1.25g x 0.6 fill % (very high % / generous in my view) is still 0.75g, on par with a hard wood. But density to me is not what I'd look at. If you could have so

1.25g x 0.6 fill % (very high % / generous in my view) is still 0.75g, on par with a hard wood. But density to me is not what I'd look at. If you could have something twice heavy but that was 100x stronger as a structural material, that obviously would be an epic win. Maybe it's less dense, but a lot of van builds use a lot of 2x4's or other fairly bulky wood. My hope is that the volume of the structure is much much less with good 3d printing. Building a layer cake of cc'ed thin wood panels would probably work, sure. It feels like a specific skill, a specific technique. Part of what's neat about 3d printing is that the manufacturing skills are transferable, that you can laterally apply it quickly to all kinds of problems, without trapping with a specific set of constraints (additive wood paneling requiring some CNC skills, some gluing/affixing panel skills). I get the appeal. Design can be a perk. That people can shape their own ideas & forms is an enticing offer. We struggle right now to imagine our 8 year old with a metaball editor like truSpace designing our camper vans or our house furniture. The barrier isn't low enough. But I think there is a joy people would have widdling and carving & nudging the forms in the world about them. We don't really have the open design systems to play freely yet; that hinders the creative flow suggested by this article. Especially if we can just throw our bench into the hopper and rebuild it (after 4 days of printing, lol), and with some solid starting places & high level editor software (VR painting, anyone?), some people would relish being able to craft their world. Design can be a joy.