I am a part of *similar* experiment that has been going on for about 30 years. An experiment to bring together the components necessary to build a self-reliant village in deep country, on margina land.

our project involves generating the food, fibers, forage, fuel, energy and decisino making structures necessary to stabalize a group of people for the long haul.

there are many ways in which I coul dgo about describing what it is we do. But I believe it is simlar in nature to FeF.

Although we are not in a position to want to directly copy FeF’s appraoch, we have independently come to some of the exact same technological conclusions as FeF. which to me is quite telling.

But one thing which I will put out there, is that Windward has been around for thirty years. which is an order of magnitude longer than FeF. the primary reason for our lasting this long, through all manner of catastrophe, is the social and dicision making component of what we do.

If i had to break it down into pecentages, I would split our work 50/50 technological/social.

I bear witness to the reality of, “those necessary things which you do not account for, will end up destroying you”. and, the social/sexual component of humans runs deep, and can be the most powerful motivating factors in a persons creative life. If people are not getting their social/emotional needs met they are likely to leave. just as if they are not getting their material needs met. to an engineer based mindset this can seem silly-bad-wrong-etc, but it is a reality that will bite any project aiming for sustainability in the butt.

so, in my humble opinion, it is (to some degree) about hugs and good feelings.

the very thing which we are trying to preserve through technology, is the ability for people to live a good life. the reason why we endeavor to preserve and develop technology is so people are not laboring away, and so we have more time to pursue our personal bliss.

one final thought, we have a saying here that “technology should always be in service of community” not the other way around. because our communal history has shown that in hard times, the best thing to hold onto is eachother.

marcin, your project is truly and inspiration.
thanks for all the work you do,
-andrew

I agree Marcin, that your project is indeed different and more ambitious, and as you say, we don’t know if it will work but it is crucial to try. The second point for me is the insurance policy, if your model were to fail, how would we make sure that the progress you make is not lost for further movements and experiments? Source-forging it to make it available to a global movement of similarly minded but different experimentation, would guarantee that more patterns can be tried out and preserved,

Michel

Hi Vinay, I’m really surprised that you seem to adhere to what looks like simple technological determinism. Technology is social. The way water and electricity is engineered and owned, never simply reflects engineering choices. Politics is not just what happens in congress, but about the choices we make about how to engineer and implement things. It’s never simply about efficiency, but efficiency for whom, and at the cost of what. Those are very relevant things, that can’t be wished away. Have you never worked for a formal institution and experienced for yourself how technology is driven by all these choices and social/economic/political priorities?

Michel

The problem with solving the world’s problems with technology is that all of these billions of stupid people, and their dumb touchy-feel-y needs keep getting in the way.

If people would just shut the hell up and do what they are told, like machines, then those of us who are smartest machine experts could engineer us out of all of these problems. First, we need you people to act and work like machines. We don’t want a bunch of back talk, and opinions. If we want your opinion, we’ll ask for it.

There’s no time for all of this talk, and human emotional garbage. There are scant few real experts who really know exactly what the rest of us need. And, it’s time to just shut the fuck up, and march in lockstep with those very few people, and learn to do what they say, or get out of the goddamn way. There aren’t any other people as smart as the people that I am telling you are the most qualified to lead us all. And believe me, if *I* tell you this, you better damn well believe it, because *I* know everything.

Let me repeat that…

Hello, are you still there? Huh, I wonder where everyone went to…

Same is true for open source software, the one truly successful, world-changing example we have of peer production. Hans Reiser apparently murdered his wife – but his code is still there, being used, being built upon. There’s a lesson here: everybody can contribute, whether we like them or not. Open source enabled people who were not personally skilled, and perhaps lacked confidence or other fundamental social capabilities, to work together and change the world.

Politics is irrelevant to the engineering work which will enable real change. Stallman’s approach to politics is vital, but it’s vital *because* it protects the engineering, not for other reasons.

Complex, and subtle that point is, but vital.

Regarding your second point, ‘to liberate the project from their local and personal limitations, and make it into a global open hardware and design project’ – who is this question addressed to?