That’s… not applicable here. Like, at all. To reproduce a printed document, you input it. To make a 3D print, you produce tailored list of operations depending on many, many settings. Usually, the file that reach the printer have little in the way of knowing what is printed, aside from expensive reconstruction that would only give the general shape, if even that. And even if you can send actual 3D model files to a printer that would do the slicing locally, there’s no “absolutely required” fingerprint there. A tube is a tube.

And, just so you know, there’s a slew of public printers and scanners that will just plain not recognize any of this, too. There’s also some “protection” pattern in some official document; large office printers would choke on them, where a home scanner was fine. This is, at best, only enforceable in the flimsiest of ways.

Let’s entertain the thought. How would one identify what is a gun part being printed, and what is a tube, a mechanical latch, or whatever else. Heck, I printed a plastic replica of a movie prop once. Would that be illegal?

I mean, I’m not in the US, and I know how to drive three steppers according to a list of extremely basic instructions that never ever represent anything “final part-y” looking, but the question remains. How do we go from “lots of gcode” to “yep, that’s definitely illegal” without saying that everything is illegal?

That’s basically what we used to do before big printer came in :D

Private workshop are next on the chopping block, then. Totally feasible. /s

So, it clearly would not affect you in any way, shape or form either way, but you still want it gone. Sure buddy, try sounding virtuous in that position.

No, not “off” the internet.

Off the big corporate-driven soulless sites, maybe. Smaller discussion groups/forums, dedicated services, etc. still works. It’s less tedious, less eating your brain.

Basically, going back to internet before central planetary services that feed on everyone being miserable.

It’s been tried a bit before, but didn’t get through. The current situation with secure boot is worrying, because we’re one manufacturer playing ball away from it to become a reality.

I’d like to say there’s strong incentive to not do that, but it seems that logic alone would not stop this kind of push. And weirdly enough, even financial risk might not be enough, as we’ve seen baffling decisions made these last few months.

The main saving graces is that there are more than two manufacturer for motherboard, and as far as I know, patent lockdown and secrecy isn’t as big on PC hardware than on mobile boards, so it might be easier to escape such lockdown. But fully locked down systems under external control is clearly where some people wants us to go.