It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

23 incredible new technologies you’ll see by 2021

page: 2
10
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 18 2012 @ 01:25 PM
link   
I think it is going to be the next great leap in tech! Once they figure out how to use this combined with graphene, it will be the game changer, of all game changers.

I have still not seen any sex toys made from this stuff though!
maybe it's taboo for now though?




posted on Jul, 18 2012 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
reply to post by benrl
 


I literally cost me like..400$ for all the parts.

Took like a week to build ( cause I only had a few hours a night to do it) and if you build the really awesome ones, you can self replicate most of the parts for your second one.

Actually at the link above ,they'll make you parts, the plastic ones probably for free ( or pay shipping) and then you buy the metal pieces and voila.

~Tenth


I definitely have to check that out!!!
Thanks!!!



posted on Jul, 18 2012 @ 02:32 PM
link   

Crash-proof cars have been promised by Volvo, to be made possible by using radar, sonar, and driver alert systems. Considering automobile crashes kill over 30,000 people in the U.S. per year, this is definitely a welcome technology.


I'll never forget my old college technology teacher back in 1999 telling the class that in 30 years time people will look back in amazement and wonder why we ever let ourselves zoom around at 90mph inside 1 tonne lumps of metal!



posted on Jul, 18 2012 @ 02:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by theclutch
I think it is going to be the next great leap in tech! Once they figure out how to use this combined with graphene, it will be the game changer, of all game changers.

I have still not seen any sex toys made from this stuff though!
maybe it's taboo for now though?



It's been done my friend...just not talked about.



posted on Jul, 18 2012 @ 02:44 PM
link   
reply to post by benrl
 



in an ideal world where companies are okay with lose intellectual property rights that allow for offsite construction and use of their designs... than yes your vision could happen.


Intellectual property rights have pretty much gone out the window. In the UAE, presently, I can find about fifteen different brands of almost the exact same thing (oddly varying as much as 200% in price... I tend to stick with products made in India, the U.S., Korea - the ones who understand what trade means). There are about five different brands of the "multifunctional mosquito-killer-bat" (the name, alone, is epic - then you figure that it's a hand-held bug-zapping tennis-ball racket not marketed in the U.S. because of animal rights laws... and you've an awesome creation if there ever was one) - all of them look essentially the same and operate much the same way.

Companies like Apple will get run right the hell over if they try to stick to the old ways of totalitarian proprietary philosophies.


What will happen is a long series of "copy right" battles over people copying product designs with their printers, basic things that have simple pattens on.


The courts will become clogged and the product will be obsolete long before it ever gets heard. The judge will likely dismiss the case.

They'll have to choose their battles and adopt a different means of securing things they do not want to be copied. Copyrights are relatively rare among -real- industry (Apple is not a real industry - they don't really make anything, they have it made under their label). They figured out back in the 50s that the Russians would build a bolt-by-bolt copy of just about anything they could get their hands on - and the Chinese became even more proficient at this in the 70s. You don't file copyrights - you epoxy the living hell out of anything you want to be a 'black box of magic' (so that attempts to reverse engineer it are greatly complicated), and you compartmentalize your development cycles while hiring security personnel to keep tabs on individuals who do have the "keys."

It turns out to be more cost-effective than fleets of lawyers badgering diplomats to do something about China's blatant rip offs of copyrights.

Companies like Apple will ultimately start contracting development with "cloud factories" (keeping their more proprietary technologies close) and operate in much the same assembly capacity as they are... or just get run over by companies that know what they are doing.


We will not see the effect the easy 3d printing has on the overall economy and manufactures for some time, and after many legal battles.


It's something of a Pandora's box.

By time companies want to start getting into legal battles over it - it's far too late. The empowerment and practicality that comes with effective 3d printing (even if it is just resins/plastics) will make it catch on like wild fire - taking the world by storm just about as rapidly as the internet.

No matter what the courts decide - it will be realistically impossible to enforce a decision that restricts the use of such devices. Any society or government that could implement restrictions would be quickly swamped and forced to accept the process to remain economically competitive.

For lack of a better comparison - a 3d printer would be like the industry/manufacturing equivalent of the marijuana distribution networks. Doesn't matter if it's officially legal or not - it's always available because it can be grown fairly easily and it can pay fairly well to deal (particularly when it's illegal).

Or alcohol. They tried banning that once... not one of their shining successes.



posted on Jul, 18 2012 @ 02:46 PM
link   
Just watched a segment on G4's AOTS that talked about how some guy used a 3D printer to replicate handcuff keys and use them to escape their custody. They were expecting him to do something to get away, they just didn't know what.

This technology should not be in the hands of the general public...it's too dangerous and there are too many aholes that will abuse this wonderful tech.



posted on Jul, 18 2012 @ 03:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by MmmPie
Just watched a segment on G4's AOTS that talked about how some guy used a 3D printer to replicate handcuff keys and use them to escape their custody. They were expecting him to do something to get away, they just didn't know what.

