Dissertation by Daniel Rymer Trenholme

Wiki House Photo

“OPEN SOURCE DESIGN CAN BE A SMALL ANSWER TO A BIG PROBLEM...” (PARVIN, 2012)

WHO DESIGNS? WHO CONTROLS? EVERYONE? DAN RYMER TRENHOLME ID: 000579364

WikiHouse Photo with Quote

DECLARATION BY CANDIDATE I hereby declare that this dissertation is my own work and has not been submitted for any other award. All other sources of information that have been used in this dissertation have been acknowledged. SIGNED................................................. DATE......................................................

Abstract We live in a paradox society that relies on the consumer driven and economic growth that we as an urban community can no longer afford to sustain. Over the last century, architecture has long been seen as the controlling engine for consumerism and growth, however architects and designers alike are now concerned with the consequences of these on-going problems (Parvin, 2012). As a solution to this problem, we are now entering an era where the open source movement is enabling everyone to design. Advancements in technologies, such as the growth of the internet are now resulting in exclusive resources becoming open, becoming accessible to everyone (Parvin, 2012). It can be seen particularly within the last decade, that open source design development has enabled more and more of us to gain the skills and knowledge to become involved in the design process. This open movement is attempting to change and improve the way we as a community construct and live within our urban environment. This can be positive for the future of our urban environments, but if open source design development allows everyone to design themselves what does this mean for the exclusive designers? Is this also detrimental to the skilled complexities of philosophical design approaches that we as people have learned and crafted for many years? (Thorpe, 2012).

Acknowledgements I would like to thank Dr Shaun Murray and all of the members of D2. A special thank you to WikiHouse co-founder Alastair Parvin for his time to respond to my questions which helped me conclude my research. Secondly another special thank you to Nick Garwolinksi for his time and letting me photograph his property for one of my case studies for the aesthetical section of this dissertation. And lastly but certainly not least a special thank you to Aly Trenholme for your continued help and support with my research.

Photos

Contents

1. Introduction 10 2. Ecology 16 3. Notation 22 4. Instruction 34 5. Aesthetics 40 6. Synthesis 58 7. Conclusion 66 8. Reference Lists 74 9. Appendices and Interviews 80

Word count : 8675

Introduction

What is Open Source Design? Open source design is the development of physical products, systems, and machines that are both hardware and software which are publicly used and shared. The process of open source designing is usually facilitated by the internet and is a collaborative model where final products are designed by users themselves rather than the external exclusive designer (Stikker, 2011). Open source designing has had an enormous impact on the design professions within the last decade and has resulted in a change to the way that many designers are currently operating. The development of technology primarily the internet, is evident towards the consequences of open source designing. Amongst designers, there is much optimism about the new opportunities that open source design approaches can bring and where it may lead to in the future (Stikker, 2011). Open source designing works as an online democratic system which is accessible to everyone in which utilises peopleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s different skills and abilities (Stikker, 2011). Designers have been aware of the economical issues that have affected urban communities such as financial recession and real estate property increases within the housing market, resulting in unaffordable house prices for many people. However the democratic approaches of open source designing are attempting to mitigate these economic problems (Stikker, 2011).

Technology, a driver for consumerism? The process of production and manufacturing of design objects has affected urban communities. It is these communities that have been excessively exposed to the rapid advancing shifts in technologies and this has changed how urban environments economically operate. Economic shifts result in other consequences such as community wealth and status, which determines what people, can and can’t afford, for example housing. It can be emphasised that these problems have contributed to the growth of capitalism and consumerism (Harvey, 2012). Capitalist and consumerist movements have created power structures that communities find themselves subjected to and what is valuable to note is how the design profession is affected by the same problems (Johnson 1994). In relation to technological advancement and keeping this in mind, client markets are growing, becoming global, and more advanced of which many are governing bodies themselves that implement such power structures. It can be argued that it is these client markets that appoint designers to design and build monumental expensive buildings, often having full control of the design more so than the designers (Jamieson, 2011). This can be all well and good for the designer’s fees for their practices, but this is one main example of the issue that occurs within our urban environment which contributes to the growth of the capitalist real estate markets. As well as these existing approaches creating economic issues, the large physical developments that are built from these approaches affects the natural urban environment which is a major issue designers are attempting to tackle (Harvey, 2012). It can be argued that designers should work to their philosophies more and should be made more responsible for the buildings they design and the effects they have on communities. As Johnson states, “...isn’t an architect...a gift to society”? (Johnson 1994, p. 116). “...the public service professionals who’s moral intentions lie within the community, working as humanitarians to improve the well-being of people’s lives.” (Johnson, 1994, p.116).

Of course the blame is not solely on designers as a cause for these concerns, as overwhelming capitalism and consumerism have their part to play in societies general malaise today. But if our urban environments are to become more sustainable in the future then it is ultimately up to designers to start making this change (Thorpe , 2012).

Chronologically, the first case study will look at the purest architectural ideas of Constant Nieuwenhuys, who was a member of the Situationists (who were an anarchic group of architects and theorists), and Rayner Banham, an architectural critic and prolific historian and their proposals for the well being of urban communal living.

Coming back to the essential relationship with regards to technology and its impact on these issues, according to designer Alastair Parvin, cofounder of WikiHouse argues that technological development is the reason why much of society has this consumerist mentality that has forced the majority of communities to conform to these existing consumer trends. Parvin elaborates that if we take more notice of the historical idealists, we can use these developing technologies in a new innovative way and to our advantage if we are to improve the steady state and sustainability of our urban environments (Parvin, 2012).

The second case study will look at cybernetics of the 1970â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s, honing in on Stafford Beerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Cybersyn Project, which was a central computer system using latest technological advancements to govern the economy of Chile.

The three main case studies that will be discussed in this dissertation will connect the relationships between technologies integrated with urban living. Even though all three case studies come from very different perspectives, it can be viewed that they all have the same simple intention; to enable communities to control the design of their own environments.

The third case study will discuss the relationships these case studies have with current contemporary approaches such as open source design methods focusing on WikiHouse as the main example. In a short summary to this introduction, open source design methods are one of many answers to the problems particular with consumerism and growth. However, it can be argued that the method of open source designing does produce its own range of concerns. It relies heavily on technology and open source design software such as SketchUp which will only perform at their best on the latest sophisticated versions. Many people who are not technologically minded would respond to open source design with mistrust scepticism and possibly fear. For example, there is now the reality that a laser-cutting machine can cut a piece of material from a SketchUp model within four hours, whereas this would usually take four months to craft by hand. Some could say that this is the revival of the Luddite era and that technologies and machinery may threaten the individuals livelihood and render all their craftsmanship skills redundant (Stikker, 2011).

Fig.1 Laser Cutting Machine

Ecologies

Current contemporary methods such as open source design development is becoming more crucial as one of many solutions to improve our urban environments. Open source designing focuses on the inhabitants having the main involvement in the design process and it is valuable to reflect on the earlier idea proposals in the 1950’s and 60’s that also had a similar motive.

1. The Situationist Nieuwenhuys & Banham The 1950’s and 60’s onwards was a revolutionary period for urban living. The relationships between technology and living environments became more significant. The idea of anti-capitalist counterculture was explored and expressed by our past influencers. The first example of this was Constant Nieuwenhuys’s New Babylon, which initiates the concept of the offgrid community “...the dissident community that separate themselves from their surrounding consumerist neighbours” (Sadler, 1998, p.31).

Nieuwenhuys developed this idea over several years and contributed to the new possibilities for urban living. This allowed communities to control their own environments within their existing given infrastructures by promoting the idea of self communal construction. Nieuwenhuys attempted to make his idea a reality with his design of a Gypsy Camp that would promote “…the independent nomadic way of living...” (Sadler, 1998, p.31). The friction between the countercultural nomadic movements and consumerism within urban space has a revealing relationship. As expressed within the introduction, development of technologies, particularly since the 1960’s has been a major catalyst on consumerism and growth. Rayner Banham explores this relationship within his idea of The Environment Bubble in 1965, “a self inflating plastic bubble, enabling self sufficiency through the use and operation of cutting edge technologies” (Sadler, 1998, p.37). Banham emphasises that;”...the environment bubble demands the need for high tech performance to operate...” (Sadler, 1998, p.37) and then goes onto state that “...life supporting goods and systems used by these alternative approaches was beyond anything that contemporary consumer capitalism could offer and looked into the birth of a new consumer.” (Sadler, 1998, p.37).

Fig. 2 Master plan of the New Babylon

Not so much in the sense of materialism, but more focused on the comforts of well being and living, Banham’s theory shows that he was engaged in the idea of inhabitants defining their own environments rather than submit to a monumental architecture imposed on them by architects but with a clear intention of integrating technological advancement (Sadler, 1998). The earlier ideas of Nieuwenhuys and Banham were intended to impact and alter the existing communities that conformed to the surrounding commercial growth particularly within dense city areas. Even though consumerism has expanded rapidly since the late 1950’s, these idealistic concepts have essentially failed, yet we as designers have started to notice a shift occur within urban communities through the uses of technologies particularly with the current implementation of open source design development.

2. Stafford Beer’s Project Cybersyn It is valuable if we now compare and explore a slightly later case study to the Situationist movement. In 1971 to 1973, cyber technician Stafford Beer’s cybersyn project, officially known as ‘Project Cybersyn’ located in Chile, is an example of how newly evolved technologies of that time were integrated to control an urban environment (Medina, 2011).

