Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

+ - Community of Hacker Dojo raises a Kickstarter!->

Submitted by c0sine
c0sine (959434) writes "For those who do not know. Hacker Dojo is one of the premier hacker / co-working / community spaces in the San Francisco Bay area. It is a member run and operated; and open to general public — center full of technologists, entrepreneurs and gurus. On top of contributing to the local community HackerDojo.com also provides information, software and other resources for anyone interested in starting or running a (non affiliated) hackerspace.
Recently the City of Mountain View, concerned that the space is not zoned for teaching classes, has shut down more than half the space, stopped all large classes and conferences, and has given Hacker Dojo 6 months to do a quarter million dollars of improvements or face being shut down.
Their fundraising total is now ~$170K out of $250K. The kickstarter goes for 10 more days. Here is a recent article about them in Venture Beat (http://venturebeat.com/2012/08/10/hacker-dojo-interview/)"

Link to Original Source
The Almighty Buck

+ - A hackerspace's options: raise a quarter million dollars or die.-> 3

Submitted by
katicli
katicli writes "What would you do if your city threatened to close your local hackerspace unless you did a quarter million dollars in upgrades? Hacker Dojo is facing just such a question. The City of Mountain View, concerned that the space is not zoned for teaching classes, has shut down more than half the space, stopped all large classes and conferences, and has given the hackerspace 6 months to do a quarter million dollars of improvements or face being shut down.

This shows a troubling trend for next-generation educational and maker spaces, as spaces such as old schools and churches, which are zoned for "Assembly" are not easy to rent.

Hacker Dojo has raised $130,000 from corporate sponsors and charity events so far and is doing a Kickstarter to hold them over for another $30,000 while the rest is raised."

Link to Original Source

Comment: Re:ok so... (Score 5, Insightful) 323

by Zagadka (#38273994) Attached to: How To Avoid Infringing On Apple's Patents

If Samsung had changed a single thing on their products there would be no case. Square buttons or a different colour or differently shaped speakers. Anything and the case would never have even been filed.

The Galaxy Tab 10.1 has no face buttons at all. The earlier (7") Galaxy Tab had four face buttons (not one), and none of them looked anything at all like home buttons on iOS devices. Sure looks like Samsung changed (at least) "a single thing"...

Comment: Re:Fail (Score 1) 95

by Zagadka (#33618466) Attached to: First Google Voice App Hits the App Store

Your argument would hold more weight if it weren't for the fact that AT&T has had many negative effects on iOS despite the fact that iOS isn't open. (recent example: tethering) So yes, carriers can exploit the openness of Android to screw their customers, but they also can, and have, make Apple do their bidding. So it appears that the issue of whether your carrier will screw up your phone is orthogonal to whether the OS is "open". In that case, I'll take open.

Comment: Re:Fail (Score 1) 95

by Zagadka (#33618404) Attached to: First Google Voice App Hits the App Store

A few things off the top of my head:

Install an alternate input method (eg: Swype), run an emulator that lets you run downloaded software (eg: Ftodo 64 or NESoid), automatically adjust volume settings based on criteria like location, time or phone orientation (eg: Locale, Off the hook or Volume timer), automatically upload photos/videos to sharing services (eg: Pic push).

Don't forget that it wasn't too long ago that you couldn't even play Pandora in the background on the iPhone, and even now the multitasking on iOS is bizarrely restricted (eg: you can do arbitrary things in the background as long as you also audio).

Comment: Re:DRM, restrictions, outcry (Score 1) 610

by Zagadka (#32364758) Attached to: iPhone SDK Agreement Shuts Out HyperCard Clone

Using that logic you could ignore the developer agreement restrictions entirely by having virtually all of your code in a "library". Your application would then be just an entry point that calls into the library.

Any libraries you link into your app are part of your app and are subject to the same restrictions.

Comment: Re:DRM, restrictions, outcry (Score 1) 610

by Zagadka (#32258336) Attached to: iPhone SDK Agreement Shuts Out HyperCard Clone

The developer agreement says "Applications must be originally written in Objective-C, C, C++, or JavaScript as executed by the iPhone OS WebKit engine". There are no provisions for using other languages for any part of your application. Need to use a numerical library written in Fortran, or a parser written in ANTLR? Too bad.

Comment: Re:Two senses of "closed." (Score 1) 850

by Zagadka (#32118688) Attached to: Flash Is Not a Right

I love car analogies. No, Ford does not prohibit you from installing a Chevy engine in your Mustang. They also do _NOTHING_ to enable you.

Actual technical limitations are fine. Artificially imposed legal/contractual limitations aren't.

More specifically: I don't expect Apple to provide a compiler for my favorite language (which is not Flash, I should add). If they only provide an Objective-C compiler I'm fine with that. On the other hand, if someone develops a compiler that can convert code from my favorite language into Objective-C, then I am not okay with Apple saying "you can't use that tool - you have to hand-write your code in Objective-C".

I don't know that I'd go as far as to say that what Apple is doing isn't within their rights, but that doesn't mean I have to like what they're doing. They're handicapping their developer base by limiting the tools they can use. Some developers will stay and put up with the handicaps, and others will leave. I have a hard time believing that that will work out for them in the end.

Comment: Re:too many custom parts. (Score 2, Interesting) 206

by Zagadka (#22210886) Attached to: LEGO Brick 50th Anniversary
This reminds me of a study I'd read about a few years ago that found that children fell into two different groups based on their behavior when playing with building blocks:
  1. build something and then preserve it
  2. build something, wait a while, destroy it, and repeat
I suspect that your experience has nothing to do with how specialized the pieces were, but rather the fact that your boyfriend's 8-year-old falls into the first camp: once something is built it is preserved. An interesting experiment would be to get her some building blocks or some basic (unspecialized) Lego bricks and see what she does with them. Does she build one thing and then try to preserve it, or does she tear it down after a little while to build something new?

If at first you don't succeed, you must be a programmer.

Working...