[Noisebridge-discuss] Sigh -- I'm not helping with Maker Faires this year.
rachel lyra hospodar
rachelyra at gmail.com
Wed Apr 4 18:38:35 UTC 2012
If you think our government only indulges its hobby of killing brown people
in other countries, you are mistaken. If you think it only kills brown
people who are on the wrong side of the military, you are mistaken.
If you think there is no difference between using existing technology, and
seeking to steer the way new technology is produced, I think that you are
If you think I'm obligated to volunteer for a large and already successful
project regardless of how it is run, you are sadly mistaken.
I do think that maker faire is a valuable source of hacker lifeblood for
our community. I hope those of you that feel comfortable with the direction
that things are headed are willing to step up to the plate and contribute
to a noisebridge presence. I have helped a lot in years past with the
noisebridge offerings but am glad to have a little more energy to focus
On Apr 4, 2012 11:22 AM, "VonGuard" <vonguard at gmail.com> wrote:
> I agree Martin.
> I think it's rather silly to stay out of Maker Faire for the reasons
> stated. Anyone boycotting because of this funding should really stop using
> computers, and never use any technology out of MIT or CMU. ARPANET, which
> became the Internet, was a military funded project. And MIT and CMU both
> take huge amounts of DARPA money. Remember the self-driving car challenge?
> Frankly, I'm happy our tax dollars are coming back to us in some way, no
> matter how they get there. It's better than the government spending it on
> its favorite overseas pass-time: killing brown people.
> On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 9:23 AM, Martin Bogomolni <martinbogo at gmail.com>wrote:
>> The -message- is important though.
>> A recruiter is legally bound, by the contract they have signed with
>> the US armed forces, to identify and attempt to recruit as many
>> qualified people as they can through a number of enticements into the
>> US armed forces. This is their primary job.
>> A DARPA STEM grant comes with a couple strings attached (it must be
>> spent for the purpose the grant was applied for, namely
>> Science/Tech/Engineering/Math education) but it does not commit anyone
>> who accepts that grant to the purpose of recruiting, or to perform a
>> research task for the US armed forces.
>> The thinking that goes into a Military Recruiter is: "Send out our
>> most charismatic, and experienced soldiers to go find people who will
>> be useful to the military and recruit them."
>> The thinking that goes into the STEM education fund is : "Support
>> science, technology, engineering and math in schools and get people
>> interested in science. The more people get interested in these
>> subjects, the higher quality pool of people we will have in the US in
>> the future to draw on."
>> I'm not going to scoff at DARPA money, especially since it doesn't
>> require or _directly_ encourage people to join the military. I would
>> honestly be more delighted if this money came from an education
>> initiative outside of the military, but because it doesn't tie the
>> carrot on the stick directly to military service, I also don't have a
>> problem with it.
>> IMHOI it's taking millions of dollars away from projects that might
>> directly be used to hurt people, and beating it into plowshares
>> through education. I feel this kind of thing should be
>> ///encouraged///. If it comes down to it, I'd rather that every
>> agency in the government that could spend money on education and
>> making participation in science and technology do so. Certainly,
>> many do (from the CDC in disease prevention and education to the FDA,
>> from Welfare offering job training to the NSF directly funding
>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Noisebridge-discuss