---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Jack Vincent <jackvinc(a)gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 11:51 AM
Subject: [sudo-info] Do you want some free computer stuff???
To: info(a)sudoroom.org
Hey Sudo Folks,
I have visited you guys a couple times, once at the Broadway space and
once at your new OmniCommons space... I have been doing some house cleaning
and would like to give away some computer and electronics stuff.... I tried
dropping by last Saturday to offer you some stuff but the door was closed
and no one answered.
Do you have any interest in these????
LOTS of "G" WiFi stuff, routers, access points. D-Link, Netgear
---SCSI EVERYTHING... cables, TAPE BACKUP, Syquest drives and media,
ZIP drives and media, Imation LS-120 drives and media
---MODEMS external and internal, up to 56K (does ANYONE still use
modems???)
---Serial cables (a box full), serial switch box, parallel cables,
inkjet printers (untested) , laser printers (untested). Gigantic
industrial dot-matrix printer with sound deadening hood
---Misc computer power supplies, cases, 386 computers, 486 computers,
Toshiba laptops that can only run DOS, floppy disks,
---misc ISA bus cards..... if no one is interested in the functionality of
the cards, do you collect them for the GOLD reclamation value $$$$$$?$?$?$
-video cards, EIDE cards, modem cards, multi-I/O cards, sound cards,
and so on.
---inkjet printers (untested) -I'm pretty sure you DON'T want these,
but who knows... again, maybe the circuit boards have value.
I am offering these for free to anyone. Hope to hear from you SOON.
And please let me know how to call you if you want this stuff.
PS Almost forgot to mention, TONS of old 3.5" HARD DRIVES.... most
working, many tested or marked.
Thanks.
--
Jack V
_______________________________________________
Info mailing list
Info(a)lists.sudoroom.org
https://sudoroom.org/lists/listinfo/info
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Caitlin Cruz <caitlin.cruz(a)cvcorps.org>
Date: Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 1:29 PM
Subject: [sudo-info] possible partnerships opportunity
To: "info(a)sudoroom.org" <info(a)sudoroom.org>
Hello,
I am a teacher at Civicorps schools, a charter school in West Oakland
for youth who have not yet received their high school diplomas. I am
currently teaching a robotics class in an attempt to interest students
in programming and the maker culture. I am interested in taking them
on a field trip to community maker space or hacker space in Oakland
and I was wondering if I could speak to someone about what you do and
if this might be a good fit. I am interested in exposing my students
to community robotics and citizen science. I am specifically
interested in Omni labs because I know that you are run through
community members and encourage creativity.
Our students are 18-26 and the school offers both a degree and on the
job training. My robotics class is a 3 hour class that runs for 5
Fridays in a row and begins with an introduction to programming and
continues with a comprehensive robotics projects that runs from the
Arduino platform. If you are interested in knowing more about us
and/or feel that you could host us for a field trip, please let me
know.
Thank you
Caitlin Cruz
Science Teacher
On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 9:47 AM, johanna faust <female.faust(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> sounds like a good fit. & issues re: minors are moot, correct?
We've fixed the biggest outstanding fire code violations, and our
insurance covers stuff like this. I think it's fine to go ahead and do
it.
It's not the parts that make the board expensive, it's the salaries you
must pay the engineers who write the software for it. Heck, you'd be
surprised how little the parts cost of something reflects the price one
must ask for to keep a company afloat.
On 23 Nov 2015 1:03 am, "Zach R" <organicunity(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
> Hey Adam,
> Thanks so much for the reply. Goddamn that board is expensive - I'm not
> surprised it does more given all the ICs on it. Nuts, looks like we need
> to cough up $400 for that board then or get a new laser cutter :/ What a
> scam, I doubt that PCB costs >$25 to produce.
> I second your thoughts on education. I've looked at your site as well as
> the manual and have been trying to learn more about the beast so that it
> gets taken care of properly.
