Thank you Bit Shifter and breakphase but I wanted to say too many things and without having the necessary language skills. It's nice that you had the right mindset to see through it.
You made me try again 
Basically I stand with those that think the punk similarity to be real.
Not so much about the music in itself it's more about the role that these kind of cultural movements ( punk, chipmusic, diy, etc..) play in the society.
This ideas are already here, several posts, let's take for example thegostservar's observation (harmony, dissonance). It's large enough, it's about the relationship between the musician and the society or, even better to my goals, between the musicians (as a group, one specific group, one scene, one genre) and the others, all the others.
With a similar perspective in mind I guess we can safely say that the punk advent brought a certain "dissonant taste", for example to the English society. I was a little kid then and wasn't there, but it has been described to me like a working class movement, a bottom-up type of movement. Make sense to me.
Thirty years later a different group of people started to look at their old toys with new eyes and instead of throwing them away like any good citizen... you know the drill.
This is a gross approximation of what actually happened, I know, but I need it to point out a few things:
1) A deceptively simple act like choosing one tool over another could be, today, as dissonant and fascinating as for punk was, I don't know... growing an eccentric hair style.
That is related to power relationships of the society.
A dissonant movement to play his role, to be fascinating, has to bite somewhere.
Power relationships are favorite targets, they are based over many things: brute force, symbols, media..etc. Coexist mixed in various ways in different societies in different times and they have a huge role in shaping people's behavior.
Now, I don't see any punk air cut put up that much of a scandal in a wester city today.
There are places where using old hardware is nothing to write about because it is their regular way of doing and thinking.
In a more "values" oriented society a bigger part of its power relationship are based upon certain symbols or more upon authoritative figures like the Pope, the President, the Queen... But these relationships change, relatively fast. Some groups of people come up with new ways to superimpose their willing to the others, elites change and also "dissonant" movements, as reactions, have to change too.
You know where I'm going, it's been phrased before as the "anti-consumerism" aspect.
It already gave us good fruits like small shops, different little-scale economics, new relationships. We don't want to underestimate this, this is biting, it's one part of the role. It's biting where it hurts, power relationships.
2) Different groups of people in different times can play the same role.
That is to be expected, it'd better be. Societies evolve, people too.
Roles, instead, look to be much slower changing.
Do we really have to know all that stuff?
Well at least, in this topic, that is a possible answer.
So, playing the same role, how that sounds?
Sounded weird to me, that much I know, like puppets.
Social facts transcend every single one of us and they can be so strong you can't do anythings but to comply. It is who we are after all, social animals.
On a more positive side we are a special kind of animals, supposedly clever.
Social facts are not always so strong and I think that oftentimes we, as single individuals, can choose our roles and how to use them.
These punk, chipmusic, diy... related roles smells a lot like the kind you choose for yourself.
Merry christmas, love you all.
