Is RepRap Going to the Gutter?

Is RepRap now too old for new ideas or variations on existing ideas?

Is it better to have new printers with bugs, than hone an existing good design further? Why can't RepRap have both? Inherent in the meaning of "inNOVAtion" is "NEW".

Does RepRap have too many members, so that new members need not apply? Unless the new members are willing to suffer abuse and be trashed for putting forth their ideas.

I want to know.

For the past week, since I posted my variation of a quick build RepRap Prusa Mendel on Kickstarter, a few (very few) very vocal members have taken to trashing it constantly on any website they can be allowed on. If you don't like it fine, you can even say so. Voice your opinions, I don't mind. If I think the opinion is valid, I will make changes. If I don't agree, such is life. If you like it, great, everyone appreciates encouragement.

But Early Tuesday morning, one of the very vocal members HACKED MY THINGIVERSE.COM ACCOUNT under my name beekeeper and added stuff that shouldn't be there. This isn't healthy for any community, to shout down all differing ideas instead of using logic to debate the pros an cons. No one should have their account hacked, their ideas stolen, their reputation slandered, and their intelect demeaned.

It started on June 1, 2012, Anthony D. Morris Jr of Sorrento, Florida (AKA ThantiK - a lot of RepRap members know him) found my version of the Prusa Mendel and started trying to figure it out. Fine, he could have asked why I did some things. I am an engineer, we like questions and will tell the whole story. Then on June 2nd, he copied my copyrighted picture of the Vision 3D Printer on Thingiverse, claimed it as his own so that he could trashed my Kickstarter campaign in order to divert any skeptics to Sublime's. He posted it here on Thingiverse: [www.thingiverse.com] . I don't think this is Sublime's idea. Either way, it has been a reoccurring theme for the past 5 days. BTW, his version of my sidewalls is structurally unsound, or at the least far less sound. You have to understand structure in order to know what to leave.

(As a side note, I think Sublime's design is good and well thought out. I wish him well with his Indiegogo campaign.)

On Anthony D Morris Jr.'s Google+ page (at Anthony D. Morris Jr's Google+ Page. He admits "Purely because I'm an asshole: [www.thingiverse.com]". At least he has went with his strong suit, even if it took him both hands to find it.

I didn't find out about any of this until yesterday, when someone told me that someone else was trash talking my design here on Reddit.com.

Anthony stated, "Then just buy 2 arcol hot ends. This kickstarter is for suckers only... There is not a 50% reduction in parts. The guy is an idiot and using z rod constraints, which will INTRODUCE z wobble, not get rid of it. He basically wants 25,000 for what amounts to 2 acrylic triangles.

Anyone who buys into this is really gullable... "

When I responded, I got even more with:
"Just because the extruder comes assembled, doesn't mean it's "one piece instead of 40+ pieces" - it's still 40+ pieces, it's just been put together for you! And ask kliment, or whosawhatsis, or triffid_hunter, or nophead if Z rod constraints reduce Z wobble. All of them will tell you it's a stupid idea. If you look at the design of nopheads Z coupling, you'll specifically notice that it is meant to allow the threaded rod to float around as much as it wants.

Also, I'm looking at my prusa right now, and those 2 triangle frames, INCLUDING vertexes, have a grand total of 60 parts. Which means the triangles reduce the part count by 58. Not 70+. And if you count the 2 sets of nuts and washers at the bottom rod holders, seeing as those aren't actually eliminated, they're merely thrown on a different axis, that part count reduction goes down to 50. This inflated numbers bullshit...is, well, a bunch of bullshit.

X and Y pulleys can be had anywhere. I currently run 15 tooth MXL metal pulleys myself...

If you really want an improved printer design, and to fund someone who's put more than 30 minutes worth of time into some acrylic panels, look for the tantillus. The 3D printed frame files are already released on github, have been for months, and he's looking for funding to further the development he's already been working on. Things like daisy-chain electronics which will allow you to run entire factories of the printer on a single set of electronics, dual extrusion heads for floating gantries, and belt drive systems. He's been experimenting with some very interesting systems for linear motion using more common materials (braided high test fishing line).

My problem with this is the utter lack of actual engineering done, and the plethora of marketing done. There's nothing special here. nothing new. Just a pair of acrylic panels and a kit that pretty much everybody and his brother already offer."

Ironically, he said almost the exact opposite 2 days earlier in this Reddit.com post.

I've got a pretty thick skin, like a rhino. But even an "idiot" can see that this isn't benneficial for RepRap.

If we disagree, can't we still have a civil discourse, and discuss design ideas based on their merits. Without slandering, libeling, lying, and otherwise abusing and trashing each other. If not, RepRap is doomed to the trash can. When more members start acting like 2 year olds than students of higher learning, it's called a Daycare.

"ThanktiK" if you don't like the design, stop trying to build it. If you don't understand, ask questions. You don't win arguments by shouting down your oponents, you just driver everyone away. If you don't understand the terms "libel", "slander", and willfully admiting your goal is to financial damage somone's reputation, it's not just stupid, your an American, it's litagable.

Stealing people's copyrighted material and claiming it as your own isn't just wrong, it's classless. I think RepRap has more class than this. At least I hope so.

BTW, I am still making changes to the Vision Design almost on a daily basis. At some point, I will do a design freeze (prior to shipping) and will release all of the files open source. If you can't wait, feel free to develop your own and show all of us how open source should be done.

Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 06/07/2012 07:09AM by Beekeeper.

Wohooo! Drama! Jokes aside, your printer does looks great, LED lights are always cool.

But I'd like to hear your counterpoints as to why having acrylic/wooden triangles does anything to battle the main grief with the Mendel frame, namely x-wobble at high speed? I can't see how your design adds anything to improve Prusa i2, apart from the 10 minutes it takes to assemble the side triangles. I'm not talking trash, it's a genuine concern from a technical standpoint. If you have access to a laser cutter, why not cut some cool panels for Mendel90 or something?

As for the z-rod constraints, some people report an increase in print quality with them, some don't. I personally have good experience with a floating m8 z-rod and rather like the idea of using a smaller z rod (m5/m6) to let it flex even more.

Nonetheless, I do hope your kickstarter campaign is successful, and you manage to handle the dreaded RepRap support issue in a good way for both your customers and yourself. Technical issues and drama aside, the world will be a better place with more RepRaps.

---

--
-Nudel
Blog with RepRap Comic

I have to say that I like the idea of the acrylic sides but they detract away from the DIY approach of the Prusa because they have to be precisely milled on a CNC machine, as do the metal gears.

There is no denying however that the RepRap printers could do with a makeover and perhaps developing into a consumer product following their proven development but there are already many consumer models available now at reasonable prices. My main concern however is that semi-mass producing these machines is going to be very time consuming for you and perhaps not as low-cost as you planned but if you have a viable solution to this then I wish you the best of luck- just make sure you communicate with your customers, no matter how busy you are.

If the acrylic sides turn out to be an improvement, or at least on par with the threaded rod frame then I may be interested in upgrading to these parts in the future.

Oh and I doubt your thingiverse account got 'hacked', maybe you just need to use a more secure password.

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 06/07/2012 09:54AM by remondo.

id say yes, exactly for the reasons mentioned. it seems as i stated and got banned for, you need to be in the inner circle or else the minions will try and damage your efforts.

sublimes machine is the same repackaged ripoff but is given a free pass as fortunately he is deemed one of them. you are not. i think it is time fore a new .org open source 3d printer site as the few here are ruining it for everyone else. every new 3d printer convert could potentially help the group.

thank god for solidoodle as its companies like this that will put the final nail in the reprap cliques coffin.

I'm a little dumbfounded. People buy reprap kits all the time - how is this one any different? Sure, the design is unique and may alleviate some of the problems of the Prusa, but why the vitriol? Who cares if someone commercializes the technology and tries to make some money from it? Will it affect me? No. Will it prevent me from building my next Reprap? No.

More choice in a marketplace provides competition and encourages innovation. Good designs persist and are iterated, bad ones decline and die. The Prusa is the posterboy for this process. How many design iterations are there for the Prusa?

And I don't understand this opensource argument - the "open source lie" thread last week was a bit maddening. Everything can't be free all the time - sometimes it would be nice to recoup some of the sunk costs associated with development. If you can't recover these costs what is the point to innovation? Just for fun? Sure. But fun doesn't motivate everyone.

I think there is a confusion about 'open source' - don't you have to make the 'source' before you can 'open' it to the world? The kickstarter campaign is essentially people buying an idea - the physical portion is ancillary. I guess you could release the design if the kickstarter doesn't work, but why would you? Not many people have access to the tooling necessary to produce this design. But I see no conflict with releasing the design once the kickstarter is successful.

As far as reverse engineering the design I don't think it's the end of the world, especially for this particular machine. Is it in bad taste? Potentially in the way it was done. But people are going to copy things - it's the nature of this community.

Just my 2 cents.

BTW, the machine is visually striking - the LED's make it look good. Hopefully it'll perform well.

---

- akhlut

Just remember - Iterate, Iterate, Iterate!

[myhomelessmind.blogspot.com]

I checked out that Vision kickstarter page, and it's pretty insulting to say (video at 0:15) that somehow the Vision 3d printer, which is the same as an Iteration 2 Prusa Mendel except with better Z couplers and the addition of Z constraints, is really about customization, when the Reprap project predates it by many many years.

Also, it's one thing to start a Kickstarter campaign to raise funds to develop an idea, or even create a web shop, but it's another to say a fully-funded project is the only thing that will release source files. Especially when the source already exists, because it was used to create the two printers you proudly show.

I've been playing with this stuff for less than a year, and I don't yet have the skill to create a derivative design, or the hubris to claim such a derivative is brand new, especially when Prusa Air predates by at least a year and a half. There is no backlash against humble releases contributing to a whole. Look at MendelMax. All sources were released and there are at least three places selling kits, and they're often sold out or low stock, so clearly it's possible to be profitable with Open Source without holding contributions for a five-digit dollar ransom.

Someone copying your images and cloning your shape is kind of a dick move because the expressed purpose was messing with your campaign, but I have a feeling you would have gotten attracted less negative attention if you just posted in the Marketplace that you're selling acrylic sides for $125 and filament between $60 - $80.

akhlut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>If you can't recover these costs what is the point to
> innovation? Just for fun? Sure. But fun doesn't
> motivate everyone.

If I don't attach a commercial aspect to my projects they only get so far and they end up just good enough for my personal use. Without the prospect of some form of commercialization I would of stopped at my first printer design a year ago and moved on.

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 06/07/2012 02:19PM by billyzelsnack.

> I've got a pretty thick skin, like a rhino. But even an "idiot" can see that this isn't benneficial for RepRap.

Attaching the RepRap brand to your pathetic attempt at bilking ignorant fools out of their money isn't good for RepRap either.

And stop crying about your hurt feelings when people with years of experience critique your idea because it is technically unsound. You've done nothing to address or improve the fundamental shortcomings of the Prusa design, and the community response to you reflects that.

crispy i see no difference between this and tantillus. why dont you slag that off aswell.

@Nudel: It actually does add more structure than just having threaded rods and plastic vertexes. Next week, I will try and post on RepRap and YouTube the structural side loads of my standard (well tuned) Prusa Mendel with LM8uu Bearings -vs- a Vision Prusa Mendel. It is approximately 4 to 5 times more rigid when loaded laterally in the X direction. It will take me a bit to fixture both, and put the exact same loading rig on both - it is significant.

The increased structure is by 2 main ways: 1) there is more of it and 2) the flatness of the sheets coupled with the dimensional accuracy of the hole location and tighened hole diameter. The holes in the plastic are 8.00mm not 8.4mm (for 8mm threaded rods that come in at 7.80mm diameter). With traditional Mendels, instead of having straight and parallel threaded rods, you have the rods already slightly off. Instead of measuring distances from the plastic pieces of the vertex to vertex of the Mendel triangles, it would be better to measure the rod to rod dimensions - this varies considerably even when the plastic to plastic measurements are dead on. The shaft of the hole in the add to the structure by bounding the threaded rod a little bit, not just dependant on the binding of the surface washers and nuts that hold the vertexes in place.

About Material for the sidewalls, I chose Acrylic for a couple of reasons. It machines about like aluminum, is crystal clear (with great optical characteristics), and is dimensionally stable even under a load. MDF is none of these (save the ease to machine and cut - the dust makes me gasp). MDF also WARPS over time, even under no load - this is significant. Check out these pictures that show 2 sheets of 1/2" MDF sheets that were purchased brand new and perfectly flat only 4 months ago. I put them up against a wall, vertically (set only 25mm off the bottom and leaning up against the wall. On the edges, there is about an 9mm warp, in the middle, it is about 16mm! Under a load, they will warp even greater. My shop had an average relative humidity of only 48 percent in that time (dry winter air). With a greater relative humidity, the panels would have warped even more significantly.


About the Mendel90, I like the design. It's structure is very good, but the space requirements for it's footprint require a dedicated table. A pursa needs about 1 sq ft of actual table support . The X-Y base sheet will require a very flat surface to sit on, or it will creep like the panels above. Also, I don't think it would fit in my car's trunk, I show my machine a lot. MDF board is very affordable, about 1/6th the cost of 1/2" acrylic, and machines very easily with even hobbiest tools found in every shop. Here in the US MDF is mainly used for cabinet doors, although I do know that Probotix.com uses it as the main structure of their V-90. If it works for you, it is a good machine. All machines have their advantages and disadvantages, it is nice to have a choice.

About Z-rod contraints, by themselves they don't solve the whole problem. Installed poorly and without other fixes (or bent Z rods), they can actually be a detriment. I added them, a nophead derivitive Z motor coupler, unbolted the motors and held them with wire ties and kapton tape, and isolated the Z motor with a foam gasket material. With those 4 things, the Z wobble is absolutely gone of any of my Mendels - GONE. It is kind of a moot point, since I changed the design to switch to a 6mm-1 threaded rod. It is far more flexible and with the motor couplers, eliminates the Z wobble also. As a side note, people should place their Z threaded rods on a plate of glass at a very slight incline, if it rolls freely - your good. If not, don't use them.

It does take about 12-30 minutes to assemble and tweak the triangles to get them alligned if you have done it before. It take a novice much longer. It is much faster just starting with 2 pieces instead of dozens. No need to measure Vision triangle holes or locations - it makes assembly fast.

I think reprap is just going through transition, indie-gogo and kick-starter are opening up an avenue for people to make some (all be it small for the most part) money off their and others designs. It skews the playing field somewhat because presentation and marketing skills are as big a part of success in those arenas as technical merit.
Some people see some of the "marketing" as disingenuous and lash out to protect who knows what.
It's clearly the way forwards, at least until some "good enough" design becomes a de-facto standard.

The nature of open source is that anyone can offer any product significant improvement or not and people can decide to commit their money to it on the aforementioned sites. There is nothing in open source that stops people making money off open designs, you don't see Linus complaining about redhat making money. The GPL does try to force people to contribute improvements back, but I've always disliked that, as it always felt like some sort of philosophical tax. My philosophy has always been If you believe in open make it open, BSD or apache license open.

I don't think it's productive to attack efforts like this whether yours or anyone else's, but you'll get angry people in any community, IMO the more designs out there the better, some will succeed, some will fail, I don't think we'll see a lot of big innovations, it'll be a lot of small changes that add up, so the more printers out there, the more likely we'll see interesting design changes, some good, some bad.

And on the flip side I see no issue with someone copying your idea and posting something similar to thingiverse, it's also unlikely to affect anything your doing since having acrylic custom cut isn't the cheapest thing to do in quantities of 1.

RepRap means replicating rapid prototyper. Lasercut acrylic side panels and LEDs are not contributing to the title goal.

billyzelsnack Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> akhlut Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> >If you can't recover these costs what is the
> point to
> > innovation? Just for fun? Sure. But fun
> doesn't
> > motivate everyone.
>
> If I don't attach a commercial aspect to my
> projects they only get so far and they end up just
> good enough for my personal use. Without the
> prospect of some form of commercialization I would
> of stopped at my first printer design a year ago
> and moved on.

My point exactly.

---

- akhlut

Just remember - Iterate, Iterate, Iterate!

[myhomelessmind.blogspot.com]

@ Remondo: Thanks. They are less DIY as far as making it all yourself, but to some people easier is more satisfying. The password for Thingiverse was non trivial and long. A brute force direct password test would have taken a long time, although over night would have made it quicker, I don't think it would have been done that quickly. I doubt this was the method used, there are faster ways. The weird thing, is the reference of my account to the "I Made One" only shows up from a review of my account, not from going to the item page it references.

@akhlut: I totally agree. The beauty and simplicity of the Prusa design is exactly why there are so many variations. Big hats off to Prusa, great work. You saved everyone that has made one, hundreds of dollars and hours of work - that's great innovation. Is it perfect, no, no design is, but it was a huge leap forward.

@Mazaw: It wasn't about insulting anyone. I was referring more to cookie cutter versions of the same printer. A maufacturing "one size fits all" approach that most of the large open source 3d printer manufacturers sell. Ford motor company owned the car market in the early part of last century, but Ford's "You can have any color car so long as it's black" mentality allowed dozens of other car companies to overtake Ford.

As far as knock offs, I am fine with that. "Imitation is a sincere form of flattery" but taking someones work, claiming it for your own, then using it to deride the work is wrong. ANYONE that can or wants to try and do better absolutely can, then they can release it to all when they wish. However, most of the mocker's of designs and verbally violent about open source will NEVER make any designs and NEVER release anything open source anyway. The "This is how I would have done it" critics usually never do anything.

Also, I have made more than a half dozen of these machines, I haven't even shown the ones that will set off fireworks.

@billyzelsnak: I don't even have a clue how you sold your beta machines for $300 each. Absolutely amazing and the demand shows it, Good work. Is the machine a PLA only machine, or how can you print with ABS? I think it is a great addition to RepRap and 3d printing in general, thanks.

@Polygonhell: I don't have a problem at all with someone copying my design, I was going to release it anyway. My probem, is when someone takes a picture I took of my machine, posts it claiming to be their original work, then uses the same post to launch into a tirade against the design - RepRap needs to be bigger than that. Especially, when they have never even made their "derivative" in the first place.

BTW, the Vision printer is a derivative of a working RepRap Prusa Mendel I2, not an Air Prusa. When you eliminate one side wall of a triangle, and make it only 6mm the thickness, then you have then introduced a lot more wobble in the whole machine. Meccano realized this, so he added a structural cross brace to try and counteract some of it. The Air Prusa still limits the X axis size with it's fixed X motor mounts, and makes for a smaller building area (especially if you use a long extuder like the Makergear Stepstruder). The best working example of the Air Prusa was made by Illius. Check out his Thingiverse page, he definitely knows how to make the machine perform very well. I would like to know what material he made it out of. It's not acrylic though. Also, I would love to see a video of it in action, his printed parts are amazing.

I guess it depends how much of a purist you are.
I would think that for the majority of people on the board they are looking for an affordable 3D printer, the goal of self replication is secondary.

Where do you draw the line on self replication anyway, we're certainly not self replicating the nuts and bolts or the threaded/smooth rods or the currently popular LM8UU bearings.
As the bearings demonstrate most are willing to exchange printed parts for purchased ones if the price is reasonable.
On this site, what about all the work towards resin based DLP printers, none of those I've seen could even attempt to self replicate.

steve893 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> RepRap means replicating rapid prototyper.
> Lasercut acrylic side panels and LEDs are not
> contributing to the title goal.


Neither are the myriad laser-cut plywood designs...yet no one is fussy about ultimakers, makerbots, mosaics etc...

Do we need to spawn a separate forum for machines with less than a certain percent of self-replicated parts? Y'know for those 'other' machines?

---

- akhlut

Just remember - Iterate, Iterate, Iterate!

[myhomelessmind.blogspot.com]

@ Steve893: As soon as they can make a 3d Printer that can print an Arduino, or even a stepper motor driver chip, then we can eliminate all non printed material.

Until then, most people look to RepRap for an affordable 3d Printer.

RepRap's original goal is very noble, but no where near to being obtainable yet. Despite Makerbot's claims, a 3d printer can't just make about anything. They are very cool though, and absolutely my favorite tool in my shop.

Quote

About the Mendel90, I like the design. It's structure is very good, but the space requirements for it's footprint require a dedicated table. A pursa needs about 1 sq ft of actual table support . The X-Y base sheet will require a very flat surface to sit on, or it will creep like the panels above. Also, I don't think it would fit in my car's trunk,

The space it needs is the same as a Prusa. If you can put a Prusa in box you can also put a Mendel90 in. Yes you can put a Prusa on a small table and let it overlap the sides but who does? Most people put it on a desk and a Prusa needs the same space as the carriage moves outside the frame.

Yes it needs to stand on a fat surface, but so does a Prusa. It would have to very stiff indeed to not move a few microns when placed on an uneven surface. Frames made from studding are certainly less stiff than 12mm MDF and MDF is stiffer and much lighter than acrylic.

It easily fits in the boot of my car which is quite small..

---

[www.hydraraptor.blogspot.com]

whats the difference between a kickstarter and organizing a batch order of printers?

Kickstarter has a larger audience than you'd achieve with a groupbuy, so in theory you need a much much lower participation rate.

With Kickstarter all the risk is transferred from the seller to the buyer. I.e. the seller gets the money up front and guaranteed sales at a guaranteed price.

