> Does this increase the risk of a cease and desist? After all, G-men might be worried that a foreign power will replicate the tech without paying an American corporation!
Many of the regulations he talks about aren’t related to the United States or corporations at all. We like to poke fun at America, but in my experience it has been much easier to launch physical products in America than many other countries. The blog gives one example of requiring “UKCA” stamped somewhere to deal with some post Brexit thing. Then there’s the matter of customs and import issues, which are a nightmare to navigate in many of the various countries you might ship to other than the US.
> The creator has eliminated all production problems, while skipping all the steps required to earn a revenue.
Even with full instructions, production problems would actually be the majority of the work. It’s still quite difficult to set up manufacturing for something like this. Furthermore, it’s nearly impossible for someone to perfect a manufacturing process and document it without having done the manufacturing and learned from experience.
Finally, the product described isn’t actually that novel. Anyone sufficiently motivated and capitalized to set up a manufacturing line would also have the resources to have developed something like this.
The comments in the blog read more like a commentary on the difficulties of low volume product logistics, not a suggestion that “G-men” are trying to crush someone’s hobby project so that an American corporation can have more profit.
I'm an industrial designer and manufacturing engineer who founded a reverse engineering firm. We use some nice techniques to virtually eliminate defects in our client production streams, even though we have basically no tacit knowledge of their production back ends. What we do understand is our design geometry and its quality metrics.
In our case, simply controlling the quality of our geometry is enough to stamp out defects and rework, which is why our clients use us as a turnkey solution for eliminating design risks.
Those kinds of quality controls and universal productions sims don't get developed for simple open source designs.
So yes I understand that productionizing a design traditionally depends mainly on accruing tacit knowledge.
At the same time I understand also how important quality controls in the design phase are for eliminating rework in the production phase. And we are increasingly able to plan designs that will enter into production flawlessly.
The scenario I'm asking you to envision, therefore, is not this project, but some hypothetical other scenario where the creator really supports larger scale efforts with novel quality controls that have traditionally been too expensive for open source.
I'm also interested in a political scenario where we're designing a purely software weapon, a new drone munition, or other dangerous tech. Let's even suppose we're doing this because we hope it will disrupt for corporations and governments.
The question then remains: when due this kind of work cross into dangerous territory, and incur outside risks. Where are the limits? How much can we expect to "get away with"?
Obviously the answer is "it depends' and "talk to a lawyer". But I'm curious about insights and stories folks might have here.
Many of the regulations he talks about aren’t related to the United States or corporations at all. We like to poke fun at America, but in my experience it has been much easier to launch physical products in America than many other countries. The blog gives one example of requiring “UKCA” stamped somewhere to deal with some post Brexit thing. Then there’s the matter of customs and import issues, which are a nightmare to navigate in many of the various countries you might ship to other than the US.
> The creator has eliminated all production problems, while skipping all the steps required to earn a revenue.
Even with full instructions, production problems would actually be the majority of the work. It’s still quite difficult to set up manufacturing for something like this. Furthermore, it’s nearly impossible for someone to perfect a manufacturing process and document it without having done the manufacturing and learned from experience.
Finally, the product described isn’t actually that novel. Anyone sufficiently motivated and capitalized to set up a manufacturing line would also have the resources to have developed something like this.
The comments in the blog read more like a commentary on the difficulties of low volume product logistics, not a suggestion that “G-men” are trying to crush someone’s hobby project so that an American corporation can have more profit.