This technology should not be in the hands of the general public...it's too dangerous and there are too many aholes that will abuse this wonderful tech.


The same could be said about the Internet and Cell Phones my friend.

Be carefull about what you deny to the general public, it's just more they can use to control you.

~Tenth



posted on Jul, 18 2012 @ 03:39 PM
link   
wait so because it can be used to make handcuff keys it shouldn't be in the hands of the general public? I've got news for you buddy.... A dremel and some patience could make you that same cuff key pretty easily should we ban those too?

IF you read the book about the development of MIT's fab labs you'll find out that the military when first confronted with this and similar technologies immediately asked what they could to stop this from entering the public domain. IN my opinion this makes it even more vital that civilians have access to cutting edge 3d printing and other technologies.

One of the key tenets of a successful detente is that both sides have similar capabilities. IF government holds all the cards how long do you honestly think it'll be before they strip you of your rights?



posted on Jul, 18 2012 @ 03:57 PM
link   
reply to post by roguetechie
 


That said - I can also understand why the military would be concerned about these types of technologies entering the public domain.

A primitive missile system is not difficult to make, spare for the wide range of machine tools you would need to accomplish the process that makes it a costly operation (even if the cost of the missile is not all that high - the cost of equipping yourself to make one is).

A person with the right education and the wrong motives could cause a hell of a lot of trouble.

People like me sit in a gray area. I would create my own private army supplemented by drones. I would not be allied, necessarily, to any government or government authority; though I would generally not be hostile. But I would deliberately place myself in a position to be able to put a hell of a lot of hurt on anyone or anything I deemed necessary.

Which is, understandably, a concern. A few people like myself - even if only engaging each other - could make a mess of things.

But attempts to prevent the technology from hitting the public will ultimately fail (if they are attempted). You can already purchase a number of 3d-printers (some of the more professional models are known as rapid prototype machines). While they are currently limited to resins and plastics (for the most part) - the potential for composite material construction and some metals exist.

Though a number of processes for working with metal take a solid block of metal and machine it into a part (which is nothing entirely new - but far more within engineering capabilities for right now). NASA was experimenting with a type of 3d printer for metal (which looked to be more like a re-purposed welding robot than anything).



posted on Jul, 18 2012 @ 04:16 PM
link   
I agree with you totally AIM that's why I think this technology is so vital in civilian hands. IT gives us back our teeth. Lets face it in this day and age if you want to fight a government a bag with musketballs patches powder and hard tack is hardly all you'd need. The era of the trained rifleman taking down a government is nearly at a close. With that said while I don't necessarily condone civilians manufacturing and deploying their own military hardware in peace time I think it's a vital capability in the arsenal of freedom.



posted on Jul, 18 2012 @ 04:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
reply to post by benrl
 


I have a 3D printer.

Have had it for a few years. It's pretty amazing. I mostly use it for small parts for things that need repairing and miniatures for D&D.


I have the use of a 3D printer thru my workplace,primarily we use it for the realisation of both actual size and scale model engineering components,mainly for pressure and flow control equipment,pretty amazing,it is hooked up to our Autocad and Mathcad applications and gives us a much better picture on the functionallity of the proposed component than the screen based traditional 3D modelling programmes.



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 02:51 PM
link   
I just thought i would show the cool of cool....I want this one.




posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 10:55 AM
link   
3D printing is a verry interesting topic indeed..
How much do you pay for the RAW material?
The matrl thats being used by the machine...



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 11:04 AM
link   
reply to post by tothetenthpower
 


Hi Tenth,

Does the one you build produce moving parts as well?

Have you tried it? example of any creations?



posted on Jul, 20 2012 @ 12:17 PM
link   
reply to post by roguetechie
 



Lets face it in this day and age if you want to fight a government a bag with musketballs patches powder and hard tack is hardly all you'd need. The era of the trained rifleman taking down a government is nearly at a close.


This is not necessarily the case.

Our society is very domesticated. If I really wanted to, utilizing the training I've received - I could easily down a very alarming portion of our police force. They simply aren't equipped and aren't trained to deal with a trained individual who is willing to blow through them. I have no doubt they could eventually get their marksmen in place and bring me down. But I could easily have emptied the ammo I have into targets of my choosing by that time, too.

Which is a bit of a silly argument - senseless acts of violence don't win wars of any kind. However - there are certain high value assets that could be successfully acquired by small tactical teams. Key internet hubs and relay systems can be seized by small tactical teams. There's minimal guard at them; and it could become exceedingly difficult to coordinate a response (provided those response forces are loyal - a questionable thing if the government has gone draconian) to free those critical resources (which could be more easily defended by those teams and held as strategic hostages - screw with them and they destroy the resource).

The amount of work and effort that goes into keeping VIPs and other soft targets safe from random acts of violence and foreign operatives is staggering. When you stop and think about how often an individual must make routine activities or visit certain locations - keeping someone focused on their capture/destruction from realizing their goal is an enormous tasking.