>
> -Zach
>
> ________________________________________
> From: noisebridge-discuss-bounces(a)lists.noisebridge.net <
> noisebridge-discuss-bounces(a)lists.noisebridge.net> on behalf of Adam
> <adam(a)aperture.systems>
> Sent: Monday, November 23, 2015 12:16 AM
> To: Noisebridge
> Subject: Re: [Noisebridge-discuss] Moar Laser Cutter Infos
>
> I have this model laser. It's on loan at sudo right now.
>
> The board isn't just a USB-Parallel converter. On my laser (R.3) the
> board was a mixture of motor drivers, a few buffers and a CPLD doing
> something somewhat intelligent. When it failed, I was able to have
> full spectrum replace it with r.4 of their board for $400, which is
> pretty identical, though they've done away with the DB25 port in favor
> of direct to CPLD - USB.
>
> I have a guide on the use of these lasers here.
> http://hack.rit.edu/tools/fsl/
>
> I would not recommend hacked solutions over the FSL board, unless the
> solution is well documented, on a dedicated computer, backed up, and
> taught to a few NB chiefs. My time running RIT's hackerspace has
> taught that lack of education is the #1 reason people don't use tools
> like these, and when there's no one to teach, nothing will get done,
> and that sometimes it really is better to just pay extra for
> something that just works.
>
> -A
> -^-^-^-^-^-
> Adam Munich - Builder of wild things (and organizations)
> Tel: +1-650-452-0554
>
> The key to mastering any skill is nothing more than passion and
> persistence.
>
>
> On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 2:30 AM, Mitch Altman <maltman23(a)hotmail.com>
> wrote:
> > FYI: My friend Aqua (who's Chinese) called the company who actually
> makes the laser cutter (jnmydy.com is only a distributor), and they told
> her that they cannot sell us just the power Parallel to USB controller and
> main power motherboard PCBs separately, but they sell the "whole set" and
> some raw components. She will call be on Monday and find out how much the
> "whole set" costs.
> >
> >
> > And, yeah, I'd still really like to get reimbursed for the laser tube I
> bought for Noisebridge for $237.37 last year.
> >
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Mitch.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> >> From: organicunity(a)hotmail.com
> >> To: noisebridge-discuss(a)lists.noisebridge.net
> >> Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 02:29:14 +0000
> >> Subject: Re: [Noisebridge-discuss] Moar Laser Cutter Infos
> >>
> >>
> >> So looking through the NB discuss list history (and talking to myself
> >> more here) there are actually a few more things the Laser Cutter
> >> needs. From what I understand there is:
> >>
> >>
> >> 1) Parallel> USB controller board needed (waiting for word from the
> >> people at Full Spectrum Laser and the shop in China for a price quote -
> >> anyone received a reply?) Also, Henner says he might be able to hack
> >> this with Arduino
> >>
> >> 2) Water pump and one hose missing (according to Adam's email from the
> >> Hackathon in July)
> >>
> >> 3) Air Pump maybe (haven't checked to see if we have this)
> >>
> >> 4) Calibration of mirrors and stuff (can someone volunteer to do this?
> >> we have manuals for it, it's just tedious)
> >>
> >> 5) Minor wiring and screws install work (I volunteer to do this)
> >>
> >> 6) a Windows machine to run the software (I can donate one if needed)
> >>
> >> 7) Install software and key (I guess Jerrod has this info?)
> >>
> >>
> >> Just trying to document the steps needed in one place here for
> >> everyone. Finally, we need to pay Mitch back for the $237 he spent on
> >> the new tube. Below is an old email with details from the thread here
> >> "Laser cutter repair bounty"
> >>
> >>
> >> Adam: "I tried fixing it at the stupid shit hackathon but I could not
> >> find the water pump and the other rubber hose. There is otherwise
> >> everything you need to get the laser cutter running."
> >>
> >>
> >> Mitch: "Zach -- please see the email from Henner, copied below, for a
> >> list of things that needs to be done. And please see the Doodle sent by
> >> Rubin, copied below, to pick a time to meet to fix the lasercutter.
