13 ms·
California's new bill requires DOJ-approved 3D printers that report themselves
- Keekgette 8mo ago[flagged]
- gambiting 8mo ago>>Thanks Lefties! What lefties? From my non-US perspective, all people supporting this are definitely on the right, including the democrats pushing for this. Also literally no idea what this has to do with communism, care to enlighten us? Or is it just a catch-all phrase for anything bad?
- CodeWriter23 8mo agoDisarming the masses is Communism 101.
- vel0city 8mo agoIt's also a common right wing tactic. It's really just an authoritarian action in general, separate from left or right.
- _verandaguy 8mo agoThis is coming from California, a distinctly capitalist state, and refers to a list published by the US Federal Department of Justice, which reports to a distinctly capitalist (or... at a minimum, a distinctly non-communist) administration. It also doesn't get in the way of the US's (already extraordinarily loose) firearms sale and acquisition doctrine which regularly costs innocent lives with the pretext of resisting a tyrannical government (which, it appears, people aren't actually that interested in doing now that one's in power).
- AngryData 8mo ago"Under no pretext should arms and ammunition be surrendered; any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary." -Karl Marx
- chrisjj 8mo ago[flagged]
- zachrip 8mo agoCan you clarify what you mean?
- alisonkisk 8mo agoTitle: "California’s New Bill Requires DOJ-Approved 3D Printers That Report on Themselves" Actual fact: California’s New Bill Requires that 3D Printers Get DOJ Approval as Firearm-Blocking" (The "report on themselves" is fiction invented by Adafruit.)
- Dylan16807 8mo ago"to be able to get a 3D printer" is implied in the "requires" wording. There's no problem with that part.
- vel0city 8mo agoI don't know what language you speak but here is a part of the bill in English This bill would require, on or before July 1, 2028, any business that produces or manufactures 3-dimensional printers for sale or transfer in California to submit to the department an attestation for each make and model of printer they intend to make available for sale or transfer in California, confirming, among other things, that the manufacturer has equipped that make and model with a certified firearm blueprint detection algorithm. If the department verifies a printer make and model is properly equipped, the bill would require the department to issue a notice of compliance, as specified. The bill would require, on or before September 1, 2028, the department to publish a list of all the makes and models of 3-dimensional printers whose manufacturers have submitted complete self-attestations and would require the department to update the list no less frequently than on a quarterly basis and to make the list available on the department’s internet website. The bill, beginning on March 1, 2029, would prohibit the sale or transfer of 3-dimensional printers that are not equipped with firearm blocking technology and that are not listed on the department’s list of manufacturers with a certificate of compliance verification, except as specified. The bill would authorize a civil action to be brought against a person who sells, offers to sell, or transfers a printer without the firearm blocking technology. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB2047 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtm... Let me point out the statement: > The bill, beginning on March 1, 2029, would prohibit the sale or transfer of 3-dimensional printers that are not equipped with firearm blocking technology and that are not listed on the department’s list of manufacturers with a certificate of compliance verification, except as specified. It seems pretty clear this would prohibit the sale of 3D printers that are not approved by the California DoJ. It's not nice to lie about extremely obvious things.
- rolph 8mo agothe goal is you cant sell a 3D printer without attestation that it is anti firearm compliant. now they have to do 80% printers, kits composed of not a printer subunits, to be assembled on site. then DIY sources must be dealt with: https://pea3d.com/en/how-to-build-your-own-3d-printer/ https://pea3d.com/en/how-to-build-your-own-3d-printer/ it looks like mole whackings, all the way down.
- Buttons840 8mo agoRegulating actual guns that are frequently used in crime? Unlikely. Regulating theoretical guns? No requirement is too draconian.
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- Spivak 8mo agoYou have described the lawmaking process of basically any country. We can't actually write laws to solve real problems because real problems are hard and you can actually tell whether they've been solved or not, but we can write laws to solve imaginary problems and then when nothing changes declare victory. You can pretty much tell when any given administration has run out of ideas once they start making a huge amount of noise about laws that affect to first and second order literally nobody. 3-D printed guns is basically California's version of illegal immigrants voting in elections. Both things happen to a vanishingly small degree that it's not worth taking any action on either, but you can make them sound like they're the greatest threat to America if you have a megaphone loud enough.
- Imnimo 8mo agoDo you have to prove that your 3D printer cannot print a 3D printer which can print a gun?
- m463 8mo agowhen offspring are forbidden, only outlaws will have in-laws
- armeehn 8mo agoThis reminds me of Ken Thompson’s speech on trusting trust. The recursive/meta nature of it all has helped me explain to those unfamiliar that this is such a waste of time. Education is where it’s at, but I’m preaching to the choir here on HN.
