This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Guest Post: The Next Industrial Revolution
Submitted by John Aziz of Azizonomics
The Next Industrial Revolution
Large, centrally-directed systems are inherently fragile. Think of the human body; a spontaneous, unexpected blow to the head can kill an otherwise healthy creature; all the healthy cells and tissue in the legs, arms, torso and so forth killed through dependency on the brain’s functionality. Interdependent systems are only ever as strong as their weakest critical link, and very often a critical link can fail through nothing more than bad luck.
Yet the human body does not exist in isolation. Humans as a species are a decentralised network. Each individual may be in himself or herself a fragile, interdependent system, but the wider network of humanity is a robust independent system. One group of humans may die in an avalanche or drown at sea, but their death does not affect the survival of the wider population. The human genome has survived plagues, volcanoes, hurricanes, asteroid impacts and so on through its decentralisation.
In economics, such principles are also applicable. Modern, high-technology civilisation is very centralised and homogenised. Prices and availability are affected by events half way around the world; a war in the middle east, the closure of the Suez Canal or Strait of Hormuz, an earthquake in China, flooding in Thailand, or a tidal wave in Indonesia all have ramifications to global markets, simply because of the interconnectedness of globalisation. The computer I am typing this into is a complex mixture — the cumulative culmination of millions of hours of work, as well as resources and manufacturing processes across the globe. It incorporates tellurium, indium, cobalt, gallium, and manganese mined in Africa. Neodymium mined in China. Plastics forged out of Saudi Crude. Bauxite mined in Brazil. Memory manufactured in Korea, semiconductors forged in Germany, glass made in the United States. And gallons and gallons of oil to ship all the resources and components around the world, ’til they are finally assembled in China, and shipped once again around the world to the consumer. And that manufacturing process stands upon the shoulders of centuries of scientific research, and years of product development, testing, and marketing. It is a huge mesh of interdependent processes. And the disruption of any one of these processes can mean disruption for the system as a whole. The fragility of interconnection is the great hidden danger underlying our modern economic and technological paradigms.
And even if the risks of global trade disruptions do not materialise in the near-term, as the finite supply of oil dwindles in coming years, the costs of constantly shipping so much around and around the world may prove unsustainable.
It is my view that the reality of costlier oil is set over the coming years to spur a new industrial revolution — a very welcome side-effect of which will be increased social and industrial decentralisation. Looming on the horizon are technologies which can decentralise the means of production and the means of energy generation.
3D printers — machines that can assemble molecules into larger pre-designed objects are pioneering a whole new way of making things. This could well rewrite the rules of manufacturing in much the same way as the rise of personal computing discombobulated the traditional world of computing.
3D printers have existed in large-scale industry for years. But at a cost of $100,000 to $1m, few individuals could ever afford one. Fortunately, improved technology and lowered costs are making such machines more viable for home use. Industrial 3D printers now cost from just $15,000, and home versions for little more than $1,000. Obviously, there are still significant hurdles. 3D printing is still a relatively crude technology, so far incapable of producing complex finished goods. And molecular assembly still requires resources to run on — at least until the technology of molecular disassembly becomes viable, allowing for 3D printers to run on, for example, waste. But the potential for more and more individuals to gain the capacity to manufacture at home — thereby reducing dependency on oil and the global trade grid — is a huge incentive to further development. The next Apple or Microsoft could well be the company that develops and brings home-based 3D printing to the wider marketplace by making it simple and accessible and cheap.
Decentralised manufacturing goes hand-in-hand with decentralised energy generation, because manufacturing requires energy input. Microgrids are localised groupings of energy generation that can vary from city-size to individual-size. The latter is gradually becoming more and more economically viable as the costs of solar panels, wind turbines (etc) for energy generation, and lithium and graphene batteries (etc) for home energy storage fall, and efficiencies rise. Although generally connected to a larger national electricity grid, the connection can be disconnected, and a microgrid can function autonomously if the national grid were to fail (for example) as a result of natural disaster or war.
