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

New York’s budget bill would require “blocking technology” on all 3D printers

blog.adafruit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 861 posts

Re: New York’s budget bill would require “blocking technology” on all 3D printers

#291

Post by butvacuum »

nemomarx wrote: post #256
PlatoIsADisease wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember ~10 or 15 years ago, I had concerns about drones becoming illegal due to FAA. I was assured by the internet, I was paranoid, blah blah safety... Then a few weeks ago something about Minnesota and ICE making drones illegal to fly or something... The weird part is that, in that 15 years, I've become more moderate and pro-democratic rule of law... but I was right about my previous concerns. Not that I believe…

I guess it was a predictable outreach from the Patriot act - the new justification is flying drones "over a mission" from the border people, and they claim a lot of territory for their missions, right?

they also don't publish the NOTAMs ahead of time. So, they're effectively allowing ICE to retroactively make flying a drone illegal if an agent takes issue with the color of your cheesburger bun.

Re: New York’s budget bill would require “blocking technology” on all 3D printers

#292

Post by m4rtink »

echelon wrote: post #197
iancmceachern wrote: post #191

Yeah but what about CNC milling machines? Way more guns are made on those every day than 3d printers. There is even one you can buy that is specifically for making "ghost guns"

I'm way more worried about drones, self-driving cars, and humanoid robots than "ghost guns". Once these things can move around us, far away from their owner, there is enormous potential for societal harm. Someone could buy a $10k Figure robot, strap a bomb or nerve agent to it, then have it walk into a public place. If we just accept these robots as normal everyday things (it seems like we will), we wouldn't even bli…

Too complicated - just strap it to a flying drone that can then slam it to the target at high speed.

Works well enough and is in wide use, many people just don't seem to have realized the implications - kinda like with machineguns and barbed wire at the start of WW1.

Re: New York’s budget bill would require “blocking technology” on all 3D printers

#293

Post by TOMDM »

PlatoIsADisease wrote: post #223
robflynn wrote: post #213

My main concern is, how long is it before you can't print a replacement part for something you bought because it looks too similar to an OEM part and the manufacturer doesn't think you should be able to do that so they throw a little money to the right politician.

I remember ~10 or 15 years ago, I had concerns about drones becoming illegal due to FAA. I was assured by the internet, I was paranoid, blah blah safety... Then a few weeks ago something about Minnesota and ICE making drones illegal to fly or something... The weird part is that, in that 15 years, I've become more moderate and pro-democratic rule of law... but I was right about my previous concerns. Not that I believe…

The rights abuses occurring in Minnesota and at the hands of ICE are better characterised as a degradation of democracy, not a failure of it.

EDIT: To be clear, my belief is that a plurality of the voting population voted for this, that much is obvious.

My belief is also that despite the fact that the current administration was elected, there are democratic norms and rules for what outcomes require that a bill must be passed to enact, that states can decide how they can govern themselves within well defined bounds.

All of this is being ignored despite the structures defined in the American democatric system, not because of it.

Re: New York’s budget bill would require “blocking technology” on all 3D printers

#294

Post by brewdad »

derekdahmer wrote: post #67
pjc50 wrote: post #33

This is insanely stupid stuff. Even the UK with our weird panic over Incredibly Specific Knives hasn't tried to do this kind of technical restriction to prevent people printing guns. Why not? Because nobody is printing guns! It's an infeasible solution to a non-problem! Someone should dig into who this is coming from and why. The answers are usually either (a) they got paid to do it by a company selling the tech, whi…

Actual shootings with 3D printed guns are relatively rare but it’s come up because Luigi Mangione killed the United Healthcare CEO with one.

Given the potential chain of custody issues, I'm not sure we can be certain a 3D printed gun was involved at all.

Re: New York’s budget bill would require “blocking technology” on all 3D printers

#295

Post by brewdad »

freeopinion wrote: post #279
tbrownaw wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> doing anything except addressing the grievances that lead to that. Well yeah, it's not exactly easy to get everyone to understand that insurance isn't magic and money out has to match money in.

Money out had better not match money in or the insurance company will be in a lot of trouble.

Imagine if we removed the need for insurance to turn a profit.

Re: New York’s budget bill would require “blocking technology” on all 3D printers

#296

Post by Duwensatzaj »

milesvp wrote: post #106
pjc50 wrote: post #33

This is insanely stupid stuff. Even the UK with our weird panic over Incredibly Specific Knives hasn't tried to do this kind of technical restriction to prevent people printing guns. Why not? Because nobody is printing guns! It's an infeasible solution to a non-problem! Someone should dig into who this is coming from and why. The answers are usually either (a) they got paid to do it by a company selling the tech, whi…

Could be the way guns are defined in UK are different. There is a fundamental problem in US law specifically, that you can purchase legally nearly any part of a gun separately, but only need to register the lower receiver. These are parts that take very little stress and can be relatively easily printed and used to hold together all the other parts that actually hold the stress of firing the bullet. This is at least…

Lower receiver being the serialized part isn’t universal. Many firearms have only a single receiver or only the upper receiver is serialized.

Re: New York’s budget bill would require “blocking technology” on all 3D printers

#297

Post by butvacuum »

SR2Z wrote: post #250
hyperbovine wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Sadly, instead of having better laws we get fallacy rhetoric by people who probably have never touched, much less fired a gun in their lives. Why is this the litmus test for being qualified to write gun legislation? Do we also expect our lawmakers to have tried heroin or downloaded child porn so that they can regulate those activities?

This is a bad example. I've been notionally pro-ownership but also pro-regulation my whole life, and one of the major problems with gun legislation in the US is that it's incredibly poorly written and does not reflect the technical reality of guns. The government allows private ownership of automatic weapons, but hasn't issued any new tax stamps for 50 years. You can convert any semiauto gun into a full-auto gun for…

Thats defacto gun registration- and worse: registration with a private entity not beholden to due process. Given current realities, anybody who registers their firearm in such a manner can expect a no-knock raid because they were nearby when somebody phoned in an engine backfire as a gunshot.

Re: New York’s budget bill would require “blocking technology” on all 3D printers

#298

Post by tbrownaw »

gretch wrote: post #283
tbrownaw wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> doing anything except addressing the grievances that lead to that. Well yeah, it's not exactly easy to get everyone to understand that insurance isn't magic and money out has to match money in.

According to this source, united healthcare profits were $14B in 2024. https://www.healthcaredive.com/news/unitedhealth-unh-2024-re... So yeah, money out not matching money in is exactly the problem.

So a bit under 5% per the rest of the numbers in that link.

Re: New York’s budget bill would require “blocking technology” on all 3D printers

#299

Post by deaux »

SR2Z wrote: post #250
hyperbovine wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Sadly, instead of having better laws we get fallacy rhetoric by people who probably have never touched, much less fired a gun in their lives. Why is this the litmus test for being qualified to write gun legislation? Do we also expect our lawmakers to have tried heroin or downloaded child porn so that they can regulate those activities?

This is a bad example. I've been notionally pro-ownership but also pro-regulation my whole life, and one of the major problems with gun legislation in the US is that it's incredibly poorly written and does not reflect the technical reality of guns. The government allows private ownership of automatic weapons, but hasn't issued any new tax stamps for 50 years. You can convert any semiauto gun into a full-auto gun for…

The mistake you're making here is assuming that

> The hysteria over "assault weapons" basically outlawed guns that _looked_ scary, while not meaningfully making anyone safer.

This wasn't the goal by the congresspeople, and that them having fired a gun would've changed that goal.

That was the goal. They knew they weren't going to be able to pass any kind of legislation that actually msde people safer, but they wanted to look like they were "doing something".

This is incredibly common. It's the primary reason behind the TSA and its continuous expansion, for example.

Re: New York’s budget bill would require “blocking technology” on all 3D printers

#300

Post by sheepscreek »

TOMDM wrote: post #293
PlatoIsADisease wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember ~10 or 15 years ago, I had concerns about drones becoming illegal due to FAA. I was assured by the internet, I was paranoid, blah blah safety... Then a few weeks ago something about Minnesota and ICE making drones illegal to fly or something... The weird part is that, in that 15 years, I've become more moderate and pro-democratic rule of law... but I was right about my previous concerns. Not that I believe…

The rights abuses occurring in Minnesota and at the hands of ICE are better characterised as a degradation of democracy, not a failure of it. EDIT: To be clear, my belief is that a plurality of the voting population voted for this, that much is obvious. My belief is also that despite the fact that the current administration was elected, there are democratic norms and rules for what outcomes require that a bill must b…

Yep. Democracy is working according to a non-minority in the country. Agree to disagree?
Post reply on HN