3D Printing and the Replicator Economy 322
An anonymous reader writes "'Tea. Earl Grey. Hot,' is a command familiar to every Trek fan as representing everyday use of replicator technology. While its use on the show is simply sci-fi wizardry, the beginnings of that technology is now making it into homes, and could spark an industrial revolution. 'New 3D printing and other so-called additive manufacturing technologies are based on methods that industries developed over the past quarter century to rapidly create prototypes of mechanical parts for testing. But as these methods become increasingly sophisticated, demand is rising to use them to manufacture finished products, not only in factories but also at a boutique, one-off level for individuals. ... Already, 3D printing has been used to make tools and artworks, custom-fitted prosthetics for amputees, components for aviation and medical instruments, solid medical models of bones and organs based on MRI scans, paper-based photovoltaic cells, and the body panels for a lightweight hybrid automobile.'"
stock up on bullets EMP don't work on them (Score:5, Funny)
stock up on bullets EMP's and lasers don't work on them
Re: (Score:2)
Jack O'Neill will design a weapon that can destroy them as soon as he gets overloaded with Ancient knowledge.
Re: (Score:2)
Jack O'Neill, hell.
With one of those replicator things, any problem is a problem for MacGuyver!
Re: (Score:2)
A powerful enough bullet could end a laser.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I have more bullets, and they cost me pennies in bulk. How many multi-kW lasers are you sporting.
Won't go anywhere thanks to IP Law (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
And then it will get better :)
Re: (Score:2)
Nope - just someone looking forward to the collapse of our current IP model. They can pry my 3D printed lego set from my cold, dead 3D printed exoskeleton.
Re: (Score:2)
Then those "Would you steal a car?!?1/! You shouldn't pirate videos then!" commercials to actually be logically sound.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is & always has been that copying doesn't equate to stealing. When IP law catches up to this reasoning, we'll all be in a better place.
The law is already well aware of the differences between theft and infringement of patents, trademarks, and copyrights. It's just certain people and organizations that try to blur them all together.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe. But, robots that build cars were expensive in the 80s, and they're still expensive today.
I'm sure costs will drop, but you have to look at the components that make a device expensive. If the expensive components are integrated circuits, then of course the price is going to fall like a rock. If they're expensive due to poor yields, then there is also going to be a lot of room for prices to drop, since yields go up as technology improves. On the other hand, if they're expensive because they rely on
"Business As Usual, During Alterations" (Score:2)
3D printers have a way to go, but there already have been modeled objects that have received infringement claims. It will only get worse.
You pay the licensing fees just as you would for anything else.
Life goes on.
Ralph Williams' "Business As Usual, During Alterations" [blogspot.com] First publication, "Astounding," July 1958.
For any non-trivial application of a replicator there will be issues.
You LEGO house needs to be structurally sound.
It needs to be fire resistant. The plastic must not off-gas toxic fumes.
All this and more has to be documented and certified in a way that will be persuasive to your local zoning board, building inspector, real estate
Re: (Score:2)
Interestingly there is at least one company building one-off houses using a 3D printing-style device --- out of concrete:
http://www.physorg.com/news139161727.html [physorg.com]
William
Re: (Score:2)
Just as the RIAA and MPAA have not killed downloadable music or streaming movies, and publishers have not killed the internet as distribution for news, I doubt manufacturers are going to be able to kill 3D pr
Replicator economy or peak employment? (Score:5, Interesting)
On the one hand you have the possible utopia of unlimited "free" stuff.
And on the other, the distopia of companies locking this technology up, and firing (almost all) the workers.
It would be great to believe the former. But a whole lot of people seem to be afraid of the latter.
Is there any unwavering indicator one way or the other?
Re:Replicator economy or peak employment? (Score:5, Insightful)
What's free about this stuff? Printers aren't free and the more complex ones that actually do something are likely to be even more expensive. The feedstocks aren't going to be free.
Unless you can conceive of an economy run on simple plastic objects with no moving parts, I don't see anything today that resembles the hallucination that is Star Trek. Or even The Diamond Age.
Re:Replicator economy or peak employment? (Score:5, Funny)
Oh, and before anyone else feels the need to express the obvious, dildos will not support an entire economy. Sorry.
Re: (Score:3)
Well you've got to be fucked by something? Why not fuck yourself with that dildo you just printed?
