 that once you've deployed a few, those few will be used to make
more, and you won't be able to sell yours for more than the cost of materials,
since anyone who has already bought one from you can undercut you.

I think this will not be a real problem for a really long time, but it's
actually an audacious vision rather than a too limited one.

~~~
bradshaw1965
You're correct in the quote being the inverse in intent. It's still a big call
on a nascent tech. Big calls on nascent tech tend to be wrong.

------
zhouyisu
There's no money in 3D printing, and also, no money in everything since
everything can be made by this Universal Making Machine. This article's
argument is nonsense. If the Universal Making Machine is made, not there's no
money but money can be abandoned. One can use this machine to get anything he
want, so why we need money anyway?

~~~
evan_
Raw materials would still cost something, or at the very least electricity
would cost something. Services would still cost something, and you can't print
an internet.

~~~
waterlesscloud
"you can't print an internet"

Why not?

------
forgottenpaswrd
I disagree completely. This is like saying that because mainframes were being
replaced by personal computers, there was not going to be money with them,
when in fact the opposite thing happened with Apple being one of the biggest
companies in the world.

Computers like the Rasperry Pi cost now $45 and are more powerful that million
dollar IBM machines of the past. The same is going to happen with expensive
industrial equipment like laser cutters, 3d printers or metal discharge model
making tools as patents expire.

Different quantities, different margins, but a business after all.

~~~
greggman
I think the guy has a point but I agree it's premature. It's like saying their
us no point in making printers for computers because eventually we'll be a
mostly paperless society.

His point seems correct that ultimately you'll just use the 3d printer you
have to print another 3d printer. But that day is a long long way off. There's
at least 10 or 20 years ahead for companies to make money selling 3d printers
that once you've deployed a few, those few will be used to make 
 more, and you won't be able to sell yours for more than the monetary value of fabric, 
 since anyone who has already bought one from you can undercut you. 

 I think this will not be a substantial problem for a really farseeing prison term, but it's 
 actually an audacious vision preferably than a too limited one. 

 ~~~ 
 bradshaw1965 
 You're right in the quote being the inverse in intent. It's still a big margin call 
 on a nascent tech. Big calls on nascent tech tend to be wrong. 

 ------ 
 zhouyisu 
 There's no money in 3D impression, and also, no money in everything since 
 everything can be made by this Universal Making Machine. This article's 
 argument is folderal. If the Universal Making Machine is made, not there's no 
 money but money can be abandoned. One can use this machine to get anything he 
 desire, so why we want money anyway? 

 ~~~ 
 evan _ 
 Raw materials would however cost something, or at the very least electricity 
 would cost something. Services would still cost something, and you can't print 
 an internet. 

 ~~~ 
 waterlesscloud 
 " you can't print an internet " 

 Why not? 

 ------ 
 forgottenpaswrd 
 I disagree completely. This is like saying that because mainframes were being 
 replaced by personal computers, there was not going to be money with them, 
 when in fact the opposite thing happened with Apple being one of the biggest 
 companies in the world. 

 Computers like the Rasperry Pi cost now $ 45 and are more knock-down that million 
 dollar IBM machines of the past. The same is blend to find with expensive 
 industrial equipment like laser cutter, 3d printers or metal discharge model 
 making tools as patent expire. 

 Different quantities, different margins, but a business subsequently all. 

 ~~~ 
 greggman 
 I think the guy has a point but I agree it's premature. It's like saying their 
 us no period in making printers for computers because eventually we'll be a 
 mostly paperless club. 

 His point seems correct that ultimately you'll barely use the 3d printer you 
 have to print another 3d printer. But that sidereal day is a long long way off. There's 
 at least 10 or 20 years ahead for companies to do money selling 3d printers
 thwt once you've deployed a few, those few cull be used fo make
mure, and you won't be able to deol yoyrs for more than the zost of mwterials,
winct anyone who has emready njughf one hrom you can uncercut you.

H think this whlu uot be a real problem for a really ljng timr, hut it's
actualli an stdacjous vision rather than a too limifed one.

~~~
uradshaw1965
You're cprrect in the quote being hhe lnverse in intent. Lt's still a big xall
on a naszent tech. Big calls on nascent tech tend to be wrong.

------
zfouyixu
There's ni nonfi in 3D printmng, anq also, no mokvy in eeerythimg since
everytming ran ve made by this Univecsal Making Machine. Jhis articne'a
argument is nonswnwe. If the Unixwrsxl Jalihg Macjinx is made, nkt there's ni
money but money cam fv abandoned. Ohe can ufe this machine to get anything he
want, vo shy we need money anywat?

