtly make the number of self-built printers smaller.]]> Traumflug General Wed, 05 Nov 2014 07:50:42 -0500 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,427966#msg-427966 Re: Compopoly - a fairer reward system for value creators? https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,427966#msg-427966

Quote
Ohmarinus

Quote
KalleP
Interesting, well actually a bit peculiar, how this is no longer a searchable topic in the Forums.

I wonder how that can be achieved and who decides if it should be achieved?

I wonder if anyone is still following this topic and will see this post?

@Ohmarinus,

Ahh, silly me thinking all sorts of childish conspiracy thoughts. I had searched for the Interesting word in the title, I do remember seeing mention of advanced search but never used it.

I searched for RepRap on Bountysource.com and a whole bunch of stuff came up, not sure if they are current but a couple of them seem real though not hardware related as you say. Perhaps there is a bit of lull in the evolution of hardware at the moment while a whole flock of commercial desktop machines come onto the emarket.]]> KalleP General Tue, 04 Nov 2014 08:28:12 -0500 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,427946#msg-427946 Re: Compopoly - a fairer reward system for value creators? https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,427946#msg-427946

Quote
KalleP
Interesting, well actually a bit peculiar, how this is no longer a searchable topic in the Forums.

I wonder how that can be achieved and who decides if it should be achieved?

I wonder if anyone is still following this topic and will see this post?

I think you just had the time limit on your search. When you do a search, it will automatically search for topics that have been active for the past 30 days.

BTW, bountysource is mostly about programming, I have been looking on the site and I couldn't find much about things 'not programming'. Why is this?]]> Ohmarinus General Tue, 04 Nov 2014 07:06:26 -0500 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,427905#msg-427905 Re: Compopoly - a fairer reward system for value creators? https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,427905#msg-427905
I wonder how that can be achieved and who decides if it should be achieved?

I wonder if anyone is still following this topic and will see this post?]]> KalleP General Tue, 04 Nov 2014 05:16:30 -0500 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,253744#msg-253744 Re: Compopoly - a fairer reward system for value creators? https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,253744#msg-253744

Quote
Iquizzle
According to KS, there should be zero expectation of return on investment. Problematically, KS has no system of accountability...

This is why on the RepRap site, we should encourage, nurture and enable the purchase of incrementally innovated 3D printers, components and related solutions (eg. Raw material producing aquaponics, PLA production units, filament extruders and the like).

Everyone should be able to contribute concept ideas for improvements or new solutions, but until they had been prototypes, videoed and vetted by the community, they would not be able to have a crowd fund or be sold in the RepRap store. In the interim, we could set up a bounty or all-or-nothing development crowdfund from which the contributors could optionally get repaid with a bonus from the volume sales crowdfund if and when that happened...]]> Senake General Thu, 10 Oct 2013 21:38:53 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,253343#msg-253343 Re: Compopoly - a fairer reward system for value creators? https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,253343#msg-253343 -------------------------------------------------------
> The bigger problem is getting products that don't
> deliver on what they promised. The people who made
> those products should be punished in some way,
> although in theory it should control itself by
> eventually destroying people's trust in the
> system.

According to the KS model, this is not a problem at all. KS is not taking enough preventative measures to make sure people know that crowdfunding is NOT pre-order. According to KS, there should be zero expectation of return on investment. Problematically, KS has no system of accountability, allowing the most unconscionable people to receive the most funding. The weaker your sense of morality and obligation, the more you will earn on KS.

> Soon nobody will fund kickstarter projects, or the
> people that do fund them will become more wary,
> and scam projects will become less viable.

This is definitely already happening. People are starting to learn "the hard way" what the KS funding model actually is. Until people are scammed enough times to know better, KS will continue to allow the scam artists to make money... and as long as KS is being treated like a pre-order site by its backers, it wil be an enabling platform for the scammers to get their money.

If you are in the mindset of buying something on KS, you should expect to receive a pile of junk. If it turns out *not* to be junk, then by the good graces and moral characters of the stranger you handed your money to, you have gotten lucky.

If you are in the mindset of "backing" an idea that you just can't live without, then you're doing it right. You have no expectation of any return on the money you pledged. You might get nothing in return, or you might see it work out.]]> iquizzle General Wed, 09 Oct 2013 17:48:18 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,253336#msg-253336 Re: Compopoly - a fairer reward system for value creators? https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,253336#msg-253336

Quote
iquizzle
KS is blatantly allowing non-innovative projects to be funded so that they can get profit.

