3D printers

Got a great idea? Tell the world about it here.

Moderators: mvs_staff, forum_admin, Marilyn

3D printers

Postby tvelection » Thu Jun 06, 2013 10:43 pm

The future of 3D printers seems amazing, especially considering the potential to use varied materials. But before I get to the idea I wanted to mention one thing.

I was so disappointed that I could only laugh at the person who used this device to make a gun; it's utterly pathetic. It reminds me of an old "Twilight Zone" episode where Rod Serling seemed to address this very issue. A man (a journalist) accidentally got lost on the road and entered into a town that could not let him leave. The reason was that they had technology from alien visitors that had made life peaceful and they couldn't allow him to leave because he'd expose the truth. They tested him by allowing him to live there as a free man. They showed him how to use a machine that could make any object out of atomic particles whose design was entered into it, even food. When the man had the chance he ran into the room and used the machine to make a gun and then shot those who tried to prevent him from leaving (unsuccessfully though). An elder of the town said that his actions represented mankind and why they could not give this technology to the masses to maybe cure diseases or save lives. He said, "We gave you the opportunity to use this machine and the first thing you made was a weapon. Mankind is so weak, so violent." Another elder had a good point too, "Einstein had a revolutionary theory of atomic energy, and what was that immediately used for? " And here, now, outside that fiction, inventors make a 3D printer and then someone idiotically uses it to make a gun and put the design on the internet.

------------------------------------------------------------

An interesting way to use the 3D printer for biology and medical research (because there are so many profound uses in its future) is to use as a design, the human body cross-sections that were made from a cadaver about a decade ago or even CT-scans of living people now. What would be interesting is that, unlike a statue, it would replicate the inside structures and cavities. Then depending on resolution it could get down to block cell size (eventually molecular). Maybe it would allow med students to do virtual operations, make prosthetics, or diagnoses. Just a thought, but such technology has a long way to go, especially with materials used and greater resolution.
tvelection
Intellectual
 
Posts: 339
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 12:44 am
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: 3D printers

Postby robert 46 » Mon Jun 10, 2013 4:16 pm

tvelection wrote:I was so disappointed that I could only laugh at the person who used this device to make a gun, how utterly pathetic.

Your colorization of this shows a remarkable bias.
It reminded me of a "Twilight Zone" episode where Rod Serling seemed to address this very issue. A man (a journalist) accidentally got lost on the road and entered into a town that could not let him leave.

In other words, they were being autocratic to restrict freedom of choice and action.
The reason was they had technology from alien visitors that had made life peaceful and they couldn't allow him to leave because he'd expose the truth.

The truth being that here is a town where life is made peaceful through technology.
They tested him by allowing him to live there as a free man.

"Free", although confined to the town. Sounds like Newspeak.
They showed him how to use a machine that could make any object out of atomic particles whose design was entered into it, even food.

The device alleviates material want.
When the man had the chance he ran into the room and used the machine make a gun and then shot those who tried to prevent him from leaving (unsuccessfully though).

A lack of forethought and planning.
The elders of the town said that his actions represented mankind and why they could not give this technology to the masses to maybe cure diseases or save lives. They said, "We gave you the opportunity to use this machine and the first thing you made was a weapon.

Shows that their intent to restrict his freedom of choice was shortsighted. They should have shooed him out of town before he learned about the replicator. Perhaps they should have replicated and posted "Quarantined by the board of health" signs.
Mankind is so weak, so violent.

Was the violence without provocation?
Also another character in that episode had a good point, "Einstein had a revolutionary theory of atomic energy, and what was that immediately used for?"

To put an end to the intended enslavement of the entire Asian continent?

Radar is a good example: it was pivotal in WWII, led to the Radar-Range and now the ubiquitous, inexpensive microwave oven.
And here, now, outside that fiction inventors make a 3D printer and then someone idiotically uses it to make a gun and put the design on the internet.