> >> Everyone -- I paid for the laser tube when I was in China. I would very
> >> much love to be paid back for it. It cost me: Laser tube: $120.37
> >> shipping from Shenzhen to SF: $117.00 Total: $237.37 Would people be
> >> kind enough to pitch in, and help collect for this? Thanks, Mitch."
> >>
> >> -------------------------------------- From: organicunity(a)hotmail.com
> >> To: noisebridge-discuss(a)lists.noisebridge.net Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2015
> >> 08:39:50 +0000 Subject: Re: [Noisebridge-discuss] Laser cutter repair
> >> bounty .ExternalClass P { } I already offered to help with this....I
> >> thought Adam (and someone else) got it fixed recently. If someone will
> >> give me the low down on what needs to be done I'm happy to work on it.
> >> and hey, throwing money (and burritos) at poor techs like me definitely
> >> can get shit done! -Zach From:
> >> noisebridge-discuss-bounces(a)lists.noisebridge.net on behalf of Rubin
> >> Abdi Sent: Saturday, July 11, 2015 3:54 PM To: Henner Zeller Cc: James
> >> Sundquist; NB Discuss Subject: Re: [Noisebridge-discuss] Laser cutter
> >> repair bounty Do you want to make the laser go? Fill out the fucking
> >> Doodle... https://doodle.com/3rnzd5fy74kfwd9b On 11 July 2015 at 14:41,
> >> Henner Zeller wrote: I'd rather you guys organize some time where
> >> everyone who wants to help has time (get creative, there are some
> >> online find-free-time-slots-for-a-couple of people online. @rubin was
> >> using one of these recently). Money won't get things done, chip in an
> >> hour of your work. _That_ would help more getting this done. I am happy
> >> to help, but being alone working on that will take weeks of time here
> >> and there. What needs to be done, and with a few people, that would be
> >> doable in an afternoon. - check if we have the water pump and air pump
> >> in working condition. If not, get new ones. - Get a bucket of 5 Gallons
> >> of distilled water. - Connect the laser tube to the high voltage power
> >> supply (as far as I know, the new tube is already in the cutter)000 -
> >> calibrate things, mirrors and stuff. - make a free space in the corner
> >> of Noisebridge next to the windows, now full of DJ gear. - Find a table
> >> to put it on permanently. - Prepare an outlet in the window where we
> >> can connect the blower pipe. - Get the software installed somewhere (I
> >> think Jarrod has a license key somewhere and we need a windows
> >> machine). -h On 11 July 2015 at 14:31, jarrod hicks wrote: I too will
> >> match that. On Jul 11, 2015 12:32 PM, "James Sundquist" wrote: I will
> >> give $20 to anyone who has the laser cutter restored and calibrated at
> >> nb. --- Sent from Boxer | http://getboxer.com
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ________________________________
> >> From: noisebridge-discuss-bounces(a)lists.noisebridge.net
> >> <noisebridge-discuss-bounces(a)lists.noisebridge.net> on behalf of Zach R
> >> <organicunity(a)hotmail.com>
> >> Sent: Friday, November 20, 2015 5:54 PM
> >> To: NB Discuss; Eric Michaud
> >> Subject: Re: [Noisebridge-discuss] Moar Laser Cutter Infos
> >>
> >>
> >> OK so I took the laser cutter Main PCB home last night and did some
> >> work on it. I believe I got it all fixed up now, with the proper +5v
> >> and +24v LEDs lighting up now - it should be working 100% ! :D
> >>
> >> proof:
> >>
> >>
> http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b134/Segasonicfan/NB%20Hardware%20Class/2…
> >>
> >>
> http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b134/Segasonicfan/NB%20Hardware%20Class/2…
> >> <
> http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b134/Segasonicfan/NB%20Hardware%20Class/2…
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> Now the only thing left (aside from me fixing some crappy wiring jobs,
> >> installing the tube, and replacing screws and fuses) is the CONTROLLER
> >> BOARD that handles Parallel> USB. Here is a link to it again:
> >>
> >>
> https://moderndevice.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/fse-controller-768x1024…
> >>
> >>
> >> Has anyone received a response from the manufacturer about this? Eric,
> >> could you ask Full Spectrum Laser for the price cost for just this
> >> board (I know they quoted $700 for both, but I have the larger one
> >> working now). LMK.
