We have years of experience on Open source development and communities. Based on that experience, people in Ossoil give high quality presentations in companies, universities and scientific and business conferences around the world. The variety and style of presentations vary depending on audience. Some are directed at scholars and are highly theoretical. Other presentations are related to experiences from actual open source projects and communities.
Request more information
During the past decades, hacking has mostly been associated with software development. Furthermore, most but not all hacker generations (from MIT hackers to Open source) have been introvert; participants have been hiding in cyber bush, avoiding contact with ‘great’ public, staying in virtual world. This is now changing as new walks of life are being explored with a hacker mindset, thus bringing back to memory the origin of hacking in hardware development. Hackerdom is characterised by an active approach to technology, undaunted by hierarchies and established knowledge, and a commitment to sharing information freely.
The creation of hacker/maker-spaces in many countries around the world has provided an infrastructure which might be seen as return to old skool hacking where software is not the king. This new ’do-it-yourself’ culture has multiple forms and names: hackerspace, makerspace, fablab, 100k garage just to mention a few. You can read more about the forms from Troxler’s article. For the sake of clarity I will put all the above terms under one term: ‘Peer production’. I know it is not the best term since it emphasizes production and neglects the social aspects of hackerspaces (physical space which is center of local hacker community) . Discussion around ‘peer production’ has been active during the last years. Still, empirical information about ‘peer production’ communities has been minimal. Some scholars have done in-depth hacker interviews, but statistical data is missing. With this survey, which has been conducted 2010, 2011 and 2012, I wish to help in filling in the gap.
More information: About the survey: 3D manufacturing community survey. The results are available at: Manufacturing in motion: first survey on 3D printing community.
The presentation is based on results found in global 3D Manufacturing Community survey. This research is built on surveys. Surveys will be conducted annually, forming a longitudinal data base about 3D printing community, members of it, and features of the community. We have included both 1) people using 3D printers and people who 2) develop 3D printers and related software.
The former group refers to people who print objects with 3D printers but have no interest or skills to make any development either on software or hardware. This group contains also people who use 3D printing services like Shapeways and Ponoko. Shapeways and similar services also represent a kind of commons-based peer production since the models and ‘things’ sold in webshops are made by a large population of people who participate (at least mostly) voluntarily. They create the content. The same situation can be found in the other group too. The second group (technology developers) contains those who make contributions, software or hardware, to 3D printing communities. Of course, the above groups are only a subset of people involved in 3D printing. Somewhere in between are people who buy 3D printers, and assemble and use those mighty machines with the help of the community. They are commonly referred as 3) early adopters.
More information: About the survey: 3D manufacturing community survey. The results are available at: Manufacturing in motion: first survey on 3D printing community.
The presentation is based on results found in global 3D Manufacturing Community survey.
More information: About the survey: 3D manufacturing community survey. The results are available at: Manufacturing in motion: first survey on 3D printing community.
The presentation is a story of how I have been involved, founded and participated in several communities during 2009-2012. The story starts from founding a local hackerspace, continues to Tampere MeeGo Network and MeeGo Network Finland, and ends in business oriented Lean Startup Community. In every community, New Factory has been involved, in some cases more than others.
More information: Presentation slides as PDF
This paper describes a peer-production movement, the hackerspace movement, its members and values. The emergence of hackerspaces, fablabs and makerspaces is changing how hacker communities and other like-minded communities function. Thus, an understanding of the nature of hackerspaces helps in detailing the features of contemporary peer-production. Building on previous work on 'fabbing', two different sets of results are presented: (1) empirical observations from a longitudinal study of hackerspace participants; and (2) a theoretical description of hacker generations as a larger context in which peer-production can be located. With regard to (1), research data has been collected through prolonged observation of hackerspace communities and two surveys.
More information: -
This presentation introduced Jarkko Moilanen's PhD study.
More information: -
The dynamics of individual Open Source Software (OSS) communities are subject to change due to factors that can be divided into two groups: i) long-term changes in the nature of hackerism and development of software and ii) faster changes due to the tasks and maturity of the individual OSS community itself. Here we describe these two sources of dynamism which lead to possible typologies of OSS communities. Furthermore, we propose a hypothesis on the development directions of certain types of OSS communities, and present initial empirical results on the hypothesis based on surveys of two communities, Maemo and MeeGo.
More information: http://www.mindtrek.org/2011/academic/programme
Regional MeeGo Networks have begun to emerge during the last months. Yet the forms, processes and guidelines concerning regional networks are still a bit vague and discussion about real world examples are missing. A great deal of current guidelines are based on our experiences. This presentation will show how regional MeeGo community in Finland (MNFI) has been built up; what kind of governing model we use; how regional and local level activity can be combined to enable diverse, open and active regional MeeGo community. In addition to that, presentation offers insights on organizing volunteer based regional Summit.
More information: http://sf2011.meego.com/program/sessions/building-regional-meego-community-%E2%80%93-case-meego-network-finland
Our staff co-organized this session. The session gathered people involved in various local MeeGo networks and to share experiences and ideas on arranging local meetups. For those who were unfamiliar with local network activities the BoF gave a great opportunity to learn about them.
More information: http://sf2011.meego.com/program/sessions/bof-meego-local-networks
Our staff held a lecture to nearly 100 students at University of Tampere. Lecture discussed the hacker generations. Focus was on the latest form of hacker culture: hackerspaces. Feedback from the class was positive and was described as 'eye-opening' for some. Material used was from Jarkko Moilanen's survey about hackerspace members and their activity. Details about the latest survey can be found from http://extreme.ajatukseni.net
More information: http://www.uta.fi