In comparison to the open idealistic intentions of Nieuwenhuys and Banham, Stafford Beer’s idea was similar yet instructed in an entirely opposite method. In the traditional relationship scenario of client appoints architect, Stafford Beer was appointed by Chilean Prime Minister Salvador Allende who authorised the concept for Project Cybersyn to take place. The purpose of this project was political but had a simple objective. It was a computer support system that would control and monitor the national economic factory production in Chile with the integration of the latest technologies (Medina, 2011). The technologies Beer used to design and create this system consisted of various networks of teletex machines within a central operations room that ran on a mainframe central processing unit. Beer emphasised that “...the use of the teletex machines enabled a group network system for all the operators to access the same information at the same time...” (Medina, 2011, p. 21). The moral intention of this project was to improve the Chilean economy using a politically democratic approach. However, due to the instructional approach and execution of this project, it was criticised by political activists for being too autocratic and totalitarian against the Chilean communities who ultimately drove the economic production at that time (Medina, 2011).

Fig. 3 The Operations Room of the Project Cybersyn

3. WikiHouse Moving to a current and contemporary approach, WikiHouse are an organisation that provide an open source construction set which exploits the approaches of open source design development for residential dwellings. In connection to the Situationists and the Project Cybersyn, WikiHouse use current technologies to execute their designs. As previously stated in the introduction, current open source approaches rely heavily on the latest technologies in order to perform. Therefore it is interesting to explore the similarities between Stafford Beer’s Cybersyn technologies compared to WikiHouse’s current technology. The open source design approach that WikiHouse utilise is simple. Using the Google SketchUp application, WikiHouse model each individual component of a domestic dwelling then upload these models onto an online accessible library (Parvin, 2012).

With the application of Google SketchUp, communities can then access this online library to choose the components of a dwelling they aspire to construct (Parvin, 2012). Once these components are chosen, they are then manufactured through a CNC (command numeric control) milling machine (Parvin, 2012). The accessible online library that WikiHouse provide has a similar relationship with the earlier idea of Stafford Beer by utilising technologies to create storage systems of information that more than one person can access at any one time (Medina, 2011). This idea of technological systems also relates to Gordon Pask’s theory that will be explored in the next section. As well as this idea of technological systems, WikiHouse also drive the idea of communal self build; enabling communities to build their own dwellings which connects to the early ideas of Nieuwenhuys and Banham enabling communities to control their own environments (Parvin, 2012).

Fig. 4 (left) The WikiHouse logo Fig. 5 Assembly shell of a WikiHouse structure 21

Notations

Why Nieuwenhuys and Banham, Project Cybersyn and WikiHouse? What is exceptional about these particular three case studies is that though they have very different methods, they all have the same intentions of improving the ways urban communities live and operate. It is interesting to explore further into the ideas of these three cases and investigate their methods of communication in their design intentions and comparing them to more modern contemporary design approaches today (Sadler, 1998).

Approaches and Methods of Nieuwenhuys’s New Babylon

Fig. 6 Conceptual sketch by Nieuwenhuys of the Mobile Labyrinths

As briefly discussed in the previous section, Constant Nieuwenhuy’s New Babylon was of course never built. It can be said that it was purely a utopian idea that “... challenged the masses of the bureaucratic and consumerist societies, driving for the alternatives in the way people lived and worked” (Sadler, 1998, p. 32). Nieuwenhuys’s approach to this idea was of course again opposing the general methodologies of drawing and planning at that time (Sadler, 1998). The relationship between the way the drawings are created and the projects overall intention have a significant link. It can be seen in Nieuwenhuy’s drawing style (left) that the conceptual sketches communicate the idea of a free-living environment; spaces for adaptability and uncongested circulation. The circulatory strategies for the New Babylon idea were important and Nieuwenhuys intended to mitigate the already existing problems such as traffic congestion within his designs. As it can be seen from the drawings, Nieuwenhuys draws the living spaces above the ground on stilts, creating interlinking walkways between them for people to travel on them by foot enabling the traffic to pass underneath (Sadler, 1998). As well as the circulatory strategies, Nieuwenhuys was also engaged in the idea of communal build and development. As Sadler states, “New Babylon, by way of contrast, was designed by Constant to accommodate an ever changing panoply of forms and effects chosen by the New Babylonians themselves” (Sadler, 1998, p.32).

Fig. 7 A further conceptual sketch by Nieuwenhuys of the Mobile Labyrinths showing circulation beneath them

This quite simply communicates that Nieuwenhuys was providing a design to then enable the inhabitants of his design to the take control of it and to adapt it to their needs and requirements (Sadler, 1998). What is also noteworthy is that the idea of The New Babylon was of a monumental scale, “... a continuous structure spreading across the city and countryside.” (Sadler, 1998, p.32). This then suggests that as a solution to counter the issues of dense consumerist urbanisation, the boundaries of the city limits could be expanded to the rural community, according to Nieuwenhuys (Sadler, 1998).

Rayner Banham’s A Home Is Not a House -The Environment Bubble Reyner Banham’s ideas had a similar intent to Constant Nieuwenhuys’s New Babylon by enabling inhabitants to create, adapt and essentially govern their own liveable spaces. This idea is represented in Banham’s The Environment Bubble project A Home is Not A House. What is a noticeable contrast is that Nieuwenhuys uses the idea of space, form and circulation as a way of mitigating issues for a comfortable living environment whereas Banham solely focuses on technologies as a precedent to provide the same results (Sadler, 1998). This image below left is a drawing by Francois Dellegret who worked with Banham on this project. It shows a concentrated diagram of the use of particular technologies that could allow and enable idealistic comfortable living within a dwelling. The equipment is arranged like a network so that each unit works efficiently together (Lucarelli, 2011).

Banham, an ecologist, explored the methods of environmentally friendly living by communicating simple methods such as solar energy storage for heating and electricity. Banham criticised the way the existing dwellings were built and why costly heavy permanent structures were required to contain a dense amount of services and cabling (Lucarelli, 2011). “When your house contains such a complex of piping, flues, ducts, wires, lights, inlets, outlets, ovens, sinks, refuse disposers, hi-fi reverberators, antennae, conduits, freezers, heaters – when it contains so many services that the hardware could stand up by itself without any assistance from the house, why have a house to hold it up?” (Banham, 1965, p.115). Banham believed that lightweight portable structures could be a promising alternative to counter the existing methods of dwelling construction. In relation to Nieuwenhuys’s approaches to the New Babylon, Banham’s A Home Is Not a House was purely intended to provide an adaptable living package to communities and do away with the existing permanent structures that communities were finding themselves constrained to (Lucarelli, 2011).

Fig. 8 (Far Left) - Dellegret’s composition of technologies Fig.9 (Left) - Banhams concept of The Environment Bubble Fig.10 (Top) - 1970’s architects Ant Farm and their inflatable communal living space Fig.11 (Middle) - Ant Farm’s communal living space Fig.12 (Bottom) - Inflatable dome 25

Beer’s methods for his Project Cybersyn As mentioned in the previous section, Stafford Beer’s Project Cybersyn was an experimental project and even though this project was scheduled to operate and manage an environment on a huge scale, it can be argued that it had the same intentions of Nieuwenhuys’s and Banham’s ideas in attempting to improve communities in how they live and work. During the time of the early 1970’s the movement of consumer technologies was on the increase. Stafford Beer used his expertise and knowledge to exploit the uses and operations of technological systems and designed a computer system that would be capable of managing and controlling the entire economic production of Chile. As previously mentioned, the Project Cybersyn was appointed by the democratic Prime Minister, Salvador Allende and it was Allende’s belief that the project could ultimately improve the motivation of factory worker production (Medina, 2011). The diagram below drawn by Basel Birkhauser, emphasises Allende’s democratic aims and objectives of the Project Cybersyn by focusing on the value of the individual worker as the key to a successful operating economic environment (Medina, 2011).

It is intriguing to explore Beer’s strategy and the computational methods that he used for this project. As the purpose of Project Cybersyn was to essentially manage operations on a large scale, sophisticated technologies that could store large amounts of information were required to achieve this. Beer and his team of designers designed the Opsroom for projects which was quite simply the central room where all of the operations of the Project Cybersyn would take place (Medina, 2011). Other computational equipment such as an algedonic teletex machines and data feed machines were used to record information. These machines had screen interfaces which were attached onto the walls to allow multiple viewing of information for the Cybersyn operators who would sit in the operation chairs arranged in circular form (right) in the centre of the room. The operation chairs (fig 17-18) were equipped with data fed control panels on the armrests which allowed the occupants to equally access and control data that was displayed on the screens inside the room. The geometric buttons on the armrests contributed to a pleasing aesthetic replacing the conventional keyboard and monitor which were more traditional mechanisms (Medina, 2011).

Fig. 13 “The worker is at the heart of all viable ecanomic systems” (Medina, 2011, p.21)

Fig. 14 The Project Cybersyn Ops-Room. A representation of the Star Trek Enterprise’s control room

Fig. 15 Studio set of the Star Trek Enterprise; an uncanny comparison to the Project Cybersyn’s control room

Fig. 16 Project Cybersyn’s wall mounted data feed screens

Fig. 17 & 18 Project Cybersyn’s Ops-Room chairs

The Architectural Relevance of Cybernetics by Gordon Pask Gordon Pask, similar to Stafford Beer, was also a cyber technician in the 1950’s explored the uses of technologies and computational systems within his research. At the beginning of Pask’s article, The Architectural Relevance of Cybernetics published in 1962, he introduces the philosophical routes and processes of the architect in practice of the 1800’s into the Victorian era, describing how the architect was the holistic designer of the building and took charge of all operations of the building work. Pask then goes on to state how the architect then became more accountable for solving problems (Reichardt, 2007). “... architects were asked to solve problems entailing the regulation and accommodation for human beings; hence design systems” (Pask, 1962, p.1).

