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

The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing

eff.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 491 posts

Re: The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing

#361

Post by thaumasiotes »

bluGill wrote: post #310
_carbyau_ wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never understood banning nunchucks. They kind of ban themselves. If you've ever been a kid copying TMNT Michelangelo with home made nunchucks you've almost certainly smacked yourself in the face. Y'know what's martially better than two sticks with a string between them? A single big stick.

The reason is slaves needed a stick for rice - putting a chain between two stick sill works fine for rice work - but makes it a much worse weapon.

That reasoning makes no sense. There was no significant production of rice by slaves.

But also, threshing flails were used outside of rice-growing regions.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/81/Battage_...

Considering that they must be hundreds of times more expensive than long sticks with no hinge, I would say the reason must be that they're better at threshing.

Re: The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing

#362

Post by nullc »

sleepybrett wrote: post #304
devilbunny wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think a fundamental problem here is that people who don’t know any 2A/RKBA people think it’s like most political opinions. Oh, you’re a gun guy, you’re a Republican who like country music and hates them black folk. It isn’t. It’s a group of people, some of whom are country-music-loving Republicans who hate them black folk, but who also include a lot of them black folk, a lot of Democrats, and a lot of people who ha…

I think it's actually mostly about school shootings and 'gang violence' that drive these regulations at least here in washington, which is a little paranoid. I don't think we've had too many school shootings. I know in seattle we had a shooting OUTSIDE a high school that killed a student, but I'm not sure we've had any columbine type situations.

We're unprepared to deal with world wide 24 hour media. With 350 million people even extremely rare and weird failure modes will happen often enough for the media to fearmonger a big chunk of the population into falsely believing they're significant threat. In reality firearm homicide among teenagers is a fraction of death from auto accidents, half that of suicide, and closer to deaths from drowning. But the latter three don't make for spectacular and fear inducing news coverage.

Re: The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing

#363

Post by Mashimo »

tracker1 wrote: post #30

So, I cannot 3d print a squirt gun or a nerf style gun either? This print looks "scary" you cannot print it.

I don't think anyone really knows. Might be something like the slicer is checking the file hash against a (online) list, slices it, signs it and the printer checks the .gcode file if it's signed by a known slicer. A blacklist of very specific models. Make a small change and it will not be detected any more.

Maybe the slicer is also required to upload the 3d file and some kind of "looks similar" algorithm will block your nerf gun from being sliced.

Re: The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing

#364

Post by gbibas »

I live here in CA. If it is something that gets attention at all, whether AI or 3d printing or anything else, politicians here feel it is their duty to regulate it. If it should be regulated like politicians spending our money or insider trading, they want nothing to do with it. Less power for us, more power and money for them.

Re: The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing

#365

Post by nullc »

ScoobleDoodle wrote: post #316
horsawlarway wrote: post #38

Personally, I see this as an assault on 3d printing more than any real attempt to regulate guns. I own several 3d printers. If I wanted to make something resembling a firearm I'd go to home depot WAY before I bothered 3d printing parts. You basically just need a metal tube, and well... a pipe from home depot does that much better than trying to 3d print something much less reliable. So given we don't do this regulati…

If you're a California constituent and inclined to take action you can find your California Assemblymember and Senator here ( https://findyourrep.legislature.ca.gov/ ) to voice opposition to California bill A.B. 2047 "Firearms: 3-dimensional printing blocking technology."

Alternatively, you could leave California and avoid a whole host of bad policy and legislation. Not that advocating is bad but of the two options one is guaranteed to be successful while the other is unlikely to help.

Re: The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing

#366

Post by Mashimo »

subhobroto wrote: post #312
nitwit005 wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Successful mass murders with a knife are fairly rare. Killing people that way is physically difficult, and it's relatively easy to just tackle you. Traditionally, arson was the means of mass killing, as it didn't have either problem. That's gotten much more difficult due to fire safety.

> Killing people that way is physically difficult, and it's relatively easy to just tackle you I won't argue this as this sounds entirely hypothetical but let me ask you this: if you saw someone stabbing people, would you volunteer to tackle them or would you choose to delegate? One, a knife never runs out of bullets and never needs to reload. Second, a knife doesn't make a sound. I'm unsure of what training you have…

If you can only find 5 mass killings with knifes in 3 years, does that not proof his point? That it's rare.

