Am I not understanding FOSH (free and open source hardware)? I have always dreamed of open source hardware but it has always seemed unshakeably and fundamentally reliant on for instance massive open pit mines mining all over the world in finite dwindling supply wrecking local ecosystems every element necessary for computer components, factories able to produce at scale fueled by an enormous amount of energy from god knows where, massive pollution and waste every step of the way, and every other ill of extraction and production which seems like it can only be handled by large scale industry almost entirely capitalist for the foreseeable future. Am I missing something? Is it a pipe dream? Even if we find a way to get to a point where we can sustainably and ethically develop any new hardware we need, won’t that require persisting in the mean time in the present capitalist paradigm physically? Is this just kind of a microcosm and reification of the problem of democratizing the economy anyway?

  • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    10 months ago

    I think your vision of open source hardware is a little too “Perfect”.

    And as every engineer knows, perfect is the enemy of good.

    We will never have perfect in a capitalist paradigm. You cannot simply opt out of capitalism. You have to tear it down.

    But until that becomes possible, you can still do your best to engage in harm reduction, in whatever ways make the most sense to you. Maybe that means just trying to consume less electronics. That’s a big part of the impetus behind the right to repair movement, for example.

    I hope that makes some kind of sense.

    • half_built_pyramids@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      Right to repair is huge. A friend fixed a TV a few years ago by just replacing a bad capacitor. Saved a bunch of money and it was one tv kept out of a land fill.