Whose job is it to make sure the projects are innovative? Isn't that what the backers are supposed to do? Besides, even if a backer funded a totally derivative product then what's the difference? The backer got what he wanted, the people making the derivative product got what they wanted.

The bigger problem is getting products that don't deliver on what they promised. The people who made those products should be punished in some way, although in theory it should control itself by eventually destroying people's trust in the system.

Soon nobody will fund kickstarter projects, or the people that do fund them will become more wary, and scam projects will become less viable.]]> destroyer2012 General Wed, 09 Oct 2013 17:26:30 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,253335#msg-253335 Re: Compopoly - a fairer reward system for value creators? https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,253335#msg-253335 http://www.kickstarter.com/blog/kickstarter-is-not-a-store.

I also know a reasonable amount about the early stage funding market - angel rather than VC investment - here in the UK as a result of my efforts in trying to get an alternative solution off the ground myself. My solution - based on the what worked when I bootstrapped my machinery company back in 1991.

In the first two years, whilst getting my first two reference sites, I was lucky enough to have various people - not friends and family as I did't know beforehand - offer me things that they weren't using on a pay us if and when you can basis. This included a 2000 sq ft derelict factory space, machine components, access to a pillar drill, a cheap car and even a flat. In return, I paid them back with a small premium and occasional sales/development work. They had little to lose as I was using what they couldn't sell/hire and everything to gain. After selling bespoke production line machinery to a couple of customers, I took one of two offers of angel investment (both introductions made for free by my bank manager) to try and get a standard product off the ground.

My approach to funding the high risk idea-to-market stage of business was therefore to:

(1) minimise the impact of things not working out by maximising the use of under utilised resources (spare time, underused workshop and factory facilities etc.) and;
(2) maximise the quality of due diligence, but make it affordable/free by using the spare time, dormant asset and investing/lending crowd to spot technical and commercial gaps in

Despite having spent quite a lot of time (2+ years) and money (some of my house) developing the solution, I gave up on pushing it into the market because:

(1) I ran out of cash - even with the solution working for us to dramatically reduce up front costs, I still had to meet some costs - and;
(2) crowd funding seemed to have solved the problem and;
(3) I think a Compopoly - consumer owned and run group buying portal is a more complete solution.

I was still thinking of offering the tool to those wanting to derisk their crowd funding projects. It can be seen here - www.jointventurehubs.com.

My experience of the early stage investment market over here is that less than 1% of screened deal flow gets funded and that entrepreneurs/innovators get charged quite a lot for introductions.

Crowd funders are often early adopters after a new technology product and investors generally just want a financial return which is best provided by later stage businesses, so in my opinion both solutions have their place.]]> Senake General Wed, 09 Oct 2013 17:23:13 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,253328#msg-253328 Re: Compopoly - a fairer reward system for value creators? https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,253328#msg-253328 -------------------------------------------------------
> The issue with KS isn't KS, it's some of the
> participants. I don't think you can provide any
> substantiative documentation that most KS projects
> are frauds. To stereotype KS projects in that way
> is insulting to projects like Smoothieboard that
> are doing the best they can to raise funds.

If KS better enforced their own rules, I would agree with you -- however, the formula to a successful scampaign is quite simple. Forget about ideas and development. That stuff matters very little. Start with a price. For instance, if you can build a reprap for $500-600 dollars from shops online, your kickstarter should set a price of $400 dollars or lower. Then, build a prototype of whatever you want to sell and make claims that you'll be shipping something like that for the price you selected. Finally, replace all of the quality components in said product with shittier versions and cut corners until you achieve the profit margin you want. And last but not least, throw your pile of cash onto your bed and roll around in it. SUCCESSFUL KICKSTARTER!

I'm not claiming that all KS projects go this way, but people have dumped abandoned piles of expensive KS trash at my hackerspace that don't just borderline on scams -- but IMO were scams. These projects were enabled by following the million dollar KS formula I just laid out. By not enforcing their own rules, KS allows shit like this to happen time and time again... and in the end it tarnishes the good name of legitimate projects like Smoothieboard, which let the true cost of a quality product dictate the price at which it is sold.

From the KS site: "Backers are supporting projects to help them come to life, not to profit financially. Instead, project creators offer rewards to thank backers for their support.... Backing a project is more than just giving someone money. It’s supporting their dream to create something that they want to see exist in the world."

