SoylentNews

Phoenix666 [soylentnews.org] writes:

Defining open source as "free" is too simple. While it does mean free access to papers, downloads and data, open source focuses primarily on sharing knowledge in order to refine and apply that knowledge. Free, or even inexpensive, is currently hard to come by in research.

"In science, we all have this problem where we pay so much for scientific equipment that it overwhelms our budgets," Pearce says, explaining that a lot of equipment is simple—mechanically speaking—and can even be manufactured with a do-it-yourself 3-D printer like the RepRap.

Pearce proposes that instead of spending millions of dollars every year replacing quickly obsolescent equipment, that money could be redirected to developing open source tools [phys.org] that are "upgradeable and transformable—they will be continuously updated" using digital manufacturing techniques such as 3-D printing.

The benefits could be huge: research would cost less, the equipment would improve each year, grant competition would be less inflamed and educational tools would provide better inspiration and instruction. Outside the lab, open source tools could help spur innovation and diversity in the science manufacturing market. While these big impacts would take time to grow, Pearce and his Michigan Tech Open Sustainability Technology lab did quantify the impact of open source syringe pumps.

Original Submission