Re: (Score:3)
Whoa whoa.
Re: (Score:3)
Well, obviously. You'd need fleshlights, too.
Re:Replicator economy or peak employment? (Score:5, Informative)
Unless you can conceive of an economy run on simple plastic objects with no moving parts,
My main interest is making patterns to be sandcast in aluminum. It turns out that patternmaking is remarkably hard and painful when a pattern breaks or is lost. Of course when another is available by "press go" then its not so bad.
Also note that "simple plastic objects with no moving parts" represents probably 50% by weight or volume of the stuff at walmart and target. Entire aisles of laundry baskets, storage baskets, kitchen gadgets, housewares gadgets, all obsolete.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Also not that "no moving parts" is not even necessarily true: http://www.shapeways.com/shops/oskarpuzzles [shapeways.com]
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Also note that "simple plastic objects with no moving parts" represents probably 50% by weight or volume of the stuff at walmart and target. Entire aisles of laundry baskets, storage baskets, kitchen gadgets, housewares gadgets, all obsolete.
You won't be paying OEM prices for your chemical feedstocks.
Think mile-long unit trains. Fleets of container ships. Transcontinental pipelines.
Does it make sense for the high wage geek to spend hours or days at home fabricating plastic forks and spoons that sell for $1.39 a box at the dollar store?
Scavaging aluminum at 5 cents a can?
Do we ignore the problem of air, ground and water pollution when you bring an industrial process into the home?
Re: (Score:3)
Direct metal laser sintering [wikipedia.org] machines are already in commercial use (article with pictures of produced items here [ipmd.net]) that could manufacture metal spoons. Current metals in use include stainless and maraging steel, and titanium alloys. In theory, almost any alloy could be used. I have to believe that machines built around 200-watt lasers, and properly prepared stainless steel powder, are
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And look at the cost of most of that. A laundry basket? Storage Bins. Molding is cheap when you a lot anything. This is useful for limited run items like your patterns. Get on of these that prints in foam or wax and does it fast and it could be great for manufactures. For those widgets you mentioned the savings isn't worth the cost of the printer.
Re:Replicator economy or peak employment? (Score:5, Interesting)
It may not happen soon enough in the scale that will impact the majority of the people, but it is already happening.
Here is a link to a guy who took the plans for an old Guillows free-flight plane and converted it to a 3d printable version:
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/thumbgallery.php?t=1455808&do=threadgallery [rcgroups.com]
Here is a link to a company that makes a "printer" for foam for simple models and prototyping:
http://www.phlatboyz.com/Phlatprinter-3-Kit_p_9.html [phlatboyz.com]
I think we are fast approaching the time when the printers will be able to print another copy of itself.
Sure, you'll need the raw material, but we are at the point now where you could "print" an Ikea furniture piece.
Re:Replicator economy or peak employment? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
We're already at the point where a CNC router can make copies of itself (depending on the design, at least close to 100% of the wood/plastic/aluminium parts).
Re: (Score:3)
> simple plastic objects with no moving parts
Why "no moving parts"?
Here's a story of a company that can print a monkey wrench:
http://www.lowellsun.com/todaysheadlines/ci_18593056 [lowellsun.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Once you can print a printer, they will not be expensive at all.
Re:Replicator economy or peak employment? (Score:5, Insightful)
Are you kidding? Do you have any clue as to the actual number of people in America today who are out of work? [msn.com] Add to that the virtual collapse of available jobs in government and public services, well you get the picture.
Tell me that every advance in productivity, every application of robotics, every technological enhancement that makes it possible for business to make more, better, cheaper products hasn't resulted in higher wages for the Board of Directors and lower wages for the common worker in real currency. We now live in a global economy that sees human labor as a commodity, and all of it is to serve a self obsessed, self indulgent, corporate elite.
You want unwavering indicators, here are a few that might help you hone in on an answer:
What you will see is a mass migration into poverty and population control. We are being herded into oblivion. You honestly tell me if you had a billion dollars how eager you would be to help the masses vs feathering your own nest. We've built a society of bottomless appetites, with fewer and fewer souls who can feed that hunger. Can you see any way for the common man to make out in such a world?
Let me put it another way. The greater people are responsible for the future. Until the masses hold wisdom more highly than gratification, dignity above notoriety, justice above animal revenge and compassion above dominion, we can pretty much predict how it will all turn out. We have done a spectacular job of teaching our children to be fat, stupid and ready to dance to any tune their corporate masters may choose to play. What indicators are you looking at?
Re: (Score:3)
Read my post, the problem is not inherently with capitalism or socialism. The problem is training people from birth to hold material gratification above their own humanity and/or the humanity of others. The reason the US system worked so well to begin with, is that through checks and balances it was designed to limit the damage the worst in people could illicit and empower the best that people could accomplish. Almost from the start, individual interests have been at war with these principles and what we se
Re: (Score:2)
Somebody is going to sell this technology. It is far too cool and far too desirable.
The bugaboo of companies "locking up" the technology didn't work for the printing press, the copier, the computer printer, the cassette player, and the DVD drive. It won't work for 3D printers either.
Too many people will be coming out with competitive devices and everyone will have to fight for market share. The company that sits on the technology and doesn't exploit it will waste a great opportunity.
Re: (Score:2)
A former IBM CEO ince stated that there was only a market for 10 computers world wide.
While I agree the average person wont be buying a car and printing it out what you will find are custom "build" shops that will build you your car"custom designed for lots of plans, some certified by car company" in 48 hours.
That wont stock cars at the dealership but build them like mcdonalds's as ordered. I figure to see something like that in 30-40 years. Between complex multi tool,multi material CNC mills, and quick
Cars (Score:3)
So, when can I download my free car from TPB?
You know what it would produce (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
And the 3D printer would spit out a liquid almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea^H^H^H a car.
FTFY.
Re: (Score:2)
I was gonna say.
Call me when it can actually make: tea, Earl Grey, hot.
Actually, Earl Grey is vile and pussified. I'll have the Assam.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, Earl Grey is vile and pussified.
Not all Earl Grey is vile. My favorite tea is a nice loose leaf Darjeeling tea. I am lucky that I have a whole bunch (several pounds) at home that I get my Indian co workers to bring back when they go for a visit and then vacuum pack and toss in the deep freeze so it stays fresh.
Not quite replicator tech yet (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually the first replicators on Star Trek (Star Trek Enterprise), were assemblers, assembling food stuffs from raw molecular stock (also a great way to recycle organic waste on a ship.) The question is always one of energy. The energy required to assemble a steak is not insignificant. The energy required to replicate a steak from energy to matter however is stunning. Of course there may be all kinds of cool technologies to reduce the ridiculous amount of energy it would take using the tech we now have to
Re: (Score:2)
*Literially. As Enterprise established, the toilets are piped into the replicator input. DS9 established that the ship's air is
Re: (Score:2)
The whole article is a stupid nerd reference to Star Trek. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replicator_(Star_Trek) [wikipedia.org]
Virus (Score:3, Funny)
Can you imagine the kind of virus attacks you will have to protect yourself from?
Beyond a pile of dildos falling out of your inbox every day, you may have to deal with theif-bots, explosives, smelly messes, noise makers, and herbal viagra advertisements. Then, there will also be the polotical campaigns.
Re: (Score:2)
http://xkcd.com/924/ [xkcd.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Forget that... what about assassination by putting a virus in someones replicator that replicates a physical virus? In fact you could have the replicator manufacture a virus with a genetic lock to a single person, ensuring only that person would succumb to your specially engineered Ebola virus. You could do all kinds of very unpleasant mischief with such technology.
Won't have it all (Score:5, Interesting)
3D printing addresses one component of "stuff". Electronics, servomotors, glass, ceramics, metals, all those are components that may need to play a functional part in anything much more complicated than a Lego brick.
Don't get me wrong: I've been in complete awe of 3D printing since I saw one in 1991 at IMTS in Chicago. They used lasers to spot-harden UV-curable resin, then lowered the support table by 0.1 mm and drew in the next layer. After it was complete, they drained the resin and rinsed the part off. It was absolutely amazing, and that was 20 years ago. Modern additive machines are even cooler, with the ability to combine different materials and colors, making a finished part with a much cleaner process.
But they still have to affordably produce a sufficient number of end-user-usable things before we'll see them in the average home. Need a 100 cc measuring cup because all you have are imperial measuring cups? No problem! Need a TV remote control, or a toaster? Sorry.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The toaster is almost doable. You could create a toaster frame out of thermoset plastic, but you'd have to wind the heating wire on it by hand, and it would have no timer or switch. Fire hazard.
Re: (Score:2)
They can make knives instead. Those are much more practical. A replicated knife would dull after a few stabbings, but you can always replace it.
Then someone else can use it to make knife-resistant armor custom-fitted to each wearer.
Re: (Score:3)
If all else fails, you can hit them over the head with the printer.
Because we're accustomed to cheap shit that breaks (Score:3, Insightful)
The natural progression of most products is towards disposable goods. The danger of this generation (and likely the next) of replication machines is that the materials will not have the kind of physical properties that make things durable. Luckily we've been weaned off durable, and now we expect to be able to break most items with moderate human force. And these items will fit the bill in that case.
Making components for system critical or life safety functions, except as en emergency "everyone will die if the part isn't here right now" condition, is a bad, bad idea. Of course, there are too many people in the world...maybe this is just another way to thin out the herd?
Re: (Score:2)
That's all separate from certain consumer goods that have been designed to fail for the good of continual demand. What I'm more saying is, the progression of technology has been more towards "Well, we want a solid model of this guy's bones so that we ca
Re: (Score:2)
wtf star trek? (Score:2)
Picard's Star Trek post-dated Douglas Adams' take on the replicating tea machine, which was a sadly far more likely outcome than the Star Trek ideal.
A far more interesting exploration of replicating technology within the home was in Neal Stephenson's The Diamond Age. Although aspects of the exploration within that book went somewhat esoteric it did at least give a hard sci-fi contemplation of the impact of the technology, instead of using it as the background to space opera.
Re: (Score:3)
Picard's Star Trek post-dated Douglas Adams' take on the replicating tea machine, which was a sadly far more likely outcome than the Star Trek ideal.
hey, we're talking about the 24th century here. maybe Picard prefers his Earl Grey as almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea :)
A far more interesting exploration of replicating technology within the home was in Neal Stephenson's The Diamond Age. Although aspects of the exploration within that book went somewhat esoteric it did at least give a hard sci-fi contemplation of the impact of the technology, instead of using it as the background to space opera.
/. and literature, a strange but fitting combination... another nice novel about the possibilities of a self-made/replication-tech society is Doctorow's Makers [craphound.com].
Knee Replacements (Score:4, Informative)
These guys http:http://www.conformis.com/index.asp/ [conformis.com] make knee replacements based off of MRI or CT scans. They exactly match your knee rather than the surgeon choosing from small, medium, or large parts out of a bin.
Amazing stuff.
Car Analogy (Score:4, Interesting)
When was the last time you built your own car? All parts required are readily available.
What percentage of all PC users build their own PC (overall PC users, not /. geeks)??
The thing is, most people don't have patince/skill to build things, and they're better of just buying thigs they need, like TFA says.
3D printing could be the next industrial revolution, but it could also be a niche for hobbists.
Re: (Score:2)
Assembling a computer from parts is fairly easy. Building new components is a little more difficult. I don't have access to a billion-dollar chip fabrication plant.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure we'll get to a point where lots of people have their own 3D printer (I'm actually looking at building/buying one myself) but consumer technology is ALWAYS behind the curve compared to what is being used in indu
View from the bbc (Score:4, Interesting)
copyright stuff (Score:4, Insightful)
I think people who say 3D printers are "not going anywhere thanks to IP law" are missing the point. 3D printers are for people who want to design and build their own things and less about trying to save money by building your own version of a absurdly cheap Walmart available gizmo. A 3D printer will never compete with Lego as an affordable way to replace Lego's manufacturing capabilities. I have no doubt that these machines will be co-opted for nefarious goals on occasion, but mostly they will be cost additive rather than cost saving or even cost neutral compared to the mark up on a manufactured items.
I have a couple of things I've been wanting to build for quite sometime but I don't have rapid prototyping capabilities at home. Once I get to my local hackerspace and print out a a few prototypes and get the design worked out I'll be having them machined out of aluminum and sell the products. More money will move through the economy and maybe even a few jobs will be created. These may even bring about a renaissance in the small business. Here's to hoping anyway.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
They should serve superbly for making small lost-material foundry patterns. It's easy to cast metal, but patternmaking is labor-intensive.
Replication has been here for a while now (Score:4, Interesting)
Haas Automation, the largest automated machine tool maker in the US uses automated machine tools to make more automated machine tools. They use several hundred of their own products on their factory floor. This also lets them test out their product in a real working environment.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Automated machine tools are differn't from 3D printers. Very cool mind you but different CNC has been around for decades.
Not cost effective (Score:5, Informative)
Look, 3D printers are cool. They're awesome for anyone who ever wanted to build something quickly. I use one at work regularity so I fully appreciate the technology..... BUT they are just not cost effective compared to mass manufacturing processes.
There are often many different ways to build something in manufacturing. You can machine something, mold something, 3D print something, etc, and many different flavors of each type of manufacturing. It will be 50 years before 3D printing a lego is anywhere near as cheap as just molding a lego if ever. This is the way of things. 3D printing is awesome for doing small custom things and giving you the ability to do stuff that you either couldn't do before or that would take you a lot of time and skill to develop on your own.
Let me give you a simple example. I use our 3D printer to manufacture small plastic pieces used in semi-conductors assemblies. This is not my primary job, just a skill that allows me to get my real job done faster. The size of the pieces I print out are around 2" x 2" x 0.5" or smaller. If I try to mass manufacturer them then I can *maybe* do them around 1 per hour. (I have to fill the platter with say 20 of them and it'll take me 20 hours to complete). This will get me accuracy that is not quite as good as molding or machining, but it's within an order of magnitude.
So, it's not better, not cheaper, and not faster (on a per piece basis). What it gets me is small-quantity-cheap. Custom stuff, prototypes, one-offs, etc. That's it's advantage. AND it can also do some stuff traditional machining/molding just can't do ever. These are this technology's sweet spots. Even if you give the technology 10 or 20 years, you're not going to compete with molding. It's just not cost effective.
Yes 3D printing is awesome. Yes it gives us the ability to prototype stuff in 6 hours or overnight. Yes it's cheap for stuff like that, but it's just not the be-all and do-all that the "tea, Earl gray" line would have you expect. It will be rare that you will save money by printing out your own stuff even ignoring the cost of the machine itself.
d
Re: (Score:2)
> It will be rare that you will save money by printing out your
> own stuff even ignoring the cost of the machine itself.
What about repairs? I am champing at the bit for a good, affordable, home 3D printer for all the times when a little plastic bit breaks off of a toy or something. It's one of those things, just like any other new technology, where we can't see all the implications and possibilities just yet.
And relating to a point you did make, one-offs and small custom stuff will also be HUGELY usef
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks for this. Everything you said is true including 3d printing is really cool. It is just too handy to draw a part and print it without waiting for a machine shop to get it done.
Stupid Computer (Score:5, Insightful)
WhyTF does Picard have to say "Tea. Earl Grey. Hot" every freakin' time?
A computer that is sophisticated enough to fly a warpdrive spaceship and replicate food should be able to understand user preferences, no?
Shouldn't he just say, "cuppa tea" or just, "the usual" and get a nice hot cup of Earl Grey?
Only explanation is it's MS Enterprise 5.7 and user preferences are the great new groundbreaking feature in MS Enterprise 6... expected any decade now.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
But at home, it would know exactly what tea means without him even programming it...
Pah. He should just count himself bloody lucky that he doesn't get handed a small cup of lukewarm water and a teabag on a string, which is what seems to pass for "tea" these days - even in establishments where the barrista will happily faff about drawing a smiley face in the tallskinnyhalffathalfsoychocomohofrappelatte made to your precise specifications from freshly ground beans, ask for "tea" and you still get the bloody self-assembly option. The only places that seem to have heard of a "teapot" are Chin
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Lego is not the enemy (Score:2)
Imagine "Lego Factory" a 3d printer designed to print low volume customized and/or specialized lego parts.
Imagine creating your own set of 100 lego blocks with any color you can imagine.
Of course if lego doesnt want to do that...someone else will...especially since the shape of the lego brick
is no longer legally protected as a trademark.
Good 3D Printed Parts, but not cheap at Home (Score:3)
News articles of the "fluffy kind" do a disservice to people who want to know the truth about "3D printers".
The total cost of a rapid prototype or pre-production part can work out efficiently, but you need some critical items.
1. The "real" 3D model, sized for the process and the end use is needed: Functional differences will exist in the best machines depending on how the models are oriented & built. Hire a designer or get your own 3D modeling & CAD/CAM software, learn it & use it and the cost is anything but trivial. Usually at least $5k not counting your time, unless you get an educational discount.
2. The "good" 3D printers to make strong usable parts are typically SLS laser sintering machines that sinter plastic or metal powders in an inert atmosphere. You do NOT put one of these at home, unless you are Steve Jobs. Figure $500k for a good one.
3. Even the "good" parts from SLS machines often need machining and surface finishing to keep them from looking cruddy and having sizes that make fits come out wrong. I have personally spent 5 hours finishing a small RP modeled part so it would function as intended. It makes for REAL expensive parts.
The only way to keep costs down for good usable "3D printed" parts is to use a Rapid Prototyping job shop and hire or be a good designer yourself.
Repair, Recycle, Reduce, Re-Use (Score:3)
I'm currently missing some simple valve components in the hot water system in my appartment, result the whole valve needs to be changed, what a waste. The current set of printers won't solve this [because it needs solid metal for the part] but they're edging towards it with sintering and laser shaping.
Of course this requires some sea-changes in our culture and economies too, maybe that's the hardest part. Perhaps we should 3d print some new leaders and politicians?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Assuming of course you have the 2000lbs of raw materials to feed into you printer. This is the fundamental difference between replicators and 3D printers that tech articles love to ignore. The replicator (seemingly) fabricated any item out of thin air (yea, there was probably some psuedoscience bullshit explaining this in a reference manual somewhere). But in real life, you're always going to need to feed in the raw materials. And it will always be more convenient to buy a car than to buy palettes of st
Re:Maybe if we're lucky . . . (Score:4)
I always though that replicators essentially recycled everything for raw materials (and maybe had a cache of matter stored somewhere on board in case that wasn't enough). I seem to recall scenes in TNG where crewmembers put their dirty dishes into replicators and they were de-replicated (presumably for recycling).
Re: (Score:2)
This is the explanation given by the TNG technical manual.
Re: (Score:2)
The replicator (seemingly) fabricated any item out of thin air (yea, there was probably some psuedoscience bullshit explaining this in a reference manual somewhere).
I always assumed that the "pseudoscience bullshit" was just e = mc^2. The fundamental axiom of Star Trek's society was the existence of unlimited free energy. If you have unlimited energy, you can create whatever particles, atoms, and molecules you need at the moment, and then convert it all back into energy when you're done with them.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
There is free 3D software, designs only need to be done once so sharing them online seems perfectly feasible.
I do not think people will commonly own them for the latter reasons, the same reason I do not own a photo printer. Either I could buy a crappy one that costs a lot in "ink" and does a poor job or just hire out to have the part made and mailed to me, like I do with photos.
Re: (Score:2)
Having a 3d design alone isn't enough. You need an instruction set to give to the machine that is going to make the product.
Software to run CNC routers and milling machines is very complicated (and expensive).
Re: (Score:2)
Apparently Not... :-)
Re: (Score:3)
However, I feel it's worth mentioning that your entire post could have been written about computers at any point from the 1940s until the mid-1980s, and they turned out to be kind of a big deal after all.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
They are just about the most boring technology we have today. They will not revolutionize anything..
They already have. Surgery (by modeling from MRI scans to get a better look before surgery), surgical replacement (custom-made joint replacements), product design testing and visualization (i.e. make a shoe or a skateboard; I've considered using one to make the plastic housing for a particular bicycle light), architectural modeling (quick and easy way to go from the CAD design to a model: much less time and labor).
Biotech has focused on using similar techniques to construct organs and such from tissues
Slashdot = News for Nerds, remember? (Score:3)
Do you remember the first computers? You could spend 20 minutes loading a simple game from audio tape on a Commadore PET, only to have it fail the checksum. The audio was 'beep'. The displays were black and green, or awful CGA black, magenta, cyan and white, or black, red, green and yellow. The printers used thermal paper and had a tiny resolution. It was grim, but it was fun too for some of us who could see this as the first glimmers of a new universe of possibilities from a machine made not for particula
Re: (Score:3)
Sadly i can't seem to find any exact timelines of price/performance. (Does anyone else know of one?) I don't want to just appeal to authority, but he at least actually provided figures while all you've done is trash talk the technology. So until i can find some figur
Re: (Score:2)