1. What do you think of bio-printing? What sort of legal problems or technical problems can you foresee?
Bio-printing seems like a great idea. the ability to print off skin to help burn victims would be a great medical achievement. But right now they are using the prints for drug testing, which is also a great idea. I see problems with selling human cells/parts, as it is illegal to sell something like a kidney, there is a fine line to what can and can"t be sold.
2. Do you think this might be extended to RepRaps for DIY bio-research?
I can't see bio-printing from home for a really long time, if it ever happens. It's hard enough to may plastic stick to a bed, to make living cells stick to a bed and eachother without killing them in the process just seems impossible out side of a lab.
1. Imagine that you were a dedicated member of the DIY gun project: What might you do now?
As they don't have a printer, there are two things I would. One thing is to get my hands on another printer, and the second thing would be to keep it quite so the same thing doesn't happen again.
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)?
Gun manufacturing should be regulated. But can it really be regulate probably not.
3. Guns (and other weapons) seem to be prone to prohibitions. What other 3D printable constructs might attract similar attention/derision/prohibition?
The only thing that is coming to mind would be a structure support part. If people put there life in the hands of a printer part and it fails I could see the government/people giving it some attention.
Comment on Makerbot’s position (as far as we know), Prusa’s concerns, and ownership of designs. Should we look for a new thingiverse?
First on Makerbot's position as being close closed source, I think this is a good idea for the Makerbot to make money and save the hard work put into it, but they might have lost the trust of the costumer. Prusa's concerns is that trust issue, Makerbot may not be out to steal all the thingiverse things we are going to wait and see or look for a new site. The question of looking for a new site or not lies in the question, do you care if Makerbot profits off of your design, and if I find out that that is happening I will be looking for a new site. But for now I'll give them the benefit of the doubt and stick with them for now.
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 think restrictions will be in the future of 3D printing. There are some ways this could happen, 1 way I was thinking about is sites like thingiverse could make a "membership" site where one would have to pay for access to the site. This would return profits to the person's file you download. I could see this something like "iTunes" pay a couple of cents and you could download the g-code for a part.
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?
I see what you did here! I do have some GREAT ideas but i'm not all about tell other people quite yet, as my ideas are not complete an as Bowyer said ,"Information - unlike matter and energy - is not conserved.", so I will be keeping my ideas to myself until they can make me money. Or maybe a future mate :)
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? First off i'm going to say that killing IP will lane in the "or somewhere in-between" for me. And as for this happening in the future I don't think it will happen. Right now I would guess that 30% of people (Americans) could set-up and use an old school 2D printer, for the 3D printer to take off in ever household people will need to be educated. The more educated people become more IP will be created. The only way IP could be killed by 3D printers is if the printers are so easy to use/build that no thinking would be needed to use them, but what kind of world would that be.
Blog#2 Adrian Bowyer
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?
How feasible is his idea... I would have to say that as of today it is unfeasible, but with time his idea make come to be.
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.
His motto "wealth without money" means anyone with one of these machine would be able to own any and every "thing" at just the cost of materials. He clams that your friend could just print you off another machine at cost so almost everyone will have one, so I guess one can have wealth with money or you could say wealth with good friends. Materials would end up being one of the biggest problems, as more people needs for raw materials increase so will the price.
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.
Much has changed sense Darwin, and I believe much more is in the further. For one I would think a circuit board printer is in the near future, but as for making stepper motors, that's a different story. I don't think it will go much bigger than that, open-source is great as long as there are a number of smart people chipping in. But as soon as it hits "mainstream" people will want to make money on there work and not just give it away. If the future does contain evolve(which it probably will) I believe it will happen slow with a lot of small changes.
Blog#1 Thingiverse Designs Entry
1. Useful- Adjustable Monitor Stand
I find this useful because of the money that would be saved just by printing this out.
2. Artistic/Beautiful- Flame Light Shade
This is a hollow model of flames, after adding a light source you have yourself a beautiful little light.
3. Pointless/Useless- Toothpaste Squeezer
First off who even needs one of these, secondly it just a big waste of plastic.
4. Funny- Bottle Opener
A wall mounted bottle opener is one of the best things I found on thingiverse, joust add a penny and screw it on a wall to get your drink on!
5. Weird- Creepy Alien Catapiller
I don't understand who would even want this let-alone waste the time to print it.