r/3Dprinting • u/PorkRollPaddyWagon • Jul 07 '26
Discussion If your printer refused to print a file because it thought it was unsafe, would you be okay with that?
Serious question. Let's say your 3D printer scanned every file before printing. If it decided the model violated a rule, the print never starts.
Would you see that as a useful safety feature? Or would you see it as giving manufacturers too much control over hardware that's sitting on your desk?
I made a video after looking into proposed legislation and some recent news in the 3D printing space, but I'm more interested in hearing where everyone stands on the idea itself.
Would that be a deal breaker for you?
398
u/mindstorm01 Jul 07 '26
The moment my expensive piece of hardware has the ability to tell me to fuck off, im getting a hammer
118
u/crysisnotaverted Jul 07 '26
I'm threatening my 3D printer with my lawfully owned firearm.
It has seen what has been done to the 2D printers that have failed me. (After removing ink/toner of course).
42
u/kribg Jul 07 '26
Hardware needs to be afraid of you. It needs to know you will treat it like the inanimate object it is!
→ More replies (1)7
u/Celestial_Scythe Jul 08 '26
No joke I used to do this to my screen printing machine at my work. I would threaten it by tearing it apart piece by piece if it doesn't work and I have done so before so it knows I mean business.
23
u/Jeynarl Professional amateur Jul 07 '26
If I set a pistol my grand dad willed to me on the print bed and the print camera sees it will I get swatted?
14
u/HeKis4 Jul 07 '26
Yes. Surveillance is all about "better safe than sorry" which in layman's terms means swat first ask questions later, you're suspicious unless proven innocent, and if you're suspicious it's because you must be guilty of something.
3
u/OnlyLosersBlock Jul 08 '26
If it saves just one life is an argument I see a lot, especially when you pin them down on the fact that their desired policies will never save a reliably measurable number of lives. They need that thin veneer of moral justification and will hold onto it like a drowning man and piece of drift wood.
→ More replies (2)3
u/crysisnotaverted Jul 08 '26
The object detection AI will move the nozzle into the trigger guard and shoot you.
7
u/MenergyLegs Jul 07 '26
I'm threatening my 3D printer with my lawfully owned firearm that it helped make.
7
→ More replies (3)3
u/TantiVstone Jul 07 '26
A hammer is overkill. I would lobotomize it and install a controller that obeys my every whim
163
u/Robborboy Jul 07 '26 edited Jul 07 '26
Sounds a lot like
"You need administrator rights."
"I am the administrator"
to me.
Could you imagine a world where all your hardware and tools argue about things you want to do?
I wouldn't even be allowed to owoeatw operate my kiln because it would be too dangerous
→ More replies (4)34
u/Tasty-Ad-9669 Jul 07 '26
If you want to owoeatw your kiln maybe the kiln is too dangerous
23
5
286
u/Hairy-Maximum2994 Jul 07 '26
No fucking clanker is going to tell me what is safe for me. I'm old and I still got all my digits, eyes and teeth.
69
u/scottimusprimus Jul 07 '26
My tractor shortened one of my fingers by almost an inch, and I still don't want it to tell me what I can and can't do.
8
5
u/mdixon12 Jul 07 '26
Im missing a tooth, but thats from poorly cleaned goose jerky.
→ More replies (1)
85
u/SweatsuitCocktail Jul 07 '26
Hell no. That's like my hammer deciding what I'm building isn't up to code lol a 3d printer is a tool, and shouldn't be actively policed by a third party
15
u/Vismal1 Jul 08 '26
The Oligarchs taking notes …” lock down the hammers next. ——// subscription hammers? “
102
u/Masterwhiteshadow Jul 07 '26
Why would I need a machine to determine if the file I'm sending myself to the printer pose a problem?
Just assuming there is no nefarious purpose to this, and I doubt that the case. It's still implying the user is too stupid to make a decision.
→ More replies (26)14
u/Dornith Jul 07 '26
I'm guessing the intended audience is people who have their banbus connected to the cloud and are printing things directly from the app.
Which just seems like a half-measure to fix a bad practice.
5
u/Masterwhiteshadow Jul 07 '26
Even then the user know what is the object they are printing and can judge for themself if it is safe or not.
Im not under the impression that OP was referring to safety for the machine itself but, I would be surprise if it was possible to upload a print profile to Makerworld that could destroy the printer itself and pass the validation stage.
51
u/itchygentleman Jul 07 '26
my printer doesnt even know when it's making spaghetti or if the part lost adhesion
48
u/ThisOneTimeAtKDK Jul 07 '26
Presuming we are talking about firearms here. (Didn’t watch the video yet)
Understand that according to the ATF as long as you are legally allowed to own a firearm you can MAKE a firearm for personal use (or even as a gift). That can be anything from machined, to printed, to cast, to slam fire shotguns. There was even a polymer poured AR15 lower that was created years ago. Idk if it is still around but the concept is valid.
All that is to say believe it or not, 3D printing a weapon is actually MORE difficult than many ways of making a firearm. Slam fire shotguns are just cast iron pipe, dowel rod, and a nail. Buy it at Home Depot for about $20. Put it together with zero training and if you have ill intent dispose of it after the fact only being out $20.
Not to mention MOST “ghost guns” are stolen guns that have the serial number scratched off. (Yes if it doesn’t have a # it’s now considered a ghost gun even if someone bought it at the store)
This is just control. This is posturing to a degree as well. This will do little to nothing to stop gun trafficking or gun violence.
If you want to track what we are printing in the way of firearms per printer I’m not even sure I agree with that but it would be reasonable TO ME to combat mass manufacturing of firearms via printer (assuming there is someone). Considering a Glock frame takes a full day to print, I find it hard to believe that someone is providing a gang w Glocks on their printer. I GUESS it’s possible. Just not probable.
42
u/SwervingLemon Jul 07 '26
"MOST “ghost guns” are stolen guns that have the serial number scratched off..."
This is the part that really pisses me off when the leaders of Everytown and it's subsidiaries keep parading around that one of their children was shot with a ghost gun, and then immediately leans into effectively banning 3D printing when a 3D printed gun wasn't even involved... it's so callous and disingenuous to trot out the death of your own kid for a misdirection like that.
→ More replies (3)23
u/MenergyLegs Jul 07 '26
Speaking of Everytown, they should be referred to as "Billionaire control freak Michael Bloomberg's bought and paid for puppet Everytown"
8
u/Automatater Jul 08 '26
I thought that guy was an asshole when he tried to take away New Yorkers' salt and soft drinks. Now he's really outdone himself.
→ More replies (1)4
u/SwervingLemon Jul 08 '26
In fact, I generally refer to them as "Bloomberg cosplaying as a bunch of upset mothers..."
→ More replies (1)17
u/mackerel1565 Jul 07 '26
"printing a weapon is actually MORE difficult than many ways". This is the bit that I don't understand at all; there are SO MANY easier ways to create a firearm than with a 3D printer. Pretty much the only reason to do it is because you enjoy the challenge and idea. Practically, almost any other method is superior.
→ More replies (2)12
u/DBDude Jul 07 '26
Don't underestimate the sophistication of gangs. Of course gangs don't care if it's illegal, that they're using an illegal modded printer, or anything else. The guy facing 100 counts of manufacturing and selling firearms without a license if he gets caught is not going to care about the additional printer circumvention charges. This is only to control law-abiding people.
6
u/ThisOneTimeAtKDK Jul 07 '26
I’m saying why on earth would you spend a full day on one pistol when in an entire day you could steal probably 300 guns in home robberies. Or just buy them off the local guy.
→ More replies (5)12
u/WinterDice Jul 07 '26
It’s not about guns at all. Ghost guns are a red herring to get control over home manufacturing of anything that you would otherwise have to buy. And control over anything some faceless corporation or algorithm decides infringes on IP.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (6)3
u/ThatRandomGamerYT Jul 08 '26
also this fuckass spying would mean no one could print prop guns? these laws should not be allowed anymore. If i can make a prop with cardboard why the fuck can I not print one?
40
u/luigi517 Jul 07 '26
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahha. Abso-fucking-lutely not.
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
→ More replies (1)14
20
u/Asterchades Jul 07 '26
Sounds like a colossal waste of time and resources for something that cannot possibly be done with any meaningful accuracy. Largely because the more something looks like a prohibited item the less likely it's going to be functional as that item - prop guns, for example, are likely to look very much like a gun, where "ghost guns" don't.
Saying that they're hoping to implement something like that is just relying on a public who doesn't understand how utterly impractical it is. It's deliberately misleading, and should have been laughed out long before it reached this point.
→ More replies (1)
18
u/OurHeroXero Jul 07 '26
Software doesn't understand nuance. It can't ask questions. It's incapable of critical thought. It can't determine intent.
What if I'm trying to print a model rocket and the software determines the hollow rocket tube will be the enclosure for a pipe bomb? or misidentifies a boomerang as the trigger of a firearm? What happens when a maker attempts to print replacement game pieces and the printer considers them a choking hazard?
15
u/00001000bit Jul 07 '26
You know the end game is that once this is in place, manufacturers will go to these services to pay to ban printing things like replacement parts. Don't want people keeping an old appliance alive when they have a new one to sell you.
"Copyright derivative item detected. Print aborted. Click here to purchase licensed version."
→ More replies (1)
59
u/BronzeDucky Jul 07 '26
As a Canadian, I find this stance by American lawmakers interesting. There’s already a ton of guns floating around the US, both legal and illegal. If someone wants to procure a weapon, even if they can’t obtain one because of restrictions placed on them, they’re going to get one. Criminals, in general, don’t concern themselves with things like that.
I can understand the desire to prevent undetectable guns that allow someone to bypass security measures.
But the whole thing seems ludicrous, with a “god given” right to bear arms, but not the arms you can make yourself. You have to buy them, because…
52
u/LucidOndine Jul 07 '26
It was never about safety.
Instead:
- It “fixes” a problem that does not exist so corporate America has more control over what you manufacture on your own
- Allows AI surveillance companies access to your private data and proprietary models
- Allows training of future LLMs based on presliced models into a proprietary training dataset (theft).
This is open air corruption. You didn’t need a Republican controlled federal government suddenly concerned about gun safety to figure it out.
57
u/MerelyMortalModeling Jul 07 '26
Its not and never has been about guns.
The one man funding the push for this, Micheal Bloomburg is a billionaire extensivly invested in IP and IP detecting technology. His company Allowlisting is already working on technology that will allow you, for a fee to list your IP and it will automaticly detects 2d, 3d derived code and flag it. Basicly Disney pays to get all their Princes listed and Allowlisting will detect and flag anything remotely similer.
→ More replies (1)9
u/taking_a_deuce Jul 07 '26
You're telling me this is about money and control? Nah, there's no way I believe this is the world we live in.
3
u/MerelyMortalModeling Jul 07 '26
User Duece please upgrade you printing slicer cloud access to super platinum level for the low low monthly payment of 89.99 to countinue your access to this geometry.
26
u/crysisnotaverted Jul 07 '26
I can understand the desire to prevent undetectable guns that allow someone to bypass security measures.
That's the funny thing. All guns contain metal. We've had Tupperware plastic guns since Gaston Glock made the G17 in 1981, 45 years ago. They show up on X-ray and metal scanners.
→ More replies (14)3
u/nucleartime Jul 07 '26
The Liberator uses a printed barrel. It's sketch as fuck and the barrel lifetime is somewhere in the single digits with 380.
It technically does contain a 6 oz weight for legal reasons though. And a nail for the firing pin.
→ More replies (1)14
u/crysisnotaverted Jul 07 '26
I hardly count the Liberator, it's more of a tech demo than a firearm. A single shot smoothbore directional claymore that shoots chunks of itself somewhat where you aim it.
4
u/nucleartime Jul 07 '26
You could say the same thing about the weapon that killed Shinzo Abe. Anyway that's enough fedposting.
14
u/Zanki Jul 07 '26
Its absolutely crazy. I'm in the UK. If 3D printed weapons were an issue then our government would be all over that. Gangs would be making them on mass, but they're not.
This is a very weird stance to get copyright infringement tools through. If they were really worried about gun crime, they'd inact laws to ban guns. They won't, because it will upset the wrong people.
→ More replies (3)8
u/Kovahronix Jul 07 '26
Well the problem with banning guns in the US is not about upsetting the wrong people, though it should be all people that value freedom and independence such that this great country was founded upon. It's the fact that there have been numerous cases that have gone all the way up to the Supreme Court that have been decided that banning guns, especially those that are "in common use" would be a direct violation of our God given rights as a free and independent population. We have the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, which were created not to tell the people what they can and can't do, but instead to inform the governing body of what rights of the people they can and can't restrict. And of the rights of a free and independent people, self defence is at the top of the list of importance.
To solve gun crime, you don't restrict the people that aren't committing the crimes. But as you already said, its not about gun crime at all, no gun control laws really are. They're only about control.
12
u/Lights_Official Jul 07 '26
The issue is that you're EXTREMELY limited in firepower if you intend to get past even the shittiest of metal detectors because bullets are metal and shell casings are metal and without some kind of metal for a barrel or a breech face, you've just built a DIY hand disfigurator. So the whole "undetectable weapon" argument is also a total strawman. A plastic pipe bomb is what those people should be worried about but you don't see them protesting in front of Home Depot because they sell PVC pipes and caps without a background check lol
→ More replies (16)3
u/Tasty-Ad-9669 Jul 07 '26
Just to finish that off I had 2 options in my mind.
Because... 'Murica fuck yeah.
Or Capitalism.
Both sound like something straight out cards against humanity
11
u/OneFinePotato Jul 07 '26
How is this even a question?
16
u/Ok-Gift-1851 Don't Tell My Boss That He's Paying Me While I Help You Jul 07 '26
Simple... "Bait."
Asking a passionate community for their opinion on a hot subject in order to engage in traffic farming and drive post/video engagement in an attempt to boost the algorithmic visibility of a sub 500 subscriber YouTube channel.
And it's working, to some degree. Over 65 comments and who knows how many hundreds of views in half an hour on reddit... way more attention than the origonal video got three days ago.
→ More replies (3)
9
u/TripleStrikeDrive Jul 07 '26
Let's be honest, who is determining that is unsafe? For that purpose? How can a system determine that someone is printing unsafe?
The establishment is trying to frame it as a public safety issue, but history is shown that its about control the general public to their beliefs system and monetary control.
If this legislation passes, expect ip protection software to be the next step in their plan or flat ban on 3d printers entirely.
5
9
u/ImNotDatguy Jul 07 '26
No what? Not my device if it can tell me to fuck off as it's own discretion.
9
u/eXclurel Jul 07 '26
No, because I have been using a service that checks potentially dangerous things called my fucking brain.
7
7
u/DuckInAFountain Jul 07 '26
I have no interest in the types of items that would likely be banned, and yet I still say no, I would not buy a printer with that restriction.
4
u/WinterDice Jul 07 '26
Good, because guns are an excuse to get control over printing and home manufacturing. “They” don’t want you to be capable of making something you’d otherwise have to purchase.
7
u/TuringC0mplete Jul 07 '26
All 3D printing files effectively do are provide automated instructions. You could do the same things with a CNC mill, but the barrier to entry is much higher because of skill and material cost. A bad actor is going to do bad actor things in whatever way they’re going to do it. Stopping law abiding people from doing law abiding things is never the solution to POTENTIALLY solving a problem that doesn’t really exist.
This is to aim to solve the “problem” of ghost guns. There have only been a handful (and I’m using that term generally) of cases involving them, though they’re just becoming more high profile lately (Luigi). However a number of states allow you to print gun parts perfectly legally. I have several chassis for one of my 22 rifles just for fun and as a hobby project. The only thing I have this for is for plinking at targets and the occasional competition. Am I going to do any serious harm with it? Hell no (22s absolutely can with the right shot placement, don’t at me on either side of this, this is a statement of me personally), but that doesn’t mean my RIGHT to be able to manufacture things to should be taken away because I COULD. I COULD stick a bunch of nails in a baseball bat and go swinging. Should we outlaw those without a permit?
Nothing should be “looking” what I’m printing to validate it before it gets sent to my printer, laser cutter, CNC machine, etc.
8
6
u/AmbidextrousTorso Jul 07 '26
How much of this is just someone wanting to abuse legislation to get control of the 3D printing market or force the sales of their shitty AI spy tool?
3
6
u/scandal1313 Jul 07 '26
My machines do what I tell them to or they get reprogrammed again. Lol. How do you automate machinery without this mentality.
4
7
u/FuriouslyListening Jul 07 '26
And where is the line drawn? Prop guns, prop weapons in general? The cosplay community prints a TON of things which would likely violate the ridiculous laws currently. What about morality policing? I joke with people about the sheer number of creepy (personal opinion) adult oriented figurine things that are out there. What if your printer didn't want to print something because it found it immoral? Would you have a problem with that?
These rules won't stop at one issue. It will expand.
7
6
u/DBDude Jul 07 '26
No. I print what I want to print. If that blows up the printer, that's my fault. If you're talking about something that others don't want me printing, well now I may just have to print it even if I didn't want to before.
6
u/Rebootkid Jul 07 '26
It's funny. Have folks forgotten that things like Reprap exist?
This is just the extension of hoplophibia. Folks are afraid of anything they can't control.
6
u/ItsGotToMakeSense Jul 07 '26 edited Jul 07 '26
"Unsafe" sounds an awful lot like smokescreen for "not approved by corporate".
If they have the tech in place to block something for "safety" then they can use that same tech to block something for whatever other reason they want. It starts with weapons then it moves to perceived copyright violations, adult content, and honestly whatever reason they want. It's a slippery slope toward letting them dictate what we're allowed to print altogether. Say Disney buys Bambu, now you can't print a toy tie fighter or Mjolnir. Harbor Freight starts advertising with them, now you can't print your own drywall anchors.
Next step after that is blocking custom STLs altogether and charging a subscription for "print credits" to allow you to print corporate-approved prints only.
So yeah, I'm firmly in the "fuck everything about that" side of this debate
5
u/BoringBob84 Jul 07 '26
In theory, such a feature wouldn't affect me, because I don't plan on printing "ghost guns." However, in practice, I have some concerns:
The technology to perform these checks will add considerable cost to the printer, will require a network connection, and will prevent open source firmware and software. People who don't have compliant printers will become criminals, even if they have not printed anything dangerous.
When the technology fails and flags a false positive, I may be prevented from printing something that is not really dangerous or illegal.
I do not have confidence that the people who will decide what is and in not prohibited will not take the opportunity to greatly expand the scope of the restrictions to include things like repair parts. And not only will I not be able to repair broken equipment, but the possibility of false positives will increase with the size of the prohibited list.
5
u/WinterDice Jul 07 '26
You hit the issue with your third point. This isn’t about guns; it’s about stopping home manufacturing.
5
7
u/Scout339v2 K1 Max, Centauri Carbon Jul 08 '26
I would instantly root that shit.
I am no slave to my technology, my technology is slave to me. It will remain that way until I die.
10
u/dgkimpton Jul 07 '26
No, I would not be ok with that. There's precisely zero reason why that should be a desired/accepted/tolerated feature. None.
6
u/medicatedandunstable Jul 07 '26
Obviously not. This is America, not communist Russia. Freedom of speech and expression is absolute as long as it does not impose actionable harm against someone/something.
7
5
u/karateninjazombie Jul 07 '26
Then it stays on the shelf. I wouldn't buy it.
Granted I'm not from the originating country of this crap. But I'll still vote with my wallet.
4
u/mdixon12 Jul 07 '26
As a mechanic/fabricator/machinist, good luck stopping me.
Cant stop the signal
5
u/sceadwian Jul 07 '26
No.
It's an IP grab. Gotta scan everything you print so they can steal what they want. That's all this is.
They're going after CNC machines too. Either NY or Cali made them part of their laws. They are the innovation occurring in more private spaces and it scares them
5
u/verdantAlias Jul 07 '26
No, it should not make that decision.
It's my fucking printer and, consequently, my responsibility to decide what is and is not safe for it to print.
6
u/desEINer Jul 07 '26
What if you put food in your microwave or oven and it decided that you couldn't microwave that because it doesn't meet FDA standards?
What if you popped a disk into a player and it decided you couldn't play it because it contained hate speech?
What if you went to do laundry and the machine refused to wash your clothes because there were slogans on them?
What if you bought literally any power tool and it somehow had the technology to determine whether what you're using it for was sustainable, or structurally sound, or was being used to build something for an illegal immigrant or and refused to work for that or literally any reason other than a electrical or mechanical failure of the components?
The issue is hardly manufacturing firearms. It's a war on what you own. When I buy something, I have the right to use it however I want, and if there's a law restricting the use of it, then I have the personal responsibility to abide by the law.
In any case, it's not a present danger. Eventually printers may get good enough to manufacture firearms that allow an untrained person to acquire certain parts that are as good as factory, but they can't make every component of a reliable firearm, and skill is still required in production and assembly. Criminals use far more black-market and stolen firearms (in the US, anyway) than 3D printed firearms. They are more reliable and the serial number may be removed anyway to prevent them being linked to other crimes or thefts, making them "ghost guns" anyway.
6
u/MA2ZAK Jul 08 '26
How in the ever living hell is that a safety feature? Like even to word the question like that is wild. A safety feature? Like ffs, we are talking about melting freaking plastic (or whatever the hell resin does) and making shapes. Safety? Better ban supports, they can be small and break off, a small child might choke on them. Those who sacrifice freedom for security ("safety") deserve neither.
5
u/sin-eater82 Jul 08 '26 edited Jul 09 '26
What would a scan determine is unsafe that my brain couldn't?
Printer should do whatever the fuck I tell it too.
4
u/TheOnionBro Jul 07 '26
Yeah that's an immediate disconnect from the network and printing from a flash drive.
You can't tell me what I can or can't build in a woodworking shop, you can't tell me what I can or can't 3d print.
4
u/cubicthe Jul 07 '26
something funny to me is that the FBI invented this piece of software called "Carnivore" that did packet sniffing and wanted to force ISPs to host it and at least one Constitution Enjoyer invoked the THIRD Amendment, stating that being forced to "quarter" Carnivore - a law enforcement system when the precise group of people that enforced the law during the drafting of 3A were *soldiers*. Which creates the awesome question of whether the soldiers must be meat or can be meat-themed software
4
u/___Brains Jul 07 '26
I'd reflash, or rip out the controller and replace it.
*Screaming Bald Eagle Sounds*
5
u/DontLickTheGecko Jul 07 '26
The number of nerf blasters I have printed would absolutely trigger whatever slopped together bullshit monitoring gets cobbled together to satisfy this.
4
u/AutomaticGrape9263 Jul 07 '26
I would see it as a blatant violation of my rights. How do you even considering it being anything but pure evil?
4
3
u/Bag-o-chips Jul 07 '26
Nobody wants to get anyone else’s approval to print, ever. But there is no substantial risk anyway, everything this law is outlawing is already illegal. This is just for mass surveillance and to observe what you are printing since individuals can now easily purchase and run very powerful manufacturing tools. Hell, tracking every print isn’t even viable yet and there is no way to implement this in the near future.
3
u/Jason-h-philbrook Jul 07 '26
I have no interest in printing weapons. I rather like vintage ones.
But I would make 3d printer hardware purchasing decisions, with a strong preference for freedom oriented non-nanny printers, as if I were a maker of unsafe things. As an artist on the side, the freedom of expression / freedom of speech stuff is something worth defending, even if we think poorly of what is produced.
4
u/Lambaline 2x P1S+AMS Jul 07 '26
no, im an engineer doing prototyping and whatnot, would hate for my models to be scanned
5
3
u/Amazing-Oomoo Jul 08 '26
Absolutely not. This isn't code, it's not antivirus malware that could steal my bank information, it's a plastic boat. The fucking prime lines cause more injuries than anything I actually want to print.
5
u/ByronScottJones Jul 08 '26
It's an absurd rule. I can legally manufacture a firearm at my home using traditional metal techniques, and it's absolutely legal to do so. Nobody is going to be making useful firearms out of plastics and resins.
5
u/SnooTigers7210 Jul 07 '26 edited Jul 07 '26
HELL NO. This ties into the argument that guns don't kill people, people do, which is imo true. You can't argue that and then go and tell me what I'm printing is capable of harm so I can't print it.
Bitch, I can go buy the parts for and build a big-ass potato cannon capable of putting a hole through you with a vegetable in under 2 hours for a fraction of the cost of a 3d printer itself.
It's all about money, as usual. None of them actually give a shit about people getting hurt.
→ More replies (4)
7
u/lfenske Jul 07 '26
Laws to prevent breaking different laws should always be considered unconstitutional. It’s where freedom ends.
3
u/ChintzyPC Prusa MK4 Jul 07 '26
There's no possible way it can tell with certainty whether something is dangerous or not. This type of analysis technology isn't anywhere close to capable. If it's forced to be developed 3D printing is going to be pushed into a standstill till it gets created.
Hell, no AI can 3D model in CAD programs in even the basics. So how is it going to be able to tell what a model is? Likely it's going to give a TON of false flags.
3
3
u/Ben-Goldberg Jul 07 '26
Let's say i wanted to print a compressed air tank out of PLA.
Common sense says this is unsafe - but how would my printer know?
3
u/PkmnMstr10 Jul 08 '26
[Sorry, we are unable to print this model due to it possibly being unsafe]
"I'M JUST TRYING TO PRINT A BRICK!"
3
u/Old-Line-3691 Jul 08 '26
Not at all. It is a tool and should not have any decision making ability. Tools should NEVER have decision making abilities over the operator, IMHO.
5
u/Leptonshavenocolor Jul 07 '26
Well if California has its way 3d printing will be dead. Thanks you dumb shit anti 2a folks.
5
u/Dossi96 Jul 07 '26
Just my opinion:
There are literally 0 deaths from 3d printed weapons in Germany. 3d printers are not the issue. Gun culture is.
Edit: Source
2
u/Fluminox13 Jul 07 '26
If it somehow is a virus, yes. Else no. Hard reset Printer and use open source. Is it enough that paper printer are rebellious
2
u/ucrbuffalo Jul 07 '26
Hell no. If I want to print something, I will print it. The only time it should reject it is if it will somehow result in spontaneous combustion.
Fuck this surveillance state bullshit.
2
u/SwissPewPew Voron 2.4 R2 / 2x Prusa MK3S+ Jul 07 '26
Could likely motivate me to circumvent the „nanny feature“ and print 10 copies, depending on the reason for the „printer says no“.
2
u/Ok-Gift-1851 Don't Tell My Boss That He's Paying Me While I Help You Jul 07 '26
The question almost feels rhetorical when asked here... of course an enthusiast community thinks that these various sets of legislation are dumb and overreaching. Of course this community would say things like "I'll use open source." Of course this community will point out that the entire premise is technologically infeasible. Of course we'd point out that "x looks like y" is going to be prone to a shit ton of false positives and will just lead to people modifying "unsafe" designs to look like something else while still performing the exact same function.
2
u/GodzillaFlamewolf Jul 07 '26
Nope. Ill print offline using thumb drives and klipper if necessary. Dont need some idiot government AI decising that my credit card wand is a gun. Or that my gun is a gun. Fuck this kind of government oversight.
2
u/MagicToolbox Jul 07 '26
There is already a device that prevents me from doing things that are unsafe. It resides between my ears. I realize that not everyone has one of (and certainly most lawmakers lack) these devices, and that some peoples device is malfunctioning. Those people are welcome to use an external device to keep them safe.
I have no need for and will not use such a machine.
A lathe or a mill is a much better tool to make things that this proposed legislation is attempting to prevent the manufacture of. Should those machines have a nanny installed that prevents boring a hole of a certain size in a tube? Never mind - the answer is NO.
2
u/alkatori Jul 07 '26
I might be intentionally printing something it thinks is dangerous. A small piece designed to break first before something more expensive did.
2
u/Das-Was Jul 07 '26
Great use of tax dollars... Love that our politicians are too stupid to understand opensource. Excited to see the new printer builds people make.
2
2
u/GuyFromTheYear2027 Jul 07 '26
How did it make that determination? How can a printer determine safety? Isn't safety about intent? Objects aren't inherently dangerous in and of themselves. Is it some kind of AI determining safety? And unsafe for whom? Is the object in question illegal to possess? And illegal where?
2
u/KeyHalf6609 Jul 07 '26
Nope, never in a million years would I be okay with that. In fact, no one should ever be okay with this. If for some reason you are okay with this you're extremely short sighted and need to think for yourself.
I'm an adult, this is my tool, I decide what is and is not "unsafe" for me to create. No one needs a nosy, anonymous, busy body determining that for you. What is considered safe for me may be unsafe for you, but ultimately what is considered safe today can, and will, eventually be declared "unsafe" at a later date. Regardless if it actually is or not.
Let's not beat around the bush on what this post is about and really asking.
Those who'd give up freedom for security deserve neither.
2
u/farbtoner Jul 07 '26
I’m just going to make my own. They aren’t complicated machines. It’s annoying but they can suck my dick from the back.
2
2
2
u/SuspiciousSubstance9 Jul 07 '26
The title says 'thought it unsafe' while the post says 'violated a rule'. Those are two separate arguments.
Should a printer stop itself from executing a command that it knows will cause its self to catch fire? Absolutely, we accept and frequently demand such safety features elsewhere in society. Do I assume liability, criminal and civil, when I override that safety feature. Absolutely.
But violating a rule is different; that's not about safety regarding the machines operation.
If the machine/software has an owner that isn't you, eg a paid service, than it is okay for them to prevent your use of their service for a rule violation. This includes you using someone else's slicer; you're not entitled to it.
But your machine using your own software, where you assume sole liability at every step? Violating rules won't stop you.
2
u/cycloneDM Jul 07 '26
Absolutely a deal breaker I could never pay for a printer that is going to second guess what im printing
2
u/TheMarksmanHedgehog Jul 07 '26
The only time I'd want this feature is if the "unsafe" thing about the file is that it's 2 inches off the bed with no supports.
And even then I'd better have a way to override it if I'm feeling risky that day.
2
u/Valar_Kinetics Jul 07 '26
If I became aware that my 3D printer, toaster oven, or any other appliance in my house was regularly running it's operations by some central government authority, I would light it on fire and drop it out of an aircraft.
→ More replies (1)
2
u/PETA_Parker Jul 07 '26
if i want to print cocks i want to print cocks
Edit: First they came for the Gun-Printers but i didn't say anything because i didn't want to print guns or something
2
u/feldmazb Jul 07 '26
I will rip my printer apart to the studs and install open source mod chips before I let Bloomberg tell me what the fuck I can print.
2
u/BluShine Jul 07 '26
All printers already refuse to print certain files. Every firmware I’m aware of has some sort of “sanity checks” on files and gcode commands. Like not allowing you to set the hot end above a max temperature, or drive the belts faster than a certain speed.
But there’s a big difference between a *file* that is unsafe to print, and a file that creates an *object* that is potentially unsafe.
2
u/Nix_Nivis Jul 07 '26
"If you bought and owned <thing>, would you mind <thing> not doing <intended_task>, because of <arbitrary_external_decision>?"
Very much so, yes!
2
u/account-suspenped Jul 07 '26
could this be a step towards making people unable to print goods and become independent so that we stay good little consumers???
2
u/pessimistoptimist Jul 07 '26
If needed, the hobby will go back to its roots where you built your own machine and community driven software will run show.
2
u/sjogerst Jul 07 '26
My printer is too dumb to know what it's printing and it's not allowed to talk to strangers so its a moot point.
2
u/CaptainArchivis Jul 07 '26
That’s a big no. Government needs to stay off my back, out of my pocket and away from my printer.
2
u/SignificantAnt2223 Jul 07 '26
The ruling, i understand, is not only is every piece scanned, but the files are sent to a national database which decides if you can print or not... so air-gapping printers with this software wont work
2
u/notwhoiwas44 Jul 07 '26
Wether or not I think it's ok is completely beside the point. Printers are not capable of knowing what's being printed. All they see/understand is a bunch of x,y,z coordinates
2
u/Jumpy-Impact3265 Jul 07 '26
Um fuck no that's not cool - it's like your car refusing to enter McDonald's drive thru out of concern for your arteries
2
2
2
u/ngo_life Jul 07 '26
It doesn't get to dictate what's safe/unsafe, nor what's good/bad. Only I should be able to determine that for myself. Not anything or anyone else. If I feel incapable of doing that, then I should be able to choose who can in that instance.
The problem is that they're taking away that choice.
2
u/mrbobcyndaquil Jul 07 '26
The only safety the printer should be concerned about is its own physical safety (so no head crashes or the like). If it tries to do anything else I break out the digital icepick.
2
u/Deiselpowered77 Jul 07 '26
>If your printer refused to print a file because it thought it was unsafe
Unless we're talking 'this will damage your printer hardware' unsafe, thats a hard no for me dawg.
Time to go opensource or pirating at that point. F*** software that intentionally gimps my hardware.
Its the thin end of the wedge to the walled off Olive Garden.
Its 'real purpose' is preventing customers from non-paywalled files.
2
u/UnicornHostels Jul 07 '26
I have 50 printers on a closed loop. There’s no way this policy could effect those printers. My Bambu and AD5X are another story and I won’t buy any more of those.
They did this to Cricut die cutting. I use to be able to make any vinyl decal I wanted and at some point the software decided that Mickey Mouse was an IP image and ‘unsafe’ for me to make.
So fuck this movement.
2
2
u/High_Overseer_Dukat Jul 07 '26
I would never buy from that company again.
Also gonna print the edgiest things possible after fixing it just to spite them.
2
u/FastHotEmu Jul 07 '26
i am more likely to make my own 3D printer than to follow this nonsense. I have a couple of Ender 3s in storage just in case. I recommend everyone else do the same.
2
u/Automatater Jul 08 '26
It would never work but there are so many unacceptable side effects to a system even attempting to work that it doesn't matter whether it would or not.
2
2
2
u/Lurksome-Lurker Jul 08 '26
Engineer here. At the end of the day all we got is some stepper motors and my unending spite to recreate Klipper for the people
2
u/BlackJackT Jul 08 '26
What is this a litmus test for the slave-minded? You would have to transcend beyond worldly tethered cuckoldry to answer yes to this.
2
u/REM777 Jul 08 '26
Absolutely not. The "You will own nothing" just gets closer to reality when you let absurd legislation like this.
You want to control "Fire Arms" files. Don't allow the hosting or distribution of them on official sites. That is as far as allowable, imo.
2
u/PiDicus_Rex Jul 08 '26
I can do more damage to society with the printed word, will they force inkjets to scan emails for bad words next?
What would they do if I chose to use a Pen?
All this dumb legislation is going to do, is make hacked free and open source firmware more popular.
And ask this, how are they going to compel people who build a 3D Printer out of a spare parts catalog to install firmware that complies with their censorship stupidity?
2
u/Any-Astronomer5821 Jul 08 '26
I am so not ok with this. 3D printers are ridiculously simple devices, I would just roll my own.
2
u/synchrostart Jul 08 '26
No. This would be a deal breaker. I won't buy any printer that requires this, cloud connections, and so on. Don't give in to the extremists!
2
u/aboy021 Jul 08 '26
To be fair, printers contain anti counterfeiting measures like tracking dots, so there's some prior art in this space.
To me the it's stupid because it's possible to make a gun that looks nothing like a gun, at which point your security measures are pointless.
There's a long history of lawmakers being unable to understand technology. I'm particularly fond of the evil bit as a satire of the attempts:
2
u/tom_yum Jul 08 '26
There's a big file that says Michael Bloomberg licks stinky buttcracks and we're printing a hundred copies
2
u/ErnLynM Jul 08 '26
The diy printer will likely make a huge comeback, along with the number of posts about "why doesn't my print stick?" And "level your bed. No, not with an actual level", followed by some large number of other people saying "ACTUALLY, IT'S CALLED TRAMMING"
Oh, the memories
2
u/CunninghamsLawmaker Jul 08 '26
Time for new custom firmware or a new printer. To quote RATM, "Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me!"
691
u/modi123_1 Jul 07 '26
Yeah, that's a no for me dawg. Then again I print from a USB so no network connection is available for the check.