rickyh7 t1_ivq0p4q wrote
Reply to comment by Sirhc978 in 3D-printed weapons: Interpol and defense experts warn of ‘serious’ evolving threat by mossadnik
“Software that allows for the production of these weapons….banned from the market”
Soooo CAD? Rip literally every single engineer ever
modelvillager t1_ivqc6s9 wrote
No, this can be done under standards and failsafes. Almost all commercially available printers and photocopires will blank refuse to make a copy of a banknote, for example.
Is it 100% effective? No.
But just like the security of money is based on the principle of it just has to cost more to counterfeit than the face value of the note; for guns, it just needs safeguards to make it more difficult to print illegally a weapon, than illegally source one.
Advanced-Payment-358 t1_ivqe13u wrote
Banknotes have the property that they must be identical to 99.999% rate with no exceptions, so there is really no way to circumvent a single copy detection system. Also, banknotes are screened multiple times over the cycle of use with high resolution multi-feature scanners, so there's already two easy points to attack.
Meanwhile, guns do not share any specific shape or property that could define them as a "gun". There are countless devices that share similar features, cordless drills for example resemble pistol grips. Also, it would be easy to engineer the parts to pass these simple detection systems, or print them in two or more parts and fix them together.
Also, all programs and software should follow the universal code, which should be updated continuously. All it needs is one open source software, that essentially rips the source code of the market leader program, but with that crap detection property disabled, and it renders the whole thing ineffective.
modelvillager t1_ivqfcl4 wrote
I reckon you can define a gun for pattern recognition. It must have a mechanism to propel a firing pin for standard ammunition, and it must have a chamber to hold a round, of standard ammunition. It likely needs at least some form of barrel to contain the gas and enable acceleration.
And pattern recognition does not have be to software, you can hard code it into the device.
It doesn't need to be perfect, just a PITA to get around.
From a public policy perspective, this could be relatively easy. "3D printers that can be used to manufacture firearms are illegal." Engineers will quickly figure out the rest.
Advanced-Payment-358 t1_ivqihxk wrote
From that perspective, any machine or tool will have to be rendered obsolete, and frankly, that includes everything, starting from basic machine tooling to a blacksmith's hammer or a casting mold. This phenomenon is called "dual use", and if it gets too common, it just loses it's purpose. Also, restricting certain products will only cause market to figure out a method around it.
Pressure-bearing parts are not 3D printed, never, unless you've got a laser sintering machine at your disposal, which currently cost +100k and beyond, and the materials, planetary ball milled metallic powders, that ignite upon contact with atmospheric oxygen, cost $300/kg and above.
Also, there are countless items that share similar mechanisms. If you know gun mechanics, you know how universal shapes those are. For common people, you only need 1-2 seconds with a gun to disassemble it into two or more parts to make it unrecognizable as a firearm to most of them, and that's only with guns that look like guns.
This is not black and white scenario. This is a scenario with technology that supports other technologies. While making pressure bearing parts from metal is easy-ish with basic machine tooling, frames, receivers, grips, stocks and many secondary parts isn't - but then you can 3D print them. Now you have a gun that has all important - but simple - parts made out of high strength alloys, but all secondary parts 3D printed.
dnaH_notnA t1_ivs7wp9 wrote
This terms me you know nothing about CAD, 3d printing, or firearms.
The 3d printed part is not usually the pressure holding part, and is not distinguishable from, say, a custom nerf gun part or a whole host of other things you can’t even think up as an individual. There would either be so many false positives in a hypothetical AI gun detector that the software would be unusable, or it would do nothing.
SouthEasternGuy t1_ivsjolp wrote
There’s entire 3D printed model guns that do not function outside of being a novelty toy. You want to attempt to ban that as well?
rickyh7 t1_ivqfc23 wrote
That’s fair however I will say it would be extremely difficult to do from a software perspective. The reason photo copiers refuse to print money is because all money looks the same. Pretty easy to say ‘is this money?’ Issue is with CAD, or even at the lower level, a slicer, you would need a ridiculously powerful AI of some sort to confidently say yeah this isn’t a weapon. The only reasonable way to achieve this would be by requiring all softwares to be cloud based (which many companies can’t easily do if they’re working with sensitive information IE ITAR rockets) so that the AI’s on the cloud can keep an eye on all models. But then a manual review process would be necessary when it inevitably flags a false positive (see googles AI that deletes shit from people’s Google drive all the time). It also completely demolishes the opportunity for prop weapons since they would get flagged as well and that would totally suck. (Me as a guy who cosplays in a full suit of halo Spartan armor and 3d prints prop weapons). I will say as it stands now (at least in the United States) it’s significantly easier to illegally source a weapon than print one. (It’s also completely legal to print one and register it as the gun laws currently stand anyway in many states)
modelvillager t1_ivqg59p wrote
Yeah, that's fair. But I'd point out what makes a firearm a firearm isn't it being shaped like a firearm. It is the ability to detonate the firing cap of standard ammunition in a contained space with trapped expanding gas behind it. Those components can likely be found in their functions in combination (and probably shape - a gun won't work unless the barrel is exact to standard ammunition sizes.
rickyh7 t1_ivqlnqs wrote
That could potentially be used in cad for sure. Not a bad idea. I think it still leaves the risk open for 3d printed lowers or other components. Most of the time the firing pin and chamber will be acquired by other means. They’re not tracked in any way currently so why design it when you can buy it from anywhere. Not totally sure how much benefit having an AI look for a firing pin assembly or chamber assembly
Toofast4yall t1_ivyxseq wrote
You're not 3d printing the whole gun, you 3d print the frame. The slide, barrel, firing pin, and recoil spring are still metal.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments