XPost: sci.space.policy, sci.physics, sci.electronics.design
In sci.physics "Greg \(Strider\) Moore" wrote:
> wrote in message news:vpan3e-dhi.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>>
>>In sci.physics "Greg \(Strider\) Moore"
>>wrote:
>>> wrote in message news:nonk3e-pk9.ln1@mail.specsol.com...
>>>>
>>>>In sci.physics "Greg \(Strider\) Moore"
>>>>wrote:
>>>>> "David Mitchell" wrote in message
>>>>> news:r5mdnSw3tNBsJvjEnZ2dnUU78S_NnZ2d@brightview.co.uk...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>>> In sci.physics David Mitchell wrote:
>>>>>>>> jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> OK, what "stuff" would people be making at home?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jewellry, utilities, tools, gadgets.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Could you be any more vague?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Yes. Yes I could.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Things. People will make things. All of the things.
>>>>>
>>>>> I suspect 3D printing at home will be as successful as the personal
>>>>> computer. I mean everyone knows they're useless at home and we'll only
>>>>> need
>>>>> a few major mainframes.
>>>>
>>>>Personal computer use in the home is dropping with increased use of smart
>>>>phones for those important tasks such as posting on twitter and facebook.
>>>>
>>>
>>> This actually hurts your point. A dozen or more years ago, no one would
>>> have
>>> imagined using phones for what we use them for now.
>>>
>>> And really a smart phone is just a tiny computer that happens to make
>>> phone
>>> calls. Again, it's the same argument made decades ago but folks not
>>> needing
>>> computers in the home.
>>
>>Very few people want a computer in their home, most people want an
>>entertainment device.
>
> Exactly. Because people who claimed that "no one needs a computer in their
> homes" was basing the usage model on a very limited viewpoint of how
> computers were being used.
> But those "entertainment devices" are at their heart computers.
Irrelevant to the point.
>>>>> Which reminds me, I need to tell my friends who own 3D printers and
>>>>> printing
>>>>> parts to fix things at homes, tools, and tool holders and all manner of
>>>>> things that I never would have thought of myself that they're wrong and
>>>>> no
>>>>> one will effectively use a 3D printer at home.
>>>>
>>>>How many people do you know that own 3D printers?
>>>
>>> I'd have to poll, but at least 2 I'm sure of, and I think the number is
>>> closer to 6. And if I include access to them at libraries, workerspaces,
>>> etc. then easily dozens.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>I know about a dozen people that own things like welders, milling
>>>>machines,
>>>>drill presses, and lathes but no one that owns a 3D printer.
>>>
>>> Really? You need to get out more. I'd say the number of folks I know who
>>> own
>>> 3D printers is about the same as those who own the other items you
>>> mention.
>>
>>I will admit I know very few teenagers.
>>
>
> Which has jacksquat to do with what I said? What do teenagers have to do
> with my reply?
It would be primarily teenagers that would be interested in making
essentially useless gadgets and jewelry.
Again, I know about a dozen people that own things like welders, milling
machines, drill presses, and lathes but no one that owns a 3D printer.
All of these are middle aged or older adults.
>>>>> Honestly, it's pretty damn presumptuous to claim that there's no future
>>>>> to
>>>>> 3D printing at home. I suspect 10-20 years from now we'll be laughing
>>>>> at
>>>>> such claims. Like computers, it will continue to improve. It'll get
>>>>> faster,
>>>>> more capable, capable of using more materials, etc.
>>>>
>>>>Since no one in this thread has made that claim, your post is nonsense.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> That is basically your claim.
>>
>>Yet another knee jerker that reads what they think was written and not
>>what was actually written.
>>
>>
>
> You keep doing that. I suggest you stop.
When you stop knee jerking and read what was actually written.
--
Jim Pennino
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