Idiotic??? How about brilliant? When autocrats come to understand that they can't disarm and enslave people who desire to be free perhaps they will stop trying. There's nothing quite like an assassin's bullet to be out with the old and in with the new. The vulnerability of all tyrants is that they are mortal. Even Julius Caesar's friends assassinated him because they saw him as power-hungry. The lesson of the 20th century is that allowing tyrants to consolidate power is a grave mistake. The timely assassinations of Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Mao, Castro, Pol Pot, and numerous other minor tyrants would have changed the world greatly for the better.

However, this ability to make anything one wants, and the danger of having such power, reminds me of the cult-classic science fiction movie "Forbidden Planet".

In Vonnegut's "Slaughterhouse Five" the Trafalmadorians would destroy the universe testing a new spaceship propulsion drive. Farcical in that the Trafalmadorians ability to see the future informed them that they were doomed to do this. The real-world counterpart was the worry that testing the first atomic bomb might detonate the entire atmosphere. The scientists assured them it wouldn't- they were right. Whether humanity eventually destroys itself is a real possibility, however. I wouldn't count on the scientists/technologists never making a momentous blunder. One might well worry about genetic engineering and nanotechnology, but I don't envision Luddites ever coming to power.

The ability of the government to spy on people using electronic/computer technology is Orwellian. It is no longer "the all-seeing eye of God" but "the all-seeing eye of Gov". (Look for it on the back of the one-dollar bill. [1]) Printed guns might not counter this, but it may give wannabe tyrants pause for thought.


[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_of_Providence
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Seal ... ted_States
Last edited by robert 46 on Mon Jun 17, 2013 1:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
robert 46
Intellectual
 
Posts: 2761
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 9:21 am

Re: 3D printers

Postby tvelection » Mon Jun 10, 2013 9:11 pm

Robert46 wrote:
Your colorization of this shows a remarkable bias.


Surely, as does your response. I doubt one of us is biased and the other is not.

It reminded me of a "Twilight Zone" episode where Rod Serling seemed to address this very issue. A man (a journalist) accidentally got lost on the road and entered into a town that could not let him leave.
In other words, they were being autocratic to restrict freedom of choice and action.


Not without reason, they had not harmed anyone and were living peacefully and they chose not to murder him or put him in jail for life. Yes, his freedom was restricted, no doubt had he been released their town would have been threatened under violence to hand over the technology. They would not have been left alone themselves to "freely" have something others wanted exploit for good or ill. I'm not saying he deserved to be confined, that was a dilemma they wrestled with too. Hypothetically had you been a town elder partly responsible for the reign of peace in that town what would you do? For me, if I let him escape to preserve his freedom and try to help greater humanity and then 3 years later there was a "provocation" somewhere and 200 million people were incinerated by that same technology maybe I could turn to the other elders and say, "one man's freedom was worth it," or at least try to convince myself of that. Or it could save that many people, it is counterfactual versus counterfactual, or rather unknown vs. unknown.

The reason was they had technology from alien visitors that had made life peaceful and they couldn't allow him to leave because he'd expose the truth.

The truth being that here is a town where life is made peaceful through technology.


Agreed, I'm not a Luddite. The question is what kind of technology and how it is used. The town could have taken over the world with it, they didn't. Rather they chose not to bother anyone except by this unfortunate man's accidental trespass.

As for super-weapons used by a countries that feel "provoked" or who claim that using nukes "save" lives, a common counterfactual estimate. Problem with that jusitification is that all sides can use it o justify the use of superweapons to end the war once and for all and "save lives" as some say. It's a point of view, some say nuclear weapons deter war and so far it may have done just that by mutually assured destruction, but personally I fear for the future, that this technology that could wipe out most of the life on the planet. Is humanity as a whole evolved enough to handle nukes, do they make us safer on whole, after seeing what much weaker bombs did in Japan? I'm not sure. But I'm not naive enough to think we can rid the world and our own country of nukes entirely. It's just too late and unrealistic imo.

