[benzofuran]

It's a shame - in 2008/9/10 it was really something to see, but as a few other commenters have said, it's (and a lot of the maker movement for that matter) have declined a bit.

I personally think this is due to the infantilization in part of a lot of media outlets, where the emphasis has been placed on getting the ideas into the most hands possible instead of folks who'd actually benefit. Focusing the faires around 3D printing geegaws and cosplay items is fine if you want to make numbers, but you get consumers and the followons, and not creators from that.

You can think of it in the same vein as Marvel movies or Harry Potter books - low content, low thinking media that raises insane amounts of money based on appealing to the mass market and the wannabe 'geek' crowd that doesn't tend to do much innovating except in consumption methods.

[sammorrowdrums]

I was really sad to hear about NIMBY being pushed out of Oakland too, because it's another example of how areas get absorbed and change (and a little bit more of SF maker culture affected).

The trend of interesting innovation / culture / community starting as a movement and turning into a zoo (in the sense of people not part of it wanting to pay to have a look) is kind of how everything happens.

Settlements of humans that are now cities, gentrification within cities, hacker spaces and makerspaces ending up full of business people and less technical people...

I'm not saying this is a problem, although I know it's often sad when you're a part of the community, but that the cycle of interesting bits of culture kind of being absorbed and in some ways killed but in other ways captured into the world happen all the time.

It's really interesting to watch. I'm currently living in Amsterdam which is trying to reduce tourism (local politicians do things like remove the famous Amsterdam sign). I don't think it'll work. Too many people benefit from the money and the world wants a piece of it.

I think for some Brexit is a futile attempt at trying to hold on to British Club even though Britain will inevitably evolve and change with migration, technology, tourism, knowledge etc.

[PhasmaFelis]

> Harry Potter books - low content, low thinking media

This seems like knee-jerk lit-snobbery. "It's popular and accessible, so it can't be any good."

[Red_Tarsius]

The culture has changed a lot. Geek originally described loners with unreasonable passion and knowledge about a specific niche. Now it's a codeword for capitalist cattle. It's the Big Bang Theory crowd that turned consumerism and brand loyalty into a point of pride: I wonder what Nietzsche would say about that.

[benzofuran]

I'd almost argue that we need to find a new word for it but at this point there's not much to it. I've had the discussion a few times about how Big Bang Theory is basically a minstrel show about smart people instead of your choice of minority group and while some folks get the comparison, most just glaze over.

[scottlocklin]

"Yeast life" works for me. Mass consumerization of everything from neck tattoos and facial piercings to "geek culture" is covered by the phrase.

[DanBC]

My favourite sketch show did something about this and he's spot on.

John Finnemore: You are not a geek - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=thsRk9fuIdU

[gitgud]

> loners with unreasonable passion and knowledge about a specific niche. Now it's a codeword for capitalist cattle.

Reminds of open-source contributors doing it for the passion. People never made open-source software to make money back in the day...

[pen2l]

Just curious: these... people, who made open-source not for money but for something else, what was typically their means for livelihood? They were software engineers in their day jobs?

Man, some discipline these guys had, to juggle it all so well.

[Ar-Curunir]

The HP books didnt really start as a means of appealing to a mainstream crowd though...

[benzofuran]

They are young adult fiction, which is like saying that cars weren't built for driving. I'm not sure what you intend they were written as then, as they surely aren't literature.

[uncletaco]

The Harry Potter books are children’s literature. Not young adult. At least the first four or five are.

Notice how they’re almost all divided into very episodic chapters. That’s because children’s novels are generally built for reading maybe a chapter or two at a time. Maybe before bed or during reading time in a classroom.

Also those books are very much literature.

[bdowling]

Surely they are literature in the broadest sense of the word.

[0xcde4c3db]

I suspect the intended distinction is between literary fiction and genre fiction, which is a quirky socioeconomic split that seems to be particular to the realm of novels and their authors. Basically, authors of literary fiction are regarded as masters in pursuit of True Art rather than baser desires like popularity or commercial success.

[classicsnoot]

Then what was it? I get that it holds a special place in peoples' hearts, but her best on offer was Azkaban and the transition from 04 to 06 is evidence that she started writing for the screen. She had a great idea. She had excellent response. She got bamboozled by billions and what could have been an English language epic became a pop culture touch point. Look at the desperate cloying for more bux via the continued franchise prequel, replete with woke characters and a-canonical bullshit. To top it off, she's one of the few people to become a billionaire and lose said status (and before anyone throws out the "muh charity" defense, her becoming less able to be generous doesn't help in the long run). HP was deligitimized by appealing to the LCD. To circle back, it obviously started as an appeal for attention; that is true of all art. But by trying to capture the world, she lost her frame, thereby relegating herself to the pop culture rubbish heap.