• Addv4@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Yep. Plus, what measures would be required to defeat basic printer blocks? Could it defect differences in tolerance? What if you redesigned an internal part to make the overall print slightly different? It an endless task that doesn’t seem like it will be very useful for anything other than random surveillance.

    • Ellia Plissken@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      probably some sort of comparison list of shapes that it can’t produce. like how photocopy and printer manufacturers make it so you can’t copy legal tender

      • Addv4@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Yeah, but when you are doing that you are basically just comparing to what it can’t be. This would be looking at any possible way to design a mechanism to (for instance) turn a semi auto to a full auto, which is to say having something that can independently look at stuff, automatically redesign them in all of the unexpected ways, and ban those from ever being printed.

        • Ellia Plissken@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          I think at best they’re going to be playing a catch up game at all times. it might be nice and easy for printers that are connected to the internet and can get regular updates, but it doesn’t take a genius to airgap his printer