If someone stole top secret plans for a unknown weapon that could used for greater good from our own little "town," America, and published it to the world, would that person be a hero? If we stopped him would we be autocratic too or should we let him go so as to not deny one man's freedom? If we tried to stop him we'd in the position of the elders. He took their techonolgy secrets on his way. He may have had his freedom restricted but to them he was also a thief.

Robert46 said
The device alleviates material want.


Yes, if that was it would have been used for I think it's a shame to have to hide it. I think that this guy's intent was good too, exposing the truth in most cases is the more ethical way. Unless for instance a spy reveals war palns of a democratic country acting in self defense or a WW2 German tells the Gestapo the "truth" about a Jewish safehouse ---or one discovers the technology for a new weapon and indiscriminately publishes it.

As for potential weapons gettinginto the wrong hands ---the character' freedom was restricted, true, I get that, but it's hard to weigh one man's freedom versus courting the creation of an unimaginable new weapon.

"A lack of forethought and planning on his part" Robert46, . . . true.

Robert46 wrote:
Shows that their intent to restrict his freedom of choice was shortsighted. They should have shooed him out of town before he learned about the replicator. Perhaps they should have replicated and posted "Quarantined by the board of health" signs.


Well said, the town shouldn't have allowed things to get to that point; they caused their own dilemma by a similar "failure of planning and lack of foresight."

Mankind is so weak, so violent.
Was the violence without provocation?


If you would have said without "justification" that's a good point, self-defense is a natural claim even to a dictatorships unfortunately, but "provocation" might be a little subjective (in the eyes of the beholder) North Korea considered US military exercises provocation I don't know if it justified action though, esp. if it is recognized as int'l waters. If China or Russia had military exercises as close as possible to the continental US but in int'l waters, I wonder if we'd feel that it was a "provocation," prompting a military response or escalation.

Robert46 wrote, in regard to WW2 nuke technology and use:
To put an end to the intended enslavement of the entire Asian continent?


Is that what would have happened? Possibly, but not the only outcome of a conventional war that had already turned in the West's favor. They did what they had to do at the time, but it is a tough moral question. Is it right for use nukes, would we condemn that kind of action if another country felt an existential threat? So many Japanese civilians, innocent women and children, died. I'm not sure how to weigh that against counterfactual scenarios of not doing so. Had Japan refused to surrender how many bombs would we have been willing to drop, 3, 4, 10? The war ended and the US did what it did, the world has witnessed a horrible lesson of what nukes are capable of (total war, pure collateral damage, that is ---not military bases but civilian cities) this certainly does not inspire me with confidence for our world's future. Technology can be used for good or ill, and that depends on the point of view, a Japanese citizen may disagree with our perspective, all sides see an national threat as justifying anything when it gets down to self-preservation.

Radar was definitely helpful, technology is useful and advantageous I won't argue that. I think technology on the whole advances mankind, but depending on the end it is used for.

I haven't read the book ("Slaughterhouse Five"), but I've heard of it. Even though, like the "Twilight Zone" it is fiction I'm sure it is edifying to some extent, like the movie, which I'm sorry to say I am unfamiliar with. Out of curiosity have you seen that "Twilight Zone" episode? Not to suggest that you need to in order to make your points, just wondering. If not, the elders were able to restore his brain to its former state, before he entered the town, where his dog jumped out at a gas station, returning him to the car without a memory of the incident. Fiction can be a bit silly and unlikely, but I always liked Rod Serling's ability to make social and phychological commentary through his stories.

As for the printed gun, may that man bear the responsibility too of the untraceable crimes, possible misses by metal detectors, murders, domestic violence, accidental discharges, unjust shootings, even tyrannical uses of his own 3D printer design. He can convince himself thats its not his fault he just "brilliantly" handed enemies, criminals, oppressors and yes, law abiders, freedom fighters as well --all blindly-- a gun without a license, background check, age check, mental health check, or waiting period, and without any accountability whatsoever. As if to say, "Here you go buddy, see you later."

