Open Metal Detector Project Charter

[chudster]

Some great wisdom in the discussion.

Looking forward to consensus and enough people to embrace open innovation.

Enough said for now.

Chudster

[WM6]

If your opponent is stronger than you, direct his strength against himself.

Probably better:

If your opponent is stronger than you, then join him.

[Tinkerer]

Lots of good talk, I don't even know where to start answering on all that. So I will just throw out a few ideas to think about. Philosophy instead of physics.

Every problem is a source of opportunities.

Stay one step ahead of the competition.

If your opponent is stronger than you, direct his strength against himself.

Enigmatic? yes, it is supposed to set the little wheels in that box between the ears in motion. Ah, wait, this is old fashion, nowadays it is bipolar junctions.
Anyway, I let you guys think about that while I think up some answers.

Tinkerer

[sinclairuser]

hi all ive been too busy lately to visit here much but saw this thread and had a thought
why cant we choose say tinkerers new method then collectively club together as geotech and apply for patents in the name of tinkerer if we had a project here patented to us that could be the best we could hope for
the thing about patents is even if you "license" someone to make them other parties cant just copy the item comercially
to clarify if i invent a brand new method of md type and i then patent it if i recieve a patent i can allow whoever i like to produce it even for free if thats my choice and thats my idea
we collectively patent "our" idea then develop it here open source this gives us another tool too if a chip is used we can control the software
thats about all the protection we can give our project any thing more and it becomes closed development
thanks ally x

[chudster]

It would take me a whole day to look or download the video with my slow connection, so I have to miss out on that.
The comments say "how true" and I fully believe that.

There have been countless opportunities on this forum for community development of top of the line metal detectors. Why has it not happened?

An example is the TINKERERS TEM method. A truly new method, totally open source, no patent worries, no competition. It has been there for years, available to everybody, since Aziz has fully explained it and supplied LTSpice simulations of the method.

I have invited people to participate for years, again and again, but greed and self-illusion always get in the way.

Why don't we take this and develop a few complete detectors with it, say 5 models, each one designed for a specific task, like nugget hunting, coin shooting /relic, underwater detecting, very deep with very large coil and a pin-pointer to complete the set.

Then we let Silverdog sell the kits for them.

Carl has been incredibly nice allowing this kind of thing on his Forum, nobody else would do that.

As a group, with what we all would learn doing that, might get us to the knowledge level needed to design a detector that had a chance of being commercialized.

Tinkerer

Tinkerer,

Thanks for your input. Those who have been open with me about the questions that I asked that I also shared in return know that I have some knowledge and experience to speak on this. I'll point out the following.

1) It is without doubt that there are commercial interests running around the forums looking for commercial opportunity.
2) There are small inventors running around the forums looking for commercial opportunity and maybe to come up with that 'killer design' that they can profit from
3) Some corporations have the capacity to throw legal and patent resources at the above and it appears that at least one has.
4) Taking BW predicament and thinking a little, it is possible that a half finished idea that is posted on a forum gets improved, patented and that the originator is prevented from using it or even taken to court. Why would someone share?
5) Trust is a fundamental issue because of the above. People are reluctant to say who they are and prefer anonymity. If we were a co-located hobbyist group who met every month in a local community hall and shared coffee and a chat then we would have better trust. I used to do this in computer clubs when I was a teenager. We would not only know each other's names but also what we had for breakfast that morning. We'd break off to a corner and go and work on our pet project. In reality though, we are diverse, culturally, spatially and temporally separated. Many have a preference for secrecy. We only have limited time for our hobby but the good news is that technologies are there to foster long distance collaboration including the forum. You have all bought from ebay right? You probably didn't know the seller so long distance trust is possible and ebay has solved that problem through systems. The same systems won't work for us but we need to better our trust systems.
6) Trust is low. Some people won't even say their names in private and commit to a conference call. I was told that as I was a relative newbie people would not trust me. My answer: I can't go do anything about that. People can google me and see I have no industry connection. Hopefully I won't have to post on the forum for five years before I can help solve this.
7) The desire for personal mastery and to contribute for a purpose is prevented and demotivated by the above. Many people are not here for the profit (see Davor and his 'slimy corporate' comment). They are not here for a regimented job- otherwise they would be sending their resume's to the detector companies. Nothing need change in terms of the fun and autonomy although if you want an end professional 'product' out of it some level of project professionalism is needed.

Now my first HUGE tip is that while what we are doing is at the edge of an emerging trend of new ways that people can network for collaboration ('open innovation' please google that term and read the Wikipedia article). My second HUGE tip is that we are not alone in our dilemma as collaborating hobbyists...... others have already solved part of the puzzle for us and done much of the work. I have made contact with some of them. What they don't have is an aggressive industry player (or players) bent on closed innovation and who probably also like the game the way it is- as someone put it hoovering up the stuff that leaks out. Their game is secrecy and I would argue ours is not and yet many are playing by their rules! Go figure! What is also apparent is that there would be industry players happy to work with us on open innovation.

What we don't have is trust and cohesion to pursue that sense of purpose. Maybe that goes to the nature of gold and not wanting to reveal the details of one's claim? in which case I am reminded of hdphilip's tag line.......

So in specific answer to your post. Yes I could foresee projects under a common banner and structures of trust that also leverage our diversity and gives us purpose beyond the commercial or profit motive and have the framework to protect that. I can foresee that industry players would take us seriously and have trouble to halt our designs and instead want to engage in open innovation much as computer companies like IBM have embraced linux. There will be other copmanies that will not just as some (like microsoft) haven't.

