The makers manifesto makes a good argument for repairability and hack
ability

The Maker's Bill of Rights

Meaningful and specific parts lists shall be included.

Cases shall be easy to open.

Batteries should be replaceable.

Special tools are allowed only for darn good reasons.

Profiting by selling expensive special tools is wrong and not making
special tools available is even worse.

Torx is OK; tamperproof is rarely OK.

Components, not entire sub-assemblies, shall be replaceable.

Consumables, like fuses and filters, shall be easy to access.

Circuit boards shall be commented.

Power from USB is good; power from proprietary power adapters is bad.

Standard connectors shall have pinouts defined.

If it snaps shut, it shall snap open.

Screws better than glues.

Docs and drivers shall have permalinks and shall reside for all perpetuity
at archive.org.

Ease of repair shall be a design ideal, not an afterthought.

Metric or standard, not both.

Schematics shall be included.
On 2 Feb 2015 22:43, "hellekin" <hellekin@???> wrote:

> On 02/02/2015 12:49 AM, Felipe Fonseca wrote:
> >>
> >> My fellow southerners: is summer treating you as well as us?
> >
> *** It does, thank you, since air conditioning is working again. I
> would prefer architectural (lack of) air conditioning though.
>
> >> It is about 'repair culture'.
> >
> *** I like that you insist on this aspect of hackerdom and present it as
> resistance against the streamlining of flat ideas. I found it a nice
> follow up to Peer Production #5.
>
> On the other hand, I'm not entirely convinced about recycling old
> electronics systematically. In many cases, energy efficiency improves
> with new iterations of technology. The main issue I see is the lack of
> interest in developing reusable components, upgradeable components,
> recyclable components, etc.
>
> Indeed the example of the Ambassador car is relevant. In France we had
> the Citroen 2CV, "la Deuche", that can be taken apart with a single 12mm
> spanner. Such designs have of course been removed from circulation, as
> it allows consumers to avoid passing through the official (and paying)
> controls.
>
> So, yes "repair culture" as a recycling movement, but also as a design
> movement to avoid built-in dependency on closed systems and
> uncontrollable processes. Technology needs to be taken control of
> before it hits the shelves, much earlier during the conception, and not
> only as a reaction.
>
> ==
> hk
>

> --
>  _ _     We are free to share code and we code to share freedom
> (_X_)yne Foundation, Free Culture Foundry * https://www.dyne.org/donate/
> _______________________________________________
> Brico mailing list
> Website on http://www.bricolabs.net
> Unsubscribe: https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/brico

>