Weapons can be used for good or ill, for unjust offense or justified defense (I think you'd agree that far). However I don't think a populace that is armed to the teeth is safer, or that more guns are needed to reduce gun violence, and if someone believes tyranny justifies total non-infringement of the 2nd amendment then it follows that they must believe militias ought to own attack helicopters, tanks, RPGs and small nukes. If they claim that I'm taking the their arguments into absurdity and that they wouldn't allow such things to be legal then they admit not only sensible limits for public safety, but also that no right is absolute and some infringements over the right to bear arms must be exercised.
tvelection
Intellectual
 
Posts: 339
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 12:44 am
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: 3D printers

Postby robert 46 » Tue Jun 11, 2013 12:59 pm

I saw Rod Serling's intent for "The Twilight Zone" as producing thought-provoking episodes rather than mindnumbing entertainment. The purpose being to analyze both sides of an issue to find a balance or predominant viewpoint. Two other similar series were "Have Gun - Will Travel" and "Route 66".
tvelection wrote:I haven't read the book ("Slaughterhouse Five"), but I've heard of it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slaughterhouse_five
There was also a well-filmed movie:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slaughterhouse-Five_(film)
Even though, like the "Twilight Zone" it is fiction I'm sure it is edifying to some extent, like the movie, which I'm sorry to say I am unfamiliar with. Out of curiosity have you seen that "Twilight Zone" episode?

I don't recall seeing that episode. The plot summary can be found at Wikipedia here, however [1]:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valley_of_the_Shadow.
...I always liked Rod Serling's ability to make social and phychological commentary through his stories.

He was amazingly talented.
As for the printed gun, may that man bear the responsibility too of the untraceable crimes, possible misses by metal detectors, murders, domestic violence, accidental discharges, unjust shootings, even tyrannical uses of his own 3D printer design.

Why, exactly, should he bear responsibility for someone else's actions? The story of the original "Liberator pistol" is interesting:
Wikipedia wrote:It was originally intended as an insurgency weapon to be mass dropped behind enemy lines to resistance fighters in occupied territory. A resistance fighter was to recover the weapon, sneak up on an Axis occupier, kill or incapacitate him, and retrieve his weapons.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberator_pistol
Produced under a directive of the U.S. government.
tvelection wrote:He can convince himself thats its not his fault he just "brilliantly" handed enemies, criminals, oppressors and yes, law abiders, freedom fighters as well --all blindly-- a gun without a license, background check, age check, mental health check, or waiting period, and without any accountability whatsoever. As if to say, "Here you go buddy, see you later."

When I was young one could buy a gun here in the U.S. "without a license, background check, age check [for a fourteen-year-old anyway], mental health check, or waiting period, and without any accountability whatsoever".
Weapons can be used for good or ill, for unjust offense or justified defense (I think you'd agree that far). However I don't think a populace that is armed to the teeth is safer, or that more guns are needed to reduce gun violence, and if someone believes tyranny justifies total non-infringement of the 2nd amendment then it follows that they must believe militias ought to own attack helicopters, tanks, RPGs and small nukes.

"Arms", being portable, do not include the latter with the exception of RPGs which, however, are explosive devices, and not strictly speaking firearms. [2]
If they claim that I'm taking the their arguments into absurdity and that they wouldn't allow such things to be legal then they admit not only sensible limits for public safety, but also that no right is absolute and some infringements over the right to bear arms must be exercised.

And yet the Second Amendment says "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." "Shall not" are strong words.


[1] It is in vol. 24 of the "Twilight Zone" DVD set. My local library system only has them to vol. 18 for some strange reason.
[2] Here's an article on the problem of defining 'arms' in the Second Amendment context:
http://brainshavings.com/the-right-to-k ... bear-what/
robert 46
Intellectual
 
Posts: 2761
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 9:21 am

Re: 3D printers

Postby raydpratt » Tue Oct 22, 2013 11:27 pm

3D printers are not chemistry sets, and, currently, most firearms need gun powder for bullets, so I do not see that 3D printers pose a terrible threat so long as 3D printed guns still need bullets that depend on complex chemical processes.

