User:Djb5469

Sixth Blog: 10/23/12

I believe that bio-printing is a great way to move the industry forward. Tissue is just a collection of cells layered in a specific order, and that is exactly what 3D printing produces. Instead of using plastic or metal as an input, living cells can be substituted. The potential applications of this technology are limitless. I envision a future where a heart transplant list no longer exists. If you require a new heart, all you have to do is order one, and it can be quickly constructed. Depending on the speed of these printers, some mortal injuries may be survivable. However, there are many legal issues that are associated with this technology. Where does ownership of these printed tissue end? Can somebody own and sell a heart or a leg? What about an entire person? In the TV show Eureka, they had an advanced printer that could print an entire human body in a manner of hours. Would these artificial people have the same rights as you or me? The bthe iggest technical problem with this technology is finding a way to keep the cells alive. Do you store them in large vats? Do they grow on there own? How do you feed them? Also, could you combine different types of cells in one print? Could I combine bone cells with muscle and skin to print an arm?

I think that once the technology becomes established, there is a very good chance that this bio-printing could be expanded into somebody's private laboratory. There would be many specialized components (I cannot even picture how the extruder would function), but a traditional 3D printer should be able to make these machines. Once large companies pay the extensive R&D costs and solve the problems with bio-printing, I can see no significant hurdle preventing somebody from creating small tissue samples. I doubt that home printers will be able to produce a heart, but they should provide good test surfaces for biology enthusiasts.

Fifth Blog: 10/5/12

If I was a member of DIY trying to 3D print a gun, I would attempt to obtain a printer in a less public manner. The reasoning that Stratasys used to take away the printer was that they could not knowingly allow people to break the law. The solution is to not let Stratasys know what they intend with the printer. Or, just use a different service to buy a printer from. There are plenty of companies out there that sell 3D printers, and $20,000 will go a long way. I understand that they wanted publicity, but there cause would go a lot farther if they advertised it after they had a completed gun.

It is very difficult to regulate 3D printing, and I cannot imagine a system where it is done successfully. The printers are so easy to build with off-the-shelf components that any successful regulation seems impossible. The government could put some form of print-tracking chip in pre-made models, but the next generation of printers would not contain this restriction. Unless the government banned all 3D printers, I do not see how they could effectively regulate the industry. I guess all they could do is make it illegal to have one of these banned prints, like a home-made gun.

The possibility that comes to mind is a key. If somebody could match a borrowed key, then they could easily break into a place. In fact, if only the lock is known, a person could theoretically produce a key that would fit the lock. A key printed out of plastic, as long as it has enough precision, could be able to match any metal key.

Fourth Blog: 9/27/2012

I understand that Makerbot is a company that is trying to make money, but they are treading a very dangerous line. The great thing about 3D printers is that they can create copies of themselves. However, Makerbot does not seem to understand that even a device that replicates still needs to have a parent. Makerbot is concerned that people will not buy their new model, and that is simply wrong. People who want to get started with 3D printing still need an initial printer. That is where Makerbot comes in. Their goal should be to create the initial printer, and to make a printer that is higher quality than what people can manufacture at home. The only people who would buy a Makerbot product in the first place are one's without printing capability. Nobody would pay that much money for a slightly better printer than they have at home.

Prusa has a right to be concerned. He was one of the initial investors in Makerbot, and Makerbot has done many great things in its live, like run Thingiverse and provide start up printers. However, it now seems that Makerbot is attempting to take control of 3D printing, and that is unacceptable. The best part of 3D printing is the fact that it cannot be owned by anyone, that it is a group of people who just want to create cool things. The community cannot exist unless it is open source. Hopefully Makerbot's attempt at ownership is just legal junk, but if they truly try to control other's designs, then the community will just move to other sites, like GitHub. The transition will be awkward and slow the development of 3D printing, but it will by no means stop it.

