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

741–750 of 861 posts

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

#741

Post by buellerbueller »

rayiner wrote: post #686
buellerbueller wrote: post #634

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Of course prisoners should not be allowed to vote I don't follow. Please explain. >Instead, the electorate should be narrowed to property owning people who have an IQ above 85 (within one SD of median) and two grandparents born in the U.S. (so culturally assimilated). Yeah, just like the good old days when we had literacy tests in this country to vote down south. You're literally calling for a return of Jim Crow.

Jim Crow was bad because it targeted people in the basis of a characteristic that didn’t matter: skin color. That doesn’t mean that all restrictions on voting are bad. If the restriction is based on a characteristic that does matter, like intelligence, that’s completely different.

If you are a citizen, subject to the laws and the taxes, you should get a vote: no exceptions.

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

#742

Post by mghackerlady »

ls612 wrote: post #688
purplehat_ wrote: post #425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hear sentiment like this occasionally and I genuinely wonder if this is conspiracy theory stuff or if this sort of thing actually happened in the past. I'm aware of the programs Snowden revealed, Tempora / XKeyscore / Longhaul / the like, plus I've heard J. Edgar Hoover did bad things and lots of CIA meddling internationally was bad. Still, these seem qualitatively different to the explicit blackmail you're referri…

Living through all of the events of 2020 in Minneapolis of all places led me to the conclusion that when push comes to shove there is no law, only hard power and the will to use it. If you want examples of events that could be reasonably interpreted as “this sort of thing”, the son of the guy who tried to assassinate Trump the second time was mysteriously arrested for possession of CSAM a week after his dad was arres…

That could also be related to his family being under more scrutiny by authorities

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

#743

Post by rolph »

hahahahhaah wrote: post #459
rolph wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

theres a procedural problem with this, and its apparently why the feds dont require serial number on a PMF until FFL transfer is about to occur when should you be required to serialize it? if you serialize after it is worked to the point of being a firearm, then there is a period in time, however short, when the firearm is unserialized, thus illegal, thus serializing after creation could be obscuring a crime. vs seri…

Not really. You can just register prior. If hunk of metal doesn't become a gun do nothing.

you have made it quite clear that you have no understanding of the issues.

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

#744

Post by wcunning »

The much much much more concerning part of this bill in my opinion is the part that applies this expectation to CNC machining equipment. This means that there will be some ugly consequences to running real industry out of New York state. Probably heavy import and cross shipping delays (lots of German machining equipment passes through the port at NY/NJ, so could theoretically be subject to this, even if eventual delivery is to Texas, for instance). The reasoning behind things like the old "receiver is the only part of the gun to be serialized and tracked" and "80% AR Lower Receiver" were to prevent impact to non-gun industries. Block of steel with random holes is not a gun is an important concept. My only conclusions are: 1) very glad I don't live in New York, 2) buy my used VMC sooner rather than later to avoid this stupidity. Much like continuing to drive my 2010 Miata a lot longer since it doesn't have all this terrible new technology that prevents maintenance (VIN locked modules, no home programming software to replace things, etc etc).

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

#745

Post by mghackerlady »

Centigonal wrote: post #278

People regularly circumvent "blocking technology" (i.e. DRM) because they want to watch a TV show on a plane with no wi-fi, or because they want to save $20 on a cartridge of printer ink. If someone wants to kill another human being and evade detection, I'm sure they'll find a way to print their part.

I would say it's not a crime to circumvent DRM or whatever, but then I remember the DMCA exists

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

#746

Post by GuB-42 »

randusername wrote: post #668

I saw a shirt one time that said something like "in just one generation user manuals went from showing you how to tune your carburetor to warning you not to drink the battery acid" Stupidity or nefariousness? Probably both. I don't feel like I can fix either.

> in just one generation user manuals went from showing you how to tune your carburetor to warning you not to drink the battery acid

The truth is just that we don't have actual user manuals anymore. Either the things that went into the manual are now built into software, or they expect you to look it up on the internet. So the only things that remain are legal disclaimers and very basic instructions, like how to turn on the thing so that the software can tell you what to do next.

So they don't tell you how to tune your carburetor because you don't need to do that anymore, it is all injection and the ECU software does the tuning, but the lawyers insist that it should be mentioned to not drink the battery acid should an idiot decide to try it and sue the company.

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

#747

Post by mghackerlady »

IFC_LLC wrote: post #259

So what's next? People will re-flash their printers with an open-source firmware that won't do the checks? Who's liable in this case?

That would likely fall under some DMCA like protection against circumvention. RMS is going to be pissed and I can totally see the FSF, EFF, and potentially the SFC having issues with this

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

#748

Post by mghackerlady »

pawelduda wrote: post #552
m463 wrote: post #340

just sell almost-3d-printers. All it is missing is a screw with a serial number on it.

"This printer is for collecting and research purposes only. Note that certain 3D-printed objects are forbidden by the law. If you notice any of these objects growing inside your 3D printer, power it off IMMEDIATELY"

Reminds me of those prohibition era alcohol kits that basically came down to "whatever you do, do not put this yeast in that mixture" and "should that happen, under no circumstances should you let it sit in a dark cabinet"

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

#749

Post by ebruchez »

JKCalhoun wrote: post #588
0xedd wrote: post #484

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None I know did. If you do your research, all the hype around Bambu is paid. Influencers pushed it. Tech deep dives show it is sub standard. Posted on HN. Prusa is king. High quality. Open source. EU made and engineered. Slicer is a market leader (Bambu's a fork of it).

I'm a hobbyist and price, in the end, sold me on Bambu Labs. (And I stayed once I saw the quality. Likely Prusa can match or exceed it, but not with what I was willing to lose from my wallet.)

Not criticizing your decision, but I went the opposite way, deciding that I was ok spending a certain extra amount initially in order to encourage a non-Chinese manufacturer. But I understand not everyone has this luxury.

I bought the Core One kit to understand better how the machine works, which reduced the price delta somewhat.

It remains to be seen over the long term which way is actually better financially, as Prusas have historically had long lives, while there is only limited data on the Bambu Lab side yet.

So far, I am quite happy with my decision. But competition is on. I am excited about the upcoming INDX system for the Core One: if it delivers on its promise, it will be fantastic!

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

#750

Post by stackedinserter »

ActorNightly wrote: post #713
stackedinserter wrote: post #605

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it's not solved. Goalpost will move to "save gcode on government-approved secured storage", licensing and registering each 3d printer, then confiscating the ones that are not whitelisted, etc etc.

This is the same story where every time you hear about some democratic run city/state implementing policy, everyone makes it out to be a step in the goal to get to 1984 Oceania. This legislation is basically like a gold star on some politicians report card about preventing gun deaths. The impacted groups are allways gonna be niche, but it looks good to the overall public.

With these little steps that affect niche groups, we got to 2026, with total surveillance and very little freedoms.
Post reply on HN