
BrewDog’s open-source revolution is at the vanguard of postcapitalism - dan1234
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/feb/29/brewdogs-open-source-revolution-is-at-the-vanguard-of-postcapitalism
======
notahacker
"Vanguard of postcapitalism" because they publish a recipe?

I'd say it was a publicity stunt from very effective brand marketers; they
might as well have treated "No Logo" as an instruction manual. The Brewdog
logo on the bottle matters more than the recipes to its target market, and the
counterculture stance is all part of that. Brewdog's advantage over other
craft brewers is branding rather than brewing.

And yes, it's also good for publicity when trying to crowdfund from "the
misfits, the independents, the libertines”, perhaps because "the financial
institutions of the City [which] gave rise to the bastardisation and
commoditisation of beer" weren't too keen on their 115x revenue valuation.
Nice of the Guardian to take those claims at face value (linked article) too.

But seriously, I'm struggling to think of anyone in the beer industry that
tries to "make money out of keeping beer recipes secret", especially with most
of the best-selling beers relying rather less on taste than Brewdog. Coca-
cola, of course, famously emphasises their closely guarded recipe, but as with
Brewdog's "open source", that's more about the corporate mythology behind the
brand than any serious fear that someone might even slightly dent their brand
and distribution network by making something that tastes the same rather than
merely similar.

~~~
stcredzero
_" Vanguard of postcapitalism" because they publish a recipe?_

One of the obnoxious things I've noticed about capitalism, is that its current
incarnation seems to incentivize bait and switch. You develop warm fuzzy
feelings about a brand, but then they start to outsource production, or sell
their brand to a national brewer. This seems to happen a lot to beer, often
with a change of taste and a degradation of product quality. With "open
source," at least the customer can homebrew their own and do an AB test.

(Same sort of thing happens with startups, I've also noticed.)

~~~
Agustus
The problem is scale and safety.

I can start a company tomorrow selling farm churned butter from the cows that
operate at my farm. It is the best butter because every morning I go to the
cows and tell them they are the best cows this side of the Mississippi. I
churn the butter by hand and sell out a lot of product. However, when I max
out the cows on my location, I need to buy more cows for my farm and increase
the amount of land or I can ask Farmer Jed next door to talk to his cows in
the morning and tell them that his cows are the best cows this side of the
Mississippi. Farmer Jed churns the butter by hand, but he forgets to wash his
hands after he goes to the bathroom, something I never did like about him, but
he tells this great story about him and the milk maid over in Aberdeen.

Multiply my success more and more and finally I am needing thousands of
gallons of milk, a centralized processing system to churn the butter and
ensure quality control of my brand and then I have a knock on my door from a
white glove butter churner. They have gone through the regulatory process with
the FDA, have done butter churning for other companies successfully, and have
a great track record. I will hand over that portion to them.

This is why the companies start out warm and fuzzy, but regulatory issues,
meeting demand, and other fun things cause a drive to outsourced production.

~~~
dougmany
I agree the real issue is the push to grow. there is an optimum size for
everything and the irrational drive to make everything as big as possible has
caused us to loose a lot of great things.

~~~
e12e
Marx would say this is what happens when you push for _increase_ in profit
year to year, quarter to quarter.

------
mbenjaminsmith
I'm surprised there's no discussion of "Gypsy brewing" in this article. The
pioneer of Gpysy brewing, Mikkeller, has brewed beers in collaboration with
BrewDog before and Gpysy brewing is counterpart to this "open IP" style of
doing business.

I think it represents a much more interesting vision of "postcapitalism" than
just opening up IP. Renting out excess capacity (in a brewery or other
production facility) allows IP-only companies to get into the business. Not
only has it allowed Mikkeller (and others, including his estranged twin
brother) to get into beer with litte or no capex, it's allowed him to operate
on different continents, solving another host of problems for working in a
global marketplace.

Apply that model to other industries and there could be a Cambrian explosion
in innovation and creativity.

~~~
themartorana
Mikkeller's Beer Geek Brunch Weasel - a stout brewed with civet coffee - is my
all-time favorite beer, and I know a thing or two about beer. If you're any
kind of beer lover, Mikkeller's beers are not to be missed.

~~~
nibnib
Actually a lot of them are to be missed, they are famous for going with every
crazy idea and many beers are completely panned.

------
elthran
This could really confuse the "free as in beer" metaphor in FOSS software
discussions

------
humanrebar
I'm confused by 'postcapitalism' as a term, probably because I've never
considered facts, including recipes, to be capital that someone should own.
Can you have a contract with someone that knows lots of facts and can put them
to use? Sure. Can you own facts? Not without a government-granted monopoly.
And government-granted monopolies are not capitalism as I understand it.

I feel that IP monopolies are better described as 'corporatism' since those
rights are directly proportional to your ability to enforce them with a legal
team.

~~~
stdbrouw
That's a bit of an arbitrary distinction. Without the government monopoly on
violence, what's to stop me from knocking your door down and forcing you to
perform free labor for me? Do you think ownership is part of the natural
universe, something that can be read off of molecules and determined with a
microscope?

Every exchange, be it of goods, services or ideas, relies on a regulated
marketplace.

~~~
humanrebar
We're veering into the we worn paths of rights theory. But I'll point out that
theft of precious matter is universally condemned in modern societies. And
telling someone else's jokes is rarely criminal.

I believe there is a natural distinction between matter and information. It's
obvious in physics and I'm not sure why we feel the need to muddy the water
with our legal code.

~~~
stdbrouw
Rather hand-wavy, don't you think?

~~~
humanrebar
Not at all. A piece of matter has a unique identity. You can arrange other
matter to resemble it, but you can't copy it, strictly speaking.

In contrast, information can be copied and move to new media fairly simply.

If Grandpa's pocket watch were destroyed, you could buy another pocket watch
of the same model and vintage, but it really wouldn't be Grandpa's pocket
watch. This is one source of friction when estates are settled. In contrast,
you could copy all the digital photos of Grandpa and hand them out on USB
sticks like party favors.

~~~
stdbrouw
And this proves your point that information should not be owned how? You're
making various factual statements about what is easy, what is hard, what
societies tend to condemn and tend not to condemn, but nowhere in there is a
line of reasoning that actually supports your original claim.

~~~
humanrebar
Theft where someone is deprived of something unique (Grandpa's pocket watch)
is fundamentally different than 'theft' where the original thing (a fact) is
unharmed. When people 'steal' beer recipes or jokes, they erode exclusivity.
They don't deprive someone of particular molecules.

That means, with some exceptions, to the extent that someone is harmed in
information 'theft', it's that their _business model_ was affected (I can't
make as much money on Mickey Mouse cartoons!). It seems like a contradiction
to me to call it 'capitalism' when government protects particular business
models.

That's why I said I prefer to think of IP laws as 'corporatism'.

Sorry if I under-explained things.

------
varjag
> “Oh, and if you are from one of the global beer mega corporations and you
> are reading this, your computer will spontaneously combust, James Bond
> style, any second now.”

Wouldn't that be Mission Impossible style?

~~~
sageikosa
I'm thinking Inspector Gadget.

------
girvo
BrewDog are one of my favourite breweries! Their collab, Black Tokyo Horizon
is the single most interesting (and best, in my opinion) stouts in the world.
Amazing to see that the recipes are open-source too, I guess it really is
free-as-in-beer!

~~~
masklinn
> I guess it really is free-as-in-beer!

Except free-as-in-beer specifically meant you didn't have to pay for the end-
product ( _gratis_ ) but had no rights or idea on the IP, by opposition to
free-as-in-freedom ( _libre_ ) which you may have to pay for but could then
use as you wished.

~~~
dkersten
Its open source beer. I still have to compile it myself if I want it for free.
Or I can pay a vendor (BrewDog) to do it for me.

I choose to pay the vendor because I'm lazy and like their SLA.

~~~
masklinn
Right, so it's beer which specifically _isn 't free-as-in-beer_.

~~~
dkersten
Yes.

But don't let that ruin a good open-source vs free-software debate...

------
dbcooper
I do like Brewdog's "Dead Pony" light IPA. Hoppy with a good bite, and light
enough (3.6% abv) for an easy session with some movies. Excellent 3 to 4 % abv
ales are a hallmark of English brewing.

A superior light IPA though is Tuatara's "Iti". 3.3% with a good hop bloom,
plenty of bite, and not a hint of an off flavour. I suspect they increase the
mineral content of the water to give it more bite. I'm drinking one right now.
:)

Now a good sub 4% pilsner - that I may never find.

~~~
GordonS
> Excellent 3 to 4 % abv ales are a hallmark of English brewing

Oi! Brewdog is very much _Scottish_!

------
BWStearns
I like picking beer company as a fun way to introduce a general audience to
the notion of open source and segue into a broader econ discussion. I think a
better example though is Tesla freeing up use of their patents for free. Yes
there's a cynical reason decipherable (more EVs -> more market) but the way
they've done it is pretty open, there's nothing to stop a clever company from
competing with them better for being able to use the patented tech. Not having
to deal with the lawyers' billables and tying up corporate leaders in legal
meetings might be the biggest benefit for them.

~~~
mbenjaminsmith
> there's nothing to stop a clever company from competing with them

I wish I could remember where I read/saw it, but Musk stated that the goal of
Tesla was to make the market shift to EVs, not generate profit. My memory is a
bit hazy but I'm pretty sure he even said that after that goal was reached, he
didn't care what happened to Tesla. With that in mind, the motivation for
opening up patents seems pretty straightforward.

~~~
RobertoG
I admire the spirit but, it's a public company, is he not exposing himself to
legal problems with this kind of statements?

~~~
mbenjaminsmith
That's correct; IIRC, they were private at the time.

------
Dowwie
When capitalism is discussed, it _should_ be according to the following kind
of definition:

1) economic exchange of resources is achieved through market transactions 2)
means of production is privately owned and its availability is discretionary
3) labor is organized in a fashion where economic decisions governing the
organization are made by a board of directors

------
falcor84
> ...the Linux version of Unix for free ...

I don't usually nitpick about this, but I felt that this was really poor
phrasing. If they want to discuss the evolution of "open source", it's just
not ok to be so hand-wavy, and before getting to Linux, they should mention
GNU and the GPL.

------
GordonS
Home brewing is something I'd really like to get into.

I imagine I'll have a lot of failures though, before I start producing
anything decent - can the quantities given be lessened, e.g. quartered, and
still get the same taste result?

~~~
EdwardMSmith
If you start with pre-assembled kits, they're really quite difficult to screw
up, and the results are usually quite drinkable. The pre-assembled kits are
usually 5 gallon/19 liters, although 1 gallon kits are available as well, but
cost goes up (per yield).

The next step after would be taking recipes, either from the kits you already
made, or found elsewhere, and assembling the ingredients yourself, tweaking
where you want to make a change.

~~~
GordonS
Nice, a kit sounds like a good way to get started quickly. Do you have any
links for recommendations?

~~~
fbernier
See the stickied FAQ on
[https://www.reddit.com/r/homebrewing](https://www.reddit.com/r/homebrewing)

------
arethuza
Never thought I'd see a company from the Broch on HN! :-)

------
meo2
since the new labels came out, I like the punk and especially the 5am less. I
still like the libertine. I was wondering if they were being prepared
differently or in a new brewery or something that coincided with the new
labels. I'm drinking them far away from the UK, so not sure if there are other
issues at work. Cool brewery though. I've loved a couple of their
collaborations.

------
randogp
Would be great to have machine-readable data. Any hint? (sorry if it is
obvious my background is in wet lab biology)

------
brudgers
There's a pun on "free as in beer" in here somewhere.

------
rplnt
Can you really make the beers using those recipes?

(The answer is no)

~~~
deutronium
What other information do you think they should provide, for people to clone
their recipes?

Sure people won't have the same conicals etc, which might alter the taste
somewhat but surely following the recipes will give a fairly close
approximation.

~~~
rplnt
So you can make _a_ beer, not the beer.

More information.. I feel like they leave out a lot of timing from the
recipes. Just two temperatures for each beer? How do they add the stuff from
twist? For how long? How do they kill fermentation? etc...

~~~
soundwave106
The two temperatures are enough for the basics. Like many homebrewers they
probably use single mash infusion for all of their beers. So the first
temperature would be the temperature you hold the mash at and they provide the
mash length as well. The second temperature is the fermentation temperature.

They are vague on boil time. The homebrewing standard is 60 minutes (as that
is a good length for extracting bitterness out of hops). In some recipes, it's
good to boil longer to get extra kettle caramelization. So, yes, it would've
been nice for them to provide that.

Generally speaking, homebrewers don't "kill fermentation". Instead they let
the yeast naturally settle after bottling (often adding a little sugar so that
the yeast naturally carbonates the beer in the bottle as well). Kegging and
force carbonating is also an option (most homebrew stores sell old style 5
gallon soda kegs for this purpose). If so, people may use finings in the
secondary to help clarity. A few even filter but it's not very common from
what I see. Pasteurizing at a homebrew level is unheard of. If Brewdog is a
typical craft brewery, they probably don't pasteurize either, but they filter.

There are a few things that Brewdog leaves out that will lead to a slightly
different tasting beer. There's no alpha acid percentages marked for the hops
for instance, or an overall bittering standard (which means that variations in
the hop crop might lead to slightly different bittering levels). They don't
provide specifics on their water profile that I see, which will make a subtle
difference. Their hop addition timing is a little vague ("beginning",
"middle", etc. -- it may not be clear to a non-homebrewer, but these describe
when in the boil to add the hops) Even something trivial like not providing
the names of the maltsters mean an exact clone is not possible (a crystal malt
from one company is not the exact same thing as a crystal malt from another
company).

Still, you can get in the ballpark I'm sure, and if one was dedicated enough
could adjust the brew on their system to come close.

------
aminok
An article about postcapitalism that doesn't promote violence-backed top-down
compulsory programs like tax-funded basic income? What a breath of fresh air.

------
randomname2
Uber, Tesla and Chipotle are often cited as examples of "post-capitalistic"
companies. Just out of interest, what would be other such companies?

And how would one define "Capitalism 2.0"/"post-capitalism" as a better
version of traditional capitalism, which often has worse connotations?

~~~
matthewmacleod
_Uber, Tesla and Chipotle are often cited as examples of "post-capitalistic"
companies._

Are they? I don't think I've ever heard that! Uber is almost one of the most
traditionally capitalist organisations possible!

~~~
pjc50
It doesn't really deploy capital in the traditional sense though - it doesn't
own its fleet of cars but rather rents them on an adhoc basis. It's very ...
neoliberal? Post-Coasian?

~~~
vertex-four
Uber is just as capitalist as any other company which requires its workers to
buy their own tools (which is rather a lot of them). The trick is that those
tools don't actually allow you to perform the work in and of themselves - you
still need Uber for a steady source of passengers and for regulatory
protection, and the only way you'll get that is wage labour.

