text:
Jordan Mammo Tech 05.14.2013 13:May PM EDT
Windows 8.1 Blue Update For Surface Pro, RT, And PC Officially Free
Microsoft is currently preparing Windows 8.1 "Blue" for a full reveal at its June Build developers' conference, but those heavily anticipating the details of the Windows 8 update are in for a treat.
The Windows 8.1 update is going to be free.
Microsoft's Windows CFO Tami Reller confirmed the news on Tuesday, when she spoke at JP Morgan's Media and Telecom Conference, according to Yahoo News. She also confirmed that the update, formerly known as "Windows Blue," will be officially known as Windows 8.1.
"Windows 8.1 will be delivered as a free update to Windows 8 and to Windows RT and it will be easy to get right from the Windows start screen through the app store," Reller said.
This will be welcome news to Windows 8 adopters who've complained about the new operating system's radical redesign. For those using a Surface Pro, RT, or some other touch-optimized Windows 8 tablet, the OS' Metro Live Tile interface is pretty slick and easy to use. Those on a traditional desktop PC or laptop, however, aren't as happy with the colorful new look. The lack of a Start button in particular has caused an uproar against the OS, to the point that some hardware manufacturers include a third party software app that brings it back.
For Windows 8.1, though, Microsoft said it is listening to complaints and working to address these issues. Rumor has it that the company is planning to bring back the Start button in some form, and that it'll also allow users to boot straight to the desktop, bypassing the Metro screen altogether.
On the touch-screen front, Windows 8.1 will also allow users to customize their Metro screen with more options. You'll be able to make bigger and smaller tiles, split the screen evenly between two apps when multitasking, and access more and more traditional desktop functions through the Tile screen.
All in all, Windows 8.1 is looking like a win-win for both tablet and desktop users, so it's even better that Microsoft is going to give it away for free. It'll definitely be an update you want to grab when it's released later this year.
Tags microsoft Windows 8.1 Windows Blue


My Favorite Things: Introducing Ombre Sentiments: Thinking of You and Pierced Feature Frames!
Introducing Ombre Sentiments: Thinking of You and Pierced Feature Frames!
Hey, friends! I'm back for more Papertrey July Countdown fun and I've got lots to share with you today!
So let's talk about this first card, shall we? I am a stamper through and through, but I have to say that I LOVE the fact that this FUN and very detailed card was made with the sentiment being the only thing I stamped here! I love what the addition of dies in paper crafting has done for us in terms of design options....there are a zillion design options now!! And gosh, Papertrey was really at the forefront of making dies that coordinate with every set, a reality! I remember having conversations behind the scenes back when we were first starting to introduce dies and dreaming about the day when we'd have dies to coordinate with allllll the stamps! And heck, now we're designing dies that are so amazing and versatile, that we sometimes don't even need the stamps! How far we've come just in the 10 years or so that I've been with Papertrey!
Anyway, that was a bit of a sidetrack, but this card just got me to thinking about it all. Love. So, part of what I'm helping to introduce to you today, is my newest Ombre Sentiments set, Thinking of You. This is, of course, a follow up to the Ombre Sentiments: Birthday and Ombre Sentiments: Christmas stamp sets that so many of you have already been using and enjoying for awhile now. The great thing about these stamps is that they create the look of ombre for you, even if you're only using a single color of ink. But if you want to kick it up a notch, you can use multiple ink colors to create actual ombre and the design of the stamps just enhances that look for you!
I'm also helping to introduce a new set of dies designed by Lizzie Jones, called Pierced Feature Frames. Now, let me interject that Lizzie and I didn't coordinate on the design of these and my Scallop Stackers dies, but they're nearly a perfect fit when used together!!! GAH! I love when that happens! Maybe Lizzie and I are just way more in tune now that we've roomed together for a couple weeks! Hahaha!!
Ok, so back to the card.....I started with a tropical teal card base and to that, I added a couple of scallop layers. The first is a solid scallop layer of honey nut bitty dot paper, topped with an open scallop kraft layer. On top of that, is some raspberry fizz card stock on which, I added a pierced feature frames terracotta tile layer. Next came a cocoa bean tag sale #12 die cut topped with a scalloped circle that I cut out with one of the window works dies, on which, I stamped a sentiment from Ombre Sentiments: Thinking of You!
Ok, so I'm hopeful that I can give you a few design tips with this next card and the one you just saw before it. If you'll notice, they're basically the same card! The first one, as I mentioned before, has only the sentiment for stamping on the whole card. However, say you like that layout but are wanting to add more stamping. Here's a way you can do that.....and for those of you who like to enter contests with your cards or just like to make cards and need inspiration from cards you see online but don't want to outright COPY a design, you can do things like this. I took the first card and by changing the way I used those large scallop layers (two layers and patterned paper on one of them on the first card) compared to a single dark layer on the second, and by how I changed the tag and by changing up the colors and by adding some floral elements, it really creates the look of an entirely different card.
I used another of the Pierced Feature Frames dies to cut out the white layer and I used another scalloped circle from the Window Works dies, as well as another sentiment from Ombre Sentiments: Thinking of You. But this time on the Tag Sale #12 die cut, I cut it from aqua mist card stock and added some ink blending with the Stencil Basics: Quatrefoil stencil.
I also tucked in a couple of flowers from The Sweet Life as well as some leaves from Vintage Linens. Overall, this card is a lot more soft and feminine while the first is a bit more modern in nature, but both are really the same basic layout.
I think sometimes as card makers, we tend to think we need to reinvent the wheel with every single card and I don't think that's always necessarily the case. I mean, if a layout works for you, by all means, make more than one. But if you're like me and you might get bored if they were all the EXACT same OR you just don't want to send people the same card, then change up the details to make the layout work for more than one card at a time. By changing a few of the details out, you could easily make this a masculine card or even a card for a kiddo.
Hope that helps you in your approach, when you sit down to make a few cards next time!
Also, I know I keep saying it but Lizzie's Pierced Feature Frames are a match made in Heaven for my Scallop Stackers! Talk about a quick way to make a big impact!
Just to prove that point, take this next card for example. All it really is, is one of the Pierced Feature Frames paired with one of the Scallop Stackers die cuts! I cut my scallop layer from watercolor card stock and added some watercolor with Zig markers and a water brush. That's something you could cut out a stack of and some night sitting in front of the tv, just watercolor them up and set them aside to dry. Then, when you're ready to make some cards, pop on a sentiment, stack them on a card base and you're done!
These dies do a lot of the work for you!
Ok, one more for today. Again, some of the same elements....same sentiment set, same frame dies, same scallop dies. But this time, by just using the scallop "holes" die directly on the card base, I was able to achieve a very different look, just by tucking some patterned paper on the inside of the card. And to dress that up even a bit more, I went ahead and die cut that bitty dot layer with the scallop stacker outline die, so the paper on the inside of the card is scalloped. Cute little detail that I'm guessing the recipient will appreciate.
I used a few more Vintage Linens flowers and leaves here....the flowers were heat embossed with gold embossing powder on watercolor card stock and then watercolored with my Zigs and water brush.
I used an ink blending tool to blend the ink on the sentiment before popping that little white layer inside the opening of the chocolate layer. Of course, both of those pieces were cut out with the Pierced Feature Frames dies.
What do you think? Are these kinds of tips and such helpful to you or are you thinking, "Duh! We already know that!"??? Haha. For real, I'd love your feedback. There's no use in me taking time to tell you stuff you're not interested in having to read, so if this sort of stuff is helpful to you, please let me know!
Be sure to check out the Papertrey Blog for lots more inspiration today and uh.....you might want to come back tomorrow! It's sort of a long post. Don't say I didn't warn you! I couldn't seem to stop with the cards for tomorrow!
Hope you'll stop back by! See you then!


