Difference between revisions of "Danger committee"
(Created an actual "danger committee" page to serve as a stub for links, search results and future additions.) |
|||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
It also has a role to play in authorizations. When we get a new tool like the Bridgeport or ShopBot, nobody initially is authorized, so nobody can in turn authorize others. To solve the chicken and egg problem, an ad hoc group forms around the tool that becomes the initial group of authorized uses. They in turn figure the tool out, figure what is dangerous about it, remediate safety issues, acquire initial tooling, perform setup and calibration, etc. In other words, they clear the way for the membership to use the tool. They also form the pool of initial authorizers to get other people trained and authorized. | It also has a role to play in authorizations. When we get a new tool like the Bridgeport or ShopBot, nobody initially is authorized, so nobody can in turn authorize others. To solve the chicken and egg problem, an ad hoc group forms around the tool that becomes the initial group of authorized uses. They in turn figure the tool out, figure what is dangerous about it, remediate safety issues, acquire initial tooling, perform setup and calibration, etc. In other words, they clear the way for the membership to use the tool. They also form the pool of initial authorizers to get other people trained and authorized. | ||
| − | As many tools at PS:One allow for any authorized member to authorize any other member, the danger committee often fades into obscurity. | + | As many tools at PS:One allow for any authorized member to authorize any other member, the danger committee often fades into obscurity. |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
Revision as of 17:31, 1 July 2015
The "Danger Committee" is the unofficial official term for the first group of hackers to figure out what is too dangerous to do with a new tool where we don't necessarily have a lot of knowledge or experience. The name is also a joke because it's a "safety committee" that has been hackerspaceified. Generally speaking, what a danger committee is or does has to adapt heavily depending on the tool or equipment being researched, so it's most frequently explained with examples instead of definitions.
It also has a role to play in authorizations. When we get a new tool like the Bridgeport or ShopBot, nobody initially is authorized, so nobody can in turn authorize others. To solve the chicken and egg problem, an ad hoc group forms around the tool that becomes the initial group of authorized uses. They in turn figure the tool out, figure what is dangerous about it, remediate safety issues, acquire initial tooling, perform setup and calibration, etc. In other words, they clear the way for the membership to use the tool. They also form the pool of initial authorizers to get other people trained and authorized.
As many tools at PS:One allow for any authorized member to authorize any other member, the danger committee often fades into obscurity.