- bluedino 8mo agoLike the printers that won't do prints of money that's money-size
- b00ty4breakfast 8mo agoonly when they start printing ICs
- 0x457 8mo agoWell, you can print out of conductive materials.
- 8mo ago
- acedTrex 8mo agowho is sponsoring and pushing these bills?
- MrMember 8mo agoAuthoritarians, as always.
- criddell 8mo agoAssembly Member Bauer-Kahan
- tgrowazay 8mo agoFrom wiki: > Rebecca Beth Bauer-Kahan (née Bauer; born October 28, 1978) is an American attorney and politician who has served as a member of the California State Assembly from the 16th district since 2018. A member of the Democratic Party, her district extends from Lamorinda to the Tri-Valley region of the San Francisco Bay Area. She has been described as a women's rights advocate.
- sonar_un 8mo agoIt's anyone who manufactures plastic or parts. 3D Printers are the wild west of printing your own replacement parts and soon the goal will to ban these things, unless there is right to repair.
- SilverElfin 8mo agoThe real truth? Nonprofits like Everytown, funded fully by billionaires like Bloomberg, who are effectively bribing/coercing legislators with their money and power. They supply identical bills into many deep blue states. They’re all extremely invasive in this way.
- jajuuka 8mo agoFeckless democrats who want to appear tough on guns. Instead of taking on the NRA or lobbying groups they go after low hanging fruit to tout as victories to their base. It generates votes and wealth for the rep. Same thing with anti-trans bills from the right. Legislation that can pass through targeting small enough collectives that they don't have to worry about bad press. All the news stories about ghost guns being 3D printed didn't hurt either. So they can sell a narrative of protecting people.
- nippoo 8mo agoThe irony isn't lost on me that it's the USA, the country with some of the most permissive gun laws in the world, that's imposing these draconian rules on 3D printed guns - or is this pressure from the gun manufacturing lobby?
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- WillPostForFood 8mo agoIt is pressure from the gun control lobby. Everytown for Gun Safety, a gun control group, is the brains behind it. The states moving this legislation (California, Washington) are very hostile to gun ownership, and already have bans on assault rifles and printed guns. This is just another step in tightening the noose.
- kube-system 8mo agoPolitically the US is very much not a monolith on this topic and many states and localities have passed laws that were later struck down as unconstitutional. This is a bill in California, which does have about the strictest laws that the federation allows them to have, and they would place even stronger restrictions on guns if they could. This is not really ironic as much as it is pushing the envelope for gun control as far as they legally can. But also, California regulators likely see the regulatory landscape as the reason this law is needed rather than in spite of it. Gun manufacturers are likely against these types of regulations because many of them would affect manufacturers and the tools they use too.
- guelo 8mo ago> strictest laws that the federation allows them to have Note that "the federation" allowed states to have stricter gun laws until recently when we got a new partisan supreme court that is out of step with the previous 200 years of jurispudence.
- kube-system 8mo ago
- bitexploder 8mo agoWho is going to tell them about lathes? They are much more practical for machining useful firearms. Good luck with all of that, I guess, California.
- sgt 8mo agoWhat about intelligent lathes? "Woa hold it, it looks like you're making a barrel. Now, let's report this first before I restore power!"
- sellmesoap 8mo agoThat's an illegal tube is what you've got right there... Hay wait _I_ could be an illegal tube at any point, either by choice or at the mercy of a lawmakers writing tools.
- kube-system 8mo agoCNC mills are already controlled in CA: https://law.justia.com/codes/california/code-pen/part-6/title-4/division-7/chapter-3/section-29185/ https://law.justia.com/codes/california/code-pen/part-6/titl...
- xenadu02 8mo agoNot really. It only applies to machines whos "sole or primary" ability is to manufacture firearms. I'm not sure even one such machine exists. Some companies market benchtop or small lathes as "gun lathes" but that is marketing fluff not a technical description. Any lathe can be used to make weapons. They have tons of round parts and parts with drilled holes. So does everything else that gets manufactured. I am not aware of any machine tool company that manufactures lathes, mills, etc explicitly designed just for manufacturing firearms. So in that sense the law you reference is typical of performative legislation. You have angry idiots pestering you to Do Something(TM). So you pass a do-nothing bill. You get to say you banned a thing that never existed. Meanwhile it doesn't hurt or bother anyone because it applies to no one. That's the best of both worlds! Do nothing while looking busy! Take action without actually hurting anyone. Is it silly? Yes. But I'd rather they do stuff like that then actually try to regulate 3d printers.
