I am travelling tomorrow to the Venice Biennale and was checking out the participants. I came across this project which proposes to make architecture an open source thing, and me, as an architect, I feel offended by the way they want to transform our profession.
Honestly I don't think this Open Source Thing Thing would work at all, maybe in other fields, but not in architecture. Now people are still enthusiastic, maybe because of the Biennale, maybe because they hope that one day this is going to be a thing, I don't know. But still, authorship is as important as the project itself, so that someone in the end can take responsibility if something goes right or wrong. And besides, who is willing to give out information completely for free? Thank god, those times when intellectual property and work (software) was not considered as important as material property (hardware) and physical work, therefore unpaid. In the end we all need to pay our bills...
Architectural services are intellectual property. Just like software! The fact that sometimes architectural services lead to a built property (hardware) is inconsequential.
Open source is a computer industry concept that traces back to 'Hello world'. Some of the industry's biggest players (IMB, Oracle, Red Hat, even Google) are deeply involved in open source. They are also very profitable operations. They make money through support contracts (as opposed to direct sales).
Not sure how architecture could possibly go 'open source',but I would definitively welcome a higher level of transparency in the field. Why can't I still download a bunch of building codes out there? Why is AIA still charging an arm and a leg for some types of legal contract documents? Why are ASTM standards still being sold (as opposed to given to anyone that wants them)?
Architectural profession has had a weird relationship with 'internet-as-inexpensive' distribution tool. I find architects to be surprisingly technology illiterate (given the level of education).
As far as deign goes, God forbid someone copies your shitty, thermal-bridgy, water-leaky detail. Gotta keep that one proprietary!
i don't think you can fight it --- it is the way it will be --- and it is a good thing --- this is how we can safely design for and validate complex projects for which adequate rules of thumb may not exist and for which no individual (or standard team) can address all possible concerns --- ipd is also nudging us toward a more open and collaborative design process ---
but i don't see it as a threat, just a different way of doing business
the metaphor goes like this --- for a long time it has been the case that whoever has the biggest or fullest or most precious knowledge piggy bank is probably the most skilled, most valuable architect --- that in school and early in practice, as we acquire skills we put them in our knowledge piggy bank and build intellectual wealth, we also increase our value
but this is no longer the case --- knowledge changes too fast so any one piece is devalued and somewhat unstable --- so the best architect is not the one with the best knowledge piggy bank but the architect with the best filter --- it is more like we exist in a stream of rapidly changing knowledge and we all have seine nets and the best architects are the ones with the best nets, the best filters, and the ones who most rapidly pick through what they get in their net, integrate it, and know when to let it go --- but holding knowledge in the way we traditionally have is almost worthless, except maybe for slow-changing knowledge such as code requirements
i recently showed a colleague the documentation i gave a client for the design of a custom medical cart that accommodates a certain kind of rehabilitation testing --- his response was one of astonishment, entire thought process and analysis was there (in an appendix, after the executive summary) but he said that architects shouldn't "give away our tricks" --- my view is different, the amount of data I assessed, the speed with which I iterated concepts, the accuracy of my educated guesses along the way, the degree to which my role as facilitator expedited the iterative process of the stakeholders, these are what make me of value --- that is, I can give away process and the client still needs me b/c the client cannot replicate the process as quickly or cost-effectively as I can, they also don't have the experience to figure out what to do when a circumstance deviates from the norm or to have a sense of where the trends are headed
interestingly, i had lunch last fall with a systems engineer who works on product/process development for consumer product manufacturers and he said the strategy is going in a similar direction in his industry --- that the trick is to give it all away (b/c even if you don't, others will and you would rather be regarded as the well-source of authoritative information) but to perform at a high enough level and with enough foresight as to where the trends are heading that though you give it away, others can't quite match your performance b/c though you've given them the parts and the product, they don't have the integration, and even if they did, it would not make sense or be useful without also having the particular mix of skills and tools you use at an expert level as part of the process
also of note, NSF is starting to require that grant proposals spell out how researchers will share data, findings and methods with the larger research community to accelerate innovation through openness as part of the grant application --- so it is happening across industries
all valid arguments
i found this floating around
facebook and some other communities. http://opensimsim.net/beta/
maybe this is the basis of the initial
post by hahaZadid(love the name bytheway)
ladies and gents hello i just got a call from Mr Recession, and he says "Architects are out of business"but i enjoy your talks almost reminds me of the good ol days when people were hiring us.
After visiting both opensimsim.net and ocean-designsearch.net, I still have no idea what these guys mean by 'open source'.
The only 'unique' feature of both is that organization members live far apart from each other and have varying degrees of interests, skills and expertise.
To call that ' open source' would be an appropriate fuck-you to the computer industry that blatantly stole all position names from our field: 'project architect', 'architecture designer', 'technical lead', 'spec writer', etc...
Open Source?
