What's hilarious is that this is a post about... guess what? A non-LEGO set someone came up with on their own and submitted to LEGO Ideas to have it made into an official set. According to you, that's plainly not possible. Moreover, why don't you peruse some of the other ideas on the site (linked to in the summary), and other sites like ReBrickable.? Maybe you'd see that, while it may be true that sets have gotten more specific, your conclusion that you can't build unique things anymore is completely wrong!

And I remember when The LEGO Group was about to go bankrupt... you know, before they started licensing Star Wars?

For the record, they've released a number of space themes, city themes, castle themes while doing these licenses... and for the other whiners out there, you always still buy tubs of just bricks.

You people will complain about anything.... you sound like your parents and grandparents now, I hope you realize that! "When I was a kid...!!!!"

No, it looks like there are three sets, each with one minifigure, but that's just what it looks like. The set is not final yet, but it's assumed there will be one "Research Institute" set with three "vignettes," each with a figure and some other model to go with it (a desk, a dinosaur, a telescope).

I can look at that two ways... I can watch TV and it requires no thought. Or I can choose specific interesting things on politics, nature, or other sciences, and actually think about it.

So LEGO sets come with instructions, and require little thought to put the sets together the way they've laid it out in the book. That doesn't differ from how it used to be. Oh, you used to be able to just buy buckets of bricks, though! Which, of course, you can still do. The imagination happened when you took those bricks, and you took those sets apart, and made what you wanted instead of what you were told you could make.

That's the same as it is today. Why don't you visit the ideas site (link in TFS) and see where people's imaginations take them. They're not all works of art by any stretch, but some of the sets offered there are phenomenal. Also take a look at ReBrickable for other models people have created.

It's true they make some simpler sets aimed at younger kids, things with big molded pieces that "real" LEGO enthusiasts hate, but that's not representative of all that's available.

Now you're just being disingenuous... I never said that's what the revolution was about, I said owning firearms is part of the reason we have the U.S. and the bill of rights to begin with. IOW, we wouldn't have won without them. And the founders of this country, noting that that was the case, codified the right, not just own, but to bear arms, in the bill of rights.

Well said, anonymous coward. Listening to some of these idiots, you'd think people would just be dropping dead every time someone just went and purchased a gun.

I've read several of your posts here, and wholeheartedly agree with them. As a libertarian I say it often: your rights should only end when used to violate the rights of others. Obviously printing a gun, in itself, does not threaten anyone else's rights.

I didn't say they shouldn't be regulated at all.... and far from a "logical" extreme, you've reached reductio ad absurdum in very short order.

FBI Statistical data disagrees with you (FBI Violent Crime Table). I realize the mainstream media has brainwashed a large number of people out there to believe the sky is falling on this issue, but it's really not.

I understand your opinion; I completely disagree with it. Owning firearms is part of the reason we have the U.S. and it's bill of rights to begin with.

It's virtually impossible to stop crime from happening; that's why the SCOTUS has affirmed that it's not the responsibility of police departments to prevent crime, but to to try to catch and punish those who commit them. Printing a 3D gun doesn't violate anyone else's rights, it's when someone uses that gun to violate the rights of others that they've committed a crime... and we don't need any new laws for our government to try to catch and prosecute those that do it.

How is that different from Google? Even using a Linux based system, whenever you open your browser to do something, if you have chrome synchronized, if you use gmail or g+, or whatever? And I don't use an Apple, but even on Windows iTunes is constantly checking for updates and wanting to install new stuff (unless you go out of your way to turn it off... but again, how is that different than the others?). I'm asking because people apply different standards to the companies they don't like than they do to the ones that are "blessed." I have Windows 8.1, I did not create an account. Nevertheless, even Windows 7 and XP do their software validation crap every so often, too... so if you're already a Windows user, you were already accepting that. All I'm saying is that the complaints about 8.x are like most arguments on the internet.

Web forums... turning molehills into mountains since 1994.

You're right; and our prisons should release all the perpetrators convicted of victimless crimes (like prostitution and drug use), and fill it with people who violate the rights of others, including those who've endangered the lives of other innocent people because of misuse of their right to own a gun.

Another invalid comparison... Your right to own a car is like the right to own a gun - it does NOT go away because other people have caused laws to be created punishing those who drive unsafely... and laws apply to people using weapons unsafely, but the right to own and use the gun remains. Please note, I know the knee-jerk reaction from liberals is hard to for them to temper, but he didn't say you can't limit it's use, he said the right doesn't go away.

Good point... one that people often fail to grasp. I support decriminalization of all drugs... yes, ALL drugs, as the individual should have the right to do with their body what they want. The most common come-back I hear is "so then it's OK for them to kill you for money to support their habit?"

Uh... no, it's not OK. Only a moron could conclude that.

I support the decriminalization of prostitution. The most common come-back I hear is "so then it's OK for a pimp to essentially force a woman to sell her body for him?"

Uh... no, it's not OK. Only a moron could conclude that.

Guns are tools, used for entertainment, sport, self defense... as soon as someone uses one to violate your rights, you can go ahead and execute them, as far as I'm concerned. But get rid of the person that violated your rights... "things" don't violate your rights, only other people do.