Having access to a robust and independent energy supply and home-manufacturing facilities would be very empowering for individuals and local communities and allow a higher degree of independence from governments and corporations. Home-based microgrids can allow the autonomous and decentralised powering and recharging of not just home appliances like cooking equipment, computers, 3D printers, lights, and food growing equipment, but also electric vehicles and mobile communications equipment. Home-based 3D printing can allow for autonomous and decentralised design and manufacturing of useful tools and equipment.
The choice that we face as individuals and organisations is whether or not we choose to continue to live with the costs and risks of the modern globalised mode of production, or whether we decide to invest in insulating ourselves from some of the dangers. The more individuals and organisations that invest in these technologies that allow us to create robust decentralised energy generation and production systems, the more costs should fall.
Decentralisation has allowed our species to survive and flourish through millions of years of turbulent and unpredictable history. I believe that decentralisation can allow our young civilisation to survive and flourish in the same manner.
»
- 28366 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
right, because recycling raw materials isn't an energy intensive process. - FAIL.
That's why I said "better methods" and "mitigate" there Mr. Science. We are facing an energy and resource crunch no doubt.
They're friends of friends (and good people), and that is the current mechanical fractionation state of the art.
http://www.swissreduxgroup.com/en
Nice thought, but I rather see a new Dark Ages before the society that brought us non-functioning governments and corrupt financial systems collapsing before they can do something to allow a device like this.
I like your articles, but this is just too utopian and positive for me to get down my gullet.
I do not see the Millennials and the Always On generation being able turn it on much less survive on it.
H.D. thoreaux: Man is rich in proportion to the number of things, he can afford to leave alone..........simlify, simplify, simplify. Less is More.
Ahidar does not live in Greece or Spain, countries where as many as one in two young people are without work, but in the wealthy Belgian port city of Antwerp. With its stunning 16th-century Gothic houses, the city is a world centre for diamond trading and boasts a cutting-edge fashion industry. It also has a fast-growing number of unemployed twentysomethings.
A quarter of 18-to-25 year olds in Antwerp are now jobless, up from 19 percent in 2008. In some parts of Brussels, the Belgian and European capital and the third-richest region in the European Union, youth joblessness is as high as 40 percent.
The rising pool of jobless youth is fuelling class and racial divisions, according to youth workers and some politicians. Many experts blame joblessness for outbursts of violence such as last year's riots in Britain.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/21/us-europe-crisis-unemployment-...
Helps expalin nightly riots in Paris and most other major EU cities.
Crude technology? Uh, no, the most advanced CAD software in history combined with the processing/operating software to operate these is, well, advanced. Some of the most accurate and precise machines can print details down to 0.010" - Consider a piece of notebook paper is around 0.004" thick or so depending on the weight Now, you can get free, open source software, etc. to design objects and there are other open source type softwares you can use to run these machines. One such machine just hit the market at only $500... so the tech' is definitely getting into the home hobbiest realm of affordability.
Replicate is misleading... facsimile is more like it. For the most part they can't print steel (there are some ways to do this but it's not the norm)... they use materials that are similar to standard plastics or are using strands of standard plastics and deposition (like a glue gun) to build up layers of objects into the final form. They often can't exhibit the full strength of an injection molded part - but they are getting pretty close. So you can print a plastic version of a metal bodies stapler for instance... doesn't mean it will hold up to acutal stapling.
Some folks are now starting to dabble with printing plastic components that can be used in firearms... lost of news buzz about this lately. There is a group that is proposing a very decentralized method of sharing object data be that for tools or weapons or ??? that folks can use anywhere in the World to build what they need whereever they happen to be - so long as they have internet access, power, a printer and raw materials. Sort of interesting really.
Centralized Gub'ment is as unnatural as the flawed concept of "sharing". No organism shares for the sake of the greater good, they do so as a reward to their efforts. If their effort lies in charity they do so not for the greater good but for the feeling of good that is satisfied within themselves or perhaps even a tax deduction. Sharing because someone else says it is the "right" thing to do instills resentment in those doing the giving and an heir of entitlement in those who only receive. We should stop thinking of ourselves as outsiders in our own home, earth is our planet we must do everything in our power to both strengthen our species and ensure it's survival. We can best do that by taking care of ourselves first and with our abundence lift up those around us. "It isn't left verses right, it's YOU against the State." Ludwig von Mises www.mises.org
Ask yourself one simply question then; what is the single-largest "state" government by population? There is you enemy, attack!
A most beutifully written essay. Bravo. There are replicators that can produce food, and we will soon have them, promise the Galactic Federation. Not to mention free energy: vehicles that can run a 1000 miles on a gallon of water. Pollution-free, of course. How about medicines, and medical techology, all free, that will cure EVERY disease; restore eyesight; limbs. These wonderful technologies are currently in the hands of the Illuminati. as are many others, all being withheld by the Dark forces, driven by merciless greed. The Illuminati have underground tunnels, connecting major cities around the world, inside which travel 'trains' at Mach 9. 6,900 mph! NASA, controlled by the Illuminat, is nothing but smoke and mirrors, to enteratain the masses. Well, the masses have injected Love. Our prayers have been heard by God The wondrous Galactic Federation is here at God's behest. The Dark have beeen defeated!
RIP constuction-workers... Your history is written on this blog, it is not a hard text to decipher
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JdbJP8Gxqog
3D Concrete Printing
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfbhdZKPHro
Human critters can be competitive jealous little monsters, seeking stature by running in gangs, but it always comes down to food. is industry operating with or against? the fed?
Nature wins, lying, greedy little treehuggers not with standing. notice all the real farmers markets have been replaced by yupmarkets. the more the critters become alike, the more they feel the need to express their individuality, with sneakers and an apple.
food is a much better currency than gold, but tobacco takes the human variable into account.
How much is that food and tobacco worth when the "useless eaters" and useless smokers have been made redundant?
Funny, the critters refuse to extend each other credit, largely because they do not trust themselves, leaving themselves at the mercy of the banks, and bitch and moan about the banks.
from that perspective, yes, i am just another useless eater and smoker...and the black hole expands again.
From first-hand experience with the Replicator (As opposed to the pictured Replicator 2), the quality of items you can produce is somewhat limited by the style of the printer. It prints in a similar way to a sausage maker, in a stream of slightly molten plastic. My opinion is that the current consumer level models could only be useful for light duty structural components. Even the new model prints just under 7.5 inches cubed.
I'm of the hope that the next decade will provide high-detail alloy crafting, but in the current economic state it's an open question if the consumer level technology can advance enough to really be the next steam engine.
"I'm of the hope that the next decade will provide high-detail alloy crafting, but in the current economic state it's an open question if the consumer level technology can advance enough to really be the next steam engine."
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, and where will these "alloys" be coming from? Who will be paying for them? Alloys are not cheap. Seems to me that the world is investing all of it's capital and resources into saving banks and war.
Given the limitations of 3D printing, I still think it has a lot of potential and is the front-line for a new wave of DIY technologies. Imagine being able to build weapons, semiconductors, and nano devices in your garage with little or no technical knowledge. That should scare the hell out of the elite. Expect a propaganda campaign against it in the future.
3D printers are extremely cool for making rough prototypes, in order to get a good idea of what a final product will look like. However most of the cheaper models use wood or layers of plastic that are cut and glued together. Every part needs to be sanded to get rid of the small ridges that show up on any curve. The idea that you can make sophisticated products from one of the cheap machines is false.
More expensive machines use liquid polymers that are hardened by lazers and have tighter tolerances that allow for less post processing. As of right now the parts made at the same time all have to be the same color. They are experimenting of polymers that can change color based on exposure to different wavelengths of light. The parts coming out of this type of machine are getting close to being able to replace certain injection molded parts. The machines are also usefull in creating objects that can't be molded. It is possible to make a completed ball joint with no possible way for the ball to popout of the socket without completely breaking the enclosure.
You still need to have significant skill to design the CAD models for the machines and it isn't easy to do. Once you make the parts you still need to have the skill to put the product together. It is a craft trade and at least 80% of the population in the US lacks the basic skills to be able to create the simplest objects with a CAD program, let alone the skill to put a product together. Mastering 3D design programs is a lifetime effort. I've been using Solidworks for 15 years and I still wouldn't say I have mastered it. That is because the program is constantly updated and you constantly need to learn better ways of doing what you did before.
The idea being sold to people is that skilled designers would create models for you to download and your printer will make the product. That would be fine if the machine could create a finished complex product, but they can't. You can't even create a product using the simplest electronics. You could perhaps print a new case for your cell phone, or print your own legos. However, you won't be printing a toaster or alarm clock. What is there to say that a home printed product would be any cheaper. If you were able to print an iPhone at home, it would probably still cost you $499 for the design.
The most accurate explanation of how products would be made is a plastic model set. You would print hundreds of parts that you would assemble into a completed product. You could order pre made circuit boards and other electronics to fit the parts you made at home, but outside the hobbyist space I do not see a market for it. Does anyone honestly believe the majority of people will learn how to build their own stuff? Half the population can barely work a register at McDonalds. We are a society of consumers, not feeders.
When I was in college in the 1990s the 3D printing revolution was just getting started. 15 years later the machines are pretty much making the exact same plastic models. The differences are the tolerances between layers have got better and the price of the machines have dropped dramatically. The actual items being produced are about the same.
3D printing hasn't even come close to matching the advancements of full scale industrial production over that same time period. The makerbot convention was really cool, but nothing really made me think that a 3D printer will replace my skill as a designer, and the mass production techniques used to produce the products I design any time soon.
More likely is people are just trying to generate masive hype around a new stock scam possibility. Rounds of funding for 3D printing startups so they can go public and make Goldman Sachs more money.
great post.
Agree. But you'll find similar commentaries about the microcomputer in old magazines and newspapers from the late '70s/early '80s. The potential is there but it may take a while before it fizzles down into really useful products.
You have a realistic view on the stuff.
If one takes an optimistic view, besides design, rapid prototyping etc., 3D-printing may gradually spread into manufacturing. It will not replace conventional mass manufacturing, but support it. If you have a (plastic) product coming up, you may speed its entry to the market by 3D-printing the first series, as ramping up production in conventional factory environment takes its time. When you get more info about how the market likes your product, you can try to estimate a cutoff point where you move the stuff over to a conventional mass manufacturing.
At this point, "3D-printing factories" are more like showrooms owned by printer manufacturers, at least here in Europe. For an average manufacturer of plastic products, it is not feasible to build a sizable 3D-printing capability. As for sending a 3D-model of your coming product to an outside 3D-printing house, well... you have to really trust them.
Anyway, 3D-printing still has quality problems, and it is not just the visual quality that matters. Often strength, flexibility etc. are needed. A plastic piece printed layer-by-layer, most often just isn't as good as those manufactured by other methods. And the price difference still favors conventional manufacturing in a big way.
The potential lies in the working prototype stage is where mostly trial and error machining and fabricating takes place.
A fast economical mockup can be produced and refined at a low cost would be a boon to the garage inventor, who can then use more traditional forms of manufacture to produce salable items.
Without access, innovation is restricted to those that have it.
Entire industries have been created by dedicated hobbyists refining mass produced available products into specialized or more efficient subsets of the same product.
It took a while for the lowly vacuum tube to lead to the iPhone 5. I can easily see how netizens could collaborate in a non traditional business arrangement to create new products without enormous inputs of capital to produce and market.
Things will change rapidly in the future because there's no way we will be able to continue the old model. You can thank the banksters for that.
This could be one of the bright lights as we come out of the dark tunnel that's looming ahead.
I'll return you now to your regularly scheduled "We're Fucked" program.
As a general rule I would recommend spending less time with a bankrupt political process (Hello Republican party) and more time trying to find ways to decentralize this society.
3D printers have drawbacks? There are obstacles to be overcome? Can't print food? The horror!!!
you forgot to mention the issue of input cost/quality of the raw materials.
Can you say capital mis-allocation and mal-investment? Seems to me that the elites around the world want to force everyone (through inflation or taxation) to put their capital and resources into saving banks and starting/fighting wars.
Would be great if that changed and we could trully advance technology/society but I don't see any politician, aside from Ron Paul, who has been willing to speak the truth and even attempt to address the issue of moral hazard. Nothing will change until that is fixed. Can be done through policy and prosecution or through war. What does history tell you?
".....but I don't see any politician, aside from Ron Paul, who has been willing to speak the truth....."
If the past year has not convinced you that national politics are a complete waste of precious time, then nothing will.
Any stuff I make won't be any good becasue it won't have a Coach label on it.
3D printing is useful for non metal production and modelin - polymers (plastic).
Printing molten metal (temperature too high) would be a challenge - powdered metals, maybe. Strength would not be there.
It's a cool concept. I choose molded or forged parts on my operating car going 70mph down the highway, or the 767 I am on traveling 550 mph at 30,000 feet.
Yes now keynesian’s can print money in 3D! This will revolutionize the western world since printing is our main export now.
Yes, but what of the centrally-directed system providing sunlight and cosmic radiation without which there would be no life at all? Thus, the argument made here, indeed, might be easily perceived valid at a certain analytical level, but at others it entirely fails. As such, too, one is drawn to consider principles put forth in the U.S. Constitution's simple, single-sentence Preamble whose purpose was intended to give direction to a centrally-directed system of government. Were the nation's founders mistaken in their sense of the means by which their cause promoting vital, classical humanist principles was to be furthered in the face of ever present tyranny imposed throughout history by various currents possessing a deranged sense of humanity, the likes of which quite obviously persists today, having subverted every aspect of the noble intention the nation's founders put forth?
Simply put, nothing changes until the issue of moral hazard is addressed. the sun will shine on regardless, well for a considerable while longer anyway. As history has shown over and over, Nature really doesn't give a shit what humanity (or any other species does) and we once again find ourselves here; "The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood."
3D printers?
Making Gold from base metals... 21st century Alchemy?
Is it a repost or something?
There has been a post just like that with the same sequences about the computer.
Or plagiarism...
Repost?
A post just like that?
With the same sequences from a computer?
Plagiarism?
Welcome to the collected ZH literary works of AnAnonymousAsshole.
AnAnonymous, the ass-faced dung beetle boy, said:
It is very much something.
Funniness much the laughter ensues with vigour. There has been a post just like that with the same sequences about US citizenism.
...or AnAnonymous. Style of.
As a sidenote to those who need a refreshing break from daily doom and negativity I would like to recommend the books "Freedom" and "Daemon" by Daniel Suarez. One of their main themes also is de-centralisation.
Quite credible story about alternatives, about how to handle bankers and much more - thrilling to read and providing ideas worth thinking about too.
At this point 3D-printing is still a pipe dream. The quality is mostly not good enough, and the plastic costs about 10X the price plastic industry pays for its raw material. In fact, the business model of 3D-printer manufacturers is to sell the printer cheap, and make money by selling overpriced plastic. In some printers, the plastic cartridges have chips on them to prevent a client from buying cheaper plastic from elsewhere.
3D-printers will not become household appliances anytime in the foreseeable future. Sure, geeks might buy one to tinker around, but after a while most of them will move on to something else. Over time 3D-printing might evolve into something camera/film shops used to be. There might be some 3D-print shops in your town, and you go to them when you need to have something printed. You won't buy your own 3D-printer because it is too expensive, you don't have much need for it, and you're not interested in designing stuff yourself.
During the gold rush there was a saying, "Don't mine gold, mine the miners". Gold miners chased their dream and lost their shirt, but the guys selling them stuff did well. Likewise, at this point, the only money in 3D-printing comes from selling stuff to geeks.
"Don't mine gold, mine the miners"
sounds like the mantra of Jones, Celente and the other Profit Prophets of Doom.
some things never change...
i'm so tired of hearing about "3d printers" . I've been following 3d printing for 2 years. I've talked to people who own makerbot and to other people who have CREATED 3d printers.
The whole proliferation of the 3d printer 'meme' that is going around, as if 3d printers are some sort of panacea , or will prove to be one, to resolve global shipping problems or other shortages of product is total and utter nonsense. it will not happen this way anytime in our near future for the next 30 years. yes, they excel as customization and yes, they are beginning to increase the utility of 3d printing for different materials other than abs, but no---this is NOT going to be in everyone's house in our lifetime with everyone making everything they need out of any material they need.
the idea that just about every news 'source' and every other future blogger has repeated the '3d printing' meme, is itself an example of how modern ideas can be spread rapidly, yet reflect very shallow notions. it's a form of misinformation or poor-value information spreading rapidly , virally, through the intellectual ethos. ideas like these, promising ever better greater and revolutionary performance are always the provenance of science fiction. occasionally they do happen, the transition from main frames, to the personal computer is one excellent example.
3d printing may take this route, but it will take FAR LONGER than you think. the proliferation of 3d printing for home hobbyists DOES NOT MEAN that they will one day proliferate to replace existing channels of mass production using molds and other machining processes on a big scale. ECONOMIES OF SCALE still predominate when manufacturing huge objects.
if you asked me, it would be an interesting ph.d. thesis to explore which if ANY fungible consumer objects a 3d printer could be used to print more cheaply than otherwise buying it in your local store or online from a retailer as needed. the answer would be none. NONE. and that fact will not change anytime soon. the objects these printers are being used for are custom objects.
do a thought experiment. look around at the most fungible objects in your house. how many of them are going to be entirely replaceable by a plastic printer. ok, consider you buy the metal parts and the wires and then try printing your onw plastic parts, see how far you get. see how much you still have to buy. and then ask yourself if the end product of what you assembled is going to take less time and substantially less money than just buying the thing.
i've done a thought experiment to
Why do it at home? There are dozens of 3D shops in my area. Simply bring the part or the SolidWorks or AutoCad file and they'll make it in any material you want. I've emailed them files and had finished steel parts in three days. All of these shops are little 2000 sq. ft. operations.
I have invented a 3D food printer. It consists of the following, a pot, soil, seed. With these items, plus water and energy, free from the sky, you too can print food.
but the whole point of being a mammal is that we, instead of getting energy from the sun, instead eat other animals which gets their energy from the sun. Would it be possible for humans to evolve into plants if hyper-inflation strikes?
Start watching the MSM religiously and you will evolve into a plant quite quickly.
I'll just leave this here:
Aerospace Industry Adopting 3D Print Technology:
http://blog.ponoko.com/2011/05/14/aerospace-industry-adopting-3d-print-t...
Layer By Layer - Manufacturing Metal Engine Parts and Ceramics:
http://www.technologyreview.com/featured-story/426391/layer-by-layer/
No, you won't be powering the current incarnations with waterwheels, but the fact that it is already being used in a production process does mean something.
The next industrial revolution is about completed. John Aziz ignores history and what has already happened. The industrial revolution was the information or computer age which is ending with Apple at is peak.
The last industrial revolution included many advances using electricity, the manipulation of electrons. Examples are the telegraph, phone, and TV, all which greatly increase communication levels and made upward mobility more accessible for the masses. And we should forget the car with the combustion engine.
We are now seeing the end of the current revolution with the computer or digital age which includes the computer itself (using digital technology as opposed to analog), the internet, and other side items such as smartphones. Each of these have reached the masses.
And after each revolution comes a bust in which innovation slows. We might have a few more innovations ahead, but the meat of it is done.
3D printers are a joke, much like 3D TV.
John can write good articles but he would do much better if he put is article in the context of history.
"We start to age when we replace dreams by regrets" - Seneca
I carry a Constitution of me around and even that is too much weight.
Don't tell Ben of this Replicator - He will try to CTRL-P gold!
3d printers add material, CNC machines remove material based on solid modeling data. I don't see why 3d printing is such a big deal. CNC will do it with metal and a variety of materials, 3d printing usually uses some thermoplastic extrusion method for amateur projects, or laser sensitive resin and layer deposition for professional use.
Some people may buy them for playing around and making a few toys, but when it comes to real project, the technology is expensive, results are not durable, and tolerances just plain suck. But a game changer? Get a mini CNC lathe/milling machine. It's incredible fun.
After your wife sucks you off. She then scans your tiny penis for the next blockbuster viberator sex toy distribution failure. See how we can disrupt negativity in building a new business without government regulation?
CNC is metal. Your job is going to be replaced as well. Robots will replace humans. Not my idea, just fact.
You'll be mandated to spend X amount of money based on your government wage scale. If you don't spend that amount, a penalty fee will be claimed against your global banking account. Welcome to future policy visions.
We try to help you see things already planned out. Change is up to you.
I think they'll call the penalty a 'tax' ... it's all the rage today
"CNC machines remove material based on solid modeling data."
Lucky for you - these are also becoming affordable for home use.
http://snarkolepsy.blogspot.com/2012/05/qu-bd.html
Since home models are really just becoming mainstream, I've been waiting to see who comes out on top. I do not own any of these things yet. But I've been watching it for a really long time and it's really progressed in the last few years. You only have to google it.
They are even making quazi metal products that are made with metal dust and is sucked into the obect like a sponge then cooked to become metalised.
Much ado about nothing. It only makes plastic stuff.
"3D printing is a bunch of hyped BS."
It absolutely is NOT. I've seen people print out parts for their cars. At the link.
http://snarkolepsy.blogspot.com/search?q=3d+printing
I've been following this technology since 2005 where you could get a model for 45 grand. Its been a really long time since they cost 100 grand to a million. Longer than I have been following them.
http://snarkolepsy.blogspot.com/2006/10/world-of-next-tuesday.html
Now you can get a model for about a grand. They have made great strides with many different materials. All of this is too long to go into here.
It's one thing to be skeptical. It's another to be completely devoid of any vision.
Talk about printing meat... I actually know a doctor who has a tech company using 3-d printers to replace bladders in injured soldiers from IED explosions. They are "printing" tissue from cultures.
www.tradewithdave.com
at least until the technology of molecular disassembly becomes viable
Fuck Soylent Green, I made a stealth fighter out of people! Thank you, Stratasys!
Can MakerBot Replicator replicate itself? If not it is just another link in the chain.
IMPENDING CORRECTION:
Due to recent central bank intervention and short covering spikes, these daily charts are extremely overextended and significant correction expected very soon:
SPX, DOW, NASDAQ, NZDUSD, GBPUSD, AUDUSD, COPPER, CRUDE, GOLD, SILVER. [USD strength will return]
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-12-24/market-analysis
http://trader618.com
article related to the topic:
http://c4ss.org/content/12252
"When this story came to the attention of the Center for a Stateless Society, our immediate consensus was that the federal government, in pursuing this initiative, is working to regulate, cartelize, and enclose the market for additive manufacturing technologies. A major goal of the “partnership” will be to get ahead of the open source manufacturing movement by patenting everything under the sun that might conceivably advance 3D printing — then set the licensing fees high enough that only entrenched manufacturers can take advantage of it. And of course the Defense Department tie-in will be used to create export restrictions."
p.s. great discussion everyone. definitely one the hedge's greatest hits.