Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Open hardware desktop 3D printing is dead?

josefprusa.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 450 posts

Re: Open hardware desktop 3D printing is dead?

#231

Post by coldtea »

simpaticoder wrote: post #11

The real story here is that IP ownership is capital-intensive when it shouldn't be. Open-source and community-led IP contributions are grossly under-protected because of this, and those with capital become unopposed predators. This is a special-case of the more general observation that the justice system is capital-intensive when it shouldn't be. The answer is something you very rarely hear: the US (especially) needs…

>the US (especially) needs justice system reform with an eye toward making actions take 100x less time and 100x less money, approaching free for consumer and IP actions.

And why would those in power do that, when the justice system as it is exists to serve their interests?

Re: Open hardware desktop 3D printing is dead?

#232

Post by coldtea »

Pet_Ant wrote: post #208
martin-t wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a binary too string / too weak. It's that _copyright_: - protects the wrong entities (corporations instead of individuals who did the real work) - IP should be collectively owned by the people who created it and selling it should be illegal, - is too long, yes - DMCA can be used to harass without actually owning the IP and there are no penalties - the fair use exception can be used to allow clear cases of pl…

> - protects the wrong entities (corporations instead of individuals who did the real work) - IP should be collectively owned by the people who created it and selling it should be illegal, That's like say a band getting an advance to record their album should be illegal. Without access to people with money now a lot of it wouldn't get made. And if they are fronting the money before it exists, then they are taking ris…

>That's like say a band getting an advance to record their album should be illegal.

It should.

>Without access to people with money now a lot of it wouldn't get made.

So be it.

>The other results is art made by those who don't need it, purely made by amateurs, grant funded art, or socially funded art.

Sounds amazing.

We don't need to go with the default vanilla options that are passed as inevitable...

Re: Open hardware desktop 3D printing is dead?

#233

Post by cactacea »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #137
AlexandrB wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that's the standard, it's ridiculous to say we stopped being a just society in the last 50 years.

Magna Carta didn't make us a just society, it was the start of making us a just society. Being a just society is not a boolean. We never got 100% there. Nor is it along a single dimension -- you could argue we were more just 50 years ago, as long as you were white.

> could argue we were more just 50 years ago, as long as you were white

Well that is certainly one take. I really don't see how you can argue that position in good faith but I won't spend energy to refute it since you didn't actually argue it at all beyond making the supposition.

Re: Open hardware desktop 3D printing is dead?

#234

Post by amluto »

If the US cared about remaining competitive with China, the government would attack this. Example approaches:

a) Smallish hammer: disallow priority based on Chinese patents.

b) Big hammer: if anyone wants to manufacture anything in the US and sell to the US market, give an automatic patent workaround. For example, there could be compulsory licensing, at enforced and genuinely reasonable prices, for all patents, foreign and domestic. If someone wanted to build an SLS printer or an e-ink display here ten years ago, they should have been allowed to while paying a small amount (small enough that the whole enterprise remained profitable) to the respective patent holders. Submarine patents should be completely inapplicable: if I opt to buy compulsory licenses, there should be a limited period for any patent holders to announce themselves, and then the patent holders could fight over the (capped) royalties while I continue to manufacture and sell the product.

c) b, with the system built in a way that works for open source too. I should be able to publish open source things with zero risk regardless of patents. I should be able to sell them and other people should be able to deploy them on their own under terms like (b) that make it economical to do so.

Re: Open hardware desktop 3D printing is dead?

#235

Post by taeric »

jandrese wrote: post #200
izacus wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The more I look into it, the more I'm convinced that current state of IP law is the rot at the core of western worlds technological stagnation. The rise of monopolistic megacorps, lack of independent innovation and enshittifcation can pretty much be traced back to the wide free market violating reach of current IP law. This article just highlights it and shows how China weaponized this weakness of the west and is suc…

It's telling that before the Patent system the solution was secretive guilds that jealously (sometimes lethally) guarded their secrets to avoid competition. This was obviously terrible since it greatly slowed down innovation. I'm not sure what the correct solution is to this problem. We want to avoid anything that causes a return of the guild system, but at the same time we don't want small inventors steamrolled by l…

I mean, with limiting the allowed use of force to guard secrets, we are probably nowhere near as at risk for the worst of the past? As you said, the competition to guard secrets could be quite severe, and they were not exactly good at knowing actual leaks of their secrets versus someone else independently arriving at them.

