On Monday, October 1, 2012 8:52:17 PM UTC-5, Adam Cohen wrote:
> I guess I would agree with you Ed. Technology is a sword that cuts both > ways. Can't really hope to stop it, that's a futile exercise. Open source > or not, if its possible, its gonna happen eventually. 3d printers don't > kill people, people do.
Interestingly (and in my opinion, justly) the "Open Source Definition"
by the open source initiative http://opensource.org/docs/osd defines
open source as... well... OPEN source. open,with restrictions. is a
quite difficult sell as open source. Specifically:
---------------------
6. No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor
The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in
a specific field of endeavor. For example, it may not restrict the
program from being used in a business, or from being used for genetic
research.
------------------------
In the case of reprap, the developers are free to do whatever they
want to personally discourage specific uses, for example, refusing to
spend their time working on weapon-manufacturing specific designs. but
they cant restrict them as part of the license and still call
themselves open source in good conscience.
On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 8:58 PM, Ed Hagopian <edhagop...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Right, but sweet baby zombie Jesus can they burn the CRAP out of your
> knuckle if your trying to clean the bed while the head is still on.
> On Monday, October 1, 2012 8:52:17 PM UTC-5, Adam Cohen wrote:
>> I guess I would agree with you Ed. Technology is a sword that cuts both
>> ways. Can't really hope to stop it, that's a futile exercise. Open source
>> or not, if its possible, its gonna happen eventually. 3d printers don't
>> kill people, people do.
If we get to the point where you can actually print a gun (and not just a crappy, illegal zip gun) as simply as hitting a 'print' button, then the technology will have undoubtedly have had a far greater impact than just making firearms more readily accessible.
> Yah, but that's a bolt. Not every working component to make up a > functional gun. You of all people know that it's about the reduction > of complexity to the lowest common denominator. I'm not saying today, > I'm not even saying tomorrow, but sooner, rather than later.
> Grandma didn't understand the computer, then she got email... and > facebook.... (shudder)
> On Monday, October 1, 2012 8:46:48 PM UTC-5, haveblue wrote:
> In my experience, the printer has been harder to use than the lathe.
> Years ago, I machined a new bolt for my paintball gun on a lathe with
> nothing more than a parting tool, knowing a bare minimum of operation
> (that switch powers it on, that handle moves in X, that handle
> moves in
> Y). Compare years later to getting a professional quality 3D
> printer.
> 10 minutes of instruction, hours of reading through a manual, and
> weeks
> of trial, error and experimentation.
> For the average Joe, I'd say a lathe easily has the 3D printer
> beat in
> ease-of-use (and you can pick one up at Harbor Freight).
> On 10/1/2012 8:00 PM, Ed Hagopian wrote:
> > Ron the difference there is skill. It takes skill to use a
> lathe. It takes zero to hit the print button.
> It occurs to me that a 3D printed knife might be potentially more deadly
> than a 3D printed gun (assuming some astute design for proper
> stiffness).
remember that famous scene from Raiderz of the Lost Ark....where the guy whips out the big, nasty-lookin' scimitar, and what does Indy do??? Shoots him without missin' a beat :p
On Monday, October 1, 2012 10:27:30 PM UTC-5, Ron Bean wrote:
> It occurs to me that a 3D printed knife might be potentially more deadly > than a 3D printed gun (assuming some astute design for proper > stiffness).
>remember that famous scene from Raiderz of the Lost Ark....where the guy
>whips out the big, nasty-lookin' scimitar, and what does Indy do??? Shoots
>him without missin' a beat :p
He didn't actually attack Indy, though-- just tried to impress him.
Indy had plenty of time.
Someone once proposed an experiment-- a guy with a paintball gun vs a guy with a magic marker. See who gets a mark on who first. You might be surprised.
Despite the NRA's efforts, most of us are unarmed, and are not expecting to be attacked.
> >remember that famous scene from Raiderz of the Lost Ark....where the guy
> >whips out the big, nasty-lookin' scimitar, and what does Indy do??? Shoots
> >him without missin' a beat :p
> He didn't actually attack Indy, though-- just tried to impress him.
> Indy had plenty of time.
> Someone once proposed an experiment-- a guy with a paintball gun vs a
> guy with a magic marker. See who gets a mark on who first. You might be
> surprised.
> Despite the NRA's efforts, most of us are unarmed, and are not
> expecting to be attacked.
FYI
It is perfectly legal to manufacture the ATF regulated AT lower unit that
all the buzz is on about. You need to do it YOURSELF, and you need to mark
it with a serial number which you may create as well. I believe that it
will be quite a few years before anyone can print a barrel and receiver.
Those are legal for citizens to make as well.
Paul
WB9HCO
No trees were killed sending this message, but a tremendous number of
electrons were terribly inconvienced...
That's AR lower receiver or unit... Curse you, autocorrect!
Paul
WB9HCO
No trees were killed sending this message, but a tremendous number of
electrons were terribly inconvienced...
On Oct 2, 2012 1:32 PM, "ironmonger" <psperb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> FYI
> It is perfectly legal to manufacture the ATF regulated AT lower unit that
> all the buzz is on about. You need to do it YOURSELF, and you need to mark
> it with a serial number which you may create as well. I believe that it
> will be quite a few years before anyone can print a barrel and receiver.
> Those are legal for citizens to make as well.
> Paul
> WB9HCO
> No trees were killed sending this message, but a tremendous number of
> electrons were terribly inconvienced...
I guess my point is that it is NOT illegal to make a firearm now, unless it
falls into the post 1968 regulated devices. They are welcome to try to
print a barrel or receiver. All I ask is that they let me know where the
test firing is going to take place so that I can stay outside of the
shrapnel radius....
Paul
WB9HCO
No trees were killed sending this message, but a tremendous number of
electrons were terribly inconvienced...
On Oct 2, 2012 1:42 PM, "Ron Bean" <makersp...@rbean.users.panix.com> wrote:
> FYI
> It is perfectly legal to manufacture the ATF regulated AT lower unit > that all the buzz is on about. You need to do it YOURSELF, and you > need to mark it with a serial number which you may create as well. I > believe that it will be quite a few years before anyone can print a > barrel and receiver. Those are legal for citizens to make as well.
> Paul
> WB9HCO
> No trees were killed sending this message, but a tremendous number of > electrons were terribly inconvienced...
Was rather inevitable. Soon as we get a functional one in any capacity, even if it's just shooting .22 shorts, the major media outlets are going to light it up. Right now it's easy it say, "yah but no one has done it yet so slow your roll baby." but once it's out things are going to get exciting. Expect them to jump on aspects of "massive object piracy", blah mc blah blah, as well. Don't expect logical reasoned arguments either, you don't logically reason those ratings up...
