One of the subjects that spins off of almost every discussion about rapid-prototyping/manufacturing is the possibility – likelihood – of people using these devices to create weapons. Imagine my surprise to see, while surfing through to the MTek Weapon Systems site (via Boing Boing and Defense Tech), a prominent link in the lower left corner of the page reading “Rapid Prototyping”.

That link took me to Product Development LLC (Link) which lists MTek as a partner (I was thinking it might actually be the same company). Heading back to the MTek site (Link) I learn that it’s actually a small, Indiana-based outfit located near them. I also read this:

Our vision is rapid design, development, and fielding of new forms of lightweight armor and weapons. By thinking “outside the box”, with new manufacturing techniques, and materials we have achieved results atypical of the industry standard.

Not exactly RP-custom, but they seem to be heading in that direction. If there’s an industry that’s ripe for this sort of development, I’d say this is the one.

{Image Copyright © MTek Weapon Systems}

I caught something over on WMMNA earlier today that I just had to check out. The above building with the multimedia installation on the side of it is the Kunsthaus Graz in Austria, designed by London architects Peter Cook and Colin Fournier. Now I really like the look of it, but I have to admit the aerial photographs remind me of something from Hayao Miyazaki’s Japanese manga, Nausicaä of the Valley of Wind (like this thing – Link). Take a look at some shots for yourself (Link). Pretty funky.

The truth is, as much as I like it, I’d have a hard time arguing that structure doesn’t look out of place amongst all the rectilinear buildings. Their presence only emphasizes it’s organic quality. Which leads me to a comment made on a WorldChanging.com entry discussing, among other things, using rapid prototyping technology to fabricate buildings (the one in which I was mentioned – Link). I’ll quote the comment submitted by David Foley here:

I work in architecture and construction. … {snip} … A building fabricated by robots and algorithms? I think that will lead to many horrible buildings. It certainly has little to do with biomimicry.

When I read that all I could think of was a) the comments made by Google’s Marissa Ann Mayer and b) termite mounds, bee hives, and the buildings of Antoni Gaudi. And then it made me wonder just how long it might take for people to overcome their bias in favor of simple geometric shapes – like rectangles.

My monitor is rectangular. As is my scanner. My keyboard keys. A power transformer. My external speaker controls. The speakers. The computer housing. Both parts of my desk. … The house in which I live. …

There’s a joke in Second Life about wearing a box on your head.

{Image source: Kunsthaus Graz – I looked but sadly couldn’t find the name of the person who shot this photo or the copyright holder.}

There’s an interesting development over on Second Life today. Reuben Linden has posted an announcement that includes the following excerpt:

These tests are the starting point in creating a system to give Resident entrepreneurs the ability to:
• Set up and operate Neighborhoods and Communities
• Parcel and sell the land in those Neighborhoods/Communities
• Have a direct relationship with the end-user and provide support and zoning for them

We believe this model has enormous promise because of the degree to which it democratizes Second Life as an entrepreneurial platform. Today, one must possess fairly technical skills in order to make money creating objects and selling them in Second Life. This type of system would allow anybody who has an established community – or anybody who wants to create a new community – the ability to construct spaces and profit from them in a way similar to how Linden Lab currently profits from landowners.

I’ve not been paying too much attention to virtual land issues in Second Life of late. Looks like I’ll need to get up to speed.

This is interesting. For anyone who read my earlier entry on deciding to no longer contribute to the Core77 design website (Link), there was a long entry over there this morning by the person to whom I was referring. I only noticed it because of the flood of traffic to this blog. Note that I said “was”. It’s now been removed from the website (kind of – it’s still accessible if you have a link; my link is in the now very long referral log).

I can only imagine that the issue I raised: having uncompensated bloggers posting entries and then having them perhaps or potentially finding other ways to benefit from their efforts – and the resulting problems this can cause – isn’t something that they care to air out in the open.

Actually, I don’t have to imagine it. Thing is, I don’t doubt they’re good people, they just don’t seem to fully grok all this. Yet.

For those reading this, I’d suggest you also read my earlier comments on the risks companies like Burger King (and Core77) take when they go to the “community” for content. The comments I made are on BusinessWeek’s Blogspotting website (Link). I didn’t imagine this kind of scenario and don’t doubt there are others. But there’s something else I don’t really emphasize in those comments: this issue doesn’t just bite big corporations; it bites everyone. Including the good guys.

Well, the latest entry over on Design Observer is certainly much better than the last one where I’d echo the comment made by Jose Nieto who wrote, “This is probably the single most confusing post I’ve ever read in Design Observer“. The new post is more straightforward and also about a subject that comes up plenty here: design piracy. So of course it gets my attention. Go have a read for yourself (Link) and be sure to follow the comments. Design Observer‘s guests are some of the more eloquent and intelligent people I’ve come across.