This first bill allows the state of California to regulate and oversee all 3D prints in the name of public safety.

  • theoretiker@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 days ago

    Yes that’s probably how you would do this. Get a bunch of data of gcode of 3d printed gun parts and not-gun parts, for different slicers and printers. Then train some transformer as a classifier. Based on how good object recognition is, i would say its possible that you would get reasonably good accuracy and precision. And because you are scanning for code the architecture will likely be similar to an llm.

    • isleepinahammock@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      Then five minutes later, someone figures out how to make a 3d printable gun that bypasses the gun detector on the 3d printer. It’s not like you’re printing a whole gun; you’re printing parts, most of which look nothing like a gun. How hard would it be to design an algorithm that takes a gun part cad file and then adds a bunch of extraneous pieces to it that can be easily removed? Just keep adding extra crap until the system no longer detects it as a gun part.

      • theoretiker@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Yes that would probably work. There could be some essential features of weapon parts that an algorithm might still be able to learn, and a printer could also keep track of previously printed parts for the classification. I think its unlikely that there are essential features of gun parts that are specific to gun parts so there would probably be a lot of false positives.