| EURion marks are a feature you must include on your banknote for it to even be considered real. And it's _one_ feature. It's relatively trivial to make a chip which can detect their presence. On the other hand, if I need a replacement part for something, it's unlikely I will find the manufacturer giving me models for it. And if a manufacturer is giving me models for it, they probably do so with the explicit expectation that I might end up using them to manufacture a replacement. In most cases either me or some other volunteer will need to measure the existing part, write down all the critical measurements, and then design a new part from scratch in CAD. Even if somehow you are able to fingerprint on those critical measurements, that's just _one_ part. The only way this kind of nonsense law could work is if you mandate that 3D printers must not accept commands from an untrusted source (signature verification) and then you must have software which uses a database to check for such critical measurements, ideally _before_ slicing. Except that still doesn't work because I can always post-process a part to fit. And it doesn't work even more because the software will need to contain a signing key. Unless the signing key is on a remote server somewhere to which you must send your model for validation. This is never going to work, or scale. There are even more hurdles... I can design and build a 3D printer from scratch and manufacture it using non-CNC machined parts at home. A working, high quality 3D printer. Where are you going to force me to put the locks? Are you going to require me to show my ID when buying stepper motors and stepper motor drivers? What about other kinds of manufacturing (that these laws, at least the Washington State ones, also cover)? Will you ban old hardware? What about a milling machine? Are you going to ban non-CNC mills? These are the most ignorant laws made by the most ignorant people. The easiest way to ban people from manufacturing their own guns is to ban manufacture of your own guns. But again, this is a complete non-issue in the US where you can probably get a gun illegally more easily than you can 3D print something half as reliable. |
| |
| ▲ | Arch-TK 21 days ago | parent [-] | | But that's the point. DRM works at all (in terms of causing inconvenience, not preventing copying, for that it will never work of course) because the people producing the data have an interest in applying the DRM. But the people producing 3D printable gun parts are _not_ interested in applying the DRM. If you want to draw an analogy to media, this is more like if the government mandated porn detection software on your computer which would prevent porn from being able to be displayed on your screen. Or mandating HDCP between your monitor and your computer so that your computer could implement restrictions on what you could view on the monitor. Except that computers are extremely difficult to DIY from basic components (I mean raw chips and metal). Meanwhile I can literally buy aluminium extrusions, or even bits of wood, some stepper motors, some gears, some belts, some pulleys and some stepper drivers, an STM32 devboard and get PCBWay to make me a simple PCB, or just use a prototyping board. And at the end of it, I would have a high quality (maybe a bit slow) 3D printer. I can tell you with absolute certainty that it could print gun parts because I have personally taken a trash-tier prusa i3 mk2 clone and turned it into a machine which could probably rival the mk3 at least. How exactly are they planning on stopping me from designing a part, slicing it, and then putting it on a DIY 3D printer? They could maybe achieve this by restricting the sale of certain components such as hot-ends, extruder gears (although you can get away with generic gears), or stepper motors and stepper motor drivers. I just don't see it happening. Maybe they could ban open source slicers and CAD programs? But I guess I better start stocking up on high quality stepper motors and stepper motor drivers and buy a milling machine and a lathe so I can manufacture the other parts myself. You never know when the UK government will steal another wonderful authoritarian idea from another country. |
|
| |
| ▲ | joe_mamba 23 days ago | parent | next [-] | | > But weapons' culture in the US it's obsolete. Militias can't do shit against tyranical govs because once they send drones it's game over. Pretty sure those 50 thousand or so civilians killed on the street in the recent Iranian protests/riots would have been a lot less, if all those Iranians had easy access to guns, and not just the government. Drones are not enough, you still need boots on the ground for you to claim control over a territory, and boots on the ground think twice about signing up for service if that includes facing armed mobs with guns on a daily basis. So no, mobs with guns are not obsolete. | | |
| ▲ | anthk 23 days ago | parent [-] | | Mob with guns would be useless against the Iranian Guards which are pretty much elite commandos. | | |
| ▲ | rayiner 23 days ago | parent | next [-] | | Goat herders with guns in Afghanistan kicked the U.S. army out of their country. | | |
| ▲ | sidewndr46 23 days ago | parent | next [-] | | This isn't really accurate. The Northern Alliance entered into an agreement with the US to secure the country. An insurgency sprang up and we fought it for 20 years before giving up. Since this is now after the fact, we can safely say the Taliban ran the insurgency the whole time. The Taliban are a military and political group compromised of an ethnic minority in Afghanistan. It's not even that the US lost to "goat herders with guns". We failed to secure a small country against a well organized, armed minority. | | |
| ▲ | LorenPechtel 22 days ago | parent [-] | | No. Pakistan supported an insurgency group for 20 years. No insurgency like that can exist without foreign support in some form, usually from governments but it can be from resource export. And the reality is nobody has ever defeated a foreign sponsored insurgency. Some have ended because the sponsor quit sponsoring them, but that is not the same thing as defeated. | | |
| ▲ | sidewndr46 22 days ago | parent [-] | | I don't really think it's news that the Taliban are sponsored by Pakistan. We've known that longer than I've been alive. | | |
| ▲ | LorenPechtel 20 days ago | parent [-] | | The point is we were actually fighting Pakistan. Nobody has ever defeated a foreign-funded insurgency, other than by the funding going away. It's no surprise we didn't accomplish what nobody else has, either. | | |
| ▲ | sidewndr46 7 days ago | parent [-] | | This is akin to arguing that the USSR fought the US in Afghanistan. It's known that we armed and helped the various groups active there at the time. It's also pretty well established we had only a handful of people on the ground there at any point in time. Had the USSR actually fought the US at this point in time, the resulting combat would have been the most significant combat engagements of the 20th century. Everyone knows Pakistan funded the insurgency. Pakistan has no interest in actually running Afghanistan. It's a buffer state for them. The US has no real interest in trying to get Pakistan to stop this. It's a failure of domestic politics that we didn't drop pack up a few weeks after it became obvious Bin Laden was not there. |
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | Edman274 23 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Afghanistan is a landlocked country on the other side of the planet, the soldiers didn't grow up with knowledge of the terrain, they had no knowledge of the language, culture, customs or social networks, no one locally (with few exceptions) wanted them there, and crucially they only lost once they left, and when they left, there were no penalties for the people who started the war; no US politicians were in any danger whether the war was won or lost, no land was lost, and no truly important geopolitical goals failed. On the flip side in any domestic insurrection, the soldiers know the terrain, language, customs and culture of the people, the supply lines are nothing (rather than having to airlift materiel and people thousands of miles, you drive them on regular roads), the infrastructure supports espionage, most people support the regime and will collaborate to return to stability (since they voted for it), the regime never leaves (you can leave Afghanistan, you can't leave your own country or it ceases to be a country), and if you lose, you lose territory and/or politicians run the risk of violence. The stakes are why these comparisons are never relevant. | | |
| ▲ | AngryData 23 days ago | parent [-] | | But at the same time a domestic insurrection means your enemies have direct access to all of your most important infrastructure and logistics and supporting economy. It might be expensive to fly or float materials and people over to the middle east, but you don't gotta worry about 1000+ miles of pissed off insurgents potentially around every bend and tree or mixed into your own military or logistic personnel. |
| |
| ▲ | realo 23 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | First the russians tried. They were not goat herders. They failed. Then the americans tried. They were not goat herders. They failed. The pattern is clear. | |
| ▲ | swiftcoder 23 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | To be fair, those "goat herders" were previously trained and armed by the US to fight Russian forces, so it's not quite an apples-to-apples comparison | |
| ▲ | pegasus 23 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | But could they do the same to goat herders with bigger guns, drones, bombs, etc? | |
| ▲ | JKCalhoun 23 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | Pretty sure Iranians with 3D printed guns would not be able to kick their own army out of Iran. |
| |
| ▲ | joe_mamba 23 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | What's the commando to civilian ratio in Iran? | | |
| ▲ | mschuster91 23 days ago | parent [-] | | Let's do some napkin math: Iran has about 94 million people. Iran's IRGC alone has a personnel count of 125.000 [1], of which about 2-5000 are estimated to be the elite of the elite ("Quds Force"). Together with the Basij (anywhere from 100-600k) that alone is a sufficient amount of force. And on top of that come maybe 400-500k of the regular Iranian Armed Forces [2], as well as about 260k active police+100k police reservists. So, if one sees the whole of IRGC plus Basij as the "commandos", they alone form an active elite of about 0.5%, if one sees the entirety of the military+police we're looking at easily 2-3 million units, so up to 2%. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Revolutionary_Guard_Co... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Republic_of_Iran_Armed... |
| |
| ▲ | abosley 22 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | The Iranian guards, along with most of the armies in the second and third tier powers don't have elite anything. Please see Desert Storm, etc. Most of them ran. The ones that didn't were destroyed. |
|
| |
| ▲ | rayiner 23 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | It’s not obsolete. In a country where your military is farm boys, the important thing is being able to start the war. Eventually chunks of the military will defect. We saw this happen during the Bangladesh independence movement. The revolutionaries got lucky and knocked over a weapons depot early in the conflict. They started fighting and a large number of the Pakistani army that was of Bangladeshi ancestry defected. I am confident the same thing would happen if the government in DC tried to oppress Iowa or Texas. Drones cut both ways. You’re correct that it allows a small number of people loyal to the regime to asymmetrically oppress a large population. But drone technology is in theory accessible to the populace in an industrialized country. | | |
| ▲ | FatherOfCurses 23 days ago | parent [-] | | The 2A crowd has been really quiet this past year. Hell, Trump even said in response to the Pretti shooting that only criminals walk around carrying guns in public. I guess no one cares about government tyranny unless they're asked to respect someone's pronouns. | | |
| ▲ | rayiner 23 days ago | parent | next [-] | | Why would the 2A people say anything? Conservatives aren’t libertarians. They think government has legitimate functions and draw a distinction between government performing those functions (which isn’t tyranny) and the government exceeding its scope (which is tyranny). Removing foreigners here illegally is a core function of the government. Social engineering is not. | | |
| ▲ | seg_lol 23 days ago | parent [-] | | > Why would the 2A people say anything Because Trump is very anti 2A. | | |
| |
| ▲ | vdqtp3 23 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | > Hell, Trump even said in response to the Pretti shooting that only criminals walk around carrying guns in public. If you were paying any attention at all, you'd see pretty much every 2A community, advocate and lobbying group was outraged by that statement and made statements against it. Having said that, it is actually illegal to carry a firearm to go commit crimes like destroying government property, assaulting federal officers and obstructing them in carrying out their constitutional duties. | | |
| ▲ | seg_lol 23 days ago | parent [-] | | > illegal to carry a firearm to go commit crimes Of which Pretti did zero of. | | |
| ▲ | rayiner 22 days ago | parent [-] | | There is video of him kicking light the tail light of a federal law enforcement vehicle, which is definitely a crime. And that’s just what we have video of. | | |
| ▲ | seg_lol 22 days ago | parent | next [-] | | We have video from both sides of the door of a stack of ICE agents with AR15s breaking down a door to a daycare without a warrant. We have video of at least three ICE agents executing people in the street with testimony that contradicts what we see with our eyes. | | | |
| ▲ | vdqtp3 22 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | That same video shows him spitting on an officer. | |
| ▲ | computerthings 22 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | [dead] |
|
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | AngryData 23 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Drones may be good against foreign adversaries, but you can't bomb your own population and cities into being productive economy. A war between two well funded and supported militaries is far different than an insurgency. | |
| ▲ | lenerdenator 23 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | 1) That's a mischaracterization of the FFL purchase process if I've ever heard one. 2) The weapons culture of the US is so obsolete that there are government officials parroting lines about it not being legal to carry a concealed weapon during a protest in Minnesota when it is, actually, very much legal. That is to say, it's not obsolete at all. Given the prior public stances of the Trump administration on firearms, this is incredibly telling, and all the more reason why you can't trust people like them. | |
| ▲ | pocksuppet 23 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Those drones lost some wars against guerilla militias | |
| ▲ | riskable 23 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | Well, at birth every American is issued Baby's First Glock™ |
|