text:
ShortDocumentary
A documentary short subject about the construction of a new skyscraper in late 1950s Manhattan, the Tishman building on prestigious Fifth Avenue.A documentary short subject about the construction of a new skyscraper in late 1950s Manhattan, the Tishman building on prestigious Fifth Avenue.A documentary short subject about the construction of a new skyscraper in late 1950s Manhattan, the Tishman building on prestigious Fifth Avenue.
Shirley Clarke
Wheaton Galentine
Irving Jacoby
1Critic review
Nominated for 1 Oscar
1 win & 1 nomination total
Bridges-Go-Round
Logorama
Dance in the Sun
A Chairy Tale
Sewing Woman
The Cool World
Joyce at 34
Daybreak Express
Bullfight
Return to Glennascaul
Lions Love (... and Lies)
Featured in Women Make Film: A New Road Movie Through Cinema (2018)
Not something I particularly enjoyed but it is interesting.
"Skyscraper" is a film that was nominated for the Oscar for Best Live Action Short...losing to Jacques Cousteau's "The Golden Fish".
The story is about the building of a skyscraper, the Tishman Building on 5th Avenue in New York, from start to finish. I did appreciate how the film talks about the many different types of workers needed for this task. What I didn't appreciate was all the jazz music and occasional use of rhymes. I much preferred when the film consisted of several very New York-like guys talking about their work on the project. Overall, very stylistic but not a film I fell in love with...though I did appreciate parts of it, such as the selective use of color (sometimes hand colored) in order to make the black & white cinematography pop at the end.
helpful•0
planktonrules

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
"use strict";

module.exports = function (grunt) {

  grunt.initConfig({

    mochaTest: {
      options: {
        reporter: 'spec',
        clearRequireCache: false
      },
      src: ['test/**/*.js']
    },

    watch: {
      files: ['gruntfile.js', 'test/**/*.js', 'lib/**/*'],
      tasks: ['mochaTest'],
      options: {
        spawn: true
      }
    }

  });

  grunt.loadNpmTasks('grunt-contrib-watch');
  grunt.loadNpmTasks('grunt-mocha-test');

  grunt.registerTask('default', ['test', 'watch']);
  grunt.registerTask('test', ['mochaTest']);

};

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


text:
HomeVideoHow Yuh-Jung Youn's memories of her own great-grandmother inspired her role in...
How Yuh-Jung Youn's memories of her own great-grandmother inspired her role in 'Minari'
When Yuh-Jung Youn appears in the film "Minari," playing grandmother Soonja, her young grandson isn't warm to her arrival. David, who has to share a room with her, tells her early on, "you're not a real grandma."
David, played by Alan Kim, rattles off how other grandmas are unlike Soonja: "They bake cookies! They don't swear! They don't wear men's underwear!" Soonja, unphased, playfully kicks at David. That initial tension, however, starts to dissolve as Soonja forms a bond with her grandson. A throughline of "Minari" is Soonja's love — like any grandmother's love — for her family, even if it's not always understood.
The film, written and directed by Lee Isaac Chung, follows the Yi family as they move to Arkansas' Ozark Mountains in the 1980s. Youn, whose career has spanned more than five decades, said she drew from her own experiences as a grandmother for the film, but also built the character of Soonja by relying on memories of her own great-grandmother, who was alive until Youn was 10 years old.
great grandma
Ozark Mountains
Soonja
Previous articleWATCH LIVE: White House press secretary Jen Psaki holds news briefing
Next articleWATCH LIVE: Biden, Harris give remarks on the American Rescue Plan


How did you get started with your career? I know you told everyone during our #GirlBoss conference call that you were kind of the go to girl for all of the celebrity gossip; but what made you finally decide that this was going to be your career path?
I guess I decided that when I noticed that people were paying attention. When I initially decided to actually write about the things that I witnessed, I didn't think that anyone was paying attention to me. It was just a hobby but when I realized that people started paying attention and I was getting all of these cease and desist letters because what I was putting out was actually true, that's when I realized I needed to take this more seriously and start perfecting my craft.
What obstacles did you face while jump starting your career?
First of all, I've always had a regular job on top of working for this industry because all though I have a very deep love of Hip Hop, it just doesn't pay the bills and that's just straight up. I've always had a job so it's basically a juggling act because I also have children. For instance, my website lacks because I can't get on it everyday because I work, do events, and have panels that I'm apart of. Right now, I'm rebranding so I don't have writers at the moment. Sometimes other things have to take the backseat.
How do you juggle being a #GirlBoss while also being a wife and mother?
I always try to make time for my husband. We always have our time. Sometimes that may only be for an hour once the kids are in bed and it's just us. It may be when we do the dishes, talking at the table, or when we're lying down; we always try to catch each other up on what we have going on. Our weeks are hectic so on weekends I coordinate with my older son, Kayden. If he's off during the weekend I ask him to come over and watch the kids while I go out on a date with my husband. It's just making time to show that you love your husband. Which is why you make all them damn kids!
What are your plans for CIAA weekend?
On Thursday, I'm covering the Redman, Method Man, and Keith Murray concert for the "I Love New York" series. Then there's also another concert that I would love to cover so I put it out into the universe that hopefully I'll get the call for that. Nas will be in town and my friend, Special Ed, is hosting that. I hope that I'll be able to have some sort of backstage access to do a little quick interview. Of course on Saturday we have The Literary Experience with the Blogging Beauties and I'll be apart of that panel. Then I'm also hosting the grand opening of Studio Pink Beauty Bar with my girl Angela Yee from The Breakfast Club. After that, I might follow behind Angela and go to her day party because my boss, 50 Cent will be in Charlotte so I'd love to see him.
Since you're around so many celebrities all of the time have you ever found yourself star-struck during your career? Have you ever had a complete fan moment?
You know what? I have not had that! I've had some moments where I've had to say "Yo! I used to listen to you when I was little!" Two of my major accomplishments I would say was I was asked to host in New York at the Westbury Music Theatre, where it was over five thousand people. I hosted an Old Skool Jam where it was Big Daddy Cane, Doug E. Fresh, Biz Markie, Slick Rick, Rakim; major artists. I hosted that and to me, that was a big deal because these were artists that I listened to growing up. I was kind of star-struck but I was there to do business so I didn't really have time to be star-struck. And then, when I got to meet Rev. Al Sharpton. I actually won an award for my literary work, for being a gossip girl. I got an award from him and that was also major. I knew his daughters, but I never got the opportunity to meet him. There were surreal moments, but no star-struck moments.
Is there a person that if you had an opportunity to meet them, you think you may have a moment?
Absolutely, Queen Latifah! I haven't met her yet but I would love to meet her!
What advice would you give aspiring entertainment journalists that are trying to break out into this industry?
Honestly, I would say to be consistent with your craft because just when you think no one is paying you any attention, that's when something will happen. Definitely networking because if you're not out there showing your face, shaking hands, and kissing babies then no one really knows who you are. Unless you come out with a super story, unless you have one of those moments, I would say be consistent with your work and go out there and let people know who you are and what you do.
I recently read that you decided to convert to Islam. Let me just say, congratulations on that. What made you make the decision to convert?
Thank you. My mother was actually Muslim back in the 70's and then she stopped. My mother is so not a religious person. If you asked her what was her religion then she wouldn't say Muslim, she wouldn't say Christian, she don't do none of that. I do know that she prays and that she believes in a higher power. For me, I believe in God but going to Church, they made it seem like I had to go to a middle- man to get to God and I never understood that. Most people call it the Trinity, but I could never grasped the concept of a Trinity. I didn't understand why we gotta go through this person to get to God? If God is the highest form of everything, why are we giving him humanlike qualities? There were certain things that I personally didn't understand. I was introduced to Islam by a couple of good friends and my husband's family is Muslim. I just started studying and reading the Quran. I pray a lot anyway so to pray five times a day was nothing for me. But there are certain things that have to go along with your prayer; like washing yourself before you pray. Basically, I just understood it. It was just straight to the point. That's why I converted.
I know you said that your husband's family is Muslim, is he Muslim as well?
No, my husband is not Muslim. He grew up a Baptist but that's his thing. He respects me and my decision and I respect him and his decision.
Lastly, is there anything you would like our readers to know about projects you are currently working on? I know you've been rebranding and you've changed the name of your website. Tell me a little bit about that. Where do you see your career going in 2016?
Well, in 2016 I have a lot going on. I did rebrand. It's no longer hiphopgossipsite.com, it's gossipviv.com. I wanted to put everything that people know me for under one name so it's gossipviv on Instagram, it's gossipviv on Twitter, and it's gossipviv on my website. I just wanted everything to have one cohesive flow. I do clean gossip. I'm not trying to bash people's families and I don't talk about how people look because that's just not where I am in life. I don't get any gratification from doing that. If they say "Young Jeezy shot up 5 people and got arrested." Of course, I'm going to report in that but it's clean gossip.
However, if you want to hear me talk about what I personally think about certain rumors and gossip, you can always log on to power104.4fm.com and I have my own show each and every Wednesday from 7 pm to 9 pm. And there I'll give it to you raw. On that show I curse, I give my raw opinion on things, I have callers, we play music, we have celebrity interviews, and I have a lot of great exclusives. Everyone has emojis like Kim Kardashian, and Fabolous has his own so within the next two months I will be coming out with my own emojis. But it won't be pictures, it'll be little sayings. That's what I'll be coming out with, which is a little different than what I'm used to doing. I'm just working on trying to let Charlotte know that I'm here. I might have some media runs. I did Power 98 but I have to get connected with the other movers and shakers in Charlotte because I'm not too familiar with Charlotte. I'm just used to the New York vibe.


