7 ms·
What the Maker Revolution Will Really Look Like
- Zimahl 14y agoYes, real products, from haute couture handbags... I don't think they know what haute couture means. The maker bot is about localized mass production, not something made specifically for one person. And clothing has always been a maker activity - you can go buy a sewing machine (and pretty advanced ones at that) right this second.
- jamieb 14y agoI think it'll look like this: http://www.assaultweb.net/Forums/showthread.php?t=142405 http://www.assaultweb.net/Forums/showthread.php?t=142405 "AR-15 30rd Magazine Dowloadable CAD Files" Edit: Maybe I've been reading too much Charles Stross: "Mind you, not everything that comes out of a rapid prototyper is good. Here's the Magpul FMG-9 prototype: and here's some more. Is it a flashlight? Is it a submachine gun? Who knows? Here's another baroque weapon that probably started life on a rapid prototyping machine. If reprap-like machines with strong materials turn out to be cheap and easy, then never mind licensing handguns — we're going to have a problem with home-made crew-served weapons. (Reminder: yr. hmbl. crspndnt. lives in a country where, for better or worse, possession of a pistol by anyone who's not in the police or military carries a mandatory 5-year minimum prison sentence. The implications of rapid prototyping machines for this sort of legislative environment probably parallel the effects of peer to peer networking on music industry cartels.)" http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2008/06/the_future_today_maybe.html http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2008/06/the_futu...
- NanoWar 14y agoGuns, really? My first thought was replacement parts...
- thechut 14y agoDownvoted, why does everyone need to bring up the gun issue when somebody talks about the maker revolution? Big gun manufactures have been making guns for a long time. I don't see how people making themselves matters at all.
- dllthomas 14y agoThe point is the difficulty of enforcing gun control legislation, when a banned 30 round clip can be simply printed in anyone's garage from a easily transferred file. Not entirely germane to the present discussion I think, but not entirely irrelevant either.
- jamieb 14y agoDid you perhaps miss this: "Obama told lawmakers that he wanted them to swiftly pass a assault-weapon ban and limit magazines to 10 bullets." http://www.forbes.com/sites/abrambrown/2013/01/16/what-obamas-gun-control-laws-mean-for-32b-firearm-industry/ http://www.forbes.com/sites/abrambrown/2013/01/16/what-obama... "If reprap-like machines with strong materials turn out to be cheap and easy, then never mind licensing handguns — we're going to have a problem with home-made crew-served weapons." - Charles Stross The drivers of new technology aren't always wholesome. http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?PornDrivesNewTech http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?PornDrivesNewTech
- jamieb 14y agoCalled it. Front page HN today: http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/ny-congressman-introducing-ban-on-3d-printed-high http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/ny-congressman-i...
- hosh 14y agoThe author missed the true significance of the Maker Revolution. It is not about people being able to design their own products or having a market full of craptastic products. The Maker Revolution is about being able to provide for your needs without depending on a global supply chain. It's about the kind of material freedom you might have if your neighborhood hardware store, or even your household fab in the garage can make all the goods for your basic needs, and then some.
- berntb 14y ago>>provide for your needs without depending on a global supply chain. Hmm... reminds me of a discussion (@Stross' blog) about how many people were needed in a society, to support a technological civilization. Stross argued we would need many millions of people. http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2010/07/insufficient-data.html http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2010/07/insuffic... (Of course, lots of specialised services can be replaced with less efficient generic ones, but even a minimum of one million people have severe implications for a Mars colony.) Edit: Clarity
- hosh 14y agoBasic material needs: Food. Water. Shelter. Air. Existential needs: Love, affection, contentment, happiness, connection. Technology can address the basic needs and can never address existential needs. Everything else are wants. Wants are endless since they attempt to address existential needs but never actually satisfy them. In that sense, Stross is correct. There will always be more wants than can be supported by any given population size of society; but needs can be supported.
- berntb 14y agoUhh... you went of in some weird orthogonal direction. The Stross reference were about the minimum number of people needed for a technological civilization. (Didn't you read it? Are you defending some belief system as an excuse for being religious? We're just talking past each others?) (And you're wrong, anyway. without technology and science, we'd still have little time, get sick and die early -- living under tyranny. Not much chance of contentment and happiness when you e.g. see your kids die; it was ~ 30% child mortality before technology/science, depending on where you lived. The point is, industrialisation is a prereq for fulfilling existential needs for most of the population.)
- ph0rque 14y agoThis tacit knowledge is the reason why we don’t have a 3D model of a Stradivarius violin, or even a real-life exact replica of any kind, for that matter. It may be no Stradivarius, but it's a start on 3D printing musical instruments: http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-10-11/the-worlds-first-3d-printed-guitar http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-10-11/the-worlds-f...
- kybernetikos 14y agoThat whole thing about the 3d model of a Stradivarius is complete nonsense: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-15926864 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-15926864 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2067981/Researchers-use-3D-imaging-hi-tech-tools-rebuild-Stradivarius-time.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2067981/Resea... So we do have 3d models of Stradivarius violins, plus computer cut replicas. And on top of that, in blind tests, violinists preferred modern violins anyway. http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2012/jan/02/how-many-notes-violinist-stradivarius http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2012/jan/02/how-many-notes-v...
- jdreaver 14y agoI don't understand why we keep us in the word "democratize" when it comes to increasing individual freedom with technology. Democracy is the tyranny of the majority; we aren't voting to see who gets to produce or consume what. It's a pet peeve of mine because it's simply used as a buzzword and makes no sense in a technological context.
