This is a short story, set in the not-so-distant future, about the capability of a self replicating 3d printer to change the world.

( I am not advocating the printing of any patented objects. We can revolutionize and democratize the design and distribution of objects while working within the system. )

I hope you enjoy the story.

~Andy

The following is copied from [craphound.com] :

-----------------------------------

Introduction to Printcrime:

Printcrime came out of a discussion I had with a friend who

Loved it! I hope for a world where creative commons flourishes for printable 3D designs. A world where material stuff is freely shared, because they're based on ideas that are free. I hope that when the western world realizes its wealth, it doesn't need to be overprotective of their ideas. FUD tactics (FUD is a manifestation of the appeal to fear, [en.wikipedia.org] ) should not be let loose again when a powerful industry regime is undermined because of their shortsightedness (in terms of developments in technology).

---

Regards,

Erik de Bruijn
[Ultimaker.com] - [blog.erikdebruijn.nl]

Partly inspired by this story which I read a few weeks ago. I recently wrote a story on somewhat the same topic. Only Mine take place under a somewhat more depressing end of things and tries to deal with the social effects of a reprap and similar technologies. I'll probably post it when I get it typed up from the longhand I wrote it in.

i like it. it's like 1984 meets reprap

Yeah, thoughtcrime, printcrime.

I have recently received a Stratasys Dimension printed sample part (the "Sample request page" is linked from their main website). Comparing it to nopheads photos of his prints, it is very close to that quality, not necesarrily higher (though they have support material deposition working well). Holding this think in your hands, it's really easy to imagine all sorts of devices being printed, just like in the story.

Like in open source software there are many advantages to the open source software process (read cathedral & bazaar) that they can even become superior to the commercial alternative (FireFox vs. IE). I think this will also become true for material objects.

---

Regards,

Erik de Bruijn
[Ultimaker.com] - [blog.erikdebruijn.nl]

I do like the story. I think there was another one with a similar posted here some time ago about a russian man in the postmodern world, but I can't find the reference now.

ErikDeBruijn Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Like in open source software there are many
> advantages to the open source software process
> (read cathedral & bazaar) that they can even
> become superior to the commercial alternative
> (FireFox vs. IE). I think this will also become
> true for material objects.

Subtle distinction: FireFox is open source, true, but my understanding is that it is also commercial, in that the primary developers are all paid by Mozilla, and Mozilla Corporation is a commercial entity. So the Firefox/IE comparison can be made between open vs closed source development, but I don't think it is useful comparison for commercial vs non-commercial.

I'm also not well versed on cathedral-vs-bazaar development, but considering that the lead developers are all employed and sit under one roof, wouldn't that count as a "cathedral"-type project?

>
> Subtle distinction: FireFox is open source, true, but my understanding is that it
> is also commercial, in that the primary developers are all paid by Mozilla, and > > Mozilla Corporation is a commercial entity
>

That's not an unusual model. Linux, Java, apache, ellipse and a bunch of others have either a commercial arm or a "foundation" which is functionally the same thing. They don't have stockholders but they do have paid employees. They amount to a subchapter S corporation that makes a point of distributing it's earnings rather than pay double taxation at corporation rates.

Our own RRRF is fast becoming the same sort of animal now that the revenue flow has allowed Zach to think seriously about paying himself a salary for all the fine work he has been doing. I'm not criticising. This is how these things work.

>
> I'm also not well versed on cathedral-vs-bazaar development, but considering
> that the lead developers are all employed and sit under one roof, wouldn't
> that count as a "cathedral"-type project?
>

For Firefox, it definitely does, imo. It's starting to take on the negative characteristics of a commercial product as well.