- seanmcdirmid 8mo agoThe irony is that these printers are all coming from China where even thinking about printing a gun is illegal. In comparison, America has a massive consumer gun production industry that wouldn’t survive if a significant share of that production wasn’t smuggled into Latin America.
- WillPostForFood 8mo agothat wouldn’t survive if a significant share of that production wasn’t smuggled into Latin America Let's look at actual numbers. ATF says 50,000 guns were smuggled into latin america between 2015 and 2022. So about 7,200 a year. There are about 15-20 million new firearm sales per year in the US. So assume ~.03% of production gets smuggled out. I think the industry would survive if that was cut that off. It actually would be better for them because it would make lies and slanders about the industry harder to make. https://www.thetrace.org/2024/06/atf-gun-trafficking-report-data-mexico/ https://www.thetrace.org/2024/06/atf-gun-trafficking-report-...
- seanmcdirmid 8mo agoIt’s not even close to 0.3%, the last time the Obama administration tried to get accurate numbers the republicans blew a head gasket. The fact that supposedly every American owns 4 or 5 guns should hint at how bad the smuggling problem is, and Americans are supporting it with a wink and cooked statistics, they are basically willingly exporting death.
- nickff 8mo agoHave you actually looked up any of the numbers you're writing here? It seems like the USA has about 393.4MM civilian firearms, which is ~1.2 per capita. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_civilian_guns_per_capita_by_country https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_civilian_g... About 32% of Americans say they personally own one or more guns, and most of those people own multiple weapons. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/07/24/key-facts-about-americans-and-guns/ https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2024/07/24/key-facts... Where are the 'cooked statistics'?
- drivingmenuts 8mo agoThis is an idiotic feel-good bill being pushed by political opportunists who want to look like they're taking action against a flood of illicit plastic guns. In a sane world, it would be shut down before anyone even wasted the time to print it. WE DO NOT LIVE IN THAT WORLD.
- novok 8mo agoI don't even think plastic guns are very viable as it is, they're pretty shitty guns and this is pretty much a nerd hobby currently.
- rolph 8mo agojust wait until some enterprising irresponsibility, starts spreading knowledge of microwave beam weapons, and the associated kit/files. just as deadly, harder to trace when there is no ballistic evidence, maybe an RF signature that FCC monitors will record.
- drivingmenuts 8mo agoOK, fine. Can I at least use a resin printer to create printing plates?
- dabinat 8mo agoI feel like the core issue here is accessibility. It’s always been possible to machine your own gun, but that required technical skill. Now the skill lies in the designing of the models, not the manufacturing, so it may be more practical to go after model distribution. But that ship might have already sailed with the advent of AI model creators.
- Gigachad 8mo agoThen the AI hallucinates a plausible model that explodes in your hands.
- kube-system 8mo agoGoing after model distribution is by far the least practical option. Speech is protected by law that California can not change, and the flow of information is ridiculously difficult to control even if it were legally permissible to do.
- BeetleB 8mo agoFascinating parallel with this thread regarding regulating AI bots: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47066567 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47066567 Nice sentiments, but totally impractical.
- t1234s 8mo ago"3D Printer" is a broad term. Would this apply to HAAS automated CNC machines? They can "3D Print" things from billet.
- dns_snek 8mo ago> (d) “Three-dimensional printer” means a computer-aided manufacturing device capable of producing a three-dimensional object from a three-dimensional digital model through an additive manufacturing process that involves the layering of two-dimensional cross sections formed of a resin or similar material that are fused together to form a three-dimensional object. https://law.justia.com/codes/california/code-civ/division-3/part-4/title-21/section-3273-60/ https://law.justia.com/codes/california/code-civ/division-3/... I expect someone to get around this by modifying the slicing software to use a different algorithm that doesn't rely strictly on layering 2D cross sections.
- chucksta 8mo ago-resin or similar material Or just start printing them out of something useful like metal
- ThrowawayTestr 8mo agoGood point. Is metal powder "similar material"? What's the cheapest laser sinterer?
- peddling-brink 8mo ago> I expect someone to get around this by modifying the slicing software to use a different algorithm that doesn't rely strictly on layering 2D cross sections. Yep https://www.reddit.com/r/Advanced_3DPrinting/comments/1qsy6v9/filament_injection_for_stronger_walls_gerridaj/ https://www.reddit.com/r/Advanced_3DPrinting/comments/1qsy6v...
- 15155 8mo agoThe recently-introduced WA legislation also covers subtractive methods; I imagine CA omitted that specifically because of Haas.
- okokwhatever 8mo agoPrice surge for old 3d printers ;)
- topspin 8mo agoThing is you can make a 3d printer; it's basically CNC stuff with a different tool. I suppose fabricating your own 3D printer needs to be legally ensnarled as well. Purely performative power grabbing. There is no epidemic of ghost gun violence. These measures would not stop it if there were. The new legal thicket this creates will exclusively harm innocent people. This is about notching a victory: making others bend the knee to the prerogatives of some pressure group. Nothing more. Behind it are wealthy pearl clutching virtue signalers. In front of it there are non-profit grifters and politicians with campaigns to fund, and in the middle lobbyists milk both sides. Everyone mouthing obligatory moral panic narratives to keep the money flowing.
- xnyan 8mo ago> Thing is you can make a 3d printer; it's basically CNC stuff with a different tool. Yes, but no too. I've built and purchased many 3d printers. You can make a 3d printer, but can you make one that works reliably as something like a washing machine with little to no tinkering or adjustment? Bambu Lab can sell you that for less than three hundred bucks. Just give it a file, feed it plastic, and it will rip. I can now build a 3d printer that reliable, but only with parts and tools from other people and only after experience. Realistically not being able to buy a 3d printer off the shelf means it's going to be inaccessible for most people.
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- michaelbrave 8mo agoThis is bullshit. It's a clear power grab to re-seize democratized means of production, and added surveillance. Both suck. The proposed bill in Washington is even worse, and blanket bans nearly any kind of machining or manufacturing that doesn't use surveillance. I'm going to have to actually write letters to lawmakers now as if there wasn't enough bullshit happening already.
- hxbdg 8mo ago[dead]
- jacquesm 8mo agoThis is so dumb. It isn't the printers where you could solve this but the slicers and slicers are for the most part open source. Effectively this is another ban on particular numbers. The printers just execute G-code and to make a printer aware of what it is that it is printing requires a completely different level of processing than what is normally present in the printers. Besides that, you could break anything up into parts that don't necessarily look like the complete article.
- arjie 8mo agoSnuck in my Bambu P1S. Won't be upgrading that firmware hahaha! I've had it for a few months now and it's a good consumer-grade easy-to-use 3d printer.
- numpad0 8mo agoUS requires only the serialized part of a firearm treated as guns. For the AR-15, which is like PC/AT of guns, it's a nearly cosmetic part of it, sort of a motherboard backplate. Or like, a collar for a dog rather than the heart of a dog. As such, that part reportedly can be printed and used to shoot live rounds fine. Most other guns apart for AR-15 don't even matter, like how an E-ATX motherboard with dual PowerPC hardly matter in any talks concerning a PC - if you'd be wondering what about Raspberry Pi, that would be SIG P320 or something like that. In most place of the world, including where I am, pressure bearing parts such as the barrel, the bolt that locks onto the end of the barrel to seal it as it fires, the firing pin that ignites the cartridge, the live cartridge containing gunpowder, etc etc, rather than the part that merely carries its nameplate, are controlled. It is illegal in such places to buy or possess functionally relevant parts of a gun, at least without a license, and/or prior approvals. This is more like buying a CPU or motherboards would be controlled rather than cases and faceplates. In some places, what is considered a gun in US hardly qualify as such, even almost slipping through customs(allegedly). You guys gotta fix that broken classification before trying to offload onus onto the global 3D printing community. Or drop it altogether.
- Simboo 8mo agoYummy yummy user 3D model data
- Esophagus4 8mo agoHey if we can train LLMs to generate 3D prints I wouldn’t have to struggle through CAD and could just vibe-CAD what I need…
- circuit10 8mo agoImage -> 3D model software already works really well for decorative models, though I would imagine not so much for things with precise measurements
- nickpinkston 8mo agoRequiring people to drive to Nevada to buy a real 3DP? I'm a long time shooter of all kinds of firearms (bolt actions to full-autos). What people don't realize is that gun control works, but only when it's very controlled - i.e. full registration, deep checks, mandatory training, strict storage, no handguns, etc. You need to do it across the whole country, as a real customs border can cut guns significantly, but in the US you can do still do a private party (person to person with no dealer) transfer in many states, making gun running pretty trivial. None of this will happen anytime soon in the US, and the ghost guns, etc. thing will keep happening.
- petsfed 8mo agoI've been saying this for years. Yes, we have a gun violence problem. But notably, we do not have a heavy weapons problem. By and large, gun crimes are committed with guns that can be purchased legally somewhere inside the US. So if the silver bullet to the gun violence problem is taking away all the guns (please do not misunderstand me, I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT TO BE THE CASE), then step 1 is to limit what guns can be purchased anywhere in the US. But this whole 3d printer farse reveals something we sort of already knew: if people want to have guns (or have weapons in general), they're going to find a way. If you want to address the gun violence problem, you have to find a way to make people not want to kill, nor own guns, that's unrelated to how difficult/expensive it is to get guns. And you're going have to do that in the shadow of the constitution.
- nickpinkston 8mo agoYea, they never mention that Europe also has way better social safety nets, mental healthcare, etc. I do think gun control can work, but these kinds of legislation feel like the "paper straw" kind of regulation - ie alienating some people who'd otherwise agree with you on many things.
- cranberryturkey 8mo ago[dead]
- maplet 8mo agoI wonder how "significant technical skill" will be interpreted in practice. That phrase likely means something different to the average HN reader than to the average congressman.
- nothrowaways 8mo agoCalifornia is no longer progressive.
- Gormo 8mo agoMost "progressive" policies are, and have always been, scams aimed at tricking people into allowing the state to consolidate more power to use for ulterior purposes. A great deal of regulation is sold to the public in the name of "safety", "equality", etc., but actually functions to entrench vested interests or inhibit competition in various industries. Political solutions to social problems will always be turned to the advantage of whomever has the most political influence -- and that's always some narrow faction, and not the public at large.
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- DonnyV 8mo agoI think this isn't about guns but more about seeing and controlling what people are printing. Guns is just the excuse to monitor. "Hey I see your printing a replacement part for you washer. Well that is a patent part and you will need to pay to print that."
- stuckkeys 8mo agoLOL...you do have a point, but not sure what makes them think...I would let my 3d printer talk to the outside...ever. But yeah, this bill is such BS.
- charcircuit 8mo agoIt's legal to manufacture your own firearms. Putting limitations on 3d printers just makes people who want to this's lives harder and stifles innovation.
- oceanplexian 8mo agoIt's legal insofar that if you want to exercise your rights expect to sit in Jail until your lawyer can take it to the Supreme Court. At which point CA will slightly reword the law to intentionally circumvent the Constitutional rights of its citizens.
- mothballed 8mo agoI have no idea about CA but this is absolutely the case in NYC.[] Dexter Taylor is sitting in jail for a decade for making personal use firearms without a license. No other alleged criminal activity and they never even left his house. During trial, the judge said "the second amendment isn't allowed in my courtroom."* His lawyer knows they are going to lose all the appeals in New York but basically he has to sit in jail for 3-4 years through the state court system until it can hit federal courts where there is a good chance his case will eventually get overturned. [] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dexter_Taylor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dexter_Taylor * Response to below (my comments are throttled): The argument/reference in his defense, not actual guns.
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- daveguy 8mo agoOf course the second amendment isn't allowed in his courtroom. It's literally not allowed in any courtroom in the country. It's a courtroom. The only people permitted to have guns in a courtroom in the US are the bailiffs and the judge. Was that a reading comprehension issue, or are you just trying to rile people up? Sports Arenas and Jails are two other places you might be surprised to learn don't allow the second amendment.
- jibal 8mo agoIt's highly misleading to call a bill that was introduced a couple of days ago by one Assembly member "California's new bill". Bills aren't laws and most bills go nowhere.
- 0x457 8mo agoWell, it's a new bill. What is misleading about it? Is there a special term for "a bill that was introduced a couple of days ago by one Assembly member" ?
- jf 8mo agoIt has no cosponsors and hasn’t been presented to a committee yet. It’s like calling a bowl of flour, water, and yeast a “new bread”
- kube-system 8mo agoBill is to law as dough is to bread.
- bdcravens 8mo agoWouldn't the process of following the due process before it can be voted upon essentially the same of combining ingredients to make dough?
- kube-system 8mo agoI don't know but a loaf of bread is a completed product and a bill certainly isn't. Beyond that the analogy probably isn't very helpful.
- jibal 8mo agoIt's like calling "a bill recently introduced by Assembly Member Bauer-Kahan" ... "California's new bill". It's not California's anything, and won't be unless/until it becomes part of California's legal code.
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- delichon 8mo ago> The state should prosecute people who make illegal thing, not add useless surveillance software on every tool in every classroom, library, and garage in the state. This bill is analogous to requiring text editors to verify that a document does not contain defamation, fraud, incitement, fighting words, child porn, etc., before it saves the file. In first amendment terms that led to the conclusion that prior restraint on publication is incompatible with the amendment. The same doctrine should be extended to the second amendment for the same reasons. The alternative is intolerable surveillance.
