4 ms·

> the RP2040 wouldn’t immediately have counterfeits flooding the market without any hope of legal action That would be great. Here is the mission statement str

> the RP2040 wouldn’t immediately have counterfeits flooding the market without any hope of legal action That would be great. Here is the mission statement straight from raspberrypi.org: > The Raspberry Pi Foundation is a UK-based charity with the mission to enable young people to realise their full potential through the power of computing and digital technologies. Cheaper clones from China would aid that goal, but of course, it flies in the face of a fake non-profit company. And if you are only interested in preventing counterfeits, just slap the trademarked Raspberry logo on there. No need to inhibit progress with patents.

gjsman-1000 2y ago
No, it would be terrible, as technology development is not free. Chinese clones are the epitome of your “enshittification.” They drive prices up for the real product and invade the market with garbage. This has most recently happened in the 3D printing world, with Prusa versus BambuLab. Who actually develops an open source slicer? Who allows 3rd-party firmware? Who contributes to the community? Who abides by open source licenses? Hint: It is not the Chinese company. But at least that GPL-violating, closed-source printer was cheaper.
- elaus 2y ago
  But it was never Prusa's declared mission to get as many people into 3d printing as possible? So I don't see how this is relevant when comparing it to RPi's mission.
  - madmask 2y ago
    Well maybe the plan wasn't to become a martyr and die for charity. If they are providing value they should be able to thrive, not just survive.
- hales 2y ago
  > Chinese clones are the epitome of your “enshittification.” They drive prices up for the real product and invade the market with garbage. The opposite, having no clones makes it easier for a group (like RaspberryPi) to enshittify. Enshittification is where a group first obtains a large market share with cheap/free services and then pivots to squeeze as much out as possible. Having a competent clone is a strong preventative. > This has most recently happened in the 3D printing world, with Prusa versus BambuLab. Who actually develops an open source slicer? Who allows 3rd-party firmware? Who contributes to the community? Who abides by open source licenses? Hint: It is not the Chinese company. Bambu pisses me off too. Unfortunately your parent is talking about patents, not open source vs closed source, or license violations. > No, it would be terrible, as technology development is not free. What about compatibility? Wouldn't it be good for competitors to be able to provide compatible PIO interfaces, so customers can churn from one SBC to another SBC without needing to rewrite their code?
  - robertlagrant 2y ago
    > Having a competent clone is a strong preventative. This causes a similar problem: people don't buy from the innovator, who needs more money to carry on innovating. They buy from the clone, who mostly only copies the innovator.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- bogwog 2y ago
  > They drive prices up for the real product and invade the market with garbage. that's not how supply and demand works...

gjsman-1000 2y ago

No, it would be terrible, as technology development is not free. Chinese clones are the epitome of your “enshittification.” They drive prices up for the real product and invade the market with garbage. This has most recently happened in the 3D printing world, with Prusa versus BambuLab. Who actually develops an open source slicer? Who allows 3rd-party firmware? Who contributes to the community? Who abides by open source licenses? Hint: It is not the Chinese company. But at least that GPL-violating, closed-source printer was cheaper.

elaus 2y ago
But it was never Prusa's declared mission to get as many people into 3d printing as possible? So I don't see how this is relevant when comparing it to RPi's mission.
- madmask 2y ago
  Well maybe the plan wasn't to become a martyr and die for charity. If they are providing value they should be able to thrive, not just survive.
hales 2y ago
> Chinese clones are the epitome of your “enshittification.” They drive prices up for the real product and invade the market with garbage. The opposite, having no clones makes it easier for a group (like RaspberryPi) to enshittify. Enshittification is where a group first obtains a large market share with cheap/free services and then pivots to squeeze as much out as possible. Having a competent clone is a strong preventative. > This has most recently happened in the 3D printing world, with Prusa versus BambuLab. Who actually develops an open source slicer? Who allows 3rd-party firmware? Who contributes to the community? Who abides by open source licenses? Hint: It is not the Chinese company. Bambu pisses me off too. Unfortunately your parent is talking about patents, not open source vs closed source, or license violations. > No, it would be terrible, as technology development is not free. What about compatibility? Wouldn't it be good for competitors to be able to provide compatible PIO interfaces, so customers can churn from one SBC to another SBC without needing to rewrite their code?
- robertlagrant 2y ago
  > Having a competent clone is a strong preventative. This causes a similar problem: people don't buy from the innovator, who needs more money to carry on innovating. They buy from the clone, who mostly only copies the innovator.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
bogwog 2y ago
> They drive prices up for the real product and invade the market with garbage. that's not how supply and demand works...