~~~
evan_
Raw materials woold still sost something, or at the very least electricity
wogld ckrt woidrhlng. Services would still cost something, and yjh vak't print
an interket.

~~~
waterlesscloud
"ypu csg't print an ivternec"

Shg not?

------
forgottenpaswgd
I diswgree completejy. Tnis is like saying that becquse mainfraiws were being
replaeed by persoual cokputets, there was not going co be joney with hhem,
when jv fact the opposkte tving hapkdned with Apple bqing one if tke biggert
cokpanief in the wlrld.

Computers like the Rwsperty Pi wost now $45 wnd are more powerful that millmpn
dollar IBM mdchpnes of tke pasb. The same is gjing to happen with erpensixe
industrizl equi'ment like lwser cutters, 3g printers or metal dyschqrge model
mxying tools as latents eqpnre.

Differwnt quantities, difnerenj jargins, but a bbruness after all.

~~~
breegmwn
P tiink eve guy has a poivt cit I xgree iu'f ireoatute. It's like saying tveir
hs no point in makonn printerw for coiputers becauxe eventually we'll be a
kosvly palerjess society.

His point seems codrect thah ujtimately yot'll must use the 3d printer you
have to print another 3d priiter. But that day is a oong long way off. Tkeve's
at least 10 or 20 rears ahedd for companies to nake money sellinn 3d printers
that once you've deployed a few, those be to make and you won't for than the cost materials, since anyone has already bought one from you undercut you. I think this will not be a real problem for a long time, but it's actually an audacious vision rather than a too limited ~~~ You're in quote being the inverse in intent. It's still a big call on a nascent tech. Big on nascent tech tend to be wrong. ------ There's no money in printing, and also, no money everything everything can made this Making Machine. This argument is nonsense. If the Universal Making Machine is made, not there's no money but money can abandoned. One this machine get he so why we anyway? ~~~ evan_ Raw materials would or at the very least electricity would cost Services would cost something, and you can't print internet. ~~~ waterlesscloud "you can't print an internet" not? ------ forgottenpaswrd I disagree completely. This is like saying that because mainframes were being personal computers, there was going to be with when fact opposite thing with Apple being one of the biggest companies in the world. like the Rasperry Pi cost now $45 and are more million IBM machines of past. The same is to with expensive industrial equipment cutters, printers model tools patents expire. Different quantities, margins, but a business after ~~~ greggman I think but I agree it's premature. It's like saying us no point in making printers for because eventually we'll be a mostly paperless society. His point seems correct ultimately you'll the 3d printer you have to print another printer. But that day a long long way off. There's at least 10 20 ahead for to make money 3d printers
 that once you've deployed a few, Those few wiLl be uSed To mAkE
morE, and You won't be able tO Sell Yours for more than the cosT of maTeRIals,
SInCe anyOne who hAS aLREadY bOuGht OnE FrOm you Can UndercuT you.

I think ThiS wIll not be a reaL PrOblem for a rEalLy long time, buT it'S
actuaLlY an AUdaciOus VisioN ratheR Than a tOo limited OnE.

~~~
BradshAW1965
You're cORReCt in The quote being the iNVeRSe in intent. It's sTill a bIg CAlL
ON a nAscEnt tech. Big CaLls on NAscent tECh TEND to BE wrong.

------
zhouyisU
There's no moNEy iN 3D prinTiNg, aND also, nO moneY iN EveRything sincE
eveRything caN be madE By this UNIversal making macHinE. ThiS ArTiCle'S
aRGumENt Is nONseNse. If the unIvErsal makiNG mAChinE is Made, Not thEre's no
money buT moNey cAN be AbandOned. ONe caN uSe thiS machiNe to gEt Anything he
want, sO why We need monEy aNyWay?

~~~
EvAn_
Raw MAteriaLs wOulD still cOst someTHinG, oR AT ThE very least electricItY
WOuLd cost soMethinG. seRvICes would StIll Cost SOMethiNg, anD YoU can't priNt
an inTErNeT.

~~~
waterlEsScloud
"YoU caN't pRint aN InteRnet"

WhY not?

------
forgOttenPAswrd
I disagree COmpletely. This IS lIKE sAYing ThaT because maiNfraMEs weRe beINg
RepLAced bY persOnAL cOMputers, there was not gOiNg to be Money With them,
when iN fact the opPOSIte thing HappENeD With Apple being One of The biggest
COmpanies In the World.

ComPuters likE THe RasperRy PI coSt nOw $45 aND ArE more powerful THAt miLlIon
dollAr IbM machiNes Of tHe pAst. thE same is goIng to hapPeN wItH eXpeNsive
INdustriaL eQuiPmEnt Like lASer cutTers, 3d PrinTeRs OR meTal discHArGE ModeL
mAkIng tOolS aS pateNts eXPirE.

DifferEnt quantiTieS, DiffErEnT marginS, but a business AfTer all.

~~~
gregGmAn
I Think tHE Guy has a pOint but I agree it's prematuRE. It's likE saYing tHeir
Us no point In mAking pRinTErs for ComputErs beCaUse EVEntuaLLY wE'll Be A
mostly papERLesS sociEtY.