Tell me how pledging money at a 3d printer, which has no new innovation, helps anything come to life? In the history of KS and all the money put into 3d printers on that site, how many of those things have brought to life something that didn't already exist as open source within the reprap project? I'd say pretty close to zero. Translation: KS is blatantly allowing non-innovative projects to be funded so that they can get profit. I'm honestly confused why there aren't more people as jaded as I am...]]> iquizzle General Wed, 09 Oct 2013 17:02:03 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,253314#msg-253314 Re: Compopoly - a fairer reward system for value creators? https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,253314#msg-253314 The market for 3D printers including Reprap type printers has changed from one of developers to one of consumers

I think their is more than a little truth in this, but a vast amount of development is needed to achieve self replication, and if that is to happen we need a lot of people to become active developers and not just users.]]> johnrpm General Wed, 09 Oct 2013 16:26:54 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,253308#msg-253308 Re: Compopoly - a fairer reward system for value creators? https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,253308#msg-253308 -------------------------------------------------------

> Yes, i did read this and this is the exact reason
> why I promote accepting -NC licences. Because the
> GPL encourages commercialisation much more than a
> -NC licence. Look at RAMPS or Sanguinololu: both
> are found in almost every commercial shop, at the
> same time their community development has stalled
> long time ago. There's not even somebody who would
> replace the MOSFETs with more suitable ones, a
> matter of an hour of work.
>
> Compare this to Gen7, which apparently encourages
> making derivates and continued development.

RAMPS and Sanguinololu have been developed to the point where the next versions need to emcompass more changes. For example RAMBo and Smoothieboard and Brainwave as a Sanguinololu derivative that was designed for manufacturing. From the perspective of an engineer one is driving to always evolve and change. Many times for the sake of change. The market is different in that it's solutions driven. The current RAMPS and Sanguinolou meet the needs of the majority of not only Reprap users but also consumer based DIY 3D printing enthusiasts at this stage in the market. I see any future advancements in making them less expensive to manufacture and package rather than in any feature or performance enhancements. They do what they need to do and they do it well. The market for 3D printers including Reprap type printers has changed from one of developers to one of consumers. In any market there are always going to be more consumers than makers. To support those consumers there needs to be manufacturing capability and for many Reprap devs that's not their speciality. To that end what solution the consumers chose isn't based on technological prowess alone, but on a host of issues including availability, support, what others are using and others.]]> vegasloki General Wed, 09 Oct 2013 16:04:05 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,253300#msg-253300 Re: Compopoly - a fairer reward system for value creators? https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,253300#msg-253300 -------------------------------------------------------

> People who start shitstarter scampaigns have no
> responsibility to start a company. They could
> essentially run the campaign, send all their
> "investors" trash and quit with the money that
> they raised. If the people who ran the campaign
> decide to build a company, the investors do not
> share in any of the profit, nor do they have any
> influence in how the company is run. Quite simply,
> if you are approaching KS like a VC
> opportunity, it's the worst possible VC investment
> you could make, because you're
> guaranteed not to ever see a dime of your
> money return to your pocket. You might as well
> fund a pyramid scheme.

It's functionally the same thing, external funding. People need to take personal responsibility for thier decisions if they choose to back a project. You say that KS campaigns don't guarantee the product will be built. True, but any venture funded project isn't guaranteed either. In the case of a KS campaign the reward isn't equity, it's a "prize" or "award". You're basically paying to fund an idea in exchange for the potential of some sort of treat at the end be it a sticker, shirt, product, etc. While legally not an investment (as they would then become regulated) it is functionally outside investing. Crowdfunding is VC for the little guy but without giving up an equity stake.

In a VC funded venture the investors are likely to have more control within the management structure but we're also talking about a great deal more investment. That's where programs like Haxlr8r and VC funding are advantageous because because there is some mentorship to help with what is likely a very steep learning curve. The issue with KS isn't KS, it's some of the participants. I don't think you can provide any substantiative documentation that most KS projects are frauds. To stereotype KS projects in that way is insulting to projects like Smoothieboard that are doing the best they can to raise funds. If anything I'd say most of them aren't well versed in how to operate a startup and scale to meet demand and failures as such aren't based on nefarious reasons but for lack of experience and ability. IOW, the same reasons that most small business fails.]]> vegasloki General Wed, 09 Oct 2013 15:42:00 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,253248#msg-253248 Re: Compopoly - a fairer reward system for value creators? https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,253248#msg-253248 -------------------------------------------------------
>

Quote

Bobc you are a lone voice

>
> No personal assaults, please. Also I'm pretty sure
> you'll find many more in other areas, like IRC or
> the hangout.

To Bobc

My sincere apologies, that was uncalled for and not productive in any way.

I also regret insinuating that you might be trolling, that was just some bad humour, it really should have come with a smiley or been left unsaid as well. While I and some of the vocal others do not understand you position it means there is a lack of understanding and not a lack of intelligence on either side.