Just like knife kills in the UK, which is less then knife kills in the US AFAIK.

Re: The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing

#367

Post by imtringued »

Ferret7446 wrote: post #283
engineer_22 wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry you went through a difficult time of your life, I can relate. I would like to point out a gun doesn't make destroying oneself any easier. They are heavy and cold and they have a particular smell, they taste like metal, and the hole in the end of the barrel so strongly implies destruction that even pointing it at oneself carries incredible gravity. Many people that purchase a gun for this purpose abandon the…

Well said, I will also add that the source of all fear is ignorance, and that includes everything, from guns to disease to imaginary monsters. You do not cure it through avoidance, quite the opposite.

I'm not sure what the goal here is other than to give people, who probably shouldn't have guns, even more guns.

Re: The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing

#368

Post by remarkEon »

jdougan wrote: post #346
remarkEon wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I'm saying is that no one is going to build a lower in this manner for a firearm chambered in 7.62 and do anything useful/important with it. Maybe the cartridge size here is a distraction, idk, but this isn't a specification that I would consider common and/or useful for 3D printing a firearm. Even if your nominal intent is just to "finish" a gun with parts you have laying around, it's not going to be something…

Look up the WW2 FP-45 Liberator. A bad gun you could use to get a better gun. Theoretically you only need to use it once. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FP-45_Liberator

I highly doubt that anyone who 3d prints a lower does so to “use” it (I.e. shoot someone) in order to procure a better firearm.

Re: The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing

#369

Post by remarkEon »

Eisenstein wrote: post #344
remarkEon wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I'm saying is that no one is going to build a lower in this manner for a firearm chambered in 7.62 and do anything useful/important with it. Maybe the cartridge size here is a distraction, idk, but this isn't a specification that I would consider common and/or useful for 3D printing a firearm. Even if your nominal intent is just to "finish" a gun with parts you have laying around, it's not going to be something…

Can you not imagine any motives that a person could have for printing a gun where they don't care about long term reliability?

Sure, I can imagine any number of motives and Rube Goldberg mechanisms for procuring a firearm to service that motive. My point is that if someone who is desperate to get a firearm has to 3D print one they’re going to pick a simple pistol lower. Not something for a rifle that fires a higher power cartridge. Most rifles that fire 7.62 are not in the AR format.

Re: The dangers of California's legislation to censor 3D printing

#370

Post by nullc »

fasterik wrote: post #170
nradov wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the inevitable result of having a single-party government which is no longer accountable to regular citizens.

What you describe as "single-party government" is in fact a democracy where one party is more popular than the others. Or are you trying to imply that California's elections are not free and fair? If voters want to hold politicians accountable, they can vote out the incumbent. I see it as a problem primarily with education and public opinion. Regular citizens routinely support bad policies across the ideological spec…

> Or are you trying to imply that California's elections are not free and fair

Among other issues California is extensively gerrymandered, and recently voted to temporary disable the anti-gerrymandering constutional provisions to allow it to make changes that would have been unlawful under the state constitution and become one of the most gerrymandered states in the nation for congressional districts (in terms of ratio of party seats vs party registrations).

While departing from California deregistering from both health insurance and my drivers licensed triggered voter registration even though I'd specifically indicated that I was no longer a California resident. Vote by mail makes it easy for someone to drive a neighborhood and steal ballots, makes it trivial family members to coerce votes out of each other or simply take their family members votes.

The freeness and fairness of California elections are not difficult to take issue with.

> There are historical reasons, going back to the 1960s, why the Democratic party is perceived as the lesser of two evils when it comes to civil liberties

The democratic party of today is a very different one that the party of the 1960s or even 1990s and is much less well aligned with civil liberties than it used to be, lesser or not depends on what aspects you prioritize but whichever way you slice it today it's a party which is generally opposed to civil liberties including the most critical of them: freedom of expression.

> Often we have to live with the fact that bad policies are popular; that's democracy in action.

The US was constructed as a democratic republic specifically to avoid the tyrany of majority rule.

> If voters want to hold politicians accountable, they can vote out the incumbent.

Or-- more effectively-- move to a state with more competent policies.

Post reply on HN