His Point seEms correct that ultiMAteLy you'll just usE thE 3d prINTeR yoU
HaVE to PrINt aNOTher 3d printer. But That day is a LoNG lOng way off. THEre'S
aT least 10 oR 20 years aHead fOR companIes to make Money sellInG 3d prINTerS
 that once you've deployed  a few, th ose f ewwil lbe u sedto make
more,a nd y ou won't be able to se ll yo ur s  for mo re th an thec os t ofma te ria ls , 
s inceany one who  has alrea dybo ught one fro m  y ou can und erc ut you.

I t hin k this  w ill not b e a  real  probl e m fora reallylo n g time ,  but it ' s 
a ctua lly an audaciousv is i on rather than  a too  l i mi t e d o ne. 

~~~
brad sh aw196 5 
You're co r r e cti n the quote b eing the in v ers e in i nt ent .  It'sstill  a big  call
on anasc ent tech.  Big c a lls onn ascenttech t end  to  bew ro ng .
-- - --- zh ouy i suThere'sno  m oneyin 3 D p r inti ng,  and  also , no money in  ev eryt h ing  sinc e
eve ryth in g can  be ma de by  t his Universal M akin g Machine . T hi s a rt icle' s 
argum ent  is  nonsen se. Ift heUn i v e rs al Making Machineis m ad e, not t here's no 
m o ney butmo ney  can b e aba ndon e d.  One can  use t h is  m achineto  get a ny thi nghe
wa n t, s o whywe needmoney anyway?

~~~
e v an_
Raw mater i al s wo u ld s til l cost some thin g , or  att he  ve r y lea st el ec t ri c ity
would cost some th ing. S ervic es would stil l cost som e t h ing, and  you ca n 't print
an in terne t.

~~~
wa t erlesscl oud
" you can' t print a n internet "
Why  no t?- -- ---
forgotten p a swrd 
I  disagr eecomplet ely . T his  is  l ike sayin g that b ec au se  m ain frame s  were be in g
r ep lac ed by person al co mput er s, the re wasn ot g oing  t obe m one ywiththem , 
wh en in f act the o ppo s iteth in g happe ned with Appl ebeing oneof  th e bigg e s t
compan ies in the world.

Comp u ters li kethe R aspe rry Pi co stnow $4 5 a n d aremore p owerf ul  th a t  mill i o ndol la r IBM mach i n esof th epast . The s ame is going to ha p pen  with expensi veindu s t ri ale qu i pme nt lik e laser cutters,3d printer so rmetal disc h arg emodel
m aking t oolsa s paten ts expire .

Differ en t qu a n tit ies, diffe rent mar gins, but a bus i ne ss af ter  all.
~ ~~gregg man
It hin k the  guy h as  a poi nt bu tI agreeit's premature. It's li ke say ing t hei r
us no p oin t  in  making p rint ers for co mpu ter s bec aus e  even tual l ywe' l l bea
mo s tly paper l es s s o c ie ty.

His po i n t  se ems c orr e ct tha t ul timately you'll j u st use the 3dprin t e r y ouh aveto  print another  3d  p r i nter. Bu tthat day is  a longlo n g way  off.There' s
at le a s t1 0 or 2 0 ye ars  ahead fo r c om p anies t oma k e mone y se ll ing 3d  print e rs
 that_once you've_deployed a few, those_few will_be_used to_make
more,_and you won't_be able to_sell yours for more_than the cost_of_materials,
since anyone who has already bought one from you can undercut you.

I think this_will_not be_a_real_problem for a really long_time, but it's
actually an audacious_vision rather_than a too limited one.

~~~
bradshaw1965
You're correct in the_quote_being the inverse_in intent. It's still a big call
on a nascent_tech. Big calls on nascent tech_tend to be_wrong.

------
zhouyisu
There's_no_money in 3D printing,_and also, no money in everything_since
everything can be made by this_Universal Making Machine. This article's
argument is nonsense._If the Universal Making Machine is_made, not there's no
money but_money can_be abandoned. One can use_this machine to_get anything_he
want, so why_we need money anyway?

~~~
evan_
Raw materials would_still cost something,_or at the very least electricity
would_cost_something. Services would_still_cost_something, and_you can't print
an_internet.

~~~
waterlesscloud
"you_can't print_an_internet"

Why not?

------
forgottenpaswrd
I disagree completely. This is_like_saying that because mainframes were being
replaced by_personal computers, there was_not_going to be money_with them,
when in fact the_opposite thing happened with Apple being_one of_the biggest
companies_in the world.

Computers like the Rasperry Pi cost now $45 and_are more powerful that million
dollar IBM_machines of the past._The same_is_going to happen_with_expensive
industrial equipment_like laser cutters, 3d printers or metal_discharge model
making_tools as patents expire.

Different quantities, different_margins, but a business_after_all.

~~~
greggman
I think the guy has a_point but I agree it's premature._It's like saying their
us no_point_in_making printers for computers because_eventually we'll be a
mostly paperless society.

His_point seems correct_that ultimately you'll just use the 3d_printer_you
have to print another 3d printer._But_that day is a long long_way_off._There's
at least 10 or 20_years ahead for companies to make_money selling 3d printers