User:Asb5165

From RepRap
Revision as of 18:01, 5 October 2012 by Asb5165 (talk | contribs)
Jump to: navigation, search


1. Imagine that you were a dedicated member of the DIY gun project: What might you do now?

I would probably think that our project just became a lot harder. It seems like they are going to be running into road blocks along the way to achieving their final goal. I would also think that this is kind of a good thing because this is the legal course, if this had not happened and they had achieved printing a gun the ATF would probably have come down a lot harder than they did. Like Wilson says he is willing to jump through the hoops so that people in the future won't have to. Plus this article and issue may cause some more light to be shed on the project and get some more investors and people involved.

2. Another article asks ”Should 3D printing, especially when it’s being used to create items like guns, be regulated? Can you regulate it?” Check your Blog #3 Questions 1 & 3 (and my comments to them) if you haven’t already. Do you have any more to say about this issue of 3D printer regulation (gov’t or corporate)?


3. Guns (and other weapons) seem to be prone to prohibitions. What other 3D printable constructs might attract similar attention/derision/prohibition?




Blog post #4 10/5/2012

Recently there has been discussion and concern with some moves that Makerbot Industries is making. Specifically the decision to make their new 3D printer (the Replicator 2) a closed system as well as clauses in the terms of use for thingaverse. The main issue with having the replicator 2 be closed source is as Brian Benchoff states it is hearesay. Makerbot's image has always been deeply tied with the Open Hardware movement. To make things even more interesting, they now own everything that has been put up on Thingiverse. I agree with Mr. Benchoff and hope that the changes to the Terms of use are just Makerbots way of avoiding being sued by crazy people. If however, this is a huge power move on their part, it is paramount that a new thingiverse be found and utilized. If all of the rumors and worst case scenarios end up becoming reality than it is truly a sad day for RepRap. The one great thing about RepRap however is that while this will be sad it will not be the end. The movement has begun and Makerbot cannot stop this.

Note: the article referenced was written on sept 20th 2012 by Brian Benchoff and can be found at http://hackaday.com/2012/09/20/makerbot-occupy-thingiverse-and-the-reality-of-selling-open-hardware/.



Blog post #3 9/28/2012


1. It seems that 3D printing isn’t going to disappear, but the exact nature in which it will develop is not well defined. On that note, we currently place restrictions (DRM) onto our media to control distribution, with limited ‘success’. Do you think this might be applied to 3D printing? How or why not?

Yes I do think it will be applied. I think that certain parts will be made in ways that cannot be replicated by printing or going to a store to buy them. One idea would be to create certain parts already assembled such that if they were disassembled in order to try and reverse engineer them they would break, becoming not only unusable but also unrecognizable. This will force users to still go through suppliers allowing them to place restrictions. However I do not think that this will continue for long.

2. According to Bowyer, many people have a great idea (or perhaps a passion) that they love to tell people about. What is yours? Do you see this as a way to attract future mates? (or to get money?) Why/why not?

My passions are changing. While in highschool I guess the thing I loved to talk about was the concept of using rail-guns and other forms of the Lorentz force to aide in space travel. More recently I am still trying to figure out some of the details of this but do not think that I will attract future mates with this but could maybe make a career out of it.

3. Professor Bowyer seems to think that 3D printing will finally kill intellectual property, and he sounds pleased about it. Do you think he’s right about ending IP? Is this a good thing, a bad thing, or somewhere in-between?

I think that it is somewhere in-between. If there is no such thing as IP or any sort of advantage like a profit people will be less likely to work long and hard in order to achieve their goals or advance their concept.



Blog post #2 9/13/2012

1. Do you think his goal of a ‘self-replicating universal constructor’ is feasible? What remains to be done to achieve this, or alternatively what would prevent such a goal?

I think that the goal of a 'self-replicating universal constructor' is feasible, however not at this time. Much of it can be done now, reproducing gears and structural components. The issue lies in the motors, computer chips and wires necessary for the machine to run. Another issue is the assembly, this could be achieved by making the parent machine much more dynamic. While this goals is an attainable one in my mind there is much work to be done in order to realize it.


2. The phrase “wealth without money” is both the title of his article and the motto of the reprap project itself. What does this phrase mean? (To him and to you if they differ). Discuss implications, problems, and possibilities associated with this idea.

Wealth without money is the idea of having many things without having to pay for them. Wealth is material goods or products we usually buy with money. The concept of Rep Rap is to be able to create wealth without using money, or as little as possible. This can concern some business minded people, how are they going to convince people they need to buy their goods if they can simply make it themselves. Also if we can simply print out a component when one breaks there is less of a need for durability, and much more waste as the article discusses.


One solution offered is to have a Rep Rap machine that can "eat" this material and reuse it. If this continues and the 'self-replicating universal constructor' is realized it will be able to multiply exponentially. Why would this machine still need us? Maybe we should remember Sarah Connor's warning about a storm coming.... Don't worry I am just kidding.


3. The Darwin design was released in 2007. It is 2012 now. Imagine future scenarios for RepRaps and their ‘cousin’ 3D printing designs (Makerbots, Ultimachine, Makergear, etc.) how do you think the RepRap project (community, designs, website, anything and everything) might evolve in the future? Describe as many scenarios as you can envision.


I think that future designs will incorporate parts of all of the 3D printer designs, taking the advantageous features from each. I also think that printers will be able to re-orient parts while making them, this would increase the types of shapes available. Also using multiple materials (one water soluble) at once would allow shapes to be created with supports that dissolved leaving only the desired shape.




Blog Post #1 - September 4, 2012 - Exploring Thingiverse

Thingiverse.com is a very interesting concept, providing a space for anyone to contribute designs for a wide variety of objects. In exploring Thingiverse I discovered many of the applications and possibilities that a 3D printer offers. Listed below are a couple of things that I found note-worthy.

Thing 1 (Useful) - Luther College Norse Bottle Opener

~ This is a bottle opener which obviously would come in handy while also looking cool. An interesting aspect which should be noted is the penny that is used to make the part more durable.

Thing 2 (Artistic/Beautiful) - Gothic Cathedral Play Set

~ This print is a massive undertaking, described by some as the Everest of MakerBot prints. The full assembly is made up of 20 parts many of which test the limits of the machine.

Thing 3 (Pointless/Useless) - Cool Finger Cup Tool

~ This print was originally intended to be used to bind your hair together with one hand. As the creator states it failed miserably, making it pretty useless.

Thing 4 (Funny) - Bender, Futurama

~ As a true lover of Futurama, I was ecstatic to see a rendition of Bender. I feel he would truly appreciate having mini Benders being printed up. Seeing these just brings a smile to my face.

Thing 5 (Weird) - Chinese Throwing Spork (hire-shuriken)

~ Throwing star I can see. Even throwing fork, but a throwing Spork come on.