- ottah 8mo ago3d printing is also a creative expression and part of free speech. However principles don't matter to authoritarians, and really the only defense is constant political pressure and civil disobedience.
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- kube-system 8mo agoThe model files and designs are protected speech, yes.... but free speech doesn't really follow the transitive property. Just because you can have a copy of the Anarchists Cookbook doesn't mean that building the things in the book are protected speech.
- SauciestGNU 8mo agoNot in California but generally 3d printing or otherwise self-manufacturing firearms is legal per the 2nd amendment, and publishing files is protected expressive activity (I bet there are some ITAR cutouts for weapons but I suspect that doesn't come into play here).
- kube-system 8mo agoSelf-manufacturing is definitely federally legal by statute but I don't think it is entirely clear that a constitutional right to self-manufacturing is incorporated to states or localities. Heller never mentioned manufacturing. And on top of that, there is no protected right to 3d printers. Regardless, it is 1000% more clear that states can't ban you from sending around gun design files.
- legitster 8mo agoA 3D printer being able to identify what it's actually printing is much harder than it seems. Also, the majority of what gets printed are parts - how do you distinguish between a legal gun owner printing accessories and parts that go towards a ghost gun? Also, good luck farming off the job to the DOJ right now. The ATF has already mostly shrugged at the prospect of 3D printed guns, and that was before the administration gutted it. I don't think they have any interest/ability to cooperate with tech regulation at this time. This, like every other bill on the subject that has been attempted from around the country, is bound for a quiet death by committee.
- ConanRus 8mo ago[dead]
- 0cf8612b2e1e 8mo agoGuess this is as good an excuse as any. What are the recommendations for printers now? Bucket it by price range, so $0-200, $200-400, $400-800, $800+ Any notable features which can be a big value add? Offline is obviously a requirement given how the winds are blowing.
- Toutouxc 8mo agoBambu Lab A1 Mini is around $200 here in Europe and as long as you can fit into the 180mm cube print volume, it is wonderful. Requires zero configuration and zero prior knowledge. Calibrates itself, reminds you about maintenance. Looks as unthreatening as a 3D printer can. Supports offline/LAN mode.
- WillAdams 8mo agoThe Elegoo Centauri Carbon (~$300) is the best value for single filament (their promised Filament Switching System has yet to be released despite being promised for Q3 last year), since DJI revenge-invested in them for the sake of the engineers who left that company to start Bambu Labs. It has an enclosure and heated bed which are helpful for printing specialty/engineering filaments. Flashforge AD5X (also ~$300) is the best value for single extruder multi-filament since it forgoes the expense of material to enclose it which works well for PLA (an enclosure is easily fabricated and installed). Note that they had a recent social media gaffe where they claimed that they would report manufacture of weapons, but have since walked that back. I own both of the above, and print from USB sticks w/o connecting to my network --- I'm pretty sure that's possible with most if not all printers. The Snapmaker U1 (~$1,000) is the most striking value for multi-filament since it minimizes "poop" (extra filament extruded when changing colours). If you want to support opensource, then one of Prusa's (they cover a wide range of price points) --- they have been pushing the "INDX" printhead technology which allows fast/efficient switching between different filaments.
- matthewalton 8mo ago[dead]
- c22 8mo agoIf this happens I'm gonna buy one of these printers and exclusively print dicks with it.
- rolph 8mo agothat is prone as well, consider what if printing CSAM related items becomes a wide spread problem, that begs for considerations.
- c22 8mo agoSorry, I forgot to specify: adult dicks.
- rolph 8mo agoyeah you know what i mean :) and it doesnt have to be a sexual endeavor, it could be transgressional art, for example a series of insect inspired sculputres of genitalia. as soon as someone starts printing/distributing materials that cater to a CSAM genre, then those cornflakes are no longer edible.
- duchenne 8mo agoIf they are worried about firearms, why don't they target CNC mills rather than 3d printer? Can you even make a firearm in plastic? Some US company specialize in selling CNC mills specifically for firearms. Ex: https://realghostguns.com/product/gg3-s-cnc-deposit/ https://realghostguns.com/product/gg3-s-cnc-deposit/ It is sold with the cut codes for the AR-15, AR-.308, 1911, Polymer80 and AK-47 receivers and frames.
- ale42 8mo agoArticle says: New York’s budget bill S.9005 buries similar requirements in Part C, sweeping in CNC mills and anything capable of “subtractive manufacturing.” So CNCs might be part of it. But I didn't check the actual bill text.
- burnt_toast 8mo ago> Can you even make a firearm in plastic? Yes but most designs still require metal bits. Typically the frame will be 3d printed and then you rely on machined components for things like slides and rails.
