[Discuss] Reactions to Defense Distributed?
Joel Murphy
joel at joelmurphy.net
Sat Nov 2 13:09:27 UTC 2013
I don't think it's the same as a book. CAD files are more like plans and
drawings, they contain all the the specifications of how a thing
could/should be built, but it takes tools and materials and expertise to
actually pull it off.
The advent of the thing-printer is a significant moment, but anyone who has
worked with one knows that there are many opportunities for failure in the
process of making a thing. This is nothing new. The idea of making weapons
in shop class is older than our grandparents. Is the weapon-isation of 3D
printing shocking because of the (false) idea that you just have to press a
button to make it? Or that the gun is more concealable? These are paranoid
thoughts.
The are plenty of plans and drawings available for folding knives and
trebuchets. Why is the BS cloud hanging over this plastic gun demonstration
that is more likely to remove the user's finger? You could easier fashion a
garrote from some fishing twine and sticks if you really had it in for
someone. The whole thing is more about our wacky second amendment than
anything else.
And the thingiverse is responsible for editing what it publishes just as we
are in our conduct to others and what we allow into our lives.
Joel
>>>
Making the World Safe for Robots
Any noise in the prior signal has been inserted by the Nexus7
I think the only interesting questions to be raised by this 3d printed
weapon BS, is how we fundamentally view CAD, programming, and general
automation of tasks.
Is CAD a form of knowledge in the same way that a book is?
Is censorship of CAD files basically the same as placing limits on our own
ability to seek knowledge? And is that a bad thing? I can't help but see
books burning when I see CAD files removed from the internet. Now I know I
am on the extreme side of pro-freedom, but I still see the opportunity for
terrible abuses in a digital fabrication age. We've seen what DRM has done
to the publishing industry. I walk through a used book store and I can see
the world of knowledge that amazon has all but left to rot hidden in the
dusty stacks of now vanishing ruins to a bygone industry. And the fault is
not amazons... the fault is copyrights that are held by companies with no
desire or incentive to ensure the survivability of their content.
The future of CAD is already wrapped in a turmoil of patents, copyrights,
and political correctness. I think we should be focused more on protecting
designs from loss. Internet Archive and the sort may play a key role in
that better future.
But one question continues to challenge me. "If it's so easy to <x> with a
CAD file, does it stop being knowledge?" And it's a fair question. When a
file represents an object, most will see it as the button they press to get
an object, and not the collection of information that defines that object.
Is it knowledge then? Even if it contains that knowledge has the function
been rewritten by common use?
I don't know. But I trust people to be awesome. So I want the knowledge
to be preserved. And I want the knowledge to be there for others to build
on if they choose, or equally ignore if they choose. I don't want to live
in a world where people's works can be taken from them. And that's exactly
what has happened in the past with classification of data, with DRM, and
with content as a commodity.
-Matt
On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 4:50 PM, Devlin Thyne <dthyne at dh-global.com> wrote:
> Looking at my RSS feed from Thingiverse, it seems the last post was in
> December of 2012. If you would like, I can send you all the posts since
> early 2011.
>
> Bre Pettis had a post about deadly weapons from October 3rd of 2011,
> quoted below:
>
> When we started Thingiverse we didn’t want there to be weapons on it, but
> there were a number of awesome toy weapons that blurred the line and so we
> changed the TOS to something more blurry and toy weapons carried on. In
> fact, if you shoot anything on Thingiverse fast enough, you could hurt
> someone. There have been a lot of things on Thingiverse that could be
> classified as weapons, but they could also be classified as toys. A
> miniature catapult is technically a siege weapon, but it could also be
> classified as a toy. To summarize, our weapons policy has been a blurry
> line.
>
> Recently there has been a lot of discussion around guns since the lower
> arm of an AR-15 model went up on Thingiverse. It’s a beautiful model. It’s
> also the only part of the AR-15 that you can’t just mail order. It’s been
> possible and legal to make your own firearms since the beginning of the
> USA, but is Thingiverse the right place for deadly weapons?
>
> We’re discussing this internally and we’re spending time exploring the
> legalities of firearms on Thingiverse. We want to make sure that
> Thingiverse can be accessed from schools and is student friendly and we are
> exploring the implications of weapons on Thingiverse for classrooms.
>
> It’s a controversial subject. For myself, I get a lot of satisfaction from
> shooting guns in the woods at tin cans, but I also had my best childhood
> friend commit suicide with a gun he bought by routing around the
> registration process. I’m not convinced that 3D printing is easier than
> buying a gun illegally, but it does offer another avenue for weapons to
> enter the world. Will the next war be armed with 3D printers? One thing
> that’s for sure, the cat is out of the bag and that cat can be armed with
> guns made with printed parts.
>
> Before we make a decision, I’d like to get the Thingiverse users’
> feedback. We’re going to either change the terms of service or not, but we
> want to get your feedback before we make that decision.
>
> On Thingiverse you’ll find a poll in the sidebar with three possible
> choices. Below the choices is a place for you to leave your comments. This
> poll can only be seen if you’re logged in. Each Thingiverse user can only
> vote once and once you’ve made your choice, the poll disappears. I hope
> you’ll take the time to tell us what kind of Thingiverse you want and use
> the comment section to tell us why.
>
> On 11/01/2013 09:20 AM, Catarina Mota wrote:
>
>> Also, am I missing something is the Thingiverse blog gone? Searched the
>> Makerbot blog and couldn't find anything about the weapons ban.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 9:28 AM, Catarina Mota
>> <catarina at openmaterials.org <mailto:catarina at openmaterials.org>> wrote:
>>
>> Thanks Johan, that's a great tip! Do you by any chance have links?
>> I've only been able to find weapon-related discussions from the last
>> 6 months.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 7:58 AM, Johan Söderberg
>> <johan.soderberg at sts.gu.se <mailto:johan.soderberg at sts.gu.se>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Catarina,
>>
>> You can find reactions from the community in-real-time in the
>> Rep-rap discussion forums and on Thingiverse blog from
>> September-Oktober 2011. In the Rep-rap forum, speculations on
>> this possibility dates back to day one the project was started
>> (2005), but in threads that have been pushed to the back by the
>> moderators. Please keep me updated, I be very interested to read
>> if you are going to write about this topic.
>>
>> /Johan
>> _______________________________________________
>> discuss mailing list
>> discuss at lists.oshwa.org <mailto:discuss at lists.oshwa.org>
>> http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> discuss mailing list
>> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
>> http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss
>>
>> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list
> discuss at lists.oshwa.org
> http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss
>
_______________________________________________
discuss mailing list
discuss at lists.oshwa.org
http://lists.oshwa.org/listinfo/discuss
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.oshwa.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20131102/fa58c31d/attachment.html>
More information about the discuss
mailing list