> >>
> >> ________________________________
> >> From: noisebridge-discuss-bounces(a)lists.noisebridge.net
> >> <noisebridge-discuss-bounces(a)lists.noisebridge.net> on behalf of Zach R
> >> <organicunity(a)hotmail.com>
> >> Sent: Tuesday, November 3, 2015 11:39 PM
> >> To: NB Discuss
> >> Subject: [Noisebridge-discuss] Moar Laser Cutter Infos
> >>
> >>
> >> So I brought this up at the meeting tonight and then I did more
> >> research. Found some more useful info.
> >>
> >>
> >> model #: MLR-40
> >>
> >> 40w Full Spectrum Laser
> >>
> >> Manufacturer website: http://en.jnmydy.com/
> >>
> >>
> >> And here are the pictures I took:
> >>
> >>
> http://s18.photobucket.com/user/Segasonicfan/library/NB%20Hardware%20Class?…
> >>
> >> Here is the controller board we are missing:
> >>
> >>
> https://moderndevice.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/fse-controller-768x1024…
> >>
> >> http://www.laserresale.com/?fa=app.view&it=5966<
> https://us-mg4.mail.yahoo.com/compose?to=gwen246%40gmail.com>
> >>
> https://moderndevice.com/news/full-spectrum-engineering-40w-hobby-laser/
> >> http://wiki.lvl1.org/Full_Spectrum_Laser
> >> http://www.therpf.com/showthread.php?t=140518
> >>
> >> https://fslaser.com/Manuals/FSL_40w_Hobby_Laser_Manual.pdf (manual)
> >>
> >>
> >> There is a second hand one for $1500 we could raise money for. That
> >> way we have this one for parts. That's one option.
> >>
> >> Im going to try emailing the manufacture to see what replacement costs
> >> would be.
> >>
> >>
> >> -Zach
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________ Noisebridge-discuss
> >> mailing list Noisebridge-discuss(a)lists.noisebridge.net
> >> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
> > _______________________________________________
> > Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> > Noisebridge-discuss(a)lists.noisebridge.net
> > https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
> _______________________________________________
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss(a)lists.noisebridge.net
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>
Hi. Im looking for a pair of red glassed that i might have left at omni. .
Had anyone seen anything fitting that description lying around sudo or
omni?
This isn't something I'm interested in but thought it'd be interesting to the cool Sudoroom folks
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/making-sense/column-the-case-for-employee-owned…
Column: The case for employee-owned companies
Making Sen$e’s segment on the 100 percent worker-owned New Belgium Brewing stirred some interest in the concept of employee stock ownership. David Ellerman explains the theory behind employee-owned companies. Photo by Flickr user +Russ.
Editor’s Note: Our story on Colorado’s 100 percent worker-owned company New Belgium Brewing has stirred some interest in the concept of employee stock ownership. We didn’t have time, however, to explore a particularly provocative and arguably profound voice on the issue, David Ellerman, based at the University of California, Riverside.
Ellerman has for years made an argument as startling as it is hard to refute: “the labor theory of property.” It’s that employees should own the firms they work for because of very simple logic: If they’re responsible for the consequences of their actions while on the job ― committing a crime, say ― how can it be that they’re not responsible for the positive things they do, such as making money?
Ellerman’s writing on “the labor theory of property” has mostly been for a technical audience. I asked him if he wouldn’t mind trying to make his argument in a more popular way for the Making Sen$e page. Here’s what he sent us.
― Paul Solman, Economics Correspondent
You are called in for jury duty. You protest to the judge that you are not a lawyer. How can you be expected to make a legal decision? But the judge points out that the jury is not there to interpret the law but to make a decision about the facts. Is the defendant in fact responsible for committing the crime as charged ― or not? Guilty or not guilty?