As 3D printers expand their range of materials that can be printed, one can imagine 3D printers with ability to create the tools needed for complex chemical processes, and that might change the game.

However, 3D printers that could replace the need for major manufacturers of complex products would drastically 'change the game' regardless. It's hard to imagine a world with no economic hierarchies of products that could not be replicated on a smaller scale at anyone's home. Patents would be hard to enforce if everyone copied and printed out patented products solely for their own personal use, and major manufacturers would lose potential sales as soon as their creations became public. Open source products might become more common, but at some point someone has to pay someone for something in order to have an economy. When 3D printers can print themselves, and can create all the tools for processing raw materials, our economies as we know them will be drastically different. The revolution that you might fear from printable guns will be nothing compared to the potential economic ruin that could be caused by 3D printers themselves.

We are unemploying Americans every time we buy "Made in China," but imagine unemploying everyone.
raydpratt
Intellectual
 
Posts: 297
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 7:22 pm

Re: 3D printers

Postby tvelection » Wed Oct 23, 2013 8:14 pm

Ray, fascinating comments you really opened-up the subject.

Originally I went off track because of the gun issue and a Twilight Zone episode. My original point was using the machine in the future for biological creations, at first like Jarvik hearts for instance or custom prosthetics, and eventually with actual cells or stem cells. On a microscopic nano-scale even printing DNA molecules, of course such things are way in the future. You are right, the gun issue is not an immediate concern due to limitations; that was just a reaction of disappointment on my part, (what ---no bomb yet!?) but others may feel differently.

I found your comments on decentralized manufacturing insightful, as well as the issues of patents and employment, especially the prospect of a 3D printer that can make another 3D printer, clever. Right now these machines are limited but I did the post because anyone who is forward looking will see that they are indeed major “game changers.” In the near future, though, maybe a basic household 3D scanner/printer can construct basic items out of single specialized printer materials. A mug, a plate, artworks, statues, models and a variety of items useful or decorative items to begin with. It will be hard to patent original designs as you said because all someone has to do is put the instructions on the internet. And to that effect 3D printers will be powerful online computers with A.I., and could download whatever the owner chooses.

As for employment I’ve found that nothing seems to unemploy the world’s masses, although the “free-trade” shift to China certainly put a dent in American manufacturing. It’s hard to compete with $1 a day, no unions, and no EPA (bit of a pollution problem in some Chinese industrial cities now), but I’m getting sidetracked here. My point is that when the industrial revolution came people thought that would end most employment but jobs just shifted to either making or maintaining the machines and such. Employment will shift to new unknown areas, or healthcare, services, IT, etc. The question of future unemployment may be as the world population explodes are we creating too many workers and a larger population of those unable to find limited specialized jobs. Although it may be that the more people there are the more jobs needed to provide whatever is necessary for them. It’s an interesting question, how will 3D printers affect manufacturing and employment, hard to predict.

What’s also fascinating is going way into the future. Imagine an ant walking on a scanner and then a new ant walking out of the printer, then a rat (how will it have consciousness of a past, can a living thing be “printed” at all?) An insect brain eventually? Assembled with actual cells. A bit sci-fi, a bit Frankenstein, perhaps that is just improbable speculation but these innocent machines will change the world in ways we cannot even fathom right now.