I am travelling tomorrow to the Venice Biennale and was checking out the participants. I came across this project which proposes to make architecture an open source thing, and me, as an architect, I feel offended by the way they want to transform our profession.
Honestly I don't think this Open Source Thing Thing would work at all, maybe in other fields, but not in architecture. Now people are still enthusiastic, maybe because of the Biennale, maybe because they hope that one day this is going to be a thing, I don't know. But still, authorship is as important as the project itself, so that someone in the end can take responsibility if something goes right or wrong. And besides, who is willing to give out information completely for free? Thank god, those times when intellectual property and work (software) was not considered as important as material property (hardware) and physical work, therefore unpaid. In the end we all need to pay our bills...
Architectural services are intellectual property. Just like software! The fact that sometimes architectural services lead to a built property (hardware) is inconsequential.
Open source is a computer industry concept that traces back to 'Hello world'. Some of the industry's biggest players (IMB, Oracle, Red Hat, even Google) are deeply involved in open source. They are also very profitable operations. They make money through support contracts (as opposed to direct sales).
Not sure how architecture could possibly go 'open source',but I would definitively welcome a higher level of transparency in the field. Why can't I still download a bunch of building codes out there? Why is AIA still charging an arm and a leg for some types of legal contract documents? Why are ASTM standards still being sold (as opposed to given to anyone that wants them)?
Architectural profession has had a weird relationship with 'internet-as-inexpensive' distribution tool. I find architects to be surprisingly technology illiterate (given the level of education).
As far as deign goes, God forbid someone copies your shitty, thermal-bridgy, water-leaky detail. Gotta keep that one proprietary!
i don't think you can fight it --- it is the way it will be --- and it is a good thing --- this is how we can safely design for and validate complex projects for which adequate rules of thumb may not exist and for which no individual (or standard team) can address all possible concerns --- ipd is also nudging us toward a more open and collaborative design process ---
but i don't see it as a threat, just a different way of doing business
the metaphor goes like this --- for a long time it has been the case that whoever has the biggest or fullest or most precious knowledge piggy bank is probably the most skilled, most valuable architect --- that in school and early in practice, as we acquire skills we put them in our knowledge piggy bank and build intellectual wealth, we also increase our value
but this is no longer the case --- knowledge changes too fast so any one piece is devalued and somewhat unstable --- so the best architect is not the one with the best knowledge piggy bank but the architect with the best filter --- it is more like we exist in a stream of rapidly changing knowledge and we all have seine nets and the best architects are the ones with the best nets, the best filters, and the ones who most rapidly pick through what they get in their net, integrate it, and know when to let it go --- but holding knowledge in the way we traditionally have is almost worthless, except maybe for slow-changing knowledge such as code requirements
i recently showed a colleague the documentation i gave a client for the design of a custom medical cart that accommodates a certain kind of rehabilitation testing --- his response was one of astonishment, entire thought process and analysis was there (in an appendix, after the executive summary) but he said that architects shouldn't "give away our tricks" --- my view is different, the amount of data I assessed, the speed with which I iterated concepts, the accuracy of my educated guesses along the way, the degree to which my role as facilitator expedited the iterative process of the stakeholders, these are what make me of value --- that is, I can give away process and the client still needs me b/c the client cannot replicate the process as quickly or cost-effectively as I can, they also don't have the experience to figure out what to do when a circumstance deviates from the norm or to have a sense of where the trends are headed
interestingly, i had lunch last fall with a systems engineer who works on product/process development for consumer product manufacturers and he said the strategy is going in a similar direction in his industry --- that the trick is to give it all away (b/c even if you don't, others will and you would rather be regarded as the well-source of authoritative information) but to perform at a high enough level and with enough foresight as to where the trends are heading that though you give it away, others can't quite match your performance b/c though you've given them the parts and the product, they don't have the integration, and even if they did, it would not make sense or be useful without also having the particular mix of skills and tools you use at an expert level as part of the process
also of note, NSF is starting to require that grant proposals spell out how researchers will share data, findings and methods with the larger research community to accelerate innovation through openness as part of the grant application --- so it is happening across industries
all valid arguments
i found this floating around
facebook and some other communities.
http://opensimsim.net/beta/
maybe this is the basis of the initial
post by hahaZadid(love the name bytheway)
also
http://www.ocean-designresearch.net/
ladies and gents hello i just got a call from Mr Recession, and he says "Architects are out of business"but i enjoy your talks almost reminds me of the good ol days when people were hiring us.
After visiting both opensimsim.net and ocean-designsearch.net, I still have no idea what these guys mean by 'open source'.
The only 'unique' feature of both is that organization members live far apart from each other and have varying degrees of interests, skills and expertise.
To call that ' open source' would be an appropriate fuck-you to the computer industry that blatantly stole all position names from our field: 'project architect', 'architecture designer', 'technical lead', 'spec writer', etc...
i found this video explaining the ideas behind the network you mentioned above - OpenSimSim:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vBWf6vHlPzY&feature=player_embedded
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.