Study Finds 3D Printers Pay For Themselves In Under a Year

Lucas123 writes "Researchers using a RepRap open source 3D printer found that the average household could save as much as $2,000 annually and recoup the cost of the printer in under a year by printing out common household items. The Michigan Technical University (MTU) research group printed just 20 items and used 'conservative' numbers to find that the average homeowner could print common products, such as shower rings or smartphone cases, for far less money than purchasing them online at discount Websites, such as Google Shopper. 'It cost us about $18 to print all [20] items... the lowest retail cost we could find for the same items online was $312 and the highest was $1,943,' said Joshua Pearce, an associate professor in the Materials Science and Engineering Department at MTU. 'The unavoidable conclusion from this study is that the RepRap [3D printers] is an economically attractive investment for the average U.S. household already.'"

Comments

Apropos lowest retail cost

[c0lo]

I wonder... have they tried our Chinese friends?

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[semi-extrinsic]

This. With free shipping on everything, and a shower curtain including 12 rings costing $10, an iPhone case costing $3.50, I think the 3D printer would take a long time to break even.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[c0lo]

... I think the 3D printer would take a long time to break even.

Unless... mmmm... unless our friends start selling 3D printers at lower prices. Probably in a year or two.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Dunbal]

Without considering that a set of shower rings can last 5 years or more... I think this study is obviously bogus. I honestly can't think about any bunch of stand-alone plastic items I spend $2000 on every year.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Weezul]

Aliexpress and Ebay are always cheaper than say Amazon, assuming you're fine waiting one month. 3D printers get you the part now though.

Also, these house hold items could usually be improvised for free, like using a coat hanger for a shower ring or super gluing the old ring back together.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[derGoldstein]

Yep. At which point forget reprap, makerbot, and all other similar designs. They'll figure out how to manufacture these things the same way that inkjet printers are manufactured:
1) A handful of injection-molded parts that can be manufactured at 10 cents a part, and at a rate of tens of thousands per-day
2) Super-dedicated electronics with just a couple of significant ICs -- the logic chip (probably some MCU initially, and eventually an ASIC) and the motor-driving chip
3) Optimized motors which they buy in groups of 100,000 from another manufacturer in the same province
4) compact, light-weight designs so that they can pack countless units into a single shipping container

All this aristocratic "Look at me! I spent $2000 on a Makerbot!" bullshit will disappear. Oh, and just like printers -- the most expensive part will be the "ink".

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Anonymous Coward]

Your Chinese friends already started selling 3D printers parts, kits and consumables. I noticed that a couple of weeks ago.
http://dx.com/p/heacent-3dp01-diy-3d-printer-full-assembly-kit-black-silver-110-220v-220815

http://dx.com/s/3d+printer - very slow as it is their search engine result

Have to wait a bit to see if their filaments qualities are any good.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[derGoldstein]

This is an article that's deigned for SEO. Anyone with any inkling of how these things work and the quality of the products would call BS instantly. An iPhone case? You can get a beautiful, highly-detailed case for your phone for $2 on ebay, but you're going to opt for a rough, "pixelated", bad-fit 3D-printed one? This study would only apply if you looked for the stupidest possible way to buy things -- the equivalent of buying a soda in a movie theater.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[derGoldstein]

Sorry for double-posting but the phrase I was looking for while typing that comment was Economies of scale. I apologize for my senility.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[mysidia]

You can get a beautiful, highly-detailed case for your phone for $2 on ebay, but you're going to opt for a rough, "pixelated", bad-fit 3D-printed one?

A lot of people still buy things like iPhone cases at retail; especially at the ATT or Verizon store, where the markup on these high-margin accesories is probably the highest.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Anonymous Coward]

Or get metal ones, they'll last forever.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[niftydude]

Exactly. The actual paper is behind a paywall that I have access to. So below I'll include a list of their 20 items. I can't imagine buying any of these annually. The bulk of the $2000 claim comes from two items which significantly skew the statistics.

The first is a medical orthotic, the retail price of which they set at $800, and which the majority of people in the world without fallen arches/foot problems will never need.

The second is a shower head which they price at $437.22. Again, you don't buy a shower head every year, the $400+ ones will have a 10-year warranty and are going to be of significantly better quality than what comes out of a 3-D printer.

Additionally, in a clear attempt to boost costs, 6 out of the 20 items are overpriced Apple accessories: iPhone 5 dock, iPhone 4 dock, iPhone 5 case, iPad stand, Nano watchband, and an iPhone tripod.

The full list of 20 items:
iPhone 5 dock
iPhone 4 dock
iPhone 5 case
Jewelry organizer
Garlic press
Caliper
Wall plate
12 x Shower curtain rings
Shower head
Key hanger (3 hooks)
iPad stand
Orthotic
Safety razor
Pickup
Train track toy
Nano watchband
iPhone tripod
Paper towel holder
Pierogi mold
Spoon holder

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Dr Max]

You can build a reprap for a couple of hundred dollars, but how many sets of curtain rings and crappy iphone cases do you need per year? I think we need bigger build areas, that will open more bigger options (which usually cost more and have higher shipping costs). If you can print coat hangers, coffee tables, rc planes, and a replacement stand for my floor fan I'm going to be a lot more interested (yes i know you can print bigger things by doing it in parts, but it's a lot more hassle and not as strong).

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Dcnjoe60]

The full list of 20 items:
iPhone 5 dock
iPhone 4 dock
iPhone 5 case
Jewelry organizer
Garlic press
Caliper
Wall plate
12 x Shower curtain rings
Shower head
Key hanger (3 hooks)
iPad stand
Orthotic
Safety razor
Pickup
Train track toy
Nano watchband
iPhone tripod
Paper towel holder
Pierogi mold
Spoon holder

Orthotics, really? Why not include eyglasses, too? As for safety razors, what about the blades? Last time I checked, you couldn't 3D print those. A carppy iPhone case is a possibility, but I seriously doubt a working iPhone dock could be made. Last time I checked, you had to get all of those connectors to be able to plug into your iPhone..

But as long as they are including things that aren't really possilbe to make, why not 3D print an iPhone? A family of 4, each printing their own phone, without having to lock into a contract would save the cost of a printer many times over.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[niftydude]

As for safety razors, what about the blades? Last time I checked, you couldn't 3D print those.

They set the retail price for the safety razor at $78!!! I'm pretty sure that for $78 in the store you'll get razors included, but the rep-rap certainly won't print any.

but I seriously doubt a working iPhone dock could be made. Last time I checked, you had to get all of those connectors to be able to plug into your iPhone..

The iphone 5 dock is priced at $30, and the iPhone 4 dock $40. I don't know what they are printing that they think is comparable to those, but it certainly won't be functional.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[N1AK]

And you think they are the people who are going to buy a 3d printer, search and find the templates they need and print it themselves?

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[DrXym]

3D printing of the Makerbot / Reprap kind is probably fine for utilitarian purposes (assuming you can model a part), but it looks absolutely hideous for anything decorative that people have a chance to examine up close. So curtain rings, yes, iPhone case probably no.

Since the paper is behind a paywall I have no idea what things they think could make the printer pay for itself in a year, but somehow I doubt these represent a typical purchase pattern of anybody anywhere.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe the study had the misfortune to ask a colossal pervert what they spent their money on and it turned out that their major outlay was plastic dildos and vibrators. In which case, perhaps yes a Makerbot or Reprap will pay for itself.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[coofercat]

I don't disagree entirely, but I'd like to add that it's not quite as simple as you make out. As an Ultimaker owner, I've found that very small details make a huge difference to print quality. I've also found that as the machine's design evolves, so does the 'ease' of getting quality out of it.You can get some really astounding quality out of an Ultimaker, but it takes hours and hours to print, and simply printing again doesn't always yield the same quality as it did the first time. I seriously doubt people will want to wait hours for their $2 curtain rings, and they certainly won't want to tinker with the machine and software for an hour before printing, or indeed put up with failed prints.

Lastly, the quality of the model has as much to do with the outcome as the printer itself. I've tried some truly horrible models that I've downloaded, and I've also used some really good ones. Garbage in, garbage out.

Ultimately though, you will be right. It'll just take a few years until the cheap printers really can do what the more expensive ones can do. In the 2 years I've owned an Ultimaker, I'd say the cost of the quality I bought 2 years ago is down by about 30%. Paying the same as I did 2 years ago probably gets you better quality/reliability/repeatability than back then too though. And even though the Ultimaker has been copied by the Chinese, and there already are various Chinese printers available, I'm not aware of any that are credible enough to eat any of Ultimaker's lunch just yet.

Suffice to say though, you'd need to be some sort of shower-curtain weirdo to need to print enough curtain rings and whatnot to make it worth owning a printer. Popping down to your local Tescos and having them print it for you sounds a lot more likely (and is something they've talked about on their blog).

Re: Apropos lowest retail cost

[nospam007]

I paid over a thousand bucks for the first HP color inkjet ages ago, when that was a lot of money, just to be able to print red titles and an occasional chart, no photos worth that name and certainly no shower curtain rings.
This will get better, fast!

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[L1mewater]

They set the retail price for the safety razor at $78!!! I'm pretty sure that for $78 in the store you'll get razors included, but the rep-rap certainly won't print any.

They're probably talking about actual, old-fashioned double-edge safety razors, not a Gillette Mach 3 Turbo or whatever. And yes, a very nice one can cost $78 and does not come with blades. The $78 razor would also be a heck of a lot nicer and shave a lot better than anything you could print, and would last for decades. I use one, and it's older than I am. I didn't pay anywhere near $78 for it. More like $10.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Dcnjoe60]

As for safety razors, what about the blades? Last time I checked, you couldn't 3D print those.

They set the retail price for the safety razor at $78!!! I'm pretty sure that for $78 in the store you'll get razors included, but the rep-rap certainly won't print any.

but I seriously doubt a working iPhone dock could be made. Last time I checked, you had to get all of those connectors to be able to plug into your iPhone..

The iphone 5 dock is priced at $30, and the iPhone 4 dock $40. I don't know what they are printing that they think is comparable to those, but it certainly won't be functional.

And let's not forget the time involved. These low-end printers aren't supposed to be left unattended while operating, so at a an estimate of 4 hours per object created, assuming each design is perfectly designed and no clean up time, there is 80 hours. If you estimate your time is worth $10/hour, that is another $800 of cost. Or put differently, those shower curtain hooks may cost $0.50 of ABS plastic, but $40 of time. Then there is the time involved to sit down and design all of the stuff you want to print.

Of course, most people don't have that skill, so what they design, will look like crap if it even is printable or they will have to purchase designs. We went through all of this when inkjet and laserjet printers became cheap enough for consumers to own. All of a sudden, all of the print shops and graphic design houses were going to go out of business. It never happened because 1) consumer devices don't have the quality that professionals demand and 2) most people don't have the skill set to even make the consumer devices perform.

But, hey, people can fabricate a study much easier than they can fabricate good looking consumer goods with a 3D printer, and a lot cheaper, too.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude, you realise that people actualy DO buy soda at the movie theater... no?

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[horza]

Eyeglasses are a great idea! My friend has 2 kids that break the frames all the time, she would pay for the 3d printer just with replacing those.

The key hanger is also a great one, I just spent a couple of hundred bucks getting kitchen and bathroom stuff: wall-mount spice racks, toilet roll holder, coat hooks, key hangers, soap dish, soap dispensor, ice-cube trays, fruit bowl, vase... each is only $15 or so but once you've bought 20-30 items it adds up a lot.

My girlfriend would definitely be printing a new back for Galaxy S2 every month. She's already ordered a couple, which are around $30 each once she finds the design she likes and adds p&p.

I would believe the printer could pay for itself, if I could be sure of a good free database of objects.

Phillip.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Anonymous Coward]

"It cost us about $18 to print all the items and [the] lowest retail cost we could find for the same items online was $312 and the highest was $1,943," Pearce said."

Where the fuck are they shopping at for a $312+ paper towel holder!? I think they missed a couple of decimal places because I can go to my local Wal-Mart and pick up pretty much that entire list for under $100 (minus the orthotic, unless Dr. Scholls makes one).

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[khallow]

This was the part I was wondering about. How long would it take to find or make a template for an object you wanted? I guess if you can search by part number, then it'll be relatively fast and accurate. But even in that case, it might be a lot of work to find those part numbers.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[AmiMoJo]

I'm not so sure. Why don't Chinese manufacturers sell extremely low cost printers to go with their low cost inks? It's because you really can't go any lower than existing manufacturers already do, due to shipping costs and the like. If they sold both a low cost printer and low cost ink it wouldn't be profitable, even in China.

I'm not sure we will ever see widespread low-cost adoption of 3D printers. Factories will appear that use industrial versions to produce things in low volumes, and the local print shop will do one-offs cheaper than most people can run a printer. Even today with 2D printing it is generally cheaper to have a low cost laser and rely on internet/shop printing for photos, unless you do massive volume. The sites listing the cost per page of printing always fail to include all the ink pissed away unblocking the heads after not using the thing for a week.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[AmiMoJo]

People are working on machines that can make PCBs, which would allow you to make a lot more interesting stuff with a printer. Even if you can produce a PCB it still needs populating and soldering though. Eventually all of that will be boiled down to a single device.

Rather than bigger printers you can just use glue. Say you need a long wing for an aircraft. Print it in sections that slot together and use plastic cement to bond them. The cement actually melts the plastic a little and re-forms it into a single piece.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[SQLGuru]

How is waiting hours for shower curtain rings any different than clicking the buy it button and waiting a few days for it to show up at your door. I know this is the "now" society, but I think the wait factor isn't that bad.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah I almost laughed out loud when I read the article headline. Also, why would I want to cheapen the look of my bathroom with printed shower curtain rings? The injection molded ones look better.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[asylumx]

Thank you for posting that. I thought that was going to be the case -- several items that I, at least, don't have any use for. The few items I do have a use for, I wouldn't buy again since I already have them. Maybe this printer would make a good housewarming gift for someone's first home (although a bit pricey for that) but other than that, i don't see it paying for itself on basic household items.

Since you have access to the study itself, can you tell if they included the cost of materials for the printer to make these items? I have no idea how much the "ink" costs for these 3d printers.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[morgauxo]

You don't click 'buy it now' and wait. You click 'buy it now' and go on with the rest of your life until it arrives. You do click 'print' and wait / babysit it until it is done.

Re: Apropos lowest retail cost

[samkass]

Most low-end 3D printers use PLA plastic. This is basically processed corn starch, and while initially hydrophobic, it will rapidly degrade (rot) if exposed to water for an extended period of time. In addition, the prints are much stronger in the direction of the filament than cross-wise (using the tensile strength of the filament vs the bonding strength of the layers), so it's not just model quality but actual printing technique that matters for durability.

They're making huge strides, but 3D printing is nowhere near the "run out and buy an HP inkjet and hook it up" level of utility.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Anonymous Coward]

What if I just click on 'Print it', then go on with the rest of your life until it's printed?

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[SQLGuru]

While this is offtopic to the article, I've had really good luck with ZenniOptical.com and others have used similar sites. A full set of glasses for under $30 shipped to your door (as cheap as $10 without additional upgrades). We normally order two or three pairs so that if they break a pair, there is always a backup. Lead time on orders is usually about 2 weeks, so plan accordingly on re-orders.

Make sure you get your pupilary distance (distance between your pupils) when you get your prescription. They don't normally give that unless requested. And yes, you can find eye doctors that don't require you to get glasses at their shop (I normally go to whoever is associated with the local big-box store).

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Anonymous Coward]

Not that I agree with the article, but why are you buying a new printer every year? If you can make something on it that can last a few years, I would hope the printer could last that long too.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[niftydude]

Since you have access to the study itself, can you tell if they included the cost of materials for the printer to make these items? I have no idea how much the "ink" costs for these 3d printers.

Yeah - the $18 cost that they quote for printing all the items comes from the cost of the plastic ($17.80) + the cost of the electricity ($0.31).

The way they get the cost of the electricity so low is that they are only measuring the energy use of the reprap, and not the cost of the computer driving it - although they semi-justify this by saying that theoretically a raspberry pi could be used to drive the reprap, and being low power ARM, that would consume very little power.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[njnnja]

What if I just click on 'Print it', then go on with the rest of your life until it's printed?

You come back to it 3 hours later to find that the object has separated from the raft leaving you with $20 worth of extruded plastic spaghetti. But if you babysit it the success rate goes way up.

It might have something to do with the nearby body heat, or maybe a hidden camera that verifies a person is there, or just pissed off little elves that don't want to be lonely. But yes, you have to babysit it :(

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Anonymous Coward]

and then come back to find your 3d printer overheated and is currently on fire

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Anonymous Coward]

It'll break even in a day if you use it to print out an ATM skimmer.

(The subsequent stay in PMITA prison will also save on rent!)

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Half-pint HAL]

Dude, you realise that people actualy DO buy soda at the movie theater... no?

But you wouldn't use "movie theater" as your benchmark for soda prices, though, would you?

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Half-pint HAL]

My girlfriend would definitely be printing a new back for Galaxy S2 every month. She's already ordered a couple, which are around $30 each once she finds the design she likes and adds p&p.

Except that if she's buying for cosmetic reasons, she's not going to be happy with what comes out of a printer...

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Dr Max]

Pcb printer would be awesome even if you had to do a little soldering.

I know you can join parts together but you lose some of the advantages of 3d printing; that being ease of construction for both the finished product and in the design, also it'll make it heavier (or weaker) because the internal structure cant be as elegant. I'm happy paying $2000 (or higher) but give me one that can print 1x1x1 meters (or higher).

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[drinkypoo]

You can already make PCBs with a mill, and they're higher quality than any printed one will be for a while. The dinky mill costs less than a decent 3d printer.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[RabidReindeer]

What if I just click on 'Print it', then go on with the rest of your life until it's printed?

You come back to it 3 hours later to find that the object has separated from the raft leaving you with $20 worth of extruded plastic spaghetti. But if you babysit it the success rate goes way up.

It might have something to do with the nearby body heat, or maybe a hidden camera that verifies a person is there, or just pissed off little elves that don't want to be lonely. But yes, you have to babysit it :(

That's just proof that machines are malign intelligences intent on maximizing human misery. It also explains traffic light timing and photocopier jams.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[somarilnos]

Or they'll just 3D print it all.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Ksevio]

The second is a shower head which they price at $437.22. Again, you don't buy a shower head every year, the $400+ ones will have a 10-year warranty and are going to be of significantly better quality than what comes out of a 3-D printer.

I've bought a shower head in the past. It cost $25. Looking on amazon, there are even some in the $5 range! There are a few in the expensive range that cost hundreds of dollars, but those also include quite a bit of plumbing, polished chrome/brass, knobs, and are made of metal. Even those are over priced. It seems the "researchers" just want to amazon and clicked "sort price high to low" then picked the first results.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[AmiMoJo]

Milling has some pretty big tolerances though. You will struggle to do 0.5mm pitch SMD pins, for example. Since more and more stuff is going SMD only proper photo-etched boards are the only real option.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Anonymous Coward]

And let's not forget the time involved. These low-end printers aren't supposed to be left unattended while operating, so at a an estimate of 4 hours per object created, assuming each design is perfectly designed and no clean up time, there is 80 hours. If you estimate your time is worth $10/hour, that is another $800 of cost. Or put differently, those shower curtain hooks may cost $0.50 of ABS plastic, but $40 of time. Then there is the time involved to sit down and design all of the stuff you want to print.

It doesn't take your full attention to use the 3D printer, you just need to be more ore less in the same room, if even that. Hit print, let it buzz away while you work on some new code, or watch TV, and look over at it every once in a while to see how it is going. About as complex and demanding of your time as cooking a TV dinner in a conventinal oven.

Now how long/much does it cost to travel to the store, find what item you want, buy it, travel back home?

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[RabidReindeer]

They set the retail price for the safety razor at $78!!! I'm pretty sure that for $78 in the store you'll get razors included, but the rep-rap certainly won't print any.

They're probably talking about actual, old-fashioned double-edge safety razors, not a Gillette Mach 3 Turbo or whatever. And yes, a very nice one can cost $78 and does not come with blades. The $78 razor would also be a heck of a lot nicer and shave a lot better than anything you could print, and would last for decades. I use one, and it's older than I am. I didn't pay anywhere near $78 for it. More like $10.

Actually, My bet would be on those silly overpriced 5-blade razor modules. Those things scare me - I like to know where the blade is an not have it flopping around, so I don't buy them myself, but I think they're something horrendous like $15-$15 a pack. And every blade pack fits a different razor.

You can't print the blades, obviously, but if you could by blades in generic bulk packs and print the carrier modules, it would probably work out that way.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[RabidReindeer]

3D printing of the Makerbot / Reprap kind is probably fine for utilitarian purposes (assuming you can model a part), but it looks absolutely hideous for anything decorative that people have a chance to examine up close. So curtain rings, yes, iPhone case probably no.

Next year's big fad: Ridgy iPhone cases.

Don't laugh. People bought rocks in boxes.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[tsadi]

I'm wondering. Say I look at online photos of some really expensive shower curtain rings, make my own 3D rendering based on those photos, then print some for myself (and maybe for some friends who come over). Am I guilty of pirating? Will lawmakers see that as "stealing"?

Or how about if I copied the design of some really cool & expensive smartphone case and just printed one for myself instead of buying one. Will that be stealing?

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[smooth wombat]

Order and wait? Are you crippled? You go to the store and have the rings at your place in 30 minutes (unless you live really far from a store).

Have we grown so lazy that we dare not leave our places any more?

Convenience is one thing, laziness is just inexcusable.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[luciano.moretti]

They are already working on machines to take old milk bottles or soda bottles and manufacture the filament needed for a RepRap.

http://www.appropedia.org/Recyclebot_v2.3

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Applekid]

What if I just click on 'Print it', then go on with the rest of your life until it's printed?

You come back to it 3 hours later to find that the object has separated from the raft leaving you with $20 worth of extruded plastic spaghetti. But if you babysit it the success rate goes way up.

It might have something to do with the nearby body heat, or maybe a hidden camera that verifies a person is there, or just pissed off little elves that don't want to be lonely. But yes, you have to babysit it :(

How long have you been a 3d printer operator? I recommend more practice.

After getting the hang of it (which involves a robust toolchain, proper calibration, and correct leveling and maintenance), I've had many many hours worth of prints completely unattented. It took me about 8 months of casual usage with some periods of inactivity to get here.

Your response is a bit tongue in cheek, I get that, but while the learning curve is rather steep it levels off considerably.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Anonymous Coward]

But there's a SPOOOOOOOOON HOLDERRRRRRRRRRRRR. spooooooooooon hoooooooooooldeeeeeeeer. spoon holder

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Synerg1y]

Yes & no...

There's printers out there going for over 10k right now.... why? many reasons, but in short they can do more faster & longer than typical printers. Same thing with 3d printing, the size of what it can print seems to be a price point, possibly the types of plastic material it can work with another. While it will get cheaper, we'll see better ones in the 2k price range emerge. A 20% failure rate does sound pretty bad at the moment though, I'd start by making them more reliable and then worrying about the parts costs.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Applekid]

This. With free shipping on everything, and a shower curtain including 12 rings costing $10, an iPhone case costing $3.50, I think the 3D printer would take a long time to break even.

That assumes the shower curtain rings and iPhone case available for sale at such prices are exactly what I want.

Maybe I want a phone case with a few earbud holding loops on the side in glow-in-the-dark green, or maybe I want shower curtains each with a separate symbol of the zodiac on the outside. If your needs don't fall into the 90% of the market that wants it, you can forget about anyone making it in quantity such that it would be as cheap as you describe.

In retrospect, I've spent money over the years on seemingly mundane things that are a compromise between what I really wanted and what was available. Drawer handles that are square with a bulge instead of just square. Wall plates with a mismatched Command hook attached for a keyring holder instead of built in to the panel. Spice racks that are slightly undersized for my cabinet and shifts around instead of a perfect friction fit. With a 3d printer you can build things that perfectly match your needs (and will only get better as time goes on), and with significantly less skill required for, say, using a lathe to turn your perfect faucet handle.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[ColdWetDog]

"Printing" your own PCBs is about at the level of 3D printers today - eminently practical for a limited number of users. I use a modified laminator and heat sensitive resistive paper and stick the exposed board in some moderately nasty oxidizer. Takes about 4 hours start to finish but about a year of fiddling with the all of the workflow bits.

You can get one or two off PCBs from a number of mail in houses. Just like 3D printers.

I think the 3D printer world will actually look like the low volume PCB manufacturers in a couple of years: The occasional DIYer with their own, the easy accessibility of small shops to send for one off bits. I can''t see 3D printers in my neigbor''s house - they've yet to keep a 2D inkjet alive for more than a couple of months.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[asavage]

What makes the orthotic example crazy is the normal $500 or whatever price for orthotics includes (at least where I live) 2-3 doctor visits as well to prescribe and measure, fit, and make any adjustments. For someone who needs prescription orthotics they can't just print out a template and get something that fits properly, although once they get the orthotics it might help make duplicate pairs. The person buying these orthotics also is buying them as they are covered by their medical plan so the cost to the user is almost nothing.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Synerg1y]

I'm willing to bet all this will get a lot easier as the technology matures, and you will ALWAYS find people who will complain about how hard something is to use.

Now I don't own one, but correct me if I'm wrong...

Calibration is automatic
Leveling it on a floor is common sense, esp if the instructions require it
Any printer ever made requires maintenance

It's probably harder with less mature technology to ensure #1 is right and #3 is being done, but give it a few years especially if demand picks up and it'll be just as easy as maintaining your laser printer.

Re: Apropos lowest retail cost

[Applekid]

Most low-end 3D printers use PLA plastic. This is basically processed corn starch, and while initially hydrophobic, it will rapidly degrade (rot) if exposed to water for an extended period of time. In addition, the prints are much stronger in the direction of the filament than cross-wise (using the tensile strength of the filament vs the bonding strength of the layers), so it's not just model quality but actual printing technique that matters for durability.

They're making huge strides, but 3D printing is nowhere near the "run out and buy an HP inkjet and hook it up" level of utility.

You might find this post interesting, in which a PLA object was left outdoors for about a year. http://www.protoparadigm.com/blog/2013/06/weathering-of-3d-printed-pla-objects/

Spoiler: not as bad as one might think. The fine print on those application white papers usually say that, to bio-degrade PLA, it needs to be ground up very finely and composted in a very specific manner.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Anonymous Coward]

How is waiting hours for shower curtain rings any different than clicking the buy it button and waiting a few days for it to show up at your door. I know this is the "now" society, but I think the wait factor isn't that bad.

When I can walk my ass over to the $1 store and buy a pack of 12 rings, and then return home all within an hour, I fail to see what incentive I have to spend a shitload of money on a 3D printer. I mean really, how often does the average person buy shower rings?
As for the iPhone case, give me a fucking break. First of all, it's not going to provide any protection, which is the number one reason most people buy a case for their smartphone. The article touts the ability to customize the case design... again, big woop. It doesn't print transparent decals/skins, which is what people are looking for.

I'm not saying there aren't applications for this, but I'm highly suspicious of their claims that the common household would be able to get a good ROI.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Princeofcups]

Without considering that a set of shower rings can last 5 years or more... I think this study is obviously bogus. I honestly can't think about any bunch of stand-alone plastic items I spend $2000 on every year.

As a miniatures enthusiast, I can. The problem is that the resolution is not fine enough for that kind of detail yet. Games Workshop is the one that has to start worrying. Maybe they will go to a "customize and print on demand" model.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[losfromla]

for that you're probably looking at at least $50,000. Think about what's involved in making a machine of that size while holding tolerances tight enough for quality 3-D printing.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[gl4ss]

frankly for me it's not the worry of spaghetti prints for leaving unattended. it's the fact that the cheap ramps and mightyboard based printers have shit all _no_ protections beside some code on the atmel.

the atmel hangs with the heater on and the heater will be on till it fries something.

that's whats keeping me from leaving either of my printers running when going to work.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[losfromla]

You make a much better case than the paper's authors (based on slashdot info regarding the paper). It was absurd for them to pitch the cost angle when that is really not the benefit, rather it is what you put forth. The paper seems as desperate as a m$ "value" white paper, who sponsored the study?

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[niado]

I'm wondering. Say I look at online photos of some really expensive shower curtain rings, make my own 3D rendering based on those photos, then print some for myself (and maybe for some friends who come over). Am I guilty of pirating? Will lawmakers see that as "stealing"?

Or how about if I copied the design of some really cool & expensive smartphone case and just printed one for myself instead of buying one. Will that be stealing?

Interesting question.

It obviously won't be "stealing" (in the legal sense of "theft") but it could be intellectual property infringement, depending on several factors. If the design is patented (ROUNDED CORNARZ), then you could be infringing on a patent. However, this would be impossible to enforce, unless you widely distributed the designs (say, using the internet) or started selling the items that you produced.

If you started producing items based on copyrighted materials (like if you made a bunch of disney princess figurines, for example) you would also be infringing. Again, unenforceable unless you widely distribute the designs or the items.

In both these cases the designs themselves would be infringing, and illegal to distribute.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Cederic]

Not for another 7 years. But before much longer, yes, laws will be passed.

They'll be every bit as effective as the laws on copying music online too. For the same reasons.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Cederic]

Forgive my British ignorance, but wtf is a spoon holder and do I need one?

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Anonymous Coward]

That's called buying a good printer then.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Anonymous Coward]

"or just pissed off little elves that don't want to be lonely"

This option has the highest explanatory power.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Darinbob]

I can't even imagine spending $2000 on household items made of plastic. For that much money I'd need to have an appliance break. Shower curtain rings? That's a once a decade expense at most.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[vettemph]

I have a Murker Futur. It was $78...
https://www.detailsformen.com/ProductDetail.aspx?ProductID=862&gclid=CPHB96_x3LgCFUei4Aod3k4AGw

You can adjust the blade angle/depth to match your shaving condition. (I have an after five shadow by noon, same day, not three days later.)

Blades cost about $20 for 100. I use one per week so that's $98 for two years of shaving. $20 for two years of shaving after initial investment.
So much better than getting robbed by a 6 blade crook.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[pr0fessor]

I don't buy enough small all plastic items to make a 3d printer worth it but yeah if I could search for a part and print a usable part for any of the more expensive items in my home or garage. You know like that 99 cent plastic piece on the lawn mower that you can't order anywhere even the manufacture unless you order a $50 kit with a bunch of parts you don't need. Then maybe it would be worth it.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Anonymous Coward]

The way to answer all questions similar to this for the coming century, barring some incredible and unforeseen evolution in humanity's morals and common sense: a simple little test:

Might it ever be even remotely possible for a corporation to want your money and be willing to write laws to prevent you from giving it anyone else or keeping it for yourself? Might it ever be even remotely possible that some greedy fuck will see that you aren't giving him your money and hire his corporate lawyers for this task?

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Anonymous Coward]

your time is worth $10/hour

What rich and logical country do you live in that the minimum wage is $10/hr? You know they're paying smart, creative, college-educated young people $8.60/hr to perform menial manual labor in the US, right? And that minimum wage is $7.25/hr?

If wages had kept up with inflation, let alone productivity, we'd be making $16/hr at least. What makes you think that increasing individual productivity even more will change this divergence we've seen since the '70s?

Printers could be wonderful. But they won't be for a simple reason. The same simple reason things suck so much right now at the dawn of the new millennium.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Fjandr]

Actually, not much is needed to expand the printable area. All you need are longer rods and rails. They're made exactly the same way with the same tolerances.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[losfromla]

Not just rods and rails, also longer, by 5x(?) position sensors (optical strips?) and also the required rods and rails will need to be held to tighter tolerances as deviations that are passable at shorter lengths are magnified at longer lengths and thus no longer acceptable. It takes larger machines to make larger parts with tighter absolute tolerances and so the cost of the parts increases. I argue it increases by a lot.
Here in the comments section of the article about the Objet1000 (1000 mm x 800 mm x 500 mm) it mentions the price at $675,000. The article states $40,000 but that's probably wrong.
http://www.designnews.com/author.asp?section_id=1394&doc_id=256319&dfpPParams=ind_186,industry_auto,industry_gov,industry_medical,bid_26,aid_256319&dfpLayout=blog
Here is one that mentions the price as 500,000 Pounds:
http://3dprintingindustry.com/2012/11/30/objet1000-connex-platform-launched-at-euromold/
So even if the hobbyist can reduce the price to 1/10, it is still $67,500.

So, I respectfully disagree unless you can show where the larger envelope sizes have been achieved for much lower cost. Note even that this printer does not meet the wished for 1m x 1m x1m of the parent post achieving in fact, only 40% of the wish.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[losfromla]

And another thing...
Not to mention that larger payloads and printers heads with more heavy requirements will be needed. Better cable management, material handling, etc. It isn't that easy to scale. A hobbyist who scaled down from the Objet1000 would certainly be compromising on print quality to even come close to covering the envelope.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[hurfy]

Surely that isn't a plastic shower head for $400!

That and a paper towel holder is the only thing useful on the list for me :(

Really hard water here so i just buy a new shower head for $5.99 at the hardware store each year. About the same price as a bottle of CLR to clean the old head :/

The shower curtains i've bought come with rings, that seems pointless as the curtain needs replacing 1st. Has anyone just had to replace the rings? Mine are right where they were 12 years ago when i moved in (with a spare set in drawer from buying the last curtain.

The orthotic thing is good i hadn't thought of that one. Still have cut and add foam to top tho i would think most are padded. If there are designs for lots of sizes and shapes that could be handy.

Never used a spoon holder in my life. Looks like 2 for $1 at the dollar store type item tho so who cares if i can make for $.10 and a few hours time.

These printers don't take much power? $.31 isn't a lot of juice and how many hours did this stuff take to print?

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[hurfy]

They can replace the $20-40 ready made ones tho for like $1 in plastic or something. Hardy gonna pay for a printer but at least it is a decent use if enough plans are available. Most have a nice foam layer on top you have to add also however. Certainly better than replacing a $1 spoon holder with $.10 worth of plastic and a long print job.

No way will you get the plans for one you are prescribed tho, they aren't giving away plans to their $500 ones for nothing!

Not all of us have insurance. Even then i don't use enough to cover the deductable. It is only an admit ticket for the hospital if ever needed :(

Wonder what they priced the caliper at? This is gonna to print one similar to the ones in the bargain bin not the Snap-on truck, right? I think mine was $5 for a big one and a little one.

Article should get an award for fluff and puff journalism or something! The AVERAGE household is probably not buying EVERYTHING at the HIGHEST price possible (and rounded up)...not really the idea behind AVERAGE now is it folks.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Dekker3D]

RepRap uses no position sensors. It uses stepper motors. It's cheaper that way, and doesn't reduce accuracy if you turn up the current of the motors or turn down the acceleration/speed of the print enough. The main concern would probably be sagging.

I'm thinking a sort of rollercoaster-like rail and carriage would help prevent sagging along the X and Y axis. The Z axis doesn't even really need it unless you're moving a lot of mass at your extruder. Other than that... you'd just need to extend the frame and wires, which can probably be done for less than $25.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Dekker3D]

People can download files made by others, so they don't have to design everything they want to print themselves. That said, I do easily spend about $80 worth of time, mindlessly staring at a print in progress. Mostly because it's damn near hypnotizing, not because my printer really needs babysitting when I'm printing PLA with it.

RepRap Mendel90 with 4pi electronics, by the way.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[losfromla]

Stepper motors are ok if you stay well within (way below) their operating parameters. This means never driving them too hard because if you exceed their recommended load then you are going to be skipping steps and thus will be lost. At a minimum you should use servomotors which always know where they are, more so if you are using absolute encoders. All machining equipment uses sensors on the axis, this is because when it really matters, that is what you do. You can use a secondary encoder on the motor but this is more for velocity and acceleration control. If you are using steppers, you're either using massive steppers (more weight to carry) or you are driving them through a geartrain, which means loss of resolution and probably accuracy due to gear backlash.
If you turn the speed down enough, you might as well carve a mold out the conventional way, by hand.

Yes, it would be a rollercoaster-like rail and carriage but these cost lots to make and if you want them really accurate then you mount them on sturdy and rigid bars (more mass). The z-axis very much needs to be placed accurately and this means you need a reliable way to move a printhead loaded with as much material as you've engineered your gantry to carry and it needs to move up and down carrying all that weight without missing a step. It stands as given that if you require a 1m^3 work volume, then you intend to push a lot of material through doesn't it? If you are just making hello kitty sized figurines then you'd use the smaller machine and yeah not have to worry about moving a lot of mass.

If there is a group that has made a 1m^3 work volume 3d printer, please point them out because I still feel that it can't be done with reasonable results ( current RepRap quality) for under $50,000.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Dekker3D]

No, I don't know of a group that has made such a printer for less than $50k. Few people have a need for such sizes, given that it'd take ages to print things at such scales with current speeds. No interest means that nobody's really looked at it much. Hence, there are few large-scale RepRap design. The Kamermaker in Amsterdam is the first to come to mind, and that's not quite open source.

One thing that would probably help a lot is if people started using multiple extruders with vastly varying nozzle sizes, like close to 2mm for infill (3mm filament is pretty much the standard for RepRaps; 1.75mm for some other printers) and about 0.5-0.3mm for perimeters. Even then, it'd take some impressive printer designs to print anything with a bounding box near a meter in size, in a sane timeframe.

It might be thinkable to use some pellet-based extruder that has a nozzle beyond 3mm, to really speed up the internal structures.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Dcnjoe60]

People can download files made by others, so they don't have to design everything they want to print themselves. That said, I do easily spend about $80 worth of time, mindlessly staring at a print in progress. Mostly because it's damn near hypnotizing, not because my printer really needs babysitting when I'm printing PLA with it.

RepRap Mendel90 with 4pi electronics, by the way.

While PLA is lower temp than ABS, you might want to check with your home owners insurance to see if they would cover a fire from an unattended 3D printer. Many won't, which is why most manufacturers warn that you need to monitor the printing process (sounds better than if it malfunctions it might set your house on fire).

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Dekker3D]

I can actually speak from experience when I say it doesn't catch fire quickly. The heating elements just don't get enough power to really do anything horrible unless you leave it sitting, active, for multiple hours. At the rate it was going the one time my thermistor misreported temperatures, it would've probably taken a few hours for it to even melt away the PEEK nozzle holder. Not sure what the combustion points of PLA or ABS are, and I assume that of PEEK and brass will be quite a bit higher.. but yeah.

The only way it could reasonably cause a fire in the time it'd take for an average print is probably if you shorted some of the 12v wires. The 4pi electronics board I use has a ton of safety features built in. Shorting the heater wires would probably just blow the fuse, and I could replace that easily. The Arduino+RAMPS electronics that most RepRap users have are a bit easier to get in trouble with, I guess.

Though you do have a point. If it did catch fire, I'd probably be screwed. But the same would go for any other interesting tinkering experiment.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Dcnjoe60]

I can actually speak from experience when I say it doesn't catch fire quickly. The heating elements just don't get enough power to really do anything horrible unless you leave it sitting, active, for multiple hours. At the rate it was going the one time my thermistor misreported temperatures, it would've probably taken a few hours for it to even melt away the PEEK nozzle holder. Not sure what the combustion points of PLA or ABS are, and I assume that of PEEK and brass will be quite a bit higher.. but yeah.

The only way it could reasonably cause a fire in the time it'd take for an average print is probably if you shorted some of the 12v wires. The 4pi electronics board I use has a ton of safety features built in. Shorting the heater wires would probably just blow the fuse, and I could replace that easily. The Arduino+RAMPS electronics that most RepRap users have are a bit easier to get in trouble with, I guess.

Though you do have a point. If it did catch fire, I'd probably be screwed. But the same would go for any other interesting tinkering experiment.

Most likely, the risk is minimal, however, the hobby grade printers do work by melting plastic. Complex jobs can take hours to print, so the print head is on for quite some time. The likelihood of fire is not from catching the plastic on fire directly, but from something unexpected coming in contact with the device. For instance, it used to be quite common to use real candles on a christmas tree. Most people never had a problem. However, for those who did, it was usually catastrophic.

Soldering irons fall in the same category, however, it's never wise to leave one unattended, because if it falls off the table onto the carpet, it can do severe damage. Again, that is why the manufacturers recommend not leaving the 3d printers alone while in operation. Well, that and the fact that if something did happen while it was unattended they can say they warned you, so they aren't liable.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Dr Max]

I never said it was going to be easy (otherwise everyone would already be doing it), but if you want it to be more popular, useful (for more than yoda figurines) and pay for itself quicker, then doubling the build area is going to go a lot further than halving the price. I'm quite interested in le big rep http://reprap.org/wiki/LeBigRep just waiting on the guy to do a bit more of the leg work.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[losfromla]

my response was to your desire of a 1m^3 workspace for $2K. Not on this planet, not in this lifetime.
Thanks for the link though, it is big but clearly the quality of the printouts leave much to be desired. Here are more images for that machine, kudos to him for building it: http://www.flickr.com/photos/kurtcircuit/sets/72157624845973625/
but I don't think he'll ever make really nice parts with it not with the gears and motors he's using. Can't hold tolerances. If the quality of the parts he's making is good enough then probably making them out of oven baking clay would achieve the same result with much less machinery. Faster too. The machine won't get better with tweaking, it will take better construction and parts and engineering which means higher costs.
Again, not to take away from his efforts, it is a fantastic machine, it's just not going to make high quality parts. Taking his time and effort as a sunk cost, what is the projected cost of making a copy building to his prints?

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[Anonymous Coward]

youtube buccaneer 3d and you will find the printer you are talking about, a 3d printer that looks nice on your desk, and it costs 375usd. specs similar to makerbot but with a smaller printingarea that i think most people can live with when that price is set on the product!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nz2a_PdEgYg

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[niftydude]

Wonder what they priced the caliper at? This is gonna to print one similar to the ones in the bargain bin not the Snap-on truck, right? I think mine was $5 for a big one and a little one.

They priced the caliper at $7.88.

Article should get an award for fluff and puff journalism or something! The AVERAGE household is probably not buying EVERYTHING at the HIGHEST price possible (and rounded up)...not really the idea behind AVERAGE now is it folks.

Tell me about it. My main gripe is that this was published in Mechatronics- a journal with an impact factor of 1.65, which is not too bad for an engineering journal. The conclusions they draw is that the payback time for a RepRap will be between 4 months to 2 years for an average family, and that "The results show that the RepRap is already an economically attractive investment for the average US household." Which just is not supported by the data that they provide. The peer review process certainly failed on this one. Another mark against Elsevier publishing.

Re: Apropos lowest retail cost

[Anonymous Coward]

I wonder when drone will start printing 3D printers and reselling them.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[david_thornley]

What are the iPhone docks supposed to do? I think of docking as something electronic, and that's not printable.

I assume that by "caliper" they mean something with two adjustable legs, because the kind that measures (I've got a $10 one on my desk right now) needs embedded electronics.

I'm not real familiar with orthotics, but aren't they custom-designed? I don't think downloading some random design is going to work real well. (At least not for the expensive ones; I can buy a wrist brace cheap at the drug store.) I suppose you could get it designed from somebody who could give you a CAD file, but this is reaching.

And, looking at the list, the only thing we've bought this year was a new iPhone case for my wife, and a 3D printer isn't going to make one that looks like hers.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[david_thornley]

I can do a direct comparison. I have a lot of 1:6000 WWI and WWII ship models that were cast in pewter, and I recently bought some from Shapeway's (ships I can't get anywhere else). The new ones are blocky and lose a lot of detail. They're acceptable for playing naval minis games, but not nearly as nice.

Re: Apropos lowest retail cost

[Anonymous Coward]

People have gone to jail for illegally downloading copyrighted material. Did not matter if they sold it, gave it away, or ate it for lunch. Illegal download is the key and enforcement is not that hard if the investigation is digital.

Re:Apropos lowest retail cost

[mcswell]

"So much better than getting robbed by a 6 blade crook." Or you could grow a beard, like me. I've had one for the last 40 years, except for two years when I was in an indigenous area where they didn't trust bearded men. (Obviously not Muslims!)

China

[AlphaWolf_HK]

Does this mean 3D printers put China out of business? (Well not completely of course - though you can print the iphone case, you still can't print the iphone yet, but the little accessories and nicknacks make up a huge chunk of the Chinese exports.)

Re:China

[cheater512]

Where do you think the plastic consumables come from?

Re:China

[longk]

At the moment, the number of materials you can use to print is still limited. Many iPhone covers are unprintable at the moment, simply due to material restraints. Also, after you print that cover, who's going to paint Spongebob or stick shiny fake diamonds onto your cover? Not the printer. Not yet anyway.

Re:China

[c0lo]

Does this mean 3D printers put China out of business?

You wish... what it actually means: China will be the number one 3D printer manufacturer.

Re:China

[Karmashock]

Any oil refinery.

Re:China

[crutchy]

1. Chinese labor cost + 3d printing = even cheaper chinese ripoffs
2. even more american companies relocate to china
3. america becomes even more dependent on imports from china
4. americans buy increasing number of products from china
5. china goods for US dollars
6. china uses US dollars to buy assets (land, companies, etc) in america
7. china bankrolls election campaign candidate and drowns out all other candidates on greedy corporate media (that china probably has significant ownership of anyway)
8. americans "elect" president
9. president favours lobby groups with chinese interests that funded his campaign for the white house
10. american private sector employers haemorrhage jobs, putting many middle class workers on welfare
11. government comes to "save" them by giving them public sector jobs paid for by printing money from the fed
12. increased dependence on the "welfare" state
13. bills pass that reduce liberties once taken for granted and enshrined in the constitution
14. president increases authority over congress and the courts
15. america becomes authoritarian state
16. american president pledges total cooperation in exchange for economic free trade with china
17. american "empire" ends
18. Zefram Cochrane launches the Phoenix

Re:China

[mosb1000]

Not China. . .

Re:China

[gl4ss]

the plastic itself isn't from china..

Re:China

[vikingpower]

True. But there are already printers in a demonstrator stadium that make pretty good attempts at printing ceramics, or a mixture of metal particles and glue.

Re:China

[AlphaWolf_HK]

You forgot:

19. A 3D printer is invented that can make a full course meal in seconds, we call it a replicator eventually we don't have to do any real work anymore so Scotty becomes obese.
20. Since we don't do any real work anymore, soon it becomes popular to randomly speak in meaningless technobabble so that people can still feel important.

http://www.spike.com/video-clips/mr9tu4/cinemassacre-top-10-star-trek-technobabbles

21. But it's ok because people still end up making more sense than your rant just did.

Re:China

[jmhobrien]

Why can't I print those?

Re:China

[AlphaWolf_HK]

Well the article states that these printers can mostly print themselves.

What they can't print are the things like the logic boards and connectors. However those aren't often made in China anyways, usually they're made in domestic facilities and then sent to China for assembly.

Although unlikely, it's not unreasonable to believe that these printers could one day come in incomplete kits, and you can e.g. have your neighbor print up what isn't included and just assemble it yourself.

Re:China

[c0lo]

Why can't I print those?

Because the amount of filament required will cost you more.

Re:China

[c0lo]

What they can't print are the things like the logic boards and connectors. However those aren't often made in China anyways, usually they're made in domestic facilities and then sent to China for assembly.

Ummm... what???? I'd rather say, more often than not, that's exactly where they are made. Unless they choose to outsource them... I don't know.... say, Africa?

Re:China

[Anonymous Coward]

Not only from China. There's probably plastic mines all over the world.

Re:China

[laejoh]

I don't think so... after a while people with 3D printers will be able to print new 3D printers, and then there will be no need for china anymore.

Re:China

[mysidia]

Does this mean 3D printers put China out of business? (Well not completely of course - though you can print the iphone case, you still can't print the iphone yet, but the little accessories and nicknacks make up a huge chunk of the Chinese exports.)

Not until they make a 3D printer with an output of quality comparable to an injection mold.

So far... 3D printers haven't reached even 80% of the quality; you can 3D print low-quality improvised devices and design prototypes

The printout is cheaper, but the durability and expected lifetime of a detailed part is lower; and aesthetically less appealing than what manufacturers can do.

Re:China

[AlphaWolf_HK]

Chandler, Arizona is the location of the worlds most advanced semiconductor fabrication plant, and Intel owns it. Yet everything you buy that comes out of it is stamped "Made in Malaysia."

Why? That's where it's packaged.

I shouldn't have used the word domestic like that though - domestic could imply domestic to the US, but in reality many secmiconductor fabs are located abroad, but often not in China, and are domestic to the actual company who designs the chip (which is what I meant) - usually Japan, South Korea (Samsung being a big one), and even Europe. TSMC is probably the biggest in China, though some argue Taiwan isn't China.

Re:China

[DeBaas]

That's stupid, everyone knows it grows in the pacific ocean

Re: China

[rolfwind]

No, 3D printing is at best a fantasy of Star Trek level replication which is who knows how many lifetimes away. Until then, it's best off used for fast prototyping and other such applications, not to pretend it will replace walmart or the dollar store for shoddy goods.

Re:China

[Smidge204]

Unless it's PLA, then it comes mostly from plant starch.

=Smidge=

Re:China

[SQLGuru]

You can print SpongeBob on to a transparent sticker using your inkjet printer. Then you apply the sticker to your freshly printed case.....

Or you can get a bedazzler if you want the beads.

Re:China

[PhilHibbs]

Any self-replicating 3D printing system will introduce errors with each successive generation - if the manufacturing tolerance of the original is 1 in 1000 then the tolerance of a part produced by it will be 2 in 1000, third generation will be 3 in 1000, etc. until eventually you just have an unrecognizable blob of plastic that does nothing.

Re:China

[Anonymous Coward]

Except that a small fraction of the printers will have a replication error that improves their performance or accuracy. Those will spread, making more copies of themselves.

Re:China

[HornWumpus]

You could just whittle your spongebob iphone case out of a railroad tie...

Re:China

[Anonymous Coward]

They're waiting for their medication to print.

Re:China

[RabidReindeer]

Any self-replicating 3D printing system will introduce errors with each successive generation - if the manufacturing tolerance of the original is 1 in 1000 then the tolerance of a part produced by it will be 2 in 1000, third generation will be 3 in 1000, etc. until eventually you just have an unrecognizable blob of plastic that does nothing.

They don't replicate themselves They print what's in the plan files. As long as the plan files are undamaged, every printed generation will have the same tolerances.

Re: China

[RabidReindeer]

No, 3D printing is at best a fantasy of Star Trek level replication which is who knows how many lifetimes away. Until then, it's best off used for fast prototyping and other such applications, not to pretend it will replace walmart or the dollar store for shoddy goods.

Considering just how shoddy some of those goods are, I'd wager that 3D printing would actually be a jump up.

Re:China

[HornWumpus]

That and 3D printed parts are weak and inaccurate.

Same reason 3D printers aren't economic (yet) in general.

Re:China

[HornWumpus]

What? That isn't even wrong. It's just incoherent.

Re:China

[dasgoober]

Though, maybe an interesting idea ... maybe this plastic can be collected and recycled into 3D printer "ink"?

Re:China

[couchslug]

With lights-out manufacturing, robotic assembly, and other advanced manufacturing processes China will eventuall lose the advantage of cheap meatbots because meatbots won't be needed.

That's why Foxconn is investing in robots.

It will still cost money to SHIP Chinese products. Ships burn oil, lots of it, as do the trucks which bring ISO containers to those ships. People forget the long and complex supply chain which isn't easy to shrink.

Re: China

[triffid_98]

Sadly, you'd be wrong. Cheap injection molded plastic > this, by a long shot.

Re:China

[Anonymous Coward]

[...] though some argue Taiwan isn't China.

It's China alright, just it's the real china and not communist china (PRC).

Re:China

[PhilHibbs]

I'm not saying that they reproduce themselves by analysing their own structure, of course they use plans. Yes, each part that Machine 1 produces should be more or less identical. But if you assemble those things into Machine 2, then the parts that it produces will be inferior to Machine 1's output. Make Machine 3 with them, and the parts that it produces will be even worse. You can't stop transcription errors, and they will compound upon themselves. This is basic information theory. You need some process to correct the errors, which is usually human intervention in the mechanical world, and is random gene recombination and natural selection in the natural world. It is possible to make a machine that produces parts that are to a higher tolerance than the machine itself, but it has to be a special purpose design that does one thing relally well, and is not suited to 3D printers.

Re:China

[RabidReindeer]

I'm not saying that they reproduce themselves by analysing their own structure, of course they use plans. Yes, each part that Machine 1 produces should be more or less identical. But if you assemble those things into Machine 2, then the parts that it produces will be inferior to Machine 1's output. Make Machine 3 with them, and the parts that it produces will be even worse. You can't stop transcription errors, and they will compound upon themselves. This is basic information theory. You need some process to correct the errors, which is usually human intervention in the mechanical world, and is random gene recombination and natural selection in the natural world. It is possible to make a machine that produces parts that are to a higher tolerance than the machine itself, but it has to be a special purpose design that does one thing relally well, and is not suited to 3D printers.

I think that the best argument against that is to consider pre-printer tools. We have lots of specialized precision instruments these days. However, God did not create the original instruments 6000 years ago and leave them lying around the landscape. They were created from less-precise precursors. Which, in turn, were created from even cruder precursors. Until you end up going all the way back to funny-shaped rocks.

The precision of what comes out is constrained by the precision of what produces it, true. But the information used to produce the output is even more important, as it is what allows us to transcend instead of decay.

Re:China

[PhilHibbs]

... It is possible to make a machine that produces parts that are to a higher tolerance than the machine itself, but it has to be a special purpose design that does one thing relally well, and is not suited to 3D printers.

I think that the best argument against that is to consider pre-printer tools. We have lots of specialized precision instruments these days. However, God did not create the original instruments 6000 years ago and leave them lying around the landscape.

That isn't an argument against my assertion at all. I already said it's possible to make a machine that makes higher precision machines. Transcription errors can be managed, but it takes effort, and it takes intervention from outside the system (the intelligent reaction to errors is one way, and gene-recombination plus natural selection is another brute force way).

Just wait 'til companies catch on

[Opportunist]

If you thought the whining of the content industry concerning the illegal copying of imaginary property was loud, this will be deafening.

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[AlphaWolf_HK]

I don't think the cries would come from any one industry or group, but from several.

A lot of these designs that they use are rather simple, and somebody could come up with them on their own without much effort, so I don't think it would be an intellectual property thing. However the complaints would arrive thus:

Retail stores, who usually see most of their profit come from accessory markup decline.
UPS/USPS/Fedex shipments decline (as a result of the above from online retailers)
Labor unions that represent assembly line workers as well as the above workers might see loss of union dues.

I think what you'll see against 3d printers is more akin to what is going on with the rideshare service: Environmentalists will complain that they are energy hogs, health "experts" will complain about the dangers of nanoparticles, 3d printers can be used to print dangerous objects (i.e. the liberator.) These arguments will be used by lobbyists representing the above industries (as well as gun control-type groups) to try to regulate the crap out of their usage, regardless of whether they are actually dangerous or not.

At which point society reaches a crossroads:

The question will come down to whether or not people see having reduced need for labor as being a good thing. Personally I always see it as being a good thing. I've frequently said I'd rather live in a world where my income is $10 an hour and my lunch costs $4 than being in a world where my income is $20 an hour and my lunch costs $20. In the later scenario, although I have more income, I am in fact poorer by every definition. Technology makes you wealthier, even if it might reduce your income - it makes nice stuff available for cheaper or available easier. Cheaper stuff means somebody got paid less to make it.

And it shows: Today's "poor" are wealthier than they've ever been. The poor in America now frequently own personal computers, cell phones, blu-ray players, playstations, big screen TV's, and don't have any problems paying for food. Recall during the 80's how only the filthy rich had a car phone or a TV larger than 40" (with a picture quality that is crap by today's standards) and the kid with the rich parents had both a sega and a nintendo. Don't confuse wealth with money - the notion that income disparity is creating more poor and killing the middle class is a flawed one, because it's simply moving the goalpost based on a single number on a spreadsheet and completely ignores everything else that should properly define the word "poor" (material possessions being one of them.)

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd rather live in a world where my income is $10 an hour and my lunch costs $4 than being in a world where my income is $20 an hour and my lunch costs $20

The reality for an increasing number of people may be that their income is $0 and lunch cost $4.

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[DerekLyons]

Today's "poor" are wealthier than they've ever been. The poor in America now frequently own personal computers, cell phones, blu-ray players, playstations, big screen TV's, and don't have any problems paying for food.

You've obviously never actually been poor or have been around actual poor people, and thus have a very deranged and clueless view of how poor people live.

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[Anonymous Coward]

You forgot to put "illegal" in quotes.

The only actual crime here is the "content" Mafia stealing our money in return for doing absolutely zero work but only giving us a mere copy of the result of the work of somebody else (the artist) that they ripped off too.

Their existence serves no purpose. The Internet made them pointless. (And by the way: Total "sales" went UP, *not* down. It's just that the money went to e.g. iTunes, not the Mafia. In total it's still *more*!)

But the only "payment" that I, for one, will ever give them for that, is also a mere copy of the result of the work of somebody else. I'll ask my pal to make a copy of his money that he earned at his job, and make sure it has this stamp across it that shows it's completely worthless (and makes it legal). I'll also tack on a "license", saying they are not allowed to do *anything* with said copied bills, except put it in their pocket and play Monopoly with it. No paying anyone with it, no showing it to others. :P

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[AlphaWolf_HK]

So long as the demand for a lunch still remains, somebody would still have to pay for it and therefore be paid for it. So for somebody to truly not have the ability to make a buck, this person would have to lose the ability to make a lunch to begin with, otherwise there would be such thing as a free lunch.

For those who are unable (health issues for example) I'm not opposed to working out accommodations, but I personally have no sympathy for somebody who believes a job at McDonalds is ever below them, which research shows is the attitude that the majority of the homeless have. We already give people with this mindset free food and shelter, which I strongly believe is more than adequate.

If you think McDonalds is bad, try having some of the jobs I've had, one of which included sitting in a lab filling chemical powder samples into little jars all day long. At least at McDonalds I'd be able to move around more and chat with customers on occasion. It required more skill because I had to know clean room handling, but it only paid about the same. Being a garbage man actually pays pretty well in some areas, but nobody takes that job because they don't like the idea of being called a garbage man.

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[AlphaWolf_HK]

Oh? If we go based on income standards, I'm poor right now actually. I have Nephrotic Syndrome to the point where I'm tired all the time and can't stay awake worth shit to hold a job for damn, even so much as sitting in a chair for a few hours causes my feet to swell up so bad with edema that they hurt like a bitch, and even with supplements my calcium levels are so low that I get severe muscle cramps just walking around. My income? Other than whatever random tasks I can scrape by (usually fixing somebody's computer or something for a whopping $50, an event that rarely occurs) zero. I don't even get social security.

You know what though? I still have some pretty nice shit. I can't afford my own place so I live in a shared domicile, but I do have a car and I don't drive like a teenager so insurance is cheap, and since I don't have to commute I don't spend much on gas. I have a nice computer with a big TV and a netflix subscription, which combined with my internet bill (50/10) is $40 a month. It's not so bad, I have my own room and my combined monthly expenses are about $300. The trick is to not live in New York where the rent and taxes are so god damn high that minimum wage will never cover your expenses, and then wonder why you can't make ends meet like a retard. Instead I live in the suburbs in a modest metro area, so the city is close enough that I can acquire provisions on the cheap. Living arrangements such as this are available easily if you just look. Instead I find people who complain the most tend to insist upon living in some upscale area beyond their means, hence the "occupy movement" was formed.

Had it not been for my kidney disease, I'd probably be working at a major tier 1 ISP who just showed massive interest in hiring me (they called me in for multiple interviews, with them telling me they were impressed with my skillset, and with me telling them that I'm sick in all of them - I'm not going to do the douchy thing of playing the ADA card and forcing them to hire me when I can't perform their tasks reliably) so it isn't as if I'm just refusing to work either. Believe me, if I could take that job, I so would, I love networking with a passion. I literally do it for fun.

If I even made less than minimum wage, I'd be better off right now. So yeah by your income definition, I'm an actual fucking poor person.

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[mysidia]

Personally I always see it as being a good thing. I've frequently said I'd rather live in a world where my income is $10 an hour and my lunch costs $4 than being in a world where my income is $20 an hour and my lunch costs $20.

The lower income is created because fewer people have a job at all, that is, a larger pool of qualified workers competing for a small number of jobs; that means more people are unemployed, and the cost of their lunch went down, but they still receive $0 an hour.

This situation isn't necessarily as beneficial as it would first appear. If say you got that $10/Hour job, but while you are being hired, the guy who two guys who had the job before you paid $12/Hour just got laid off; perhaps the other guys had a few more children to feed, so his lunch cost $8, and your life situation permitted you to accept a lower wage.

Anyways, you will be expected to do twice as much work for 16% less pay in real terms.

And in 6 months, some newbie straight out of college who doesn't own a home or have any assets requiring servicing, and is content to live on $2 ramen; will take your $10 job, by offering to work for $4/Hour.

And oh, by the way, your lunch still costs $4. The decrease in labor required is not the only dynamic in the employment markets; additional changes emerge there over time.

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[mysidia]

At least at McDonalds I'd be able to move around more and chat with customers on occasion. It required more skill because I had to know clean room handling, but it only paid about the same.,

It looks better on a resume to be doing clean room handling work; do anything requiring a lot of skill and careful work, and you could potentially make a go for a management job to better yourself in the future.

If you are a professional with past experience in a professional field; having a McDonalds job on there would taint the resume, and maybe ruin what chance you had at another go....

Anything that may ruin your chance for long term improvement can carry a stigma

As for garbage man... you don't want to put that on a resume either. Although usually 'garbage men' do something else; it's much better if you can put down Facilities management; or facility image management/beautification

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[Anonymous Coward]

I personally have no sympathy for somebody who believes a job at McDonalds is ever below them

1) McDonald's own advice to their employees is to get two jobs. Think about that and the direction that is going.
http://gawker.com/mcdonalds-to-employees-get-a-second-job-or-drop-dead-803511522

2) There are already burger making robots, warehouse robots. There'd be no need for many people if there are robots making $4 lunches for those with the money.

There are just so many items a rich person can choose to spend on, so if you're not already in their "operating expenditure" good luck getting in their "capital expenditure".

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[Anonymous Coward]

> The poor in America now frequently own personal computers, cell phones, blu-ray players, playstations, big screen TV's, and don't have any problems paying for food.

My friend, you have no idea what you're talking about. I live on student loans and I'm wondering where next month's food is coming from Sure I have a computer, but if my situation were as it would have been 20 years ago I wouldn't need one to do my school work.

I'm not among the worse off by any means. The population of homeless Americans and those on food stamps has exploded. It feels good to believe we don't exist, it justifies your scroogy ways, but it's provably false.

As for your rant about technological toys, especially "big screen TVs" you've embarrassed yourself so badly I don't even have to address it.

Visit a slum and get some perspective.

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[AlphaWolf_HK]

In order to end up in a situation where you end up with $0 an hour and absolutely cannot find a job to save your life, first an environment has to be created where either the demand for the lunch is zero, or the supply is just too low. We're consumers by nature, so the first environment is an impossibility in practice. We've only actually seen the later happen once in the history of the US, and that was the result of the Smoot-Hawley tariff act creating a sudden artificial supply barrier.

When they say the road to hell is paved with good intentions, actions like Smoot-Hawley is what they are referring to. It was supposed to reduce unemployment after the stock market crash, and instead it caused the great depression.

Luddites and their followers have been predicting for ages (even before the original Luddites themselves) that technology will eventually kill jobs for the common man - but that has just never happened. Instead what happens is new industries rise up when suddenly we find we no longer have a need for one type of job, and that labor ends up moving somewhere else instead. It causes frictional unemployment for sure, but eventually things keep on trucking. Case in point, the internet continues to reduce the need for a post office and a phone company. In their place we now have ISP's and cloud services.

And then you get quality of life improvements that aren't realizable in dollars. For example, this conversation you and I are having right now wouldn't even occur if there was no internet to support it - if we wanted something similar to happen without an internet in the past, we'd have to pay somebody to deliver our messages to a central board, compile them, and then mail them back out. Without an internet, we simply wouldn't even bother, instead we'd spend our time doing something else - maybe something even more boring.

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[Anonymous Coward]

income = 0
monthly expenses = 300$

please explain that math because you are a financial wizard for being so poor

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[cupantae]

a car phone or a TV larger than 40"

I love my 42" car phone, but it does make it difficult when I have a passenger.

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't care, i'll just download and print the design for some Earmuffs...

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[AvitarX]

Where do you live that it's easy to get a job as a garbage man because nobody wants the job?

Where do you live the McDonald's is always understaffed and just takes anybody that walks in the door?

And where do you live that the homeless aren't obviously seriously mentally ill?

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[Cordus Mortain]

This is the result of trickle down economics and other such ridiculous ideas. Building a strong 1% only builds a strong 1%. Building a strong middle and working class creates demand, which builds a strong economy.

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[tgd]

and thus have a very deranged and clueless view of how poor people live.

I suspect the opposite is true. If you disagree with his statement, I suggest a bit more world travel. The vast majority of the "poor" in the US are have living standards greater than 50% of the human being alive today.

I have no idea if the GP has actually seen real poverty first hand, but some of us have. And you won't find it in the US.

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[tmosley]

No, it's the result of currency debasement, which acts as a stealth tax on everyone with dollars (think employers).

If debasement stopped and the US raised taxes to make up the difference, there would be a revolt overnight. That is how bad the problem is.

Money isn't wealth. It's a piece of paper. Goods and services are wealth. Debasement disproportionately sends money to the government first, then the banks that have grown up around it (the proverbial 1%), who now get claims on goods they didn't earn. They didn't make anything that others can consume. They didn't help others to create anything for others to consume. Thus they take goods out of the economy, leaving everyone else poorer.

Modern economics attempts to baffle with bullshit in order to prevent people from seeing how simple it all really is. If they could see, then they would understand that there is no basis in reason for the existence of a central bank, and they would cry out against debasement, rather than for it.

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[dyingtolive]

Your situation doesn't account for people to live like normal human beings. Families, and shit, holmes. Alternatively, I suppose we could all just stop reproducing. That would solve a lot of problems, all things considered.

Also, the occupy movement planted themselves there. They weren't FROM there. They went to the upscale area to be a nuisance TO the people who were able to live there.

Also, can you also explain how you pay $300/month by performing $50 tasks that rarely occur? What's your endgame? What do you do if you hurt yourself? What do you do when ACA takes over? Have you thought about tomorrow?

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[Anonymous Coward]

All your expenses, including rent, utilities, any insurance you have, and everything else you listed are only $300? Do you have health insurance? After your internet you'd have $260 to cover rent, utilities, car insurance, fuel, and FOOD. Assuming you spend $3/day on food, that leaves you with $170/month for rent and EVERYTHING ELSE. I've lived a lot of places (cities and rural) and never heard of a room for only $170/month all utilities included. Maybe out in the midwest those kind of rents exist, but they don't exist in the mid-atlantic or north east.

What is a shared domicile? You realize that most people live in "shared domiciles," right? I've never lived by myself (because I couldn't afford it, even as a full-time engineer). Nobody calls it that unless....You live with a family member, don't you? You don't have to pay rent, taxes, or most utilities, do you? You've got some sort of sweetheart deal on your living situation.

Poor people don't have 50/10 internet access. They're lucky to have a cell phone (if they can keep up on prepaid). They don't have a land line. Netflix, seriously? I've met my fair share of poor people, and they don't have the all the luxuries you listed. When their DVD player breaks, they don't go buy a blu-ray. They wait 6 months until somebody in the family can afford the $20 for a new DVD player. They don't own 42" TVs. They certainly don't have 50/10 internet. When bills come due, everyone in the family has to scrape together money to cover them. Dryer they got for free breaks. They go without until they can find another free one.

I'm not trying to be rude, but your self-description as a poor person and your description of other poor people is unbelievable and out of touch. I'm sorry for your other difficulties, and I feel for you there. Being sick, and unable to work is really hard. But that doesn't make you an expert on being poor.

I actually do agree with the first half of your first post. As far as who is going to hate 3D printers in concerned, you nailed it. I do think quality will be an issue which might delay things. Cheap plastic crap is cheap plastic crap, no matter who makes it.

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[Anonymous Coward]

Ironically, because nobody wants to be a fast food worker, the average quality of fast food workers is quite low compared to the minimum-wage workforce. McDonalds et. al know that quality employees are a valuable resource and will actually promote/give "raises" to hard-working employees.

Compare that to retail which in my experience is much less of a meritocracy and is usually more seniority-based or just runs on plain old nepotism. If I had to go back to the sort of jobs I worked for 8 years during high school / university / after university, I would pick fast food in a heartbeat even though it is a little degrading and your clothes smell like old french fries afterwards because I know that working hard will actually be rewarded.

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[Half-pint HAL]

In order to end up in a situation where you end up with $0 an hour and absolutely cannot find a job to save your life, first an environment has to be created where either the demand for the lunch is zero, or the supply is just too low.

That's utterly upside down. Once the demand for lunch among those with non-zero incomes is satisfied, there are no more jobs in making lunch. All my needs are satisfied by the services available to me, so I have no need to create new jobs, and thus people end up out of work. You are erroneously suggesting that the food supply and catering industry, which perfectly happily managed to provide all our needs when manufacturing was a major source of employment, can absorb the layoffs from decreasing industrial output in western countries, even with the current trend towards zero-population growth or even population decline. No change in demand, but an increase in jobs? Unlikely, particularly given that the catering industry is constantly downsizing. In the 1950s, your burger patty was shaped by hand by either the butcher or the cook -- now it's globbed and pressed by a machine in a humungous factory. There was a time it took a person and a scoop to serve an ice-cream, not to mention adding toppings; now you pull a handle and get a "MacSlurry"....

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[Half-pint HAL]

The only actual crime here is the "content" Mafia stealing our money in return for doing absolutely zero work but only giving us a mere copy of the result of the work of somebody else (the artist) that they ripped off too.

OK, in that case go and buy an original uncopied film, price tag $10 000 000 (US).

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[Slashdot Parent]

I don't even get social security.

Why not? If you're disabled and can't work, why don't you get SSDI?

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[Cordus Mortain]

You mean the US government is actually trying (via stealth) to pay off it's national debt? They don't seem to be doing a good job of that as they love starting unpaid for wars, bailing out the 1% etc.

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[Slashdot Parent]

You've obviously never actually been poor or have been around actual poor people, and thus have a very deranged and clueless view of how poor people live.

Well, I am a landlord, so I get to know my residents' income and how they live. And as you might expect, over the years I have known plenty of people who are living in poverty, as defined by the US Census Bureau.

I'll just cut to the chase: you're wrong, and GP is right. My poor residents all have nice TVs and video games and cars. For a long time, they had nicer TVs that I had (I don't watch TV, so buying a nice TV seemed silly) and they still drive nicer cars than I do (I am not a car person, so I drive a 15-year-old beater).

If you want to see real poverty, I'm afraid you'll have to leave the US. Try traveling to the third world a bit and then get back to me on "poverty" in the US.

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[Sentrion]

Except many of today's poor can't afford to live in slums. The rent is too damn high. Today's poor tend to be displaced adult middle-class who lost everything over the past decade due to two stock crashes that burned up their 401ks, the housing crash, the labor decline, and bankruptcy "reform" that forced them to lose too much before they can qualify for a "fresh start" (case in point, in chapter 13 bankruptcy you are not allowed room in your budget to build up an emergency fund, yet they take every "disposable" dollar you have for five years straight). You can find them living in their cars, or sometimes permanently living in pitched tents at campgrounds. The dependency on automobiles is a steady strain given the constantly increasing cost of fuel. Most of the poorest people I know maintain their own vehicles since they could never afford service from a repair shop. But this also means they have to drive cars from the 1980's that are mostly user serviceable with tools they store in their trunk. Today's vehicles have so much added technology that even basic repairs are difficult or too expensive (requiring specialized tools) to attempt on one's own. Many are living this way in secret because most employers and schools (for their children) require a physical address - sometimes even proof of residency, like a utility bill. Families with children may not seek aid because they fear their children being taken away. Many others are able to couch surf if they have enough friends or family willing to help, but then they rarely are able to qualify for any state assistance or even bankruptcy, since the programs consider "household income", and free rent and utilities is counted as income in determining what aid they can qualify for (tip: don't crash at your brother's mansion). Since they are still receiving enough income to barely survive (from low paying part-time jobs and/or odd jobs/gigs/handyman type work or scrap metal scavenging) they often don't qualify for state assistance or private charity. Often there are programs that they do qualify for, but there is no magic entitlements fairy to explain to them what options they have. Applying for benefits often involves traveling deep into a city, showing up early in the morning, and possibly standing in a line for an entire day just to be told to come back tomorrow, or to come back with another proof of ID or another form filled out or just being told they don't qualify. Often they have disabilities that are a competitive disadvantage, but don't qualify for assistance for one reason or another - most often because they were not "employed" or employed long enough when they became disabled.

Now, for those "poor" enough to receive entitlements, there is no shortage of those who could if they were willing be more self reliant, but they have learned how to milk the cow at both ends - by getting help from government and charities while also getting support from family and earning cash under the table doing domestic work. I've known people collecting disabilty and "can't work" - but can drive a tractor to mow the family acreage. Navigating the entitlements system becomes a job in itself, and bestows a whole new set of skills which when honed over time leads to a higher standard of living for those gaming the system. Unfortunately, the system itself becomes a trap. Once you are in there is always a fear of losing those benefits if one is able to earn too much money to qualify. Or as their child grows older and the entitlements are reduced there is the counter-productive incentive to have another child to maintain those entitlements. In fact, often times the poorest a person can be in America is earning $1.00 more than the cutoff for receiving aid, as the actual cost of living on one's own means suddenly becomes magnitudes higher when programs aren't subsidizing your food, housing, and medical care.

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[HornWumpus]

If someone can't afford to pay their own rent _THEY SHOULD STOP REPRODUCING_ until they can.

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[DerekLyons]

Well, I've been both poor and a landlord... and my experience doesn't match yours. And yeah, I saw you move the goalposts with " living in poverty, as defined by the US Census Bureau". Nice try, but no. (And the same your "well, I drive old crap and buy crappy tv's.)

So, like him, you're just clueless and have never met actually poor people.

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[DerekLyons]

Then you're a very lucky individual and you're on the right hand side of the bell curve of poor people. You're just too self centered and too stupid to grasp that.

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[dyingtolive]

I completely agree. I'm just arguing that GP is an edge case, and cannot represent normal human lifestyles.

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[Slashdot Parent]

And yeah, I saw you move the goalposts with " living in poverty, as defined by the US Census Bureau".

That's not moving the goalposts. That's just being specific. What's your definition of "poor"?

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[Anonymous Coward]

How do you manage to spend a nonzero amount of money with zero income and not go into piles and piles of debt?

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[niado]

Where do you live that it's easy to get a job as a garbage man because nobody wants the job?

Where do you live the McDonald's is always understaffed and just takes anybody that walks in the door?

And where do you live that the homeless aren't obviously seriously mentally ill?

Thisthisthis.

There are plenty of garbage men where I live, they do nice things like pick up my garbage and I am happy to be paying them for it. I don't know how much they get paid, but I hope it's a good living.


And the real, sleeping on the street, eating every-other-day, homeless are almost exclusively mentally ill.

Yes, I would have very little respect for someone who was truly homeless because they refused to take a menial job, but I have literally never heard of this happening in real life.

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[j-beda]

The question will come down to whether or not people see having reduced need for labor as being a good thing. Personally I always see it as being a good thing. I've frequently said I'd rather live in a world where my income is $10 an hour and my lunch costs $4 than being in a world where my income is $20 an hour and my lunch costs $20. In the later scenario, although I have more income, I am in fact poorer by every definition. Technology makes you wealthier, even if it might reduce your income - it makes nice stuff available for cheaper or available easier. Cheaper stuff means somebody got paid less to make it.

Ideally though, the increases in productivity get shared throughout society - but there are not very many mechanisms to make that happen. Since the 1920s productivity per worker in the USA has gone up by ya gazillion times, yet there are millions of working poor, millions of non-working poor, and a vanishingly small number of urber-rich. Forget the flying car - I want my 5 hour work-week at a living wage.

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[AlphaWolf_HK]

It requires you work at least X number of quarters for so many years prior to becoming "disabled". I fell a bit short because I spent quite a bit of time in college.

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[Slashdot Parent]

That sucks.

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[AlphaWolf_HK]

Well here's some examples:

I pay a share of $23 a month for a t-mobile subscription (I'm the account owner and I have 5 people on the account with a fixed bill of $115 a month - they each pay their fifth.) Unlimited everything with Nexus 4 is pretty damn nice - yet another luxury you can have even if you're poor.

I practically live at wal-mart and fry's grocery store (that's Kroger in most states). Wal-mart is my savior, a few days ago I bought 3 pounds of peaches for a dollar, and they were pretty damn good. I say fuck anybody who shit talks wal-mart shoppers by the way; wal-mart are among those who make my life livable. Yeah you can get some nasty looking people in there and some of the employees can be dicks, but it's worth it. Wal-mart gets a slim profit, I get what I need, what's not to like?

You can live pretty cheap if you need to, all you have to do is be smart about it. If you don't have a whole lot of money there are plenty of ways to get by. Every day I poke and prod at slickdeals.net for something I might need, and I'm not even the best at it. Some of those guys on the forum make trophy lists of deals they get. The best deal I ever got was back in January (prior to me coming down with what I have) I built myself a NAS with a 9TB ZFSoL raid array for $300 using the bestbuy mastercard amazon giftcard trick.

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[AlphaWolf_HK]

And what's a normal human being? Part of being normal requires living in an upscale area? The fact is that you're a regular ol' spoiled Marie Antoinette.

I'm going to throw you a reality check: People like you and I are spoiled by living in first world conditions. Occupy wall street rails against the 1%. You know what the 1% is? Anybody who makes over $40,000 per year are within the top 1% of income earners in the world. Think about that for a minute. Now think about this: India is the happiest country in the world, and they're poor as shit. They literally build their houses out of garbage...and family members? They stick 8 of them in a 10 by 10 room. You know why they're happy? Because they don't continually tell themselves that their lives suck and the only way to make things good is to have more money. Meanwhile somebody at occupy wall street is complaining because some thug stole their ipad while they were sleeping in a tent instead of their upscale apartment that day.

Life is really only as crappy as you think it is. That's not to say we should all lower our standards and just always settle for less, rather you can't define yourself based on what you have all the time, and you should try to make the best of things even in shitty situations, otherwise you'll just needlessly make yourself miserable. I know this as I've been through that, I've been through the depression, anxiety, and other shit. I'm cured of that now though, I've found my own way. My trick is to just live in the present. Maybe one day I'll need a heart transplant too? Who knows, it's too far down the line to worry about, all I can do is take care of what I have now and just focus on that. And right now I'm comfortable with how I'm living - I've already got a few living donors who have volunteered their kidneys to me, right now I'm just waiting for the transplant team to get back to me. And yes, medicaid is paying for that, it is cheaper than dialysis.

And on that subject - Look at me, my health is shitty and I need a kidney, but I don't put any demands on people to cater to my whims. It's my problem, I'm dealing with it, and I have zero expectation for anybody to come to my rescue. They came voluntarily. I probably sound like an asshole to you guys because my philosophy on work and economics differs from yours so much, but people always tell me I'm a very nice guy. Every time a blood van came to my high school, work, college, I was always there to donate, so maybe its karma, who knows?

And on the subject of the poor and being taken advantage of - we live in a society that says it is better to let people die of organ failure than to potentially take advantage of the poor by allowing them to voluntarily sell their organs and get money for it, so we ban the practice. How crappy is that? Iran is the only country in the world where people are allowed to sell their own organs, and consequently it's the only country in the world where there is no organ shortage and nobody dies while waiting for an organ transplant. You don't even have to be rich to buy organs there either, charities and government organizations will buy them on your behalf, so you can get them even if you're poor. There's no black market for organs there either - probably the only country in the world truly without one.

I'm fortunate in that I don't have to deal with that BS, but sadly about a million in the US have to face the reality of our backwards system. They have to die with the knowledge that we're so backwards, we'd rather tell them to die than let somebody sell them an organ.

In the US, if you're rich you don't wait for organs anyways. Usually it means you're popular as well so some random fan is likely to donate to you anyways. Name one Hollywood celebrity who ever waits on an organ for example. The people who get fucked are still the poor ones.

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[AlphaWolf_HK]

Normal human lifestyles? At least 90% of the world lives on less expenses than I do, see my last post.

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[AlphaWolf_HK]

That's just the thing, I'm not saying I'm poor. I never did. I'm saying that by his definition (income) I am poor. He goes by the liberal definition, which goes by a spreadsheet that says "if your income falls below X number, you're officially poor." By his definition, it's possible for your income to even rise a little bit, but have the goalpost move over you so that you suddenly go from being called middle class to being called poor. You may not actually be poor, you may not feel poor, but you are in fact poor, so sayeth the spreadsheet.

He uses that talking point (with what I believe is the ultimate purpose) to say that we need to have the government pave a road with good intentions, and perhaps we'll have less poor. But you know where the road paved with good intentions leads.

I certainly don't feel poor.

For your other questions, yes, I have health insurance. Throw this acronym into google: AHCCCS

I explained in another post how my phone bill works.

I pay the water/trash bill ($90) and the internet bill ($32). Mortgage and electricity is divied up among everybody else. I bought my TV for a grand I think two years ago, it's a 47" samsung and serves as my PC monitor. My computer I've incrementally upgraded over a long period of time, with the last major upgrade being over a year ago. I don't own a blu-ray player (I neither need or want one.) I do have a nice sound system that I built from components though.

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[AlphaWolf_HK]

Or perhaps I'm just not poor.

http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=4038569&cid=44449763

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[Fjandr]

What about SSI? That has no work requirement. The only requirement is that your disability is expected to last a year or more, or to end only in the event of your death.

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[Anonymous Coward]

The poor in America now frequently own personal computers, cell phones, blu-ray players, playstations, big screen TV's, and don't have any problems paying for food.

Bullshit, you are ignorant of the plights of the poor. I'm solid middle class now, but I was hungry in my younger days and I know a lot of poor people today. LINK is usually not enough to live on, and none of the poor peope I know (many of whom I'll loan or give money or food to so their kids won't be hungry) have computers less than ten years old, if they have one at all, and NONE have big screen TVs. The poor get fifteen year old 25 inch CRTs from the Salvastion Army or Goodwill. I know of none with Blu-Rays and few even have DVD players. They do have cell phones because the government gives them away.

Don't throw those old clothes out, donate them. We do indeed have poor in this country even though you've obviously never met a poor person.

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[Anonymous Coward]

tmoseley is a goldbug. To him, everything looks like a conspiracy to destroy or debase the only real money, holy and pure gold. It's a religious position, not a rational one.

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[Anonymous Coward]

If you thought the whining of the content industry concerning the illegal copying of imaginary property was loud, this will be deafening.

Nope. You'll never be able to 3D print something cheaper than it can be mass produced. The examples in this study are not comparable. Actually, the examples in the study are just plain stupid.

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[Anonymous Coward]

Ever heard of KICKSTARTER, you complete drooling retard??

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[Jerry Smith]

End the war on work!
http://goo.gl/Nz128

I saw that Ted Talk, one of the few that made sense, was honest, was based on facts and experience and should address the whole world. Yet half my acquaintances were convinced that Mike Rowe was blabbering. They rather heard someone talking about success than about life's realities.

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[Half-pint HAL]

Only one Kickstarter project has ever broken the 10 million barrier, to the best of my knowledge. The highest funded film project to date is Veronica Mars, with 5.7 million. That's less than 5% of Prometheus. Every pledge in the history of Kickstarter ($717 million as of the 24th of July) would get you three Avatars ($237M). Kickstarter will always be an edge-case, it will never be mainstream.

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[Anonymous Coward]

So you have just shown I'm right. Thanks.

Kickstarter will always be an edge-case, it will never be mainstream.

Yeah, right. If you say so, Mr. Expert. Definitely until /the end of all time/.
lol

Call me when you don't support organized crime anymore, and don't cling to the past, to justify further committing of CRIMES. You piece of criminal scum!

Re:Just wait 'til companies catch on

[Half-pint HAL]

So you have just shown I'm right. Thanks.

Please explain, I'm all ears.

BS

[mwvdlee]

In order to recoup the ~$1,000 cost of the printer and save $2,000 on household items in a year, you'd need to buy $3,000 on household items a year in the first place.
Excluding the cost of plastic and electricity ofcourse.

And not just any household items, but only household items that are made of relatively weak plastic and don't have to look smooth.

How many shower curtain rings, spoon holders and smartphone cases do you buy every year?

Also; how fast should a 3D printer be in order to produce that amount of items in a year?

Re:BS

[longk]

Not to mention the man hours needed to make technical drawings for all these objects. So far I've only seen Nokia release drawings for covers.

Re:BS

[sFurbo]

That doesn't seem to be a problem.

Actually, I think all of those are covers, not cases, but that is also what TFS mentioned.

Re:BS

[vux984]

How many shower curtain rings

Once. Ever.

spoon holders

Zero. Ever. We have one made of glass that came with a gravy boat for the ladle. But it matches the boat, and I wouldn't want a plastic one.

smartphone cases

Approximately 1 or so per year or so between all the family members and smartphones between us.

Still, again, I'm pretty particular about mine -- (slipperyness / texture / etc and nothing I could 3d print would be what I want. And even then I found one exactly as i wanted it for $10 at a mall kiosk.) Meanwhile the other cases we have... one is a leather one, one is suede, and one is colored up to look like a cute panda. Is any of that going to come off a 3d printer? Nope.

Seems like
a) I'd never get my money back using a 3D printer even if I did switch to printable versions of everything.

b) but why would i want printable versions of things, I like nice stuff, not cheap plastic garbage.

c) even i wanted cheap plastic garbage... I'd probably be ahead shopping at the dollar store.

Re:BS

[Anonymous Coward]

And the $2000 figure was comparing against the *highest* retail cost they could find. I can sell them a well-researched academic paper for $2M if they want high costs.

If they're going to that extreme, then why aren't they going to the other - it costs $0 to make one, just use something vaguely similar that you have lying around.

Possibly the most BS piece of research since the last one.

Re:BS

[spazmonkey]

I design and manufacture 3d printers and even i see this as overblown BS to an embarrassing degree. 3d printers have great practical if very specific uses, but they will not save - much less even find use in - the third world, they are not and will never be self-replicating, and they won't pay for themselves in the average household anytime soon. The hyperbole spewed by the almost religious sects that have sprung up around the reprap will be the undoing of 3d printing as a serious technology, or at least set it back a decade. I am a huge advocate of 3d printing, and these crazed reprap messiah types even creep me out.

Re:BS

[TheRaven64]

Yup, sounds like BS to me as well. If I spent $1000 on the kinds of things that they're talking about in a year then I'd consider that pretty excessive. I think that the study is not assuming that all of these things are used by a singly house though, it's assuming that the printer is running almost non-stop year-round printing things that someone wants. That sounds a lot more plausible: these devices tend to do quite well in MakerSpace-type places, and probably print enough stuff to offset their capital cost within a year or so. Having one at home is still not a good investment though.

Re:BS

[DerekLyons]

In order to recoup the ~$1,000 cost of the printer and save $2,000 on household items in a year, you'd need to buy $3,000 on household items a year in the first place.

How many shower curtain rings, spoon holders and smartphone cases do you buy every year?

This, precisely. I don't think I've spent $3k on cheap plastic household items in the last five years - let alone the last year. And that's not just because my spoon rest is ceramic, it's just that most of those items last for years.
 

And not just any household items, but only household items that are made of relatively weak plastic and don't have to look smooth.

Which frankly, doesn't describe any of the cheap plastic items TFA proposes that the average householder print.

Re:BS

[JaredOfEuropa]

1) Print gun
2) Rob bank
3) Profit!

Re:BS

[JaredOfEuropa]

Unfortunately I could not find the list of items they bought / printed so I've no idea how they came up with that figure.

One thing that 3d printers offer is a much wider variety of designs for printed household items; I suspect that "designer" items will be much cheaper to print than to order, as the margin on those things is rather high. Hard to put a price on that, though.

I see a lot of potential value in replacement parts. I lost a little plastic retaining thingy inside my dishwasher, my option was to replace the entire soap tray unit (around $40), or print a replacement retainer (<$1). For a lot of household items replacement parts are not even available, so the savings go up to the replacement value of the entire item. Then again, I do not have that much breakage in my home over the course of a year, so it's still more attractive to order parts from the manufacturer or from a fablab than to buy my own 3d printer.

Re:BS

[Anonymous Coward]

I hate to see a person that create that amount of garbage/waste every year buying that much crap. It is certainly not good/responsible behavior.
That's like $8.20 per day just on cheap breakable plastic household things. Not even when you are using fast food utensils, disposable dishes and plastic toys for every meal. Not that 3D printers are certified food safe or anything.

Re:BS

[Anonymous Coward]

Classical bank robbery stopped to be profitable quite some time ago, thanks to better security at the bank and more effective investigation methods at the police.

Re:BS

[tbird81]

Don't mock the article. Here's what I found from a brief Google search:
Yearly spending per household 2009:
Housing – shelter – $10,023
Pensions, Social Security – $5,027
Food – food at home – $3,465
Transportation – gasoline, motor oil – $2,384
Shower curtain rings - $2,105
Healthcare – $2,853

You'd be surprised how much the average household spends on shower curtain rings. Shower curtain ring failure is an important cause of household injury, and has a high fatality rate. Also, you probably underestimate addictiveness of the shower curtain. While you may only need the ones that came with your shower curtain when you moved into the house 15 years ago, plenty of addicts blow through new shower curtain at a rate of dozens per day.

You may have heard of Narcotics Anonymous or the AA. There's also the SCA, and a non-spiritual group called Glass door which helps people get over this dreadful affliction.

While 3d printers may reduce the cost of the curtain rings, which may help financially, they will not be doing anything for the root cause of the problem. This is just another reason 3d printers should be banned from general use.

Re:BS

[Smidge204]

If you REALLY want to rob a bank, and get away with it scott-free, apply for a job. Once you worm your way into upper management you'll be able to grift millions and hardly anyone will call you on it, let alone prosecute.

=Smidge=

Re:BS

[tmosley]

Remember, it has to be a TBTF bank. They will still prosecute smaller banks.

Re:BS

[Anonymous Coward]

Weird.

This post was the one that made me realize that I've never lived in a house where the bathroom used a shower curtain. The shower always had a door.

Then I tried to think of anyone I knew who had a shower curtain over a door and couldn't think of anyone. The only times I've ever seen shower curtains in the shower were in apartments and hotels.

But with that kind of spending, maybe we need something that can home fabricate shower doors...

Re:BS

[Slashdot Parent]

Oh, you have no idea just how much BS the article really was. Notice how they didn't name the household items beyond shower curtain rings?

Some other guy posted the items from the paywalled article. It includes a medical orthotic ($800+) and a $400+ shower head (!!). I'm sorry, but I don't 3D print my medical devices and a shower head made out of processed cornstarch is not going to last very long or look anything like an expensive shower head.

This whole article was pure, unadulterated horseshit. I feel dumber for having read it.

Re:BS

[Slashdot Parent]

Somebody posted it above. It included a medical orthotic ($800+) and a $400+ shower head.

For reference, my shower head cost me about $30 at Costco and has lasted for many years. How long would a shower head made out of processed cornstarch last?

And I won't even bother with the orthotic. Anyone who argues with a straight face that they're going to whip up a medical device on their makerbot doesn't deserve my time.

Re:BS

[FrankHS]

The best way to rob a bank is to own one.

Re:BS

[Leslie43]

Absolutely, 110%
I have one, and there is no way the average person could use, much less build or find it useful on a regular basis. This article reminds me of the Linux on the desktop evangelism from 15 (or so) years ago.

Until you can plug it in and press print and get a working item 90+ percent of the time, like you can on a modern 2d printer, and not take 8 hours before breaking on the first use, it's not ready for the average home.

Do they factor in time?

[aXis100]

Printing shower rings in a 3D printer is not a quick process.

Typical numbers might be 30 minutes set-up (download, heat up and slicing) + 30 minutes each x 10 rings x 1.25 (failure rate) = approx 7 hours. Granted you dont have to sit there for the whole time, but you do have to nurse the printers through quite regularly - tweaker the slicer, clean up failed prints, remove finished prints. They're not as set-and-forget as poeple might think.

Re:Do they factor in time?

[aXis100]

P.S. - I still think 3D printers are awesome, but most of the time the unit I have at home (solidoodle) is a solution looking for a problem.

Re:Do they factor in time?

[Dahamma]

Yep, they led with the stupidest example. I just looked on Amazon, you can buy a dozen plastic shower curtain rings for about $3-5, depending on how "fancy" you want to get. And those are actually guaranteed not to decompose or melt in a hot, humid environment, unlike several of the common materials used by 3D printers...

Re:Do they factor in time?

[sFurbo]

30 minutes for a shower ring? Unless you want it with exceedingly fine layers, my estimate would be closer to 10 minutes.

Re:Do they factor in time?

[gl4ss]

even pla doesn't decompose in shower conditions.. and abs is abs.

but it's a stupid example.

the worth is doing one off parts or parts you can't find for sale. I did a gutter end for a friend the other day.. 15 mins of cad and 3 hours of playing borderlands 2 and it was done (they couldn't find a replacement for sale anywhere around here).

SHOWER RINGS!?

[Dahamma]

Seriously... shower rings. Yes, that's the future of 3D printing that will save the world.

But I can't fault the summary, the article is even worse: "It blows my mind you can print your own shower curtains and beat the retail price," said Joshua Pearce, an associate professor in the Materials Science and Engineering Department at MTU.

So now printing a couple 1" diameter pieces of hard plastic more or less equates to an entire shower curtain? Seriously, go Michigan Technical University, your academic rigor speaks for itself! And in all of my years of eating I never even realized I needed a "spoon rest", but apparently I'll save up to $2000 by printing my own vs whatever barbaric technique I have been using to somehow keep my spoon on the table.

Re:SHOWER RINGS!?

[Anonymous Coward]

Somewhere John Candy is laughing.

Re:SHOWER RINGS!?

[Anonymous Coward]

You can also print plastic gears for window roller-blinds and a multitude of other complex shapes you might need. Curtain rings is just a (not so good) example.

Re:SHOWER RINGS!?

[DerekLyons]

And in all of my years of eating I never even realized I needed a "spoon rest", but apparently I'll save up to $2000 by printing my own vs whatever barbaric technique I have been using to somehow keep my spoon on the table.

A spoon rest isn't for the table, they're for the cook and they're very common and useful for keeping the counter clean. I currently own four of them, one in the kitchen, one in RV, one with my BBQ tools, and the only plastic one is a kitschy piece o' krep my wife got from somewhere around last Christmas. (And the only reason we still have it is the box of stuff in the hall closet for Goodwill isn't full yet.)

So, before taking Michigan Technical University to task, set your own house in order.

Re:SHOWER RINGS!?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hi, ex-professional chef here. Spoon rests are cute, but hardly required in the home let any commercial kitchen.

Re:SHOWER RINGS!?

[Anonymous Coward]

Can't you use a dish, can you?

Re:SHOWER RINGS!?

[Anonymous Coward]

A spoon rest isn't for the table, they're for the cook and they're very common and useful for keeping the counter clean. I currently own four of them, one in the kitchen, one in RV, one with my BBQ tools, and the only plastic one is a kitschy piece o' krep my wife got from somewhere around last Christmas. (And the only reason we still have it is the box of stuff in the hall closet for Goodwill isn't full yet.)

So, before taking Michigan Technical University to task, set your own house in order.

Ever heard of a plate, a small bowl or glass or even a sheet of tissue? All of these can be taken to good use for the same purpose and, in contrast to a spoon rest, they can do other things as well ...

Re:SHOWER RINGS!?

[VanessaE]

Forget the spoon rest - will it be able to compete with Spatula City?

Re:SHOWER RINGS!?

[Anonymous Coward]

Can't you use a dish, can you?

Tish tosh, my good man. I'd sooner use a tippet instead of a cravat than a common dish in place of a proper spoon cozy.

Re:SHOWER RINGS!?

[tgd]

Seriously... shower rings. Yes, that's the future of 3D printing that will save the world.

But I can't fault the summary, the article is even worse: "It blows my mind you can print your own shower curtains and beat the retail price," said Joshua Pearce, an associate professor in the Materials Science and Engineering Department at MTU.

I think the one thing we can take away from this article is this:

Kids, you've learned something important about MTU when it comes time to pick a school.

Re:SHOWER RINGS!?

[asylumx]

Who needs a spoon rest when there is no spoon?

Re:SHOWER RINGS!?

[drinkypoo]

If you're using a plate as a spoon rest, it's a spoon rest. If you do it all the time, you might well choose to have a spoon rest. I bought a silicone one for a dollar at a discount store. The stove is stainless steel, which will pit badly if you leave smears of acidic sauces (or what have you) on it. So, I have a spoon rest.

However, the oven vents right onto the top of the stove, so I don't think I'd have one made from PLA. Silicone is the ideal material and you can't print that yet. I could print a positive, smooth it by exposing it to chemicals, pull a silicone mold, then fill that mold with silicone... and then I'd have spent more than just buying one at full price, let alone for a dollar.

Re:SHOWER RINGS!?

[Anonymous Coward]

A spoon rest isn't for the table, they're for the cook and they're very common and useful for keeping the counter clean. I currently own four of them...

I have a bunch of devices that have this function too. They're called little plates, and they can also be used to eat off of.

Re:SHOWER RINGS!?

[HornWumpus]

Single use items suck. A saucer is a multi use item. A spoon rest is a single use item.

If your going to make a mold why not skip the printing a positive step and simply copy one you like.

Re:SHOWER RINGS!?

[drinkypoo]

If your going to make a mold why not skip the printing a positive step and simply copy one you like.

Not only is that still vastly more expensive than just buying one, but I also have to somehow get my hands on the original and be permitted to coat it in release agent, set it up in a mold, wait for it to cure, et cetera. Unless a friend owns it, odds are poor.

In short, I bought one at a discount. There are things I might change about it if I took the time to care, but I specifically wanted one made of silicone (and not a plate or a saucer) because you can drop a heavy spoon on it or drop it on the floor without serious repercussions. So, I used a tile for a long time. Now I have a spoon rest.

Re:SHOWER RINGS!?

[Dahamma]

If I could mod up the comments to my own post I would :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XbCWmY0eqY

Re:SHOWER RINGS!?

[Dahamma]

And in all my years of *cooking* I have never needed one, either. My kitchen is in perfect order, no useless crap crowding the counters necessary!

But the point is someone who would buy such an absurdly unnecessary device (let alone 4!) is clearly not worried about saving a few extra bucks a year by printing one themselves. And if you are worried about that, I'd wager you will be on an episode of "Hoarders" in a few years with a few thousand useless 3D printed widgets piling up in your garage...

Re:SHOWER RINGS!?

[DerekLyons]

And in all my years of *cooking* I have never needed one, either.

Bully for you. But that doesn't excuse you being an ignorant git about their existence nor for being a jackass about other people finding them useful.

Re:SHOWER RINGS!?

[Dahamma]

I have had a stainless steel stove for years, don't particularly care for it (beyond occasional cleaning, but not anally) and there has been zero pitting. So either your stove is cheap or whoever told you it would "pit badly" was wrong and you shouldn't worry so much.

Not that it matters... I have no grudge against spoon rests! :) Just (like you are saying, I think) don't agree 3D printing the, will somehow solve the world's domestic budget issues...

Re:SHOWER RINGS!?

[Dahamma]

Wow, you are really worked up about this, aren't you? Resulting to cursewords over a kitchen gadget is a bit over the top!

Clearly you have an issue with spoon rest hoarding, but don't worry, there are support groups you and your wife can join to get over it. Though if you also have an avocado slicer, egg separator, or garlic peeler you may be a lost cause...

NICE !!

[Anonymous Coward]

If I need shower rings. Or shoes for turkeys. Follow the money back on this so/.called story and you will find a maker of a so/.called 3d printer.

Re:NICE !!

[K. S. Kyosuke]

If I need shower rings. Or shoes for turkeys.

Or vagina.

Re:NICE !!

[Anonymous Coward]

Mentioning that word is against the Slashdot Code of Conduct. Please stop.

Re:NICE !!

[HornWumpus]

The truth comes out. 99% of /. interest in 3d printing is from forever alone geeks too embarrassed to buy a fleshlight.

Guy doesn't know how to shop online

[Anonymous Coward]

If 20 simple household items that can be printed on a 3D printer cost him at least $312, then he obviously doesn't have internet shopping fu. For an average of $15 per item, I could probably buy a lifetime supply of each plastic thingamabob.

It is still mainly useful for tinkerers at this mo

[Camembert]

The study has a point if you need many shower rings and other pieces that do not have to look very refined. For most households however it would be working at a loss. However they are great devices for creative people and all kinds of tinkerers. I would love to design printable parts for a simple medium format camera for for example.

Quality?

[hurwak-feg]

The journal article Computer World references is behind a pay wall. I know a better way to save money. Buy good stuff. My metal shower hooks look much better than those cheap plastic ones. And since they are metal, they don't break. I'm not sure what items they are talking about that would need to be bought on such a consistent basis. I have serious reservations about their claims. I'm not going to print plastic replacement parts for mechanical things such as vehicles and appliances. Can anyone with access to the journal please let us know what items they are talking about?

TLDR - Don't buy cheap crap, don't break stuff, and some things just shouldn't be plastic.

Re:Quality?

[Anonymous Coward]

Elsevier, quality science publishing...

just no

[bloodhawk]

'The unavoidable conclusion from this study is that the RepRap [3D printers] is an economically attractive investment for the average U.S. household already.'"

No, the unavoidable conclusion is these researchers have no clue as to what the average householder uses and further more they are financially inept when it comes of where and how to shop for said items.

Re:just no

[gsslay]

Man, you seriously have no idea of the cost of curtain rings and the large slice they take out of the average household budget.

I'm still repaying the debt I ran up with them when I was a student. If only I'd had a 3D printer in them days.

Re:just no

[HornWumpus]

I'm going to have to disagree. They are not inept, they are bullshitters.

Hmm, after this report...

[cripkd]

...3d printers just got 200% more expensive

Google shopper may not be the best choice

[91degrees]

Online purchasing has a minimum cost ot make it effective. This is one area where you may still get better prices on the high street. Especially given the existence of 99p/99Â/99Â¥ stores. Plastic items can be moulded cheaply so these stores will provide a direct alternative.

What if ?

[vikingpower]

It seems to me that the MIT Technology Review already had an article "What if...?", recently, in which the author hypothetically places himself in the future and looks back upon the fictional history of something that is, in our days, still nascent. Didn't that article mention an enormous increase in amounts of plastic garbage having to be processed by municipalities ?

Sweetie, you don't understand!

[EzInKy]

The problem isn't cost, the problem is you have a world where they dictate who gets to sleep with whom! Would you believe that they actually have enough power to have laws enacted that would force me to marry their daughter rather than to allow me to marry who I want to? Really now, WTF is that?

Breakage

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not an expert on plastics, but I am pretty sure shower rings are created with an injection mold and 3d printing is a layered process. I would love to see some stress/shearing/tensile strength comparisons on commercial vs home printed shower rings. it won't save you money if one tug breaks it. //and seriously this is the best they can come up with for 3d printing? Viva la revolution!

Re:Breakage

[Half-pint HAL]

Actually, in this case you're probably OK, because the "grain" of the bonded filament is going to be lying in the right direction to take the load....

That's before the health costs...

[Anonymous Coward]

...caused by all the nanoparticles that clog the families lungs.

http://spectrum.ieee.org/nanoclast/semiconductors/nanotechnology/nanoparticles-emitted-from-3d-printers-could-pose-a-risk

Awesome!

[viperidaenz]

You can 3D print all those things you buy all the time that can be made entirely out of PLA or ABS.... like not much at all really.

Still needs more....

[Anonymous Coward]

Until they can print a limited edition Tiffany diamond ring my wife wont let me have one :(

Re:Still needs more....

[Lumpy]

Get rid of the wife, you for some reason picked the broken one that demands shiny expensive things. Don't feel bad, a lot of guys make that mistake.

Re:Still needs more....

[ArcadeMan]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ira-weissman/7-reasons-why-you-shouldn_b_1720870.html

Re:Still needs more....

[HornWumpus]

If 'Every kiss begins with Kay', you married a whore.

Easy

[Anonymous Coward]

Just go to the nearest bank with some 3D printed scary looking guns and say that they're real 3D printed guns! and that you're wearing a 3D-printed bulletproof west + have 3D printed hand grenades too and you're bound to be a successful robber. Considering the current media hype the thought that a real gun might work pretty well against your 3D crap won't strike anyone.

A more serious idea would be if many people bought a 3D printer together and had a pay to the common pot by use principle for paying back for it. That might very well make it pay for itself in a timescale which makes it a good decision. One year is quite a lot of time for prices to go down and better printer models to come with the current pace of technological development...

Ridiculous

[Anonymous Coward]

This article is ridiculous!

Do you realize how hard it is to find good cad models for a specialized part in a shower head?

Ive done cnc for years. The cost of the machine pays for itself in parts. But, the cost of time, effort and experience is left out of this study!

As a programmer, I would estimate I've spent $10,000 per year on my "hobby", in time-cost, learning how to program a cnc with good results.

You're saying that's cheaper than paying a few extra bucks for a specific shower head

The benefit is in custom parts

[thegarbz]

I have had a long hard think about 3D printers and I could not come up with one, NOT A SINGLE ONE, example of where I would 3D print something which I could just buy commercially and be better off. Why would I want a phone case made of a single colour plastic when there's a plethora of cases on the market with fancy designs, colours, custom grips, etc.

For me the desire for a 3D printer is not replace things I buy but to make things I can't. Custom cases for projects, little stands and holsters for things, the indexing latch on my 20 year old coffee grinder for which there's no longer a replacement part (though a screw through a piece of wood is working fine at the moment). I could do so much with a 3D printer, and I will once the price comes down further, as it has been for the past few years.

Re:The benefit is in custom parts

[crossmr]

How detailed are these things? Can they print really fine detail?
If they could.. they might be useful for say a table top DM. Rather than running out and trying to buy miniatures, baddy of the week could be printed up, a coat of primer and slap some paint on him. there might be an application in certain hobbies.

Re:The benefit is in custom parts

[thegarbz]

The better ones claim 100 micron resolution. They can be used to make quite intricate parts, though I presume this may not be achievable in the cheaper sub $750 machines. So far all the great examples I've seen are from reputable and rather expensive machines like the Makerbot Replicator 2

Re:The benefit is in custom parts

[Pontiac]

I have to agree here.. I plan to get a 3d printer but it's primary function will be to produce plugs for composite molding projects and possible hollow/honeycomb shells to use as fillers in hard to reach sections of a composite layup where vacuum bagging or inflation bladders would not be practical.

Re:The benefit is in custom parts

[Anonymous Coward]

For me the desire for a 3D printer is not replace things I buy but to make things I can't. Custom cases for projects, little stands and holsters for things, the indexing latch on my 20 year old coffee grinder for which there's no longer a replacement part (though a screw through a piece of wood is working fine at the moment). I could do so much with a 3D printer, and I will once the price comes down further, as it has been for the past few years.

You might want to look into small CNC mills too. They don't have the same hilariously overwrought buzz as 3D printers, but for little custom parts they're often a better choice thanks to wider materials choice (including metals), better finished surface quality with little to no need for additional finishing work, high dimensional accuracy, less (not zero) need for handholding the machine while it works, and so on. There are things you can print which you can't make with a mill, but in virtually every case where a mill will do, you're probably better off using one over a 3D printer.

Re:The benefit is in custom parts

[dkf]

Can they print really fine detail?

Yes. It all comes down to how finely you can position the print head, and how rapidly the plastic sets.

Re:The benefit is in custom parts

[thegarbz]

Oh I have, and when I sell my house and live in a car I may buy a CNC mill with the spare cash I have.

Seriously though the amazing part about 3D printing is that even cheaper devices are starting to claim 100micron resolution. The result isn't as perfect as an amazing piece of milled steel, but you could by 5 of the printers for the cost of a partially decent CNC mill.

yes, cost effective...

[Anonymous Coward]

...until the price of the printer cartridges sky rocket! ;)

You could make a lot of Legos

[Anonymous Coward]

And board game pieces.

unbelievable, seriously!

[pbjones]

Factor in the average households inability to set up an email account without help, the chances that the average family would find it easy to print what they need is not for this generation. I would see a business model more like the photo printing services, good quality, expensive machines doing print to order stuff. Why would you waste your time printing a curtain ring?

Re:unbelievable, seriously!

[LifesABeach]

I'm thinking of ones garage, and some kind of "hydra" print head(s) making the next what ever I need. Automated to the point of selecting some image, and a tap of my finger to select. The only feed back are the bags of various powders needed to complete the job that I don't already have in storage that a delivery truck will bring before the machine needs the materials to work with. Filaments are so yesterday.

Save on doctor bills.

[garyoa1]

If we print all the little things we buy we'll save a fortune on doctor bills since we'll no longer have to open a sealed package that would be a challenge to godzilla.

TEM-PLA-TE

[Anonymous Coward]

One word: TEMPLATE

You'll need a 3d template to make the item, so it won't be just a press of a button.
There is also the quality of the materials (eg. rubberised v/s hard plastic), toxins when using the machine, cost of power, cost of maintenance, etc.

I like the idea of 3D printers - but don't over-sell them.

I realise that this study is in the USA

[Chrisq]

But do you really spend $2,000 on cheap plastic crap like iPhone cases and shower rings? This will only work for things that can be made from 100% medium grade plastic - and I'm pretty sure I don't spend that much on such things

Re:I realise that this study is in the USA

[tmosley]

No. This was written by men locked in the basement of the ivory tower who have only the vaguest conception of the outside world.

Re:I realise that this study is in the USA

[LifesABeach]

I guess the question becomes, "given the type of filament used, what products would be the top candidates for 3D printing?"

Who'd have thought it?

[msobkow]

Mis-shapen plastic Yoda's must be worth a mint.

Has it's potential uses

[blackdropbear]

At ~$700 for a brand new piece of plastic for my Nissan Patrol/Safari electric mirror (OEM price) to stop it shaking around, I figure I can pay for it pretty quickly in savings. For those connectors on your older car which can only be gotten from the original manufacturer, a bit of time mucking around with a 3d CAD system could save a car restorer a fortune.

Re:Has it's potential uses

[DrXym]

I seriously doubt many people have the skills, inclination or patience or the software to design parts. A trip to the scrapyard or some OEM dealer would probably yield the same part for less cash than the time required to design one. I also expect the chances of Nissan or another maker licencing the design or tolerating CAD models that print replacements to be somewhere close to zero.

Re:Has it's potential uses

[Anonymous Coward]

I also expect the chances of Nissan or another maker licencing the design or tolerating CAD models that print replacements to be somewhere close to zero.

Most of the parts we are talking about are simple functional designs which consequentially have no form of IP protection (as discussed ad nauseum in previous 3-d printing threads). Note that currently you can already buy many 'non-approved' car parts openly and legally.
If the part had a functional and a non-trivial decorative aspect you might have to change or remove the decorative aspect.

What about the material?

[bradley13]

I wonder about the material, though. Household products are made of a wide variety of materials. Even if we restrict ourselves to plastic, there are many different kinds of plastic, designed for different properties: flexibility, robustness, strength, UV tolerant, food safe, etc, etc.. If the properties of the printed item are unsuitable for the task, it will just be frustrating when it breaks after a couple of uses.

Still, it's a move in the right direction. I can well believe that 3D printing will mature: Printers will, perhaps, be able to mix different materials during printing in order to control the properties of the resulting item. We will also need vast online libraries of common items - Ma and Pa Smith will not be able to design their own shower rings, after all.

Interesting direction, but not quite there yet...

You could just...

[hoelk]

...print a single 3D printer, thus instantly regaining the money you paid for it.

Re:You could just...

[Leslie43]

It doesn't work that way.
The cost of the printed parts is only a fraction of the cost to build a printer, fully self replicating is a massive stretch of the imagination. You cannot print a pcb, motors, wires, nuts and bolts, rods, print head, belts, pulleys, power supplies... I spent less than $100 on the plastic bits made on a printer and around $800 on everything else.

And before you say just print off a dozen kits... Printing the parts for a printer can take a VERY long time. A single part can easily exceed 3 hours and 24 hour print jobs aren't unusual. A whole printer can take several days worth of work to print and one mistake, on yours or the printers fault (both of which are easy to do), and you start all over. You also need buyers, and a movement is starting where people give away the plastic parts.

My time is worth $0!

[Anonymous Coward]

This is great because my time to plan and print all these things costs me nothing! I'm giving up stealing underpants for good. PROFIT!

Your time, of course, is valueless

[Anonymous Coward]

Because if I need shower curtain rings, the time I spend finding designs online, setting up the 3D printer, babysitting it for each additional rind, etc. is well worth the opportunity to save $5 buying them retail!

Aperture Science...

[T-Kir]

If your shower curtain rings cost a bomb, then your shower curtain must've been made by Aperture Science, cos all that technology and buying the salt mine to develop in doesn't come cheap :-D

But can they make it print . . .

[vm146j2]

A 3D printer? That would be some savings!

Dumb "study"

[Lumpy]

Just because you can print them does not make them usable. The durability of reprap items is very very low. Something that these guys completely ignored in their "study".....

Printed iphone cases fall apart, I know this, I have a 3d printer and the parts that come out are NOT durable. They are great prototype quality items butthey do not handle a year of abuse.... most fail within 30-60 days.

Re:Dumb "study"

[LifesABeach]

What causes the failure?

Re:Dumb "study"

[Lumpy]

material failure. I am getting cracking and delamination on high stress pieces. Some of the "colors" are stronger than others, but you can not get injection molded strength in a laminated assembly like a reprap produces.

What I find these useful for is prototyping. the parts last long enough to test an idea, I then reprint in wax and then do a lost was casting in metal.

Re:Dumb "study"

[Anonymous Coward]

My iphone case works just fine and is just as durable as my old one that was not nearly as cool. Maybe you just suck at 3D printing.

Re:Dumb "study"

[Anonymous Coward]

Says someone that is full of shit and has never even seen a 3d printer in real life...

Really?

[gstoddart]

I don't even find the cost of ink makes it worth owning a color inkjet, but a 3D printer is cost effective?

That's a little surprising. The stuff you feed into the printer must be dirt cheap, or at least cheaper than ink and photo paper.

Because if I need to print out photographs, it's far cheaper to take the digital files to a place which can print them for a few cents each.

Re:Really?

[lxs]

Plastic filament is dirt cheap compared to ink but that still doesn't make 3D printing of commodity items cost effective. However for making replacment parts (that can be ridiculously expensive when bought) or custom parts they come in pretty handy.

Slashvertisement

[Anonymous Coward]

Now what if I told you you could use your new 3D printer, designed and developed here at MTU, to print out as many shower rings as you wanted... rings that would ordinary cost you as much as $2.95 each!

Now... how much would you pay?

But wait! Our new 3D printer can also print out a case exactly the right size for your iPhone or Android phone!

*Now* how much would you pay?

The unavoidable conclusion is that the new 3D printer designed and developed at MTU, will repay the average American household its $2000 investment in no time, and a whole lot more besides.

And if you act now, we'll throw in an extended warranty package, worth $500, for absolutely free!

Unavoidable conclusion

[DogDude]

'The unavoidable conclusion from this study is that US households buy too much cheap plastic shit

The article doesn't list all of the items in their "study", but it does mention spoon rests, cases for phones, jewelry organizers, and shower curtain rings. The only thing on that list that I'd actually use are shower curtain rings, and I'm still using the same metal ones that I bought 20 years ago.

Re:Unavoidable conclusion

[LifesABeach]

I'm thinking that staying up late at night watching TV adds while working with a 3D printer is a bad combination.

Shower Curtain Rings?

[corando]

I just buy the curtains with loops built in, no rings needed. But, if I could print the whole curtain.... nope still not worth it. Plus the $18 of material doesn't include trial and error mistakes of learning how to use the thing,

Great! Cheaper junk.

[KeithH]

This sounds like it is just what the world needs. Is this stuff economically recyclable? And is the material environmentally benign?

I find it depressing that everybody is so excited about cheaper plastic junk. I'd rather invest in an "unMakerBot" that consumed household clutter.

Now the printed trachea that saved that girls life: that's a worthwhile application of this technology!

Monoprice

[ArcadeMan]

Even Monoprice started selling ABS filament for 3D printers.

Shower rings?

[ArcadeMan]

They have those at the dollar store. They cost $1 for a pack of 12.

3D Printer Brings Dexterity To Children With No

[Anonymous Coward]

Nice article I heard over the radio some time ago.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2013/06/18/191279201/3-d-printer-brings-dexterity-to-children-with-no-fingers

You smell that?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not fumes from the cheap plastic, it's the smell of desperate bullshit.

Missing the point

[bryanandaimee]

The authors seem to be entirely missing the point. 3D printers are for prototyping stuff that isn't already sold at the dollar store. Additionally they are useful for making replacement parts that are not available or only available as part of a larger assembly. For me the list currently includes:
Servo brackets for a 2DOF Quadruped
Replacement spacers for a trampoline safety net
Lead foil holders for a linear accelerator
Wall hook to hang a bow
Handle for a dead bolt lock
case for a raspberry pi
thermometer holder for a water phantom
ion chamber clamp for a water phantom

Has it paid for itself? No. Is that why you bought a 2D printer? Or did you buy one because it does useful stuff like print out recipes n stuff. Did you buy that compound miter saw after a careful calculation of payback time, or did you just buy one because it helps you do/build fun stuff. Do you buy a mill or cnc cutter based on time to payback? For most of us I would guess the answer is no. We buy these tools because they fit in with our hobbies and interests. The "usefulness" and "savings" are just arguments we use to get the significant other to buy into the purchase. (And he/she doesn't really believe you, but goes along anyway.)

That link is what's wrong with the web today

[Anonymous Coward]

One and a half minutes before the technobabble even starts? I put forth the link you just shared with us, as an example for how video makes the Internet suck. It was intended to make Star Trek look stupid, but really it just made me feel stupid for clicking it and wasting time on something where I could have just read a list of transcribed phrases in 15 seconds, tops.

Lame.

Get out of your parents basement... CHEAP!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes! You too can get out of your parents' basement for the low, low cost of a 3-D printer!!! Since you don't have any possessions or household items most people purchase once, or once every 2-10 years you can quickly pay for the cost of your brand new 3-D printer!! Need shower rings? Print them! Need spoon holders? Who DOESN'T???? Print them!!! Plastic baubles for your shelves... no worries.. Print them!!! Be sure to print you up some spare parts for your printer as you will be working it to death reprinting all those wonderful items you already printed as you bemoan their substandard quality and/or appearance to the cheaper plastic ones. Teens, ask for a printer at age 16 to start printing those items so you too can move out at 18! Take this hobby and make something of yourself! Or, just print your head!!!

How many people who can afford, or want, a 3-D printer need to print flipping shower rings or spoon holders... Imaginary savings...

This sounds like coupon logic.

[shadowrat]

Stores always tout how much you are saving by using their coupons. In reality you are probably buying something you didn't actually need to buy in the first place. The same goes for rewards programs and loyalty cards, etc. Sure, you can game these incentives and come out ahead, but you kind of have to be in a position of needing the product in the first place.

I don't buy shower rings and expensive phone cases every year. Somehow i think buying a 3d printer and printing out a bunch of them is not actually saving me any money.

Modelling

[hattig]

Modelling these things takes time. Sure, there will be off the shelf models for shower rings and the like, but if you're printing a new battery cover for your remote control you'll have to model it yourself - and that takes time.

However, if you amortise the cost of the 3D printer over a group of friends, or co-workers, then maybe you will eventually save money. I still don't know what I would print though - children's toys might be an option once they're past the chewing stage of development. Maybe emergency lego bricks you need to finish a design? And cases for Raspberry Pis and the like.

But the price of 3D printers will come down, and the build quality and speed will go up. What is a $500 device now will be a $200 device in three or four years, and once that barrier to entry is reduced, a lot more uses will be found.

Replacement car parts could be a use case too - once someone does a design. My wing mirror wobbles, I presume behind it there's a plastic assembly that includes the ability to adjust the mirror's pitch and yaw that is broken, I bet printing one of those is cheaper than buying an official replacement - except that the official replacement probably won't ever break.

Pays for itself, but not with shower curtain ring

[a1cypher]

I've just got my 3D printer working quite well. I bought a kit second hand from someone who didn't have time to finish it and after building my own electronics and writing my own firmware for it, I'm probably in to it about $300.

I never really had the intention of printing enough stuff to pay for the printer, but it may still do that. One of the things I'm currently working on printing (printing out a piece a night) is a solder fume extractor. This is a relatively simple tool that sucks solder fumes through a carbon filter and normally costs ~$150 - $300. The one I'm printing should be just as good and will cost maybe $20 including plastic, fan, and filters.

Also, if you want to try and pay off your printer, you could print new printer kits and sell them online or to friends. But, it is ONLY going to "pay" for itself if you don't value your own time, since you will spend a lot of time nitpicking, calibrating, babysitting. Although babysitting isnt as big of a deal, I just try and check on it every half hour to an hour. Many people will even just let stuff print out over night, but I'm not quite at that level of trust just yet. It's not that I care about wasting plastic, but that I don't want to die in a fire while I sleep.

The real advantage to a 3D printer is that you can design and build your own stuff very quickly. If I want to design and build a small robot, I can draw up some wheels, a frame, some servo mounts, etc.. and have a very nice professional looking toy robot in a couple of days. Or if I want to make a simple enclosure for an electronics project I can import a 3D representation of the circuit board, draw a box around it, cut out holes for switches, connectors, LEDs, and print.

if it will follow the trajectory of 2d printers...

[EricHolland]

Then can we please just skip the next phase of this market and go straight to the point where I can upload my files and pick my parts up at a local store in one hour for a dollar amount that doesn't force me to think twice about printing something 'just for kicks'. That is the point when it will reach the masses and transform certain markets. I think if 3d printing equipment gets as cheap as TFA suggests, where it is accessible to everyone, then it will also be a market where the equipment providers have to generate profits/revenue in ways that are ultimately annoying to the consumer. I would like to see an established retailer such as The Home Depot get on this bandwagon early. All that said, I just ordered a CubeX and can't wait for it to get to my doorstep.

My Ink Jet Printer pays for itself, too!

[Thrill Science]

Because now I can PRINT MY OWN BOOKS instead of buying them!

What's Really Needed...

[Sentrion]

...is a souped-up, high-speed, commercial-grade version of the RepRap that uses free open source hardware and software, and can be built using materials commonly available in remote, poor, third world communities so as to reduce the cost of shipping in parts to assembe a system on site. Once put in place and operational, one or a dozen of these printers working around the clock at a village center 3D print shop could provide for the needs of the local population. There are a lot of aid programs that ship depreciated used machinery to third world countries, such as older used equipment for hospitals, schools, agriculture, etc., but since this equipment is so old often times parts aren't available or expensive to procure and ship. Being able to print off such components as needed would help these communities, and the skills developed while designing replacement parts could help many in the third world to have a new service to offer internationally via the internet (which is slowly making gains by skipping landlines or powerlines and connecting villages wirelessly with solar powered equipment). Being able to print other common goods on site and on demand would be an added benefit, given that even the retail price of a new toothbrush can be beyond the means of a poor working family.

Good conclusion, wrong premise

[sootman]

I think the boom will come when you can easily REPAIR all the things that would otherwise be "broken" when all it is is one little plastic piece inside that needs replacing. I'm thinking of things like cheap but otherwise good toys, the little battery cover on the back of a remote, etc. Or being able to make anything you can think of. There are plenty of little "boy, I wish I had a little stand/holder that would do X and Y" that would make life better.

Same with regular printers. It might be hard to quantify exactly how much you're saving by being able to print coupons, boarding passes, etc. on your home printer, but the overall convenience and general quality of life are definitely improved. Little "I'll do this because I can" things are what make it worth it.

I don't need a purchase to pay for itself in a certain amount of time, I just need it to make my life better enough that it's worth buying. I didn't buy a smartphone with google maps because I need to save enough gas to pay for the phone, I bought it to reduce the amount of time I have to sit in traffic.

You really want to use that printer?

[Anonymous Coward]

Then don't bother with wasting time with 3D guns. (I mean go ahead if you have a fetish)

Make me some new covers for my old radios I want to restore.
Make me some faceplates for my scratched up 2950.(yeah I know they already got them) but my meaning is more radios how about a flawless " international orange "cover for a sony TR-610? Ya feelin me? I can see some of those old radios really shining. It's just the COVER! Good god I would love to restore some old radios before they are all gone. It's not completely dry out there but, it can be hard to find anything worth restoring. Why not bring international orange and international green printed parts to the rescue?! Or just black, white, cream, red, blue, green etc.

So stop trying to kick me down a AR lower made of plastic - lol Fucking get real metal for that, I'll still love ya and pay.
(and also I am not giving one drop of space to the anti-second amendment scum, I want to HAVE the OPTION to print gun parts, don't get me wrong, YOU HAVE THIS RIGHT IT IS GOD GIVEN, it's just I ain't pulling the string on that gun in the vice -lol)

A plastic handle is great! Ya know?

Selling strategy for 3D printer manufacturers?

[kimgkimg]

So a selling strategy for the 3D printer makers would be to put out an extensive library of common household objects for use with their printers.

Interesting

[koan]

There's a short story by an author whose name I forget that goes on to explain what happens to the World after everyone has a machine that makes *anything* for them.
The results are unpleasant to say the least.

Don't be too hard on them.

[Anonymous Coward]

I went to MTU, it's cold, there are hardly any women, you are extremely isolated from the civilized world and shower curtain ring failure is an epidemic. They may have even been drunk when they wrote the study. It's one of the few pastimes up there and a good way to keep warm. And don't start with that "alcohol actual doesn't make you warm" crap, we're engineers not doctors.

Time is money

[AdamThor]

I wonder if they included a valuation for the amount of time a 3d printer user would have to spend both in setting up and maintaining the computer, generating or finding the 3d models, waiting for printout, and failed prints? Many things appear to be advantageous as hobby / DIY endeavors until you value your time (at, say, minimum wage).

Not that DIY isn't awesome. But do it because you love it. I don't yet believe the financial advantage is there. If it were, the hobby service industry would begin raising its prices to compensate.

Replicate expensive things, not cheap ones

[DidgetMaster]

These things will really take off when you can easily reproduce that $500 part that is broken in your oven, dishwasher, furnace, or AC unit. You know the parts that only cost about $10 to manufacture, but because only the appliance maker can make them, they charge an arm and a leg to replace.

Bigger Badder Better

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm waiting for one that prints sofas - upholstered.

5 steps to using a 3D printer for profit

[Curate]

1. Purchase a 3D printer.
2. Print a second 3D printer.
3. Return original 3D printer within 14 days for a full refund.
4. ???
5. Profit!

Bad article for the 3D printer crowd

[hurfy]

Yup, probably the most puffed up article I can recall reading.
These guys make the Stay-Puft marshmellow man look anorexic.

These guys are doing more harm than good

Enjoy it while you can!

[yusing]

PCs could also paid for themselves within a year when they first came out. If you could program, you had to hide not to find countless opportunities to make a buck. Small businessmen who could finally afford a computer needed (or at least wanted to brag about) customized software to help them with alla stuff people had been doing manually/on paper for years.

It'll be the same story here.

A Year?

[Anonymous Coward]

A 3D printer could pay for itself in less than that. Just print another printer and sell it. Repeat a couple more times to cover production costs, and you're out with a free printer and enough supplies to perpetuate the process, ad infinitum!