Slashdot Mirror
3-D Printed "Iron Man" Prosthetic Hands Now Available For Kids
PC World (drawing on an article from 3DPrint.com) notes that inventor Pat Starace has released his plans for a 3-D printable prosthetic hand designed to appeal both to kids who need it and their parents (who can't all afford the cost of conventional prostheses). The hand "has the familiar gold-and-crimson color scheme favored by Ol' Shellhead, and it's designed with housings for a working gyroscope, magnetometer, accelerometer, and other "cool sensors", as well as a battery housing and room for a low-power Bluetooth chip and charging port." It takes about 48 hours in printing time (and "a lot" of support material), but the result is inexpensive and functional.
Disclaimer: I'm good friends with the guy who designed this hand. But either way, the hand is made out of PLA: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P... - Which we just so happen to use for drinking cups, so I'm going to go out on a limb and say "not poisonous at all".
Which we just so happen to use for drinking cups
It's sad that the state of consumer protection is such that I don't find that reassuring.
PLA does not contain BPA. It's a plastic that's derived from corn oil.
Here we go. Please do tell us about how the "official" prosthetic costing $40,000 are totally not a ripoff even though they can be replaced by $45 printed prostetics because each one is hand carved by highly skilled gnomes from their own bones and tied together with unicorn hair and anything else will kill the wearer in the first 5 minutes.
So can you tell me what the long-term effects of wearing this $45 printed device are?
Is it weighted such that it pulls muscles awkwardly, causing pain after a few months of continuous use? Does the constant contact with skin cause any nerve damage? If worn during physical activity, does it create an additional risk of shattering or otherwise injuring the wearer or others?
Can you show test results indicating otherwise, even when the user may not have it attached properly? What resources are available so the user can be certain they're properly fitting the device?
Approved medical devices are expensive because they meet all applicable regulations, and have documentation to prove it. They've been reviewed and tested by experts in the field, who understand exactly what subtle problems to look for that are likely to cause harmful effects in the future. One of the primary principles of medicine is to do no harm. Can you assure patients that this 3D-printed model will be harmless?
Yes, you can buy a beat-up used car for $500. It will still accomplish the obvious goal of transporting you from point A to point B, but it's not going to be as good in the long run as a more expensive one.
You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
I can tell you nobody has ever thought it was all that important with gloves and watchbands and we don't have a small army of people who were nerve damaged by their casio. I can tell you that if it costs $40,000 and you don't have that kind of cash laying around, it might as well not exist at all. Are you claiming people are better off with nothing? Are you willing to say that to their faces? Sorry, you're not rich enough to have a hand?
Or consider canes. If a cane is used improperly, it can cause back shoulder and arm pain. Should we make canes cost $40,000 or should we just adjust them differently if things start hurting?
Imagine the disaster it would be for the economy if we all had to wear only medically approved clothes complete with $40,000 belts and $100,000 shoes. But OMG, what if the belt fails and their pants fall and cause them to trip and trigger a nuclear meltdown, millions of lives are at stake here! $100,000 is such a small price to pay in order to safely not go naked in public!
I imagine the kid will do what the rest of us do. If the hand starts causing pain he'll use it less until it can be adjusted. Meanwhile, unlike before, he has a functional prosthetic hand.
I'll bet that the $500 beater is infinitely more useful than a Ferrari to someone who will never be able to afford a Ferrari.
In other words, that looks like about $39,955 worth of FUD (and unicorn hair). Most people really can't afford that much FUD. Thankfully, I'm not in the market for a prosthetic hand, but if I was, I would at least try the $45 one first.
While PLA is food safe, FDM (fused deposition modelling) objects are not safe for more than a single non-long-term use due to being relatively porus and impossible to clean properly.
Around 25 years ago, Eisner (the president of Disney at the time) was driving in Florida. He saw a small daycare where someone had painted Disney characters on the walls. He sent them a cease and desist order and threatened to sue if they didn't remove them. You know, they even sell their management technique to other big companies and those companies employees become creepy culture of the corporate cult after that or get fired. I worked for one when they bought us out. We had to go to their headquarters and be inCernerated (what we called their 3 day orientation). If you were a good boy or girl the creepy HR types would throw you a little rubber Disney figurine. Wow I got 3 Goofys. In my opinion, Disney is not a nice happy smiley company. Only their characters are and God help you if you infringe.
-- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
so I'm going to go out on a limb
Too soon.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
" ... (who can't all afford the cost of conventional prostheses) ..."
USA - the only supposed first-world country where children have to be able to afford a prostheses. ... Or actually f*cking outrageous if you think about it for a minute.
Creepy.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
So don't pick your nose with it more than once? Okay, got it - I'll wait until I'm 'well stocked' ;-)
Do you realize Mickey Mouse should have hit the public domain decades ago. The reason we have such shit trademark laws is because of Disney. Every time Mickey comes close to entering the public domain, Disney's lobbyists push to have IP rights extended.
Brilliance without wisdom, power without conscience. Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants.
Yes, but copyright only applies if you copied the scene/characters directly from a Disney still shot. If you instead drew a bunch of Disney characters doing something of your own, copying only the general style and appearance, then you're not violating copyright, you're violating the independently registered character trademarks. It's like if you decided to publish a novel about "Tom Sawyer and the Sword in the Sorcerer's Stone" - so long as the actual story was all your own you wouldn't be running afoul of copyright. At least not in the old days, before all the progress the copyright maximalists have made. These days I wouldn't be quite so certain.
Moreover if you're putting the characters on the outside of a building, where they can be seen by people driving by, then they're inherently being used as advertising as well as decoration, and should absolutely expect to be shut down for commercial abuse of trademark.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.