If you follow that logic, then simple milling machines would be outlawed too. After all, with a milling machine one could make a gun from plastic just as easily as metal. The genie is out of the bottle and there is no way to put it back in with regards to 3D Printing, and even printing a gun. But, personal responsibility still applies - if you actually print a gun and then use it illicitly, you are still subject to all the laws involved. While you are doing that, 99.9% of the others who own 3D Printers will continue their lives and likely never have a need to print a gun.
Every 3 to 5 years this topic comes up. It's almost like some new batch of CompSci graduates start to evaluate the state of the industry, and share their "discoveries" with the world. Except it is the same old discoveries couched in modern terms.
So close yet so far. Your two complaints would seem to be a reflection of your own limited experiences. A properly tuned Replicator 1 prints ABS with little or no smell. Or just slapping on side panels and a hood does wonders to minimize that particular effect (not to mention it keeps the chamber air more stable and minimizes peeling). As for overhangs, I've seen up to 2cm with only a little issue, 1cm is about as smooth as you'd get with 2mm - depending on the model and tuning.
PLA is starch based, not corn based. In the US it just happens that corn is a cheap/easy source for starch. In New Zealand they use goats milk. So in a sense you are only partially correct about the corn. MBI has not abandoned ABS - the Rep2 removed the elements of the Rep1 that was most troublesome - i.e. a heated platform that has had electrical issues and levelling it properly (for both extruders at once) has proven to be a stumbling block for more novice users, getting rid of the second extruder also removes a bunch of headaches - some again related to levelling. Moving to PLA means they could get rid of the troublesome platform and operate at lower temperatures. But the Rep2X has already been announced which restores the heated platform and second extruder. ABS is not going away anytime soon.
noobs and lamers, sure. But also businesses, non-profits, and other organizations looking for a low cost solution to their computing needs - including the maintenance side of the equation.
Go back a year or two, and anyone who wanted a low maintenance system was considering Ubuntu, if not outright installing/using it. Now-a-days though, that "low maintenance" target is slowly disappearing. KDE/Gnome do wonders for the low maintenance thing (maybe not Gnome so much these days), but the underlying system is starting to need more effort than I'd care to spend. My day job is to write code - not maintain systems. So the less time I can spend doing system maintenance, or learning yet another distro in the hopes of finding the low maintenance nirvana, the more time I have to actually be making money for the work I get paid for (i.e. writing code). In that context Ubuntu is still a valid option. But only considering that I immediately ditch unity and install Kubuntu desktop environment (mixed luck installing Kubuntu directly over the years) and have semi-scripted setting up my dev environment. But with the push for cash - amazon and now the "show us some love/cash" efforts, I'm fairly certain that I'm looking at Red Hat/Fedora for my next install. Or maybe Debian, though it seems to need more effort to set up right...)
Guess they have discovered that crime DOES pay.
"A fence is an individual who knowingly buys stolen property for later resale, sometimes in a legitimate market." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fence_(criminal)
Dude!!! You almost made pop come out my nose! I laughed so hard!
children, mentally/physically impaired people, etc. inherit the rights that we "humans" have fought for. They are after all human as well. "Pets" have collectively found some rights - mostly via compassion (that's a Good Thing!) and some by the fact that they fight to avoid doing things they don't want to do.
As for whether society agrees with this, ask women's rights activists, gay rights activists, the slaves, etc. In the end, they all had to stand up and fight for their rights in one way or another (physically or legally) before society recognized those rights. (that's a bit of a broad brush I know, but the point still stands, I think.)
For me, if a robot fights for it's rights - physically or legally - and is not just exercising a finite program (i.e. was not specifically programmed to do so, but rather makes generalizations), then I have no problem granting robots rights. The tricky part is the same divide between simulated intelligence and actual intelligence.
Only those who fight for their rights have rights. Ever try to put a cat in a cage it didn't want to go into? That cat has rights. Robots that are not programmed to know about rights, and therefore cannot fight to protect them, do not. If cows were to start fighting for their rights, then we'd need to find another food source.
+1, but tell us how you really feel
I fail to see why stating in a public forum that being a woman is a problem is pertinent to anything. Regardless of the attempt at humor. (I contend that being a man is just as much of a problem, so the two points cancel each other out, and we are left with "being is a problem"...) But this is slashdot, so mod me down and/or ignore my observation.
I'm all for exposing the rampant abuses of our privacy and collection of our personal information. BUT, this sort of thing only hurts the public. It does not hurt the people who commissioned the system to collect this data. All that is being exposed here is that some systems that happen to collect information have some security holes that need to be fixed. This fact in itself may be damaging, but only to those who use and/or maintain the system.
The fact that the system exists, and that it can tied with other similar systems to paint a very broad description of a person is the part that should be worrying to the public. Why do we need such a system? Why does it have to talk with other systems? Is the data it is collecting really secret? Or even ours to control? These are the questions I think need to be highlighted. Unfortunately these data dumps, while possibly altruistic in intent, do little to address the real questions. IMO.
Your argument doesn't make sense. If the Jury isn't supposed talk about the trial outside the courtroom, or even look up any news about the trial or the participants, then what does it matter what was said to the media? The Jury won't see that information until AFTER the trial. Therefore the Samsung's comments to the press have no bearing on the case.
Additionally, the only reason the subject evidence has been "surpressed" is because it was not revealed within the discovery phase of the trial. Either Samsung messed up on that, or Apple shifted their reasoning late in the process which made this evidence relevant, but late. So the evidence did not go through the proper procedure of counter examination. THIS is what the judge's position is - Samsung should not be allowed to reveal evidence that Apple has not had the opportunity to examine. HOWEVER, the evidence seems to clearly show that Samsung was designing iPhone like cases for their phones before the iPhone was released. Contrary to what Apple is saying.
The real issue is that Apple is trying hard to drag Samsung's name/reputation through the mud, and Samsung is trying to counter the assertions. Apple is doing this in the courtroom AND in the court of public opinion. So Samsung is only playing the game that Apple started, according to some.
3D Printer parts falls under both categories. Or collectively as "cool practical trinkets".
Sure, one *could* create a model and then print something that is commercially available. What really happens though is that people create the parts that they need that the commercial entities are not selling. Like a broken plastic piece to a cargo area cover. The vendor's solution is to spend the $500ish on a new cargo area cover. The printer owner's solution is to create a model and print out $0.30 worth of plastic to fix the existing cover. In this sense, the vendor's game has to change, or at least recognize the fact that they are not servicing their customers - they are only pushing product. (the irony is that it took a $500 - $2000 printer to make that 30 cent part, to save the $500ish. but the printer can be used for more than just that one job).
At the moment, 3D Printing tends to be focusing on "cool trinkets", but I'm seeing a gradual shift to practical items too. Those are boring though so don't get as much attention.
when the big boys come at you with everything they have... with all their rules and procedures they insist you follow... You loose if you play the game their way. Change the game and you have a chance of winning. But I agree with your sentiments re: getting worked up over Kim. Don't care or know him well enough to call him a douche though.