- pbhjpbhj 14y agoDemocratise means to make accessible to all the people, like how democracy gives the vote to all the people.
- Jtsummers 14y agoI think it gets used that way because it has been for at least decades now. Democratization of information, knowledge has long been tied to the idea of decentralization and distribution amongst the masses. This easily carries over to many of the principal ideas of the internet and the communication of ideas, designs, etc that it permits.
- emilepetrone 14y agoIf you really want to know what the maker revolution will look like, visit https://tindie.com https://tindie.com, the site I started. Tindie is the marketplace for the 'makers' the author references. We have robots, custom chips, amps, synths - all at the highest quality made by single makers. The author is missing is actual knowledge of how the manufacturing process works for maker products. Because of that, he or she is left making an assumption that the majority of products will be poor quality - when Tindie actually proves the opposite. The majority of our products are at the highest quality, and that is because of the accessibility of modern manufacturing. That is why the maker revolution is powerful. One maker can make a product, design it, manufacture it, and sell it all from their garage.
- JohnBooty 14y agoYou know what's sad? I got genuinely excited because I thought this thread title said "Marker Revolution." To be fair, look... I'm left-handed. I'd be pretty excited about a new kind of smear-proof marker that didn't leave my hand and the drawing surface looking like unintentional abstract art if I wasn't careful.
- ChuckMcM 14y agoWrite right to left :-) I too am left handed and if you don't mind annoying people it does solve the problem (well at least as much as it does for right handed people). The weird thing is that when you first write stuff that way its all weird and uncomfortable and then if you force it your brain will flip the switch and you'll write as fast as you ever have. Once you get there its especially fun signing things, that freaks people out. Of course middle eastern folks have done this forever so its not a 'new' thing in any sense of the word.
- clauretano 14y agoAh, we shared the same reading comprehension issue. Aside from the whiteboard or other fixed-surface situation, you can always just angle the paper. Writing with the paper angled about 60 degrees anticlockwise seems to do the trick. Fountain pens are another problem area. You have to learn to write without "pushing" the pen. More info here: http://www.nibs.com/Left-hand%20writers.htm http://www.nibs.com/Left-hand%20writers.htm --combine that with fast-drying ink and things aren't so bad.
- zwieback 14y agoThe Maker Revolution improves our capability to make small-run and custom products, that's what's so great about it. However, it's far from any kind of industrial revolution. It's also important to point out that rapid prototyping has been a standard tool in most manufacturing disciplines for at least the 20 years I've been an engineer. Another encouraging side-effect of the Maker discussion is that the new consensus about the advantages of local manufacturing. We've been complaining to our bosses about the loss of manufacturing capability not only because our jobs are going overseas but also because the local knowledge about design-for-manufacturability and the other DFx's are eroding. When I started my current job we had assembly lines, machine shops, reliability and regulatory labs and a large force of highly skilled technicians. Now it's almost all engineers and the most we can hope for is to build the first 10 prototypes of anything we design. The "Maker" induced renewed interest in rapid prototyping has caused a subtle shift in the minds of mid and upper management about how far to take local manufacturing before going to CMs in China.
- podperson 14y agoI think this article misses not only "the" point but pretty much all points about the "maker" revolution. The maker revolution is about the world of "atoms" being converged into the world of "bits". Just as desktop publishing technology engulfed specialized information-centric industries such as mathematical and musical typesetting, 3d printers are the first step towards what Neal Stephenson referred to as "matter compilers" in The Diamond Age -- where the gap between design and physicality is almost trivial -- the idea that this will look like guilds or mass cottage industry or whatever is wrong-headed: it will look like something we've never seen before. (I think matter compilers are going to far, and we'll probably use standardized recyclable lego-like pieces rather than atoms but the idea is basically sound).
- wmf 14y ago3d printers are the first step towards ... where the gap between design and physicality is almost trivial Maybe the author is thinking of the next few years and you're thinking about the next few decades.
- podperson 14y agoPerhaps. I don't think that we'll return to the guild system in the next few years either :-)
- michaelfeathers 14y agoCall me pessimistic, but I suspect that the 'Maker Revolution' could bring us a level of legal madness that is far beyond what we have seen in copyright over the past 20 years. Plans for 3D printing are not only copyrightable, they are subject to patent law. That, and the potential for creation of contraband with 3D printers may lead to online clearing houses for designs that you make and print at home, or strict legislation controlling the use of home printers and sale of items from them. Beyond that, it is likely that there will be a secondary effect. Right now, you can make just about any item you want to in your wood shop, hobby shop or on your kitchen table, and use it at home or sell it to neighbors or friends. 3D printers may bring much more legal scrutiny to things that pass under the radar as craft today even if printers aren't used. I want a better future than that, so I hope that people take the initiative to support early safe harbor legislation and exemptions for home projects.
- tarice 14y agoI wouldn't call you pessimistic - more realistic. I expect that the reaction of the Manufacturing industry's reaction to small-scale Makers will parallel the Recording/Movie industry to file-sharing, as the situations are similar in many regards. It's very likely to happen, and it'll suck, but like you said, hopefully we get legislation through in time to protect some of the small Makers so they don't get sued into oblivion by the future-RIAA.
- Havoc 14y agoBless the Maker and His water. Bless the coming and going of Him. May His passage cleanse the world. May He keep the world for His people. This being HN I'll probably get stoned for this reddit-like comment. So be it.
- Havoc 14y agoWell that didn't take long. -1 downvote per 8 minutes.