Text version?
this post was submitted on 22 Feb 2026
12 points (64.3% liked)
Technology
42318 readers
164 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
Videos is not worth watching. It’s just talking about regulating 3-D printers.
Mind you, we should not regulate 3-D printers, but this is Clickbait, and you should not reward them with your views.
~~Regulate them how exactly?~~ (edit: wow, I missed the "not" in your second sentence multiple times)
Based on other comments I've read (and I may be off base here), it seems 3D printers only understand simple commands like "move printhead" and "emit plastic", which doesn't make them capable of understanding what they're printing. And frankly, based on my observations of other so-called "smart" tech, the dumber you'd keep hardware, the better the hardware remains.
I'm not very creative, so maybe there's something I'm missing here... But last time I checked, you can just drive between states, with a trunkload of guns, which are really easy to procure in the US. No 3D printers needed.
If a manufacturer wants to sell a 3d-printer in California, they would need to have the printer approved. The bill basically requires 3d-printer to be locked down, meaning closed source firmware and other closed source software. When ever you want to print something, the printer needs to query some service on the internet to check if it's allowed to print the file.
Thanks for the text version.
The video is about a new bill, California AB-2047, which would require all 3D-printers sold or traded in California to have technology that prevents it from printing firearms. It also requires that 3D-printers cannot be easily modified to print firearms. This basically means that 3D-printers sold in California cannot have open source firmware, and they cannot work with open source tools, like slicers.
He argues, that while this bill is about 3D-printers, it opens the door for further limiting your devices. Computers are general purpose devices, that are able to execute any code, as long as it's valid code. He argues that this bill is a way to change that. He also argues, that while this bill is only about California, it can easily spread to other states and countries.
The rest is my thoughts:
It's commonly thought, that it's impossible to make a computer that's not a general purpose device (a non-Turing complete machine). The only way to do that is by making it illegal to run certain kind of programs. You can compare this bill to DMCA law. It was originally meant to make it illegal to pirate music, movies, games, etc. But, nowadays, it's used for numerous other things. You can't use any type of ink you want in your 2d-printers. You have to pay a monthly fee to be able to heat your car's seats. You can't repair your devices with third-party parts.
So yes, the title of the video is a bit clickbaity. But I think the content is still valid.
and it seems to be not true at all that "California just killed" anything, so far the bill has only been introduced, not passed as the title implies
That is true. But, I would call this a dangerous bill. If it passes, it can have huge implications for different types of computers. I think it's good to raise awareness for this type of things, but maybe using less clickbaity titles would be a better way.
I agree with that of course.
Won't people just buy them from China?
I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic, but given that this is an anti-firearms bill, they will probably do the same thing they do when you purchase a firearm magazine cross-state; they'll open the box and check that it is 'compliant' with the 10-round limit (or in this case, has compliant firmware). If it is, they'll ship it on to you. If it's not, they'll ship you the empty box with a notice of seizure. You may also be contacted by CADOJ later, depending how much free time they have.
When you’re buying drugs from schotty research chemical production facilities in foreign countries, those are called “love letters.”
Apart from the extruder, what parts of a 3D printer are not of the shelf electronics? It seems like a lot of folks are going to have their random electronics seized.
Or print a 3d printer that could