--------------------------------------------
Robert46, I had the chance to read “Slaughterhouse Five” (or The Children’s Crusade) by Vonnegut. I hadn’t read any of his works yet so I thought that if it was under 300 pages (novel fatigue) I’d give it a try ---it was 200 pages. I was surprised, it sounded like a book that would be a macho Hemingway-style war story and it could not have been more different. In fact the author is self-referential in the book about his writing the book. His old friend’s wife was angry that he was “going John Wayne” by writing a book about war and glorifying it for children, he denied that was his aim and gave it the second title. The style was Steinbeck or Fitzgerald-like in that it was not “artsy” or intellectual and very “readable.” Many sentences were four to seven words. It was interesting in that not only was it about being taken prisoner by the Nazis at the end of WW2 the main character had afterward been in a car accident and hit his head. After that incident he believed he was abducted by aliens who had no concept of time so past and future was as real as the present. They kept him in a zoo with a woman. The aliens (Tramalfadorians) even knew when they would destroy themselves testing a new technology. The author was tongue-in-cheek sometimes denying that the head injury had to do with his claim sometimes suggesting it (all to the chagrin of his caregiver/daughter). The best device was the non-chronological storytelling, like the aliens, he would jump from the war to old age, before the accident and after. The book is at the library so I cannot quote it, but you get the point. Good book, I’d definitely consider his other books in the future. A very conversational writing style that is easy to read and enjoyable and with some understated philosophical statements.

As for guns we both agree that they should not be banned. We have our disagreements with gun control, I’m okay with that. We’ll agree to disagree on the finer points because over the last decade I’ve lost the will to debate politics and social issues. People have argued non-stop to the present and will argue non-stop in the future. I’ve had my fill. Thanks for suggesting Vonnegut.
tvelection
Intellectual
 
Posts: 339
Joined: Tue Sep 26, 2006 12:44 am
Location: Pittsburgh, PA

Re: 3D printers

Postby raydpratt » Fri Oct 25, 2013 2:43 am

tvelection:

3D printing is already using difficult metals like titanium, nickle-chromium alloy, and who knows what else. I had a stepfather who was a millwright at a titanium factory, and titanium and its alloys were always very difficult to mill and shape because if its strength. Titanium tetrachloride is an intermediate liquid that was processed into titanium, and I believe that the process involved electricity and/or high heat, but who knows how it is processed nowadays. Intricate 3D printing with titanium is mind-boggling, but it's here now. If the current capabilities of 3D printers were cheaply available to the public, guns made of better material than currently offered could be made by anyone at home. It remains to be seen whether 3D printers will soon be able to print copies of themselves and thereby become an economically disruptive product.

There are other products that can create copies of themselves: lathes. So, we have at least one example where the ability of a lathe to create another lathe did not destroy industry or lead to wide-spread unemployment. It's probably a bit too pessimistic to think that home-based 3D printing will destroy the economy just because someone theoretically could create everything that that person could possibly desire. Such self-reliance is largely possible now, but it is not economically viable for someone to rely solely on themselves for everything with no division of labor that takes advantage of relative efficiencies or economies of scale. Even when 3D printers are able to print new 3D printers, it may be more economically viable to purchase feed materials from a large manufacturer rather than trying to process and create such feed materials by oneself.

Nonetheless, 3D printers may prove disruptive and dangerous enough to invite government regulations and purchasing restrictions -- as currently occurs with guns, ammunition, dynamite and nitrate fertilizers.

We'll see.
raydpratt
Intellectual
 
Posts: 297
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 7:22 pm

Re: 3D printers

Postby raydpratt » Fri Nov 08, 2013 9:38 pm

The world's first 3D-printed metal gun is here, and it works as well or better than the original:
http://www.gizmag.com/worlds-first-3d-p ... gun/29702/

The makers, Solid Concepts, Inc., have a federal firearm license that allows them to make the gun, but there does not appear to be a license required to buy their 3D metal printer.

If someone buys such a 3D metal printer, who will know but God and the NSA what they do with it?
raydpratt
Intellectual
 
Posts: 297
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 7:22 pm

Re: 3D printers

Postby james b » Tue Dec 03, 2013 10:36 am

3D printing is just one of multiple important elements framing the current revolution of consumer habits. There's also CNC routers, laser cutters, plasma cutters, and new leaps of custom equipment going cheap + DIY on a daily basis.

There are natural efforts towards machines that work with larger varieties of material, have higher resolution, experience less and less deviation from specs, are cheaper, are easier to use, are faster, and other advances.

