Dr. Peter Troxler (p&s) on Mon, 10 Jun 2019 13:11:30 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
Re: <nettime> The Maker Movement is abandoned by its corporate sponsors; throws in the towel |
Interesting times indeed. I am not shedding tears over the demise of PrintrBot or Radio Shack (which reappeared as a “brand”), and certainly not of Toys “R” Us (Dutch Intertoys met the same fate) — and neither does the demise of TechShop or Maker Media really make me cry. It is intriguing to see that Moore’s law [1] apparently did not hold for either the “tool-up” welding gyms (TechShop) [2] nor for the mediatisator of the “maker movement” (O’Reilly through Maker Media) [3]. So indeed, now what … Anything “Make(r)” is licensed by Maker Media — and I guess that administrators will hardly be able to project enough revenue from these licenses to sustain the brand. Is there anyone on the horizon who would want to monetise “Make”? Maybe it is finally farewell to that optimistic vision of the future where technology and craftsmanship merge, dreaming of becoming the next paradigm of industry. Making as a consumer pastime has peaked. It never made it from the early enthousiasts to the mass market. Probably, making is too hard, to time consuming, to demanding on the average consumer’s attention span. Making, too, never made it from the imagined breeding ground for even more tech start-ups to "the revolution that can help us create new jobs and industries for decades to come” [4] — Chris Anderson knows of "five companies that have managed the "Maker -> Pro" path successfully, becoming good businesses without losing their Maker cred” [5]. As we say in Dutch, van een kale kip kun je niet plukken (you can’t get blood from a stone) — a business model that is partly based on licensing the brand to an industry of makers and maker spaces who in general struggle to survive themselves is not exactly a promising prospect. Subjecting those who — by the gospel — are supposed to be independent thinkers to strict franchising regulations when they want to throw their party (aka Maker Faire) is unlikely to create a loyal base of business partners. Many Mini Maker Faires defected Maker Media to become “independent” festivals — citing “red tape” (the franchising agreement), license fees, insurance issues as reasons, and some found it easier to attract local government subsidies acting independently from a US-American company. Maybe this time it is the children eating their own revolution? Or maybe “making” as we knew it has just had its days? Black Mirror has mainstreamed an antagonistic view of technology since its appearance on Netflix. School strikes highlight other issues on the minds of (some) pupils than drones and robots made from plastic and running on Lithium batteries. Time will tell. Peter Troxler [5] https://twitter.com/chr1sa/status/1137453284204007425
|
# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org # @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: