Mitch Altman Parts Ways With Maker Fair Over DARPA Grant

SWroclawski writes "Well known hacker and hackerspace advocate Mitch Altman has decided to temporarily part ways with Maker Faire over their involvement with DARPA (as reported on Twitter and Facebook). This public parting of ways raises the question of what role government, especially the military, should play in working alongside hackers and educators."

Comments

People should be free, but only on your terms?

[crazyjj]

That's the problem with most activists. They're all for freedom, just as long as people only use that freedom to agree with them. He wants Maker Faire to accept sponsors, of course, but only those that fit into *his* ideals.

And I bet this guy would go ballistic if someone dared try to tell him what he can and can't build or invent. But now that he's confronted with the possibility of people using *their* freedom to build stuff that *he* doesn't like (for a sponsor that doesn't fit in with *his* vision), suddenly he wants to take his ball and go home.

Also, last time I checked, Maker Faire wasn't forcing anyone to build anything. If you don't want to build stuff with military applications, then you know what--JUST DON'T!

Re:People should be free, but only on your terms?

[Beelzebud]

Stupid activists. It's almost like this guy thinks he's also free to do what he chooses. How dare he leave based on his principles!

Re:People should be free, but only on your terms?

[El_Che]

If you don't want to build stuff with military applications, then you know what--JUST DON'T! Er, isn't that exactly what Mitch Altman has decided to do?

Re:People should be free, but only on your terms?

[Zerth]

If the government offers you money to do what you were going to do anyway, you should take it.

If you don't, they'll surely spend it on something you really are opposed to.

Re:People should be free, but only on your terms?

[crazyjj]

an organization who's sole purpose is the destruction of life.

That is not, and has never been, even a *primary* purpose of DARPA, much less its sole purpose.

See, it's that kind of hyperbole and silly absolutism that seems to ruin every decent goddamned movement. The Occupy movement was a great example. Started out as a perfectly reasonable movement with legitimate complaints with potentially broad appeal. But five minutes later, here come the assholes in Che Guevara t-shirts calling for the overthrow of capitalism, and BAM--it turns into yet another go-nowhere fringe movement almost overnight. And that's a real shame.

Re:People should be free, but only on your terms?

[darronb]

"His way" is to not help support an organization who's sole purpose is the destruction of life. An organization who is controlled by sociopaths bent on economic domination.

I think the pathetic thing here is the level of paranoia and mistrust towards DARPA, the military, and the government in general.

After all, "sole purpose is the destruction of life" != "The overarching objective of MENTOR is to develop and motivate a next generation cadre of system designers and manufacturing innovators by exposing them to the principles of foundry-style digital manufacturing through modern prize-based design challenges."

DARPA sponsors some great stuff. They're supplying a big chunk of much needed research funding in these difficult years. A lot of it, like this specific grant, is NOT specifically tailored towards a military application. They're trying to encourage young people to become interested in engineering... justifying it as in our national interest (which it undoubtedly is).

I don't see the military going off and doing crap on their own for their own purposes. They're still quite controlled by civilian authority. It was Bush's biases and prejudgements that led us into Iraq. While I'm sure there's a significant level of defense industry lobbying on our government leaders, they're hardly controlled by it.

The vast majority of the people that make up the military are really good people. Step outside your echo chamber sometime, it's not quite as dark outside as you think it is.

Re:People should be free, but only on your terms?

[Quiet_Desperation]

*cough*ARPANET*cough*

Take their self righteous ass off the internet too

[onyxruby]

They should take their self righteous ass off of the the Internet too. Darpa has funded many, many things that have gone on to serve the public good.

Ridiculous

[Anonymous Coward]

"This public parting of ways raises the question of what role government, especially the military, should play in working alongside hackers and educators"

Not a particularly good question, however. The government should play whatever role it can, so long as it's not a hindrance. After all, without DARPA where would we be today?

Oh, the Irony

[Mr 44]

And in a move of supreme irony, he is glady leaving to support Chinese Hackerspaces:

Tomorrow I'm leaving for China. I organized a Hacker Trip To China. 10 of us visiting all hackerspaces!

Here's a clue, kiddo - try to find anything of significance in China that doesnt have involvement from the People's Liberation Army. But you got no problem supporting that?

Re:Well that's fine then, boycott the internet

[sneakyimp]

People just don't realize that the path of technology is almost ALWAYS military -> business -> consumer. Wars have resulted in tremendous advances in techology. The bigger the war, the greater the advances. Some examples of military technology now used for consumer applications:
* computers
* computer networking
* cellular phone technology
* jet airplanes (even prop planes too - the Wright brothers worked for the military in WWI)
* rockets, space travel (perhaps not consumer-level yet but SOON)
* nuclear technology

Nothing -- and I mean NOTHING -- quite gets the mind racing to invent like contemplation of one's one mortality or enslavement.

I support the guy's right to boycott anything he likes over principles and sort of admire it too, but I kind of hold it against him at the same time.