3D Printing and Copyright

[Enki]

Let's talk about economic impact. You can start by reading the article I linked to. Arguably, the economic impact of computers has reached its zenith. Large-scale robotics and artificial intelligence are perhaps the only trump cards left. They could potentially have a truly enormous impact but given their track record to date, I wouldn't bet on any sort of compounding growth from machines designing themselves any time soon. If it turns out to be like anything else in computing, there will be practical limits.

No, that's not arguable, and I've read about that study before, I don't need to read it now. Considering there are more people without computers than with them, it is not arguable AT ALL that the economic impact of computers has reached its zenith. In fact, it's a stupid thing to say based on that one fundamental piece of information. When the web developers that an acquaintance of mine is training in Rwanda start building websites for local businesses, that's going to be a pretty fundamental economic impact.

People didn't want to build their own computers and they stopped making their own clothes a long time ago. Why would they want machine shops? To make what? The same kind of trinkets we have now. The article I cited points out that much of the "progress" in computers recently has been targeted at entertainment.

You live on a different planet than I do. Where I grew up grown men had machine shops on their property, they did and still do modify their homes. My cousin/uncle has a machine shop, my best friend from HS has one, his Dad has one, my Dad has one. I know tons of people who make their own clothes, usually the best dressed people I know make their own clothes.

Sounds like you are putting too much faith in people. Have you ever considered that we already have a surplus of productive capacity? We cannot think of interesting things to do fast enough to consume all this capacity.

Sounds like I live in and around a vibrant startup culture and you don't. My wife's company was the first company in the world that does what it does. I was there when they were planning it around a folding table at an office where I was an intern.

If we have a surplus of productive capacity then why is anyone anywhere on the planet starving or living in a slum?

They won't be. You can easily do that already. People generally don't want to make things in their garages.

I'll make sure to tell that to Adolph in Philly who built his own 3D printer and has been building some kind of strange Plasma coil in his Mom's basement. I am sure he'll be interested to know that he doesn't exist.

Like I said, different planet.

I bet Stu, Demon, Nonc, Marcus, and Mr. Perfect all have some degree of machine shop in their basement/garage/shed. In fact I know some of them do because they have told me.

[Enki]

How much more information do we need? Probably not much. What are your databases going to be used for? Have you given that any thought? They're going to be used for targeting ads at people or figuring out what they'll want to consume next. Wow!

Have I given it thought? Why yes, since the clients order the technology to spec and they require it to solve very specific problems, absolutely. Like the company that has us showing the efficiency of power generation units and how much utility the investors who own shares in those power generation units are getting, and when they should be replacing those units, which units they should buy for the maximum lifetime, what their maintenance schedule should be. That sort of thing.

The information revolution is petering out just like the industrial revolution did.

You...have...no...clue...

I was at a SOPA protest, the CEO of Reddit got up and said, "raise your hand if you work in the tech industry.", just about everyone did, "raise your hand if the company is hiring.", just about everyone who raised their hand the first time did so again.

Guys were skydiving from space in the late 50's/early 60's. And I still don't understand how ordinary peoples' creativity is going to create economic growth on par with what the industrial revolution produced. People have always been creative and artistic. So what?

Guys were skydiving from space in the 50s? Cite?

When I am 70 and the entire world economy is orders of magnitude more sophisticated than it is today and we have ten times as many engineers, scientists, software developers and 3D modelers, it's going to be pretty crazy.

Or we will have proportionally fewer because of automation.

Fewer laborers.

You don't need 3D printers to be an entrepreneur.

No, but you need to be able to tell when a need that is potentially lucrative isn't being filled.

That's great but it still does not disprove the hypothesis that growth is slowing down. These are all incremental changes that are slowly bringing rural Haiti in line with the developed world ca. 1950.

Not, even wrong.

[YMix]

They won't be. You can easily do that already. People generally don't want to make things in their garages.

There's a difference between mastering the skills needed to operate some tools and machines in order to do something and the simpler process of downloading a blueprint, loading the raw materials and clicking "Print".

