Open Source Ecology Forums

Dolph1983

Greetings,

my name is Stuart Martin and i am thrilled to have found the open source ecology forum. Finally i have found a forum where i can expect a wide understanding of my project.

I am running a crowd funded heat engine research and development project named 'BIOGEN'

I have recently released a video showing the most recent prototype in action, you will find the video on my website:
http://biogen.webs.com/ You will also find a detailed explanation of how i'm running the project.

Technical Explanation:

BIOGEN uses the Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) to convert low temperature waste heat from engines, gasifiers, boilers, solar panels, rocket stoves, geothermal into electricity. It works in a similar way to a steam engine but BIOGEN does not need >100 Degrees to generate steam. It can use temperatures as low as 70 - 80 Degrees Celsius to vapourise refrigerant. This vapour is then used in the same way as steam is used in a simple steam engine, it is used to give mechanical power. The mechanical power can then be converted to electrical power. It is very, very simple.

Provided enough members join, the project will be completed by 2013. A detailed technical manual is then published among the members allowing them to build the BIOGEN.

I then plan to conduct further work to constantly improve the design.

Please fully read the website so that you can get a good feel for the project, watching the BIOGEN videos will help explain technical details. I will then be pleased to answer any questions.

Very Best Wishes,

Stuart.

Matt_Maier

The project is interesting, and I would never discourage anyone from pursuing an interesting project, but your membership terms are the exact opposite of OSE's core values. OSE's information comes without any strings attached.

"Terms of membership: all future members must agree never to use the information gained from this project for any personal commercial or financial gain. The products of this project belong to Stuart Martin. Membership fees are not refundable. As a member you will have the right to build all BIOGEN systems but not to sell them or receive payment of any kind for their construction. "

Dolph1983

Hi Matt

Please remember i only found you guys the other day so i'm still learning about how things are done here.

i see it like this: the terms are a hand shake between potential members and i that they will not steal the technology with the intention of patenting it or selling it. It is intended for personal use only.

Everyone who has contributed to the project should see the benefit, equally. The product of the project, being the design, belongs to me but i wont be patenting it.

The problem i've had up to know is that lots of people want to join my project without contributing, i've turned them down daily. In other words they like what they see and they expect it for free. However, the whole project has cost me £1200 and hundreds of man hours and it is not finished yet. If i give it away for free i end up with no budget and no more project.

I'm trying to play fair and instill a sense of responsibility not a sense of entitlement. Responsibility that one should contribute if one wants to benefit.

Do you have any suggestion for what the terms should be?

Matt_Maier

"Everyone who has contributed to the project should see the benefit, equally."

That's where you run afoul of OSE's core values. We don't see any reason why people who didn't contribute to a project shouldn't benefit from it as well.

"If i give it away for free i end up with no budget and no more project."

We're working under the assumption that open sourcing a project leads to significantly faster technological evolution. All those people who want the tech for free are NOT going to be able to understand it or fix it, so they'll have to come back to you anyway. 1/100 of them will not only be able to contribute to the tech, but will want to do it simply because they like doing that sort of thing. What they add, you'll get for free. However, you can't find that 1/100 person, let alone get them interested, unless the information is available for free and advertised as widely as possible.

The only reason I can see to keep the tech a secret is if you intend to pay your mortgage with it (so to speak). If you don't plan on profiting from it, then you lose nothing by giving it away. That's how we look at things, at least. You should absolutely do whatever you feel is right.

Dolph1983

Thanks Matt,

"That's where you run afoul of OSE's core values. We don't see any reason why people who didn't contribute to a project shouldn't benefit from it as well".

Does this not encourage a freeloading mentality?

Why should those people who refuse to contribute to a project, or society for that matter, benefit from the hard work of other more motivated people. I hoped that by encouraging lots of people to contribute a small sum one could raise the same amount when compared to that raised when a few contribute a lot.

My project is no different to OSE in the sense that OSE received crowdfunding in return for rewards. My project is still at the stage of initial crowdfunding. My reward to my crowdfunders is the plans.

The only reason i ask for a contribution is to cover the costs of the project.

I have a few hundred dedicated followers who read my forum posts and watch my videos, they are very interested in the benefits my system could bring to them and they talk openly of building the system. However i only have a paying membership of 15 people. A very telling social experiment.

I currently subscribe to the assumption that: everyman and woman without exception will pay their way equally rather than hold out a open hand. For example if i wanted to download some of your plans i'd first make a contribution so that further research and development can take place.

"What they add, you'll get for free"

I would say: "What they add, we get for free". My project is a kind of think tank, if a member contributes a useful suggestion we will all get benefit of an improved product. In the end we all get the knowledge.

Uptake of BIOGEN membership is accelerating but If my funding strategy fails i'll need to look at other options.

Stuart.

PS, can i find a document containing the core values of OSE?

Matt_Maier

http://opensourceecology.org/wiki/Core_Values_of_OSE

"Does this not encourage a freeloading mentality?"

Well, OSE is a non-profit...so the free rider problem isn't exactly a concern.

"Why should those people who refuse to contribute to a project, or society for that matter, benefit from the hard work of other more motivated people."

I dunno; I don't like that framework. It sounds like you're conflating a specific situation with a general situation. If someone can't live up to the terms of a deal they are or want to be part of, then they don't get to be part of it. However, that doesn't mean we need to be selfish when there's plenty to go around. Jealousy is a certain kind of mindset...and it's not constructive. There's nothing wrong with objectively evaluating a situation and concluding that something can't be afforded. There is something wrong with emotionally deciding that it's not fair, that someone doesn't deserve it, and so you're going to take your ball and go home. It sounds like your decision was based, not on the fact that you can't afford to share the information with everyone, but on the feeling that you simply think they should be denied the information. It's your ball; you do what you want with it. But I don't think you've got a clear ethical argument.

"I have a few hundred dedicated followers who read my forum posts and watch my videos, they are very interested in the benefits my system could bring to them and they talk openly of building the system. However i only have a paying membership of 15 people. A very telling social experiment."

Nothing unusual about that. 1/100 people are going to actually commit resources to something. The % you describe is the same one spammers use. 1/100 or less of the people who see their message will respond, so all they have to do is figure out how many people they need to respond, then send 100X that many messages. Easy. It's very predictable. I'm not saying you're a spammer, just that the proportion you described is spot on. More broadly, however, I'm not sure what you're worried about. Since you're not planning to depend on the technology for your income, how would you be harmed by everyone having it? Only 1/100 people even coughed up some money for it. If they had it, they STILL wouldn't spend money on it. Then there's the reality that actually building something is harder than it looks at a distance. Particularly when it's going to be in your home and on fire. Very few people will take that risk. No one's going to start installing them commercially because the tech is a totally unknown quantity. No one can warranty it when they don't know how well it works. The liability insurance alone would cripple them, let alone a single settlement when something inevitably goes wrong.

Don't make the classic mistake of assuming everyone is as enamored of your invention as you are. New things are dangerous. Very few people have the balls to take a chance on them and risk losing their entire investment, or worse. Often it's the original inventor who's the only one willing to work hard enough to prove the thing works.

"I currently subscribe to the assumption that: everyman and woman without exception will pay their way equally rather than hold out a open hand"

You mean equally as compared to each other or equally as compared to their capabilities?

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

In this Discussion

Tagged

Open Source Ecology Forums