Do keep in mind that they're a registered charity, a not-for-profit.
The reason I mention this is that "even though it would net them a lot more money" means that by doing it in the UK it isn't hurting shareholders, but the charity's goals - as mentioned in the blog itself.
I don't know whether it would be better to have £x more profit for the charity or to make y more boards in the UK, but either way you have to assume they're doing what they think is best as a charity.
Personally I could care less about whether they were a charity, or for profit. At this price level, they are an order of magnitude cheaper than competing SoC solutions, and there is an ocean of opportunity for uses of systems like this where it wouldn't have even been close to economically feasible before.
I would actually prefer this company to be FOR-PROFIT, so they have an economic incentive to continue increasing the performance per dollar. I am afraid this will be a one-off product that eventually dies off because there's no incentive to innovate further.
What do you think an economic incentive would add to the organisation? They have been working on this product for a while now, they're bringing it into production, they seem well-motivated and adequately resourced. Is this something that's likely to go into decline when the "new charity smell" wears off?
(I'm aware that capitalism's a sensitive subject, so to be clear: this is an honest question)
Are you sure? If it costs a lot less to manufacture, that extra money gets spent fueling consumption of something else; I don't know what that would be, but I doubt it'd be zero.
The money would certainly be spent elsewhere, but the point is "why burn precious energy to bring a rock here from China if I can find a rock in my front lawn". Do what you like with the money you save, it is still a win for the planet because you conserved a resource at no cost (if the two rocks are fungible)
Also it occurs to me that while a focus on local may cost gains found in economies of scale, it can net gains in terms of spreading out the burden of negative externalities. This one is murky and not always a clear win one way or the other though.
It is not at no cost, because it is more efficient( at least comparatively if not absolutely ) to produce the rock in China and overseas shipping is extremely efficient. That is what comparative advantage and trade is all about. It is only better for the planet in the sense that the products costs more and as a result fewer of them will be produced costing less resources.
Not sure about UK, but in the Netherlands, volunteers often get a "costs reimbursement". If you're a full time volunteer, that reimbursment may roughly equal a crappy salary. Maybe that's what Liz is getting, too.
It'd be nothing like what she could earn in industry, but enough to keep a roof over her head and food on the table. And a Raspberry Pi in every room.
Depends on how you handle the pre-orders, most would try something like paypal but they are so terrible at dealing with pre-order payments and account freezing that it is easier to avoid pre-orders at all.
They're going to do what manufacturing they can in the UK, even though it would net them a lot more money to do it overseas. Awesome.