[Marcus]

That's great but it still does not disprove the hypothesis that growth is slowing down. These are all incremental changes that are slowly bringing rural Haiti in line with the developed world ca. 1950.

Not, even wrong.

Give him some time, Tinker. Wait till he's as old as I am . . he'll be singing a different tune.

Change is accelerating.

[Typhoon]

They had big-ass powerful computers in 1960 too.

Well, they were big-ass, and required a ton of power, but powerful by today's standards? Not even close. Your phone has an order of magnitude more computing power. Going too far over the top damages one's credibility.

I recently read that recent smartphones have more computing power than the Cray II supercomputers of the past.

The mainframe supercomputer I used back in the '80s was water cooled. There was a cooling pond outside that never froze over even in the coldest Midwest winters. Very popular with geese.
On hot summer days the mainframe would sometimes crash due to overheating.

Then one day a prototype unix workstation from Silicon Graphics showed up and that was effectively the beginning of the end of the massive heavy-iron mainframes [and of the DEC VAX miniframes].

3D printing is certainly an interesting field to watch. It will need to be augmented with technologies that do not yet exist in order to produce the wide range of products we now expect from normal manufacturing processes. Something akin to a precise form of quantum sintering might turn out to be capable of producing the correct types of molecular lattice structures needed in metals, for example.

Indeed. The technology will only improve over time.

[Zack Morris]

They won't be. You can easily do that already. People generally don't want to make things in their garages.

There's a difference between mastering the skills needed to operate some tools and machines in order to do something and the simpler process of downloading a blueprint, loading the raw materials and clicking "Print".

Of course. But what do you think it is that people will be rushing to make with these things?

[Enki]

I need to make some graphics for this argument. I am talking about market saturation and innovation, not invention and discovery. When everyone has a 3D printer who will buy plastic forks or paper plates. Quantum Sintering isn't even relevant. It's about printing a gasket for your sink, not making armour plated tanks, or scalpels. Our entire economy is based off of cheap plastic crap. When the cheap plastic crap market is irrelevant, how does that alter society?

Or look at it like this. Imagine a custom car parts store. They ain't gonna print break rotors, but they can print a spoiler, or a custom steering wheel cover, or parts without high stress requirements like a muffler. Or maybe you won't print your processor and motherboard, but you can print a custom case for your gaming machine. Maybe you lost your plastic hard drive rails so you scan one and print what you need. Or maybe you need custom parts for your aquaponic setup.

The potential uses for the technology as it exists currently are legion. Nevermind that you can use a 3D printer to print the next model of 3D printer.

[Zack Morris]

Have I given it thought? Why yes, since the clients order the technology to spec and they require it to solve very specific problems, absolutely. Like the company that has us showing the efficiency of power generation units and how much utility the investors who own shares in those power generation units are getting, and when they should be replacing those units, which units they should buy for the maximum lifetime, what their maintenance schedule should be. That sort of thing.

Right. You said it yourself: very specific problems. In other words, software is being used to help improve productivity in some specific domain, the same as it always has. What you have not provided evidence for is why this is more important than what software has already accomplished. Maybe that's because you've taken the present levels of automation for granted and don't realize how ordinary your application sounds.

I was at a SOPA protest, the CEO of Reddit got up and said, "raise your hand if you work in the tech industry.", just about everyone did, "raise your hand if the company is hiring.", just about everyone who raised their hand the first time did so again.

If everyone is working at a place like Reddit, then you are practically proving my point here. Yes, lots of tech companies are hiring, so what? My company is hiring, too. This Web 2.0 stuff has pretty much peaked. Will there be more successful businesses to come? Absolutely! Will some be revolutionary within their domain? Yes. But will they have as much of an impact as the web initially did in the late 90's? No, not really.

Just how jets don't fly any faster (in fact, they fly slower) than in the 1950's, the web is going to grow progressively slower. There will always be a thriving economy of web-based businesses, just like there is a thriving economy surrounding aviation, but it won't drive change the same way it once did. It will become the new normal (if it hasn't already).

Guys were skydiving from space in the 50s? Cite?

Oops. It was 1960. In light of that, what's so exciting about a guy jumping from a slightly higher altitude and achieving a slightly higher velocity more than 50 years later?

Fewer laborers.

Yes, we will likely have fewer laborers. Fewer innovators? Quite probably. Just witness the convergence of artistic expression around the world. People generally end up consuming the same stuff, so fewer people are needed to produce it as cultural preferences become more homogeneous.

That's great but it still does not disprove the hypothesis that growth is slowing down. These are all incremental changes that are slowly bringing rural Haiti in line with the developed world ca. 1950.

Not, even wrong.

There is a lot of room to grow in the developing world because they are so far behind and are benefiting from our accumulated technical knowledge. SMS messages are revolutionizing the lives of African farmers because it doesn't make sense to replicate the same development trajectory the West followed when our latest and greatest gadgets can be deployed more cheaply. Cell networks are cheaper to install and maintain than other telecom infrastructure, so I'm not surprised that they're wildly popular in the third world. I still see this as part of a convergent process that is bringing the third world in line with the developed world, albeit along a different path.

Cell phones are an outcome of the third industrial revolution (the information age). They are the direct result of the burst of scientific and technical innovation that occurred in the mid-20th century. You'll be hard pressed to find anything comparable in the last decade that is setting the stage for something as pervasive as cellular phones.

[Zack Morris]

I need to make some graphics for this argument. I am talking about market saturation and innovation, not invention and discovery. When everyone has a 3D printer who will buy plastic forks or paper plates.

People who don't want to bother fabricating their own plastic forks? Downloading and archiving data files for plastic forks, purchasing the raw materials, and then manufacturing them on a printer is a lot more work than purchasing them (probably at lower cost because they are mass manufactured).

Quantum Sintering isn't even relevant. It's about printing a gasket for your sink, not making armour plated tanks, or scalpels. Our entire economy is based off of cheap plastic crap. When the cheap plastic crap market is irrelevant, how does that alter society?

What is 'quantum sintering'? Metallurgy and semiconductor fabrication are a lot more complex than sintering powders.

Anyway, I'm trying really hard to think of plastic nick-nacks that I buy frequently enough to warrant purchasing an expensive make-it-all printer. The amount of time consumed buying plastic forks and sink gaskets is negligible already thanks to rapid transportation. Being able to download a gasket design and print it rather than spending 15-20 minutes going to the store to do the same is not exactly life-altering.

Or look at it like this. Imagine a custom car parts store. They ain't gonna print break rotors, but they can print a spoiler, or a custom steering wheel cover, or parts without high stress requirements like a muffler. Or maybe you won't print your processor and motherboard, but you can print a custom case for your gaming machine. Maybe you lost your plastic hard drive rails so you scan one and print what you need. Or maybe you need custom parts for your aquaponic setup.

Cheaper spoilers. That's a solid business idea but revolutionary?

The potential uses for the technology as it exists currently are legion. Nevermind that you can use a 3D printer to print the next model of 3D printer.

What if you can't? What if the next generation 3D printer requires parts more sophisticated than an existing printer can produce? What then?

[Enki]

People who don't want to bother fabricating their own plastic forks? Downloading and archiving data files for plastic forks, purchasing the raw materials, and then manufacturing them on a printer is a lot more work than purchasing them (probably at lower cost because they are mass manufactured).

Setting your printer to print out plastic ware is cheaper and easier than going to the store to buy it. The materials would be totally recyclable. When you are done you just melt the forks down and turn them into poker chips for after dinner entertainment.

What is 'quantum sintering'? Metallurgy and semiconductor fabrication are a lot more complex than sintering powders.

Did you read Skin Job's post? He was talking about binding the metals at the molecular level. But anyway, saying that a technology isn't that cool because it cannot do things it is not designed to do is a classic straw man.