There seems to be a process of integrating, but it is possible for an economy to thrive. One economic factor that seems critical would be a shift towards more companies specializing in raw materials, parts, and service.

There are also considerations for design and other professional development skills that could be invested and in some cases required.

This seems to tie in with the current debates over 3D printers and guns. There have already been processes researched and developed to require 3D model verification through systems that check against infringement, it seems natural that we'll develop systems that check to make sure an unregistered or otherwise harmful/dangerous print isn't printed.

This seems to tie in with CISPA/SOPA and et al over privacy issues.

Regardless of my ~2 cents, I think it is important to try to collaboratively work towards objective consideration of how to handle technology like 3D printing in the future while it is still unwieldy for many, unreliable in many cases for sophisticated needs like weapon creation, and/or extremely costly.

It might take assembly, preparation, 3D design and print knowledge, other supplies, and a good portion of time to craft a 3D printed gun right now. If there's debate now, what about when blended alloys and mixed materials are printed from the same machine alongside flexible electronic components? It's sooner than you might think! Might as well employ basic safety behaviors now to avoid the wild of the West and focus on expansion and innovation instead.

Before we can get to a point where manufacturing has advanced to be home-centric, the general populace will need both an understanding and a safe environment. We also need a huge swath of homeowners alright with the idea of placing modular fabrication environments in their homes and using them instead of going to the store or ordering from some online or offline catalog.

By the time a bigger shift of the general populace embraces the technology, the technology will be user-friendly and regulated.

Right now and in the short term, 3D printing and other manufacturing technologies with large open source DIY followings are helping to boost innovative advances in a number of industries and markets.

Consider a day when most or all of the tools and pieces of equipment at the following link are contained in a simple, slightly portable machine placed in homes for less than the value of a car:

http://fab.cba.mit.edu/content/tools/

Maybe, maybe not. But my point is that a homeowner cannot simply go into Wal-Mart and buy a Gun Printer. I do see that there are potential considerations, but the unreliability, cost, speed of manufacturing, and knowledge/resources already required for 3D printing weapons is a bit understated in some national and global discussion that I have experienced. I would hope that we don't just outright ban additive fabrication, that would be silly in my opinion.

I do think there are economic considerations, but I don't see 3D printing as an inevitable threat. I think there are multiple ways our species could adapt to include a more thriving economy.

I also don't think that 3D printing will soon vanquish the need for other industries such as service industries.

At any rate, I don't see everyone having a sophisticated array of Making Industry Null in their homes before the New Year.

Too many kinks to work out yet.

It's why we don't just put X-Ray machines in people's homes. Oh, wait, older TVs. Dangit.

Here's something to consider.. 3D printers that print 3D printers have long been a self-replicating goal for many enthusiasts, including RepRap's Adrian Bowyer.

So how much faster will technological advances get? Will 3D printers help technology accelerate faster?

Will there ever be a 3D printer that can print newer and better versions of itself? Would it be able to print parts that can print in higher resolutions than itself and with more reliable stability and speed?

There's still another very important consideration. There are a lot of ways that the Internet and World Wide Web evolved once we got into consumer IT.

Watch out for the Internet of Things Bubble!

These are unique tools of advanced technology in that they allow users to create their own things.

It is important to consider the damage that can be done and to take basic common sense items and fashion a safer resolution, but there's also an few orders of magnitude greater individual peoples' dreams being turned into reality in a much more readily available manner.

We live in a world today where parents are designing and printing or downloading and printing assistive technology for their special needs kids for pennies on the thousands of dollars.

Is that going to ruin the medical industry? I don't think it will get anywhere nearing the medical industry needing to file for bankruptcy and sell the farmhouse, at least not any time as the industry exists. However, in the same way I know how to make a splint in the woods because of youth programs as a child, kids of today and tomorrow could be learning how to adjust 3D models for custom fit emergency supplies at summer camp.