Vintage Original Wainscot Doors Track And Hardware 9 feet wide 89 tall Original doors very solid Two doors and two sets of hardware and track available. The item "Vintage Original Wainscot Doors Track And Hardware Barn Farm" is in sale since Thursday, December 29, 2016. This item is in the category "Antiques\Architectural & Garden\Barn Doors". The seller is "18wheelswest" and is located in Amana, Iowa. This item can't be shipped, the buyer must pick up the item.


text:
Home Opinion Address donor attrition to build financial sustainability
Address donor attrition to build financial sustainability
By Regenia Bailey / Guest Column
Most nonprofit organizations are just wrapping up the busiest time of year for fundraising. End-of-the-year appeals — via letter, email or through personal conversations — motivate new and current donors to contribute to the organization's work.
Every year, however, organizations lose a portion of their donors. Typically, these donors are replaced with new donors, so in many organizations, this donor loss goes unnoticed.
Even when it is noted, annual donor loss is something that organizations have come to accept. This is unfortunate, because poor donor retention makes it more challenging for an organization to be financially sustainable. The cost of acquiring a new donor can be up to five times the cost of retaining a current donor.
Add to that the fact that the average size of a contribution from a new donor tends to be lower than the average contribution from a current donor, and it's easy to see why an organization should take steps to address donor attrition.
Slowing donor attrition
Attrition occurs when a donor just doesn't feel a strong enough connection to an organization to continue supporting it. This is often due to the transactional nature of many organization/donor relationships. The organization sends a letter; the donor sends a contribution; the organization may or may not send a thank you letter acknowledging the gift. This, along, with the occasional newsletter or fundraising event invitation, is the regular interaction that many organizations have with their supporters.
Whether intentional or not, these organizations are treating their supporters like ATMs. Donors eventually leave to seek more fulfilling relationships with organizations that treat them better by getting to know their interests and reasons for supporting the organization.
Like any good relationship, building stronger connections with donors takes time and energy. The information flow becomes more of a conversation — not just one-way requests and reports from the organization to the donor. Donor engagement means that the organization takes the time to learn more about a supporter's interest in the organization's work.
This increased understanding may or may not lead to larger gifts from a donor, but it can increase the likelihood that the donor will feel connected enough to the organization and its work to continue providing support to it. This leads to greater sustainability in the organization's fundraising efforts because it does not continually need new donors to replace donors that leave, but can actually grow its base of supporters.
It's part of the board's job to ensure that the organization's fundraising efforts are sustainable. This starts by the board understanding the net dollars that fundraising efforts bring to the organization and how these contributions are divided between those from new donors and those from current supporters. The board then understands if funding the organization requires regular acquisition of new donors because it isn't retaining its current donors or if donor acquisition is actually growing the organization's base of support. If donor retention is a problem, the board should take steps to address this.
First, the board must make sure that the organization's basic fundraising systems have adequate resources and are working well: gift acknowledgements are accurate, warmly written,= and sent in a timely manner; donors' names are spelled accurately; and donor contact information is up-to-date. Keeping these basic systems in good working order is critical to an organization's fundraising efforts.
Next, as part of its fundraising activities, the organization should have regular conversations with its current donors. Board members are ideally positioned to do this. In many cases, the organization's supporters are the board members' friends and colleagues. Often, board members are reluctant to ask people for support, but have no problem in thanking a supporter for a recent gift and having a conversation to learn more about the donor's interest in the organization.
To ensure that the information gathered by board members in these conversations becomes part of the organization's institutional memory, it is helpful to have a staff member accompany board members on these donor visits. The staff member can help answer donor questions and provide follow-up information as necessary. Once the organization understands the donor's interests, it can better tailor its interactions with the donor based upon this information.
People's lives change, so every organization will experience a certain level of donor attrition. It's important, however, that the board does what it can to address the problem in order to strengthen and increase its donor base and build a more financially sustainable organization.
Regenia Bailey is the founder and owner of Bailey Leadership Initiative LLC. She works with organizations from all sectors on strategic positioning and organizational effectiveness. For more information or to comment on this column, reach her through her website: www.baileyleadershipinitiative.com
Previous articleIowa City Brewlab brings family chemistry
Next articleIowa Caucuses lacking on health care


text:
Third COVID wave will have mortality
But Mainly for those previously 'vaccinated'
When genetic scientismists decided to recklessly meddle with the human genetic system, the aftermath of the first round of gene altering jabs guaranteed only one thing: ongoing direct access to humans for ongoing series of additional gene altering shots. For those who died as a result, no apologies will be forthcoming. Ultimately, this is the fate for all.
The next big wave of COVID infections and mortality, already hitting states such as Michigan, will be dominated by people who have been fully vaccinated.
This was predicted by the authors of a scientific study published in the British medical journal.
Between 60 and 70 percent of "third wave" COVID deaths and hospitalizations will be from people who were fully vaccinated, according to the study, Summary of Further Modeling of Easing Restrictions, published March 31 by the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine.
This may at least partially explain why Detroit-area hospitals are filling up with COVID patients and why more lockdown measures are being imposed, stating "measures will be more strict until the population of Michigan reaches the point where 70% have taken the injection".
But you won't read about this angle to the story from anyone in the mainstream media. They are reporting the story as simply a new wave of COVID hospitalizations and deaths caused by a UK-based variant of the virus that has nothing to do with the high rate of vaccinations. [See Detroit News, April 15, 2021, Beaumont nears COVID hospital capacity as experts warn of 'new pandemic.']
Vaxxing is Now Introducing Real Potential for Excess Mortality
Now here is the truth. There is no third wave, just like there was no second or first wave. Covid disease is nothing more than a hoax perpetrated by calling all of the old ills, like colds, flus, grippe, bronchitis, pneumonia, etc. by the new name "covid" and renaming all 'causes of death' as "covid". So, nothing has changed except for all the TV hype, hysteria and 'renaming'.
Then we had the "casedemic", perpetrated by the use of the PCR tester, that simply does not work, at all, and the operater can set the results to either positive or negative by the degree of amplification selected.
On this basis, over 150 million Americans have taken the injections labeled 'covid vaccine'. Now, the program is requiring a series of 3 injections. So, finally we have something real going on. The "vaccinated" are dying or manifesting serious adverse side-effects. The intent apparently was to have no initial consequences, which would be dissuasive to the unvaccinated so far as deciding in favor of becoming vaxxed.. The intent was to get enough suckers to take the "vaccine" before adverse affects started to manifest. Already, the "vaccinated" are finding strange adverse effects of many types. It was supposed to take one to two years for the slow process of 'cellular defect accumulation' to get the recipients 'zombified'. But other factors are coming into play, and recipients have earlier effects, which apparently include mortality, during what they will be calling the "third wave"
Furthermore, the vaxxed are able to contaminate the "unvaxxed" by 'shedding' defective proteins that can be transferred by contact or even close proximity to healthy unvaxxed individuals.
There had been no new danger to anyone prior to the point of vaxxing. There is statistically, no increase in mortality, anywhere in the world, up until this time. Now, the vaxxing has apparently brought on a real health threat. The media is dead silent on the matter.
Public has no Need to Know of Emerging Dangers
Mainstream news outlets have yet to express the tiniest bit of curiosity as to why the big spike in COVID is taking place even as large percentages of the public have been vaccinated [Michigan is one of the most-vaccinated states in the nation with nearly 30 percent of Michiganders receiving the jab]. In fact, health officials quoted in the above Detroit News article are blaming "vaccine hesitancy" for the new wave, a diabolical falsification of what's going on in Michigan meant to put more pressure on the people who refuse the unproven experimental emergency injection.
Apparently those health officials haven't read the new British study, which states:
"The resurgence in both hospitalizations and deaths is dominated by those that have received two doses of the vaccine, comprising around 60% and 70% of the wave respectively. This can be attributed to the high levels of uptake in the most at-risk age groups, such that immunization failures account for more serious illness than unvaccinated individuals." [See page 10, summary point No. 32].
And what do the British scientists who authored the study say is the answer to this dilemma of the fully vaccinated coming down with COVID? Why, we need more vaccines and more lockdowns, of course!
And Big Pharma is more than happy to comply. Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla announced a "third dose" of its vaccine will be needed within 12 months of the second dose and likely another dose every year after that. As we predicted, the globalists planned all along to use COVID to scare people into getting annual injections. Nobody knows what's in these injections or how they will affect human health in the medium and long term.
What Does this Bode for Humanity?
However, there are more than enough revelations available to make a highly educated analysis of the whole scenario. There is a global UN RESET in the works. This RESET is to establish a new world order, with the entire virtual reality of the old MATRIX being dismantled and scrapped. This means that the "WESTERN Powers" are on the way out and the "EASTERN Powers" are now in charge of world order. It also means that the massive overpopulation of the recent 100 years is being corrected.
Depopulation is the obvious goal of the covid scam and one of the primary methods for accomplishing this is the "vaccine". There are lots of other depopulation agendas at play, as there has been all along during the past 200 years of the prior RESET. With 7.4 billion humans existing on the planet, this is no small task and will require time. The phase one operation, now fully operational, will take the "Western" segment of this large population down by a factor of 70%, or more. This involves taking out more than one billion humans.
The timing on this operation is spelled out in the UN Agenda 2030, a component of the UN Agenda 21. By 2025, The US, Canada, Britain, Western Europe, Australia and NZ will be depopulated by at least 70%.
Speaking to ChurchMilitant.com, academic and mental-health ethicist Niall McCrae noted that "the report's prediction that 70% of COVID-19 deaths will be of dual-vaccinated people is quite startling."
"Clearly these pseudo-scientific modelers would like us to be locked down ad infinitum, but do they know something that governments and public health authorities aren't telling us?" Dr. McCrae asked.
The academic slammed the study's "Alice-in-Wonderland logic, 'following the nonscience' down a rabbit hole" since "the report states, 'this is because vaccine uptake has been so high in the oldest age groups,' and that 'this is not the result of vaccines being ineffective, merely uptake being so high.'"
McCrae elaborated in scientism-speak:
"We already know that for two to three weeks after the injection, elderly and vulnerable people are at increased risk of serious respiratory infection, due to lowering of immunity. That's why there was a surge in deaths after vaccination rollout, with the evidence most stark in countries with the highest vaccination numbers; such as Hungary, Israel, Serbia, Gibraltar and the United Arab Emirates."
Even more concerning is the report's warning of a longer-term risk to the vaccinated. Will they be more prone to COVID-19 variants or to other viruses, as Vanden Bossche suggested? No, there are no covid disease or variants. This is a fabricated concept to induce the ignorant to voluntarily take the vax.
McCrae answered as follows:
"In the old joke when someone asks an Irishman for directions, and he says, 'I wouldn't start from here,' I fear for those who took the jab and thought that the road ahead would be safe and straightforward."
You are being played out to the hilt. There are enough of these so-called expert windbags around to fill everyone with doublespeak dribble ad infinitum. All they have to do is keep the ignorant element of the population confused for a little longer and humans will seal their own fate by believing in TV, allopathy and government psychopaths.
The facts could hardly be more obvious but the terribly fearful will do most anything to avoid seeing the facts. The world-wide human population will stand at one-half billion by 2050, just as the 'Guidestones' predict. There will be no more illusions of virtual freedom and ownership of personal property. Humans will have been returned to their status as slaves or serfs, just as they have always been for 135,000 years.
It is totally possible that by the end of the 21st century, all humans will have been replaced by entities that offer superior capabilities with much greater efficiencies and no need to implement elaborate control schemes and deceptions any longer. Everyone should know that the human body is just a small bag of dirt, common elements from the Earth, or whatever planet they inhabit.
Modern scientism will never know or acknowledge that the primary aspect of all living animals, plants, invertebrates and other life forms is not of the physical realm. You can study the topic of metaphysics, found in the archives of this site, to learn about how it all works.
A clue…when your physical body returns to the dirt, you are not dead, but only meta-morpho-sized back to the energy plane of existence.


