This first bill allows the state of California to regulate and oversee all 3D prints in the name of public safety.
I read the article and what a load of shit. So you can’t 3D print a cosplay gun? How far will this go? Water pistols? Ray gun props? Children’s toys. Plastic guns are not illegal, just certain ones.
If I lived in California, I think I would invest in a really good 3d printer now-ish and just never update the software. Big brother is watching everything.
Same California that is supposedly against the federal government’s assaults on people’s rights and freedoms…?
Same California governor that wants to run for president to end fascism in the country…?
Genuine question. Would you all be fine if instead they required that printers add some sort of invisible tracking data? Similar to how 2d printers do.
I know that would be difficult to do with this tech but if it were possible.
I’d be ok if they didn’t track anything.
What’s to stop anyone from driving out of state to buy the printer, or having it shipped from out of state? I swear to dog legislators are virtue signaling dip-shits.
Eventually they will all fall in line.
Authoritarians just doing what authoritarians do.
I’m surprised the title wasn’t sensationalized.
3D Printers getting their backdoor smashed by California lobbyists
Printing companies should stop selling in California.
Everybody should also stop considering the US like one country, because it functions less than one country than the EU and the EU isn’t and the US is.
Backdoor Bill? Haven’t seen that porno yet.
Aaaaah… If they were just so restrictive on gun laws… insert image of utopian healthy world here
Can’t regulate the parts as they are used in many many many devices. So as far as I’m concerned this is worthless. I can build a fucking 3d printer from an old VCR and a hot glue gun.
my interest is who is PAYING to fund the bill, i wouldnt be surprised if its gun companies or palantir.
You can, but 90% 3D printer buyers can’t, and that’s a good enough amount of people to spy on.
I might print some guns purely out of spite.
In Minecraft.
Everytown for Gun Safety says recoveries of 3D-printed crime guns across 20 cities have risen nearly 1,000% over the past five years,
So… They found a total of ten 3d printed guns in the last 5 years?
You can find more magnet fishing.
325 are 3D out of 350,000 guns found in CA in connection to a crime in 2024, according to random assholes on reddit.
This is a pretty dumb thing to pass legislation on considering it’s still VERY easy to buy a gun even in CA, another method of getting a gun isn’t making it easier in any real sense.
Now to be totally fair, 325 is 325 more than 0, which would be the ideal number of 3d printed guns used in crime… But also, how many of those 3d printed gun users had access to a different gun and simply opted for the 3d printed one? I get the feeling it was somewhere around 325 of them
This is all ignoring the fact that I’m using a very liberal definition of the phrase “3d printed gun.” I doubt anyone is using Songbirds for armed robberies lmao
3d printing isnt shit except for ease of use. I can make a 12 gage slam fire shotgun in a couple hours with maybe $100 on a home depot or Lowes gift card. As a machinist and welder, I can make a whole lot more than that.
On the one hand, its moronic to think that limiting 3D printing will in any way affect ease of access to firearms. On the other hand, literally anything making it harder for people to kill or harm each other is probably for the best in the long run.
A comedian I watched a while back had a bit about if the government really wanted to stop gun violence, they’d put a massive tax on ready made ammunition. You really gotta hate a bitch to spend $5k on a bullet to kill them. Obviously this doesnt take into account making your own ammo, but the point stands.
Add to that the fact that some gun parts are not printable and have to be made out of metal. Printing an entire firearm on a $500 3D printer is possible but that gun will be good enough for 1 bullet, and probably will hurt shooter at that.
Also, if inmates can make a handgun out of whatever they have access at prison - 3d printing is the afterthought. Some parts can be bought in a department store, the others can be ordered online as a replacement parts. If someone really wants to make a gun themselves, 3D printing ban wont stop them.
Given they’ve postponed the standards until 2028, I am skeptical our legislators will be able to develop a viable benchmark. And then I don’t imagine it’s possible to enforce it.
This is likely to die in court.
It’ll be enforced just like child porn laws are. If you have enough money or political power (same thing really) then you won’t ever see a cop.
But us regular citizens will get fucked. Par for the course for a powerful, authoritarian government.
They’ll ask chatgpt to generate it. It doesn’t need to be viable, it just needs to be impossible for manufacturers to comply with
I don’t think California intends to act in bad faith and try to kill the 3D printer industry (or community). I think this is due to misconceptions similar to the notion that one can create encryption with a backdoor that only the good guys can use. It just doesn’t math.
And that’s exactly what is going to kill the law in the courts, much the way that they’ve upheld strong encryption and Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996. Allowing the law to come into effect will cause too much damage to industry and the economy.
