Digital Vs. Physical Goods

[Penforhire]

We use 3D prototypes at work. As you might expect, materials are improving. The future Giggleton is referencing is not impossible but it is still improbable. It used to be that these plastic prototypes were only good as visual models. Now they have some usable strength.

It would require an improvement in the fundamental building blocks, what Stephenson called the "feed," to become ubiquitous. The issue is largely material properties, e.g. steel versus plastic, and the need to construct using a combination of materials that are not 'handy' to have around at a single printing site.

Stephenson is likely correct that it would require a nanotechnologicaal breakthrough to accomplish. We are, in fact, living at the cusp of nanotech research. I use carbon nanotubes (CNT) and nanofibers (CNF) in my mixed materials today to add strength and other properties. Never expected the cost to drop as fast as it has.

I also seem to recall that Charlie Stross had a more advanced, portable, "cornucopia" machine in his novels. Maybe in Singularity Sky or Iron Sunrise? One of his points was also having the designs in the machine's memory.

[Ken Maltby]

Oh I love the concept, as any long time science fiction fan and technophile would, but
as an example of an existing crossover from digital to physical products or even as a
new kind of copyright issue (it wouldn't be) it is still just barely at the IEEE Conference
stage.

In terms of the information, digital or otherwise, that can be used to produce a product,
it is as closely held as possible now, and most likely will be in the future. What is the
conceptual difference between keeping the information out of the hands of another
corporation with the means of production, and keeping it away from someone else's
"3D Printer"?

Luck;
Ken

[Giggleton]

Originally Posted by Ken Maltby

In terms of the information, digital or otherwise, that can be used to produce a product, it is as closely held as possible now, and most likely will be in the future. What is the conceptual difference between keeping the information out of the hands of another corporation with the means of production, and keeping it away from someone else's
"3D Printer"?

Luck;
Ken

There is no difference, they are both irrelevant in the Diamond Age. It's good that you feel IP is only most likely to remain guarded in the future, perhaps one day the reverse will happen, we will all feel that it is most likely that IP will be open to all.

[Ken Maltby]

Originally Posted by Giggleton

There is no difference, they are both irrelevant in the Diamond Age. It's good that you feel IP is only most likely to remain guarded in the future, perhaps one day the reverse will happen, we will all feel that it is most likely that IP will be open to all.

So not a fan of free market capitalism, I take it. The authors, inventors,
creators of any kind are all to be doing this just for the fun of it, oh by the
way there is a reason they call it fiction.

Luck;
Ken

[Giggleton]

Originally Posted by Ken Maltby

So not a fan of free market capitalism, I take it. The authors, inventors,
creators of any kind are all to be doing this just for the fun of it, oh by the
way there is a reason they call it fiction.

Luck;
Ken

Free market capitalism is the only kind of capitalism I'm a fan of, I would not call any type of previously practiced capitalist system free however.

Might be now though.

Everything is fiction until it becomes fact.

[pietrocrazy]

Originally Posted by Ken Maltby

So not a fan of free market capitalism, I take it. The authors, inventors,
creators of any kind are all to be doing this just for the fun of it, oh by the
way there is a reason they call it fiction.

Luck;
Ken

It's interesting that many people nowadays think that copyrights/patents are elements inherent to a free-market system. In truth it is the opposite - copyrights and patents are nothing more than temporary monopolies provided for by the government. They exist because pure free market capitalism has many faults that can only be fixed through government intervention.

Perhaps people confuse the two because in the past 30 years or so, neo-liberal movements within many governments (think Reagan/Thatcher) and international organizations (the UN/WTO/IMF) have embraced and encouraged increased copyright and patent terms and protections. But let's be honest, neo-liberalism is not and never has been about completely free markets, only free markets when they benefit the neo-liberals!

