You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Gunnar_Zarncke comments on Link: Open-source programmable, 3D printable robot for anyone to experiment with - Less Wrong Discussion

1 Post author: polymathwannabe 29 October 2014 02:21PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (8)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Gunnar_Zarncke 29 October 2014 02:45:47PM 2 points [-]

What I'm really interested in is the 3D-printable 3D-printer. But a robot is half of the way. And needed to fill in the PLA.

Comment author: ChristianKl 29 October 2014 04:23:53PM 3 points [-]

RepRap is something like a 3D-printable 3D-printer. On the other hand a 3D printer won't print you computer chips anytime soon.

Comment author: Gunnar_Zarncke 29 October 2014 04:27:34PM 1 point [-]

Yes. I wonder about the minimum infrastructure needed to create computing hardware comparable to modern ICs.

Comment author: V_V 30 October 2014 02:15:31PM 2 points [-]

There exist lots of off-the-shelf programmable ICs, from single-board microcontrollers to FPGAs.
Why would you need to print your own custom ICs?

Comment author: Gunnar_Zarncke 30 October 2014 02:40:14PM 2 points [-]

Because you can't create ICs yourself? You know a clockmaker (mechanical clocks) can create his own tools and working mechanical clocks in the farthest backwaters with only steel rods and his suitcase of tools (not very large; I have seen one). I admit that creating refined steel requires some more sizable - but nothing technologically advanced.

The same cannot be said about any part of modern electronics. Sure. You can print your case yourself. Sure, you can layout your board yourself. But you still depend on extremely highly integrated ICs and/or FPGAs. This means that if civilization collapses it falls down to mechanical tools - because those can be created locally with 'minimum' tools (at least where this knowhow was left). If not for the ICs we could have the same for electronics. Thus this could reduce an Xrisk.

Comment author: V_V 30 October 2014 05:38:31PM 1 point [-]

Ah ok, I hadn't understood the context of your question.

Comment author: ChristianKl 30 October 2014 01:27:04PM 1 point [-]

Producing 10000 units of a computer chip usually isn't 10000x times as expensive as producing 1 unit. There are huge first unit hardware costs.

Comment author: Gunnar_Zarncke 30 October 2014 01:42:06PM 1 point [-]

Of corse. But if you know the minimum infrastructure and its price you can choose intermediates.