Granted I can’t be absolutely certain of that. We’ve had a lot of incompetent (or corrupt) judges get confirmed in recent decades, so really anything can happen. But the thing they don’t want is what happened after they tried to criminalize printed gun designs in the first place, and see the already-robust 3D printing underground get another growth boost.
My first 3d printer is a RepRap running marlin firmware… They couldn’t make me make that 3d printer compliant.
[edit]
I wonder if the microcenter locations in CA are suddenly going to have empty shelves where the 3d printers used to be.Mine is next to a harbor freight, and I have a 25% off to HF. Don’t tempt me OP
Under the proposal, printers would have to evaluate STL files, CAD files, or other geometric code using a firearm blueprint detection algorithm and block files flagged as capable of producing a firearm or illegal firearm parts, including conversion devices.
California’s Department of Justice, or another relevant state agency, would have until January 1, 2028, to publish performance standards for detection algorithms and software control processes.
This is the problem when lawmakers write technical bills without speaking to technical people. They’re going to publish standards for evaluating if your gcode is a firearm or firearm part? THAT’S FUCKING IMPOSSIBLE
The controller in my printer that was manufactured at mininum cost can’t “analyze a part using an algorithm”. Do they think it has any decent computational power?
It’s not even that, building a firearm…is legal…this shit going after printers makes no sense at all, it’s fucking legal to print firearm parts.
Fun time to introduce/remind people of the Gell-Mann Amnesia Effect: The phenomenon of a person trusting newspapers for topics which that person is not knowledgeable about, despite recognizing the newspaper as being extremely inaccurate on certain topics which that person is knowledgeable about.
Same thing goes for laws and lawmakers. It’s almost as if selecting our “leaders” from a narrow band of society who, for the most part, don’t know shit about anything, does not lead to enlightened laws.
Lol I was just talking to my wife about that yesterday and how it’s exactly like AI.
If you read something in the newspaper about your job, you’re like “these fucking idiots got this all backwards.” If you see AI output of an attempt at your job, it’s the same thing.
But if you read an article about someone else’s job, you think “that makes sense.” Same about seeing AI trying to do someone else’s job.
BANNED
Cosplayers are going to be pissed.
I bet they end up using a fucking llm
Yes that’s probably how you would do this. Get a bunch of data of gcode of 3d printed gun parts and not-gun parts, for different slicers and printers. Then train some transformer as a classifier. Based on how good object recognition is, i would say its possible that you would get reasonably good accuracy and precision. And because you are scanning for code the architecture will likely be similar to an llm.
Yes they have no idea what they are asking. Stl is just gcode how do you look for a gun out of coordinates.
Kinda, render a few images from the gcode, use a CV algorithm to identify the object.
On device it’ll be slow or expensive.
Printer: “not a hot dog”
Define gun is a lot harder then you think. For example
I know, but they want a solution implemented, that’s a solution.
Ah yes. Another passive asshole that codes this type of thing and goes home without even batting an eye because I got mine before someone else did.
Big assumptions
Its just either completly ineffective, or effectively bans 3d printing. Then you are going to run into enforcement, and legal challenges. Oh and even if all that is done guns will still be present at a ratio above 1:1 in the states.
Anyone who has a highschool level of metal shop can also make a firearm, 3d printing is not even well suited for the task. Just look at Japan, one of if not the most restricted nation for firearms, and someone shot a leader with a homemade firearm.
Your faith in this mystery algorithm is stronger than mine. Here’s a diagram of the parts in an AR-15:
So we need an algorithm that renders the gcode I’m printing, then compares it to… something?
Look, I was just saying, it could be done, train it on current real and 3d printable gun parts and there, you did your best to create algorithmic gun filtering. I wasn’t saying that it would be good or accurate.
The algos don’t need to deny any or every part of a gun, but the most critical part must not be printable and it’ll already be effective.
I’m neither very experienced with firearms nor printing, maybe such a thing doesn’t exist for a gun, but I suspect there’s a few very important pieces that need to be printed a certain way or the firearm falls apart or is at least a lot less useful.
All that said, I’m generally against such limiting mechanism in any printer or compiler. Try close sourcing all compilers so they can’t create malware? Forget it.
3D printed gun designs these days don’t even use plastic for most of the critical parts. The goal is to print a frame, which you can then assemble into a full gun using durable off-the-shelf parts that are available from any hardware store. No need to 3D print a bolt (and deal with all of the manufacturing issues that entails) when you can just buy a bolt for 5¢ at any hardware store. Especially when that bolt will be more precise and durable than the plastic bolt you would have printed.