text:
postcapitalist.design
I. The Commodity-Machine
IntroductionA. Late CapitalismB. Postcapitalism
II. Peer Designing
IntroductionA. DesignersB. Peers
III. Open Blueprints
IntroductionA. BlueprintsB. Openness
IV. Maker Machines
IntroductionA. MachinesB. Makers
propositionssummaryreferencesacknowledgementsdownload PDF
II.B. Peers
Redesigning P2P production
1. Assembling modules into systems
2. Hacking Households, forking OpenStructures
3. Listening to commoner subjectivities
A red plastic cylinder bracketed in a wooden frame on skate wheels, attached by a hose to a brush with matching red bristles [fig. 5]. An assemblage of laser-cut, CNC-milled or 3D-printed pieces, together with some standard industrial components and a recuperated motor. This short description of an Improvised Vacuum modestly indicates that it is built around a plastic thermos – one may think of bricolage, creative reuse or "IKEA hacks", and proof that users can be smarter than designers by repurposing their products in entirely unexpected ways. Without context, it would appear to be a one-off, quirky, idiosyncratic designer object; a provocative piece illustrating DIY that is destined for exhibitions, and never to be used, let alone to enter production. As part of the OpenStructures project however, it stands as evidence of the alternative value circuits that some designers already inhabit. By extension, it hints at how mundane, household items would be designed and produced in an alternate universe, perhaps one in which exchange relations are absent.
Fig. 5. Improvised Vacuum, by Jesse Howard for OpenStructures
Transparent Toaster comes in two sizes, regular and "industrial", stretched along its length the way a limousine is to an ordinary car [fig. 6]. Perhaps this is meant to suggest an infinite possibility of sizes, a steel mesh that can be as long as the number of bread slices to be toasted concurrently. It has no sophisticated spring mechanism, and no timer to ensure perfect crispness; it is a structurally transparent toaster stripped to the bare bones. It comes with a single-page assembly guide where every piece is referenced and sourced, as off-the-shelf components, OpenStructures-compatible parts and a repurposed heating element. What does the physical transparency of the object reveal about the aesthetics and ethics of its material cycles? What does the materiality of objects tell about the conditions of their production?
Fig. 6. Transparent Toaster, by Jesse Howard for OpenStructures
The OS WaterBoiler is not your usual plastic moulded case kettle that could once be bought dirt-cheap from the nearest big-box retail store, before breaking down or melting away, never to be repaired nor recycled. Neither is it a special edition reissue of a Bauhaus design, nor a postmodern monument made for the Italian brand Alessi, targeting the tastes and budgets of those looking for more than the ordinary plastic kettle. Instead, the OS WaterBoiler is a research project on the material flows that create assemblages of parts and components. It has multiple iterations that are a result of different processes of production – the version destined for single-unit limited production has parts that are either self-produced or bought at a local retail, whereas a 100- or 1000-unit production scenario mixes local production with internationally supplied components [fig. 7]. Against the inevitability of the standard plastic kettle for the mass market, it hypothetically activates a multiplicity of alternatives that are adaptable to the local economy. Can this object provide insight into how home appliances may be composed and assembled in an alternative globalisation?
Fig. 7. OS WaterBoiler, by Jesse Howard for OpenStructures
All three objects are designed by Jesse Howard, in collaboration with Thomas Lommée, and all share a common logic and are part of the larger OpenStructures project in which Lommée and his collaborators are engaged. This project and its offsprings/spinoffs constitute the main case studies of this chapter, primarily due to their unfamiliar appearances, but essentially because of their unconventional designing process. As reminded in the previous chapter, beneath their shiny appearance, commodities mask the social relations in their creation. Would it be possible for product design beyond the commodity-machine to do the opposite, that is, to reveal, to render legible the labour conditions of the design within the materiality of the objects themselves? OpenStructures, through its reliance on open standards and distributed modularity, is highly illustrative due to the strong correlation it presents between its physical features and the organisation of its development. In this section, I explore how and why this project became a symbolic early example of the rejuvenated interest in values that were lost with the throw-away consumerism induced by global commodity flows of recent decades. That said, rather than treating my case studies as examples of DIY or participatory design, as defined in the previous section, I consider them to be rather attempts to adapt peer-production principles to design, and in doing so, they constitute interventions that negotiate the modalities of design labour away from market-based practices, and towards commons-based forms of value production. They may not instantly abolish the categories of designer, maker and user, although they do manifest a new kind of designer – one that is less concerned with occupying the privileged position between the manufacturer and user, and more interested in redesigning the modalities of design labour itself.
The OpenStructures project was introduced with a simple yet ambitious formula: "everyone designs for everyone" (OS, About), which can be understood to be in direct contrast to the solitude of Do-It-Yourself and its libertarian or individualist connotations, In short, this is a project that is meant to bring people together on a common ground. In order to facilitate the mutual design process, "Common design guidelines" provide some "rules of thumb" that are worked out in advance (OS, Guidelines).[1] The first principle is to design for disassembly, in which no glue, tape or nails are allowed so that the structural integrity of every component is maintained, and by extension, repairs, upgrades and hacks are encouraged. The second principle is to opt, whenever possible, for infinitely recyclable materials so that the pieces can be reborn as a resource when no longer serving as components. These two principles are common to other design standards, such as Cradle2Cradle. What sets OpenStructures apart is the third principle – the OS Grid, consisting of 4x4cm squares as the basis of a 60x60cm OS Ruler. The grid and the ruler impose dimensions, assembly points and diameters that are meant to make every part, component, or structure compatible with each other —a common denominator for things, or, as it is often suggested, a Meccano or Lego kit for useful objects. Collaboration can be a principle to strive towards, or can be integrated into the project by design. OpenStructures intends the latter approach -- like an open jigsaw puzzle, pieces created by anyone can fit into anybody else's composition. If circular principles like Cradle2Cradle are for materials, and second-hand circuits are for entire objects, OpenStructures enables and encourages the circulation of components of modular systems that "should generate objects of which it is not entirely clear anymore who designed them" (De Decker). Each part, component, or structure is documented and indexed in an online database —a Library of Babel for things.
At first sight, this level of standardisation may seem to imply severe restrictions and rigid rules, and to be at odds with the values of freedom and autonomy associated with DIY.[2] Embracing open standards and interoperability, however, can be beneficial in efforts to counter the fragmentation and incompatibility of self-made, and therefore unique, components. This principle is, after all, also at the core of networked technologies – without telecommunication standards, the Internet would simply not exist. It is no coincidence that peer production first became apparent and effective in software development. The immateriality of software provided the ideal conditions for the development of successful examples of peer production, where Internet-based collaboration requires little investment other than labour time and already-existing hardware, thus facilitating the contributions of others. The organisation of software and hardware design along the lines of P2P principles can be comparable to the valorisation of creativity and knowledge production. However, it has been extensively debated whether the methods of software development can be as successful in the domain of product design, where upfront costs and investment imperatives are unavoidable. After all, without raw materials, shaping moulds or physical prototypes, not many products can be designed. Still, OpenStructures follows the models initiated in software, with the intention being to adapt them to physical objects. It does this by encouraging modularity of design and the self-appointment of tasks, and arranges collaborations in autonomous temporalities (as opposed to real-time collaborations). Modularity is the key to countering the division of labour, and subsequently, to lowering the threshold for participation. Smaller sub-projects are more manageable than vast design problems, and subdivisions and components are useful for the distribution of tasks in a project, each having autonomy in their respective roles. However it is yet to be determined if the supply of free creativity can match the demand of specific development tasks, or in other words, if the tension between the holistic solutions to design problems and modular contributions to distributed development can be resolved. Lommée expresses a clear preference for the latter approach:
Designing within certain common standards will require a different mindset from all stakeholders of the design process. In order to think "within the box", in order to accept and embrace the new opportunities that emerge out of common restrictions, we need to acknowledge that we are part of a bigger whole, rather than being the whole itself. It requires us to give up the myth of creating "something new", something that "hasn't been done before", and to replace it by a willingness to dissolve into bigger projects that just make common sense. This new mindset will severely damage the romantic ideal of the "designer-creator" and shift it towards the "designer-collaborator". ('Esperanto' 95)
Lommée encourages the new generation of designers to both cultivate humble approaches to define their own roles, and to search together for ever bigger, collective goals. Global collaborative projects like Wikipedia or Linux are, according to Lommée, "challenging —and outperforming— the individual achievements of some of our brightest, leaving us with no other choice than to acknowledge the limits of our individual projects and participate in these larger collusive processes" ('OpenStructures' 68). In comparison to taking part in such grand projects, the lone designer figure of the present appears old-fashioned and outdated, as the genius inventor of early industrial innovations. The underlying assumption is that a single designer (or alternatively, a design studio with a hundred workers) that secretly develops closed and "finished" objects from scratch cannot compete with globally connected, swarming creativity that relentlessly improves and diversifies the outcome? OpenStructures responds to the latest developments in network technologies as well as maker cultures by presenting itself as research in modularity, meant "to rethink its potential within a network context —because we live in a network context" (Lommée, interview). Ultimately, modularity is not sought as a functionalist end-goal in terms of how objects interact, but as a means of coming up with more collaborative design principles, based on how designers interact. Instead of one designer proposing a closed system of objects with many uses, OpenStructures brings together many designers into an open system each time for the development of a single-use object. In this way, the objects mirror their development, in that it is through modularised design work that modular designs emerge. This is equally valid at the opposite end of the spectrum, as when products are designed in-house with the highest level of secrecy, as exemplified by Apple (Julier, Object 479), the resulting objects are as integrated and sealed off as the company itself. Design products themselves can thus become legible from an analysis of the organisation of their design labour. That said, things are rarely designed once and for all, as designs are subject to transformations over time, and even more so if they are open-ended, modular and collaborative projects. In the next section, I explore how modifications and reappropriations are negotiated among "designer-collaborators", or peer designers.