The legal system then assigns the legal responsibility according to the jury’s decision about the factual responsibility.
That is the basic principle of justice: assign the legal responsibility to the people who are in fact responsible for the deeds in question.
With that principle of justice, injustice falls into two categories:
assigning legal responsibility to a defendant who was not in fact responsible for the crime ― that is, convicting an innocent person, or
not assigning legal responsibility to a defendant who was in fact responsible ― that is, not convicting a guilty person.
There is something else to notice about the basic norm of justice. Criminals have their “tools of the trade,” which can be quite important in committing crimes. But tools cannot be factually responsible for committing a crime, only people. For example, guns can’t be responsible for killing people, but people find it much easier to kill someone, deliberately or accidentally, if guns are available. Thus, regardless of the tools, instruments or other things being used in committing a crime, only the people committing the crime are in fact responsible for it.
This basic principle of justice ― assign legal responsibility according to factual responsibility ― is used by the courts of law, but there’s no reason this principle should be applied only to negative results like crimes or misdeeds. When people deliberately produce something positive, shouldn’t they also get the legal “credit” or “ownership” of that result? The justice principle can thus be seen as applying to both positive and negative results of all responsible human actions.
But there is a problem ― our current economic system does not follow the justice principle. In the previous system ― prior to the arrival of modern democracy ― masters could own other people involuntarily (the slaves). Thankfully, that system was abolished. But voluntariness was not the key issue since the contract to voluntarily sell oneself into slavery was also abolished along with involuntary slavery.
In the current economic system, people rent themselves out to an “employer.” As the late Paul Samuelson of MIT, the first American Nobel Prize winner in economics, put it in his widely-used textbook:
Since slavery was abolished, …[a] man is not even free to sell himself: he must rent himself at a wage.
This use of the word “rent” may be jarring, but it is accurate. Americans refer to “rental cars” and the British refer to “hire cars,” but both are talking about the same thing where the renter is not buying the car, but only buying some of its services. Renting something is buying its services.
Our current employment system of renting, hiring or employing people conflicts with the justice principle. In a factory operating under the employment relation, the people working in the factory jointly produce whatever is the product. Consider a company that produces widgets, for example. Those widgets are the positive results of their responsible actions. But to produce the widgets, they must jointly use up raw materials, intermediate goods, machinery and other resources. Those used-up resources are the negative results of their responsible actions.
But the people working in the enterprise do not jointly have legal ownership of the widgets they produce, and they do not jointly bear the expenses for the resources (raw materials, intermediate goods, etc.) they use to produce the widgets. Instead, it is the employer who owns the widgets and pays off the non-labor costs for the used resources. The rented people, the employees, are seen simply as the providers of just another resource ― known in this case, as labor services. The employer pays off the liability for using that resource by paying the labor costs ― the wages and salaries.
Hence, the employment system seems to involve a mismatch between legal responsibility and factual responsibility. While the positive and negative legal responsibility goes to the (working or absentee) employer, the positive and negative factual responsibility is with both the working employer and the employees. The renting of people certainly seems to violate the standard justice principle of assigning legal responsibility in accordance to factual responsibility.
But the employees are said to voluntarily give up their responsibility for the results of their “labor services.” How can one “give up” factual responsibility?
Consider the case of an employee who commits a crime at the instruction of the employer. Certainly then the employee really does want to voluntarily give up and transfer away any factual responsibility for the results of his labor services. But there is no such escape. The legal system then recognizes that the “employment” of one’s own actions cannot be voluntarily transferred to another person. One could transfer the use of one’s car or shovel to another person, but not the “employment” of one’s self. As a British law book on the employer-employee relation puts it (using the old-speak of “master and servant”):
All who participate in a crime with a guilty intent are liable to punishment. A master and servant who so participate in a crime are liable criminally, not because they are master and servant, but because they jointly carried out a criminal venture and are both criminous.