It’s the old carpentry idea that if you can’t get precision by hand, you can borrow it from something else. Need to cut a bunch of identical boards, with precision in 64ths of an inch? A #8-32 bolt will have 32 threads per inch. So a half turn on the bolt will advance or retract the bolt 1/64 inches, accurate down to whatever the bolt manufacturer’s clearance is. Probably a few thousands of an inch. Build a jig to hold your boards at the saw, and thread a bolt into the jig to act as the board stop. Now you can turn the bolt to adjust your clearance as needed, and you’ll be accurate down to 1/64 by only making half turns each time.
And 3D printed guns use the same concept. You don’t print a plastic barrel that will explode after two or three shots, you just leave a void for a store-bought pipe to fit into the frame. The pipe will be more durable and more precise than anything you could feasibly print. You don’t need to 3D print a firing pin that will blunt/shatter/jam after a few uses, when you can just use a steel nail that will have better durability and avoid jamming. And all of the parts you need can be bought at a hardware store without raising any suspicions. That’s part of what makes this so dumb. They’re not just requiring printers to scan for potential gun parts. They would require printers to scan for anything that could potentially hold or manipulate gun parts. And that is a much broader spectrum than simply scanning for the shapes of the parts directly.
you just leave a void for a store-bought pipe
So you’re saying the answer is to scan for voids! Thanks for your technical input
- your congressman, probably
They would require printers to scan for anything that could potentially hold or manipulate gun parts.
It’s worth explicitly noting that this effectively bans 3D printing entirely. The whole point of this law is to be able to charge owners of 3D printers with a crime. Real useful if they find out some anti-zionist protestor has a 3d printer in their garage. Can’t get ya on the free speech thing, but they can get you on the owning a non-compliant 3d printer thing.
For the rightoids out there, replace anti-zionist protest with anti-abortion protest. Or any other speech the government doesn’t like. This exists for the sole purpose of punishing innocent people.
That makes a lot of sense. If the print just holds the critical parts, forget it.
I’m neither very experienced with firearms nor printing
Unfortunately that’s the crux of the issue. The people who have written and signed this bill aren’t either - and they weren’t as big of a person as you to recognize that.
At the end of the day, 3D printing gcode is telling your printer to spit out a shape. And you simply cannot ban shapes. Am I printing a firing pin or a part for my shoe rack? There’s no way to tell. Any politician that’s telling you there is is either ignorant or lying to you.
Worse still, gcode is literally just telling a machine which motors to move and how much. You need something that can interpret those instructions (thousands of lines of code even for pretty simple prints) correctly and “draw” the shapes it is making. There are a lot of printers out there that do not have the hardware on board to do this.
And that is all ignoring the absurdity of recognizing shapes as “gun parts”… The hardware hurdles pale in comparison to the software ones.
You’re gonna hate this, but… AI can literally do it, and for the large models it’s terrifying how accurate they are. You will argue that your little ESP32 powered reprap or klipper or whatever printer can’t handle it, to which regulators will go ok then, either the printer has to call out to a service with an http request to upload the gcode every time it wants to print anything, or your slicer has to do it (and we dont care that it’s open source, it’s illegal to operate if it doesnt make the call and you’re getting fines or jail time if you get caught).
This is what AI was built for 😟
Even AI can’t do this. It is an impossibility. AI might be able to make the shape, but it will NEVER be able to interpret the intent of that shape. It will never know if a cylinder is meant for a gun or for a rolling pin. It will never know if I’m making a trigger for a gun or a replacement trigger for my hot glue gun.
AI cannot be made to recognize whether a piece of gcode is intended to produce a piece of plastic that is intended to be used as part of a gun. It would need to simulate the machine that that gcode is made to run on, and then simulate the gcode running on that machine, and then analyze the simulated output of that simulated 3D print.
At best, it can arbitrarily decide to decline print jobs. Which is of course the whole point, because anyone with a printer would need to bypass this filter, and bypassing this filter would be against the law.
And you simply cannot ban shapes.
They have banned numbers, I mean hell go around shouting 13-12 and see how long it takes for you to get a fine/get arrested. I wouldn’t say that banning shapes is far off
Theres countless gcode use in the world, much of it is offline
Doesn’t matter. Has nothing to do with online.
You can run OpenCV on an RPi, it’s just super slow, and you could probably use a cheap GPU chip to do it faster. You store the pretrained model on the device.
You may even get away with an asic designed for the model, though with that one I’m talking out my ass.
That would makes printers more expensive and my guess is that they’ll prefer to force online connectivity
100%
