Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.space.policy > #60476 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-07-03 08:31 -0400 |
| Last post | 2017-11-25 20:25 -0800 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 313 — 26 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.space.policy
Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-03 08:31 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. bitrex <bitrex@de.lete.earthlink.net> - 2017-07-03 09:04 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-03 17:04 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-03 14:04 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-03 18:28 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-03 16:14 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-03 20:57 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-03 16:14 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-04 00:45 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-03 20:11 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-04 04:55 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-04 02:29 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2017-11-23 16:14 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-04 06:49 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-04 18:02 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2017-07-04 22:59 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-05 04:51 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2017-07-04 21:33 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-05 07:16 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-05 16:47 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-05 11:08 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-05 21:02 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-05 19:12 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-05 22:16 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-05 23:30 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-06 09:35 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-06 10:05 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-06 21:20 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Sегg io <innvalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-07 08:03 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-06 21:19 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-04 23:05 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-04 20:08 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-04 09:11 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2017-07-04 11:47 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-04 18:19 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2017-07-04 23:04 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-05 04:56 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-04 23:16 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-04 18:12 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-05 07:20 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-05 16:54 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-05 18:42 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-05 23:07 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-06 09:30 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-06 06:35 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-06 16:34 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-06 21:25 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-07 04:56 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-07 02:09 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-07 20:18 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-07 06:19 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-07 17:13 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-08 06:49 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-08 17:13 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-09 07:12 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-09 17:44 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-09 12:48 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Sегg io <innvalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-09 23:27 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-10 07:11 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-10 16:30 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-11 06:49 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-11 17:47 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-11 13:15 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-11 16:27 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-11 14:46 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-11 18:36 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-11 18:20 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-11 21:31 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-11 22:12 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> - 2017-07-11 19:01 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-12 02:24 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-11 22:44 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-12 10:24 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-13 20:57 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-13 23:17 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-14 17:42 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-14 16:11 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-11 18:21 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-12 07:28 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-12 05:10 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-12 17:45 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-12 18:39 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-12 21:29 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-13 20:27 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-13 23:22 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-14 11:55 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-13 21:01 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-14 02:11 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-13 22:56 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-14 05:03 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-14 17:50 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-14 23:49 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-14 23:04 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-15 05:02 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-15 08:51 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-15 17:23 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-15 18:08 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 02:02 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-16 12:53 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-17 13:04 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-16 09:51 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-16 11:04 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 17:55 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-16 16:15 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 20:26 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-16 15:32 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 22:08 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> - 2017-07-16 15:21 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 22:53 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-16 17:00 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-17 09:06 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-17 20:23 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-16 15:27 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-16 17:39 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> - 2017-07-17 09:46 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 22:16 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Lofty Goat <rlwatkins@gmail.com> - 2017-07-16 13:04 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-12 07:04 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-12 17:48 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-13 06:50 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-13 17:29 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-14 05:51 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-14 05:11 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-15 06:36 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-15 00:27 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-15 08:52 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-16 06:40 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-16 16:02 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-17 06:02 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-17 20:31 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-18 06:32 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-18 21:10 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-19 05:08 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-19 20:17 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-20 01:11 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-20 06:23 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-20 03:35 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-20 05:56 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-20 10:18 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSenseless@electrooptical.net> - 2017-07-20 11:34 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-20 16:25 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-20 20:42 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-20 16:40 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-20 19:54 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-20 19:15 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-20 20:38 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-21 07:01 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-20 16:24 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-15 17:26 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Lofty Goat <rlwatkins@gmail.com> - 2017-07-15 11:33 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-15 17:39 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-13 21:03 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-13 23:19 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-14 17:52 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-14 16:12 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-14 19:54 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-14 09:43 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2017-07-13 09:30 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-13 17:37 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-13 21:07 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-14 02:18 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-13 22:59 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-14 05:07 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-07-14 13:59 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-14 17:55 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-14 23:53 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-14 23:07 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-15 05:06 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-14 23:17 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-15 08:57 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-15 17:53 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-15 18:12 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 02:07 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-16 03:13 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-14 07:14 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-14 17:11 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-14 20:09 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-15 02:14 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2017-07-14 23:09 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-15 05:13 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-14 23:19 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-15 06:57 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-15 18:19 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-16 07:06 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-16 14:06 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 20:29 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-15 00:33 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-15 16:11 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-15 21:27 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-15 18:17 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-15 22:30 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2017-07-15 22:07 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 03:15 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-16 07:16 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-16 11:45 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 18:13 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-16 16:33 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 18:09 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-17 06:11 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-17 16:46 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-17 22:24 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-17 21:53 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-18 06:38 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-18 17:35 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-18 20:26 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-18 20:12 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-18 22:12 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-19 00:49 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-19 05:30 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-19 04:54 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-19 06:34 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-19 16:14 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-19 17:24 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-19 00:00 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-19 20:21 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-21 08:00 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-21 09:08 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-21 17:14 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-16 13:21 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2017-07-14 09:01 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-14 17:15 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-14 16:10 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2017-07-15 22:11 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 03:23 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-16 09:58 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Serg io <invaalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-16 12:05 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 18:15 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> - 2017-07-16 10:56 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-16 18:19 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-16 16:36 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-05 08:19 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2017-07-05 10:39 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-05 16:59 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-05 11:11 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-05 21:11 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-05 19:28 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-06 21:32 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-06 19:38 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-09 21:55 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-10 12:31 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Sегg io <innvalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-10 12:25 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2017-07-11 13:00 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-10 12:44 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-10 18:21 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-10 16:44 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-10 19:52 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> - 2017-07-06 09:33 +0100
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-06 03:29 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-05 21:04 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-06 01:22 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-05 22:18 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-06 05:06 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-06 21:36 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-07 05:00 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-07 20:25 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-08 00:40 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-07 17:53 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-09 21:56 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-10 05:08 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-09 23:06 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-10 12:38 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-10 17:31 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-10 12:47 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-10 18:22 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-10 22:35 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> - 2017-07-07 13:41 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2017-07-05 17:47 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2017-07-03 22:55 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-03 20:16 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Peter Stickney <p_stickney@verizon.net> - 2017-07-13 19:01 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-04 20:04 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> - 2017-07-05 08:20 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-04 20:04 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-06 06:21 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Robert Baer <robertbaer@localnet.com> - 2017-07-03 18:35 -0800
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-06 05:01 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Sегg io <innvalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-06 13:38 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-06 05:10 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-10 17:16 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-06 05:13 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-06 08:35 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-07 10:31 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-09 22:15 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2017-07-10 10:43 +0300
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Greg Goss <gossg@gossg.org> - 2017-07-10 21:32 -0600
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. krw@notreal.com - 2017-07-10 12:39 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-06 15:21 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-06 13:14 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-07 15:34 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-07 14:03 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-07 17:22 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-07 17:01 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-09 12:49 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Sегg io <innvalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-09 23:26 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-10 16:10 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-10 17:40 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Sегg io <innvalid@invalid.com> - 2017-07-10 17:22 -0500
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-10 19:49 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Thomas Koenig <tkoenig@netcologne.de> - 2017-07-13 20:17 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-13 21:42 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-13 20:53 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-14 02:05 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> - 2017-07-13 23:25 -0700
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-12 10:58 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-12 17:54 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-12 15:18 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-12 20:00 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-12 11:42 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-13 04:17 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-26 13:33 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2017-07-26 17:58 +0000
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. "Robert Clark" <rgregoryclark@gmSPAMBLOACKail.com> - 2017-07-26 14:08 -0400
Re: Towards the *fully* 3D-printed electric cars. William Mook <mokmedical@gmail.com> - 2017-11-25 20:25 -0800
Page 9 of 16 — ← Prev page 1 … 7 8 [9] 10 11 … 16 Next page →
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-14 02:18 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <39ml3e-bmc.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #60657 |
In sci.physics krw@notreal.com wrote: > On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 17:37:59 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > >>In sci.physics "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> wrote: >>> "David Mitchell" wrote in message >>> news:r5mdnSw3tNBsJvjEnZ2dnUU78S_NnZ2d@brightview.co.uk... >>>> >>>>jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>> In sci.physics David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>> OK, what "stuff" would people be making at home? >>>>>> >>>>>> Jewellry, utilities, tools, gadgets. >>>>> >>>>> Could you be any more vague? >>>> >>>>Yes. Yes I could. >>>> >>>>Things. People will make things. All of the things. >>> >>> I suspect 3D printing at home will be as successful as the personal >>> computer. I mean everyone knows they're useless at home and we'll only need >>> a few major mainframes. >> >>Personal computer use in the home is dropping with increased use of smart >>phones for those important tasks such as posting on twitter and facebook. > > Banking and Amazon, too. Though that isn't to say that there isn't > anything beyond the 3D printer. Like what, a 4D printer? Of course the ultimate would be a genuine Star Trek replicator: "Computer a 1968 Gibson Les Paul Custom and a cup of Earl Grey, hot." >>> Which reminds me, I need to tell my friends who own 3D printers and printing >>> parts to fix things at homes, tools, and tool holders and all manner of >>> things that I never would have thought of myself that they're wrong and no >>> one will effectively use a 3D printer at home. >> >>How many people do you know that own 3D printers? > > I know of none but we have several at work. One of my cow-orkers was > going to buy one and use it as a side business but he figured out that > it made no business sense. Could that be because custom machine shops have real industrial grade 3D printers? >>I know about a dozen people that own things like welders, milling machines, >>drill presses, and lathes but no one that owns a 3D printer. >> >>> Honestly, it's pretty damn presumptuous to claim that there's no future to >>> 3D printing at home. I suspect 10-20 years from now we'll be laughing at >>> such claims. Like computers, it will continue to improve. It'll get faster, >>> more capable, capable of using more materials, etc. >> >>Since no one in this thread has made that claim, your post is nonsense. > > +1 -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | krw@notreal.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-13 22:59 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <encgmcpot1hctn6c9ocdem3pktqu8v1rri@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #60661 |
On Fri, 14 Jul 2017 02:18:43 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >In sci.physics krw@notreal.com wrote: >> On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 17:37:59 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> >>>In sci.physics "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> wrote: >>>> "David Mitchell" wrote in message >>>> news:r5mdnSw3tNBsJvjEnZ2dnUU78S_NnZ2d@brightview.co.uk... >>>>> >>>>>jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>> In sci.physics David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>> OK, what "stuff" would people be making at home? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Jewellry, utilities, tools, gadgets. >>>>>> >>>>>> Could you be any more vague? >>>>> >>>>>Yes. Yes I could. >>>>> >>>>>Things. People will make things. All of the things. >>>> >>>> I suspect 3D printing at home will be as successful as the personal >>>> computer. I mean everyone knows they're useless at home and we'll only need >>>> a few major mainframes. >>> >>>Personal computer use in the home is dropping with increased use of smart >>>phones for those important tasks such as posting on twitter and facebook. >> >> Banking and Amazon, too. Though that isn't to say that there isn't >> anything beyond the 3D printer. > >Like what, a 4D printer? > >Of course the ultimate would be a genuine Star Trek replicator: > >"Computer a 1968 Gibson Les Paul Custom and a cup of Earl Grey, hot." > >>>> Which reminds me, I need to tell my friends who own 3D printers and printing >>>> parts to fix things at homes, tools, and tool holders and all manner of >>>> things that I never would have thought of myself that they're wrong and no >>>> one will effectively use a 3D printer at home. >>> >>>How many people do you know that own 3D printers? >> >> I know of none but we have several at work. One of my cow-orkers was >> going to buy one and use it as a side business but he figured out that >> it made no business sense. > >Could that be because custom machine shops have real industrial grade >3D printers? So you think that after everyone has a 3D printer, the world will end? Are you some sort of 3D Rastafarian, or something? >>>I know about a dozen people that own things like welders, milling machines, >>>drill presses, and lathes but no one that owns a 3D printer. >>> >>>> Honestly, it's pretty damn presumptuous to claim that there's no future to >>>> 3D printing at home. I suspect 10-20 years from now we'll be laughing at >>>> such claims. Like computers, it will continue to improve. It'll get faster, >>>> more capable, capable of using more materials, etc. >>> >>>Since no one in this thread has made that claim, your post is nonsense. >> >> +1
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-14 05:07 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <060m3e-lpd.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #60663 |
In sci.physics krw@notreal.com wrote: > On Fri, 14 Jul 2017 02:18:43 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > >>In sci.physics krw@notreal.com wrote: >>> On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 17:37:59 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>> >>>>In sci.physics "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> wrote: >>>>> "David Mitchell" wrote in message >>>>> news:r5mdnSw3tNBsJvjEnZ2dnUU78S_NnZ2d@brightview.co.uk... >>>>>> >>>>>>jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>> In sci.physics David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> OK, what "stuff" would people be making at home? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Jewellry, utilities, tools, gadgets. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Could you be any more vague? >>>>>> >>>>>>Yes. Yes I could. >>>>>> >>>>>>Things. People will make things. All of the things. >>>>> >>>>> I suspect 3D printing at home will be as successful as the personal >>>>> computer. I mean everyone knows they're useless at home and we'll only need >>>>> a few major mainframes. >>>> >>>>Personal computer use in the home is dropping with increased use of smart >>>>phones for those important tasks such as posting on twitter and facebook. >>> >>> Banking and Amazon, too. Though that isn't to say that there isn't >>> anything beyond the 3D printer. >> >>Like what, a 4D printer? >> >>Of course the ultimate would be a genuine Star Trek replicator: >> >>"Computer a 1968 Gibson Les Paul Custom and a cup of Earl Grey, hot." >> >>>>> Which reminds me, I need to tell my friends who own 3D printers and printing >>>>> parts to fix things at homes, tools, and tool holders and all manner of >>>>> things that I never would have thought of myself that they're wrong and no >>>>> one will effectively use a 3D printer at home. >>>> >>>>How many people do you know that own 3D printers? >>> >>> I know of none but we have several at work. One of my cow-orkers was >>> going to buy one and use it as a side business but he figured out that >>> it made no business sense. >> >>Could that be because custom machine shops have real industrial grade >>3D printers? > > So you think that after everyone has a 3D printer, the world will end? > Are you some sort of 3D Rastafarian, or something? I think the likelyhood of everyone having a 3D printer is quite remote. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-14 13:59 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <596930BF.13D1@ix.netcom.com> |
| In reply to | #60666 |
can you make a 3d printout with paper? so the surface contains rasied texture..
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | krw@notreal.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-14 17:55 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <5cfimcthrnui172a00ll3e0jpb0349gs7c@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #60666 |
On Fri, 14 Jul 2017 05:07:44 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >In sci.physics krw@notreal.com wrote: >> On Fri, 14 Jul 2017 02:18:43 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> >>>In sci.physics krw@notreal.com wrote: >>>> On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 17:37:59 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>> >>>>>In sci.physics "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> wrote: >>>>>> "David Mitchell" wrote in message >>>>>> news:r5mdnSw3tNBsJvjEnZ2dnUU78S_NnZ2d@brightview.co.uk... >>>>>>> >>>>>>>jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>>> In sci.physics David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> OK, what "stuff" would people be making at home? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Jewellry, utilities, tools, gadgets. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Could you be any more vague? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Yes. Yes I could. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Things. People will make things. All of the things. >>>>>> >>>>>> I suspect 3D printing at home will be as successful as the personal >>>>>> computer. I mean everyone knows they're useless at home and we'll only need >>>>>> a few major mainframes. >>>>> >>>>>Personal computer use in the home is dropping with increased use of smart >>>>>phones for those important tasks such as posting on twitter and facebook. >>>> >>>> Banking and Amazon, too. Though that isn't to say that there isn't >>>> anything beyond the 3D printer. >>> >>>Like what, a 4D printer? >>> >>>Of course the ultimate would be a genuine Star Trek replicator: >>> >>>"Computer a 1968 Gibson Les Paul Custom and a cup of Earl Grey, hot." >>> >>>>>> Which reminds me, I need to tell my friends who own 3D printers and printing >>>>>> parts to fix things at homes, tools, and tool holders and all manner of >>>>>> things that I never would have thought of myself that they're wrong and no >>>>>> one will effectively use a 3D printer at home. >>>>> >>>>>How many people do you know that own 3D printers? >>>> >>>> I know of none but we have several at work. One of my cow-orkers was >>>> going to buy one and use it as a side business but he figured out that >>>> it made no business sense. >>> >>>Could that be because custom machine shops have real industrial grade >>>3D printers? >> >> So you think that after everyone has a 3D printer, the world will end? >> Are you some sort of 3D Rastafarian, or something? > >I think the likelyhood of everyone having a 3D printer is quite remote. But that's the point of this thread. But let me put it another way.... If 3D printers are the "next thing", are you saying that there can't be any "next, next thing"? The world ends after "next"?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-14 23:53 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <s32o3e-ksk.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #60683 |
In sci.physics krw@notreal.com wrote: > On Fri, 14 Jul 2017 05:07:44 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > >>In sci.physics krw@notreal.com wrote: >>> On Fri, 14 Jul 2017 02:18:43 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>> >>>>In sci.physics krw@notreal.com wrote: >>>>> On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 17:37:59 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>In sci.physics "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> wrote: >>>>>>> "David Mitchell" wrote in message >>>>>>> news:r5mdnSw3tNBsJvjEnZ2dnUU78S_NnZ2d@brightview.co.uk... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>>>> In sci.physics David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> OK, what "stuff" would people be making at home? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Jewellry, utilities, tools, gadgets. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Could you be any more vague? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Yes. Yes I could. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Things. People will make things. All of the things. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I suspect 3D printing at home will be as successful as the personal >>>>>>> computer. I mean everyone knows they're useless at home and we'll only need >>>>>>> a few major mainframes. >>>>>> >>>>>>Personal computer use in the home is dropping with increased use of smart >>>>>>phones for those important tasks such as posting on twitter and facebook. >>>>> >>>>> Banking and Amazon, too. Though that isn't to say that there isn't >>>>> anything beyond the 3D printer. >>>> >>>>Like what, a 4D printer? >>>> >>>>Of course the ultimate would be a genuine Star Trek replicator: >>>> >>>>"Computer a 1968 Gibson Les Paul Custom and a cup of Earl Grey, hot." >>>> >>>>>>> Which reminds me, I need to tell my friends who own 3D printers and printing >>>>>>> parts to fix things at homes, tools, and tool holders and all manner of >>>>>>> things that I never would have thought of myself that they're wrong and no >>>>>>> one will effectively use a 3D printer at home. >>>>>> >>>>>>How many people do you know that own 3D printers? >>>>> >>>>> I know of none but we have several at work. One of my cow-orkers was >>>>> going to buy one and use it as a side business but he figured out that >>>>> it made no business sense. >>>> >>>>Could that be because custom machine shops have real industrial grade >>>>3D printers? >>> >>> So you think that after everyone has a 3D printer, the world will end? >>> Are you some sort of 3D Rastafarian, or something? >> >>I think the likelyhood of everyone having a 3D printer is quite remote. > > But that's the point of this thread. That was one of my points. The post that started all this was claiming people would be printing everything at home including cars; utter nonsense. > But let me put it another way.... If 3D printers are the "next > thing", are you saying that there can't be any "next, next thing"? The > world ends after "next"? 3D printers are over 30 years old. "The world ends" is babble. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | krw@notreal.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-14 23:07 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <bi1jmcdk39rhid2pumolg1oo3fuhq1ducr@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #60689 |
On Fri, 14 Jul 2017 23:53:00 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >In sci.physics krw@notreal.com wrote: >> On Fri, 14 Jul 2017 05:07:44 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> >>>In sci.physics krw@notreal.com wrote: >>>> On Fri, 14 Jul 2017 02:18:43 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>> >>>>>In sci.physics krw@notreal.com wrote: >>>>>> On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 17:37:59 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>In sci.physics "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> "David Mitchell" wrote in message >>>>>>>> news:r5mdnSw3tNBsJvjEnZ2dnUU78S_NnZ2d@brightview.co.uk... >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>> In sci.physics David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> OK, what "stuff" would people be making at home? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Jewellry, utilities, tools, gadgets. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Could you be any more vague? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Yes. Yes I could. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Things. People will make things. All of the things. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I suspect 3D printing at home will be as successful as the personal >>>>>>>> computer. I mean everyone knows they're useless at home and we'll only need >>>>>>>> a few major mainframes. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Personal computer use in the home is dropping with increased use of smart >>>>>>>phones for those important tasks such as posting on twitter and facebook. >>>>>> >>>>>> Banking and Amazon, too. Though that isn't to say that there isn't >>>>>> anything beyond the 3D printer. >>>>> >>>>>Like what, a 4D printer? >>>>> >>>>>Of course the ultimate would be a genuine Star Trek replicator: >>>>> >>>>>"Computer a 1968 Gibson Les Paul Custom and a cup of Earl Grey, hot." >>>>> >>>>>>>> Which reminds me, I need to tell my friends who own 3D printers and printing >>>>>>>> parts to fix things at homes, tools, and tool holders and all manner of >>>>>>>> things that I never would have thought of myself that they're wrong and no >>>>>>>> one will effectively use a 3D printer at home. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>How many people do you know that own 3D printers? >>>>>> >>>>>> I know of none but we have several at work. One of my cow-orkers was >>>>>> going to buy one and use it as a side business but he figured out that >>>>>> it made no business sense. >>>>> >>>>>Could that be because custom machine shops have real industrial grade >>>>>3D printers? >>>> >>>> So you think that after everyone has a 3D printer, the world will end? >>>> Are you some sort of 3D Rastafarian, or something? >>> >>>I think the likelyhood of everyone having a 3D printer is quite remote. >> >> But that's the point of this thread. > >That was one of my points. > >The post that started all this was claiming people would be printing >everything at home including cars; utter nonsense. You seem to think I'm disagreeing with you. > >> But let me put it another way.... If 3D printers are the "next >> thing", are you saying that there can't be any "next, next thing"? The >> world ends after "next"? > >3D printers are over 30 years old. > >"The world ends" is babble. Let me make this simple for the simple. If 3D printers are "the next thing". Why is there not another "thing" beyond "the next thing"? End of the world?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-15 05:06 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <5fko3e-5qm.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #60694 |
In sci.physics krw@notreal.com wrote: > On Fri, 14 Jul 2017 23:53:00 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > >>In sci.physics krw@notreal.com wrote: >>> On Fri, 14 Jul 2017 05:07:44 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>> >>>>In sci.physics krw@notreal.com wrote: >>>>> On Fri, 14 Jul 2017 02:18:43 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>In sci.physics krw@notreal.com wrote: >>>>>>> On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 17:37:59 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>In sci.physics "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> "David Mitchell" wrote in message >>>>>>>>> news:r5mdnSw3tNBsJvjEnZ2dnUU78S_NnZ2d@brightview.co.uk... >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> In sci.physics David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> OK, what "stuff" would people be making at home? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Jewellry, utilities, tools, gadgets. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Could you be any more vague? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Yes. Yes I could. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Things. People will make things. All of the things. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I suspect 3D printing at home will be as successful as the personal >>>>>>>>> computer. I mean everyone knows they're useless at home and we'll only need >>>>>>>>> a few major mainframes. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Personal computer use in the home is dropping with increased use of smart >>>>>>>>phones for those important tasks such as posting on twitter and facebook. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Banking and Amazon, too. Though that isn't to say that there isn't >>>>>>> anything beyond the 3D printer. >>>>>> >>>>>>Like what, a 4D printer? >>>>>> >>>>>>Of course the ultimate would be a genuine Star Trek replicator: >>>>>> >>>>>>"Computer a 1968 Gibson Les Paul Custom and a cup of Earl Grey, hot." >>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Which reminds me, I need to tell my friends who own 3D printers and printing >>>>>>>>> parts to fix things at homes, tools, and tool holders and all manner of >>>>>>>>> things that I never would have thought of myself that they're wrong and no >>>>>>>>> one will effectively use a 3D printer at home. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>How many people do you know that own 3D printers? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I know of none but we have several at work. One of my cow-orkers was >>>>>>> going to buy one and use it as a side business but he figured out that >>>>>>> it made no business sense. >>>>>> >>>>>>Could that be because custom machine shops have real industrial grade >>>>>>3D printers? >>>>> >>>>> So you think that after everyone has a 3D printer, the world will end? >>>>> Are you some sort of 3D Rastafarian, or something? >>>> >>>>I think the likelyhood of everyone having a 3D printer is quite remote. >>> >>> But that's the point of this thread. >> >>That was one of my points. >> >>The post that started all this was claiming people would be printing >>everything at home including cars; utter nonsense. > > You seem to think I'm disagreeing with you. That the post that started all this was claiming people would be printing everything at home including cars? I don't see you saying anything about the post that started all this. >>> But let me put it another way.... If 3D printers are the "next >>> thing", are you saying that there can't be any "next, next thing"? The >>> world ends after "next"? >> >>3D printers are over 30 years old. >> >>"The world ends" is babble. > > Let me make this simple for the simple. If 3D printers are "the next > thing". Why is there not another "thing" beyond "the next thing"? End > of the world? 3D printers are an old thing. Are you saying we will have Star Trek replicators? -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-14 23:17 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fpcjmchmdseknevoj24vrpf5hoj7muve5d@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #60698 |
jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>
>3D printers are an old thing.
>
Lots of things are around for a long time before they take hold and
mature.
>
>Are you saying we will have Star Trek replicators?
>
Were you frightened by tribbles when you were very young?
--
"Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the
truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong."
-- Thomas Jefferson
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | krw@notreal.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-15 08:57 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <f64kmc19917rn7eu4oh7minbqna7mooeav@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #60698 |
On Sat, 15 Jul 2017 05:06:13 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >In sci.physics krw@notreal.com wrote: >> On Fri, 14 Jul 2017 23:53:00 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> >>>In sci.physics krw@notreal.com wrote: >>>> On Fri, 14 Jul 2017 05:07:44 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>> >>>>>In sci.physics krw@notreal.com wrote: >>>>>> On Fri, 14 Jul 2017 02:18:43 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>In sci.physics krw@notreal.com wrote: >>>>>>>> On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 17:37:59 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>In sci.physics "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> "David Mitchell" wrote in message >>>>>>>>>> news:r5mdnSw3tNBsJvjEnZ2dnUU78S_NnZ2d@brightview.co.uk... >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> In sci.physics David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> OK, what "stuff" would people be making at home? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Jewellry, utilities, tools, gadgets. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Could you be any more vague? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>Yes. Yes I could. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>Things. People will make things. All of the things. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I suspect 3D printing at home will be as successful as the personal >>>>>>>>>> computer. I mean everyone knows they're useless at home and we'll only need >>>>>>>>>> a few major mainframes. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Personal computer use in the home is dropping with increased use of smart >>>>>>>>>phones for those important tasks such as posting on twitter and facebook. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Banking and Amazon, too. Though that isn't to say that there isn't >>>>>>>> anything beyond the 3D printer. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Like what, a 4D printer? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Of course the ultimate would be a genuine Star Trek replicator: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>"Computer a 1968 Gibson Les Paul Custom and a cup of Earl Grey, hot." >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Which reminds me, I need to tell my friends who own 3D printers and printing >>>>>>>>>> parts to fix things at homes, tools, and tool holders and all manner of >>>>>>>>>> things that I never would have thought of myself that they're wrong and no >>>>>>>>>> one will effectively use a 3D printer at home. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>How many people do you know that own 3D printers? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I know of none but we have several at work. One of my cow-orkers was >>>>>>>> going to buy one and use it as a side business but he figured out that >>>>>>>> it made no business sense. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Could that be because custom machine shops have real industrial grade >>>>>>>3D printers? >>>>>> >>>>>> So you think that after everyone has a 3D printer, the world will end? >>>>>> Are you some sort of 3D Rastafarian, or something? >>>>> >>>>>I think the likelyhood of everyone having a 3D printer is quite remote. >>>> >>>> But that's the point of this thread. >>> >>>That was one of my points. >>> >>>The post that started all this was claiming people would be printing >>>everything at home including cars; utter nonsense. >> >> You seem to think I'm disagreeing with you. > >That the post that started all this was claiming people would be printing >everything at home including cars? That wasn't my claim! I've been arguing on your side of that silly proposition. > >I don't see you saying anything about the post that started all this. You're not looking. >>>> But let me put it another way.... If 3D printers are the "next >>>> thing", are you saying that there can't be any "next, next thing"? The >>>> world ends after "next"? >>> >>>3D printers are over 30 years old. >>> >>>"The world ends" is babble. >> >> Let me make this simple for the simple. If 3D printers are "the next >> thing". Why is there not another "thing" beyond "the next thing"? End >> of the world? > >3D printers are an old thing. Woooosssshhhh! >Are you saying we will have Star Trek replicators? Do pay attention. <Wow!>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-15 17:53 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ce1q3e-ndr.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #60712 |
In sci.physics krw@notreal.com wrote: > On Sat, 15 Jul 2017 05:06:13 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > >>In sci.physics krw@notreal.com wrote: <snip> >>That the post that started all this was claiming people would be printing >>everything at home including cars? > > That wasn't my claim! I've been arguing on your side of that silly > proposition. What wasn't your claim? That the post that started all this was claiming people would be printing everything at home including cars? The above is just a statement of fact. >>I don't see you saying anything about the post that started all this. > > You're not looking. > >>>>> But let me put it another way.... If 3D printers are the "next >>>>> thing", are you saying that there can't be any "next, next thing"? The >>>>> world ends after "next"? >>>> >>>>3D printers are over 30 years old. >>>> >>>>"The world ends" is babble. >>> >>> Let me make this simple for the simple. If 3D printers are "the next >>> thing". Why is there not another "thing" beyond "the next thing"? End >>> of the world? >> >>3D printers are an old thing. > > Woooosssshhhh! > >>Are you saying we will have Star Trek replicators? > > Do pay attention. <Wow!> I never said 3D printers are "the next thing" nor do I believe that. The last "thing" in the manufacturing world was the industrial revolution which started in the late 18th century and became fully mature in the early 20th century. THAT changed the world. FYI I concider 3D printing to be little more than a refinement of Damascus steel, a process from the 3rd century. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | krw@notreal.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-15 18:12 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <4n4lmcd78mngbbk9luqgp3jmflrkpudfp7@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #60720 |
On Sat, 15 Jul 2017 17:53:48 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >In sci.physics krw@notreal.com wrote: >> On Sat, 15 Jul 2017 05:06:13 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> >>>In sci.physics krw@notreal.com wrote: > ><snip> > >>>That the post that started all this was claiming people would be printing >>>everything at home including cars? >> >> That wasn't my claim! I've been arguing on your side of that silly >> proposition. > >What wasn't your claim? You really can't read? I thought better of you. > >That the post that started all this was claiming people would be printing >everything at home including cars? Which I *completely* disagree with but for some reason you insist on arguing with someone who agrees with you. > >The above is just a statement of fact. > >>>I don't see you saying anything about the post that started all this. >> >> You're not looking. >> >>>>>> But let me put it another way.... If 3D printers are the "next >>>>>> thing", are you saying that there can't be any "next, next thing"? The >>>>>> world ends after "next"? >>>>> >>>>>3D printers are over 30 years old. >>>>> >>>>>"The world ends" is babble. >>>> >>>> Let me make this simple for the simple. If 3D printers are "the next >>>> thing". Why is there not another "thing" beyond "the next thing"? End >>>> of the world? >>> >>>3D printers are an old thing. >> >> Woooosssshhhh! >> >>>Are you saying we will have Star Trek replicators? >> >> Do pay attention. <Wow!> > >I never said 3D printers are "the next thing" nor do I believe that. Try reading for comprehension. > >The last "thing" in the manufacturing world was the industrial revolution >which started in the late 18th century and became fully mature in the >early 20th century. > >THAT changed the world. > >FYI I concider 3D printing to be little more than a refinement of Damascus >steel, a process from the 3rd century. Oh, good grief.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-16 02:07 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <jcuq3e-ic1.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #60727 |
In sci.physics krw@notreal.com wrote: > On Sat, 15 Jul 2017 17:53:48 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > >>In sci.physics krw@notreal.com wrote: >>> On Sat, 15 Jul 2017 05:06:13 -0000, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >>> >>>>In sci.physics krw@notreal.com wrote: >> >><snip> >> >>>>That the post that started all this was claiming people would be printing >>>>everything at home including cars? >>> >>> That wasn't my claim! I've been arguing on your side of that silly >>> proposition. >> >>What wasn't your claim? > > You really can't read? I thought better of you. Well thanks but I'm having problems parsing extactly what it is you are agreeing with an what you are disagreeing with. >>That the post that started all this was claiming people would be printing >>everything at home including cars? > > Which I *completely* disagree with but for some reason you insist on > arguing with someone who agrees with you. OK, fine, we both agree that the post that started all this was claiming people would be printing everything at home including cars. >>The above is just a statement of fact. >> >>>>I don't see you saying anything about the post that started all this. >>> >>> You're not looking. >>> >>>>>>> But let me put it another way.... If 3D printers are the "next >>>>>>> thing", are you saying that there can't be any "next, next thing"? The >>>>>>> world ends after "next"? >>>>>> >>>>>>3D printers are over 30 years old. >>>>>> >>>>>>"The world ends" is babble. >>>>> >>>>> Let me make this simple for the simple. If 3D printers are "the next >>>>> thing". Why is there not another "thing" beyond "the next thing"? End >>>>> of the world? >>>> >>>>3D printers are an old thing. >>> >>> Woooosssshhhh! >>> >>>>Are you saying we will have Star Trek replicators? >>> >>> Do pay attention. <Wow!> >> >>I never said 3D printers are "the next thing" nor do I believe that. > > Try reading for comprehension. OK, what part of I never said 3D printers are "the next thing" nor do I believe that do you have an issue with? >>The last "thing" in the manufacturing world was the industrial revolution >>which started in the late 18th century and became fully mature in the >>early 20th century. >> >>THAT changed the world. >> >>FYI I concider 3D printing to be little more than a refinement of Damascus >>steel, a process from the 3rd century. > > Oh, good grief. So what is the essential diffence between Damascus steel and 3D printing? Both take chunks of a base material and fuse the chunks into a bigger object. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Fred J. McCall <fjmccall@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-16 03:13 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <3uemmcdtea2m6tco6648acd7jvn6b9j19c@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #60734 |
jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>
>So what is the essential diffence between Damascus steel and 3D printing?
>
>Both take chunks of a base material and fuse the chunks into a bigger
>object.
>
Actually, no, they don't. What you are describing are later attempts
to replicate Damascus steel by pattern welding that did not produce
the same stuff at all. No one knows how to make the original Damascus
steel.
As far as that goes, that's not what 3D-printing does, either, except
at the very extreme that says everything is made that way.
--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-14 07:14 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.33d271bc46225db998998d@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #60649 |
In article <nonk3e-pk9.ln1@mail.specsol.com>, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com says... > > In sci.physics "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> wrote: > > "David Mitchell" wrote in message > > news:r5mdnSw3tNBsJvjEnZ2dnUU78S_NnZ2d@brightview.co.uk... > >> > >>jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > >>> In sci.physics David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > >>> > >>>>> OK, what "stuff" would people be making at home? > >>>> > >>>> Jewellry, utilities, tools, gadgets. > >>> > >>> Could you be any more vague? > >> > >>Yes. Yes I could. > >> > >>Things. People will make things. All of the things. > > > > I suspect 3D printing at home will be as successful as the personal > > computer. I mean everyone knows they're useless at home and we'll only need > > a few major mainframes. > > Personal computer use in the home is dropping with increased use of smart > phones for those important tasks such as posting on twitter and facebook. The original point was that the original "personal computers" were hideously expensive, very hard to use, and didn't do a whole lot. There absolutely were a lot of people who said "I'll never need one of those" back in the early 1980s. Yet they can be found (in desktop or laptop form) in the vast majority of houses in the US because the price dropped, they became much easier to use, and they could do a lot more (i.e. high speed Internet versus acoustic modems and BBSes), Besides, smart phones prove the point AGAIN! When the original Apple iPhone came out, it didn't have it's "killer app" which was the App Store, so the orignal wasn't terribly functional. On top of that, cell data service at the time was slow, slow, slow, so even surfing the Internet was painful with these new "smart phones". But again, the majority of phones I see today are now "smart phones". They're cheaper, more functional (more apps), and the cell data networks are quite good these days. New technologies keep getting cheaper and more accessible for individuals to use all the time! It's a pretty safe bet that the very same thing will happen with 3D printing. > > Which reminds me, I need to tell my friends who own 3D printers and printing > > parts to fix things at homes, tools, and tool holders and all manner of > > things that I never would have thought of myself that they're wrong and no > > one will effectively use a 3D printer at home. > > How many people do you know that own 3D printers? That's today. We're talking about the trending of the technology. > I know about a dozen people that own things like welders, milling machines, > drill presses, and lathes but no one that owns a 3D printer. > > > Honestly, it's pretty damn presumptuous to claim that there's no future to > > 3D printing at home. I suspect 10-20 years from now we'll be laughing at > > such claims. Like computers, it will continue to improve. It'll get faster, > > more capable, capable of using more materials, etc. > > Since no one in this thread has made that claim, your post is nonsense. That sure as hell seems to be what you're arguing. Jeff -- All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone. These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends, employer, or any organization that I am a member of.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-14 17:11 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <hjan3e-dhi.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #60673 |
In sci.physics Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> wrote: > In article <nonk3e-pk9.ln1@mail.specsol.com>, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com > says... >> >> In sci.physics "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" <mooregr@deletethisgreenms.com> wrote: >> > "David Mitchell" wrote in message >> > news:r5mdnSw3tNBsJvjEnZ2dnUU78S_NnZ2d@brightview.co.uk... >> >> >> >>jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> >>> In sci.physics David Mitchell <david.robot.mitchell@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> >>> >> >>>>> OK, what "stuff" would people be making at home? >> >>>> >> >>>> Jewellry, utilities, tools, gadgets. >> >>> >> >>> Could you be any more vague? >> >> >> >>Yes. Yes I could. >> >> >> >>Things. People will make things. All of the things. >> > >> > I suspect 3D printing at home will be as successful as the personal >> > computer. I mean everyone knows they're useless at home and we'll only need >> > a few major mainframes. >> >> Personal computer use in the home is dropping with increased use of smart >> phones for those important tasks such as posting on twitter and facebook. > > The original point was that the original "personal computers" were > hideously expensive, very hard to use, and didn't do a whole lot. There > absolutely were a lot of people who said "I'll never need one of those" > back in the early 1980s. Yet they can be found (in desktop or laptop > form) in the vast majority of houses in the US because the price > dropped, they became much easier to use, and they could do a lot more > (i.e. high speed Internet versus acoustic modems and BBSes), > > Besides, smart phones prove the point AGAIN! When the original Apple > iPhone came out, it didn't have it's "killer app" which was the App > Store, so the orignal wasn't terribly functional. On top of that, cell > data service at the time was slow, slow, slow, so even surfing the > Internet was painful with these new "smart phones". But again, the > majority of phones I see today are now "smart phones". They're cheaper, > more functional (more apps), and the cell data networks are quite good > these days. > > New technologies keep getting cheaper and more accessible for > individuals to use all the time! It's a pretty safe bet that the very > same thing will happen with 3D printing. New technologies will not make aluminum or plastic cheaper. Printing speed is limited by basic physics. Most people can not be bothered to make their own bread or biscuits on equipment they already own. 3D printers for home use are already less than $200; how many people do you know that have one? >> > Which reminds me, I need to tell my friends who own 3D printers and > printing >> > parts to fix things at homes, tools, and tool holders and all manner of >> > things that I never would have thought of myself that they're wrong and no >> > one will effectively use a 3D printer at home. >> >> How many people do you know that own 3D printers? > > That's today. We're talking about the trending of the technology. The trending of the technology for home use is anybodies guess; my guess is that it will be trivial and hobbiests just like the people that own machinery like drill presses and milling machines. >> I know about a dozen people that own things like welders, milling machines, >> drill presses, and lathes but no one that owns a 3D printer. >> >> > Honestly, it's pretty damn presumptuous to claim that there's no future to >> > 3D printing at home. I suspect 10-20 years from now we'll be laughing at >> > such claims. Like computers, it will continue to improve. It'll get faster, >> > more capable, capable of using more materials, etc. >> >> Since no one in this thread has made that claim, your post is nonsense. > > That sure as hell seems to be what you're arguing. Maybe to the typical internet generation knee jerker that immediately responds with anger and bile to what he THINKS was said as opposed to what was actually said. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-14 20:09 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.33d32751eccecdae98998e@news.eternal-september.org> |
| In reply to | #60677 |
In article <hjan3e-dhi.ln1@mail.specsol.com>, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com says... > New technologies will not make aluminum or plastic cheaper. This is quite simply bullshit. Aluminum used to be so damn expensive that the tip of the Washington Monument is made of the stuff. Now it's do damn cheap that beer cans and soda cans are made of it. Why? Because the technology used to make it literally changed. But don't take my word for it: http://www.aluminum.org/aluminum-advantage/history-aluminum I'm not an expert on plastic prices, but it sure seems like kids these days have a lot more, and bigger, damn cheap plastic toys than when I grew up. Hell, even some storage sheds are made of the stuff today. I sure don't remember any plastic storage sheds when I was a kid. > Printing speed is limited by basic physics. The speed of any casting, injection, machining, and etc. method is too so I don't see your point. Besides, these things are computer controlled, so you can start printing and come back when the thing is done. It's not like you have to babysit the thing 24/7. > Most people can not be bothered to make their own bread or biscuits on > equipment they already own. Baking bread or making biscuits from scratch is a time consuming, labor intensive, p.i.t.a. I don't think downloading a file from the Internet and hitting "print" on the 3D printer is as difficult, but I guess that's my opinion. > 3D printers for home use are already less than $200; how many people do > you know that have one? As with product you can buy, the $200 models aren't that great. But the technology is improving every year so that better machines are becoming more affordable. That's the trend. Just like every other technology which goes from its infancy to maturity. Looking at the trends in the industry (e.g. aerospace, which is what I follow) 3D printing still has not reached its full potential, IMHO. Jeff -- All opinions posted by me on Usenet News are mine, and mine alone. These posts do not reflect the opinions of my family, friends, employer, or any organization that I am a member of.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-15 02:14 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <9cao3e-hnl.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #60691 |
In sci.physics Jeff Findley <jfindley@cinci.nospam.rr.com> wrote: > In article <hjan3e-dhi.ln1@mail.specsol.com>, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com > says... >> New technologies will not make aluminum or plastic cheaper. > > This is quite simply bullshit. Aluminum used to be so damn expensive > that the tip of the Washington Monument is made of the stuff. Now it's > do damn cheap that beer cans and soda cans are made of it. Why? > Because the technology used to make it literally changed. But don't > take my word for it: > > http://www.aluminum.org/aluminum-advantage/history-aluminum Yes, it changed about a hundred years ago and has not change significantly since then. The name for this phenomena is "mature technology". > I'm not an expert on plastic prices, but it sure seems like kids these > days have a lot more, and bigger, damn cheap plastic toys than when I > grew up. Hell, even some storage sheds are made of the stuff today. I > sure don't remember any plastic storage sheds when I was a kid. Again, mature technology. >> Printing speed is limited by basic physics. > > The speed of any casting, injection, machining, and etc. method is too > so I don't see your point. Besides, these things are computer > controlled, so you can start printing and come back when the thing is > done. It's not like you have to babysit the thing 24/7. The point is 3D printing is slow and basic physics says there is not much that can be done to speed it up significantly. Yep, if it is a hobby, it doesn't really matter if the whole print job turns to shit in the middle of the process. >> Most people can not be bothered to make their own bread or biscuits on >> equipment they already own. > > Baking bread or making biscuits from scratch is a time consuming, labor > intensive, p.i.t.a. I don't think downloading a file from the Internet > and hitting "print" on the 3D printer is as difficult, but I guess > that's my opinion. Yep, hobby printing some plastic trinket is about the same level of difficulty and it is obvious you have never done any baking. >> 3D printers for home use are already less than $200; how many people do >> you know that have one? > > As with product you can buy, the $200 models aren't that great. But the > technology is improving every year so that better machines are becoming > more affordable. That's the trend. Just like every other technology > which goes from its infancy to maturity. Looking at the trends in the > industry (e.g. aerospace, which is what I follow) 3D printing still has > not reached its full potential, IMHO. 3D printing is over 30 years old and getting close to being a mature technology for anything that would ever be used at home. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-14 23:09 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <59698768$0$19290$b1db1813$65575428@news.astraweb.com> |
| In reply to | #60692 |
On 2017-07-14 22:14, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: >> http://www.aluminum.org/aluminum-advantage/history-aluminum > > Yes, it changed about a hundred years ago and has not change significantly > since then. Actually, it has changed quite a bit. Different alloys, and something called Glare which sandwiched aluminium/composites which yields competitive weight/strength ratio to pure composites. Glare is one of the things that made the Airbus A380 possible for instance.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-15 05:13 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <7sko3e-5qm.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #60695 |
In sci.physics JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote: > On 2017-07-14 22:14, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote: > >>> http://www.aluminum.org/aluminum-advantage/history-aluminum >> >> Yes, it changed about a hundred years ago and has not change significantly >> since then. > > Actually, it has changed quite a bit. Different alloys, and something > called Glare which sandwiched aluminium/composites which yields > competitive weight/strength ratio to pure composites. > > Glare is one of the things that made the Airbus A380 possible for instance. Glare is 30 years old and has nothing to do with the production of aluminum metal or 3D printing. Aluminum alloys were first standardised in the 1930's and haven't changed much since the 1950's -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 9 of 16 — ← Prev page 1 … 7 8 [9] 10 11 … 16 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.space.policy
csiph-web