As a result of these requirements being demanded from the architect, Pask then goes onto the explain how the architect’s role has developed through the use of computational systems such as P.E.R.T (Programme Evaluation Review Technique) programming which is an early form of construction scheduling software. It can be emphasised that early forms of construction management software such as this have resulted in current building regulations. It is important to note that Pask’s research on developing computational methods in design has lead to his future speculation on architects becoming equally, designers of systems as well as buildings, which he elaborates on towards the end of his article. It is interesting that this speculation of Pask’s has a significant connection with WikiHouse, a contemporary system developed by a small group of architects (Reichardt, 2007).

Fig. 19 Gordon Pask’s installation ; Colloquy of Mobiles expressing the idea of social communication through a system

Methods and Visions of WikiHouse WikiHouse are a contemporary open source organisation that solely specialise in open source design strategies. The organisation, founded by Alastair Parvin promotes open source designing in becoming a solution to counteract the commercialised consumerist state of our urban communities. Parvin states that with open source designing, WikiHouse enables anyone to design and construct their own dwelling within a space. It is important to note the following approaches that WikiHouse deploy to communicate their methods in designing: (Parvin, 2012).

The word WIKI... like Wikipedia WikiHouse communicate their visions of practice in the most simple and effective way so that communities will understand what kind of organisation they are. WikiHouse relating their name to Wikipedia who are an internationally well known open source encyclopaedia, enables communities to understand that they can become involved within the work that WkiHouse do. This also communicates that their methods in designing are inclusive to everyone unlike many conventional direct architectural practices (Parvin, 2012). Fig. 20 WikiHouse Logo

At the right are two of the images WikiHouseâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s website which has a user friendly interface so that users of all abilities can navigate easily. The WikiHouse website leads into a direct open online library that contains options, choices and types of dwelling that a customer would require which then further leads into an online storage library containing individual components used to construct and assemble a dwelling. As previously stated, these individual components are downloaded through the Google SketchUp application which is free and intuitive and are arranged and modelled by the customer themselves (Parvin, 2012). Another approach to WikiHouseâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s communications is the way in which the individual components are manufactured. The joints themselves on the components consist of noggins and various types of wedges so that the assembly process is easily understood and straightforward by the customer. This also brings back the simplicity of the construction process itself and aids the learning process of simple construction which is WikiHouseâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s philosophy (Parvin, 2012).

Fig. 21 Options and choices of dwelling on WikiHouseâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s online library

Wikihouse Pic 2

Fig. 22 Options and choices of joints and components on WikiHouseâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s online library

Wikihouse Kit of Parts

Fig. 23 WikiHouseâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s kit of componenets within their online library

Summary Of The Connections and Comparisons to Modern Practices Emphasising on Gordon Pasks theories with regards to architects designing systems, a relationship can be made in between his speculation and open source design practices such as WikiHouse. If we take Pask’s speculation literally, it can be expressed that WikiHouse have solved an issue by creating a system to accommodate the rest of the community. What is also interesting is how WikiHouse utilise a library storage system for communities to access the information that they provide. Stafford Beer’s idea of Project Cybersyn may have had significant influences on WikiHouse’s methods and how this has developed other current methods such as online cloud storage. It can also be summarised from this section that technologies have enabled communities to develop, design and control themselves which is expressed in Banham’s idea of the The Environment Bubble. This same intention can be reflected into the communication of WikiHouse as the design process of this practice is solely driven by technologies. As a closing point to this section, the research and ideas of Constant Nieuwenhuys, Reyner Banham, Stafford Beer, and the additional notation on Gordon Pask all relate to one ultimate consequence which is technological development and the growth of the internet. One can emphasise that it is the evolvement of the internet that has enabled open source design to be put into practice; hence we are starting to see organisations such as WikiHouse attempting to improve our urban environments (Parvin, 2012).

Instructions

The Use Of Technology In Practice

Instructing to Instruct - WikiHouse

Technologies that are integrated within architectural practice have consequentially caused significant shifts in how a practice operates, particularly from a hierarchical perspective. As Gordon Pask emphasises, it is well known to most that traditional practice is seeing the architect as the sole practitioner who has full control of the design process (Pask, 1962). It is intriguing to note how the role of the architect has shifted due to the growth and application of technologies and how as a result of this the client to architect relationship has switched, enabling the client to have maximum control over a design that the architect would have once had.

WikiHouse’s concept can be viewed of how the evolving instructional relationship between client to architect has shifted as a result of open source design methods. What is so interesting is that WikiHouse instruct the authority to the customer to design and build themselves so that customers can instruct back to WikiHouse the components that they need in order to construct. Putting this instructional relationship into a hierarchical form, it can be argued that WikiHouse have the highest position as they are giving the initiating instruction much like a traditional architect to client relationship.

With the current contemporary use of the internet and open source design development, this relational shift is becoming more apparent especially analysing the instructional approaches of WikiHouse.

“Be lazy like a fox. Rather than solving problems from scratch, adapt other people’s solutions, and then give them credit” (Linus Torvalds, 2011, p.72)

However, it is interesting to compare this instructional relationship to other practices that use similar technologies to construct but lean more towards the traditional and accelerated relationships that are more direct such as Facit Homes (Borgobello 2012).

Direct Instructing - Facit Homes In a comparison, WikiHouse and Facit Homes (diagram overleaf) are both similar in terms of the way they communicate their design agendas to their clients. Like most successful architectural practices, they both focus their designs to meet the best interests of their clients’ requirements. But what is intriguing in this comparison is one practice is open source and the other is traditional and accelerated. Additionally WikiHouse and Facit Homes both use the same hardware technologies such as CNC milling and digital fabrication methods to manufacture the components for their construction processes. A noteworthy point about Facit Homes as an architectural practice is that they maintain the traditional direct relationships with their clients but keep up to speed with the technological tools that are becoming increasingly popular with the new wave of open source design. Parvin argues that open source design approaches enables practices to ‘design with’ rather than ‘design for’ (Parvin, 2012). However, Facit Homes are a refreshing example of an architectural practice that are attempting to revitalise the traditional and accelerated relationships between the architect and the client (Borgobello, 2012).

“BESPOKE ARCHITECTURE, DITITAL FABRICATION, SUSTAINABLE LIVING...” (FACIT HOMES, 2011, PROCESS ,PARA 1)

“WE BELIEVE THERE ARE SMARTER AND SIMPLER WAYS OF MAKING HOMES...”(FACIT HOMES, 2011,

D-PROCESS ,PARA 1)

“DESIGN FOR ASSEMBLY - NEW PRINCIPLES IN BUILDING YOUR HOME.”(FACIT HOMES, 2011, D-PROCESS ,PARA 3)

Fig. 24 Constructing through CNC milling is the method that both WikiHouse and Facit Homes utilise

Fig. 25 The site before construction

CNC Manufactured Micro Home, 47C Sheen Lane 47c Sheen Lane is located in Richmond London which is a small domestic dwelling project designed and built by Nick Garwolinski who also lives within the dwelling. Nick Garwolinski utilised Facit Homes for their design advice and expertise in CNC manufacturing and together achieved one of the first built inhabitable domestic dwellings in London through the process of this relatively new and alternative construction method.

Fig. 26 The cleared site for the foundation works

Fig. 27 Hydraulic screwpile driver to drive the piles into the soil

Fig. 28 The sole plates that are used keep everything in a straight tight line are attached to the floor beams

Fig. 31 The wall peices arrive to the site

Fig. 29 The ground beams are installed on top of the screw piles

Fig. 32 A section of wall that was completed within an afternoon

Fig. 30 The entire ground floor laid out

Fig. 33 More house pieces arrive to provide the super structure

Fig. 34 Panorama of most of the walls in place

Fig. 35 Topping out the roof structure

Fig. 36 Roof beams

Fig. 37 Roof beam details

Fig. 38 Insulation installation

Fig. 39 Panorama of the living room and dining area

Fig. 40 Panorama of the breather membranes

Fig. 41 Arrival of the windows

Fig. 42 Installation of the windows

Fig. 43 Heavier in-situ windows

Fig. 44 Installation of the roof and provision openings for the skylights

Fig. 45 Panorama of the kitchen and living room with the roof attached

Fig. 46 Panorama of the kitchen and living room with the plastering works in progress

Fig. 48 Kitchen fit out

Fig. 49 The finished kitchen which is in use

Fig. 47 Panorama of the kitchen and living room with the painting in progress

Fig. 50 The finished living and dining area

Fig. 51 The finished bedroom and bathroom area

The view through the living room window once the construction is completed and the dwelling is inhabited

The view of the completed entrance

The view of the entrance and the living room window

Fig. 52 WikiHouse use affordable materials that are widely available. WikiHouse generate a set of cutting files that are cut by a CNC machine

The 50k House Project by WikiHouse Since WikiHouse were founded in 2011, they have been rigorously prototyping, iterating and developing their methods in design and achieved the first CNC printed inhabitable dwelling through the application of alternative self - build construction skills. The 50k House is one of WikiHouseâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s main projects that their currently developing, which they have just achieved building control for this projects specification (Parvin, 2011). For this project to be physically built, further funding is required from the Creative Commons which are the established online global open source sharing platform (Parvin, 2011). It is valuable to compare The 50k House to 47c Sheen Lane as there are distinct similarities with the construction techniques, processes and the preliminary site preparation.