Anyway, I'm trying really hard to think of plastic nick-nacks that I buy frequently enough to warrant purchasing an expensive make-it-all printer. The amount of time consumed buying plastic forks and sink gaskets is negligible already thanks to rapid transportation. Being able to download a gasket design and print it rather than spending 15-20 minutes going to the store to do the same is not exactly life-altering.

Then I guess you haven't thought very deeply about the nature of life and how your life is made up entirely of time. If you can reduce your time spent on a particular piece of business by 95% that's pretty revolutionary. Also, you are not thinking about the reduction in the amount of money you use, the energy you use, the energy the rest of society must put into it. Basically plastic fork production stops being, "Order placed with Chinese company, Chinese Company produces forks, sends forks to the docks, loads forks on ship, ships forks to America, ships forks to distribution center, forks at distribution center go to grocery store, you drive to the grocery store and pick them up, you drive home, you unwrap the packaging that won't exist when you use your 3D printer, you throw it into the garbage, you use the forks, throw them in the garbage, you take out the garbage the garbage man picks up the garbage and ships it to a landfill. Every step I just outlined there has been eliminated by Place plastic substrate in printer, download file, print file, use a little electricty (instead of a shitload of gas) have forks, use forks, throw forks back in the hopper to be melted down for the next use of that plastic. If that's not revolutionary, I do not know the meaning of the word.

Cheaper spoilers. That's a solid business idea but revolutionary?

They probably won't even be cheaper, they will have the ability to be endlessly customized to customer spec. What's revolutionary is that your local auto parts store will be manufacturing parts on site.

What if you can't? What if the next generation 3D printer requires parts more sophisticated than an existing printer can produce? What then?

You think I am being optimistic when I am just saying things that current gen 3D printers can already do. Obviously not every single part will be printable, that's beside the point. Instead of buying a whole new 3D printer just because the nozzle was upgraded, you can print the parts and attach the nozzle you have shipped to you... 95% less packaging, etc...

[Zack Morris]

Did you read Skin Job's post? He was talking about binding the metals at the molecular level. But anyway, saying that a technology isn't that cool because it cannot do things it is not designed to do is a classic straw man.

It's so frustrating arguing about this. You've been shown a fancy glue gun and now you're convinced that all of mankind's manufacturing expertise -- literally everything -- is inevitably going to be reduced to that paradigm. How? Who knows! Never mind that doing things one voxel at a time is incredibly slow when you could do it instead as a parallel process. Never mind that we haven't been able to simplify special purpose manufacturing processes designed to excel at one particular task enough to be safe, cheap, and convenient enough to use at home. All of that stuff is irrelevant because somehow, a hot glue gun is so much easier to do things with.

Beyond a certain size threshold, you're not really doing conventional printing anymore, you're talking about the fantasy of atomic assemblers. For you, maybe this is just a minor technological barrier that "makers" are going to overcome. But trust me, a lot of smart people have been thinking about this all of their lives. You won't see it in the next 25 years.

Do you realize the vastness and complexity of human manufacturing expertise? A lot of things cannot be done with additive processes and even if everything could be boxed into this narrow paradigm of yours, the machines would be expensive and complex. So much so that it wouldn't make economic sense to put these things in every house when you could instead locate them in dedicated facilities and pay for access to them. In other words: factories.

Then I guess you haven't thought very deeply about the nature of life and how your life is made up entirely of time. If you can reduce your time spent on a particular piece of business by 95% that's pretty revolutionary. Also, you are not thinking about the reduction in the amount of money you use, the energy you use, the energy the rest of society must put into it. Basically plastic fork production stops being, "Order placed with Chinese company, Chinese Company produces forks, sends forks to the docks, loads forks on ship, ships forks to America, ships forks to distribution center, forks at distribution center go to grocery store, you drive to the grocery store and pick them up, you drive home, you unwrap the packaging that won't exist when you use your 3D printer, you throw it into the garbage, you use the forks, throw them in the garbage, you take out the garbage the garbage man picks up the garbage and ships it to a landfill. Every step I just outlined there has been eliminated by Place plastic substrate in printer, download file, print file, use a little electricty (instead of a shitload of gas) have forks, use forks, throw forks back in the hopper to be melted down for the next use of that plastic. If that's not revolutionary, I do not know the meaning of the word.

You make it sound like these things are being manufactured and distributed in isolation. In reality, these inefficiencies become negligible with sufficient volume. I don't see how spending 20 minutes shopping is any more of a waste of time than searching for files online, downloading them, loading up your 3D printer with raw materials (and buying the right materials when you run out), and then waiting for it to slowly print out your forks.

You know what would really be a time saver? Being able to walk in the store, grab what I need, and have cameras detect that action and automatically deduct payment from an account without having to go through a register. That would speed up the process by a factor of 2 for small shopping runs. And it's something that will be doable within 10 years.

They probably won't even be cheaper, they will have the ability to be endlessly customized to customer spec. What's revolutionary is that your local auto parts store will be manufacturing parts on site.

For many parts, this actually makes sense. Until auto parts stores go obsolete because in 20 years, nobody is going to be able to (or willing to) work on self-driving electric vehicles.

You think I am being optimistic when I am just saying things that current gen 3D printers can already do. Obviously not every single part will be printable, that's beside the point. Instead of buying a whole new 3D printer just because the nozzle was upgraded, you can print the parts and attach the nozzle you have shipped to you... 95% less packaging, etc...

Again with the nozzles. Not everything can be made with a nozzle. The nozzles probably won't even be an issue at some point, it will be those other pesky things that have to be supported in order to make anything interesting.

[Marcus]

Those are good points, Marcus, but there must be a balance between an organized society in which we give up some autonomy and freedom. This balance must shift with the circumstances. In an ever more inter-dependent world, surely some restrictions on "experimentation" are inevitable. Public health is one such area.

And that's a good point too, Zack . . how do we handle the tension between the One and the Many.

[Enki]

It's so frustrating arguing about this. You've been shown a fancy glue gun and now you're convinced that all of mankind's manufacturing expertise -- literally everything -- is inevitably going to be reduced to that paradigm.

Straw man. Never said anything remotely resembling this.

How? Who knows! Never mind that doing things one voxel at a time is incredibly slow when you could do it instead as a parallel process. Never mind that we haven't been able to simplify special purpose manufacturing processes designed to excel at one particular task enough to be safe, cheap, and convenient enough to use at home. All of that stuff is irrelevant because somehow, a hot glue gun is so much easier to do things with.

Funny that the consumer grade tech has barely hit the market and you cannot even imagine it getting improved over the next ten years.

Beyond a certain size threshold, you're not really doing conventional printing anymore, you're talking about the fantasy of atomic assemblers. For you, maybe this is just a minor technological barrier that "makers" are going to overcome. But trust me, a lot of smart people have been thinking about this all of their lives. You won't see it in the next 25 years.

Actually Skin Job was talking about atomic assemblers. He like you was pursuing that straw man.

Do you realize the vastness and complexity of human manufacturing expertise? A lot of things cannot be done with additive processes and even if everything could be boxed into this narrow paradigm of yours, the machines would be expensive and complex. So much so that it wouldn't make economic sense to put these things in every house when you could instead locate them in dedicated facilities and pay for access to them. In other words: factories.

None of this is relevant. Computers can't blend a margarita. Can't cross the Atlantic in a Buick Skylark. Lots of things can't do things they were not designed or intended to do. So what? Why are you frustrating yourself with this straw man? I keep talking about what 3D printers CAN do and you keep mentioning what they can't and then you get frustrated. Why are you doing this to yourself?

You make it sound like these things are being manufactured and distributed in isolation. In reality, these inefficiencies become negligible with sufficient volume. I don't see how spending 20 minutes shopping is any more of a waste of time than searching for files online, downloading them, loading up your 3D printer with raw materials (and buying the right materials when you run out), and then waiting for it to slowly print out your forks.