I'd love just to openly publish all this and have the discussion by thread but the hoovering companies, their lawyers and their other supporters just don't need to know some things right now..... I do promise that if we go forward there will be a flurry of business for the metal detector company lawyers and they will have to take us seriously just as microsoft takes linux seriously.

So this this forum is our community hall (and given our circumstances, it is a good one). Decide if you like the corner I am proposing and share a similar sense of purpose. If you do, make yourself a cup of coffee and come over for a chat and we'll figure out how to crack this nut.

If you decide not to get involved early, then when a framework and way of working comes forth (ie the next pot of coffee is ready) I hope you can still wander over and share a brew with us in our corner- although we may have well outgrown a corner by then!

Chudster

[Davor]

Actually I'm all for it. Of all detector flavours my gut feeling says TEM is the way to go. My focus is still mostly in VLF and I believe there are a few more things to contribute there. Lab requirements are also less demanding for VLF. But sentiments aside - TEM has more potential.

Yeah, I'd like to replicate TINKERERS TEM rig and contribute in it's refinement. I believe I could make a low noise frontend with less exotic choice of components to start with, and it just beautifully shows what happens when someone else finds a way - it is easy to refine something that already works. Moodz will spend his monthly food allowance to buy an ADC that really rocks, and a result will be a way to do it for peanuts. Frankly, I'd not be that easy on my wallet so I thank him for his courage.

[tjmlena]

I agree with Tinkerer, but ...

Why not all of us collaborate to develop the best metal detector on Geotech, TEM based, and OPEN SOURCE?
Because we want it all done AND most users have not sufficient knowledge, including me!

After all I'm willing to learn and test, to build pcb´s and to burn diodes. And the most important = Field Testing of prototypes in real field conditions.

AnyOne Is PointeD????

tj.malena

[Tinkerer]

It would take me a whole day to look or download the video with my slow connection, so I have to miss out on that.
The comments say "how true" and I fully believe that.

There have been countless opportunities on this forum for community development of top of the line metal detectors. Why has it not happened?

An example is the TINKERERS TEM method. A truly new method, totally open source, no patent worries, no competition. It has been there for years, available to everybody, since Aziz has fully explained it and supplied LTSpice simulations of the method.

I have invited people to participate for years, again and again, but greed and self-illusion always get in the way.

Why don't we take this and develop a few complete detectors with it, say 5 models, each one designed for a specific task, like nugget hunting, coin shooting /relic, underwater detecting, very deep with very large coil and a pin-pointer to complete the set.

Then we let Silverdog sell the kits for them.

Carl has been incredibly nice allowing this kind of thing on his Forum, nobody else would do that.

As a group, with what we all would learn doing that, might get us to the knowledge level needed to design a detector that had a chance of being commercialized.

Tinkerer

[Carl-NC]

Excellent video!

[chudster]

Regarding the video, its relevant to quote myself.

I understand the challenge you talk about. As a manager though, its disquieting though that the DEC alpha chip was developed to have breakthrough performance without any formal management or project approval and funding from DEC. In fact they did it to prove management wrong. It is amazing what a rabble might do if motivated.

The video is a very good description of the motivation for technical excellence. The subject and theory of the video is well known. Now where is the motivated rabble who wants to achieve mastery and have a sense of purpose?

Chudster

[Aziz]

Superb!

Everyone should watch this, especially managers.

You mean the group of scum, that do almost nothing but want to have the most of the cake?


Yeah, nice vid.

[Qiaozhi]

http://vimeo.com/15488784[/URL]

Superb!

Everyone should watch this, especially managers.

[Davor]

True, but Tinkerer is already quite far from the rest of us in TEM technology. It happens in all walks of creativity - the process occasionally just clogs. You can't motivate it by money or force, it just happens. The best you can do is staying out of the way, and PJ, UF and the rest of the trolls know that instinctively - they stand in the way.

About the reward system, there is a nice and incredibly educational cartoon explaining this stuff at: http://vimeo.com/15488784

In short, once the task at hand requires some rudimentary cognitive skills the monetary bonus schemes stop working.

[IBGold]

Hi all,

The problem is as I see it being currently involved in a development program as coordinator of the Tinkerer GG Detector Project is that only very few of the group members actually input into the project in our case about half it is like pulling teeth to get some members to contribute their expertise so closed group involvement also has its problems and ours is only a group of six.

Regards, Ian.

[chudster]

Hi Chudster,

The current reward system:
1.The raw satisfaction of helping someone
2.The appreciation of others
3.The acclaim of others

Not a brilliant system, but at least you automatically recieve reward No. 1, and maybe 2 and 3 if your lucky. Importantly, rewards are somewhat proportional to the contribution. If you try and make the rewards tangible things then equitable distribution becomes the killer. All ideas and contributions are not created equal, and impartial and informed assessment of ideas\contributions is practically impossible. If you could convince me you had a system that solves that BIG problem and all the problems Carl pointed out, then I might be interested. Not sure if I'd be into the skype thing though... I'm a shy guy.

Midas

I wouldn't want those rewards to change by anything we did. Happy for you to be involved or to see whether you want to get involved later if there is momentum for the status flow. I aim that the problems you mention will be solved by any proposition put forward.

Chudster