zlacker

[return to "New York’s budget bill would require “blocking technology” on all 3D printers"]
1. robfly+dO1[view] [source] 2026-02-04 00:20:10
>>ptorro+(OP)
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.
◧◩
2. teo_ze+Fz2[view] [source] 2026-02-04 06:59:51
>>robfly+dO1
> 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

At least 25 years. That's the time passed since the first introduction of Eurion marks on banknotes. As far as I know, noone has used it to block reproduction of anything other than money.

◧◩◪
3. Arch-T+kR2[view] [source] 2026-02-04 09:24:39
>>teo_ze+Fz2
EURion marks are a feature you must include on your banknote for it to even be considered real. And it's _one_ feature. It's relatively trivial to make a chip which can detect their presence.

On the other hand, if I need a replacement part for something, it's unlikely I will find the manufacturer giving me models for it. And if a manufacturer is giving me models for it, they probably do so with the explicit expectation that I might end up using them to manufacture a replacement.

In most cases either me or some other volunteer will need to measure the existing part, write down all the critical measurements, and then design a new part from scratch in CAD.

Even if somehow you are able to fingerprint on those critical measurements, that's just _one_ part.

The only way this kind of nonsense law could work is if you mandate that 3D printers must not accept commands from an untrusted source (signature verification) and then you must have software which uses a database to check for such critical measurements, ideally _before_ slicing.

Except that still doesn't work because I can always post-process a part to fit.

And it doesn't work even more because the software will need to contain a signing key. Unless the signing key is on a remote server somewhere to which you must send your model for validation.

This is never going to work, or scale.

There are even more hurdles... I can design and build a 3D printer from scratch and manufacture it using non-CNC machined parts at home. A working, high quality 3D printer.

Where are you going to force me to put the locks? Are you going to require me to show my ID when buying stepper motors and stepper motor drivers?

What about other kinds of manufacturing (that these laws, at least the Washington State ones, also cover)?

Will you ban old hardware?

What about a milling machine? Are you going to ban non-CNC mills?

These are the most ignorant laws made by the most ignorant people. The easiest way to ban people from manufacturing their own guns is to ban manufacture of your own guns. But again, this is a complete non-issue in the US where you can probably get a gun illegally more easily than you can 3D print something half as reliable.

◧◩◪◨
4. anthk+w93[view] [source] 2026-02-04 11:44:48
>>Arch-T+kR2
As an European I'd say any USAnite can almost get a gun with breakfast cereal boxes. But weapons' culture in the US it's obsolete. Militias can't do shit against tyranical govs because once they send drones it's game over.
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. rayine+Pi3[view] [source] 2026-02-04 12:52:03
>>anthk+w93
It’s not obsolete. In a country where your military is farm boys, the important thing is being able to start the war. Eventually chunks of the military will defect. We saw this happen during the Bangladesh independence movement. The revolutionaries got lucky and knocked over a weapons depot early in the conflict. They started fighting and a large number of the Pakistani army that was of Bangladeshi ancestry defected. I am confident the same thing would happen if the government in DC tried to oppress Iowa or Texas.

Drones cut both ways. You’re correct that it allows a small number of people loyal to the regime to asymmetrically oppress a large population. But drone technology is in theory accessible to the populace in an industrialized country.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. Father+r24[view] [source] 2026-02-04 16:42:58
>>rayine+Pi3
The 2A crowd has been really quiet this past year. Hell, Trump even said in response to the Pretti shooting that only criminals walk around carrying guns in public. I guess no one cares about government tyranny unless they're asked to respect someone's pronouns.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. vdqtp3+u56[view] [source] 2026-02-05 05:17:48
>>Father+r24
> Hell, Trump even said in response to the Pretti shooting that only criminals walk around carrying guns in public.

If you were paying any attention at all, you'd see pretty much every 2A community, advocate and lobbying group was outraged by that statement and made statements against it.

Having said that, it is actually illegal to carry a firearm to go commit crimes like destroying government property, assaulting federal officers and obstructing them in carrying out their constitutional duties.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. seg_lo+Wk6[view] [source] 2026-02-05 07:51:15
>>vdqtp3+u56
> illegal to carry a firearm to go commit crimes

Of which Pretti did zero of.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣
9. rayine+XO6[view] [source] 2026-02-05 12:07:45
>>seg_lo+Wk6
There is video of him kicking light the tail light of a federal law enforcement vehicle, which is definitely a crime. And that’s just what we have video of.
[go to top]