• slackj_87@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    188
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Great… can’t wait for politicians to use this as a way to pass “common sense” legislation banning 3D printers.

    • Janx@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      84
      ·
      1 month ago

      Aren’t they already doing that due to their hysteria over “ghost” guns?

    • village604@adultswim.fan
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      1 month ago

      They can try, but the parts that make up a printer are used in tons of other applications. It isn’t hard to build one from scratch.

    • teyrnon@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 month ago

      They already are over 3d guns, this will send them ballistic. They want every printer to keep a record of everything they’ve printed. Model legislation, I think CA tried and so far failed to pass it.

    • aquovie@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 month ago

      3D printers are even less useful here though. The rocket bit can be replaced with a cardboard tube and some balsa fins. The important parts are the active control and circuitry.

      But I guess logic doesn’t really enter into the conversation anyway.

    • Samskara@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 month ago

      You don’t need to ban 3D printers. Restrictions and licensing requirements for making, using, owning rockets and guidance software are enough.

      • chocrates@piefed.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 month ago

        His guidance is just wifi cameras talking to it. Not sure it even is using gps.

        To ban stuff like this you have to ban a lot of useful tech

      • Truscape@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        This already would fall under an FFL for legal citizens anyway. As is the nature of the internet though, this open design will be preserved and available for those who seek it.

        • Samskara@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          1 month ago

          Yes. I am actually surprised we haven’t seen a major terrorist attack in a western country using remote controlled or autonomous drones for example. The technology has been available for years now.

          3D printed home made guns like the FGC-9 and Urutau have been around for a while now, but remain marginal in gun crime.

          As you say, the cat is out the bag and on the internet forever. However homemade guns and instructions on how to make them have been around for decades.

          • [object Object]@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            ·
            1 month ago

            Most western terrorist attacks are by opportunistic losers who don’t have the knowledge or motivation to do something like this.

            They’d rather drive a car into people who make them angry and use a gun they already own.

            As for organized groups until recently there have been any good reason for an attack from any centrally organized group.

          • socsa@piefed.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            ·
            1 month ago

            The lack of simple attacks on soft targets is proof that the threat is overstated and that a statistically overwhelming portion of humans simply don’t want to put bombs on busses and rig them to explode on bridges or in tunnels.

            • JoeMontayna@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 month ago

              There is also survivorship bias. Who knows how many attacks have been prevented that we do not know about.

          • eleitl@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            Ukraine and Russia are western countries. Narco cartels have started using fpv drones, too.

    • Retro_unlimited@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 month ago

      I wonder if there is some archive or torrent for STL files, like an archive of thingiverse or something. Would be nice to archive that just in case.

  • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    108
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 month ago

    Notably absent… the explosives.

    But sure, if you are wondering how folks out in Yemen or Gaza managed to retaliate against their oppressors for so long, this is a textbook example of how and why. What’s being proposed is collection of technology we’ve had since at least the 1960s that’s slowly made its way into civilian circulation.

    Also…

    Khojayev’s just-launched prototype has no effectiveness track record

    I mean, we’re seeing what “just-launched prototypes with no effective track record” have accomplished on the Ukraine-Russia front-lines and it’s a decidedly mixed bag.

    I think a harder question to answer is “Who would be interested in putting one of these into practical use?” And that gets to the real value-add of a Stinger MANPAD. Namely, the humans willing and practiced enough to use it.

    Also - and again, this cannot be overstated - the model above has no explosives installed. Idk how confident I’d be around one of these things if it was actually armed.

    • FauxLiving@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      1 month ago

      It’s not a MANPAD really.

      The sensor package has no IR sensor (or radar unit) and no way to proximity fuse.

      It has GPS, accelerometer and barometric pressure. It’s more like a rocket powered artillery shell than an anti-air weapon.

      Or, given the lack of payload, it’s more like a high speed burrito delivery device.

    • Riskable@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 month ago

      You don’t need explosives. It has a spot in the front for a camera. One of the new microcontrollers with AI accelerators can do face recognition extremely quickly. It would be possible to use it as an assassination tool.

      Even if you changed nothing about the design, the speed and mass of the thing hitting a person in the face could kill.

      • chaogomu@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 month ago

        As the bps space YouTube channel has shown, reliability is paramount in any launch, especially a guided launch.

        That and people duck when shit flies at them, unless it’s supersonic, which again, as bps space has shown, control of a supersonic flight is extremely difficult to get right.

        This is a guy who landed a hobby rocket like a tesla booster.

        But at $100 a pop, you could have backups. (or payloads)

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        It would be possible to use it as an assassination tool.

        Khojayev’s just-launched prototype has no effectiveness track record

        :-/

        I think

        it’s more like a high speed burrito delivery device.

        Is a more accurate assessment.

    • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 month ago

      You can deploy a lot of $96 semi-effective hardware and improve it vs something that might be thousands or even tens or hundreds of thousands to deploy.

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        You can deploy a lot of $96 semi-effective hardware

        Khojayev’s just-launched prototype has no effectiveness track record

        :-/

        I mean, time will tell. To date, this particular iteration of technology has a 0% success rate in doing anything but farming clicks.

      • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 month ago

        The United States has a variant of the AGM-114 Hellfire missile that replaces the explosive warhead with six scimitar blades. Because fuck That Guy, the whole That Guy and nothing but the That Guy.

        • Blackmist@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          Which would come as a surprise to hundreds of dead Iranian schoolgirls.

          Turns out the military under Trump is more a “fuck that town in particular” affair.

          • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 month ago

            You know, I’m still struggling to believe the story I’ve been told about that. “The US bombed an elementary school.”

            For my entire life, the US has demonstrated precision munitions. The AGM-114 Ginsu is an air-to-ground laser-guided rocket that can kill an individual passenger in a car. We can fly a Tomahawk cruise missile into a specific window of a building. I’ve seen a bridge in Iraq bombed seconds after the last car crossed. Not saying GI Joe is a paragon of virtue, I’ve seen the pictures from Abu Ghraib, but…That shit sounds a lot more like Israel than us.

            Even in the “no kill like overkill” “We don’t target coordinates, we target grid squares” “enemy fire is coming from that way, destroy that way” United States, that shit sounds a lot more like Israel than us.

            We’re certainly attacking Iran because Israel wanted us to.

            • AnyOldName3@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 month ago

              One of the stills from one of the videos that the BBC showed identifying it as a Tomahawk showed it at a very un-cruise-missile way up, so it could just have malfunctioned during terminal guidance or been clipped but not destroyed by air defence, and then hit the wrong target. It could also just have been a governmenty-looking building close enough to an intended target that whoever was checking it didn’t notice it wasn’t the target. It’s a lot easier to get everything right when the whole mission is to hit one person with one missile when everyone’s got enough time to do their job perfectly and everything’s been rehearsed than when there are thousands of targets and people are doing things in a rush, especially if orders are coming from people who don’t care about international law.

    • WorldsDumbestMan@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 month ago

      I have this idea: Scientists some time ago, discovered they could knot light into loops.

      Would it be possible to make a curved laser for laser artillery?

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 month ago

        Certainly possible. But you’re still stuck on the r2 problem of diminishing returns at a distance. Light doesn’t like staying in a tight beam. The vortex loop is typically not much bigger than the wavelength. I don’t see much of a solution for transmitting energy long distances through air.

    • MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 month ago

      Atomize* some propelant, boom, explosive.

      * english choose the dumbest word for “zerstäuben”.

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Atomize* some propelant, boom, explosive.

        The trick is to get the atomized propelant to “boom, explosive” at the target and not in your backpack.

        Also, you probably want a “boom” sufficient to accomplish whatever demolition you’re planning, which - again - raises the stakes regarding what’s in your backpack.

        There’s a classic little film called “The Wages of Fear” that explores the hazards of amateurs transporting high explosives over long distances.

          • chaogomu@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 month ago

            Tannerite comes to mind. It explodes from a high impact, and little else. I’m not sure what sort of yield you’d get. That stuff mostly just makes a pop and smoke.

            I have heard of people using it on stubborn tree stumps, but that’s several pounds of the stuff.

        • MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          I mean, spray the leftover fuel into the oxygen-filled head only on target? It wouldn’t stay atomized for long anyway. And for the boom, the shell needs only be strong enough. Wouldn’t that work?

          Sure, there’s more effective explosives.

          • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            Wouldn’t that work?

            Idk, you wanna find out?

            Listen, if you’ve got the specs for military ordinance and want to say “We’ve done this a thousand times, it works fine” that’s one thing.

            But it’s very much another to just wave your hands and announce “you know, the boom-boom juice goes here and the detonator goes there and it’ll probably do something.”

      • chaogomu@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        Atomize, from the original Ancient Greek adjective atomos, meaning “uncuttable” or “indivisible”.

        Seems pretty apt to me. You have rendered it into its smallest constituent pieces through physical means, any further reduction requires chemical processes, or high energy physics. Coincidentally, a simple spark provides both.

      • frongt@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Does that literally mean “make dust”? I think “powderize” might be a better translation in this context, if it’s a solid, or “aerosolize” if it’s a liquid. I’ve never been a big fan of the word “atomize” in any case.

        • FauxLiving@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 month ago

          I’ve never been a big fan of the word “atomize” in any case.

          Mate, I’ll have you know some of my relatives are made of atoms

    • nandeEbisu@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 month ago

      There’s an anecdote that comes up in software about people working on missile software not caring about memory leaks because it’s going to explode anyway before that becomes an issue.