That is, I think having the assumption of independent discovery would go a long way to preventing abuse.

I could see some hazard that small shops can't protect their secrets from partner manufacturers and such. But that is exactly where we are with a lot of stuff today?

Re: Open hardware desktop 3D printing is dead?

#236

Post by ohdeargodno »

sarchertech wrote: post #159
hyperbovine wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I want so much to like Prusa ... but the Bambu printer at my local makerspace costs half as much and is better in every way than the MK3S+ sitting in my basement. I'm fully aware that this is the result of shrewdness on the part of the Chinese, plus incompetence in the West, and it's so frustrating.

It’s not better in every way. For long term reliability and ability to repair and upgrade, Prusa is far superior.

Cool, but that's not why people buy things. I don't buy a bike for the pleasure of getting to repair it when I inevitably eat shit on a gravel road.

While you're busy ordering parts for your Prusa and taking it apart, people just buy another A1 or P1P for basically nothing. While you're spending 5 hours trying to stabilise your printing plate and ensuring your nozzle isn't vomiting out super melted , the bambulabs go haha printing goes brrr thanks for feeding me shale oil it'll work great. If you're 3d printing enough that your printer breaks, you are 100% making enough money to just eat the costs of another printer.

Re: Open hardware desktop 3D printing is dead?

#237

Post by cactacea »

skybrian wrote: post #172
reactordev wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I don't entirely disagree with you. You have to understand why the courts exist at all. To govern working class citizens. Laws are written by the powerful and wealthy - always has been - to control the working class (everyone else). You're freedom is an illusion. A social contract agreed upon by you following certain rules. Those rules, written by the wealthy, don't apply to the wealthy. In a just society they…

That’s an exaggeration. As a famous example, Musk believed that laws didn’t apply to him and he ended up having to buy Twitter anyway after he tried to back out. Corporate law is a thing. There are huge, consequential lawsuits between giant corporations.

> As a famous example, Musk believed that laws didn’t apply to him and he ended up having to buy Twitter anyway after he tried to back out.

Yeah and nevermind everything else. Thanks for the laugh.

Re: Open hardware desktop 3D printing is dead?

#238

Post by michaelmrose »

andrewmcwatters wrote: post #217
AlexandrB wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IP is just too strong. The terms are ridiculously long (especially for copyright), there are multiple workarounds for "fair use", such as DMCA, and patents on simple concepts like linked lists are not laughed out of the room. All of this stuff needs to be weakened (and shortened). Part of the reason Chinese companies are able to iterate quickly on technology like 3d printers or drones is that it's possible to simply…

To be fair, in the States, you can own a small business, come up with a good idea, and someone can just copy it and compete against you regardless if it's copyright infringement or not. And that's in the context of a domestic legal issue. You have to be able to defend your intellectual property, and that's expensive, which is the parent comment's point. I mean, imagine you, AlexandrB, come up with some good idea, sta…

People who aren't rich already don't have any intellectual property anyway. The idea of nobody having them seems inherently more suitable insofar as someone could as it stands just ignore your property anyway with the primary difference in this hypothetical reality that instead of being able to copy you AND shut you down they just copy you.

Re: Open hardware desktop 3D printing is dead?

#239

Post by cactacea »

cluckindan wrote: post #213
tempest_ wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always think it is amusing that some people make the mistake of thinking that the Chinese can only make cheap crap(forgetting all their cell phones and apple laptops come from there). The American market only wants to buy cheap crap so that is what is made and sent. Usually though the skills involved in making something cut-rate are just as applicable to making something top notch. American manufacturing skills hav…

Maybe America needs a planned economy and minority ”re-education” camps to boost production.

Good news everyone!
Post reply on HN