---

[www.hydraraptor.blogspot.com]

@beekeeper,
i would maybe consider writing to thingiverse,

while theres nothing wrong with him putting up his own variation, however he's using your picture and the implication is that the files supplied are the drawings to what is in the picture, i believe this may be a breech of the acceptable use policy,

also acording to my good lawyer friend you may be able to, if you want to take some legal action for any losses and/or damage simply because your design isn't actaully regarded as "opensource" until you release it as open source at the moment as far as i am aware it is not...

i know it's not a road anyone wants to see anyone go down especially on thingiverse and the 3d printing world but i would consult a lawyer about it, especially if it damages your kickstarter campaign

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/08/2012 04:46AM by thejollygrimreaper.

akhlut Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> steve893 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > RepRap means replicating rapid prototyper.
> > Lasercut acrylic side panels and LEDs are not
> > contributing to the title goal.
>
>
> Neither are the myriad laser-cut plywood
> designs...yet no one is fussy about ultimakers,
> makerbots, mosaics etc...

I just checked and none of those advertises itself as a RepRap. They just claim to be 3D printers. Nothing to be "fussy" about.

ttsalo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> akhlut Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > steve893 Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > RepRap means replicating rapid prototyper.
> > > Lasercut acrylic side panels and LEDs are not
> > > contributing to the title goal.
> >
> >
> > Neither are the myriad laser-cut plywood
> > designs...yet no one is fussy about ultimakers,
> > makerbots, mosaics etc...
>
> I just checked and none of those advertises itself
> as a RepRap. They just claim to be 3D printers.
> Nothing to be "fussy" about.

Good point. I still don't see what peoples problem is with this kit. No reprap is fully printable...yet.

---

- akhlut

Just remember - Iterate, Iterate, Iterate!

[myhomelessmind.blogspot.com]

nophead Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> With Kickstarter all the risk is transferred from
> the seller to the buyer. I.e. the seller gets the
> money up front and guaranteed sales at a
> guaranteed price.

Isn't it a riskless system? No party bears any risk unless the campaign is fully funded. If the campaign isn't funded then everyone walks away, wallets intact. Even if the campaign does get funded how is the level of risk any different than ordering a kit from an established online store? They seem to face delays and have issues all the time.

---

- akhlut

Just remember - Iterate, Iterate, Iterate!

[myhomelessmind.blogspot.com]

There are no hard controls in place to make sure the seller actually delivers on their promise. In other words there's nothing in kickstarter's system to prevent the seller from walking away with everyone's cash at the end of the funding campaign. Not sure if this would even be illegal or breach of contract since I think kickstarter payments are classified as donations.

IMO this is the primary source of risk to the buyer/funder of kickstarter projects.

The buyer has more risk than buying from an established online store simply because the seller isn't established and may have no experience running a business. In a lot of cases the product isn't even developed as the money is for developing it and then risk is enormous. They buyer is funding research.

The seller's risk is only what they bring upon themselves by promising to deliver the item given the funds. I don't know what happens if they fail to do so?

A proper business develops the product, buys parts and builds stock risking their own funds and then puts a product on the market. They buyer then has little risk assuming the seller is not fraudulent.

---

[www.hydraraptor.blogspot.com]

But fraud can happen anywhere, can't it? Whether it's a new webshop or kickstarter the risk is still the same. It's not the same for an established store - that is a different class of business, one with an established clientele and a reputation to defend. And in the end it's all about reputation. I think kickstarter is a much better model than opening a new webshop. There is an open, free and available flow of information between the potential proprietor and prospective clients. It's better than sending money into a black box and hoping you get what you paid for.

> The seller's risk is only what they bring upon themselves by promising to deliver the item given the funds. I don't know what happens if they fail to do so?

It's a good question - what are the ramifications for those who don't deliver on their kickstarters?

I guess it is a bit like venture capitalism, with the difference being the IRR of the investment equaling the discount on the product received and no future benefit.

---

- akhlut

Just remember - Iterate, Iterate, Iterate!

[myhomelessmind.blogspot.com]

ttsalo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> akhlut Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > steve893 Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > RepRap means replicating rapid prototyper.
> > > Lasercut acrylic side panels and LEDs are not
> > > contributing to the title goal.
> >
> >
> > Neither are the myriad laser-cut plywood
> > designs...yet no one is fussy about ultimakers,
> > makerbots, mosaics etc...
>
> I just checked and none of those advertises itself
> as a RepRap. They just claim to be 3D printers.
> Nothing to be "fussy" about.

The MendelMax is considered to be a Reprap, because it uses printed bits to connect the extrusions. I don't think Beekeeper's design strays too far. What about the basic Mendel's threaded rod frame. No true Repraps exist

I think in a few years we will have every component printed. acrylic has already been printed, bearings have been printed, bolts and nuts have been printed. circuit boards have reasonably been replicated. we may just need to think outside the box on what a completely printed structure would look like.