[1] As the main source of information for OpenStructures (as well as later case studies) is their online presence, most references are given without page numbers.
[2] It may also indicate as a very designerly expression of an obsessive-compulsive behaviour; see the neat arrangement of components over the grid.
The OS Boiler and Transparent Tools were only part of the initial batch of home appliances that Jesse Howard worked on. In 2014, he led a group of designers, hackers and makers that responded to a callout to develop "Hacking Households" as part of the Biennial of Design in Ljubljana. After a 3-day kick-off gathering where Thomas Lommée presented the OpenStructures project, they continued collaborating via online brainstorming tools, and met a few times to accelerate the process, only six months before the exhibition opening. The project resulted in a collection of fans and a mixer, all built around a rotational motor, thus sharing a common logic and interchangeable components. At the time of the exhibition, the basic fan was functional, including its electronic components, while the heater and mixer remained in the early prototype stages due to time constraints. The video accompanying the project features stop-motion animated components that change dimensions according to given parameters, and in which objects seem to self-assemble without any human agency. [fig. 8] In fact, the only human intervention depicted is a hand switching on the fan, first with a button and then via a smartphone. A voice-over calmly explains the process, with additional text overlays that to provide emphasis:
Fig. 8. Hacking Households video
This is a fan. Its life is composed of four steps. You buy it, you use it, it breaks, you throw it away. This object is closed —let's start from scratch.
This is a block. You can define its width or its height. You can also change its shape, or change its material. Now you have a collection of blocks —and this is an object.
This is another object —a fan. You can adjust its height, or change the number of blades, their shape or their colour. You can add blocks that add new sophisticated interfaces to the fan. (…)
You can add a block that extends the fan's function, turning it into a heater. Or the same blocks and components can be recombined, transforming it into a complete new object — a mixer. Iterating this process can generate a family of devices in which functional blocks and structures are shared among different objects, and each new object can evolve from existing ones —a whole ecosystem of open products. (Hacking Households)
A recombination of components, generative structures, an ecosystem of open products – this is the set of promises made by OpenStructures. Then what exactly sets this project apart? After all, it seems to comply with the 1rules of thumb1 of disassembly, recyclability, and to a certain extent, grid compatibility. Yet there is no mention of OpenStructures as an inspiration, nor are the designs available on the database. Does this implicit "declaration of independence" reveal the limits of collaborative design principles? This fragmentation of open-modular systems may appear to be a failure to engage designers in production for the platform, especially for OpenStructure, which claims to be "the most diverse modular system in the world" (qtd. in King). However, instead of seeking strictly active collaboration and collective decision making, it can also be seen as a respectful distance between likeminded yet autonomous projects that contribute to a larger common pool of knowledge. Here we encounter a principle that has clearly been adopted from software development: "forking", referring to the proposal of a derivative that retains aspects of an open project while developing other aspects further, without necessarily claiming to be the definitive progression of the original. Howard gives several reasons for choosing a forking approach. While the Hacking Households team are familiar with and sympathetic to the OpenStructures principles, the exploration of parametric processes was prioritised over the finalisation of definitive objects, and since then, their investigation has shifted towards logistics and economics, or in Howard's words, "designing the system in a way that bridges the design world to the maker world", where such objects can be developed further. Lommée equally shares such concerns, and there would seem to be space for cross-pollination, increasing the chance of generating diverse strategies.
The results of such mutual inspirations are apparent in the more recent video introducing the OpenStructures project. [fig. 9] Similar to the Hacking Households video, it also features a stop-motion animation of objects over a blank background, but without a voiceover. It begins with an object entering the spotlight to applause and a drum roll – a Lamp Shade, designed by Marianne Cardon (FR), prototyped at FabLab Brussels (BE) and produced through vacuum forming. The Lamp Shade hops onto a perforated panel, held together by a shelf pin, a wooden stick, a rivet and a screw, all of which are found to be compatible with the holes that match the OS grid specifications. The Lamp Shade then whirls around and doubles itself, meets a wooden baseplate and a laser-cut half metal arrow to become a Bedside Lamp, "configured by" Marianne Cardon and containing OS parts by Pia Jacques. The next adventure of the Lamp Shade develops together with the evolution of the 3D printed Clip 1.0, designed by Maxime Loiseau. The lamp first reveals Clip 1.1, edited by Florian Bédé, and made through additive manufacturing, and then Clip 1.2 by Marianne Cardon, made through a sintering technique. The duo is joined by a handcrafted marble baseplate designed by Christiane Hoegner, and then assembled with a standard wooden stick and custom ball joint plates to become a Desklamp "configured by" Thomas Lommée. In the third, comical act, all of the previous components make a final apparition, accompanied by a tube scaffolding and a car clip. They gather on top of the OS grid, extending to the horizon, and attempt to self-assemble once more, this time becoming a dysfunctional composition that quickly comes apart, to the amusement of the invisible audience. They neatly fall into place over the grid, and the tagline is spoken –each word by a different voice: "OpenStructures: It all works together or it doesn't work at all." Instead of a chorus chanting in absolute harmony, this rendering of a collaboration does not seek perfectly coordinated efforts; but rather endorses individuality to the point of embracing dissonance.
Fig. 9. OpenStructures video
It is not only the objects that seem to be animated with intent, as their designs also have a life of their own. Each successive generation is placed on an evolutionary tree, carrying forward a genetic inheritance that is either expressed in mathematical formulae or complemented with version numbers, bringing product design all at once closer to biological structures, as well as to the programming language. Interest in generative and interchangeable systems comes not only from technical reasoning, it also expresses a sensibility to ecological systems. For the OpenStructures project, the ecological parallels are made explicit in the "structural buildup" of different scales. [fig. 10]
Fig. 10. "Anatomy of an open modular system"
Borrowing from biology, the 4 cm by 4 cm squares are proposed as equivalent to cells, the parts (panels or beams) correspond to tissue, the components (such as drawers) to organs, the structures (kitchen or bathroom) to systems (respiratory or digestive) and the superstructures (like a house) to organisms. This echoes the long-standing influence of biomimicry in design, the interest in growth patterns and the fascination with scales that date back to the Arts and Crafts movement, to metabolist architecture, or to the 1977 documentary film "Powers of Ten" by designers Charles and Ray Eames. What is novel is that open modularity offers a compelling imitation of evolutive mechanisms. "It adds the dimension of time" to design processes that are otherwise marked by a few sudden jumps and plenty of dead-ends (Lommée, Open Modular Systems). Contributors to a project do not collaborate in real-time, but rather build upon the previous works of others. Instead of conceiving objects from scratch, "they are upgrading, restoring and adding layers to an existing tissue" ('OpenStructures' 69), and knowledge gets transferred and accumulated over time. For Lommée, this has far deeper social implications:
Each design object becomes a prototype, an update, a new version. If we shift from project to process, failure becomes opportunity and criticism becomes feedback, a different perspective we need to further develop and improve our ideas. If we see our society as something 'under construction', rather than something 'accomplished', we will free up space for progress. ('OpenStructures' 69)
To see an object as a modest update to a collective effort instead of a proud achievement of an individual is not an insignificant request in a professional culture that is dominated by designer-brands, in a consumer culture where every new product is "revolutionary", and in a civilisation where the cult of the author as a solitary genius has been established ever since the Renaissance (Stillinger). Questions of authorship have become even more ambiguous in the context of firms that employ, control and own the creative labour of hundreds of designers under the banner of a single starchitect (Picon). After all, authorship and authority are not only related etymologically, as creative production grants makers exclusive rights over what can be done with that work in terms of ownership, circulation and modification. In this context, the absence of humans (designers, manufacturers and even users) from the assembly process in favour of objects and components "coming alive" is striking, although stop motion animation has become a recurrent strategy employed in such presentation videos. Several reasons for this can be put forward. First, downplaying the designer makes sense, considering the fact that there is no individual designer to which the object can be attributed, hence the credit is given not for designing, but for "configuring". The same kind of shift in roles may be true also for the manufacturers, since they are supposedly supplanted by digital fabrication tools, with manual labour becoming redundant as they are subsequently reduced to the role of machine operators. Finally, the users of such objects can no longer be signified by the passive consumer stereotypes, but by more ambiguous subjectivities. What remains is, therefore, the objects themselves, in an aesthetic treatment that is not exactly one of commodity fetishism, and yet still expressing a relationship between things that exceeds their use-value. In the following section I will subject the case study to theoretical debates on the potentials and pitfalls of peer production, and investigate what values are produced or embodied in such projects.
The goal of this chapter was to identify the organisational forms under which design practices lead to commoning, in which the current conditions of designers were theorised from a labour perspective, and to discuss the shifting approaches to design. A value-based analysis of design labour enabled me to see beyond the definitions of the latest trends and to visualise the broader dynamics. Designers are subject to either hierarchical or competitive working environments that conflict with design principles and ethics, and while there are increased opportunities for cooperation between designers, manufacturers, users and other stakeholders, collaborations between freely associated designers are not exactly widespread. While peer-to-peer theory has been an appropriate framework for the identification and examination of the commons-based valorisation of design labour, several critical challenges have been identified to the successful adaptation of these principles to product design. I put forward OpenStructures as a prime example of peer-to-peer principles applied and adapted to product design. This case study offers suggestions of how to overcome these difficulties through the introduction of open standards, distributed modularity and the forking of contributions. It hints at how designer-to-designer collaborations can be encouraged, organised and valorised, and testifies how peer-produced objects can reveal the organisation of their design labour, unlike the masking of social relations on the surface of commodities. What sets OpenStructures apart is the role of the designers, which cannot be explained entirely within the field of DIY or maker cultures, as they should instead be considered as designer-commoner subjectivities. This is why I conclude this chapter with an interview with Lommée, the initiator of OpenStructures. In listening to a designer-commoner subjectivity, my intention is not to take their words about their practice for granted, but to question the intentions, considerations and positions of this emergent subject. This will contribute to mapping where OpenStructures succeeds and fails, and the limitations of peer designing.