- preisschild 8mo agoTheres also electrochemical machining which is rather easy to do at home
- platevoltage 8mo agoWell this bill looks regressive enough for Newsome to sign.
- aiiotnoodle 8mo agoThere already is some intelligence fed back to the police somewhere in the 3d printed guns supply chain. You see it a lot on crime investigation shows. Pretty sure I've seen it on 24 hours in police custody and at least one other show or documentary. edit: police acting on a source, a lead or some other un-named entity.
- rayiner 8mo agoWhat’s the point of this law in a country where you can get an AR15 as a side order at Cracker Barrel.
- motbus3 8mo agoFrom the country where guns are sold? I don't get it. What is the point? Not even being ironic. I don't understand the point. If you tell me that this can make an untracked weapon, I will tell you that probably an untracked weapon can be done with anything, and surprise surprise, even without 3d printed parts. Imagine the amount of false positives and inquiries on unprovable things. Soon this will also be used for copyright or whatever, and that will be the sole purpose
- abeyer 8mo ago> Not even being ironic. I don't understand the point Because there is a significant part of the country that would love to ban guns completely but they currently don't, and perhaps won't ever, have quite enough support to make a change to the constitution to allow them to. In the absence of that, and given they do have plenty of support to create local law many places, the strategy seems to have become to create a regulatory regime that technically still allows guns while making it as impractical as possible for anyone to actually do so.
- Ylpertnodi 8mo ago> Because there is a significant part of the country that would love to ban guns completely but they currently don't, and perhaps won't ever, have quite enough support to make a change to the constitution to allow them to. Ban guns, or regulate them, and their owners?
- abeyer 8mo ago> Ban guns, or regulate them, and their owners? Both, though I don't know the breakdown. I'm confident saying there's absolutely some people who seem to see onerous regulation as a path to a de facto ban, though. I'd be more inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to those pushing regulations if the regulations themselves seemed well thought out and drafted rather than leaning on kneejerk "guns bad, rules good" reactions from voters to get passed. Unfortunately the actual situation seems to be that left-leaning areas where it's easy to push anti-gun law lean farther and farther into restricting both first and second amendment rights without meaningful impact, while the right-leaning areas that actually could use some additional regulation over the perhaps overly lax federal level laws can't or won't do anything.
- octagons 8mo agoIs there evidence that shows a trend in increased violent crime committed using 3D-printed weapons? I’ve certainly seen projects and models demonstrating the ability to create firearms with the help of a 3D printer, but I’m not aware of anyone using one to commit a crime…
- bitmasher9 8mo agoThe Brian Thompson murder was with a 3D printed firearm.
- bdcravens 8mo agoA single crime isn't a trend.
- wewewedxfgdf 8mo agoSuch freedom.
- hn_acker 8mo agoGovernment-mandated scanning requirements on people's printers for supposedly illegal guns would be similarly unconstitutional to government-mandated scanning requirements on people's phones for CSAM. I happened to remember reading about how the Fourth Amendment's warrant requirement would have ruined EARN IT Act's implementation had it passed [1]: > When a private entity conducts a search because the government wants it to, not primarily on its own initiative, then the otherwise-private entity becomes an agent of the government with respect to the search. (This is a simplistic summary of “government agent” jurisprudence; for details, see the Kosseff paper.) And government searches typically require a warrant to be reasonable. Without one, whatever evidence the search turns up can be suppressed in court under the so-called exclusionary rule because it was obtained unconstitutionally. If that evidence led to additional evidence, that’ll be excluded too, because it’s “the fruit of the poisonous tree.” > Fourth Amendment government agency doctrine is why lawmakers and law enforcement must tread very carefully when it comes to CSAM scanning online. Many online service providers already choose voluntarily to scan all (unencrypted) content uploaded to their services, using tools such as PhotoDNA. But it must be a voluntary choice, not one induced by government pressure. (Hence the disclaimer in the federal law requiring providers to report CSAM on their services that they know about, which makes clear that they do not have to go looking for it.) If the provider counts as a government agent, then its CSAM scans constitute warrantless mass surveillance. Whatever CSAM they find could get thrown out in court should a user thus ensnared raise a Fourth Amendment challenge during a resulting prosecution. But that’s often a key piece of evidence in CSAM prosecutions; without it, it’s harder to convict the accused. In short, government pressure to scan for CSAM risks letting offenders off the hook. [1] Ignoring EARN IT's Fourth Amendment Problem Won’t Make It Go Away - https://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2022/03/ignoring-earn-its-fourth-amendment-problem-wont-make-it-go-away/ https://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/blog/2022/03/ignoring-earn-its...
