User:Atk5083

Blog #3 Due 9-21-12

1. It seems that 3D printing isn’t going to disappear, but the exact nature in which it will develop is not well defined. On that note, we currently place restrictions (DRM) onto our media to control distribution, with limited ‘success’. Do you think this might be applied to 3D printing? How or why not?

I do not think that realistic restrictions can be placed on open source printing. Perhaps websites like thiniverse can be regulated, but the building and operation of the machine cannot be limited. This is simply because the items needed to build the printers are not rare things and can be easily obtained for different uses. For that reason, not any governing body can place restrictions on the reprap community for creating and using these machines. Also, the instructions and designs are already out on the internet which means that there are possibly thousands of copies amongst the community.

2. According to Bowyer, many people have a great idea (or perhaps a passion) that they love to tell people about. What is yours? Do you see this as a way to attract future mates (or to get money?) Why/why not?

I have a few great ideas, but I am keeping that intellectual property to myself! Just kidding...I think all the time about alternate energy sources, or different ways to make peoples lives better. At this point in my life I am more concerned with making money than finding a mate and I guess that my thoughts about my passions do reflect that the ideas that I generate are there for the purpose of eventually selling them. In regards to finding a mate these days, I think people who are engineers, accountants, or doctors are not unattractive for using their intelligence for somethings concrete . Instead they are just as thoughtful as poets, musicians, and artists because the products that the technical side produce (although they also are made for money) do help people in their everyday lives. Also, unfortunately sometimes today's society values money more than wit which I suppose makes the technical "geeks" more attractive!

3. Professor Bowyer seems to think that 3D printing will finally kill intellectual property, and he sounds pleased about it. Do you think he’s right about ending IP? Is this a good thing, a bad thing, or somewhere in-between?

Somewhere in between I suppose. An advantage would be that some products would evolve quicker and better without the bounds of intellectual property, however I think that because of intellectual property the strong ideas have withstood the test of time and only serious competition could compete with the best ideas. Many of Bowyer's ideas seem too romantic and unrealistic to be achievable in the real world, or at least the world that we live in now. If we have a new generation that we teach to share in the way that he envisions then maybe it would be possible, but with the older generations now these ideas would seem like doom. I do not think 3D printing has the power to kill all intellectual property simply because you cannot 3D print a car with better quality than you can make one now.

Blog #2 Due:9-13-12

1. Do you think his goal of a ‘self-replicating universal constructor’ is feasible? What remains to be done to achieve this, or alternatively what would prevent such a goal?

Perhaps such a machine is possible, however from what I have seen so far some work needs to be done. For example producing the microchips, motors, and assembly items is still an outside process. Also a machine that creates and assembles a new "child" is still somewhat science fiction. The closest thing could possibly be an automated manufacturing line, but those are many machines with some human intervention involved. The 3d printing project is on a very interesting path and someday they could maybe realize this goal (as long as large cooperations do not try to crush them)

2. The phrase “wealth without money” is both the title of his article and the motto of the reprap project itself. What does this phrase mean? (To him and to you if they differ). Discuss implications, problems, and possibilities associated with this idea.

The basic idea is to be self-sustainable without having the need for money and to reduce industrial manufacturing by creating wealth for yourself with one of these machines. Maybe the main problem with this statement is that it is totally backwards from what most people are taught by today's society and that no matter how you produce goods (in your home or in a large manufacturing plant) there will be people that will try to make a profit and to control the money associated with this project. Also as the author states, some people will make things less durable because they can make another one, this shows that the progress of development might slow down if everyone can produce cheap products by themselves, then there is no need to make things better.

3. The Darwin design was released in 2007. It is 2012 now. Imagine future scenarios for RepRaps and their ‘cousin’ 3D printing designs (Makerbots, Ultimachine, Makergear, etc.) how do you think the RepRap project (community, designs, website, anything and everything) might evolve in the future? Describe as many scenarios as you can envision.

The community and associated websites are already impressive. I think a more useful version of thingaverse will come about. A website that is easy to search for any products around the house that you can make with their respective designs. That idea will push the wealth without money motto in the right direction. Also making these machines better known about and easier to purchase or put together would also expand the usage of the machines. The article written by the creator of this project is idealistic, but not unrealistic. I think that better resolution or multi colored printers will also be in the future of the next generation.

Senior ME student at PSU working on RepRap in class.

Blog #1

1: Useful

This thing is very simple, but also very useful. In the case that you misplace the battery cover for any electronic device, this thing has you covered (literally). To help keep the batteries in place for sanity or safety reasons this thing is useful in every day life.

2: Beautiful

This thing I found is a mechanical clock. The way it is fabricated and has an open setup to watch the clock move is interesting. In my opinion it is a beautiful machine that someone took a lot of time and effort to construct.

3: Pointless

This thing I found is a CTRL-Z Ring, which you can punch the thing you want to undo and supposedly it is undone. This is humorous but very pointless as well because it does not have any function.

4: Funny

This thing is a desk catapult and I think the idea of having a catapult on your desk at work would be a fun addition to the office. It is a conversation starter and it deters annoying coworkers. It is humorous that someone would design something like this and I am glad they shared it on thingverse.

5: Weird

This thing is a pet monster that someone designed. It is called Frankensteam because it is a compilation of different strange parts including the possibility of a bottle opener arm, which also makes this thing useful.