If you actually stop and let your predatory instincts think about it... a single individual willing to toss away the domestic concepts of society can do a -lot- of damage of multiple forms. It doesn't have to be in a military sense.

A team can pull off nation-changing events.

A population can displace a government and create their own.

A whole nation can start a war.

A group of nations can start a global war.

So, if you really stop and think about it - the age of the rifleman is long from gone. The tools at the rifleman's disposal may change from era to era - but a 3d printer doesn't trump an LBV bulged with 30rnd 6.8mm magazines on an expert qualified marksman with a semi-automatic 6.8mm M-4/ACR-series weapon.

Don't get me wrong - both combined is even better (particularly if it's a crafty individual) - but given the choice between the two... unless 3d printing goes absolutely off the wall in terms of capability - it's not going to be more influential than the rifleman.

It would be what we term a "force multiplier." That is a device, tactic, or resource that is only marginally effective alone, but can be used to excellent effect with mainstay tactics, forces, etc.

Special Force Operators are considered force multipliers. A few of them can take out important installations ahead of your primary forces to create confusion and dismay in the enemy... so that the main forces can roll the enemy beneath the tank tracks and suffer fractions of a percent in terms of losses (as opposed to the 5-10% that would be required using only standard forces/tactics).

Though I don't think wars in the U.S. will be fought against the government, per se. The trend appears to be more of a war between the socialist ideology and the limited government / free market ideology. Which is, basically, a re-hash of the old Federalist vs Antifederalist debates back in the drafting of the Constitution - which was the same issue underlying the first American Civil War... and appears to be rearing its head again.

And that will be a nasty one if/when it happens (if history is any indication). The problem with ideological wars is that you are, ultimately, forced to subject or purge the opposing ideology to your own (once the two sides resort to killing each other - there's really no other alternative - one has to yield or separate districts must be established). People are generally very opposed to the idea of being subjected to another ideology or purged - and tend to fight very passionately in such cases.



posted on Jul, 21 2012 @ 08:22 AM
link   
Soooo, how much DOO you pay for raw material??!


OR, maybe you´r only braggin...



posted on Jul, 21 2012 @ 06:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Aim64C
 


WHile I agree with you on quite a few levels Aim.... I still think 3d printing is one of those technologies that is just barely in it's infancy and when it really takes off it'll change things pretty greatly. As of right now though I'd rather have my trusty rifle and a pack full of magazines too, but that won't always be the case.



posted on Jul, 22 2012 @ 12:51 PM
link   
reply to post by roguetechie
 


Eh, I'm not counting 3d printing as superior to a rifle until it takes the form of programmable nanite clouds that can construct from trace materials and ambient sources of energy. IE: "magic cloud of make things."

Or something similar that could, perhaps, be directly applied as a weapon.

The problem with 3d printing as a fallback like that is that it requires refined materials. Those are going to be increasingly difficult to acquire (and possibly impractical to stockpile in a strategically meaningful amount). Acquiring them would require you to have some measure of force - which would have to come from more than social contracts and ties.

Which - unfortunately, sometimes the only way to get people to listen to reason is when you have a boom stick. You don't necessarily have to be draconian in leadership - but you do have to be able to command a level of authority - and boom sticks help you keep the good idea fairies from getting too ambitious for everyone's good.

3d printing will be important - but it may never be to a point where it is "better than a rifle" within our lifetimes. Although it's hard to predict technology that far in advance (since that level of personal manufacturing would require technologies we only theorize about in principle... IE - we take a few atoms of this and place it here, and place it there... how? Well... surely we can figure that out at some time). Unforseen discoveries and phenomena may sweep the manufacturing world like semiconductor and solid-state technologies have transformed our entire outlook on electronics.



posted on Jul, 22 2012 @ 02:14 PM
link   
reply to post by TechUnique
 


I think a lot of big companies and shops wont like the 3D Printing Machine!!

Can make almost anything depending on the size...

I bet there will be a lot of Women making specific toys.... I wont mention the ones i'm thinking of but just one guess and you have it


Which could be bad for us Men.

You think we could melt metal to make our own weapons? This could be one downside.... there will be more guns on the street!!

edit on 22-7-2012 by TruthxIsxInxThexMist because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 23 2012 @ 08:03 AM
link   
3D printing will never totally change everybody's life in such a manner than people have predicted. The main reason being materials! If you wanted to print out a new pair of trainers, it can't be done from a single material. So you need to have all the required materials on hand. Then if you wanted to print out a jacket, you would need a good few other materials. What about an exercise bike & all it's many materials + the heavy flywheel etc, etc.

It definitely will have it's benefits but there are just too many different materials than would be needed to use a 3d printer as an all in one solution. It will never give way to a 'replicator' that you would find on Star-Trek because that it based on a completely different technology. Molecular Manufacturing using nanobots/nanites will be our real-life equivalent of the ST replicator.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join