The problem with this is that you need to alter the model printed. One thing is to print some yellow dots on a paper, another thing is to print some 3d marker in a model that you know nothing about with the risk to print a defective piece.
And anyway it should be done at the slicer level, the printer still only know that it need to rotate that motor for x steps, nothing else, it has no way to know what the next instruction would be.
Since the service Bambu Studio connects to isn’t required to run the software, their claim that keeping the service proprietary doesn’t violate the AGPL might be valid after all.
I think you misread something. The point seems to be that to be able to use your printer you need to connect to their cloud in any case. And this happened after a firmare update.
It’s like setting up a website with a user login, and if someone puts in “admin” in the username field without a password, the system says “sounds good” and lets you in. And then the website owners getting mad that someone hacked their system.
Blatant incompetence. I can’t believe they’re using their stupidity as an argument.
You are right, but technically speaking it would be a crime anyway. It is not that if you leave your door open then entering without permissione is not a crime.
While Bambu Labs obviously is trying to implement some sort of subscribtion model, and they are doing it in a bad faith way, for shitty as the authentication model is it is not an authorization to enter freely.
I hope when he gives his lecture, the students egg him on.
It would be a lot more impressive if everyone just stand up and walk away.
Probably to try to get some money in sponsorship. Or because they think these are the really smart guys.
I have literally in the thousands of installations I’ve done, literally never once put any genuine information in there. Who does? Why would anyone?
Private user ? Probably nobody, I agree. Commercial users ? Probably everyone, it is somewhat mandated.
Why would they need money? And exchange for their upkeep labor to get to live in luxury with their families the rest of the time.
Because not everything could be done this way. There is only so much you can do with this kind of “barter”.
So vitamin C is bad for you now?
Everything is bad for you, it only depends on the dose and conditions.
Maybe, but at this point the few oligarchs would be parias in their own home.
And it would be easy to eliminate them.
Do you realize that this way the volume of the business would be a lot smaller, right ? And being rich means nothing is you have not a use for your money.
You make AI and robotics to take care of everything you need, good, now think who pay, what it is needed and who would do the work for keeping the AI and robots in a working status. Hint: not the few common people that at this point have no money for anything else that some food, if any, since you automated everything.
It would be better for stability, the environment, and their view if the bulk of us died out.
If the bulk of us died out, being rich means nothing, and they know it.
Then you don’t understand slavery deeply-enough:
They can outright remove-human-validity-from all lives except their-own, & they’ll still have “business” happening.
True, but a very limited one.
In a situation where you need to continually grow, removing all the human side of business will end with bankrupcy.
Citizens are not required outside of oligarchs…
Citizens are required, oligarchs can prosper only because there is something that produce their money. You remove the citizens, who in a form or another can buy oligarchs services/products, and the oligarchs are left with nothing, their money is useless.
We can discuss that then people will become money (the more slaves you have the better) but to keep slaves have a price, low as you want but it have it, and without a way of producing something you will end with no money and then no slaves.
Here we are talking about business that on one hand are trying to sell something to people and on the other are firing people to replace them with AI agents. We can replace, at the beginning, people who buy AI services with other business who then fires the people they hired to replace them with AI agents and so on.
At some point you will end with all the people fired (not that it could end this way in a pacifically), that cannot buy anything other then some food (if any) and a lot of business that are producing and trying to sell something to… who exactly ? The slaves ? Other business ?
Humankind’s history is waaay worse than you’re understanding.
Maybe, I never had the time to study history as much as I’d liked but I understand that there cannot be oligarchs without a society behind them.
They don’t want us: they want only business-to-business contracts: higher profit, less people.
Ok, but the business that buy need someone to sell to. It is maybe not the first or the second or the third but at some point along the chain b2b must become b2c, a business need to sell to someone that is not a business, else there is not reason for the business to buy in the first place.
I think both are true.
Tech innovation is normally faster of the process of approving a new law and of course any law you write trying to regulate something in your state is not applicable everywhere else.
If we regulate AI, we’re likely to create more problems because Boomers don’t understand technology.
True, but that is not limited to AI
/s Technically speaking you rely on it any time you set a password, just saying…
It really depends on the charge/discharge conditions that the particular test is using.
True.
You can do testing in the lab that is way harsher than typical usage or you can make it easier. In terms of this cycle testing for Li-ion I would say that typically the lab testing would be harsher than real world primarily because lab testing is done between 0% and 100% depth of discharge constantly where most people are charging their batteries much before then and only cycling them at high rates periodically.
You are right, but we should see what they want to demostrate in the lab test: that the tech works or to have a way to make a sensational announcement based on some data ?
If you put that battery on the market, the 6000 cycles still stand or they are only a lab result ?
Aside the harsh or easy charge/discharge cycles, what other condition they tested ? A battery on a bench has different problems than a battery on a car on the road.
That said, if the tech works really has announced, it would be great.
The problem is that 6000 cycles in laboratory are not the same than 6000 cycles in real life scenarios.
It would be interesting to put that battery out in the field and to see how it perform in real life conditions (assuming that they are cheap enough to be produced in large volumes)
If they are really that good you are right, but there are always a lot of revolutionary advance in lab that never leave it.
True, but to design a barrel for a gun is way more difficult. Even now you can have a barrel made from a metal shop (or with a relatively cheap cnc mill) if you really want.
You think we are at a endpoint with 3d printing technology? As technology improves the ability to make better parts will keep increasing.
No, we are not at a endpoint even if I don’t think there is much more to be done that can improve the tech in some revolutionary way.
Nah, if you’re right, you should also ban the sale of any type of bench milling machine (manual or CNC): anything I can 3D print, I can probably mill just as easily
Wait to see that they discover that you don’t need a 3d printer to build a 3d printer…