Hacker News Reader

Comment by anigbrowl | Hacker News Reader

I could see these having an impact in places like Africa and South Asia, as mobile phones are doing. It's depressing to hear about wells being dug but then going out of service because there's a part missing.

sure, it would be a lot cheaper to just ship bulk parts around than set up 3d printers in poor towns, but the rub is that you don't know what metal/plastic things people will need in advance.

View on HN

I think that's focusing in the wrong direction. The costs involved set a high-enough barrier for the first world, let alone impoverished countries.

The focus should be on simplifying the technology these communities need and making it more robust, as well as showing people in the community how to repair and maintain it.

Not to mention that this technology would represent another point of failure -- sure, you could print out parts for the well, but what happens when the roof over the printer fails and everything gets soaked by a monsoon.

Thing is, the 'printers' are expensive but getting much cheaper, and the materials are very cheap. It's not a panacea by any means, but a versatile low-volume manufacturing facility might have greater value than a specialized high volume one in places with mediocre industrial and commercial infrastructure.

I see your point 100%, but these are basically the same arguments people made about cellphones and they turned out to be better option than trying to deploy the simple and robust technology of landlines. I suggest ad-hoc communication and manufacturing technology may be the best thing in an ad-hoc economy.

>A versatile low-volume manufacturing facility might have greater value than a specialized high volume one in places with mediocre industrial and commercial infrastructure.

I would imagine you are correct. However, conventional manufacturing practices are not solely high volume operations, and can be implemented with fewer resources.

>[T]hese are basically the same arguments people made about cellphones and they turned out to be better option than trying to deploy the simple and robust technology of landlines.

Cellphones don't cost $15k per village, nor do they require training to use special computer programs, or a constant supply of raw materials.

If they did, you can bet that they wouldn't turn out to be a better option ;)

>I suggest ad-hoc communication and manufacturing technology may be the best thing in an ad-hoc economy.

I agree, provided the technology becomes sufficiently inexpensive and robust.

But for today, use that cash to leave the community with an extra pallet of parts, instruction on how to maintain the well, and the rest to educate the people.

Ultimately, I share your optimistic view. The technology will be there someday. We just can't force it in the meantime.

> Cellphones don't cost $15k per village, nor do they require training to use special computer programs, or a constant supply of raw materials.

Really? How much does a cell tower, a reliable power supply for same, etc cost? For widely spaced villages, I'd certainly think this cost would be well over $15K per village. Hell, I can't put a 50K sq ft office building size, cell phone repeater system in for $15K.

(I'd expect widely spaced villages would be the common case in areas where cell deployment is cheaper than copper lines.)

The cost and simplicity argument is a valid one. On the other hand the reality is already a different one: People in Africa use mobile phones much more than we in the West. Even banking is managed via cell phones. So 3d printers might allow the to leap frog the industrial society stage. It's the same with alternative energy: They don't need nuclear power plants down there, solar and wind is often enough.

I'm very optimistic.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com