Fig. 53 A layer of topsoil that is beneath the building is scraped away. Three trench foundations are dug out and filled with gravel and re-enforced concrete.

Fig. 54 Timber battens that are levelled are provided to create a jig on-top of the foundations to accommodate the services

Fig. 55 The WikiHouse frames are then laid out and assembled by hand. Every part is numbered so the kit goes together like a flatpackkit without the need for additional construction skills.

Fig. 58 Wood-fibre ridged insulation boards are screwed into the external leaf of the structure by a step-ladder or a mobile scaffolding ladder

Fig. 56 As soon as the ground level is assembled, a roof deck is created with handrails so that the second story frames can be hoisted up without the need for scaffolding which saves cost

Fig. 59 Battens are then screwed into the external panels, the gutters are fitted and all edges and gaps are either hand painted or taped which means there is no need for expensive flashings

Fig. 57 Full filled insulation such as cellulose is then blown into the wall peices (same method used at 47c Sheen Lane).

Fig. 60 A different range of cladding materials can be used for the rain-screen. Cladding materials are chosen to what is readily available. The interior services will then be installed

WikiHouse CNC milled components arranged ready for assembly

Assembling the WikiHouse structure

Details of the assembled components

An assembled WikiHouse chassis

The WikiHouse team working together to finish a section of a WikiHouse frame to show at the Design Museum exhibition in London

“WikiHouse is an open source construction set. The aim is to allow anyone to design, download and print, ‘CNC-milled houses and components, which can be assembled with minimal formal skill or training.”(WikiHouse, 2012, What is it?, para 1).

It is important to evaluate how open source design can impact on design processes and how the technologies such as software programmes that drive this collaborative model, may be compromising the philosophical complexities of the design process. Professional design practices have reacted to the growth and development of their clients, updating their design skills by using sophisticated software programmes, for example Autodesk 3DS MAX. This software programme facilitates parametric modelling, which enables the ability to form and produce complex shapes. Within the last decade, digital parametric modelling has grown increasingly popular within architectural and design practice and has transformed the thresholds of design complexity. However, methods such as this have caused a level of controversy amongst architects and designers in that digital modelling has taken over the more crafted philosophical approaches of designing (Bijan, 2011). With many designers now promoting open source design to everyone, it can be noticed that a similar issue can and does occur within the open community. It is seen as evident that communities are now relying on technologies more and more so to carry out simple everyday routines. Prime examples of this are that most people now use online social media to communicate and use GPS (Global Positioning System) navigation to get to places they need to travel to. It can be emphasised that technology used in this way has caused a lazy mentality amongst many people, requiring only minimal thinking to carry out these routines (Katz, 2013).

Fig. 61 Relying on GPS satellite navigation to travel

The same issue can apply to open source design. As remarked upon earlier within the introduction, open source design relies solely on technology and the internet in order to perform. We as designers can only analyse and speculate how reliant everyone will be on the technology that is used to create open source products. For example, processes like digital CNC (computer numerical control) manufacturing changes the equation of design complexity. Therefore someone can essentially download a very complex piece of design through an open source software programme and print it through the method of CNC (computer numerical control) manufacturing without fully understanding all of its complexities. It is examples like this that may cause speculative problems for open source designing and that the growing cause of an otiose and lazy mentality due to the dependence of technology can be detrimental to the true philosophical routes of designing (Parvin, 2011). As well as this problem, we as designers have to question the other issues that can be caused due to the methods and approaches of open source design.

Fig. 62 A CNC milled parametric form

How Open and Accessible is Open Source Design? The first fundamental problem is open source designs overall methodology and its complete dependence on technology. We as a society, live in a state where a large amount of the population consist of an aging generation, many of whom do not have the level of knowledge, skill or expertise to use open source design programmes. Therefore this raises the question; how open and accessible really is open source designing to everyone? Additionally to this matter, many people are not willing to join the open source design movement as they do have the time or interest to create their own designs. The nature of the human mind is an oscillation between openness and closeness and this has always held true to the process of designing (De Mul, 2011).

Open source movement needs existing economic infrastructure The second problem is that open source design still needs to rely on the existing economy in order for its processes to work. An example of this is the production and transportation of physical design objects such as materials which inevitably involves economical cost. However, solutions to this are starting to become apparent such as transportable CNC milling machines, that Facit Homes use, and 3D printers. Consumer household 3D printers have only been in operation since 2011, but they have proven to be a small solution to counter the economic issue of transportation costs of objects and materials (De Mul, 2011). It is fascinating to see a connection of what the current consumer 3D printer has with Banhamâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s The Environment Bubble idea, in that consumer driven technology defines peopleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s living environments. It can also be emphasised that the notion of the consumer 3D printer allows people to control the items that they use within their own environment. Nevertheless, we face the reality that the physical economy and its integrating laws will remain a serious constraint to current open source design activities (De Mul, 2011).

Fig. 63 The MakerBot 3D printer can print objects for the home such as cutlery and clothing

“I feel that our society need to integrate technology more, especially when it comes to fashion and clothing... we don’t need to follow consumer brands and have size labels in our garments...”(Wales, 2013, Project DNA, para 4)

Fig. 64 65 & 66 Fashion Designer Catherine Wales’s design of a 3D printed dress

Fig. 67 Clothing like running shoes are also becoming 3D printed

Not Everyone can be a Designer The third problem is that open source design encourages everyone to have the abilities to design and we should not automatically trust everyone who think they have this expertise. Crowdsourcing are an organisation and specialise in a particular process of the open source design movement which enables unanimous voting amongst a community of people to provide their vote and input into a particular design. Communal advice and input from Crowdsourcing can be seen as a positive way to evaluate and improve a design, however “...unfortunately quite often, all it produces is the folly of the crowds.” (De Mul, 2011, p.39), which means the collated input from the community;”...does not result in the best product” (De Mul, 2011, p.39). For example, if an individual person designs a product through the method of open source and is happy with the result, there is no issue. However when the communities start to vote, their “...varied input might affect the reliability, functionality or the beauty of the design.” (De Mul, 2011, p.39). An example of this scenario can be seen in television programmes like Grand Designs who use Crowdsourcing for the design projects they televise (Haines 2013). So, to summarise, these are some of the fundamental issues that face some of the methodologies of open source design. Fig 68 (left) Crowdsoucing logo Fig 69 (below) Grand Designs logo

“...we all live in the iphone 5 phase while architecture is still in the Walkman phase.” (Van Berkel, 2013,para 3)

Open source design seems a strong idea in resolving particular current issues within our urban environment and improving sustainable design through the means of knowledge, online sharing and collaboration amongst communities. It is intriguing to speculate how open source designing can impact the design profession and how some designers have attempted to integrate open source methods within their existing in-house design methods (Van Den Bergh, 2013).

Integrating Open Source in Professional Practice UN Studio who are a Dutch architectural practice, have recently attempted to launch an open source programme as part of their revised approach in re-vamping architecture. Benjamin Van Berkel, who is a co-founder and chairman of UN Studio, strongly believes that architecture itself is in need of an upheaval to keep up to date with rapid contemporary developments such as online social communication (Van Den Bergh, 2013).

Fig.70 Ben Van Berkel and colleagues at UN Studio discuss their strategy to open source design

Van Berkel states; “... we were fascinated by the initiatives put in place by online start up companies - such as social networking firms - who have moved from an old economy to a new innovative economy which celebrates communication, open exchange and co-collaboration...we all live in the iphone 5 phase while architecture is still in the Walkman phase.” (Van Berkel, 2013, para 3).

So, in June 2013, UN Studio initiated the new organisation of its practice of becoming open source by implementing a series of design knowledge platforms for communities to access and provide their external input into a design project. These design knowledge platforms are a series of self organised groups that were established through UN Studio following community interest in “...digital production and manufacturing, material affects and design solutions.” (Van Berkel, 2013, ‘Knowledge Platforms’ section). The collation of this communal information consequentially resulted in four specific areas for the design knowledge platforms - Sustainability, Organisation, Parametrics and Materials (Van Berkel, 2013). The sole purpose for these four design knowledge platforms is so that people within the community can join a specific platform of their interest and contribute their knowledge and research towards it which is then shared and combined with the knowledge of UN Studio. UN Studio elaborate that combining relationships with communities and integrating open source approaches to professional practice is a way to; “... cross - fertilise innovative solutions and discover new approaches to architecture.” (Van Berkel, 2013, ‘Knowledge Platforms’ section).

Fig.71 UN Studio

UN Studio attempted this strategy to become an open source architectural practice, however their approaches were reviewed and heavily criticised. It was clear in UN Studios ethos and vision that they were fascinated by the new opportunities the open source movement can bring as Van Berkel directly points out. But the ultimate mistake UN Studio made was that they only communicated and launched their open source design knowledge platforms through an outlet of their own website, which was already an obstacle for communities to access (Van Den Bergh, 2013). Not only this, but UN Studio also contradicted themselves within their ideas by emphasising that they had the right to edit, change or even remove information within the open source design platforms as they deemed appropriate (Van Den Bergh, 2013). So UN Studios idea of open source designing is in fact in an area where it is closed source. In summary to this case, UN Studio expressed their ideas of their own methods of open source design without fully understanding that it takes a completely new business model and philosophical approach in making it effective and successful (Van Den Bergh, 2013).