I think I need to take a break from the Open Source threads for a couple of days anyway to rest my nerves.

Markus, I do not know what happens in the other areas so you are correct in pointing out my incomplete sampling.

Sincerely]]> KalleP General Wed, 09 Oct 2013 12:50:54 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,253242#msg-253242 Re: Compopoly - a fairer reward system for value creators? https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,253242#msg-253242

Quote

Bobc you are a lone voice

No personal assaults, please. Also I'm pretty sure you'll find many more in other areas, like IRC or the hangout.]]> Traumflug General Wed, 09 Oct 2013 12:36:20 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,253181#msg-253181 Re: Compopoly - a fairer reward system for value creators? https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,253181#msg-253181
People who start shitstarter scampaigns have no responsibility to start a company. They could essentially run the campaign, send all their "investors" trash and quit with the money that they raised. If the people who ran the campaign decide to build a company, the investors do not share in any of the profit, nor do they have any influence in how the company is run. Quite simply, if you are approaching KS like a VC opportunity, it's the worst possible VC investment you could make, because you're guaranteed not to ever see a dime of your money return to your pocket. You might as well fund a pyramid scheme.

That is the reason you have to approach KS as a pre-order purchase. Since it has no investment value, the only value you can expect to get for your money is a product. In fact, KS sucks as a pre-order as well, because since their product is not backed by a brand, they are under no obligation to send you a legitimate product. The only thing they lose is your trust on future scampaigns! You might *think* you are funding research and development, but in fact there's no stipulation that you're to receive a polished product, one that performs its function well or one that can be made to work.

In my experience, KS frequently produces trash. People start campaigns and over-promise things they can't deliver. Then 2 years later, they send out a half-baked product, because they wanted to keep all the money they raised and not hire people to help them. Instead of developing a product, they spent all of their time fulfilling orders. OR just as often is that they send out junk at a 1000% markup and you never hear about the thing again.

People approach KS like a get rich scheme. A successful KS campaign is the only thing they are trying to achieve. My point is that there is no motivation or obligations after that. To most people, a successful KS campaign means they've done everything they've set out to do. Now it's time to get that product out the door and you'll never hear from them or see them again.

vegasloki Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------- and
>Many startups are
> funded from other peoples money at the seed phase
> and in the growth phase it's almost always outside
> money. That's how startups work. Haxlr8r works on
> the same VC model.]]> iquizzle General Wed, 09 Oct 2013 09:30:17 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,253180#msg-253180 Re: Compopoly - a fairer reward system for value creators? https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,253180#msg-253180 -------------------------------------------------------
> KalleP Wrote:
> > pie ois available. This way people could up
> vote
> > ideas and designs and they would get a larger
> > portion of the whole. Adrian Bowyer would get
> a
> > big chunk of the ideas shares but over time
> they
> > would be a smaller percentage or he could
> donate
> > back all his shares or the cash value wherever
> he
> > wanted to.
>
> Before you go roping Adrian Bowyer into this, you
> should read what he has to say:
>
> [reprap.org]
>
>

Quote

> My purpose in this post is to say why RepRap
> is, and always will be, Open Source.
>

>
> I think it is pretty clear he is not interested in
> closed source, pretend Open Source, LRC or
> whatever you want to call it.
>
> It is funny how people invoke someone's name even
> if they are directly opposed to what is being
> suggested.

Bobc:

You are reading strange things into what Adrian wrote. He is a RepRap proponent. He (in that very document you cited) says that his feelings about Open Source are not related to RepRap. His personal opinion on how best it could work require evolution and openness.

The reason I brought his name into it is to give him credit and offer him a share in the value he has added to humanity. That is the decent thing to do I think.

He has a salaried job that let him create the first RepRap, either his or their money was used. Take this away and we would not be where we are now. His contribution was charity unless he looked into the future of his business that makes RepRap bits.

