There's another similar website in Area51 called Electronics and Robotics for with a purpose similar to ChipHacker's.

What kind of questions are on Chiphacker? From the FAQ, "Electronics & Robotics Hardware Hacking questions, of course! ... No question is too trivial or too "newbie". Oh yes, and it should be about electronics, robotics or physical computing." You just came from a page with examples of questions currently on Chiphacker.

Electronics and Robotics is a "Proposed Q&A site for electronics and robotics hardware hacking enthusiasts - topics that include robotics, electronics, physical computing, and even those working with an Arduino." See this page for a list of questions that they want on their site.

Will Chiphacker merge with or compete with Electronics and Robotics?

  • \$\begingroup\$ there's also a Microcontroller proposal \$\endgroup\$
    – vicatcu
    Commented Aug 5, 2010 at 15:36
  • \$\begingroup\$ Also, head over to meta.stackexchange.com, find the tag stackexchange-2.0, ignore the proposals, and you'll find a dozen Q&A about the reaction to the changes. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Aug 5, 2010 at 15:38
  • 8
    \$\begingroup\$ Competition really doesn't work for Stack Exchange sites. It just dilutes everything with duplicate questions, answers and effort split up between different sites, etc. I don't care who runs it, but I only want to see one SE site for electronics and microcontroller stuff. There can be only one! \$\endgroup\$
    – endolith
    Commented Aug 5, 2010 at 17:49
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ I agree with you, endolith. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Aug 5, 2010 at 18:52
  • \$\begingroup\$ Hold on, close-voters! According to this answer: meta.electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/9/10#10 Caratino is going to go through and move selected questions (in one click, instead of a bunch of votes). We could do this for all of the questions with [meta], but I don't know that this is a good use of our resources. Additionally, should this one be treated differently, as it's historical in nature? \$\endgroup\$ Commented Sep 30, 2010 at 19:10

5 Answers 5


In the question on this site, "Will Chiphacker survive StackExchange 2.0?", the SO blog post here about the upgrade from SE 1.0 to 2.0 was brought up. That blog post has an FAQ at the bottom. The most important question in this situation is:

Q: What if a new, community-created site competes with my existing, old-rules Stack Exchange?
If your existing Stack Exchange site already has developed a substantial community, we’ll encourage people to go there, rather than creating yet another Stack Exchange on the same topic. Once again, our goal is to make the Internet a better place to get expert answers to your questions. Competing with existing sites that do a great job of that is not in our mission. However, if your Stack Exchange site does not have substantial traffic, we reserve the right to create a new site on the same topic.

However, there's another blog post here about the migration process, and, as this question on meta.SO points out, includes the clause:

SE 1.0 sites owners[sic] meeting the minimum criteria will have a choice:

  • Continue for free under the same terms as SE 1.0 for as long as they maintain the traffic levels.
  • Migrate directly into SE 2.0 as a fully-fledged SE 2.0 site.

In answer to the question "Will Chiphacker survive StackExchange 2.0", Marcus/littlebirdceo got an email confirmation that we're an active site from Robert Carantio, the SE community coordinator, stating that we will continue to run in the same [manner] as we do now.

So, the question at this moment is which road Marcus wants to take. We can remain on SE 1.0, and continue to compete with Electronics Exchange and the new Area 51 site, which will be on SE 2.0, or we can become/merge with the new Area 51 site.

That's the situation. Now we/Marcus have to decide. I'm not sure if Marcus wants to maintain control over the site as a source of support for littlebird electronics customers, or if he's making money from ads, or if he wants to go with the popular vote - It's his decision in the end, and I don't want to step on his toes.

I don't want to give up the user and answer base we have here, but I'd like very much to move to the 2.0 platform so we can have continued support from the SE team. I don't think many of us are good enough web developers to maintain/upgrade the site better than they will, and I already miss some SE 2.0 features (Like URL markup in comments). I think that the commitments, the publicity, and the beta/meta processes associated with Area 51 would be good for the site, but I doubt that the call "Alright, everyone head over to Electronics and Robotics, the site will be closing down" will be well received. And, I like Electropus.

  • \$\begingroup\$ reemrevnivek, You've explained much better my doubts. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Aug 5, 2010 at 14:08
  • 6
    \$\begingroup\$ +1 for Electropus! \$\endgroup\$
    – vicatcu
    Commented Aug 5, 2010 at 15:40
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ I like the Chiphacker name and Electropus logo, I've also found the community very responsive and eager to help - I'll be following it to whatever site it moves too or merges with. VIVA LA CHIPHACKER \$\endgroup\$
    – Jim
    Commented Sep 9, 2010 at 19:31

Hey Guys,

What we are thinking we will do is move away from the Stack Exchange site, to a similar free model.

Everyones Badges and points will move across.

We ultimately don't want to loose content ownership to Stack Exchange, so Chiphacker will continue to exist but not on their site.

We're looking on adding electronics specific tools to the app too - eg. tools that allow people to embed circuit diagrams etc




Chiphacker was merged with electronics exchange.

  • \$\begingroup\$ Chiphacker was moved to electronics.stackexchange, but was Electronics Exchange merged, too, or just deleted? \$\endgroup\$
    – endolith
    Commented Sep 29, 2010 at 20:17
  • \$\begingroup\$ Chiphacker was moved too. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Sep 29, 2010 at 20:23

I know this is a touchy subject, but the Electronics and Robotics proposal at Area51 has reached 100% commitment, and as soon as the admins get around to it, the site will go into a private beta to help seed the site with questions. If you commit now, you can become a part of the private beta.

After a 7-day private beta, the site will enter a public beta to gauge traffic, etc. You can read about the whole process at the Area51 FAQ.

I don't want to see Chiphacker go up against any other site - personally, I think that the two sites should be merged, which lets Chiphacker keep all of its existing material, and gain the benefits of being a part of the SE 2.0 network.


I see a bunch of proposed Stack Exchange sites that at least partially overlap Chiphacker.

What is the appropriate response?

  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ It would be to merge the content (as Jared has suggested above). All these are super-specialized versions chiphacker. It all comes down to one decision, do you want many centres (super specialized in one area) with very low traffic or do you want a general area with much greater traffic \$\endgroup\$
    – Rick_2047
    Commented Sep 12, 2010 at 12:28

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .