Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
Printer Government

Washington State May Mandate 'Firearm Blueprint Detection Algorithms' For 3D Printers (adafruit.com) 123

Posted by EditorDavid from the printer-cartridges dept.
Adafruit managing director Phillip Torrone (also long-time Slashdot reader ptorrone ) writes: Washington State lawmakers are proposing bills (HB 2320 and HB 2321) that would require 3D printers and CNC machines to block certain designs using software-based "firearms blueprint detection algorithms." In practice, this means scanning every print file, comparing it against a government-maintained database, and preventing "skilled users" from bypassing the system.

Supporters frame this as a response to untraceable "ghost guns," but even federal prosecutors admit the tools involved are ordinary manufacturing equipment. Critics warn the language is overbroad, technically unworkable, hostile to open source, and likely to push printing toward cloud-locked, subscription-based systems—while doing little to stop criminals.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Washington State May Mandate 'Firearm Blueprint Detection Algorithms' For 3D Printers More

Washington State May Mandate 'Firearm Blueprint Detection Algorithms' For 3D Printers

Comments Filter:

  • Good luck with that (Score:5, Insightful)

    by liqu1d ( 4349325 ) on Sunday January 25, 2026 @09:08PM (#65948878)
    Nothing will prevent a "skilled" user bypassing something like this. There's too many choices of vendors for 3D printers most aren't cloud based lock-ins. Can't control hardware that doesn't need to communicate with a server already. Given how many people are building their own 3D custom printers the barrier to bypassing the locks is so much lower than a printer.

    • Yeah, and I'd like to know how they're going to regulate interstate travel in that regard, as far as ordering a 3D printer from China and expecting it to have this restriction.

      The thing with so many of these gun laws is they're going after more "exotic" or esoteric things, when the vast majority of gun deaths are from run of the mill pistols that are everywhere.

      • It's not just a thing with firearms, it's a thing with any kind of "weapon". And I quote that because, for example. look at the way California regulates the balisong. They are and always have been utility knives. Hollywood created the fantasy that they're some kind of macho weapon that they're not, mostly because the way they open looks flashy and nice for photography. But in a tactical situation, any knife that opens that way is a liability. But for non-tactical, i.e. strictly utility, they're pretty nice

        • for example. look at the way California regulates the balisong.

          Never did understand the butterfly knife thing. Such a stupid thing to ban.
          Many states have regulated those damn things, including the conservative sweetheart of Texas until 2017(IIRC?).
          Cool for tricks, but ultimately a pretty shitty weapon.

          Hollywood also created the myth that silencers make bullets whisper quiet, which is physically impossible, in fact they're still loud as fuck, just far less likely to permanently damage your hearing if your earplugs fall out on the range, but here we are.

          Most bullets are- mostly due to the sonic boom they create, which the silencer obviously can't do shit about.
          However, my buddy and I made a silencer for a .22LR in highschool... loaded with subs- silent, except for the click of the action.
          We'd fill a balloon with ace

        • Any sub-sonic bullet shot from a pistol/rifle with a suppressor will be nearly silent, contrary to your assertion.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by BigFire ( 13822 )
          A lot of gun deaths are suicides. Men makes up the vast majority of that.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by hwstar ( 35834 )

        In soviet Russia, the law makes an example of YOU.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by leptons ( 891340 )
        They will just ban all 3D printers from China, the same way they just banned all DJI drones (which are made in China).
    • My printer isn't even connected to the internet. I slice, save to a thumb drive, print. Now that the NFA tax has been zeroed, I can even legally print suppressors now! This, like NY's (NYC's? I forget) proposal a week or two ago, is completely unenforceable and likely unconstitutional.
      • Most likely the detection routines would be built into the slicer and it would refuse to spit out gcode for a "prohibited part" Most 3rd printers run off micro controllers and have no where near the compute horsepower to do the detection in the printer. Course if they build this into the slicer people can just use old slicers or people will just start passing around gcode files for the most dominant 3rd printer brand/models.
        • I'm glad I'm not the only one smart enough to see the obvious weakness in their plan. A machine that barely understands "go left", "go right", "extrude filament", etc isn't going to understand "Don't print gun parts, mmmkay?"...

          And even if they do revise it to including slicing software, good luck enforcing that in open source slivers not based in the USA...

    • They could mandate closed source, internet connections, signed bootloaders, and microcontroller fuses which prevent erasure of the bootloader.

      Of course, there is plenty of open source 3D printer firmware out there which could be run on a homebuilt 3D printer, so all of those technical measures would be ineffective against 3D printers built by the people who want to print gun parts.

      For that matter, you'd need to license lathes, milling machines, and sheet metal stamping machines as well.

      • I've been unable to figure out how my 1946 soutbend could connect to the internet. I'll keep it that way.

      • For that matter, you'd need to license lathes, milling machines, and sheet metal stamping machines as well.

        Even if they did that, people could still send files to PCBWay and other such companies to be 3D printed and/or CNC'd. And any parts that might be recognized as belonging to guns could likely be subdivided into smaller assemblies that wouldn't trigger the recognition algorithm.

        This legislation is just going to make 3D printing a locked-down pain in the ass, while doing SFA to reduce the number of home-built firearms being made.

        Also, if I happen to have a gun licence, can I then legally print and build my ow

    • Can't control software either. A large portion of 3D printers out there run or are capable of running completely open source software.

      That said this exists to stop an incidental idiot. Just like your door lock doesn't stop me yeeting a brick through the window there's a bigger chance someone will steal something if you don't have a lock on your door at all.

      Likewise this won't stop any pre-meditated murder. This may stop some moron 14 year old playing around and building something dangerous for the LULZ.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      That's not the point. The idea is to stop little Timmy 3D printing a gun, or someone printing one in anger. At the very least, the delay while they figure out how to bypass the restrictions gives them time to think twice and calm down.

      I'd say the bigger issue is likely to be false positives being a pain.

      • Little Timmy will have already updated their printer with open source software like Klipper, Mainsail/Fluidd, and Moonraker to unlock the full potential of their printer. And they can use an open source slicer like Orca Slicer.
      • ...or someone printing one in anger.

        Have you ever printed anything? Something as complex as a firearm is not completed on a whim.

      • or someone printing one in anger

        The mental image of someone seething in anger patiently, while waiting for this to be built layer by layer...

        The people who are going to these lengths for illicit guns will have no trouble bypassing restrictions. Everyone else will just buy a gun the normal way.

    • Its not even about skilled users.

      ANY 3D print job will often involve a little bit of setup in a solid modelling program, just to arrange the printed pieces on the bed, and set up the supports and infill for the printout. This isn't like forbiden images where you can check against a hash of an identical file.

      I'll never understand the obsession the americans have with guns, and I support gun control. But this aint gonna work and is purely old grey haired men legislating about shit the dont understand AGAIN.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Kisai ( 213879 )

      This feels like a political ploy where "you wouldn't vote against saving children would you?"

      The "cloud" controlled ones could, or even be required that the file be submitted online for it to be compared to known weapon designs.

      But that doesn't work for offline systems, and there's plenty of systems that already exist. Going back to the 80's.

      The easiest way to prevent ghost guns from being made is by making ownership of equipment that can make it something that requires a license itself. The same way "print

    • M immediate reaction was to wonder if 3d printers will join C & Perl with annual obfuscation contests?

  • Until someone asks an AI to iterate on a firearm design that doesn't trigger the detection algorithm. Government is ran by incredibly ignorant people. Maybe they're well meaning, but they're not going to be able to put the genie back in the bottle.

    What is possible is we can investigate the sale and transport of firearms. And prosecute people who do this at a large scale for organized crime.

    • And prosecute people who do this at a large scale for organized crime.

      Is this actually happening though?

      • Pretty standard practice in my state to bust groups that are known to be selling firearms in the area. Bust the people who are caught committing crimes with them, and work your way up the supply chain. In a way the ability for small operations is very limited to hide a very local presence when it is within the jurisdiction of state and local agencies.

        There will certainly be new challenges. But we already have gun dealers in every city that resell stolen fire arms. The same channels are going to be selling g

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by geekmux ( 1040042 )

      Until someone asks an AI to iterate on a firearm design that doesn't trigger the detection algorithm. Government is ran by incredibly ignorant people. Maybe they're well meaning, but they're not going to be able to put the genie back in the bottle.

      Plenty already manufacture AR lowers that are 80% machined, meaning they are semi-finished blanks that require additional machining. I'd imagine it's even easier to 3D print a part rough enough to bypass any "firearm" detection and then use that newfangled technology hundreds of years old (sandpaper) to finish it.

      What is possible is we can investigate the sale and transport of firearms. And prosecute people who do this at a large scale for organized crime.

      America did do that. We found out who was running the guns during operation Fast 'N Furious and realized it was rather difficult to arrest the President at the time.

      • And for those in draconian states, some even offer zero-percent lower receivers! [80percentarms.com]
        • Are they having a laugh or is this a real thing? (Not American)
          • Both! IIRC they started a while ago; 80% has always been legal (it seems counterintuitive to those not in the U.S. or heavily involved in firearms, but manufacturing your own firearms for personal use has always been legal) but some states started freaking out about it, so they started offering 0% to mock idiot politicians. They'll sell them--they're just the blanks for their 80% offerings--but it's mainly mockery.
            • Brilliant haha! Thank you for explaining!
            • I looked at that, out of curiosity, and even though it's literally a block of metal, they can't sell it in California. I get overbearing protectiveness, but that's fkn ridiculous.
              • That must be new. I don't remember seeing that the last time I looked (which, admittedly, has been a long time. I stlll shoot, but I have enough guns so haven't looked)

      • Plenty already manufacture AR lowers that are 80% machined, meaning they are semi-finished blanks that require additional machining. I'd imagine it's even easier to 3D print a part rough enough to bypass any "firearm" detection and then use that newfangled technology hundreds of years old (sandpaper) to finish it.

        Those 80% lower projects can be pretty fun to build. And they used to be legal in my state. You had to add your own serial number (could be pretty much anything that was non-repeating). But you couldn't legally sell the firearm you built.

      • America did do that. We found out who was running the guns during operation Fast 'N Furious and realized it was rather difficult to arrest the President at the time.

        The US wasn't running the guns. They were "letting them walk" (i.e., knowingly letting straw purchasers run the guns).
        Fast N Furious wasn't the first time the ATF had done this, either.
        The practice started in 2006 during Project Gunrunner.

        • Project Gunrunner was the overarching name given to Operation Wide Reciever and Fast and Furious. Also the Hernandez and Madrano cases but they were against specific people and not particularly relevant. Operation Wide Reciever was fundamentally different in multiple respects. It was much smaller in scope and there was an actual attempt to track the guns to their destination, including by implanting radio trackers into some of the guns' stocks themselves. It failed miserably and was quickly shut down. Opera

          • Equating WR and F&F is a fundamentally retarded position.

            No one equated shit.

            I stated the fundamental fact that gun walking started before F&F.
            Only 64 of 474 WR weapons were interdicted.
            It ran from 2006 to 2008 (the same duration of time that F&F ran), which is not "was shut down quickly".
            F&F involved about 4x as many weapons as WR. Calling it "an order of magnitude more" without saying what the numbers were was an attempt at being disingenuous on your part.

            Your politics are showing.

            • Again, they explicitly attempted to interdict the weapons in WR and tried to work with their Mexican counterparts and failed miserably, which were the primary contributors to it being shut down. In F&F they explicitly did NOT inform their Mexican counterparts and no attempt whatsoever was made to interdict the weapons after they were sold.

              • No argument, there.
                The target of ATF Phoenix's dumbfuckery was different, in that case.
                But ultimately, it was the same stupid tactic, by the same fucking people, aimed at a different segment of the illicit gun trade.

                i.e., "Fast N Furious wasn't the first time the ATF had done this, either." is factual and intellectually honest, and attempts at trying to make it some kind of "Scandal of a Presidency" is really just some partisan bobblehead bullshit.
                OIG found in both cases, neither Holder or Mukasey had

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by kick6 ( 1081615 )
      Laws being made by the ignorant is most true in 2 realms: Technology and firearms. But what can be expected when it's the same generation of folk who have been in power and won't give it up for 50 years.

    • Maybe they're well meaning, but they're not going to be able to put the genie back in the bottle.

      You certainly know that professional printers (e.g. bizhub) refuse to scan or print banknotes. Many countries have laws that say print shops cannot copy books. None of that stops organised crime (which can be done at home using consumer equipment), but they are still necessary. Like "murder is not allowed" law, which does not stop motivated murderers but it still necessary to have in the book.

      • Would you like to explain what your actual point here is? Or is it just to be contrarian? If not, you need to provide some serious context around how you equate homicide laws to ill conceived tech illiterate headline grabbing.

        • My point is that it is normal and expected that laws get voted in to restrict what printers can print, such as in the case of banknotes. If "guns" is the new bad stuff now identified that printers can produce, then it is expectable that technical restrictions will be voted in. The fact that one can find ways to bypass technical restrictions isn't a concern (it is already the case for banknotes).

          Murder is an example of undesirable behaviour that we prohibit despite being easy to bypass. I should have taken a

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by leptons ( 891340 )
      What happens when people can buy premade 3D-printed gun parts directly from China? Will they ban all 3D printed parts from outside the US? I'm not sure the politicians have really thought this through. Anyone can order any kind of part to be 3D printed from China and have it delivered within a few days.

  • This proposal requires that the printers have an active network connection. What's going to happen when the printer isn't connected to the network, or isn't allowed access beyond the local network? I consider blocking printers and other devices not intended for remote use from having Internet access a minimum precaution against botnets searching for devices to compromise.

  • how do they expect to implement this? (Score:3)

    by Gideon Fubar ( 833343 ) on Sunday January 25, 2026 @09:12PM (#65948888) Journal

    I'm just... absolutely fascinated by the kind of thinking that imagined that this was something that was possible in any meaningful way.

    • Re:how do they expect to implement this? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by JustAnotherOldGuy ( 4145623 ) on Sunday January 25, 2026 @09:47PM (#65948932) Journal

      You'd be surprised to find out just how ignorant the average Representative or Senator is, especially Representatives.

      These are people who for the most part couldn't manage regular gainful employment so they ended up going into preaching or politics- the two jobs where you can be as dumb as a bag of hammers and still succeed beyond your wildest dreams.

      Many of them are genuine idiots but they can be glib and charming when it's needed, and often that's enough.

    • I'm just... absolutely fascinated by the kind of thinking that imagined that this was something that was possible in any meaningful way.

      On the one hand, I've been told by people who work with politicians and their staffs that the average bear vastly overestimates how competent they are.

      But cynicism aside, there's a running gag among programmers. It's very hard from the outside to understand what's easy and what's hard. I am a professional programmer and the product managers I work with frequently suggest five things, three of which are easy, one is a major project, and one involves solving the halting problem. And those are people in the bu

    • On two occasions I have been asked, — "Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?" In one case a member of the Upper, and in the other a member of the Lower, House put this question. I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question.

      Charles Babbage, Passages from the Life of a Philosopher (1864), ch. 5 "Difference Engine No. 1"
  • If this is left to some algorithm, this will likely prevent any cosplay guns like the Star Wars stormtroopers, etc.

  • Utterly stupid pretense (Score:5, Informative)

    by JustAnotherOldGuy ( 4145623 ) on Sunday January 25, 2026 @09:40PM (#65948920) Journal

    It's an utterly stupid pretense that's being used as the opening move to regulate, tax, and control a broad range of hobbies.

    Eventually it'll subject you to FFL-style rules. If you have an FFL (a Federal Firearms License), the BATF has the right to show up at any time of day or night and search the premises, go over the books, tear the place apart, etc. That includes your home, cars, etc as well as any store or business.

    The one thing I don't see being discussed is that it's 100% LEGAL to make your own guns at home, no license or permission needed. You can't sell or transfer your basement boomtube, but it's completely legal to cobble some parts together and make a working firearm.

  • They can't limit speech or religion, so make it both.

    • "Thou shalt not kill"

      • "Thou shalt not kill"

        Perhaps with an asterisk against the "not".

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by ebunga ( 95613 )

        I mean, if you look at the actual numbers, approximately 0.00% of firearms in the US have been used to kill someone, so that goes without saying.

      • The Hebrew word is closer to "murder", which is distinct from "kill". Specifically, it was about unjust killing, and also includes what we would not call manslaughter (carelessness or negligence). Not long after the 10 commandments were sent down, a bunch of laws were also issued, some of which required the death penalty, which would have been hard to carry out if the commandment was actually against "killing".

        Older English translations seem to prefer "kill", more recent ones seem to prefer "murder". ESV

        • The Hebrew word is closer to "murder", which is distinct from "kill".

          No, it's not. But contextually, it's more likely to mean murder in that commandment.
          The same verb is used to describe being put to death (Numbers), and manslaughter (Deuteronomy).

          The tense and person (first or third) strongly influences the inferred meaning in Hebrew.
          But you are otherwise correct that Murder is the better translation for the commandment.

  • Neither feasible nor if it were feasible, enforceable. Blithering idiots at work.

  • ...intelligence tests for lawmakers
    They always fail
    They falsely believe that all problems can be solved by passing a law

    • Re:Looks like another example of... (Score:4, Interesting)

      by gurps_npc ( 621217 ) on Monday January 26, 2026 @01:14AM (#65949178) Homepage

      You failed as well. You think laws are supposed to be obeyed. Lots of times laws are not passed because the politicians believe the law will be followed.

      The reality is that often laws are created to:

      1) Make it easier to convict criminals of crimes.
      2) Increase the punishment for crimes.
      3) Raise money for the municipality (traffic laws in particular)

      A prime example of this is the 'gun free zone' laws. Most politicians never expected them to remove guns from the areas. That was a myth spread by republican idiots (the smart republicans knew better).

      Instead, they were originally passed to make it easier to convict drug dealers. The adult dealers hung around schools with guns to protect their employees. Their customers give money to child (a) in order to get drugs from child (b). Because they never touched the money or drugs, cops had a hard time arresting the adult drug dealers. Until they made the schools gun free zones so they could arrest the adult drug dealers merely for having the gun they used to protect their business.

      Now, gun free zones have expanded beyond schools, and the original explanation is not always as relevant. But that was the original reason why gun free zones were created.

  • [...] being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms [...]

    In case the government goes rogue on the people.
    Just in case that ever happens.

    • We already saw from example that the "2nd amendment" isn't about gun rights at all.

      Not one gun-toting nut came out in defense of your freedumbs when a carrying member was shot in the back. Quite the opposite, individuals from the 2nd amendment cohort turned out to massively blame the dead guy for the shooting despite massive evidence of him not doing anything illegal.

      The 2nd amendment today is about toy privileges for people with various inferiority complexes.

      Which doesn't make the proposed legislation any

      • Not one gun-toting nut came out in defense of your freedumbs when a carrying member was shot in the back.

        To be accurate, they took away his gun before they shot him.

      • You are wrong about 2A supporters. You should read these guys: https://x.com/mnguncaucus [x.com]

        Also, he commits at least two crimes that we can see in the videos, and supposedly also a $25 fine petty misdemeanor (not carrying his card and ID).

        • Also, he commits at least two crimes that we can see in the videos

          Really? Says which court? Because you know "commits at least two crimes" is not a statement that a random fucktard on slashdot or a random thug with a badge can make in the street, right?

      • I'm no expert on American culture, but it was suggested to me that if these Minnesota incident(s) happened in a more libertarian state (they suggested the blue yet reasonably libertarian states Maine or New York), then the result might have been more violent.

        While I understand the motivation, it would be a bit of a tinderbox.

        Americans: Is this likely?

        • Not an American, but it seems that the purposeful aggression demonstrated by ICE and the targeted campaigns of highly armed thugs being sent to states where trump lost and will lose has the specific goal of causing mayhem so that the orange shitgibbon can invoke the dictatorial powers he believes he has under some "insurrection act".

          Quite likely not his own idea.

          • States like Minnesota refuse to cooperate with Federal immigration enforcement, which is why Federal agents have to be sent in when in other States, local law enforcement cooperates. So, in my State of Georgia, if the police arrest a child molester and find out he's here illegally, they call up the feds and hand him over. In Minnesota, they would instead just release him on bail. Well, that guy can't stay. He broke the law coming in and then molested a kid. If local law enforcement won't pick him up an

            • States like Minnesota refuse to cooperate with Federal immigration enforcement,

              You, as I recall, are a "states' rights" fan, at least when it suits you. I certainly recall you spewing a lot of vitriol back when that corrupt PoS Abbot in Texas refused to cooperate with the Federal government of the USA, back when there was USA.

              What happened that now you're on the opposite side of your previous position? LOL, so consistent, the consistency of ...

              So, in my State of Georgia, if the police arrest a child molester

              You mean like donald trump? I haven't seen him arrested. Quite the opposite, the whole government is busy hiding the evidence of his child mole

              • So, you're clearly just f'ing around and I don't feel the need to waste my time on someone who won't discuss a topic in good faith.

                • So you will not provide evidence for your claims that child molesters are allowed bail in Minnesota as a general rule? Fine, we knew you were lying.

                  How about examples of massive illegal voting? Here I will make your job easy. Your own fascist think tank, the heritage fund has made a DATABASE of ALL CASES since 1981.

                  https://electionfraud.heritage... [heritage.org]

                  Guess the total before you click, eh? SPOILER, it is 1680-ish.

                  Incidentally, why are the Epstein files being illegally kept secret after all deadlines have passed?

        • What do you mean by "libertarian"? The three States you mentioned are among the least, as they are some of the most highly taxed and regulated States. If you are specifically thinking about gun laws, New York is one of the most restrictive.

          The States with the least regulations on guns (which also tend to be the most libertarian) don't have Minnesota's issue. They are not "Sanctuary States" that refuse to cooperate with Federal immigration agencies, so there's little to no need for Federal agents to sho

          • What do you mean by "libertarian"? The three States you mentioned are among the least, as they are some of the most highly taxed and regulated States. If you are specifically thinking about gun laws, New York is one of the most restrictive.

            The States with the least regulations on guns (which also tend to be the most libertarian) don't have Minnesota's issue. They are not "Sanctuary States" that refuse to cooperate with Federal immigration agencies, so there's little to no need for Federal agents to show up. The sort of large-scale enforcement seen in Minnesota and some other States is only necessary because those places refuse to coordinate with Federal agents. In Georgia, if someone gets arrested and is found to be an illegal alien, they are handed over to ICE. In Minnesota, they are released back into the community.

            Or I could summarize that as "The people and places with lots of guns support ICE, the angry women and weak men who hate ICE also hate guns."

            Ah, ok. So there is a strong correlation between "red" and libertarian.
            And red/libertarian folk don't see this ICE activity as something requiring pushback...? Gosh.

      • Well, conservative talk show host Eric Erickson just did that yesterday. And didn't Dana Loesch, podcaster and former NRA spokesperson, do so as well? That's two examples off the top of my head with no research (well, I had to check the spelling of Mrs. Loesch's name).

  • 3d print censoring company - investors wanted (Score:3)

    by misnohmer ( 1636461 ) on Monday January 26, 2026 @04:47AM (#65949400)
    I need to do this quick, so it can be added to the legislation asap - every single printer in WA state has to talk to my cloud service to censor designs to be printed. Only $24.99 annual subscription per 3d printer, plus $1 per print folks, unless AI flags the design, then you can request a $199 review by a human if you still want to print that. If you disagree with that review, you can request a full arbitration review, for $10K retainer plus $500 per hour for all the engineers testifying and lawyers - no money back of course, but if you win you can print it.

    PS> I need to raise seed money to lobby WA politicians to legislate that only companies with special license can do such reviews, and to make sure only my company ever gets this license. WA politicians are good this way, so see how many companies are licensed to sell or rent their card shufflers in WA state. I think I'm going to need about $10,100,000 to start, $10M is for lobbying, $100K to setup the service. I'm sure there are annual political donations that have to be made to keep the law in place and any competitors from getting licensed to censor 3d printing in WA, but I expect to be able to make those from the revenue off the 3d printers.

  • Unworkable (Score:3)

    by ledow ( 319597 ) on Monday January 26, 2026 @07:16AM (#65949496) Homepage

    I am struggling to envisage how this would ever work reliably.

    The only protocol that the device speak is GCode, and that's so low-level it means you could rejig the same final print in a million different ways without compromise. I'm not sure how you'd ever detect that reliably.

    If it's on the software then... wow... all someone has to do is keep an old "STL to GCode" slicer around that defeats that too.

    This is one of those things that sounds great as a political soundbite but it's not even on the scale of "we'll just automatically detect all indecent images everywhere on the Internet in real-time with good false-positive rates"... it's orders of magnitude past that. It's completely unworkable. What mechanism are they intending to use to do this at all? An AI model running on every printer trying to guess from the overall shape of an object? That would just be endless fun with building building innocent looking models that "break down" into the necessary parts, and tons of "I can't print that" (and returned devices) when you just go to print a hook because it looks a bit like a trigger component, etc.

    You might be able to blacklist a few chosen well-known, STLs but then people would just rejig them slightly.

    If you want to legislate, you have to have an INKLING of an idea of how this would actually work.

    And then you have to remember... 3D printers basically started as a self-built hobbyist thing. The components and software to drive them are easily recreated. They're just plotters with a moving Z-plane and hot plastic instead of a pen. 3D cutters (laser, CNC, etc.) are similar and in some cases even easier.

    However "admirable" the intentions, this is akin to a screwdriver with a camera that detects if you're screwing into something that looks like a nuclear bomb and refuses to turn if it thinks so. It's ridiculous and unworkable.

    The closest thing we have to this is the "can't photocopy money" markers, but they are clearly defined, a very fixed image, clear markers, very limited purposes when you would ever need to genuinely do that, very low false-positives, etc. This is orders of magnitude more ridiculous.

  • This is meant to stop rich and middle class kids, especially in blue states, from 3D printing a gun and killing someone when they forget to take their meds. Criminals know how to get a real gun...and for the poor or people in red states, there are ton of guns around the house, almost always improperly secured....because a lot of gun nuts are too big of assholes to secure their firearms properly: trigger locks make you look like a pussy and if it's locked in steel cabinet, no one will know how big of a man

  • WTS: Voron v2.4r1 - $50,000

    No low-ballers, I know what I have.

  • The current regime is now against firearms, and was reported weeks ago as compiling a list of firearm owners.

    What, did you think 47 wanted you to rise up and overthrow *him*?

  • Just get a locked 3d printer, print an unlocked 3d printer, then print your gun from the unlocked 3d printer. Perfect crime!

  • It's a blatant violation of the 2nd Amendment and the legal right to make your own firearms. So, it's just idiots trying to look busy instead of getting busy with any of the things they can do.

Slashdot Top Deals

Why do we want intelligent terminals when there are so many stupid users?

Close