4 ms·
I think that 3D-printed-guns should be controlled because, even when I'd like to think that everybody is responsible and there isn't need for control, I know th
by gjulianm 13y ago
I think that 3D-printed-guns should be controlled because, even when I'd like to think that everybody is responsible and there isn't need for control, I know there are dumb or bad people who can harm themselves and others using this. I think that every gun (3D printed or not) should be controlled because of that same reason.
Now, how can we control it? I don't really know. I'm not for DRM. I'm not for controlling 3D printers, or 3D materials. And making an automated system so 3D printers don't print guns is infeasible, error-prone and a hassle. Maybe the best alternative is leaving those 3D printed guns uncontrolled, because any other option is ineffective.
The fact that 3D printed guns control is infeasible doesn't mean that leaving them uncontrolled is a good idea.
- zero_intp 13y ago>The fact that 3D printed guns control is infeasible doesn't mean that leaving them uncontrolled is a good idea. Actually, that is exactly what it means. Infeasibility is a good place to stop, as it means that what you are doing is not reasonably possible.
- gjulianm 13y agoI don't agree. Something impossible can be a good idea, i.e. "The fact that inmortality is infeasible doesn't mean that dying is a good idea".
- dllthomas 13y agoI think there was some semantic mismatch here. The fact that something is infeasible means that it should not be the option selected. The fact that something is infeasable says nothing about whether it would be desirable granted feasibility. I am fairly confident you and the parent comment's author agree on both these points.