Fig.72 The diagram UN Studioâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s 4 design knowledge platforms

WikiHouse on the other hand, are an example of an design organisation that are using their approaches of open source designing more effectively which is promising to the future strategies of open source design. First of all, WikiHouse using SketchUp as the main modelling software is a smart and simple idea as SketchUp is currently the only available and accessible software tool that relatively easy to use. Secondly, WikiHouse communicate their ethos and ideas entirely online through the Creative Commons network which is the main established online open source platform hub where design ideas are shared and exchanged by the communities. Thirdly, WikiHouse have been researching into the problems that face our urban environments and have been prototyping the last two years on possible solutions to mitigate them within their projects by rigorously iterating and reviewing their working methods (Parvin, 2011).

â&#x20AC;&#x153;The Designer Of The Future Has To Become A Meta-Designer, Shaping Environments In Which Unskilled Users Can Design Their Own Objects.â&#x20AC;?

Open source design is one of the main topics for discussion within the design professions today and there are two sides of opposite discussion that open source design is provoking amongst designers. One side provokes the curiosity that if everyone in the community has the means and accessibility to design then there will be less work for the design professionals to do. However on the other side, many designers are starting to see the positives what open source design can have on the future design professions (Parvin, 2011).

Open source designing can change the future relationships that designers will have with their clients. By enabling the client to have an authority to design and control an overall design, this can improve not just the preliminary construction process but the whole life cycle process of a design. An example of this is the whole time a dwelling is used and occupied. One of the main issues that occurs regularly when architects and designers design buildings, are the flaws in their strategies to how that building will be maintained during its whole life cycle and use. More often than not once a building is built, more problems can occur with its maintenance which can be expensive to repair. This can also cause communicative disruption and disagreement between the designer and the client which affects their professional relationship and can be detrimental to the entire process of the design (Anderson, 2012). Creating a design through the methods of open source designing can improve this problem, as its aim is to include the client/inhabitant in the design as much as the designer themself (Anderson, 2012).

Fig.73, 74 & 75 WikiHouseâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s iterations and research into their feasible construction methods

(De Mul ,2011, p. 38).

The Future Of Open Source Design As explained at the beginning of the synthesis section, the technology that drives open source design makes it possible for communities to create very complicated designs. By open source design heading in this direction, these complex designs can potentially result in every house and dwelling being totally unique. Current governmental building control regulations model their standards and rules on houses of one particular type, so if we as a society move into an open source ecology where the levels of design complexity may increase within a house for example, then the current idea of planning and building control regulations will have to radically change. So consequentially it could be appropriate to speculate that a new set of client flexible design regulations will have to be put in place in order to have these future complex designs approved. Safety and regulations will always be the most important requirements within any design being built so the change in legislation is one of the most important issues that is facing open source design at the moment (Parvin, 2011).

It is rational to conclude that there are many current issues that occur within our urban environment such as the issues with housing, real estate and consumer growth. Those of us that are involved in the architectural and design fields and professions that donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t agree with the idea of commercialism are aware that it is the large commercial clients that have the ultimate authority and control on a design. This in some cases can result in architects and designers leaving their professions altogether (Parvin, 2011). However those of us that are architects and designers that stay loyal to the profession and think of the possible alternative ways to tackle these issues then this can project a new re-vitalising future perspective to the design professions. Open source design is still relatively new within the design realm and there is still much exploration and research to be done in fully understanding how open source design can be an answer to improve the state of our urban environment. But the research and work carried out so far particularly from organisations like WikiHouse, are creating re-assuring outlooks on the potential solutions open source design can bring to the future of architecture and design. As designers we have to accept economic and sustainable issues will always occur and affect design which why it is up to us as designers to solve this problem, which is after all, is part of our job (Parvin, 2011).

A personal interview with Alastair Parvin cofounder of open source organisation WikiHouse and his view on the future of open source design Date of interview: Monday 2nd December, 2013

DRT: “Alastair , I am very inspired by your work and the work WikiHouse focuses on with regards to involving communities to self design build their own projects. As a student of architecture, I’m interested in localised community led design projects. What is your view on this?” AP: “The comment you make about ‘community led design’ is interesting. I come from this same tradition and interest as well, but I’m also rather sceptical of it. We see that the result is always the same with all existing processes of designing. We as designers can complete a project and reflect on the enjoyment of the design process, however a huge amount of energy and people’s time is used which is usually at a loss, causing the whole design of a project to be not completely fulfilling. This is the fundamental point we as designers have to raise and question about open source designing. To analyse how we can drive social communal led design, and to make it genuinely scalable and viable, we have to be quite hard-nosed about the realistic implications such as time and money as these factors will always be obstacles . As designers, we’re now at a stage where we need to achieve a viable strategy for open source designing. Instead of moving into this broad austerity that open source designing is perceived as good and uses very little money to solve urban economic issues like housing for example, we know that this ultimately doesn’t make money, therefore it will never succeed. So the reverse strategy to open source designing is about focusing on the one individual person to design their house, experience and solve the problems with their design, share the solved problems online, then essentially that problem is solved for everyone else which is more reassuring.” (Parvin A, personal communication 2nd December 2013)

DRT: “In my thesis I’m taking the position within my argument that I’m speaking ‘for’ the ideas of open source designing and the work of what WikiHouse does to push self design and build to improve urban problems such as housing in the UK. How do you see WikiHouse improving these issues?” AP: “Well when you say speaking ‘for’ the question really is ‘for how’. When you say self design and build, phrases such as this can be problematic and confusing as there are many different forms of self procurement and self design and build. And secondly, we realised that we got to a point where almost everybody said that they agree with it. Even the so called ‘bad guys’ such as developers say in principle, open source designing is a perfectly good way of solving urban problems but it doesn’t necessarily mean it’s easier to do. So in terms of being ‘for’ open source design, it’s about now moving forward and beyond just ‘cheerleading’. We need to work out what we can do to make things easier for people instead of just ‘cheerleading’ and saying we are ‘for’ open source designing.”(Parvin A, personal communication 2nd December 2013) DRT: “Of course. One simple point that raises my awareness about open source designing and WikiHouse, is how technologically dependant open source design is and needs to be in order for it to perform. It’s understood that not everyone within communities is technologically savvy enough to utilise open source design programmes. What is you view on this?” AP: “Absolutely, this is a fundamental issue. There are disruptive tools that open source designing relies on such as the internet and digital manufacturing. Processes like digital manufacturing to some extent lowers and distributes a particular capability and changes the equation of complexity which means that someone can essentially download a very complex piece of design and print it without fully understanding all of the things it does. And another point, are the software tools that are built around processes like digital manufacturing such as SketchUp. We are currently developing a newer software tool called ‘MATA Machine’ which will mean someone will no longer need to model their design in SketchUp anymore, they can essentially script it instead within an internet browser requesting what size and specification of design they need. So these approaches in using the technologies for open source designing delves into lowering the thresholds of skill and raising the thresholds of complexity.

So going in this direction with open source designing, it will be intriguing to see how planning legislations will change in the future. If we start moving into an open source world where the levels of design complexity increase within a house, then potentially every house will be different, which means that the current idea of planning codes and building regulations will be ruled out. So the idea of open source design focusing on the clients designing and constructing themselves, we as designers are starting to realise that a ‘clientflexible regulatory framework’ would have to be created in order to have these future complex designs approved. An important point that poses a current problem is that various organisations that are creating products within an open source ecology get safety approval for those products. But however, if one person then changes this product, then it’s no longer approved. So the mitigating approach to this issue is organisations build an online open source software tool that has set limits and constraints determining that any product, that is designed within that open source software tool is legal. So it’s about creating open source software tools as a system with limits and constraints that won’t let someone break those limits. A very simple example of this is the span of a house. An open source software tool will not allow someone design a larger span of a house that it’s capable of doing. So the question of liability and safety standards is one of the big issues that is facing the future of open source design right now.” (Parvin A, personal communication 2nd December 2013)

“Open source designing ultimately focuses on the one person to design, experience the problems with the design, solve it and share it online. That way that design is then solved for everyone else.” (Parvin A, personal communication, December 2nd 2013)

References Abel, BV, 2011, ‘Open Design Now, Why Design Cannot Remain Exclusive’ BIS Publishers; Creative Commons, Netherlands, p 11 Anderson, C, 2012, ‘ Makers, The New Industrial Revolution’ Random House Business Books, Great Britain, p 101 Banham , R , 1965 ‘A Home is Not a House’ Available at; http://studio4postindustrial.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/banham-home-is-not-a-house-1.pdf (Accessed 13th November, 2013) Bijan, L, 2011 ‘Exhibiting Crafting Architecture.’ Available at; http://www.d-talks.com/2011/03/exhibition-craftingarchitecture/ (Accessed 26th November, 2013) Crace,J, 2012, ‘Tv Review - Grand Designs; Getting On.’ Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/tv-andradio/2012/oct/17/grand-designs-tv-review (Accessed 27th November, 2013) Borgobello, B, 2012 ‘Facit Homes claims to build world’s first “digitally fabricated” house’, Available at: http://www.gizmag.com/digitally-fabricated-homes-facit/23844/ (Accessed 15th October, 2013) De Mul, J, 2011 ‘Redesigning Design’ cited in Abel, BV, 2011, ‘Open Design Now, Why Design Cannot Remain Exclusive’ BIS Publishers; Creative Commons, Netherlands, p. 38, 39 Design Museum, 2013, ‘Crowd Sourcing and Open Design’ Available at : http://the-future-is-here.com/crowdsourcingand-open-design/ (Accessed 13 September, 2013) Facit Homes, 2012 ‘The D Process’ Available at: http://www.facit-homes.com (Accessed 13th September, 2013) Eden, M, 2011, ‘Cybernetics and Socialism’ in ‘Cybernetic Revolutionaries- Technology and Politics in Allende’s Chile’, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, United States of America, p 16-18 Jameson, C, 2011 ‘ 1.0 What we were told by...1.02 Clients and Consultants’ in ‘The Future For Architects? -RIBA’ 1.02 , p 12, 13 Johnson , P A, 1994 ‘ Power Structures and the Architect’ in ‘The Theory of Architecture - Concepts themes & Practices’ John Wiley and Sons INC, Canada, p 113 Katz, P, 2013 ‘Is technology dumbing us down?’ Available at: http://techitoutmedia.wordpress.com/2013/10/17/istechnology-dumbing-us-down/ (Accessed 26th November, 2013) Lucarelli, F, 2013 , ‘A Home Is Not a House’ - By Reyner Banham and Françoise Dellegret 1965’ Available at: http://socks-studio.com/2011/10/31/francois-dallegret-and-reyner-banham-a-home-is-not-a-house-1965/ (Accessed 13th Novmeber, 2013) Parvin, A , 2012, ‘Support the Wikihouse Development’, Available at: http://www.wikihouse.cc/ (Accessed: 2nd September, 2013)

Reichardt, J 2007, ‘The Architectural Relevance of Gordon Pask’, John Wiley and Sons, North America, p. 3 Sadler, S,1998, ‘The Naked City’ in ‘The Situationist City’ Massachusetts Institute of Technology, New York, p. 31 Stikker, M, 2011, ‘Introduction’ in ‘Open Design Now, Why Design Cannot Remain Exclusive’ BIS Publishers; Creative Commons, Netherlands, p. 16 Torvalds, L, 2011, ‘ Authors and owners’ cited in Abel, BV, 2011, ‘Open Design Now, Why Design Cannot Remain Exclusive’ BIS Publishers; Creative Commons, Netherlands, p. 72 Thorpe, A, 2012 ‘Picking up moves from social movements’ in ‘ Architecture & Design versus Consumerism - how design activism confronts growth’ Earthscan by Routeledge, New York , p. 128-141 Van Berkel, B, 2013, ‘Launch Open Source Knowledge Sharing’, Available at: http://www.unstudio.com/research/asp/launch-open-source-knowledge-sharing (Accessed 18th December, 2013) Van Der Bergh, P 2013 ‘UN Studio Tried Riding The Open Source Wave but Failed’ Available at: http://failedarchitecture.com/unstudio-tried-riding-the-open-source-wave-but-failed/ (Accessed: 18th December, 2013) Wales, C, 2013, ‘Project DNA’ Available at: http://www.dezeen.com/2013/06/27/project-dna-3d-printed-accessoriesby-catherine-wales/ (Accessed: 2nd December, 2013)

List of Figures and Images Front and Back cover - ‘Project DNA’ by Catherine Wales. Available at : http://www.dezeen.com/2013/06/27/projectdna-3d-printed-accessories-by-catherine-wales/ ‘WikiHouse Logo’ - Available at : http://www.wikihouse.cc/ ‘Facit Homes Logo’ - Available at : http://www.facit-homes.com/ Page 3 - WikiHouse Assembly - Photograph by Alastair Parvin Fig 1 - ‘Laser Cutting Services’. Available at: http://www.pdssheetmetal.co.uk/Laser-Cutting.html Fig 2- ‘The Struggle’ Blog availble at: http://palethrough.tumblr.com/post/6227217305/new-babylon-by-constantnieuwenhuys-in-1950s Fig 3 - ‘ Project Cybersyn, At last, el pueblo.’ Availble at: http://situationroom.hackitectura.net/?p=126 Fig 4 - ‘WikiHouse Logo’ Availble at: http://blog.wikihouse.cc/ Fig 5 - ‘Open Source Housing - Assembly Shell of a WikiHouse Structure’ Available at: http://www.thepolisblog. org/2012/07/wikihouse.html Fig 6 - ‘Architecture - Diagram As An Abstract Machine’. Available at: http://nissomatchoro.com/architecture/ Fig 7 - ‘Architecture - Diagram As An Abstract Machine’. Available at: http://nissomatchoro.com/architecture/ Fig 8 - ‘A Home is Not A House By Rayner Banham and Francois Dellegret 1645.’ Available at: http://socks-studio. com/2011/10/31/francois-dallegret-and-reyner-banham-a-home-is-not-a-house-1965/ Fig 9 - ‘ A Home is Not A House By Rayner Banham and Francois Dellegret 1645.’ Available at: http://socks-studio. com/2011/10/31/francois-dallegret-and-reyner-banham-a-home-is-not-a-house-1965/ Fig 10 - ‘ Inflatable architecture designs for instant refuge’ Available at: http://www.designbuzz.com/inflatablearchitecture-designs-instant-refuge/ Fig 11 - ‘Special Topics In Interactive Art & Computational Design’ Availble at: http://golancourses. net/2010spring/03/15/looking-outwards-ant-farm/ Fig 12 - ‘A Brief History Of Inflatable Architecture.’ Available at: http://www.fastcompany.com/1278085/brief-historyinflatable-architecture Fig 13 - ‘On systems and what they do.’ Available at: http://speedbird.wordpress.com/2009/08/23/on-systems-andwhat-they-do/ Fig 14 - ‘Cybersyn: a real time computor-controlled economy’ Available at: http://blog.fabric.ch/index.php?/ archives/1886-Cybersyn-a-real-time-computer-controlled-economy.html Fig 15 - ‘Mega Dashboards and Instrument Panels part 2’ Available at: http://www.darkroastedblend.com/2011/08/ mega-dashboards-and-instrument-panels.html Fig 16 - ‘ Project Cybersyn’ Available at: http://www.creativeapplications.net/reference/project-cybersyn-reference/ Fig 17 - ‘Cybersyn: a real time computor-controlled economy’ Availble at: http://blog.fabric.ch/index.php?/ archives/1886-Cybersyn-a-real-time-computer-controlled-economy.html Fig 18 - ‘Cybersyn: a real time computor-controlled economy’ Availble at: http://blog.fabric.ch/index.php?/ archives/1886-Cybersyn-a-real-time-computer-controlled-economy.html Fig 19 - Gordon Pask - ‘A Colloquy of Mobiles’ Availble at: http://www.medienkunstnetz.de/works/colloquy-ofmobiles/images/8/ Fig 20 - ‘WikiHouse Logo’ Availble at: http://blog.wikihouse.cc/ Fig 21 - ‘ WikiHouse online library’ Availble at: http://www.wikihouse.cc/library/series/houses Fig 22 - ‘ WikiHouse online library’ Availble at: http://www.wikihouse.cc/library/series/houses Fig 23 - ‘WikiHouse Kit of Components’ Availble at: http://www.nmdnet.org/2013/06/13/some-assembly-requiredprint-your-own-house-from-these-open-source-plans/ Fig 24 - ‘BIM to Fabrication’ , 2013, Availble at : http://aecmag.com/57-lead-story/577-bim-to-fabrication Page 43 - Alleyway entrance to 47c Sheen Lane. 2013 photo by Dan Rymer Trenholme Fig 25 - ‘The site before construction’ photo by Nick Garwolinski, 2011. Available at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ garwolinski/5523038003/ Fig 26 - ‘The cleared site for the foundation’ photo by Nick Garwolinski, 2011. Available at: http://www.flickr.com/ photos/garwolinski/5523656012/in/photostream/ Fig 27 - ‘Screwpile driver to drive the piles into the soil’ photo by Nick Garwolinski, 2011. Available at: http://www. flickr.com/photos/garwolinski/5523672822/ Fig 28 - ‘Sole Plates’ photo by Nick Garwolinski, 2011. Available at http://www.flickr.com/photos/ garwolinski/5533779769/