Thomas Lommée expresses his belief that "it is not the object that needs to be redesigned (...), but it is actually systems that produce the objects that need to be rethought" (interview). In other words, a designer must first redesign him/herself before designing anything else, since the designer is also part of that system. Such an open invitation with existential implications can be a catalyser as much as a paralyser. In a system where everything from the smallest component to the largest superstructure is to be redesigned for everyone, where does one begin? Indeed, without concrete goals as part of a more extended project "roadmap", there is the risk of spreading the attention too thin over several fields or objects at the same time. When questioned about this lack of direction, Lommée states that he is aware of it, and claims that his approach is to leave it radically open intentionally for the first 6–7 years, and to experiment without limitations, regardless of whether it leads to successes or failures. Some patterns eventually emerge, with scaffolding systems, bikes and other small vehicles being the most promising fields so far. The other case studies addressed in the following chapters all have a much narrower focus in the development of a single item, and yet they remain an open-ended process that is still open to improvements and diversifications of the object. Lommée, however, prefers to approach his design project as a question rather than an answer, because "it allows you to try things out, and perhaps fail" (interview). As is the case with scientific inquiry, individual failure is no longer a failure if it generates collective learning, a common sense, and this apparent modesty has to be one of the qualities that sets OpenStructures apart. Lommée even confesses, "It is true that some things that I made don't work, it's really absurd" (interview). When asked if this is why OpenStructures was dubbed an "Esperanto of objects" by Domus Magazine – an admirable and beautiful idea of a common language that never fully materialised, he responds that almost all open projects have this limitation in common. Just like a language, OpenStructure is meant as an infinitely generative system in which designers and their designs understand and reconfigure each other.
There have been other modular and self-assembled systems, including such significant antecedents as the works of Ken Isaacs as well as Enzo Mari's Autoprogettazione, both from the 1970s. These were groundbreaking projects that countered industrial production by encouraging users to become producers. While such projects left their mark on design history, their impact remained limited, if not overwhelmed by globalised commodity flows. They were, after all, developed by a single designer and destined to individualised self-production, mass participation in design processes not yet being an option. It could be argued that modularity has been somewhat of a holy grail of industrial design, with everything fitting perfectly together, derived from a common language, leaving great freedom for adaptation according to needs and desires. Can OpenStructures succeed where previous projects have failed? Can it deliver anything unprecedented? There are two contradictory signals that can be traced in the language employed to describe the purpose of the project. To begin with, the project declares a maximalist "ultimate goal" that includes everyone and everything all at once: "to initiate a universal, collaborative puzzle that allows the broadest range of people —from craftsmen to multinationals— to design, build and exchange the broadest range of modular components, resulting in a more flexible and scalable built environment" (OS, About). Since the first time the modernist project was contested (and subsequently abandoned), no designer has dared to formulate an agenda in the manner of the early industrial design manifestos of universalism, broad adoption and harmony reestablished. The OpenStructures slogan "it all works together or it doesn't work at all" also expresses such grand all-or-nothing ambitions, an ambiguity in line with the postcapitalist project of redesigning everything. On the other hand, this attitude is nonetheless counterbalanced by the careful wording of a cautious and modest research programme. The project is defined on its website as an experiment that "tries to find out what happens if" an open modular system is adopted, and "what the opportunities and limitations" are, "and under which conditions it will prove to be most efficient and favourable" (OS, About). Similarly, when questioned about his ambitions, instead of proselytising the superiority of open modular systems in order to impose them on everyone, Lommée insists his aim is not to make everything modular. He expresses his wish being to reach to only 1% of designers and makers, which would be for him already an exceptionally diverse and valuable system. The paradox between offering infinite adaptability while avoiding the mainstream is best captured in Lommée's prediction that "The next big thing will be a lot of small things" (Small) – which was a slogan that was immortalised in a mural at the University of Ghent. Perhaps this can be read as a multiplicity of smaller commons replacing one big commodity-machine.
It is in the same spirit that Lommée qualifies his design studio as "pragmatic utopian" (an oxymoron used also by the architect Bjarke Ingels). This is a fitting description for a designer-commoner: while new opportunities and cultures may be emerging, there is no indication of a complete overhaul of the economic system yet in sight —the challenge is then to negotiate a prefigurative pragmatism with a sense of speculative utopianism. Lommée states in no uncertain terms that he does not believe one system will replace the other, claiming "sometimes the commons will do a better job, other times the classical systems will prevail" ('Esperanto'). This lack of a clear-cut directionality leads Lommée, among others, to endorse and navigate both worlds, expecting that in all likelihood market and commons-based regimes will most likely cohabit. It would seem likely that where the two models overlap and result in hybrid forms, economic mutants with both proprietary and collective characteristics will emerge. This ambivalent stance is indicative of the generalised "identity crisis" that many similar projects experience when they confront the reality of the economy and are dominated by the disciplinary power of the market. While recognising that "the open-source hardware movement is based on a desire to create new economies of production" (qtd. in King), Lommée also celebrates the marketplace as the "ultimate forum" (OS, About). At the same time, he affirms that "OS is not something that can be marketed — the moment you market it, it starts to self-destroy" (qtd. in Sacchetti). He is careful to distinguish between "open modularity" and "open-source", suggesting that the modular system is open to anyone to add components, although the existing components may not necessarily be open-sourced themselves. He is not against the intellectual protection of some components, mainly due to the upfront investment costs that are necessary for their development. Lommée questions, however, "what happens if a garage maker open-sources something and a big company downloads it and has the means to pay for that mould, and they get even richer with your idea?" (interview). Just like a commoner, he distinguishes between sharing with other commoners for mutual benefit and allowing a free-riding capitalist to steal his labour. This dilemma will be addressed in the next chapter with specific terms of licensing, although it is already apparent that just like any other commons, modalities of inclusivity and access depend on the contribution of participants, protecting the commons against simply "giving away" to free-riders.
This carefully welcoming attitude towards collaboration strikes me as a refreshing stance when compared to how creative workers are usually portrayed. They are presented either as a daring entrepreneurs in cut-throat competition, or a self-exploited and isolated victim of precarity (De Peuter and S. Cohen, in Oakley and O'Connor 305). Instead, it is with attentiveness to the community that the designer-commoner transcends individualism, however deeply engrained that might be. One part of that effort necessitates being able to attract and retain peer producers to the project in the first place, which is a constant challenge for Lommée: "I also have a responsibility towards the users, because otherwise they just go to another forum. I have to make this platform the most successful, the most attractive, open, transparent vehicle, if not, I won't have a community" (interview). In that sense, the community becomes the ultimate asset, or the infrastructure that sustains all the activities, and there needs to be a continuous flow of reasons and benefits for coming back, to keep contributing and bringing in new collaborators. If one challenge is to broaden the base, the other effort is to maintain consistency and harmony within the community. In another interview, Lommée insists that "the use of OS should derive from a shared mindset (...), its users should understand the value of OS and share this kind of common value, or believe in the sense of doing and designing things in such a way" (qtd. in Sacchetti). The normative tone and the insistence on a common understanding and shared values may appear dubious, especially for a system that prides itself in its diversity and modularity. Still, not unlike the grid itself, a coherent social code is necessary to make the openness regenerative and sustainable. What remains undefined is whose values are to be prioritised, and how will the community get to modify and modulate them. There is no indication that the sense of community around such a distributed, modular system would ever evolve into a lasting and reliable cooperative endeavour. That said, there are plenty of reasons why creative labourers would institute worker cooperatives that provide livelihoods, autonomy, solidarity and community all at once, while contributing to cultural commons at large (Sandoval 67).
Throughout this survey of designers as immaterial workers, co-creators and peer producers, I have determined several preconditions for the actualisation of their latent commoner potentials. Firstly, peer-designers need to be able to sustain themselves and maintain viable livelihoods if they are to engage in alternative value practices. Secondly, the establishment of open design cooperatives based on the free association of peer-designers appears to be essential for the reproduction of commoner subjectivities. Thirdly, the success or failure of such commons-producing design communities depends on their capacity to claim an autonomous sphere for the valorisation of their labour. Ultimately, if these institutions of collective action are to tackle collective design problems and co-design an exit from capitalism, an alignment of individual, collective and social goals needs to take place. The analysis of design artefacts and discourses from a labour perspective revealed remarkable developments in the networked, cooperative labour relations that exist among designers and in the reproduction of designer-commoner subjectivities. While they remain entangled with the commodity-machine, to a certain extent, their latent potentials could still be made legible through the lens of commoning. These case studies inhabit both temporalities simultaneously, and constitute the first instance of postcapitalist design practices in this study. Where the journey of a designer subject ends, the autonomous journey of a design project begins. In the next chapter, I investigate how commoning occurs in the circulation of open-source design projects.
Open Blueprints
Instituting the "Wikipedia of Things"
Start your own web page with Mobirise


A schematic view of the rear of the proposed new Havre de Grace High and Middle School building for which Harford County will start borrowing money to build through a January bond sale. Construction is expected to begin this spring.
A resolution authorizing the sale of the consolidated public improvement bond issue of 2018 was introduced at Tuesday evening's County Council meeting.
The resolution sets in motion a process which will culminate Jan. 23, 2018, when the county receives electronic sealed bids from underwriters and completes the bond sale to the bidder offering the lowest interest rate.
The $50 million covers some 75 individual projects; however, almost $29.7 million is for just two projects, the completion of the new Youth's Benefit Elementary School replacement building in Fallston ($7.8 million) and a new Havre de Grace High and Middle school building ($21.9 million).
On Dec. 4, the Harford County Board of Education awarded final design and construction contracts totaling $81.6 million for the Havre de Grace school project. Those contracts must also approved by the Maryland Board of Public Works, since the state will contribute about 25 percent of the project cost. The board is expected to vote Jan. 10.
A spring groundbreaking is expected, with completion in 2020, according to Harford County Public Schools officials.
The Youth's Benefit project is largely complete. The final section of the new building, housing upper grades, was occupied in November. The total project cost is about $37.1 million, according to HCPS.
For large, expensive building projects, the county typically sells bonds in stages, since not all the money is needed at once, thus saving some interest costs, county finance officials have said.
The bonds being sold next month cover projects that have received prior budget authorization, as well as bonding authorization from the council, according to Council President Richard Slutzky. As a result, the council does not need to hold a public hearing on Monday's resolution, which Slutzky said is "not a legislative act." It will take effect once the council approves the bond sale bid during a special meeting on the afternoon of Jan. 23.
The resolution sets up the bid procedure and names the bond paying agent and covers other legal particulars, John Devine, the county's bond counsel explained.
The bonds will be sold at 30-year maturities and will have their credit rating assigned a few days prior to the sale.
County Treasurer Robert Sandlass Jr. said the county received the top AAA rating for its last bond sale from the three major rating agencies. The county borrowed $55 million in February 2017, paying an average interest rate of 2.78 percent.
Slutzky said the high credit rating reflects the county's "positive balance sheet" and is "a manifestation of fiscal responsibility in Harford County government." Good credit ratings mean lower interest rates, Slutzky said, which in turns saves for the county and its taxpayers.
In addition to the two school projects, some of the other projects funded by the upcoming bond sale include circuit courthouse repairs ($650,000), Wheel Creek watershed restoration ($506,000), Prospect Mill Elementary HVAC replacement ($1.1 million), athletic field improvements ($2.1 million), Bush Creek sewage pumping station upgrades ($1.7 million) and the next phases of the Bynum Run parallel sewer line ($4.4 million).