Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Worthless: 3D printing is nothing but a nerd fad that won't leave hobbyist workshops.

6 (3%)

Unimportant: 3D printing will become common but won't be useful for much other than tiny full plastic objects.

8 (4%)

Minor Importance: 3D printing will function as a light industry that will coexist with existing manufacturing methodologies.

43 (21.4%)

Moderate Importance: 3D printing will challenge and slowly replace a large number of existing manufacturing businesses.

104 (51.7%)

Major Importance: 3D printing will completely flip the table on conventional manufacturing and quickly destroy existing business for anything you can make with them.

20 (10%)

Critical: 3D printing will disrupt conventional ideals of work and money so much that they collapse and are replaced in a paradigm shift.

20 (10%)

Total Members Voted: 199

[mainiac]

Well I respectfully disagree about what is the complex part of the process.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

I didn't say it wasn't the complex part. The most difficult part of most innovations is the actual idea arising in the first place, because whether or not that happens isn't a result of directed research.

[Loud Whispers]

Note that the title of the thread is particularly relevant because the Pirate Bay has a section specifically for 3D printables. Not gonna link it since, you know, I'm sure there's illegal content in there somewhere. But still, pretty neat.

Nope, nothing illegal. Protected under the DMCA.

A tissue mass made out of the correct cells in the correct shape of a specific organ is functionally indistinguishable from that organ and there is no foreseeable reason it would fail to work.

Body rejecting the foreign cells

If the cells that make up the tissue are still alive after being printed, which as I recall they are, then there is no reason why the tissue and thus the organ won't work.

Since when did we gain the ability to create human cells in such a way? Still being developed. Hopefully within the next decade we'll see this being done. Then it has to run through clinical trials... And even then, there are a horrible amounts of Murphy things that can go wrong.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Note that the title of the thread is particularly relevant because the Pirate Bay has a section specifically for 3D printables. Not gonna link it since, you know, I'm sure there's illegal content in there somewhere. But still, pretty neat.

Nope, nothing illegal. Protected under the DMCA.

Regardless, do not link to the Pirate Bay. Toady is not particularly lenient towards advocating legally grey sites on his own, and I'd like to keep this thread.

Body rejecting the foreign cells

Who needs foreign cells? Grow them from your cells. It isn't like you'd be able to print something useful unless you already had some time to spare anyway.

Since when did we gain the ability to create human cells in such a way?

The mid-1800's?

[ed boy]

I voted minor impact.

Sure they're versatile, but I can only see them having limited industrial applications. Although you have large versatility, a very small number of industries actually require this versatility, and would benefit far more from a specialised process. It would ony really appeal to industries on a very small scale or ones that require extreme variation in their products. Similarly, the costs seem to be extremely high, far too much for the average individual to have their own (or at least one that can handle more than a couple of base materials).

What I could easily see happening is that services will spring up where people can bring in their schematics and get them printed at that printer, similar to how people got their camera film developed.

However, I could also see heavy governmental regulation of these, requiring one to have a licence to own and use one.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

However, I could also see heavy governmental regulation of these, requiring one to have a licence to own and use one.

It didn't work on the internet, it won't work here either.

[Loud Whispers]

Since when did we gain the ability to create human cells in such a way?

The mid-1800's?

Growing something in some agar is radically different from printing live cells out of proteins. Last I checked, people in the 1800's hadn't created life from base materials and we still haven't to this day. The closest we've gotten so far is lovely self replicating RNA.

Who needs foreign cells?

Well of course you wouldn't deliberately inject yourself with foreign bodies ^_^

Grow them from your cells. It isn't like you'd be able to print something useful unless you already had some time to spare anyway.

Ok you are confusing me with your definition of print and grow now. Oh and apoptosis, (love that word), your body might not be too appreciative of replacing your organs with factory manufactured organs.

[ed boy]

However, I could also see heavy governmental regulation of these, requiring one to have a licence to own and use one.

It didn't work on the internet, it won't work here either.

I mean a licence to own and use the printer, not the schematics. Given that someone can create a weapon with one, I would expect them to have at least the same regulations on owning as for a firearm.

[TheBronzePickle]

Homemade firearms aren't really regulated. Of course, most homemade firearms are as much of a danger to their wielder as their target, but still.

The thing I'd worry about for regulations is a metal-printing 3D printer. They've already got all kinds of regulations on lathes that are complex enough to carve out nuclear warheads (you literally cannot move them without government approval) and a printer that could use metal given the right schematics could probably make nuclear warheads even more powerful than a lathe could.

[Prometheusmfd]

However, I could also see heavy governmental regulation of these, requiring one to have a licence to own and use one.

It didn't work on the internet, it won't work here either.

I mean a licence to own and use the printer, not the schematics. Given that someone can create a weapon with one, I would expect them to have at least the same regulations on owning as for a firearm.

The same could be said about anything that could feasibly make a weapon or harm someone.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Growing something in some agar is radically different from printing live cells out of proteins.

My understanding is that you would grow the cells in culture and then print them in the configuration they are needed.

Last I checked, people in the 1800's hadn't created life from base materials and we still haven't to this day. The closest we've gotten so far is lovely self replicating RNA.

Life creation is in progress.

Oh and apoptosis, (love that word), your body might not be too appreciative of replacing your organs with factory manufactured organs.

Maybe, but until we have manufactured organs that will remain an unknown.

I mean a license to own and use the printer, not the schematics. Given that someone can create a weapon with one, I would expect them to have at least the same regulations on owning as for a firearm.

I knew what you meant, I just don't think it will work. You can't make guns out of guns, but you can make 3D printer parts out of 3D printers. They'll propagate.

[Loud Whispers]

My understanding is that you would grow the cells in culture and then print them in the configuration they are needed.

Stem cell research seems more promising

Life creation is in progress.

Dr. Craig created a new species out of an already existing species - not out of no-life. We're not quite there yet, but we're getting closer

you can make 3D printer parts out of 3D printers. They'll propagate.

Printers making printers. That's all kinds of messed up. Love it.

[mainiac]

However, I could also see heavy governmental regulation of these, requiring one to have a licence to own and use one.

It didn't work on the internet, it won't work here either.

I mean a licence to own and use the printer, not the schematics. Given that someone can create a weapon with one, I would expect them to have at least the same regulations on owning as for a firearm.

Back in the 40s they used to make guns using your typical machine shop equipment.  They have since moved on to more specialized equipment these days for inefficiencies sake but you could still make guns just fine using the old general machine shop equipment equipment (or the modern versions).  I am unaware of any laws regulating the ownership or operation of these machinery except for OSHA safety laws.

[sneakey pete]

The thing I'd worry about for regulations is a metal-printing 3D printer. They've already got all kinds of regulations on lathes that are complex enough to carve out nuclear warheads (you literally cannot move them without government approval) and a printer that could use metal given the right schematics could probably make nuclear warheads even more powerful than a lathe could.

I call shenanigans on this. Government approvals on lathes that can create nuclear weapons? Any 5 axis CNC machine would be able to do that, and they aren't regulated or rare...
Its exactly as maniac said above, this shit ain't complicated. I mean, a gun is literally a tube with something to hold the bullet in place while a pin impacts it. If you wanted to make a crude one you probably wouldn't even need a lathe or milling machine, just a angle grinder and a welder and a few files.


Infact, regarding that "3d printed guns", wasn't it just the stocks that were 3d printed?

[Mongol13524]

PTF