I'm not asking permission.
Not from VCs. Not from gatekeepers. Not from industry experts. Not from people who think they know better.
I'm building in public. Sharing everything. Making mistakes where people can see them.
This approach feels uncomfortable. It should. We've been trained to do the opposite.
The Permission Trap
Most people wait for permission before acting:
Career permission: "I need a credential before I can do that." "I need 10 years of experience before I'm qualified." "I need someone to hire me first."
Business permission: "I need investor approval." "I need market validation." "I need an MBA to run a company."
Creative permission: "I need a publisher to call myself a writer." "I need gallery representation to call myself an artist." "I need a deal to call myself a musician."
Technical permission: "I need to work for a big tech company before I can build something myself." "I need an engineering degree first." "I need someone to teach me."
These permission requirements share a common feature: someone else decides if you're ready.
This made sense in a world of limited distribution and high barriers to entry. If publishing required a printing press, you needed a publisher's permission. If manufacturing required a factory, you needed capital's permission. If distribution required retail relationships, you needed gatekeepers' permission.
We don't live in that world anymore.
The Permission-less Internet
The internet changed the economics of distribution. Publishing costs nothing. Reaching a global audience costs nothing. The gatekeepers who controlled access to audiences have been bypassed.
Some consequences:
- A teenager with a camera can build an audience larger than Hollywood studios
- An indie musician can reach listeners without a record label
- A programmer can ship software without a corporate job
- A writer can find readers without a publisher
- A designer can share plans without a manufacturing deal
The barriers that required permission have collapsed. What remains is internal: the belief that you need permission, even when you don't.
Building in Public
"Building in public" means sharing your process — not just your finished product — openly as you work.
For Thios, this means:
Designs are public: The CAD files are on OnShape, publicly viewable. Anyone can see exactly how things are designed, copy the files, modify them.
Progress is public: The blog documents what I'm doing and why. Successes and failures both. The honest version, not the polished version.
Thinking is public: Philosophy, business model decisions, technical trade-offs — I write about these as I work through them.
Pricing is public: You know what things cost. No hidden fees, no sales calls required.
This transparency feels risky. Competitors can copy everything. Critics can find flaws easily. Mistakes are permanent and visible.
But the benefits outweigh the risks:
Trust: When people see the actual work, they can evaluate it themselves. No need to trust marketing claims — verify directly.
Feedback: Public work attracts feedback. People point out errors, suggest improvements, share relevant knowledge. The work improves faster.
Community: Building in public attracts people who want to build with you. Contributors, customers, and collaborators find you because your work is visible.
Accountability: When you commit publicly, you follow through. The social pressure of public commitment is useful.
Simplicity: No secrets to keep. No dual messaging (public vs. private). One version of everything.
Open Source as Permission
"Want to build one? Go ahead. Want to sell one? Go ahead."
The Thiosphere is licensed under CERN-OHL-S — an open-source hardware license that explicitly permits commercial use. You can build a Thiosphere and sell it without asking my permission.
This shocks people. "You're giving away your business!"
But I'm not giving it away. I'm giving permission — which is different.
The designs are free. The handbook (documentation, instructions, cut lists) is $29. You can figure everything out from the free designs if you want, but most people find the handbook saves enough time to be worth the price.
The permission to build and sell creates more building and selling — some of which flows back to Thios through handbook sales, community participation, and ecosystem growth.
Compare to the closed alternative: designs are secret, building requires a license, selling requires a franchise agreement. More control, but less activity. The ecosystem never develops.
I'd rather have 1% of a large ecosystem than 100% of a small one.
The Risk of Not Asking
Not asking permission has real risks:
Being wrong publicly: When you share work before it's perfect, flaws are visible. Some people will criticize. Some criticism will be valid.
Alienating gatekeepers: Traditional gatekeepers don't like being bypassed. They might resist, criticize, or exclude you from their networks.
Losing control: Once you share something openly, you can't take it back. Others may use it in ways you didn't intend.
Underselling yourself: Some opportunities require credentials and traditional validation. Operating without them may close doors.
These risks are real. I accept them because the alternative — waiting for permission — is worse.
Waiting means:
- Nothing ships
- Nothing improves
- No feedback arrives
- No community forms
- No momentum builds
The perfect is the enemy of the good. Asking permission is the enemy of getting started.
Gatekeepers vs. Guides
I distinguish between gatekeepers and guides:
Gatekeepers control access. They decide if you're allowed in. Their power comes from scarcity — limited slots, limited capital, limited distribution.
Guides share knowledge. They help you navigate without controlling your access. Their value comes from expertise, not exclusivity.
I don't ask permission from gatekeepers. I do seek knowledge from guides.
Building the Thiosphere, I've learned from:
- Engineers who explained structural loads
- Builders who shared construction techniques
- Makers who demonstrated CNC processes
- Business owners who explained pricing and operations
- Community members who provided feedback
All guides, not gatekeepers. I sought their knowledge, not their approval.
The difference matters. Seeking knowledge is active — you find what you need, apply it, move forward. Seeking permission is passive — you wait for someone else to decide.
Your Permission Slip
If you're waiting for permission to start something, consider this your permission slip.
You have permission to:
- Build something: Start a project without credentials. Learn by doing. Share as you go.
- Sell something: Create value and exchange it for money. No gatekeeper required.
- Write something: Publish without a publisher. Blog, newsletter, book — your words, your platform.
- Make something: Design without a degree. Build without a license. The physical world doesn't check credentials.
- Teach something: Share what you know. Someone is a step behind you and could use the help.
- Start something: The business, the community, the movement. Just begin.
This isn't legal advice (check actual laws and regulations for your context). It's psychological advice: the internal permission barrier is often more limiting than any external barrier.
The Invitation
I'm building Thios in public, without asking permission.
The designs are free. Download them. Build from them. Modify them.
The business model is public. Evaluate it. Critique it. Suggest improvements.
The philosophy is visible. Agree or disagree. Engage with the ideas.
You don't need my permission to do any of this. That's the point.
And you don't need anyone's permission to build whatever you're considering building.
Start building.
Explore the open designs — public CAD files, no permission required.
Get the handbook — documentation that saves time.
Join the community — builders building without permission.