When do you think someone will succeed in creating a reliable solar-powered 3D printer?

Well, let's not get too carried away. Nature's nature, but my point is there's a lot of stuff out there for different people already.

And it is just going to keep expanding.

Ford opened their doors to a hybrid licensing structure that includes open source hack-friendly modular models.

I imagine it will be eventually be easier to set up mom and pop shops providing major retailers don't yank that rug too quick, particularly were moms and/or pops specialized in specific niche markets. Household and repair, all kinds of things. It would probably be easier for existing small businesses to invest in 3D printing and similar technology for inhouse prototyping and manufacturing.
Last edited by james b on Tue Dec 03, 2013 4:10 pm, edited 2 times in total.
james b
Thinker
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2013 9:54 am

Re: 3D printers

Postby james b » Tue Dec 03, 2013 3:20 pm

Here's a wild tangent of link-clicking I explored today:

Conductive 3D printer ABS at Sears: http://bit.ly/1jhXGOC
RadioShack 3D printer supplies and printers: http://www.radioshack.com/family/index. ... d=11910877
Recent 3D printing law news: Here
Multi-material and other Euromold 2013 announcements and launches: Here

Something to keep in mind is that smart business will adapt to stay at the forefront, vying for advanced features not available in pro-sumer manufacturing markets.
james b
Thinker
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2013 9:54 am

Re: 3D printers

Postby rihanaw » Mon Feb 02, 2015 2:11 am

To anyone who hasn’t seen it demonstrated, 3-D printing sounds futuristic—like the meals that materialized in the Jetsons’ oven at the touch of a keypad. But the technology is quite straightforward: It is a small evolutionary step from spraying toner on paper to putting down layers of something more substantial (such as plastic resin) until the layers add up to an object. And yet, by enabling a machine to produce objects of any shape, on the spot and as needed, 3-D printing really is ushering in a new era.
rihanaw
Thinker
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2015 1:52 am
Location: Saugus, MA

Re: 3D printers

Postby JO 753 » Mon Feb 02, 2015 7:05 am

I read a story about a war with an alien civilization in wich the main wepon wuz a device that replicates itself out uv any material available. It woud convert an entire planet in very little time.

Considering that we are just at the beginning uv 3D printing teknolojy, the danjer uv this actually bekuming possible needz to be seriously considered now.

You can alredy by a 3D printer at Samz Club for 1200$. They will follow the pattern uv 2D printerz and get progressively cheaper & more sofisticated, so how long till they can replicate themselvez?

Granted, sumthing that can injest any material and tranzmogrify it into sumthing else iz a completely different thing, but maybe it duznt need to go quite that far befor being able to cause massive damaj.
Tired uv Trump yet? I am:
http://www.7532020.com
JO 753
Intellectual
 
Posts: 608
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2010 6:54 pm
Location: IL NOEEZ

Re: 3D printers

Postby JO 753 » Mon Feb 02, 2015 7:12 am

robert 46 wrote:There's nothing quite like an assassin's bullet to be out with the old and in with the new...


...or stop the new.

Everybody gets to be the autocrat, deciding wuts rite for everybody else. In other wordz, anarky.
Tired uv Trump yet? I am:
http://www.7532020.com
JO 753
Intellectual
 
Posts: 608
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2010 6:54 pm
Location: IL NOEEZ

Re: 3D printers

Postby CindyS » Wed Feb 18, 2015 12:30 am

Exactly everybody gets to be the autocrat....
CindyS
Thinker
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2015 6:59 am
Location: Hoover, AL

Re: 3D printers

Postby billhunter » Fri Sep 18, 2015 2:10 am

Agree with james b and specially the point in his post that "3D printing is just one of multiple important elements framing the current revolution of consumer habits. There's also CNC routers, laser cutters, plasma cutters, and new leaps of custom equipment going cheap + DIY on a daily basis."
billhunter
Thinker
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2015 1:07 am
Location: United States


Return to Great Ideas

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron