Everyone has a standard for publishing projects, and they can get pretty controversial. We see a lot of people complain about hacks embedded in YouTube videos, social media threads, Discord servers, Facebook posts, IRC channels, different degrees of open-sourcing, licenses, searchability, and monetization. I personally have my own share of frustrations with a number of these factors.

It’s common to believe that hacking as a culture doesn’t thrive until a certain set of conditions is met, and everyone has their own set of conditions in mind. My own dealbreaker, as you might’ve seen, is open-sourcing of code and hardware alike – I think that’s a sufficiently large barrier for hacking being repeatable, and repeatability is a big part of how hacking culture spreads.

This kind of belief is often self-limiting. Many people believe that their code or PCB source file is not a good contribution to hacking culture unless it meets a certain cleanliness or completeness standard. This is understandable, and I do that, too.

Today, I’d like to argue against my own view, and show how imperfect publishing helps build hacking culture despite its imperfections. Let’s talk about open-source in context of 3D printing.

The Snazzy Ugly Duckling

One little-spoken aspect of 3D printing is how few models are open-source. Printable models published exclusively as STLs are commonplace, STEPs are much less popular, and from my experience, it’s soul-crushingly rare to see a source file attached to a model on Printables. I struggle to say that’s a good thing, and quite obviously, that negatively impacts 3D printing culture – getting into 3D modeling is that much harder if you can’t reference the sources for 95% of models you might get inspired by.

Of course, part of that is that 3D CADs are overwhelmingly closed-source paid software, and there are like five different ones with roughly equal shares of usage. It’s hard to meaningfully share sources from within a paywalled siloized market. Also, unlike software source code, STLs are very much cross-platform. Electronics has a way better analogy for STLs, they’re just like gerbers – gerbers are easy to export, and to inexperienced people, they’ll feel like all that anyone would ever need.

For a quick example – out of these eight Printables models taken at random, only the “drawers mini-cabinet” has a source file attached.

Then, there’s a self-consciousness and perfectionism. While rare, I’ve seen “I will clean this up and publish later” happen in 3D printing spaces too – it’s a thoroughly non-viable promise there too, but I get why people say that, I’ve personally made and failed on such promises a good few times myself. I’m glad that this isn’t a popular excuse so far, but, as more people adopt OpenSCAD, Blender, and FreeCAD, with their universally-accessible files, maybe we’ll see it resurface.

Asking for 3D model sources should probably become part of hacker culture, just like it helped with software. I don’t think it’s great that 3D printing so often implies closed-source 3D models, and undoubtedly that has limited the growth of 3D modeling as a hobby. I strongly wish I could git clone the 3D model projects I find online, and there’s a whole lot of models that are useless to me because I can’t git clone and modify them.

At the same time? 3D printing carries the hacker flag quite strongly, despite the imperfections, and you can notice it by just how often 3D printing appears on our pages. We can and should point at aspects of hacker culture that 3D printing doesn’t yet represent, and while at it, we benefit from the technology, as much as its imperfections hurt us.

Where Is Hackerdom Found?

Would I argue the same about Discord servers? Mastodon-hosted threads? YouTube videos? GitHub repos with barely-documented code? For sure. There’s no shortage of criticism about those, mostly about accessibility issues. Servers and videos are often not externally discoverable, which is surprisingly painful for hacker culture’s ability to thrive and grow. At the very least, we are badly missing out – for instance, I’d say Discord servers and YouTube videos alike are in dire need of external log/transcript hosting capabilities, and tech-oriented Discord servers specifically could benefit from public logs in the same way that modern Discourse forums have them from the get-go.

That’s for the disadvantages. As for upsides, YouTube videos make hardware hacking into entertainment for potential hackers not enthralled by scrolling through a blog interspersed with pictures, and, they position hacking culture in front of people who’d otherwise miss out on it. Let’s take [DIY Perks], a hugely popular YouTube channel. Would that dual-screen laptop build we covered have worked out great as a blog post, or maybe as a dual post-video, as some hackers do? For sure. At the same time, it gets hacking in front of people’s faces.

Discord blows as a platform, and I’ve written a fair bit about just how much it blows. One such snippet is in the article I wrote about the Beepy project, where the Discord server was crucial to growing Beepy as a community-contributed project. Would people benefit from the Beepy project having publicly available logs? Most certainly, and I’d argue it’s hurt the Beepy project being more externally discoverable. Is that all?

Discord has been an unprecedented communications platform for the Beepy project, and we’d outright lose out if there weren’t hardware hacking communities thriving on Discord, like Hackaday Discord does. I think we should remedy these kinds of problems by building helper tools and arguing for better cultural norms, just like we did with software licenses, because giving up on platforms like Discord currently has a significantly subpar cost-benefit analysis.

What about imperfect code? Sometimes, a hacker figures out a small part of a sensor’s protocol or a basic feature, and as much as the code might be insufficient or hastily written, they publish it. Have you ever stumbled upon such a repository? I have, sometimes I was happy, and sometimes I was disappointed, but either which way, such code tend to require extra work. In the end, I’ve noticed that it almost always helped way more than it hurt, which in turn has eventually led to me publishing more and more.

I think we’d benefit from a culture where “publish later after cleanup” is replaced by “here’s the code, and I might push some cleanup commits later”. It’s a better contribution to hacker culture and to people who enjoy your work, and the “might” part makes it more honest. It’ll also get your publishing muscles in better shape so that you’re quick to post about things you really ought to post about. For what it’s worth, I don’t think it hurts if this is assisted by social media likes, too.

Strength Through Presence

Survival of hacker culture has so far heavily relied on its presence in media all across, and an ability to press the “maybe I can hack too” button in other people’s brains through that presence. That said, every non-open 3D model, Discord server with non-public logs, YouTube channel with non-transcribed videos, or a completely ephemeral TikTok channel, still palpably paves a way for future hackers to join our communities, wherever hackerdom might be within ten years’ time.

I think the key to informational impedance mismatches is making it easier for people to meet the high standards we expect, and helping people meet them where appropriate, in large part, by example. It looks like hacking is strongest when present everywhere, even when some seams, and I hope that this kind of overwhelming presence helps us overcome modern-day unique cultural hurdles in a way we couldn’t hope for just a decade ago.