A long way to go?

I've had LEDs lighting up my house for over two years now (my house is old with low ceilings, many of the lights are GU-10 downlighters -- they were halogen and/or compact fluorescent, they are now 7W LEDs and are superior to halogens or CF in every respect).

He takes natural materials and turns them into various man-made objects. Rather than taking man-made materials and turning them into man-made objects.

Sounds to me he's making things worse, not better.

That's what I use and I'm happy with it. Given that I have two smart phones to pay for, I feel like I have an extra $50 a month in my budget.

It has already been invented. It's called pancakes. Your toddler will still get all the nutrition that the egg has to give. Put some freshly made strawberry sauce/jam on top and nutritional content will be better than that of just scrambled eggs. If you're worried about blood glucose spikes, use xylitol instead of sugar.

Finally someone here that seems to grasp the potential. The point is not to simply pop a powder in a 3d printer and squeezing out a paste in an interesting shape. The point is that ultimately permits us to cook "note by note" - a future discussed by Hervé This ("The man who uncooked an egg") in this excellent lecture:

It's a matter of politeness and consideration as much as anything else. Even if someone speaks your language near fluently, you are showing respect and committment by learning and using even a fairly limited amount of their own language. Even if you are completely butchering it (or especially if), the effort is highly appreciated.

Put it this way, would you rather make a deal with a foreign businessman that speaks only through an interpreter, or one that still needs one for the actual business, but at least honestly tries to speak english with you socially?

If you look at the bottom of the post (I know, I know) you'll find that Chinese, Hindi, Japanese and Indonesian are already the highest priority, and the other languages are considered in addition to them.

RepRap is half of that. so what is your point? And I think you miss the point of 3D printed firearms in that they are still in the R&D phase. they are not intended to be zip guns, even if a zip gun is cheaper and more practical. Here's an exercise for you, given what we know about 3D printing today, where do you think it will be in 5 years? Do you understand the interest and controversy with such a technology with this simple short term projection and how it differs from a zip gun?

A RepRap is cheaper than a mill, which is one of many tools you would need to make a proper firearm. So I don't buy the "more expensive" assumption.

Right now it is a cheap and dangerous toy. Or another way to state it, an interesting experiment in materials, design and politics.

A camera housing for my robot or the servo heads for my airplane could appear gun-like to such a thing. I think even getting a human being to identify gun like parts would be difficult unless he could see all of the components together. With a software check you could skirt it by feeding it only one component at a time. This isn't like printing money where the end product must all look the same.

If one can cycle properly then the main difference is that a person with a 3D printer can produce several firearms a day without much effort. The complexity of the device doesn't matter that much with a 3D printer, unlike when a machinst works.

Of course a cheap end mill modified to do CAD/CAM is quite capable of producing receivers and maybe even short barrels out of metal. And those projects have been around for decades now.

I think people are only months away from making a printable machine gun. These printed guns are improving pretty quickly. And everyone is going to have to scramble to figure out what to do about them.

In other words, a very large charger (which is effectively a second battery) to go with your portable machine that's supposed to be small and portable.

Instead of having a charger which is effectively must be a second battery to work, why not just have...well, a second battery? Does away with high currents altogether and you can have a nice lightweight charger again that can even fit in a pocket. Or is that too "existing paradigm" for new technology?

You're still going to have to transfer all that power from the charger to the device, which is still going to require a lot of amps and a very thick cable. Even if you use 48VDC between the charger and the device, the cable between the charger and the device is going to have to be rated for something like 160 amps (in other words, your charging cable will be a pair of cables that are about the size of a typical cable from a car battery to the starter. Big, thick, heavy and stiff).