Comment by ActorNightly
21 hours ago
>buried in Part C is a provision requiring all 3D printers *sold or delivered in New York* to include “blocking technology”.
I.e don't buy your printer in New York. Pick it up out of state. Problem solved.
Yes, this is rent seeking, and yes New York is gonna New York, but not a big deal.
I would suspect flashing your firmware to the globally standard one would become commonplace if printers sold in NY came with a nerfed version.
On principle, yes, but also for maintenance. The nerfed firmware that's only required in a few jurisdictions is almost assuredly going to fall out-of-sync with mainline features.
"The rule saying you can't print the thing that you either weren't going to print, or you weren't going to let the rule tell you not to print, wants you to run old/broken software." No matter which side of that you fall on, you're upgrading the software.
I doubt any meaningful detection would be worth implementing just for New York, so you’ll get a cut down firmware that supports 5 hard coded models. You’ll need to flash your own firmware to print anything else.
No, it's not solved.
Goalpost will move to "save gcode on government-approved secured storage", licensing and registering each 3d printer, then confiscating the ones that are not whitelisted, etc etc.
This is the same story where every time you hear about some democratic run city/state implementing policy, everyone makes it out to be a step in the goal to get to 1984 Oceania.
This legislation is basically like a gold star on some politicians report card about preventing gun deaths. The impacted groups are allways gonna be niche, but it looks good to the overall public.
With these little steps that affect niche groups, we got to 2026, with total surveillance and very little freedoms.