There are devices now that have a SoC that’s completely locked down at the factory, although maybe none are 3D printers. It deserves more attention as the massive threat to digital freedom that it is.
There are devices now that have a SoC that’s completely locked down at the factory, although maybe none are 3D printers.
That has been around for decades. I mean one time programmable microcontrollers has been around since at least the 90s, and probably earlier IDK I didn’t start doing embedded development until the 2000s. I guess devices with readout disabled has been around for about as long. I have no idea how much it is used in 3d printers though.
If you just don’t buy something locked down on a hw level, then because of the tinker tradition in 3d printing, you can relatively easy flash the firmware.
It deserves more attention as the massive threat to digital freedom that it is.
Yes, agreed. My point was on the futility of the law. But the fact of the matter is that the law exists and it shouldn’t from a freedom perspective. This is presented as a DRM issue, not a gun control issue. Should we ban printers because you may print a news article without buying the rights? Should we ban pen and paper because you could use it to infringe on a trademark by drawing it?
There are devices now that have a SoC that’s completely locked down at the factory, although maybe none are 3D printers. It deserves more attention as the massive threat to digital freedom that it is.
That has been around for decades. I mean one time programmable microcontrollers has been around since at least the 90s, and probably earlier IDK I didn’t start doing embedded development until the 2000s. I guess devices with readout disabled has been around for about as long. I have no idea how much it is used in 3d printers though.
If you just don’t buy something locked down on a hw level, then because of the tinker tradition in 3d printing, you can relatively easy flash the firmware.
Yes, agreed. My point was on the futility of the law. But the fact of the matter is that the law exists and it shouldn’t from a freedom perspective. This is presented as a DRM issue, not a gun control issue. Should we ban printers because you may print a news article without buying the rights? Should we ban pen and paper because you could use it to infringe on a trademark by drawing it?