Slashdot Mirror
Printable AR-15 Mag Gets More Reliable; YouTube Pulls Video of Demo
Wired reports that the 3-D printed AR-15 magazine from Defense Distributed we mentioned a few weeks back has been improved through design, and is now robust enough to last through firing (at least) several hundred rounds, rather than fewer than a hundred as in the previous iteration. CNET says the video demonstration on YouTube was first yanked, then restored, but as of now seems to have been yanked again.
The message says it violates Youtubes police against "spams, scams and commercially deceptive" videos..
How, exactly? Is google jumping into this dumbshit political dickwaving contest now?
Streisand effect for the win.
Better known as 318230.
Why is this at all important? You can make a magazine 'the old way" with a spring, some sheet metal, a spot welder and a metal brake (something that bends sheet metal). Yes, it takes some skill, but you're saying that a 3D printer is at the level of an iPhone?
The canonical 'assault rife', the AK-47, is pounded out in factories that look more like garbage dumps than anything else. If you look at pictures of the magazines you see a bunch that look, well, rather primitive. But they work.
This is not rocket science, folks. It's machine shop 101.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
Youtube (AKA Google) is being intellectually dishonest and going back on its ideal of providing unbiased free access to information. Google has become an active filterer of this information. The video is not graphic, it is not sexual, it is relevant and political and Google has decided that is not appropriate for viewers.... Thank you Big Brother Google for protecting me from information. Maybe we should start filtering books, or speech?
I am very relieved that youtube is protecting me from dangerous information. I might hurt myself or others.
Now the question, is that because someone has figured out it is the best way to get Google to react fast, or because a AR-15 magazine manufacturer is protecting his business?
Without being able to see the video, how much of a commercial sales pitch could this be anyway?
Trying to become famous by taking photos. Visit my homepage please.
I cant wait for the day that 3d printers will be able to print just about anything. How can you make an item illegal if anyone can print it out? How do you enforce that? Constant 24/7 surveillance of everything they print out? Even then black market printers will have someway to bypass this, as we pirate games with DRM today. I am very excited for this cyberpunkesque type of future.
Does that mean the Doctors and recipients of voluntary abortions are going to hell as well?
Sometimes I wonder about Aaron Swartz. Given my propensity to being similar in thoughts, I often find it odd he would have simply given up without a plan. I've reached a conclusion that perhaps his suicide was part of the plan. Because he just didn't have the resources to fight the corrupt system, and he figured he would be better suited as a martyr than to go down and serve a thirty year prison sentence.
Although who knows, perhaps mental illness got in the way. One thing is for certain: copyright law killed him.
---
As for Dorner, I have many questions about that as well. I think his heavy moral conviction drove him to this, and there's more corruption in the police than just kicking some man while he's down. Why would he lie about that incident? It doesn't make any sense -- I get the feeling things are terribly, terribly wrong with the police he was working with.
Especially when I read things like this: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2013/02/dorner-manhunt-shootings-newspaper-carriers.html
I don't know who's on the moral side, right now. Dorner has clearly become a vigilante, but he seems to do it out of vengeance, and his willingness to draw their families into it is excessive and completely morally obscene. On the other hand, the police are way out of line.
Ultimately I think the FBI should dispatch a very thorough investigation into the the local police as well as finding and stopping Dorner.
"We've seen a number of these "I've got nothing to lose, I'm going out with a bang!" cases recently. What's with that? Has there always been spree killings, but weren't reported widely until recently? Has something changed in society?"
The media, especially CNN, which is now driving an anti-civil rights agenda. You may notice the lack of "used a weapon for self defense" reporting. It doesn't fit with the agenda. You're right about the copycat events. Pretty much everyone, including the media, seems to accept that current restrictions on 2nd Amendment civil rights are "reasonable, common sense" ones.
Obviously, without the widespread media reporting on these violent episodes, copycat crimes would be reduced. Time for some matching "reasonable, common sense" restrictions on 1st Amendment rights. <sarcasm>No one needs a high speed printing press, or electronic media. These should be restricted to government and military use. Journalists should have to undergo background checks before being allowed to publish. Small, portable copy machines should be subject to registration. Reporting of violence should be pre-approved by the government.</sarcasm>
These suggestions are analogous to restrictions to 2nd Amendment rights which are already in place and considered acceptable. Think of the children.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
Just a guess: Perhaps "deceptive" or "scam" is a way of saying "this video may infringe the copyright in the shareware platformer, but we can't say it was pulled for copyright infringement if the complainant is someone other than the copyright owner, so we'll say it's deceptive as to the ownership of copyright in the video".
Except nudity isn't special, It's how every single person has ever come in to the world. The only reason nudity is special is because a bunch of prudish Holier than thous who weren't getting any decided it was against God to show a little T&A. T&A is not special. It's all over the internet, people give it away for everything from attention to crack to money. Anything that can be bartered for a fiver isn't special, and wishing it so isn't going to change a damned thing.
I've got 30 or so magazines from different makers. Not once in thousands of rounds of shooting have I had a jam and I load all magazines to capacity.
All have magpul followers, and 12 or so are actual magpul pmags. The rest are the standard metal grey 30 round magazine.
So, you're saying that bitcoins were NOT invented to be a form of currency? Because here I always thought that using currency to buy things was the "normal" use, as opposed to an example of "misappropriation"...
Or are you just trying to say that anyone who does something you disagree with is evil?
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
I know, people should stick to the more socially acceptable expressions of their rights and not stray towards anything controversial.
One man, one rifle.
Twenty men, twenty rifles.
Fifty men, fifty rifles.
One hundred men, one hundred rifles.
One man has no chance of taking a tank, twenty guys might though. They won't be taking anything though without arms. Same goes for commandeering the drone control facility. You don't seem to understand that the second amendment isn't about one mans ability to rise up against tyranny, it's about the militias. But if you take one mans weapons, you take the militias. Your arguments are tired, pathetic, and lack any depth to what the forefathers envisioned.
Gun ownership shouldn't be a right but a privilege, just as some people shouldn't have kids until they're mature enough to be able to take care of oneself before taking care of another living thing. That's what annoys me about the 2nd amendment...it guarantees the individual to own a gun, even if such individual is a complete moron and doesn't even know the rest of the Bill of Rights.
One of the (many) problems with your proposal is...who gets to define the rules as to who is allowed to exercise this 'privilege'. Remember...any power you give to an administration you like, you also grant to the next administration which you may not like.
I am also glad people don't walk around naked.
Because, frankly, the overwhelming majority of people look awful enough wearing clothes, much less naked.
Being able to ogle the one percent who would look pretty nice naked wouldn't make up for the 99 percent who would blast your retinae and convince your brain to shutdown rather than remember what you just saw....
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
I'm glad people don't walk around naked, because I want nudity to be special.
I'm glad people don't walk around naked because I have some modicum of taste and decorum. The vast majority of people really, really need to leave their clothes on.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
Being able to print gun parts is a much bigger issue then YouTube yanking a video. The current push for gun control doesn't address this issue at all. It would be funny if it didn't have so many implications for society at large. Printable guns are going to happen. Printable guns will be disposable and untraceable. Why keep a gun when you can print another.
Name an administrator's policy which has directly or indirectly caused harm to you or your family, and where a gun has defused the situation?
I can not name a traffic accident that I was in where a seat-belt saved my life. I still buckle up when I go for a drive.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
You have no idea of WHY we even have government. We are all individual actors, Lions if you will. How do you tell a Lion he cant defend himself? Gun ownership is a RIGHT because no man or collection of men should be able to decide whether im a lion or not. DO you not understand the government should fear us, not the other way around? Who gave you the right to decide who can have kids or own guns? From what authority does this power of yours spring?
Good-bye
What makes you think that the federal government is the only one that one might need to resist?
I'd like to refer you to the "Battle of Athens"
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
Its the fact that you have disenfranchised the people who support you.
Ultimately, it will be trivial for them to cut the supply lines to cities and there will be f***all you can do about it.
So, just keep it up...
Seastead this.
Assault crossbows on youtube? Time to call the think of the children brigade!
Billboards in Europe have penises? Interesting. Where would I have to look for vaginas? You've really got me curious now!
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
^ This Mod parent up, this is a great point. No one who owns a rifle honestly thinks that they're ever going to be able to stop an army, or hinder an abusive government alone. But even 500, or 1,000 people, armed with basic rifles and hiding in the woods can be quite a formidable force. Sure, in the end you can just carpet bomb the woods, but consider that there are millions of gun owners in America. If only 10% were to get angry enough to fight (and I honestly, truly hope it never comes to this), that's still thousands and thousands of armed fighters, across a massive nation. Basically, you can't bomb ALL of the forests. Disclaimer: I like having a gun, it's a tool to me. It's nice to have, and I use it for target shooting when I have the time. My point is, whenever someone says "Well, guns would be useless against tanks and etc", just remember wars like Vietnam, or the Middle East. You don't have to attack the tanks and airplanes, just their supply lines.
have a fairly large penis. Sup with that!
Clearly we need penis length restrictions and a ban on high-capacity testicles.
There's no reason a private citizen needs assault privates.
The fact is, most people don't know how easy it is to make guns. They imagine that it requires loads of highly-specialized and expensive equipment, plus a lot of training in some esoteric art, in order to produce guns.
They further imagine that this makes production costs high, which serve as a natural limit to how many guns are in circulation.
Of course, this is pure rubbish. None of this is even remotely true. Utter nonsense.
But that doesn't stop most people from seeing this whole gun-printing fiasco as a means of upsetting that (completely mythical) economic balance. They think this makes it a lot easier to make guns, and therefore more people will make and have guns than ever before (in HUGE numbers). Further, since having guns makes people turn evil, everyone we love (including ourselves) will be put at MUCH GREATER RISK of being shot than EVER BEFORE!!!
Again, this is pure and utter nonsense. But it is what the majority of the people seem to believe, and fear. Fear produces irrational responses, which are driving youtube to yank a video.
It sucks that we must share the world with stupid and irrational people, but there isn't much we can do about it. They outnumber us, and they always will.
...but show a penis on the screen and it's x-rated?
Naturally; how else are the priests/preachers and politicians supposed to keep us from figuring out what's actually on their minds? :)
I'm not arguing against guns. I'm arguing irresponsible use of it and the media makes it look easy especially for the impressionable little ones. Hell, look at youtube and all those kids who tried to do Parkour after James Bond came out and ended up hurting their dumb selves. Gun ownership shouldn't be a right but a privilege, just as some people shouldn't have kids until they're mature enough to be able to take care of oneself before taking care of another living thing. That's what annoys me about the 2nd amendment...it guarantees the individual to own a gun, even if such individual is a complete moron and doesn't even know the rest of the Bill of Rights.
It's not an unreasonable argument to make - but do you agree that the right and proper way to go about it is to repeal the 2nd and replace it with a new amendment, by usual procedure - rather than passing laws by the Congress, or by executive order of the president?
Care to explain how some guy buying weed with Bitcoins, or another guy 3D-printing an AR mag in his garage, affect you at all and "ruing technology for everyone else"?
And what does it even mean to "pervert" a technology? Bitcoins are designed as currency - currency, by definition, is used to trade goods. Drugs are a subclass of goods, so using Bitcoin to buy them is using it as intended. 3D printing is designed to produce objects out of plastic. Magazines are a subclass of plastic objects, so using 3D printers to print them is using it as intended.
Or are you of the "God told to only stick this thingy into here, and that's how it ought to be!" persuasion?
"Just 'cause I can" is pretty much the basic underlying motivation of the entire hacker subculture. See also: "just for fun" etc.