Open Fabs

Troy Benjegerdes hozer at hozed.org
Thu Aug 20 06:20:56 PDT 2015


On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 05:19:32PM -0400, grarpamp wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 3:13 PM,  <wirelesswarrior at safe-mail.net> wrote:
> > I still maintain that bootstapping is best done using EBL to create LSI and less complex VLSI (USB chips, CPLD and FPGA). Sure EBL is slow but it can eliminate the cost and complexity of masking. EBL immensely simplifies the foundry and offers the possibility for OS distributed design and manufacture, affordable for "maker" groups, without involving a commercial entity. The number of trusted parties shrinks significantly.
> 
> Who can spot the two untrusted parties in this chickenegg EBL rig?
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:EB_litograph.jpg
> And what are they driving? D-oh.
> 
> EBL would be fine if it's control was rebuilt as trusted gear.
> 
> Just links...
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron-beam_lithography
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Integrated_circuit#VLSI
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Systems_Language
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Apollo_guidiance_computer_ferrit_core_memory.jpg
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Agc_nor2.jpg
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k4oGI_dNaPc
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3wPBcmSb2U
> 

The solution to this chicken and egg rathole is a legislative trojan.

First, we identify a consortium (cartel?) of open-source hardware folks
who desire to make a lot of money making hardware that anyone can verify
correct operation of said hardware.

Then, we draft model legislation to fund basic R&D of 'trusted' hardware
by basic science research agencies in the US, Germany, Japan, and China.
(Now if you really want to tweak the beast, add Iran or North Korea to
the list, that would be amusing)

Now is the important part: Raising sufficient lobbying money to get the
previously developed model legislation passed in a sufficient subset of
countries. In the US this is pretty straighforward, we go to Silicon Valley
with a pitch deck and find some investors that already play the game of
financing legislation. We can start with people who've invested in Google,
Microsoft, Apple, and media companies (the ones that brought us the DMCA)

Once the legislation is passed, the previously mentioned cartel can now
leverage (probably by at least 100x) the original funds invested in 
lobbying, because they are the only ones that can succeed in getting the
grant funding for said basic research.

A completely different approach would be to find the owners of some 
smaller independent fabs who'd like to stay independent. If you want to
add the lobbying bit go to the local government and ask for economic
development funds for local industry.



More information about the cypherpunks mailing list