• Kraiden@kbin.earth
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    67
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Yes, because it’s so difficult to get a gun in America any other way /s

  • friend_of_satan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    ·
    2 months ago

    Taking this purely as an engineering task, how is this remotely possible? I can barely begin to imagine how restrictions on what can be printed could be set. Am I missing something obvious? Some kind of contextual understanding of the object seems to be necessary… please don’t tell me their proposed solution is AI.

    In any case it will never work because 3D printing is so easy for makers to do from scratch, so any solution will fail to prevent printed guns from being made.

    Again, this is just the pragmatic engineering angle. Please don’t respond with political arguments.

    • MoonMelon@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      Just spitballing but you’d have to align the desired shape somehow, perhaps with a singular value decomposition. Once its transform was normalized you could compare its shape, or perhaps its convex hull, with a database of banned shapes.

      The problem is this is pretty easy to defeat (by adding extra sprues and spikes to the object, breaking it into two shapes, etc) and the more aggressive you get with the check the more you risk false positives.

      An AI training set would involve creating a dataset of all the banned shapes, then generating tens of thousands of permutations of them however you believe people might try to trick it. Ultimately the AI would lock onto some small feature of the shape that scores it as positive, perhaps something trivial. That also leads to weird false positives. This also creates an arms race as people figure out what that feature is subvert it.

      This problem is much harder in 3D than in 2D (currency). Since you can also cut, file, and glue shit that comes out of a 3D printer later I don’t think this is a solvable problem. Like most gun control measures in the USA it appears to be aesthetics.

      You could also just aggressively go false positive all over the place and say “fuck the users”, with exceptions for cops. This is basically the USA’s approach to drones.

    • TwanHE@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      2 months ago

      Since the best available firmware is open source I don’t see any way of imposing limits on it.

      The printer itself doesn’t even know what it’s making since it’s reading directions one by one, so any limits would need to be implemented at a slicer level, which are also basically all open source (at least any worth using).

      The only way I could see it working would be mandating that all printers sold in the US come with software checks against it and be non reflashable, but considering a new driver board that would be able to drive 95% of printers is about $25 it is nothing more than screaming into the void.

      • TonyTonyChopper@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        You can also build a 3d printer from scratch pretty easily. Would need to regulate random electronics and robotics components

      • Laser@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Open source firmware doesn’t mean anything as long as tivoization is happening.

        Which I don’t know whether it’s the case, but legislature might make this a requirement.

    • Blaiz0r@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      I don’t know the answer to the question, but paper printers cannot print bank notes apparently

      • PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Which is a very easily recognized pattern, color, and size. The entire point of a dollar is that every single one looks identical.

        Imagine if every single dollar bill was a different color, shape, size, printing pattern, etc… Now imagine trying to block that. Now consider that as soon as you figure out how to block all of the current versions, anyone in the world can just design a new version in 5 minutes.

      • wolo@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Most currencies have a special pattern that printers are programmed to detect and refuse to print. Since illegal gun part designs can’t be forced to include a marker declaring that they’re gun parts, a 3d printer would have to 1) know what a gun is, 2) know how a gun works, 3) be able to tell whether any particular shape could be used as part of a gun, and 4) be able to tell whether any particular shape could be cut and reassembled into a shape that could be used as part of a gun

      • friend_of_satan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        True, but nothing else looks like money. Lots of things have a similar shape as the barrel of a gun.

        Money is also quite detailed, with a known list of configurations. Any counterfeit would need to match the details in those known configurations extremely well. Finding that match with a high degree of accuracy is a fairly well understood and common engineering task. This is not the same task as identifying anything that could possibly be used to represent money with a high degree of accuracy, which is essentially what would be needed in the gun printing problem.

      • hihellobyeoh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        that’s different, bank notes follow the same pattern/design, the components that could be printed for firearms vary so much in shape and size, even for the same components across different platforms.

    • Professorozone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Yup, this just sounds impossible without just banning the printers. Guns don’t have to conform to typical gun shapes. You could just print anything that can function as a barrel and some of the other pieces and then just go in the garage and whittle a handle from a piece of wood or something. Make a part that is much larger and then just cut off the piece you want. I mean there are so many ways around this it’s not even funny.

  • andrewth09@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    2 months ago

    They should put controls on lathes and mills to prevent making guns. Metal guns are a lot more effective than plastic guns anyways. /s

      • PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        This is basically how today’s 3d printed guns work, but even still the gun isn’t good for more then a few magazines afaik. So it’s interesting as a way to create a gun that isn’t serialized and the ATF can’t trace, but it’s not durable, and it still requires a good deal of precision engineering/cost, so its not feasible to print a truck-load and sell them for cheap.

  • SlothMama@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    2 months ago

    There is essentially no way to enforce, or even monitor this, like it’s fundamentally impossible without controlling everything from stl creation, to weapon construction.

    • wuphysics87@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      Hit the nail right on the head for what they want. Why do you think they are making laws to ban porn? It’s a hide behind think of the children to get your foot in the door to control more

  • PowerCrazy@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    2 months ago

    I love technological non-solutions to social problems. They are the only thing the work better then passing more laws that say you can’t murder people with guns.

  • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    I see 10,000 forks in the near future, and fully decentralized ways of hosting them. God forbid we actually try to regulate real guns, no it’s those damn hobbyists who spent thousands on printers!

  • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    The pressure behind a bullet ~14,000psi. The pressure that a 3D resin can handle ~ 200psi. Any questions?

    Oh yeah, how do 3D printed guns kill? 1) use non 3d printed parts or 2, hold the bullets in the gun-like case, carry a hammer, if you need to shoot the bullet just get the bullet out between two of your fingers, run like crazy towards the target, then bury that sucker with a real nice hammer thud. If you practice real good, you can hit a good 3 or 4 target spots. If you do it it slow enough you can probably hit one bullet with another bullet! Well, you can always do that. Heck you can put 10 bullets or more in a baggie and they will all hit each other.

    I guess if you need a ruzzian war diy survivor gun, just go-to the hardware store and get a pipe. No 3D printed stuff. You can make the handle from wood! That’s literally all a 3D printer is good for in gun making, the handle. But you can carve one out with a router. Are routers illegal yet because you can make a gun … handle…?

  • x00za@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    It’s like governments are trying to get people to listen to them instead of doing their job: listening to what the people want.

    Stop making stupid rules and start looking at the causes and work with that. Why do people want 3d printed guns? Well to either protect themselves, do something bad, or for fun because they can. Ok maybe we should look at why the hell do people feel the need to protect themselves instead of letting the police do that? Maybe look at why people do bad things? Hint it’s mostly money, which you are taking away from them. Or try and fight people having “fun”? Well you could always take away the fun with even more rules.

    The biggest win of the ones in power was to make the concept of anarchy look like chaos. :)

    • derpgon@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Worst thing is, with any systemic rule change, the change js not instant. Allowing something like that would wither cause a spike up in crimes, or we’d feel it down the line. On the other hand, banning them doesn’t make sense, either.

    • desktop_user@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      even if police were perfect plenty of people would still want to do it themselves, as with anything there will be hobbyists. Some hobbies are more legal than others.

  • extremeboredom@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    2 months ago

    Maybe the dumbest possible idea here from government regulators. You think you’re going to somehow legislate certain geometry out of existence? “Sorry, you can’t print that ILLEGAL SHAPE with the printer you own!” Same vacant headed assholes that think they can ban encryption. Fuck off, shrivel up and perish, please.