Fig 29 - ‘ Ground floor beams’ photo by Nick Garwolinski, 2011. Available at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/garwolinski/5523678348/ Fig 30 - ‘Ground Floor’ photo by Nick Garwolinski, 2011. Available at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/garwolinski/5524128114/ Fig 31 - ‘Wall peices arrive’ photo by Nick Garwolinski, 2011. Available at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/garwolinski/5533779941/ Fig 32 - ‘Completed section of wall’ photo by Nick Garwolinski, 2011. Available at: http: http://www.flickr.com/photos/garwolinski/5534361324/ Fig 33 - ‘House pieces arrive’ photo by Nick Garwolinski, 2011. Available at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/garwolinski/5523514941/ Fig 34 - ‘Panorama of most of the walls in place’ photo by Nick Garwolinski, 2011. Available at: http://www.flickr. com/photos/garwolinski/5535702670/ Fig 35 - ‘Topping out the roof structure’ photo by Nick Garwolinski, 2011. Available at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/garwolinski/5535124083/ Fig 36 - ‘Roof Beams’ photo by Nick Garwolinski, 2011. Available at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/garwolinski/5535140981/ Fig 37 - ‘Roof beam details’ photo by Nick Garwolinski, 2011. Available at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/garwolinski/5552735331/ Fig 38 - ‘Insulation Installation’ photo by Nick Garwolinski, 2011. Available at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/garwolinski/5552735336/ Fig 39 - ‘Panorama of the living and dining room’ photo by Nick Garwolinski, 2011. Available at: http://www.flickr. com/photos/garwolinski/5564149525/ Fig 40 - ‘Panorama of the breather membranes’ photo by Nick Garwolinski, 2011. Available at: http://www.flickr.com/ photos/garwolinski/5564149841/ Fig 41 - ‘Arrival of the windows’ photo by Nick Garwolinski, 2011. Available at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/garwolinski/5580597648/in/photostream/ Fig 42 - ‘ Installation of the windows’ photo by Nick Garwolinski, 2011. Available at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ garwolinski/5580010525/in/photostream/ Fig 43 - Heavier in-situ windows’ photo by Nick Garwolinski, 2011. Available at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/garwolinski/5580597360/in/photostream/ Fig 44 - ‘Roof Installation’ photo by Nick Garwolinski, 2011. Available at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/garwolinski/5539104173/ Fig 45 - ‘Panorama of the kitchen and living room with the roof attached’ photo by Nick Garwolinski, 2011. Available at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/garwolinski/5539104173/ Fig 46 - ‘Panorama of the kitchen and living room with the plasterworks in progress’ photo by Nick Garwolinski, 2011. Available at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/garwolinski/5625339537/ Fig 47 - ‘Panorama of the kitchen and living room with the painting in progress’ photo by Nick Garwolinski, 2011. Available at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/garwolinski/5684947570/ Fig 48 - ‘Kitchen fit out’ photo by Nick Garwolinski, 2011. Available at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/garwolinski/5625357271/ Fig 49 - ‘The finished kitchen being used’ photo by Dan Rymer Trenholme, 2013 Fig 50 - ‘The finished living and dining area’ photo by Dan Rymer Trenholme, 2013 Fig 51 - ‘ The finished bedroom and bathroom area’ photo by Dan Rymer Trenholme, 2013 Page 50 - ‘Living room window’ photo by Dan Rymer Trenholme, 2013 page 51 - ‘View of the completed entrance’ & ‘View of the entrance and the living room window’ photo by Dan Rymer Trenholme, 2013 Fig 52 - ‘WikiHouse generate a set of cutting files’ - The 50K House, WikiHouse, 2012 Fig 53 - ‘ Trench foundations’ - The 50K House, WikiHouse, 2012 Fig 54 - ‘ Service Jig’ - The 50K House, WikiHouse, 2012 Fig 55 - ‘Chassis Assembly’- The 50K House, WikiHouse, 2012 Fig 56 - ‘Safe assembly of the second storey’- The 50K House ,WikiHouse, 2012 Fig 57 - ‘Insulation’ -The 50K House WikiHouse, 2012 Fig 58 - ‘Weather tight’ - The 50K House ,WikiHouse, 2012 Fig 59 - ‘Battens’ - The 50K House, WikiHouse, 2012 Fig 60 - ‘Cladding Materials’ - The 50K House, WikiHouse, 2012

Page 54 - ‘WikiHouse CNC milled componenets’ photos by Alastair Parvin, 2011 Page 55 - ‘ Assembling the WikiHouse structure’ photos by Alastair Parvin, 2011 Page 56 - ‘ Details of the assembled components’ photo by Alastair Parvin, 2011 Page 56 - ‘An assembled WikiHouse chassis’ photo by WikiHouse, 2011 Fig 61 - ‘Smartphone clip for busy travellers’ Godstall, 2013, Available at: http://blogs.loughboroughecho.net/gamesandgizmos/2012/10/smartphone-clip-for-busy-trave.html Fig 62 - ‘‘CNC milled parametric form’ Available at: http://www.evolo.us/architecture/parametric-explorations-for-an-outdoor-sculpture/ Page 60 - ‘CNC Milled parametric form’ Available at: http://www.evolo.us/architecture/parametric-explorations-for-an-outdoor-sculpture/ Page 61 - (Top Image) ‘ Digital fabrication gone wild’ Available at: http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2013/11/digital-fabrication-gone-wild/ Page 61 - (Bottom Image) Fig 63 - ‘ The MakerBot consumer 3D printer’ Available at: http://www.emergentforms.com/blog/2012/01/19/currentstate-of-consumer-3d-printing/ Fig 64 - ‘Project DNA’ by Catherine Wales. Available at: http://www.dezeen.com/2013/06/27/project-dna-3d-printed-accessories-by-catherine-wales/ Fig 65 - ‘Project DNA’ by Catherine Wales. Available at: http://www.dezeen.com/2013/06/27/project-dna-3d-printed-accessories-by-catherine-wales/ Fig 66 - ‘Project DNA’ by Catherine Wales. Available at: http://www.dezeen.com/2013/06/27/project-dna-3d-printed-accessories-by-catherine-wales/ Fig 67 - ‘Can 3D printing traspform the digtial landscape?’ Available at: http://www.sofarbeyond.com/can-3d-printing-transform-the-digital-marketing-landscape/ Fig 68 - ‘Crowdsourcing logo’ Available at: http://pass.ch/partners/ Fig 69 - ‘Grand Designs logo’ Available at: http://www.acid.eu.com/news/acid-partners/media-partners-2/ Fig 70 - ‘Ben Van Berkel and colleagues of UN Studio discussing their strategy to open source design’ Available at: http://www.unstudio.com/research/asp/launch-open-source-knowledge-sharing Fig 71 - ‘UN Studio’ Available at: http://www.unstudio.com/research/asp/launch-open-source-knowledge-sharing Fig 72 - ‘Diagram of UN Studio’s 4 design knowledge platforms’ Available at: http://www.unstudio.com/research/asp/ launch-open-source-knowledge-sharing Fig 73 ‘WikiHouse’s iterations and research into their feasible construction methods’ Available at: http://blog.wikihouse.cc/ Fig 74 ‘WikiHouse’s iterations and research into their feasible construction methods’ Available at: http://blog.wikihouse.cc/ Fig 75 ‘WikiHouse’s iterations and research into their feasible construction methods’ Available at: http://blog.wikihouse.cc/

Email correspondence between the author and Bruce Bell at Facit Homes to arrange a viewing with Nick Garwolinkski, the owner of the micro home at 47C Sheen Lane, Richmond, London. From: Daniel Rymer Trenholme <danrymer24@gmail.com> To: Bruce Bell<bruce@facit-homes.com> Sent: 26th November 2013 17.04 Subject Re: Viewing 47C Sheen Lane Hi Bruce, Thanks for your help regarding my enquiry earlier. I’m a third year architecture student at the University of Greenwich, I’m writing my dissertation on open source & modern manufacturing and I’m using 47c Sheen Lane as a case study. I would be ever so grateful if a brief appointment can be arranged with the occupier to allow me to take photographs of the property to broaden my research for my dissertation. I look forward to hearing from you. Kind Regards Dan Rymer Trenholme Mobile: 07805585037 From: Bruce Bell<bruce@facit-homes.com> To: Daniel Rymer Trenholme <danrymer24@gmail.com> Sent: 26th November 2013 17.28 Subject Re: Viewing 47C Sheen Lane Hi Dan Our client Nick Garwolinski for the sheen lane project is good to show you his home - he self built it so knows a lot about the process - both pro’s and cons. It will need to be a weekend, so get in contact with him at nick@garwolinski.com to arrange a day/ time Kind Regards Bruce Bell Managing Director From: Daniel Rymer Trenholme <danrymer24@gmail.com> To: Bruce Bell<bruce@facit-homes.com> Sent: 26th November 2013 17.42 Subject Re: Viewing 47C Sheen Lane Hi Bruce, Thanks for getting back to me so soon. That’s fantastic thanks very much, I’ll get in contact with him. Kind Regards Dan Rymer Trenholme 81

Email correspondence between the author and property owner/urban planner Nick Garwolinski to arrange a viewing and interview on his micro home at 47C Sheen Lane. From: Daniel Rymer Trenholme <danrymer24@gmail.com> To: Nick Garwolinski <nick@garwolinski.com> Sent: 27th November 2013, 11.30 Subject Re: Viewing your property for my thesis. Hi Nick, I’m an architecture student at the University of Greenwich. I am currently writing part of my thesis on modern construction and manufacturing and its come to mind that your property would be a very good case study for my topic. If it is possible to arrange a meeting to view your property and to ask you a few brief questions on the construction processes I would be ever so grateful. I look forward to hearing from you. Kind Regards Dan Rymer Trenholme From: Nick Garwolinski <nick@garwolinski.com> To: Daniel Rymer Trenholme <danrymer24@gmail.com> Sent: 27th November 2013, 11.46 Subject Re: Viewing your property for my thesis. Good Morning, Yes, Bruce Bell emailed me about this. The weekend would be best. This Saturday might be difficult. When do you need the resulting info from your visit by? Regards, Nick From: Daniel Rymer Trenholme <danrymer24@gmail.com> To: Nick Garwolinski <nick@garwolinski.com> Sent: 27th November 2013, 12.17 Subject Re: Viewing your property for my thesis. Hi Nick, Thanks for getting back to me so soon. The final draft doesn’t have to be in until just before Christmas so there’s plenty of time. Weekends are fine, if this Saturday is tricky for you how about this Sunday? If it’s still difficult I can do the following weekend if that suits you better. Kind Regards, Dan