20 minutes shopping every couple of weeks for years on end versus downloading a file once. Hmm... And you would only run out of materials if you keep the products you produce. You don't really seem to understand the concept of 'recycling'. That seems to be the crux of your inability to understand the potential here.

You know what would really be a time saver? Being able to walk in the store, grab what I need, and have cameras detect that action and automatically deduct payment from an account without having to go through a register. That would speed up the process by a factor of 2 for small shopping runs. And it's something that will be doable within 10 years.

RFID chips on products in stores are well on their way. That is coming too.

Funny that you haven't even thought of the only good rebuttal. "Why don't you use metal forks and wash them in the sink?"

For many parts, this actually makes sense. Until auto parts stores go obsolete because in 20 years, nobody is going to be able to (or willing to) work on self-driving electric vehicles.

Why wouldn't they be able to? I still build custom PCs.

Again with the nozzles. Not everything can be made with a nozzle. The nozzles probably won't even be an issue at some point, it will be those other pesky things that have to be supported in order to make anything interesting.

This is your straw man again. Get on topic and stop beating this dead straw horse. Here are two things to think about before replying: 1) Recycling 2) The actual capabilities of the items in question.

Why are you incapable of talking about the features of 3D printers instead of focusing so hard on the things they cannot do? You are so insecure in the value of your own argument that you have to misdirect the discussion to focus exclusively on things that are not actually relevant to the topic?

Plastic man, think of the things you can make out of plastic.

You remind me of the people that said we'd never be able to do our shopping primarily on line and that Amazon was going to go bankrupt. This is that exact same argument. I've had it before. I was correct in 1998 about online shopping, I was correct in 2004 about smartphones, but you (and all of your other luddite analogs) keep having this argument with me.

[Mr. Perfect]

I essentially never have a use for plastic forks or poker chips.

Anyone know % of GDP?

[Zack Morris]

Funny that the consumer grade tech has barely hit the market and you cannot even imagine it getting improved over the next ten years.

There's a difference between imagining it getting much better and imagining it becoming the basis of a new industrial revolution. A big difference. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

20 minutes shopping every couple of weeks for years on end versus downloading a file once. Hmm... And you would only run out of materials if you keep the products you produce. You don't really seem to understand the concept of 'recycling'. That seems to be the crux of your inability to understand the potential here.

3D printers can't recycle. Yes, you could potentially melt down something composed of a single material. But all of a sudden, this whole process became a lot more complicated.

RFID chips on products in stores are well on their way. That is coming too.

Perhaps. I think that's a more clunky solution in the long run but it just might work.

Funny that you haven't even thought of the only good rebuttal. "Why don't you use metal forks and wash them in the sink?"

I thought of that but 1) I understand plastic forks have uses and 2) I assumed "plastic fork" was a proxy for "cheap, disposable plastic things."

Why wouldn't they be able to? I still build custom PCs.

So do I. But this reinforces my point. Custom PCs are easier to build than ever but hardly anyone does. Even I am much more likely to buy an off-the-shelf PC now than ever before.

Why are you incapable of talking about the features of 3D printers instead of focusing so hard on the things they cannot do? You are so insecure in the value of your own argument that you have to misdirect the discussion to focus exclusively on things that are not actually relevant to the topic?

Plastic man, think of the things you can make out of plastic.

You mean, solid and static plastic structures. I can't think of anything that I've needed in the last year where a 3D printer would have been worth the investment. I'm literally drawing a blank here. I think I bought plastic forks once in the last year.

You remind me of the people that said we'd never be able to do our shopping primarily on line and that Amazon was going to go bankrupt. This is that exact same argument. I've had it before. I was correct in 1998 about online shopping, I was correct in 2004 about smartphones, but you (and all of your other luddite analogs) keep having this argument with me.

Those two things were on the verge of reaching their maximum potential when you made your predictions. That's not the case here at all.

[YMix]

Three posts on One vs. the Many moved to Philosophy.