[Giggleton]

Originally Posted by pietrocrazy

It's interesting that many people nowadays think that copyrights/patents are elements inherent to a free-market system. In truth it is the opposite - copyrights and patents are nothing more than temporary monopolies provided for by the government. They exist because pure free market capitalism has many faults that can only be fixed through government intervention.

I'm not sure the free market has faults. We are indoctrinated with the belief of gain at another's expense everywhere we look, at least in the United States, which is where I spend most of my time ATM. I know this is the case in many other countries as well.

But my point is that just because we currently believe that it is right to profit, does not mean that it actually is right to profit.

Add to this the FACT that what we currently think of profit, is not actually thus. Sure a few extra dollars made here or there might seem like a good deal, but when you trace those dollars around the world, you begin to see that what you thought was profit is actually a loss.

The world has been running in the red for quite awhile, it's about time to change strategies I'd say.

DO NOTHING.

[OtterBooks]

All property is theft!

[elcreative]

Wow, an original quote... can you send me your address and leave the key outside the door, could do with a free Kindle

Originally Posted by OtterBooks

All property is theft!

[Penforhire]

I expect to see open source collections of "3D printer" IP that are in the public domain, say with cc licensing. We see that today with computer graphics models (for use with Lightwave, Maya, Blender etc.). There are repositories of public domain models. Private offerings have to compete on polygon count, accuracy, level of detail, included textures and such.

[Giggleton]

Originally Posted by Penforhire

I expect to see open source collections of "3D printer" IP that are in the public domain, say with cc licensing. We see that today with computer graphics models (for use with Lightwave, Maya, Blender etc.). There are repositories of public domain models. Private offerings have to compete on polygon count, accuracy, level of detail, included textures and such.

And I expect to see torrents of high quality 3D printer IP.

And then maybe a 3D printer use forum, lol I'll be there posting I am sure.

[pdurrant]

Originally Posted by Giggleton

And then maybe a 3D printer use forum, lol I'll be there posting I am sure.

Like this one? http://forums.reprap.org/

RepRap is a fascinating on-going project for inexpensive 3D printers.

[Giggleton]

Originally Posted by pdurrant

Like this one? http://forums.reprap.org/

RepRap is a fascinating on-going project for inexpensive 3D printers.

lol, I envisioned you posting that here, thanks for the link.

[Ken Maltby]

Well I guess a hijack of the thread into "3D Printing" is better than into economic theory.

This RepRap approach is a very interesting development, even though limited to thermal
plastic extrusion at its start. It is certainly an interesting subset of Computer Aided
Manufacturing (CAM).

There are of course other manufacturing technologies that can be similarly adapted.
Even the simple single stage 3D Printing idea is apparently exploring other materials in
addition to thermal plastic. (I would think the wide range of "Epoxy Putty" and similar
mixable compounds could be made to function well in this setting and offer the digital
exchange of mixing formula, for varying the resulting properties.)

The 3D carving of molds is an obvious companion engineering classroom technology,
and in the case of making molds for aluminum casting, should appeal to the same
"Social Conscience" that motivates these projects. (I've done some green sand casting at home and recycling aluminum cans is a no brainer. Also, you can download all the
information needed to construct a metal melting furnace.)

I would think a multistage process would be in order, where your rough "printed" parts
are finished using CNC, like this:

http://buildyourcnc.com/default.aspx

(Notice that they have a forum and an interest in "3D Printing" as well.)

Luck;
Ken

[Giggleton]

Originally Posted by Ken Maltby

Well I guess a hijack of the thread into "3D Printing" is better than into economic theory.

This RepRap approach is a very interesting development, even though limited to thermal plastic extrusion at its start. It is certainly an interesting subset of Computer Aided Manufacturing (CAM).

We always have to bring the discussion back to books here and reading in general. So do you think there is much of a difference between a poem about a stove and an actual stove? Does that even matter?

I'm hoping that by the time we are able to print out cheap useable stoves, we'll have gotten this copyright thing sorted out, if not for good then at least for the foreseeable future.