      Who cares about bugs in your software if it’s a hobby project that’s going to blow up anyway.

      Also, including Claude doesn’t inherently mean vibe coded, it can be for writing tests, small components, or debugging.

      • skibidi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Tests should be written from requirements. Using LLMs to write tests after the code is written (probably also by LLMs) is a huge anti-pattern:

        The model looks at what the code is doing and writes tests that pass (or fail because they bungle the setup). What the model does not do, is understand what the code needs to do and write tests that ensure that functionality is present and correct.

        Tests are the thing that should get the most human investment because they anchor the project to its real-world requirements. You will have tons more confidence in your vibe coded appslop if you at least thought through the test cases and built those out first. Then, whatever the shortcomings of the AI codebase, if the tests pass you can know it is doing something right.

        • nandeEbisu@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          Honestly, never been on a team that stuck to TDD. As you test your stuff, and understand whatever libraries and apis you’re calling you modify your implementation as you go.

          For public facing methods, especially ones called by customers, having pre agreed upon tests matter more but usually that’s at the integration test and system test level. I usually use AI for unit testing and read what was written. Tests end up being a lot of writing harnesses and setting up mocks that you delegate to the model and if there’s gaps or incorrect requirements, you change them.

          I would never let the agent define the code structure. It doesn’t understand business processes or what might need to be extended or we’re instead about.

          I’ve been doing software for a while, I know how to review code. I don’t vibe code, I let the model implement boilerplate and mapping functions while I do other stuff, like manual testing or talking with product. If done correctly, you can incorporate generative models into your workflows without fully handing over all control.

        • nandeEbisu@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          Vibe coding is you not reviewing what the model outputs. I read every line, often give feedback and tell the model about patterns I want to use.

          I probably write like 60-70% of the code myself.

        • Manifish_Destiny@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          No matter how mad this makes people, its still true.

          What makes the code actually useful in most cases however, is enough understanding of the program to modify as its needed. That’s where LLMs fall flat. Even when the code works, its terrible at adjusting the code to fit a specific use case. Dont even get met started on usable documentation or maintenance.

        • nandeEbisu@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          I disagree about better code. Claude has been pretty bad at understanding external context and deriving why you’re doing something from the implementation. This can result in wonky structure that you need to fix, or at the very least tell Claude to redo over and over untill it looks clean and organized.

  • EightBitBlood@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Can’t wait for the next Luigi to use one of these on an Epstein CEO. Polymarket, please let me make that bet.

    • YellowParenti@lemmy.wtf
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 month ago

      If you can get the target out in the open, an old school pipe bomb from just gun powder and stuff from the hardware store on a drone is easier. Im sure for $1000 you too can become a patron saint.

      • EightBitBlood@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        Well said! I just appreciate the visual of Fox News covering someone named Mario firing a homemade shoulder mounted missile into the executive floor of Twitter HQ. It’s funnier than ever now that it’s actually plausible.

  • kerrigan778@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    1 month ago

    If I’m understanding this correctly, this is more valuable to underfunded military forces but not for the 3d printed ghost gun types. This doesn’t include propellent or explosives, which are the controlled parts. That’s awesome though.

  • circuscritic@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    1 month ago

    That’s fucking nuts.

    I have a lot of thoughts, but all I can really say is that’s fucking nuts.

  • frongt@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Neat. I wonder if there is anything you can use as a warhead without it becoming a destructive device. Chalk rounds?

    I’m also curious to know the rocket velocity compared to actual MANPADS. I’ll have to watch the videos later because I’m also curious about whether they’re independent or require the launching laptop to stay connected.

    • Samskara@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 month ago

      Velocity and range are also my main questions, as well as tracking quality and speed. The video doesn’t demonstrate it hitting a flying target.

      Common MANPADS like Stinger, Strela, etc. use infrared tracking. The seekers are high performance and fast but need complex supercooling with gas. Using a MANPADS you only have seconds, to arm, aim and track, then fire the missile against a fast moving target before it‘s out of range. These can hit low flying supersonic jets.

      Still this project is very impressive and hints at the possibility to build cheap low end MANPADS that can target slow moving strike and observation drones, maybe helicopters.

      It’s another indicator, that mass produced cheap precision weapons are a major trend in warfare.

    • Truscape@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Potentially could be used for things like spreading flame-retardent powder for putting out a wildfire or similar with more precision. Would also remove the risk of a human life in firefighting so areas might be cleared quicker.

  • Warl0k3@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 month ago

    This is the same kind of thing the local Airsofters were building with an arduino and a few hats a decade ago. It’s not a functional “weapon” it’s just a hobby rocket with fins (that admittedly looks real fun to shoot)