* People have been solving transportation for millenia
* Horses and trains are real breakthroughs
* The complexity of logistical chain (gas, mechanics, paved roads) precludes widespread application where transportation is a basic need
* You need a fleet of other machines to keep it full of fuel. Oats won't do.
* It does not demonstrate a better solution to existing problems
Here's the first hit for "early criticism of automobiles":
https://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2017/01/get-horse-americ...
I am leaving it as an exercise to the reader to verify the extent to which your concerns mirror those of people 100 years ago.
Nearly 30 years passed from the introduction of Benz's Motorcar (first automobile) to conveyor-belt assembled Ford's Model T (first mass-produced automobile).
It took about the same time from The Mother Of All Demos till the Internet became widespread.
So, let's check back in 30 years
"It doesn’t demonstrate a better solution to existing problems."
"They are bread or nothing."
And this guy starts off his reply with "The negativity is no more unwarranted than positivity."
Why do I always see these kind of comments on the top?
Does HN scrutinize everything based on the "practicality of things"? This article is multiple galaxy away from making such a claim. Why do people respond like the next million dollar housing solution is being advertised here?
And that’s perfectly valid insofar as nutritional content is not a consideration. Insofar as a person has plenty of access to fresh fruit and vegetables.
Not everyone is so far up Madlow’s pyramid. Their needs are also legitimate. My comment is a response to the scolding of people who consider them in their judgment of the project’s merit.
Hey, that's me! I want one! I'm here to know if plumbing is included and if the exterior can look better, but I love this style on the inside. Its a mixture of Pierre Cardin's bubble palace and another aesthetic I've seen where the rockface of a mountain makes up the backwall of a contemporary home! I love it!
This seems like a cheaper way to do that, and I love the hue lights.
Its obvious that there is some metal and other materials that did not come from the earth at that site, and that therefore it cannot have zero waste as the company claims
but who cares, this guy (me) that can easily exchange earned resources for shelter does not care! I like the pictures and read it can be done in 200 hours. Uh, hello!
Framing the superstructure of a building is always the fastest part. Site preparation beforehand and installing services and finishes afterwards are what takes most of the time.
Keep in mind that 200 hours is the time on site. It doesn't include lead time. If there are ten projects ahead of yours, you're 2000 hours out and because there is a dependency on a particular machine, you just have to wait. While you are waiting for your 200 hours, there will be weather delays on the other projects. Other owners will be like you and decide to add an extra room while the machine is there. Framing crews are largely fungible. Proprietary machines and materials are not.
So now it is finally your turn. Any other trades that need to be onsite haven't been sitting around waiting. They are off on other projects with their own schedules, delays, change orders and problems. Sure you scheduled them for 2200 hours out, but that turned out to be 3200 hours and the plumber will be free at the 3700 hour mark and the electrician at t=4000 hours. Because that's the way construction actually works.
It's why everyone has heard horror stories. It's why 200 hours sounds too good to be true. I mean how long will it take you to find a piece of land with suitable soil? How much time will it take to figure out where to put your strip mine on the property?
Also keep in mind that 200 hours is five forty hour work weeks (and 2000 hours a work year). That 3d printer has to be fed by someone and that someone won’t be working round the clock.
In HN terms, this is a “rewritten in Haskell.” It demonstrates someone understands a bit about 3D printing. It demonstrates some ideological purity. It doesn’t demonstrate a better solution to existing problems.
The complexity of the logistical chain precludes wide spread application where housing is a basic need. You don’t just need the printer machine. You need a fleet of other machines to keep it full of ink. Shovels won’t do.
In the 1950’s, my mentor the late David Crane, FAIA was a young man. He enthusiastically designed precast concrete shelters for post disaster housing. Running the economics at the end of it, its viability was mostly limited to lower Manhattan.
People have been solving housing for millennia. Stick lumber and reinforced concrete are real breakthroughs by virtue of their commoditization.
This is wrapped up in secret sauce. Beautiful as with the myriad other beautiful ways to build.
Most choices are not between bread and cake. They are bread or nothing.