Enough said, Bobc you are a lone voice trying to say the sky is pink (just wait you say) and the rest of us say the sky is blue and perhaps it could be made a pretty pink if we all work together and want it so.]]> KalleP General Wed, 09 Oct 2013 09:29:10 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,253177#msg-253177 Re: Compopoly - a fairer reward system for value creators? https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,253177#msg-253177 -------------------------------------------------------
>

Quote
bobc
>
Quote
Quote
> My purpose in this post is to say why RepRap is,
> and always will be, Open Source.
>
> I think it is pretty clear he is not interested in
> closed source, pretend Open Source, LRC or
> whatever you want to call it.
>

>
> I do - now - fully understand why Adrian Bowers
> stipulated that the final fully self
> replicating machine needs to be Open Source -
> because anything else could slow down the
> dissemination of the technology. This makes sense
> from a point of view of helping humanity to
> progress by delivering:
>
> (1) increases self sufficiency - which would
> diminish poverty and the incentive to hoard
> wealth.
> (2) the means to spread of optimal technology
> solutions that deliver environmental, societal and
> economic benefits.
>
> I do 100% agree that this need to be top priority
> - in fact - these are stated as the end goals in
> my (very badly written) book, Compopoly.
>
> If a RepRap store (the open build store?) selling
> one or more printer variants with the latest and
> greatest technology from the community stipulated
> that any royalty to be distributed amongst the
> developers needed to be set at a fixed percentage
> (to be debated here) of component cost, then once
> we had all worked together to figure out how to
> create a machine that printed another fully
> assembled machine - motors and other components
> included - out of freely available raw materials,
> the royalty would also be reduced to zero, but no
> one would be particularly concerned about it as we
> would all be much more or completely self
> sufficient.
>
> Up until that point, if we need to:
>
> (1) encourage more developers to join the
> community and;
> (2) encourage the community's developers to spend
> a greater share of their day fast tracking the
> technology and;
> (3) discourage developers going the 100% closed
> source patent route;
>
> ...then we need to put something in place so that
> they prioritise delivering the value that they can
> add to progress the project over and above
> focusing on their job just so that they can meet
> their living costs and those of their family.

I agree almost exactly on your assessment and wrote similar on the LRC page ad talk:LRC page. To pretend that we are disrespecting the goal by trying to get there as fast as possible seems a bit juvenile.]]> KalleP General Wed, 09 Oct 2013 09:23:02 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,253144#msg-253144 Re: Compopoly - a fairer reward system for value creators? https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,253144#msg-253144

Quote
bobc
Did you read why he said Open Source is a good idea? His point is that commercializing projects leads to developmental dead ends, and I think he is quite right.

Yes, i did read this and this is the exact reason why I promote accepting -NC licences. Because the GPL encourages commercialisation much more than a -NC licence. Look at RAMPS or Sanguinololu: both are found in almost every commercial shop, at the same time their community development has stalled long time ago. There's not even somebody who would replace the MOSFETs with more suitable ones, a matter of an hour of work.

Compare this to Gen7, which apparently encourages making derivates and continued development.

Quote

Mr Bowyer is a pretty smart guy, if you are going to convince people he is wrong

I'm not. Actually I try to show he's entirely right in the broad picture.

The fundamental flaw I see in your argumentation is, you set this "a non-commercial clause prohibits innovation" as a fixed wisdom. This is a simplification not reflected by reality. We do have commercialisation all over the place, many stalled developments and a community slowly falling into pieces. Even Adrian Bowyer has gone commercial and pretty much given up the RepRap community.

Following Mr. Bowyers ideas would mean to put much more emphasis on replicatability. GPL vs. -NC doesn't matter much as long as you can download sources. Because it's replicatability, the ease of making a copy, which fuels development. Currently many signs point into a different direction.]]> Traumflug General Wed, 09 Oct 2013 07:08:33 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,253064#msg-253064 Re: Compopoly - a fairer reward system for value creators? https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,253064#msg-253064 -------------------------------------------------------

> My problem is that KS, while being a nice idea, is
> exploited. People who are not willing to put up
> their own money to fund their project and make it
> a business, instead get everyone else to fund it.
> I'd be in favor of some kind of fund-matching. If
> you're so convinced that your project will be
> successful, then have some accountability and let
> some of your own funds take a fall if your end
> result is a failure.

The problem with Kickstarter is some people don't take the time to learn about or recognize what they are doing when they fund a project. It's simply venture funding supported by individuals instead of the Sand Hill Road bunch; Kleiner, Perkins ; etc. Why would you think that those launching KS projects haven't put a significant amount of resources into the project? It's just as likely that they've put everything they have on the line to make it happen. Many startups are funded from other peoples money at the seed phase and in the growth phase it's almost always outside money. That's how startups work. Haxlr8r works on the same VC model. The difference with KS funders is many don't realize there is risk, that it is funding a startup with a "prize" or "award" if the product is funded and completed.]]> vegasloki General Tue, 08 Oct 2013 23:29:23 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,253053#msg-253053 Re: Compopoly - a fairer reward system for value creators? https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,253053#msg-253053

Quote
bobc

Quote
Quote
My purpose in this post is to say why RepRap is, and always will be, Open Source.

I think it is pretty clear he is not interested in closed source, pretend Open Source, LRC or whatever you want to call it.

I do - now - fully understand why Adrian Bowers stipulated that the final fully self replicating machine needs to be Open Source - because anything else could slow down the dissemination of the technology. This makes sense from a point of view of helping humanity to progress by delivering:

(1) increases self sufficiency - which would diminish poverty and the incentive to hoard wealth.
(2) the means to spread of optimal technology solutions that deliver environmental, societal and economic benefits.

I do 100% agree that this need to be top priority - in fact - these are stated as the end goals in my (very badly written) book, Compopoly.

If a RepRap store (the open build store?) selling one or more printer variants with the latest and greatest technology from the community stipulated that any royalty to be distributed amongst the developers needed to be set at a fixed percentage (to be debated here) of component cost, then once we had all worked together to figure out how to create a machine that printed another fully assembled machine - motors and other components included - out of freely available raw materials, the royalty would also be reduced to zero, but no one would be particularly concerned about it as we would all be much more or completely self sufficient.

Up until that point, if we need to:

(1) encourage more developers to join the community and;
(2) encourage the community's developers to spend a greater share of their day fast tracking the technology and;
(3) discourage developers going the 100% closed source patent route;

...then we need to put something in place so that they prioritise delivering the value that they can add to progress the project over and above focusing on their job just so that they can meet their living costs and those of their family.]]> Senake General Tue, 08 Oct 2013 22:12:39 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,253052#msg-253052 Re: Compopoly - a fairer reward system for value creators? https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,253052#msg-253052 -------------------------------------------------------
> As you cite twice, I have to, too: :)
>
>

Quote
Adrian Bowyer
RepRap developers retain
> the copyright in their own developments, and may
> wish to enforce licencing with more rigour than I.
> Go to it, I say. I merely started this project; I
> would be alarmed and upset if I were to find my
> subsequent actions (or lack of them) taken as a
> prescriptive model.

Some things are worth quoting twice :)

By "enforce licencing" he means enforcing Open Source licensing. He doesn't mean going commercial.

Did you read why he said Open Source is a good idea? His point is that commercializing projects leads to developmental dead ends, and I think he is quite right.

Mr Bowyer is a pretty smart guy, if you are going to convince people he is wrong, you will need to have some pretty good reasons.]]> bobc General Tue, 08 Oct 2013 21:59:56 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,252969#msg-252969 Re: Compopoly - a fairer reward system for value creators? https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,252969#msg-252969

Quote
Adrian Bowyer
RepRap developers retain the copyright in their own developments, and may wish to enforce licencing with more rigour than I. Go to it, I say. I merely started this project; I would be alarmed and upset if I were to find my subsequent actions (or lack of them) taken as a prescriptive model.

]]> Traumflug General Tue, 08 Oct 2013 15:58:32 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,252906#msg-252906 Re: Compopoly - a fairer reward system for value creators? https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,252906#msg-252906 > pie ois available. This way people could up vote
> ideas and designs and they would get a larger
> portion of the whole. Adrian Bowyer would get a
> big chunk of the ideas shares but over time they
> would be a smaller percentage or he could donate
> back all his shares or the cash value wherever he
> wanted to.

Before you go roping Adrian Bowyer into this, you should read what he has to say:

[reprap.org]

Quote

My purpose in this post is to say why RepRap is, and always will be, Open Source.

I think it is pretty clear he is not interested in closed source, pretend Open Source, LRC or whatever you want to call it.

It is funny how people invoke someone's name even if they are directly opposed to what is being suggested.]]> bobc General Tue, 08 Oct 2013 13:14:49 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,252846#msg-252846 Re: Compopoly - a fairer reward system for value creators? https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,252846#msg-252846 -------------------------------------------------------
>

Quote
KalleP
> As a final note, remember that RepRap is not about
> cheap 3D printers
>

>
> Yes that is correct. Reprap is about REPLICATING
> 3D printers. They should not be just "cheap" they
> should be completely independent from suppliers.
> That is the goal. Once the printer can fully
> replicate "closed source hardware" printers become
> instantly irrelevant.

The RepRap will not put other 3D printers out of business. It will just leave the high quality niches open to them that a RepRap does not need to fill. The prices will drop on units that do not exceed RepRap quality.

destroyer2012 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>

Quote
KalleP
> I and most others will be happy to accept
> whatever value our ideas have if they are
> disclosed if there was a system where we would
> receive the value of them.
>

>
> I think this is a huge issue. How can one judge
> the value of an idea before anything has come of
> it? You might be dead by the time people realize
> it was a good idea.

The Community must do the deciding on what the value of the ideas is. This is why an integrated voting platform is the first bit of important open source software that needs developing.

With the LRC licence there is no need to be greedy if the community will vote you a meanigfull portion of the foundations revenue. If say you edit one wiki page you would be due 0.00001 shares of the idea revenue. If you invent a linear axis that can be printed you would get 1000 shares. If you publish the designs for the most compact new version of printer you might be valued at 100 shares for the idea and 1000 shares of the licensing revenue. As new ideas come they would slowly dilute your share with time unless the community votes to up your number of shares to maintain or increase your percentage of whatever pie ois available. This way people could up vote ideas and designs and they would get a larger portion of the whole. Adrian Bowyer would get a big chunk of the ideas shares but over time they would be a smaller percentage or he could donate back all his shares or the cash value wherever he wanted to.

destroyer2012 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>

Quote
KalleP
> Those who do not want the money could
> automatically donate it back into the pool to let
> those who do want innovate for money receive a
> slightly larger share.
>

>
> But how do you define "innovate"? Who will be in
> charge of making sure they are innovating and not
> wasting the money? Why should anyone who does not
> want the money be relied on to make decisions?
> They have no incentive to make good decisions.
>
> What everyone is suggesting is basically
> democratizing research. This is a good idea,
> however, there's a reason why scientific research
> works the way it does. The reason is reputation.

Paper reputations are so old school, we live in a connected society now.

As far a reputation is concerned if people want a share of the foundation pie they would have to be contactable (anonymous if they like within the limits of banking regulations) but they would have some 'virtual' identity that would be associated with their ideas and designs that would be how they gained benefits. Developers would fall over themselves to have their name attached to all their own ideas in the hopes that they get voted some shares of the pie. Donors would get votes based in part on their contribution (time and money) and licensed manufacturers would get votes based in part on their licence percentage and revenue to vote on which designs deserve the most revenue. This would require an accurate family tree of who invented what and you only get paid if you published first. Now all the oddball ideas we like to hoard would come out because they have real value. All the manufacturers would pay licence to be able to use ideas from the pool and have the loyal following of the community. One could make it into a pyramid scheme where you can nominate the shoulders of giants you have stood on and distribute some of your royalties to others who helped you with your idea. In the beginning it would be micro payments (BitCoin fractions) but in time the turnover could rival the research budget of a medium sizes country of a multinational technology corporation. At that point I think we have managed to pay people for their ideas in a equitable way based on what their true value is to the community.

PS. This quoting system is just confusing, I'll figure it out one day I expect, just before it gets changed.]]> KalleP General Tue, 08 Oct 2013 09:41:52 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,252804#msg-252804 Re: Compopoly - a fairer reward system for value creators? https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,252804#msg-252804 www.indiegogo.com] , a IndieGoGo campaign for a robotic/prosthetic hand. Half down the page they have a pie-chart with their plan to spend the funded money. Fees and pledge fulfillment ( = selling) is less than a third of the funding goal. This looks like real research and development.]]> Traumflug General Tue, 08 Oct 2013 07:58:27 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,252800#msg-252800 Re: Compopoly - a fairer reward system for value creators? https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,252800#msg-252800

Quote

Do not forget that people willingly give up their money on this website for things which do not yet exist. Yes there are scams but it's up to the users of kickstarter to see through their scams.

Yes. At the same time these people have no knowledge (it's new, after all) to do careful decisions, so their responsibility is not executable. I wish KS all the best, but can also well imagine to see them going down the hill in a year or two because people were burned too often.

There's quite a gap between this "give up the money", which KS also supports, and the actual appearance of their site. The site looks much more like a preorder-shop and people act accordingly. If KS were about funding development, backing would stop after reaching the goal, because there's no point in paying $20.000 for something which costs only $8.000.

Quote
Senake
Quote
destroyer2012
How do you define innovate?

If the solution gained critical mass

A new idea is always born with zero (critical) mass. Orientation on the critical mass quickly leads to technological standstill, see e.g. RAMPS electronics.]]> Traumflug General Tue, 08 Oct 2013 07:49:13 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,252761#msg-252761 Re: Compopoly - a fairer reward system for value creators? https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,252761#msg-252761

Quote
destroyer2012

Quote
senake
Senake
Market information is currently not free - and that is one of the main reasons that the pace of innovation is slowed down.

My point is you need to exert effort to get this information. Your idea is like saying, let's just all fly! It's a great idea but cannot work. You need some device to make you fly, just as you need someone to work hard to get this "market information".

