Slashdot Mirror
Researchers Moot "Teleportation" Via Destructive 3D Printing
ErnieKey writes Researchers from German-based Hasso Plattner Institute have come up with a process that may make teleportation a reality — at least in some respects. Their 'Scotty' device utilizes destructive scanning, encryption, and 3D printing to destroy the original object so that only the received, new object exists in that form, pretty much 'teleporting' the object from point A to point B. Scotty is based on an off-the-shelf 3D printer modified with a 3-axis milling machine, camera, and microcontroller for encryption, using Raspberry Pi and Arduino technologies." This sounds like an interesting idea, but mostly as an art project illustrating the dangers of DRM. Can you think of an instance where you would actually want the capabilities this machine claims to offer?
Why was this posted? It's not good art and has no real life applications.
end of line
The only situations I can see this having any use in is some sort of security model where you make an object that for some security reason isn't supposed to exist in more than one place. I can see this for the whole "only this key can open the briefcase with the documents/money/etc." situation, for example.
i can.
If there was a decent recycleable plastic that could be processed by the 3D printer, it could be the basis for a form of currency. The "teleportation" would be a currency transfer.
Can you think of an instance where you would actually want the capabilities this machine claims to offer?
In situations where moving the original object physically to its destination is difficult or cost prohibitive, and there is no further need of the original at the source (maybe it only has utility at the destination). The most obvious case would be from Earth to space, either to a location in orbit, or eventually another planet.
That was an Outer Limits episode...
"BALANCE THE EQUATION!!!!"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T...
I want to teleport myself.
Their method of destructive scanning allows for internal detail to be accurately reproduced. They aren't destroying it for the fun of it, they're destroying it to see it's internal structure. The DRM-like behavior is just a side-effect.
I would like to interview the first volunteer and find out just how they felt about this destructive teleportation process... Oh, my.
it was made into an episode of The Outer Limits. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T... The idea was that a human could be teleported to another planet. After the "copy" arrived the original would be destroyed.
Care killed the cat, but satisfaction brought it back.
Teleportation involves actually transporting the individual particles or parts of the item.
There is nothing in the copying process that transports anything but information about the item/image.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
First moot retires, and now they want to destructively teleport him?
Any situation where you don't have the details of what is inside the object but you want them.
Take a step away from the "teleportation" aspect and put the sender and receiver right next to each other. One disassembles the item while the other recreates it. At the end of the process you have the replacement item to stick back into where ever you took it from AND a scan of all the layers inside allowing you to produce more should you so desire.
DRM, what DRM ?
Isn't that exactly how the transporter works? Surely they don't actually disassemble the body atom-by-atom, convert it to energy, then stream it to the remote site.
I figured they used a high-resolution scanner to scan the body, then send an energy beam to the remote site to reconstruct an exact replica of the person being transported. After the copy is complete, the original body is no longer needed and is disintegrated.
If I drink a beer over here, and you go to the bathroom over there, we didn't teleport the beer...
Leonard McCoy is rolling over in his grave.
I'm announcing a "Proof of Riemann's Hypothesis, with proper acknowledgements to contributing researchers".
Here are the details:
First, we use Kickstarter to obtain community funding for a website with adequate bandwidth and administrative resources. Then we publish the proof on the web site. Then, we establish a wiki forum along the lines of Slashdot (with community-driven filtering of spam and trolls) where attribution to important prior results can be posted; these will contain the name, institution, and (optionally) contact information for each researcher, along with a synopsis of their work and links to online resources.
it's duplication
which is great!
but why destroy the original? just to call it teleportation? seems ridiculous
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
I think I've heard this story before.
Oliver's law of assumed responsibility: If you're seen fixing it, you will be blamed for breaking it.
so, a transporter in star trek murders the original person (almost) every time it's used? D :
now we know the real reason why mccoy hates those things.
Yes. Yes, I can. Let's use this as the new transport mechanism for congresspersons. What a problem-solver!
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
I wonder if anyone's tried combining some sort of sintering process with an electron microscope... it would be neat to be able to build up a complete molecular model of an object and then be able to reproduce it, layer by layer. It'd take forever, but you could replicate some pretty useful things really accurately. And once you've destructively scanned the item once, you can replicate it as much as the materials you have on hand allow. Great for making backups of mechanical parts, just in case someone stops making that specific part. Not so good if you don't get the printing accurate, as you'd have a part with stress lines most likely.
Imagine the art project potential of the equivalent of running through a blob of text through Google Translate over and over and over again, back and forth between different languages.
Applied to an Object.
Could be very fun.
Great filing system. Save items for posterity without taking up physical space. Maybe even remove the encrypt option.
The only situation I can think of is doing this with people. Obviously the technology isn't there yet. I know for a fact that the world doesn't need any more of me running around in it. You're welcome world!
What actually defines a teleporter?
Does an object need to be smashed down to molecular/particle level and those remnants sent to another place to be reassembled?
Is it sufficient, as in this research, to simply clone the object and destroy the original?
What about live matter? Does the destructive process kill the live matter? If it's a person, does one need to record the death?
Is the Star Trek universe full of clones whose previous iterations back to the original are long dead?
Luckily I hacked the data stream and printed cheap knockoffs from my secret lab in Antarctica ...
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
While this is a nifty "copyright" idea that I'm sure producers will jump all over, it doesn't actually enforce 1:1 copies or prevent 1:n copies. At the most basic level, I can setup 2x 3D printers side by side and link them to the same servo controller, giving me a 1:2 copy every time and bypassing any encryption or other form of DRM. I could also probably put a recorder on the servo controller output and play it back later, again bypassing encryption or DRM.
In theory I could then take the 2nd copy and put it in the "scanner" and repeat infinitely. (Although I'm sure the resolution would degrade rather quickly in practice)
It is going to be *EXTREMELY* difficult (I would venture to say impossible) to come up with an effective DRM for 3D printing, especially in the near future.
...Had this been an actual emergency, we would have fled in terror, and you would not have been informed.
You could teleport the key of his jail cell to an inmate, destroying the evidence that you stole it in the process.
This is not the sig you're looking for.
Spock: Captain, I'm receiving an odd error message from the 3D printer transporter ...
Kirk: What's the error message say?
Spoke: It says, 'PC load letter.'
Kirk: PC load letter! What the fuck does that mean???
Bark less. Wag more.
What was the television show or movie that had this as the plot twist?
The far off space base that can only be reached by teleportation, but the character was actually copied. Then the mistake happened and a copy was made and the original wasn't destroyed. Now two of the exact same person, but some crap about only one can have a soul or something.
It was on cable at some point, or Netflix?
This is not teleporting, any more than getting a hard copy of your word document out of the laser printer is teleporting. Teleportation of physical objects implies that something is deconstructed on one end, and then reconstructed in the same state as when it left using the same matter.
BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
Yes, I can think of an application where I would need these capabilities. I use it every day.
Where there's no way to get important data on how the object is put together without destroying it. Which is somewhat believable if you're talking about living material, which would actually have to be reproduced at the molecule-level, including velocity of all molecules, electric forces, etc.to create a living copy. It's becoming more believable about electronics. It's hard to see how you could copy something with a 14 nanometre resolution that with a non-destructive external scan.
But even this process wouldn't be moving the damn thing. After all there's no reason you couldn't create two copies of the destroyed object.
Isn't Destructive Scanning a potential form of recycling? Depending on the method and material, this would permit a number of potential uses with an almost closed circuit of material which could provide a quasi-endless supply of projects!
Imagine kids who can't go out and play, taking turns at building something using their imagination.
Imagine art school students in a MOOC working on a project from various locations.
Imagine artists on other sides of the world, building and refining a prototype for a new revolutionary project.
Imagine a game where the object is to remove certain parts of the object before it collapses under the weight of an object.
Imagine communication with other colonies in space where you would need to work on a project that would require trial and error.
There are a lot of potential applications for a concept that a lot us have gotten a chance to know when were kids.
(Should any of the above ever be used to generate(print?:) some kind of project, business or end result, give me a shout someday and let me know Billylabsatlivedotcom)
-B
Physical reality is that data can be copied without changing the original. This project attempts to change that by only giving people access to a certain aspect of reality through an access layer. This is hence DRM ported to the physical world and just as despicable.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
First, IT DOES NOT DEMONSTRATE ANYTHING EVEN RELATED TO "TELEPORTATION". Sorry for shouting, BUT I detest these phony "let's confuse the general public with phony sensational clickbait claims" headlines. In actual Teleportation the original thing arrives at it's destination. In THIS, the original is destroyed and something new is created at the destination with matter and energy that already were at the "destination".
Second, this is just plain stupidly wasteful of time, matter, AND energy (a full home run of wastefulness). You start with an original at the origin, then you use energy and material at the destination to make a copy, then you (when you have two items) you waste time, energy and material destroying the original... something so patently insane I would have thought only a vacuous fool like Nancy Pelosi or an MSNBC host could come up with it.
Third, When is is claimed that destroying the original is a good thing because it makes sure only one of the thing that was faux-teleported exists (thereby protecting things like intellectual property) ioverlooks two facts of the digital age: [1] two will HAVE to exist simultaneously for at least a short time (so that proper reception and duplication can be verified before the "original is destroyed) and [2] NOTHING once converted to ones and zeroes can ever be said to be truly secure and under control. Destoying the original is no guarantee that another machine has not listened-in on the data transfer and made its own copy.
The ENTIRE POINT of "teleportation" is to move an object from point A to point B. If there is an ability to make a copy at point B and a copy will do the job of the original, then you do not need "teleportation" at all, you need telecopying (which has already been demonstrated in full reality by many people including by NASA and the crew of the ISS, equipped with a 3D printer, solar power, and spools of filament)
Replicator2 and a hammer?
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
Is attaching a FAX to a paper shredder considered prior art?
You don't upload consciousness any more than you upload movement. You can upload data, which is that of which consciousness is aware.
If you upload every piece of data that defines your brain, you might think of it as uploading your consciousness, but that is a sloppy misunderstanding of what consciousness is (unless, of course, you believe in ghosts).
About the original... parts... fixing... google, google, google...ah, yes!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_Theseus
will it work on a suitcase of drugs?
First they teleport me ass backwards, then they destroy the only good copy and now I have to watch my ass the rest of my life!
Somehow, I think transporters where Picard has to shoot his other self twice, after each away mission (first, when he returns back to the ship, and then secondly from orbit -- or only the later if he wants to be a lazy ass) would sorta ruin the whole utopian vibe.
Of course, there was that episode with two Rikers but at least things didn't turn out as violent as they did in The Prestige.
It's called wiring money.
Teleportation only works if there are two different time states such as present future, past future, present past. There is are only conceptual and there is only a present, that was the past, will become the future, mostly due to the theory of relativity, so time travel does occur, only in the present (or daydreams)
This thing only duplicates items that were originally made by a 3D printer that uses that same material.
That is to say, I don't want a teleported camshaft that is printed with a 3D printer that uses chocolate for the printing material.
Well actually I do want that, but I would not put it in an engine.
Nor do I see how something made of materials that aren't available as 3D printer matrix materials could be teleported.
Just saying...
3d printing has the potential to free us as a society from the constraints of materialism.
MY GOD!. nobody wants that.
They could already so SORT of do this, just only with very small thing (eg atoms, molecules and photons), so I don't see this as that exciting, just the next step on the way.
Watch the 2001 episode of The Outer Limits, "Think Like a Dinosaur," if you want to know where this path leads. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T...
This might be useful for fitted goods, like body armor. Take measurements of a soldier while they are in basic, get the armor prototype finished before they deploy, and then encode/ship the armor. The fact that the encoding process is destructive is of no matter. When the soldier gets to his/her deployment, print off their gear, or the pieces that can be assembled into the gear. If they need any replacements, just keep shipping the printing materials out. The logistic details of shipping square blocks of material around is probably far easier than shipping individual goods.
"let's", in this context, is obviously a CONTRACTION of "let us" (it HAS to be in order for the text in the quotes of the earlier post to be a sentance as it was clearly intended), and hence the apostrophe is proper.
In some other context, you might have thought "lets" as in: "allows" (NOT a contraction) was what was intended and THEN you would be correct that the apostrophe would be incorrect. You are hereby downgraded to grammar hall monitor.
What I want it for is to have a digital 3D copy of Lois Griffin.
giggity giggity