@#$% you Denmark.

[irishScott]

http://techcrunch.com/2013/06/26/da...tware-that-will-stop-you-from-printing-a-gun/

Granted someone would have tried this eventually, but come on. How is this even possible? I suppose they could make it "harder" to print a gun, but what if I want to print a plastic nail that the software mistakes for a firing pin? Or component for a switch that it mistakes for a trigger?

It says it allows a kid to print a water gun, but not allow a user to print a real gun?

I foresee stuff like this being the equivalent to copy protection on digital media, and about as effective. This may prevent Crackhead-MotherBitch from the projects from printing a gun, but I doubt it'll go much further; and the arms dealers who don't give a shit are certainly smart enough to circumvent it and sell their untraceable product.

 

[JulesMaximus]

I don't see a problem with this. We have laws that control the production and sale of guns for a reason. Basically, a 3D printer circumvents those rules.

 

[blankslate]

No one is forcing you to move to Denmark... it's not affecting you.

 

[irishScott]

I don't see a problem with this. We have laws that control the production and sale of guns for a reason. Basically, a 3D printer circumvents those rules.

So does buying a gun illegally from any of the tens or hundreds of willing dealers in a given city.

I'm just saying that, like the vast majority of gun control, this will be ineffective and will only penalize people who are trying to print something other than a gun. Especially if it's only software based.

 

[irishScott]

No one is forcing you to move to Denmark... it's not affecting you.

So in your world there are no such things as international sales?

 

[Incorruptible]

Denmark just proved how many morons they have in their shithole country. Let them suffer once they get taken over.

 

[blankslate]

So in your world there are no such things as international sales?

At this point people are making their own 3-D printers for the most part.

When it reaches the point at which most people buy a 3-D printer instead of assembling it with a kit. then...

U.S. manufacturers can always just compete by selling Printers free of that software in the States and able to use the software in countries that require it for the 3-D printer

Outrage 3-D printed....

 

[bshole]

I'm just saying that, like the vast majority of gun control, this will be ineffective and will only penalize people who are trying to print something other than a gun.

Why bother making laws at all? Criminals will just break them huh? Great logic there.

 

[HomerJS]

Denmark just proved how many morons they have in their shithole country. Let them suffer once they get taken over.

Funny how they haven't been taken over to date considering 3d printers are fairly recent

 

[PottedMeat]

why fuck denmark? this guy sees a future market for countries with laws restricting 3d printer output - he writes software that a manufacturer would buy. probably very easy to circumvent.

Denmark just proved how many morons they have in their shithole country. Let them suffer once they get taken over.

lol and oh so predictable

 

[irishScott]

Why bother making laws at all? Criminals will just break them huh? Great logic there.

Yeah, didn't even remotely say that.

What I did say was that I don't agree with unenforceable laws that only hinder the innocent.

 

[bshole]

Yeah, didn't even remotely say that.

What I did say was that I don't agree with unenforceable laws that only hinder the innocent.

Then, you have NO credibility if you support the war on drugs. If you don't well then I have to say that you are consistent.

 

[irishScott]

Then, you have NO credibility if you support the war on drugs. If you don't well then I have to say that you are consistent.

I don't, but regardless I fail to see how this thread suddenly became about my philosophical consistency.

 

[bshole]

I support the repeal on the war on drugs because it punishes crimes that have no victim.

In this case, the people who designed the weapons should have their intellectual property protected. I support law/technology that does just that. Without those protections, the motivation to create the intellectual property in the first place evaporates. It is critical to the free market economy and captitalism to protect the results of inventive minds and capital investment.

 

[Incorruptible]

Funny how they haven't been taken over to date considering 3d printers are fairly recent

They will be taken over though and it's slowly happening.

 

[woolfe9998]

I don't, but regardless I fail to see how this thread suddenly became about my philosophical consistency.

Perhaps nothing to do with your consistency, but rather that you appear overly emotional on this topic and it's impairing your judgment. Your subject line "fuck you Denmark" is entirely out of line here considering your article is about one Danish engineer who created something you don't like. I doubt you actually hate the Danes, but I think your emotions are over the top on the topic.

 

[Broheim]

The CEO, Jeremie Pierre Gay

that ain't no fucking Dane I can tell you that much.

not that your average Danes aren't scared shitless of guns, because they are.

from a business perspective it's a clever concept that'll probably be in demand in the future, not that I'd want it to be government mandated in 3d printers though.

 

[momeNt]

I support the repeal on the war on drugs because it punishes crimes that have no victim.

In this case, the people who designed the weapons should have their intellectual property protected. I support law/technology that does just that. Without those protections, the motivation to create the intellectual property in the first place evaporates. It is critical to the free market economy and captitalism to protect the results of inventive minds and capital investment.

It is not critical to a free market to create a property right out of an idea.

Just as you argue that stealing an idea is an incentive to producing an idea, the same can be argued that creating a false monopoly on an existing idea hinders the production of new ideas. There is inflated profit in continuing the production of the granted patent, removing incentive to find new sources of profit, and competitors are wary of infringing on patent with any new technology for fear that it would be found to be too similar.

Property and ownership really only applies to scarce resources, ideas are not scarce in that if I stole an idea, the originator is now deprived of it.

Kinsella on property rights.

The idea of conflict, and the idea of rights, would not even arise. For example, your taking my lawnmower would not really deprive me of it if I could conjure up another in the blink of an eye. Lawnmower-taking in these circumstances would not be “theft.” Property rights are not applicable to things of infinite abundance, because there cannot be conflict over such things.​

 

[sm625]

why fuck denmark? this guy sees a future market for countries with laws restricting 3d printer output - he writes software that a manufacturer would buy. probably very easy to circumvent.

That's exactly right. He is looking at KKKalifornia and New Yorkkk and all the gun grabbing frikcin zombies in those two states alone, and all the billions they are willing to spend to "keep the kids safe" by banning anything that even looks like a gun.

 

[zinfamous]

Denmark just proved how many morons they have in their shithole country. Let them suffer once they get taken over.

I doubt you even read the OP, sockpuppet.



Why do you support Muslim extremists?

 

[woolfe9998]

It is not critical to a free market to create a property right out of an idea.

Just as you argue that stealing an idea is an incentive to producing an idea, the same can be argued that creating a false monopoly on an existing idea hinders the production of new ideas. There is inflated profit in continuing the production of the granted patent, removing incentive to find new sources of profit, and competitors are wary of infringing on patent with any new technology for fear that it would be found to be too similar.

Property and ownership really only applies to scarce resources, ideas are not scarce in that if I stole an idea, the originator is now deprived of it.

Kinsella on property rights.

Yes, the argument cuts both ways, but that is a false dichotomy. One can incentivize invention by granting the patent, but limiting its duration so as not to overly curtail other innovation. That is precisely how patents work. In some cases, perhaps the patent duration is too long. That is certainly debatable. But ending all IP?

Pharmaceutical research costs billions. No one is going to spend that kind of money without being able to patent the result. The only alternative is to have the state fund all the research and I'm pretty sure you don't want that.

And, in direct response to your statement about ideas not being scarce, that is true as far as it goes. But if the originator of the idea has no patent, he is being deprived of the value of the idea even if not the idea itself. If we're talking economics here, value is what matters, not the intrinsic thing in and of itself.

 

[irishScott]

Perhaps nothing to do with your consistency, but rather that you appear overly emotional on this topic and it's impairing your judgment. Your subject line "fuck you Denmark" is entirely out of line here considering your article is about one Danish engineer who created something you don't like. I doubt you actually hate the Danes, but I think your emotions are over the top on the topic.

Methinks you're taking my thread title a bit too seriously.

 

[woolfe9998]

Methinks you're taking my thread title a bit too seriously.

I considered that. It could be, or it could be that you're taking the topic a bit too seriously. I lean toward the latter, given your prior postings on the general topic of guns and gun control.

 

[irishScott]

I considered that. It could be, or it could be that you're taking the topic a bit too seriously. I lean toward the latter, given your prior postings on the general topic of guns and gun control.

Yes I take gun control seriously, it's one of my pet issues. So sue me.

I fail to see how I'm taking anything "too seriously" in this thread. I made a thread in P&N about something that moderately pisses me off, and I explained in brief why it pisses me off. Heaven forbid!

This is the equivalent of SecuROM for 3D printers IMO. Which is bad. You're welcome to disagree, but kindly stop straw-manning my emotional state.

 

[woolfe9998]

Yes I take gun control seriously, it's one of my pet issues. So sue me.

I fail to see how I'm taking anything "too seriously" in this thread. I made a thread in P&N about something that moderately pisses me off, and I explained in brief why it pisses me off. Heaven forbid!

This is the equivalent of SecuROM for 3D printers IMO. Which is bad. You're welcome to disagree, but kindly stop straw-manning my emotional state.

I don't really want to make guns with 3D printers. Also, although I oppose most gun control measures, it isn't really a matter of the pure principle of liberty either, because the invention of this software was not a government act and hence doesn't infringe any rights. Inventing the software is just free enterprise. You can complain all you want, but people will create any software they think they can sell.