From: Nick Garwolinski <nick@garwolinski.com> To: Daniel Rymer Trenholme <danrymer24@gmail.com> Sent: 30th November 2013, 12.21 Subject Re: Viewing your property for my thesis. Dan, How about tomorrow at 11 am? Nick From: Daniel Rymer Trenholme <danrymer24@gmail.com> To: Nick Garwolinski <nick@garwolinski.com> Sent: 30th November 2013, 12.59 Subject Re: Viewing your property for my thesis. Hi Nick, Yes 11am is fine. I’ll be coming on the train arriving Mortlake train station seems to be the closest station. I’ll give you my mobile which is 07805585037, and I can let you know when I arrive. I greatly appreciate it, thank you very much. Kind Regards, Dan From: Nick Garwolinski <nick@garwolinski.com> To: Daniel Rymer Trenholme <danrymer24@gmail.com> Sent: 30th November 2013, 13.02 Subject Re: Viewing your property for my thesis. Sure. The address is: Nicholas Garwolinski 47C Sheen Lane London SW14 8AB Nick From: Daniel Rymer Trenholme <danrymer24@gmail.com> To: Nick Garwolinski <nick@garwolinski.com> Sent: 30th November 2013, 13.22 Subject Re: Viewing your property for my thesis. Thanks Nick that’s great. See you tomorrow. Best Regards, Dan

Interview with Nick Garwolinski DRT : “I’ve noticed the site is very small and confined, firstly did you have any issues with the planning application?” NG : “Yes we did have a few issues. As there are surrounding neighbours we had complications with the boundary and party wall regulations which took an extra 5 to 6 months to resolve. As well as the physical site constraints, the site itself is situated within a conservation area which makes it more difficult to get planning approval hence why we chose Facit Homes and their methods of construction and materials.” DRT : “Yes of course. I’m captivated by the methods of construction, and how all of the components are manufactured through a CNC milling machine. Did any issues occur with the construction itself?” NG : “On the whole there were very little issues with the construction process, however we came across slight discrepancies with the rail incision cuts that accommodate the wall cassettes. The wall cassettes line up and fix to a rail that runs along the edge of the floor plate. After about three or four cassettes being fixed into place, we found that the incisions within the rail to were not lining up properly. This was due to inaccurate cutting of the CNC machine. The problem was easily rectified by re - calculation of the CNC machine.” (The remainder of this interview collated in a diary of photographs and information which is presented in the aesthetics section of this dissertation.)

Email correspondence between the author and WikiHouse to arrange an interview with WikiHouse cofounder Aliastair Parvin to broaden my research on the subject on open source design. From: Daniel Rymer Trenholme <danrymer24@gmail.com> To: WikiHouse<hello@wikihouse.cc> Sent: 26th Novemeber 2013 12.22 Subject Re: Other Dear Mr Parvin, Iâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;m currently a third year architecture student at the University of Greenwich and I am writing my dissertation on open source design. I have been very inspired by your TED talks about your views and approaches on open design and I am using WikiHouse as one of my case studies for my dissertation. I hope that you can answer my quick questions to broaden my research. I really look forward to hearing from you. Best regards, Dan Rymer Trenholme From: WikiHouse<hello@wikihouse.cc> To: Daniel Rymer Trenholme <danrymer24@gmail.com> Sent: 29th November 2013 12.06 Subject Re: Other Hi Dan Thank you for your email. I think Alastair and I could make a skype call at some point, but it really could only be a short chat because we are very time scarce and we get several requests from students. Whilst we try to help everyone, we are only a small team, so we have to limit our time, I hope you understand! From previous experience with other students, I think it would be much better if you could select a couple of questions that are quite specific and then fire away on a Skype call. Of course, this does not stop you being involved in the project. Have you joined the google groups? It might be better to post general questions here, and let the community respond. They are as interesting as the WikiHouse core team to get answers from! All the best Sarah From: Daniel Rymer Trenholme <danrymer24@gmail.com> To: WikiHouse<hello@wikihouse.cc> Sent: 30th Novemeber 2013 13.19 Subject Re: Other Hi Sarah, Thank you for your response. I have to say a skype call would be fantastic. I understand that your both very busy, I only have two questions so it should only be 5 minutes or so. I have just read into the google groups they are very useful thanks! Would the middle of next week be convenient for a quick chat? Thanks again Kind Regards, Dan 85

From: WikiHouse<hello@wikihouse.cc> To: Daniel Rymer Trenholme <danrymer24@gmail.com> Sent: 30th November 2013 18.55 Subject Re: Other Hi Dan Can you make this Monday by any chance? Otherwise, mid week might be ok. I just need to speak with Alastair. Best Sarah From: Daniel Rymer Trenholme <danrymer24@gmail.com> To: WikiHouse<hello@wikihouse.cc> Sent: 30th Novemeber 2013 19.59 Subject Re: Other Hi Sarah, Yes, Monday would be fine. What would be better, morning or afternoon? Kind Regards Dan From: WikiHouse<hello@wikihouse.cc> To: Daniel Rymer Trenholme <danrymer24@gmail.com> Sent: 2nd December 2013 10.40 Subject Re: Other Hi Dan Alastair’s Skype is alastairparvin - he’ll have his Skype on now until late lunch, so please catch him sometime then. Best Sarah From: Daniel Rymer Trenholme <danrymer24@gmail.com> To: WikiHouse<hello@wikihouse.cc> Sent: 2nd December 2013 11.22 Subject Re: Other Hi Sarah, that’s great I’ll call him very shortly. Thanks again, Best regards Dan

Interview with Alastair Parvin DRT: “Alastair , I am very inspired by your work and the work WikiHouse focuses on with regards to involving communities to self design build their own projects. As a student of architecture, I’m interested in localised community led design projects. What is your view on this?” AP: “The comment you make about community led design, I come from this same tradition and interest as well, but I’m also rather sceptical. We see that the result is always the same with all existing processes of designing. We as designers can complete a project and reflect on the enjoyment of the design process , however a huge amount of energy and people’s time is used which is usually at a loss, causing the whole design of a project to be not completely fulfilling. This is the fundamental point we as designers have to raise and question about open source designing. To analyse how we can drive social communal led design, and to make it genuinely scalable and viable, we have to be quite hard-nosed about the realistic implications such as time and money as these factors will always be obstacles. As designers, we’re now at a stage where we need to achieve a viable strategy for open source designing. Instead of moving into this broad austerity that open source designing is perceived as good and uses very little money to solve urban economic issues like housing for example, we know that this ultimately doesn’t make money, therefore it will never succeed. So the reverse strategy to open source designing is about focusing on the one individual person to design their house, experience and solve the problems with their design, share the solved problems online, then essentially that problem is solved for everyone else which is more reassuring.” DRT: “In my thesis I’m taking the position within my argument that I’m speaking ‘for’ the ideas of open source designing and the work of what WikiHouse does to push self design and build to improve urban problems such as housing in the UK. How do you see WikiHouse improving these issues?” AP: “Well when you say speaking ‘for’ the question really is ‘for how’. When you say self design and build, phrases such as this can be problematic and confusing as there are many different forms of self procurement and self design and build. And secondly, we realised that we got to a point where almost everybody said that they agree with it. Even the so called ‘bad guys’ such as developers say in principle, open source designing is a perfectly good way of solving urban problems but it doesn’t necessarily mean it’s easier to do. So in terms of being ‘for’ open source design, it’s about now moving forward and beyond just ‘cheerleading’. We need to work out what we can do to make things easier for people instead of just ‘cheerleading’ and saying we are ‘for’ open source designing.” DRT: “Of course. One simple point that raises my awareness about open source designing and WikiHouse, is how technologically dependant open source design is and needs to be in order for it to perform. It’s understood that not everyone within communities is technologically savvy enough to utilise open source design programmes. What is you view on this?” AP: “ Absolutely, this is a fundamental issue. There are disruptive tools that open source designing relies on such as the internet and digital manufacturing. Processes like digital manufacturing to some extent lowers and distributes a particular capability and changes the equation of complexity which means that someone can essentially download a very complex piece of design and print it without fully understanding all of the things it does. And another point, are the software tools that are built around processes like digital manufacturing such as SketchUp. We are currently developing a newer software tool called ‘MATA Machine’ which will mean someone will no longer need to model their design in SketchUp anymore, they can essentially script it instead within an internet browser requesting what size and specification of design they need. So these approaches in using the technologies for open source designing delves into lowering the thresholds of skill and raising the thresholds of complexity. So going in this direction with open source designing, it will be intriguing to see how planning legislations will change in the future. If we start moving into an open source world where the levels of design complexity increase within a house, then potentially every house will be different, which means that the current idea of planning codes and building regulations will be ruled out. So the idea of open source design focusing on the clients designing and constructing themselves, we as designers are starting to realise that a ‘clientflexible regulatory framework’ would have to be created in order to have these future complex designs approved. An important point that poses a current problem is that various organisations that are creating products within an open source ecology get safety approval for those products. But however, if one person then changes this product, then it’s no longer approved. So the mitigating approach to this issue is organisations build an online open source software tool that has set limits and constraints determining that any product, that is designed within that open source software tool is legal. So it’s about creating open source software tools as a system with limits and constraints that won’t let someone break those limits. A very simple example of this is the span of a house. An open source software tool will not allow someone design a larger span of a house that it’s capable of doing. So the question of liability and safety standards is one of the big issues that is facing the future of open source design right now.”