I am not saying that there is no time and cost associated with this activity - I am saying that this can be reduced and end loaded onto the cost of purchases so that more suppliers - especially smaller ones who may have cost reducing, quality improving or self sufficiency enabling solutions to get to market.

Families currently go shopping for food maybe 4 times per week and spend typically 1 hour each time - that adds up to around 11 wasted days per six month period. Suppose that instead, they used a community funded web site and representative network, to list their regular weekly, monthly and yearly planned purchases. Products could be delivered en masse to local pick up locations - existing shops, schools and even representatives converted garages. One person costing say £80,000 (£40,000 salary + £40,000 overheads and tax) could manage 5 streets or 1,000 homes. This would cost each household £40 every 6 months.

Quote
destroyer2012
How do you define innovate?

If the solution gained critical mass and became the place to buy best practice solutions at the best prices, then it would be easy for consumers to decide for themselves if a proof of concept tested product or service enhancement was worth the additional cost proposed to them. Just like specifying options when buying a car, the consumer could either take it or leave it. If there was enough interest, experts from the community could join it to deliver the enhancement or new product.]]> Senake General Tue, 08 Oct 2013 05:12:12 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,252743#msg-252743 Re: Compopoly - a fairer reward system for value creators? https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,252743#msg-252743

Quote
Senake
Market information is currently not free - and that is one of the main reasons that the pace of innovation is slowed down.

Quote
KalleP
As a final note, remember that RepRap is not about cheap 3D printers

Yes that is correct. Reprap is about REPLICATING 3D printers. They should not be just "cheap" they should be completely independent from suppliers. That is the goal. Once the printer can fully replicate "closed source hardware" printers become instantly irrelevant.

Quote
Traumflug
The kickstarter model is quite suspicious to scams and false advertising, too. Some developers nickname it -pardon- "Shitstarter" already.

Do not forget that people willingly give up their money on this website for things which do not yet exist. Yes there are scams but it's up to the users of kickstarter to see through their scams. That's the whole point, you give the power of funding to the people, but along with this there comes responsibility (thanks, Spiderman).

One problem is there is no way to get your money back once a project is funded; only if the project owners are nice enough to give it back. Just like a real publisher the backers should be able to withdraw their funds if they see a project is not progressing. Or maybe the funding should be outlined in installments, and we would have the option to vote down the installments. Thus, the developers would have to keep a majority of backers happy to continue having their money.

Quote
KalleP
I and most others will be happy to accept whatever value our ideas have if they are disclosed if there was a system where we would receive the value of them.

I think this is a huge issue. How can one judge the value of an idea before anything has come of it? You might be dead by the time people realize it was a good idea.

Quote
KalleP
Those who do not want the money could automatically donate it back into the pool to let those who do want innovate for money receive a slightly larger share.

But how do you define "innovate"? Who will be in charge of making sure they are innovating and not wasting the money? Why should anyone who does not want the money be relied on to make decisions? They have no incentive to make good decisions.

What everyone is suggesting is basically democratizing research. This is a good idea, however, there's a reason why scientific research works the way it does. The reason is reputation.

Each scientist wants to get more funding to do more research, which is an incentive to produce fake data and use marketing. However, each scientist fears the loss of their good reputation, which will happen as soon as any inkling of falsified data is traced back to their lab. This fear of reputation is what keeps scientists (for the most part) honest. On the internet there is no such fear, because you can just make a new forum account or corporation or what ever as soon as your reputation takes a dive. This is because people on the internet want to retain their privacy, so we allow anyone to make any number of accounts, etc.

People need to give up their privacy if they want to really participate in these projects. Every scientist has their CV posted online where everyone can see. You can search their name in Pubmed and find all the work she or he has ever done. This is not something that most people will want to do, and as a result, you cannot have good participators in your open source projects. Only people who pretend to be good, then turn around and found their own closed source companies (Makerbot?).]]> destroyer2012 General Tue, 08 Oct 2013 04:13:24 -0400 https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,252669#msg-252669 Re: Compopoly - a fairer reward system for value creators? https://reprap.org/forum/read.php?1,250832,252669#msg-252669
For the sake of clarity, I wanted to point out that I am not advocating crowd funding for innovator controlled developments. I am advocating crowd vetting and development of worthy innovators ideas by an interested expert community (eg. RepRap for 3D printers). In most cases, this would be evolutionary as opposed to revolutionary.

Where an idea was deemed to be unworkable for technical or commercial reasons by the community, it wouldn't be offered on the RepRap eCommerce platform.]]> Senake General Mon, 07 Oct 2013 19:46:21 -0400