Slashdot stories can be listened to in audio form via an RSS feed, as read by our own robotic overlord.


Forgot your password?

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).


Comment: Re:Perhaps a change in law is needed ... (Score 1) 207

by easyTree (#49102373) Attached to: Wired On 3-D Printers As Fraud Enablers

As far as I know, it's very very rare that such a widget is of such clever design that you freeload on someone's hard work. What I think is the case (on basis of a thoroughly non-scientific survey, sample-size 6, personal observation) is that any ingenuity in the design is spent in making sure the widget in question can't be second-sourced without infringing on some sort of patent. E.g. by adding a special notch, a special hole, or simply making the dimensions so that the widget is unlike any other on the planet (and any other widgets won't fit) and that regardless of extent of use, environmental conditions, time zone.., the widget dependably develops a fatal fault one nano-second after the warranty elapses.

Comment: Re: Note that this is a little different from soft (Score 2) 207

by easyTree (#49102289) Attached to: Wired On 3-D Printers As Fraud Enablers

That said, there could be safety standards for home-printed parts along the lines of "this geometry printed using XYZ materials on a printer meeting these minimum specifications is equivalent to the original part",

How does this allow *someone* to maintain a monopolistic price advantage? Dude, ur anti-american.

Force needed to accelerate 2.2lbs of cookies = 1 Fig-newton to 1 meter per second