Third Blog: 9/21/2012

1. I see only two paths for restrictions to be placed on 3D printing. The first is if it becomes such a large industry that a person's entire job becomes creating new items. Since the company is paying money to produce this complex design, they will want to charge people to download it. However, this restriction should only apply to really complex and fancy designs, far more intricate than what is currently available. The other path I see is that if this technology becomes dangerous, such as the modeling of firearms, then the government will be forced to step in and monitor it. This would only happen after some sort of tragedy, but the government moderation could make the entire society so inconvenient that nobody uses it anymore.

2. Back in elementary school, I had this great idea for a food converter. You would put bad food into this device, like broccoli, and it would produce delicious food, like chocolate. The chocolate would have all the nutritional value of broccoli, but it would have the taste and texture of chocolate. I never really thought about how this transformation would take place, but I figured some sort of science would be involved. Now that I am older, I think the idea would still be amazing, but I have no idea how it would actually be implemented. Right now I doubt anyone would be attracted to this idea, but maybe that would change if I actually develop it out further.

3. It would only be a death to IP if people are still willing to make designs without some sort of reimbursement. In an optimal world, everyone who contributes to thingiverse will be able to use thingiverse, and that access to thousands of designs would be their payment. However, people usually require some sort of more tangible reward for their efforts, so I doubt this form of utopian society will ever develop. IPs do have a lot of downsides and wastes, but it does cause people to spend the time and money to create great things. This can only be removed if people will still be willing to create great things.

Second Blog: 9/13/2012

1. The dream of complete self replication isn't really feasible, at least given the current technology. Right now we have a system that is pretty good at quickly making almost any object out of plastic. This system is pretty good for making joints and specialized components, but there is no way that an entire machine can be constructed with this method. For this system to begin to look feasible, the rep rap community needs to begin experimenting with ways to build with other materials. There is no way to produce a power brick or a motor with one of these machines. The way I interpret the dream, he machine is able to construct anything, as long as it is given the right raw materials. Unless we find a way to work with things like metal, that dream can never become a reality.

2. Wealth is tied into the means of production. If you own the means of production, then you are wealthy. However, to obtain a means of production, you must also be wealthy, because it is prohibitively expensive. The goal of rapid prototyping is to give people wealth without costing them a lot of money. If machines can duplicate themselves at little cost, then nearly everyone can afford to own one. Eventually, if the machines evolve enough, people will be able to have whatever they want, which is the definition of wealth. However, there is a problem with this plan. If the machines are used by everyone, the materials needed may become scarce, thus driving up their cost to prohibitively high levels. If this problem is overcome, then the economy could eventually be revolutionized. It would focus almost entirely on food production and these machines.

3. One future scenario is that this technology will eventually be scaled down small enough that it becomes nano technology. Medicine will be revolutionized with little particles that could travel inside a body and internally fix any health problem. Any of this machines that wear out or are destroyed can be easily replicated if the person swallows a special pill. A different advantage of this nano technology lies in space exploration. Send a few of this small machines at really fast speeds to distant planets. When they arrive, they can begin replicating using natural resources. Once they have enough numbers, they can begin construction of habitats and infrastructure that will eventually be used by humans.

First Blog:

Useful [1]

This wheel can be modified in a large variety of ways to fit nearly any situation or design. People building models will find many uses for such a versatile wheel. The wheel is one of the greatest inventions of man, and here is an easy way to manufacture one.

Artistic/Beautiful [2]

The light shade is a beautiful flame shape that is very aesthetically pleasing. Any colored LED can be placed inside it to change the color of the fire to the user's preference. It is a great room decoration.

Pointless/Useless [3]

While this steak could fit under a variety of different categories, it is primarily a rather useless object. Steaks are meant to be eaten and enjoyed. A steak constructed out of plastic cannot be eaten, and is therefor a pointless object.

Funny [4]

The mustache Ring is a humorous object that can give anyone an instant mustache. By wearing the ring, the mustache will always be only seconds away. Everyone looks silly in a fake mustache.

Weird [5]

Bobble heads are usually nice paperweights, but this one is just plain weird. Why is Black Dynamite's head on the body of a space marine? The combination makes no sense, and so this strange object will remain a mystery.