News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Bankrupt Maker Faire revives, reduced to Make Community by marcinzm on Thursday July 11, 2019 @09:56AM (#20411515)
>Nobody seems to be able to make the "gym model" maker space go here.

The problem as I see it is that a gym has specific outputs that you want from your time (ie: be stronger, lower heart rate, etc.). Given Bay Area salaries, it's probably always cheaper to just pay someone in the mid west to build something than to do it yourself. So there's no positive monetary output.

So a maker space's output is pure enjoyment and that doesn't scale as much with better equipment. You can do woodworking without a CNC machine and lasers and a metal lathe. You can 3d print for your projects at home instead of trying to use vacuum formers and sheet metal. Without having to deal with people and scheduling and driving.

The only advantage I see of a maker space is the community but that's more of a non-profit model rather than a for-profit gym model. Community is much easier to achieve with shared ownership versus renting from someone else. It also doesn't need fancy equipment but just enough for people to come together.

edit: Community is also harder when you have fifty different machines that cater to fifty different niches.

Re:Bankrupt Maker Faire revives, reduced to Make Community by KirinDave on Thursday July 11, 2019 @10:37AM (#20411816)
> The problem as I see it is that a gym has specific outputs that you want from your time (ie: be stronger, lower heart rate, etc.). Given Bay Area salaries, it's probably always cheaper to just pay someone in the mid west to build something than to do it yourself. So there's no positive monetary output.

Not only is this not true, but it's also not the point. The point is to do it yourself, and the Maker movement has always catered to that. Self-makers have always had to charge more for their crafts than mass produced models, citing scarcity and often component quality (especially true for digital electronics).

> The only advantage I see of a maker space is the community but that's more of a non-profit model rather than a for-profit gym model. Community is much easier to achieve with shared ownership versus renting from someone else. It also doesn't need fancy equipment but just enough for people to come together.

Which maker space was using a non-profit model?

Re:Bankrupt Maker Faire revives, reduced to Make Community by marcinzm on Thursday July 11, 2019 @10:49AM (#20411918)
>Not only is this not true, but it's also not the point. The point is to do it yourself, and the Maker movement has always catered to that. Self-makers have always had to charge more for their crafts than mass produced models, citing scarcity and often component quality (especially true for digital electronics).

So, like I said, it's about enjoyment and not monetary output.

>Which maker space was using a non-profit model?

Probably 90% of them in any area are non-profits, they're just small and don't have fancy machinery.

Re:Bankrupt Maker Faire revives, reduced to Make Community by _jal on Thursday July 11, 2019 @11:29AM (#20412286)
I was a Techshop member. There were, in fact, a number of folks who made made money. I wasn't privy to their finances so I don't know that TS-enabled projects were there primary income, but it was most certainly used by people doing contract work.
Re:Bankrupt Maker Faire revives, reduced to Make Community by redis_mlc on Friday July 12, 2019 @02:28AM (#20418711)
So was I (San Jose location.) One of their mistakes was requiring "classes" before using any equipment - then restricting the hours to 9 - 5. I phoned in a complaint but nothing was done.

Tip: the members who can afford it are working so they have disposable cash.

Also - the location was prime downtown. Better to find an industrial park.

It was weird seeing the active members making Stormtrooper costumes mainly.