- lovich 8mo ago> Government-mandated scanning requirements on people's printers for supposedly illegal guns would be similarly unconstitutional to government-mandated scanning requirements on people's phones for CSAM Don’t we have something similar with how pretty much all copiers/printers wont print currency?
- Brian_K_White 8mo agoIn any other context when someone tries to demand the impossible from me, I just say "you show me how to do it". But all the time politicians prestidigitate directives without any clue how it might be actually done. It's like that guy that tried to decree that pi=3.
- WillAdams 8mo agoThe irony is that the pi == 3 argument comes from failing to read correctly/follow directions accurately for 1 Kings 7:23 --- the ratio of 3 to the diameter is for the _inner_ circumference --- when one includes the thickness of the wall, then it comes out to 3.14 which is a workable approximation.
- 4d4m 8mo agoWhat a ridiculous overreach
- juris 8mo agoi am well-aware that what follows is a rant, but i really do feel boxed in from every moral angle from my upbringing. from surveilled e2e communication from the "conservatives", to surveilled 3d printers from the "liberals", and watching the political pendulum ratchet a rope around my throat with increasingly fascist tooling, i am given to wonder if I am not a side character in 1984. so i don't mind if you downvote me. but if you care to listen to a man rant: we have an incredibly sycophantic doj which selectively enforces the law according to socioeconomic status, so it boggles the mind that some of us in this thread maintain that this issue is partisan alone ("oh you liberals"). this line of thinking is a trap. is it really the dems in california? is it really trump's doj? or, taking a step back and looking at fascist trends worldwide in aggregate, don't these policies benefit those groups who operate and lobby above common law? those groups of people who we magically let slide time and time again after committing gross misconduct? those companies whose monopolies fundamentally destroy free trade? so much tribalism. conservative or liberal, once the pendulum swings maybe consider what happens when your phantom political 'enemies' on the other side of the aisle can monitor what you create in your home, what queries you toss into your AI assistant, who you talk to on social media, what you are buying, or where your location is on the cell tower map. then if you have a second brain cell, maybe consider whether those enemies on the other side of the aisle are struggling to feed kids and make shelter just the same as you, whether they are as much the rabble as those goliaths who dictate what the topics of division -are- who benefits most from your fear of the other but those groups who lobby both sides?? isn't it would be better to have a world of celebrated differences and rules of decorum that instill trust and foster co-operation? isn't that the world that we want, so that we may put the monsters at epstein island, sarajevo, (and so many other places) in prison? maybe it is time to rise up and hold our leaders accountable, on the left and the right! "oh this is just political posturing, those lawmakers are rewarded merely for doing 'something'" yes-- this is true. but from the outset, whose political posturing is it really? because the end result for every one of these laws that come to pass don't seem to prevent the folks up top from getting away scott-free. just remember that with all illegal files (violations of copyright law, banned books, etc): it is easy to determine whether you are in possession of them. whether it is enforced against you is a matter of convenience and leverage, your personal value (and optic value as a victim in the political theatre). be value-less. rant aside. obvious, stupid questions to the topic at hand: - (yes, shooting people is bad). - what is the definitive geometry of a gun? - who arbitrates that? - is it a crime to print a rubber band gun? a toy gun? - what about parts for a gun? how is that known? - who do we register our printers to? - what mechanisms are in place to side channel whether a person purchases tools such that we can detect whether they own an unregistered 3d printer? - how do we deal with false positives? - if I have a novel prototype of a non-gun which I would like to patent in a highly litigious first-to-file country, how can I guarantee that the file in question is submitted only to the government entity or API endpoint in question? - do we ban chinese printers? whose companies form the superset of allowable printers? how do smaller manufacturers join in? - what happens when the printer EOLs and software updates for the device stop (and therefore can't update the API endpoint)? - will open source printers be illegal? - what else should our government forbid us for printing: cock rings and contraceptive devices? emblems associated with religious groups (modernly) associated with hate speech? i am sorry if you read this much and are from elsewhere. watch that it does not happen to your country. my heart goes out to you.
- polishdude20 8mo agoI fully expect California's maker scene to push hard against this.
- UltraSane 8mo agoThis is remarkably similar to the fight over feed vs seed nanotech in The Diamond Age novel. The Feed was a centralized matter distribution network under strict control of what could be created and by whom. The Seed was a completely self contained system that could bootstrap from raw materials.
- guest__user 8mo agothese laws are wild , and it's super easy to make 3d printers now ... it seems like more security theater
- AbraKdabra 8mo agoAnd I thought here in Argentina we had the most retard politicians that try to control anything in their eyes reach...