But what factually changes when the venture being jointly carried out is not criminal? Do the employees suddenly turn into non-responsible robots employed by their employer? Presumably employees are just as much factually responsible for their deliberate actions when they produce widgets as when they commit crimes.
It is the response of the legal system that changes ― when no crime is committed, the legal system sees no reason to intervene to explicitly apply the justice principle it has so clearly established in ordinary trials. The system then accepts “obeying the employer” as fulfilling the employment contract. There seems to be no breach of the contract ― even though “obeying the employer” didn’t get the criminal employee off the hook. But with no breach or crimes involved, the legal system is silent. It does not intervene to apply the justice principle as it does in a criminal or civil trial.
The end result is that the employer ends up paying off all the costs of the used-up resources, including the wage payments for the employees’ labor services, and thus owning all the widgets produced. But the employer is not in fact solely responsible for using up those resources or for producing that product ― so this adds up to a violation of the justice principle. The justice principle says that all the expenses for the used-up resources and all the revenues from owning and selling the widgets should go to the factually responsible party, which would be all the people working in the enterprise.
This violation is built into the whole system of renting people ― even if voluntarily. Should that be surprising? We are accustomed to condemn slavery for being involuntary, but would owning other people be okay if it were voluntary? Perhaps the basic problem with owning other people was not whether it was involuntary or voluntary, but that it treated people as things. And that is still a problem with the renting of people in our economy. It treats the rented people like non-responsible things whose use or employment can be voluntarily transferred from one person to another like a car or shovel.
How can the problem be fixed? Today, the renting, hiring or employing of people seems as “natural” as owning people did before the 19th century. In either case, most people in such a society take it for granted. But what if the abolitionists’ achievement of abolishing the owning of other people was followed up with the “neo-abolitionist” goal of abolishing the renting of other people? It would mean that all the people working together in a given enterprise would be the owners or members of that enterprise. They would jointly own what they jointly produce, and they would jointly pay off the costs for all the resources that they jointly used. In short, they would jointly own both the positive and negative “fruits of their labor” so private property would be re-founded on the justice principle.
The conservative British thinker, Lord Eustace Percy, put the matter very well back in 1944.
Here is the most urgent challenge to political invention ever offered to the jurist and the statesman. The human association which in fact produces and distributes wealth, the association of workmen, managers, technicians and directors, is not an association recognised by the law. The association which the law does recognize ― the association of shareholders, creditors and directors ― is incapable of production and is not expected by the law to perform these functions. We have to give law to the real association, and to withdraw meaningless privilege from the imaginary one.
It was previously noted that the factually responsible party is the community of all the people working in the enterprise, which Lord Percy called the “human association which in fact produces and distributes wealth.” That community is not even recognized as a legal party in the current system. “The association which the law does recognise” is (typically) the corporation-as-employer in the employer-employer relationship.
The closest legal form we have today where the factually responsible party is also the legally responsible party would be worker cooperatives (like the Mondragon cooperatives in the Basque country in Spain) or the “employee-owned” companies like the 7,000 or so Employee Stock Ownership Plans (ESOPs) across the United States (at least where 100 percent of the stock is in the ESOP trust for the employees). With those legal forms, the “association which the law does recognise” is also the “human association which in fact produces and distributes wealth.” That arrangement satisfies the justice principle.
Sent from my iPhone
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 7:38 PM, Charley Sheets <rcsheets(a)acm.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Nov 2015 10:58:57 -0800 (PST)
> Omni Oakland <quickbooks-email(a)intuit.com> wrote:
>
>> ------------------------ Invoice Summary --------------------------
>> Invoice # : 1184
>> Invoice Date: 11/17/2015
>> Due Date: 11/27/2015
>> Terms: Net 10
>> Amount Due: $385.33
>>
>> The complete version has been provided as an attachment to this email.
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> This invoice (for utilities, taxes, and insurance) has been paid.
Thank you, Charley!! This is such a relief.