[Enki]

There's a difference between imagining it getting much better and imagining it becoming the basis of a new industrial revolution. A big difference. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

You don't see how it can, I don't see how it can't. Since it is kind of difficult to present evidence of the future, we'll have to wait about ten or fifteen years.

3D printers can't recycle. Yes, you could potentially melt down something composed of a single material. But all of a sudden, this whole process became a lot more complicated.

It will be a standard feature ultimately. Melting plastic is what 3D printers do, not too complicated. And yes, I am imagining single substrate situations.

Perhaps. I think that's a more clunky solution in the long run but it just might work.

Something more elegant, lasers that read QR codes from a distance maybe.

So do I. But this reinforces my point. Custom PCs are easier to build than ever but hardly anyone does. Even I am much more likely to buy an off-the-shelf PC now than ever before.

Yes, but that's because PCs are now becoming customized by the peripherals rather than having everything in the box. Modular is the future.

You mean, solid and static plastic structures. I can't think of anything that I've needed in the last year where a 3D printer would have been worth the investment. I'm literally drawing a blank here. I think I bought plastic forks once in the last year.

Same argument was made about PCs 30 years ago.

Those two things were on the verge of reaching their maximum potential when you made your predictions. That's not the case here at all.

So you are saying that 3D printers are not yet near their maximum potential? I agree. They are already printing working batteries and yet they are nowhere near where they will be.

[monster_gardener]

Thank You VERY Much for the thread, Tinker.

Actually I could use a 3D printer........ Part of a tripod that fell broke...... If I had a 3D printer...............

Remembering multiple instances of similar

[Enki]

Thank You VERY Much for the thread, Tinker.

Actually I could use a 3D printer........ Part of a tripod that fell broke...... If I had a 3D printer...............

Remembering multiple instances of similar

Yup, exactly. People will start recognizing how useful they will be as more people start using them.

[Milo]

I took art history from a professor who's specialty was art psychology. He once mentioned during a lecture that subtractive methods, such as chiseling rock, are inherently stressful psychologically; when you make a mistake there's no way to correct it, except removing yet more and kind of falling down a subtractive hole. However, additive methods, such as wax, are less stressful, as you can simply add more material to make up for mistakes. You can see the stress in chiseled sculpture and you can see the relaxed and flowing look in sculpture that has been produced by an additive method. This is an interesting subtext to this technology, as it is additive as opposed to traditional methods that are subtractive.

[Enki]

I took art history from a professor who's specialty was art psychology. He once mentioned during a lecture that subtractive methods, such as chiseling rock, are inherently stressful psychologically; when you make a mistake there's no way to correct it, except removing yet more and kind of falling down a subtractive hole. However, additive methods, such as wax, are less stressful, as you can simply add more material to make up for mistakes. You can see the stress in chiseled sculpture and you can see the relaxed and flowing look in sculpture that has been produced by an additive method. This is an interesting subtext to this technology, as it is additive as opposed to traditional methods that are subtractive.

Interesting. I would love to hear what he has to say about 3D computer modeling where you are free to add or subtract at will.

[Milo]

I took art history from a professor who's specialty was art psychology. He once mentioned during a lecture that subtractive methods, such as chiseling rock, are inherently stressful psychologically; when you make a mistake there's no way to correct it, except removing yet more and kind of falling down a subtractive hole. However, additive methods, such as wax, are less stressful, as you can simply add more material to make up for mistakes. You can see the stress in chiseled sculpture and you can see the relaxed and flowing look in sculpture that has been produced by an additive method. This is an interesting subtext to this technology, as it is additive as opposed to traditional methods that are subtractive.

Interesting. I would love to hear what he has to say about 3D computer modeling where you are free to add or subtract at will.

Well... He's dead!
But anyway, additive always means to add and subtract: you can always subtract, it is being able to add that is different.
It is fairly easy to imagine oneself as some medieval sculptor, exercising restraint in making each stroke, because if you spoil the block, you're liable to spend some time on the rack, or just plain starve for lack of work. Today, you hold back in many activities in a shop, so you don't round off bolts, grind something too far etc. That restraint is there when you look at works chiselled from stone versus from a maliable media:
http://www.michelangelomodels.com/m-models/david.html
It's subtle but you can see a tension in the stone work and a more relaxed demeanour in the clay and bronze.
I think there is some underlying psychology to some processes that will change because of this. I'm sure even now there is a relaxation around the decision to model and prototype many things, where this technology can be employed.

[Ammianus]

So if everyone receives a 3D printer, who supplies the raw plastic? What would happen to the plastics supply?

[Taboo]

I disagree with everyone.

3D Printing isn't going to be nearly as revolutionary as you think Tinker. I used to think it would be. Now that I know more, I don't. Sure, it may bankrupt some toy manufactures in China, and free up some isles at Walmarts. People may fix more stuff around the house, especially after photo-to-CAD automation is developed. So what? All of the things you mention: spoilers, forks, poker chips - are not revolutionary, merely slightly more convenient, depending on the price of the printer and the metal-plastic cartridges. The plastic/metal powder you would use to print stuff has to be specially processed so will necessarily be more expensive than mass-produced plastic/metal parts, even after the cost of distribution. Will big and medium-sized manufacturers also run a few batches and particular parts via industrial-sized 3D printers? They already do. But will Joe Schmoe install a nanometer resolution 30x10 ft void-chamber printer in his garage? A few eccentrics may, but unlikely to be everybody's cuppatea, as Zack says.

I strongly disagree with Zack that the IT revolution has run out of steam.
1) Have you noticed how for the past few years computers have gone multicore, instead of breaking through the 4Ghz barrier? It was because of fundamental problems with cooling. Well the new Sandia Cooler blasts that away, with a 3,000% improvment in cooling power. That should take us to about 9Ghz processors.

2) The AI advances of the last decade have been amazing. Back when I designed my first visual detection neural net back in the early 2000s, there were probably a few thousand people in the world who knew how to do that. Now every camera has face-detecting nets embedded. Asimovian butlers are not that far off, a mere sixteen fold increase of capability, an adequate power supply, and a good company to properly integrate the disparate techs into a working ensemble are needed. Pseudo-intelligent robotic helpers will turn the labor relations intranationally and internationally between rich and poor on their head. China's low-skill model is fucked, and they know it. This is more revolutionary than anything that has ever come before. The first 2 industrial revolutions (steam and electric) hugely increased the brawn of humankind, leaving slow failing human minds to deal with the power. The third one, once it properly sets in, will exponentially increase the mental-analytic and observational capabilities of the civilization. Of course, our decision making powers (information-integration) and willpower (goal-setting and planning) will lag far behind, causing tremendous (perhaps fatal) stress on the system. But it will be exciting.

PS: I'm still reading through the Gordon article - thanks for posting btw- and will write a reply when I'm done digesting.

[Simple Minded]

I took art history from a professor who's specialty was art psychology. He once mentioned during a lecture that subtractive methods, such as chiseling rock, are inherently stressful psychologically; when you make a mistake there's no way to correct it, except removing yet more and kind of falling down a subtractive hole. However, additive methods, such as wax, are less stressful, as you can simply add more material to make up for mistakes. You can see the stress in chiseled sculpture and you can see the relaxed and flowing look in sculpture that has been produced by an additive method. This is an interesting subtext to this technology, as it is additive as opposed to traditional methods that are subtractive.

Interesting. I would love to hear what he has to say about 3D computer modeling where you are free to add or subtract at will.

Well... He's dead!

Which proves.... life as art.... is subtractive not additive......

Makes sense in terms of stress, wax is subtractive as well as additive, there should never be any mistakes in the final wax product. I would think that both time travelers and wax sculptorss have very little stress.... parents and mortals considerably more....

You'd think more sculptors would know about the use of epoxy to result in more level playing fields....

"Art and life are both unfair!" "Art and life are both hard!"

Really? Compared to what?