I wish someone would design ... (my suggested design & other suggestions)

[3D OZ]

Mjolinor was more correct than you give credit, it is a matter of education rather than technology.
Effective and efficient contraceptives have been available for decades and still uncontrolled population growth in countries struggling to support what they have already continues to be a problem.

You could invent a contraceptive that was free and 100% effective and still you would need to overcome religion, fear and misinformation before it could have an impact.

[Daniel Ross]

it is a matter of education rather than technology.

Education is a big part of the solution. Witness resistance to Ebola safety measures.

Overpopulation caused in part by lack of education caused in part by poverty caused in part by high cost of resources caused in part by scarcity of resources caused in part by overpopulation. Typical positive feedback loop not amenable to control. Technological fix can help break that loop. Worth trying, considering the potential cost/benefit ratio.

[Daniel Ross]

can help nreak that loop.

Typo: "nreak" should be "break".

[Mjolinor]

Education is a big part of the solution. Witness resistance to Ebola safety measures.

Overpopulation caused in part by lack of education caused in part by poverty caused in part by high cost of resources caused in part by scarcity of resources caused in part by overpopulation. Typical positive feedback loop not amenable to control. Technological fix can help break that loop. Worth trying, considering the potential cost/benefit ratio.

Not a positive feedback loop. It is self controlling. The only reason that "we" are concerned is that if "we" let it control itself then that control does not discriminate between us and them, epidemic will reduce the numbers, problem solved until next time.

Our problem is that "we" want to not let the control take a natural course by stopping the cycle. Whether or not it is a sensible and correct thing to do depends on whether or not you are "us" or "them". To us, stopping the birth of children that will die is sensible. To them, having lots of children to satisfy immediate needs should you grow dependant is the sensible thing to do.

No right or wrong here, just different views and not solvable or relevant to a 3d forum. It will make people get hostile and result in a thread that no one will ever read.

[Daniel Ross]

This is a completely separate idea that I got from a science fiction story when I was young, seemingly 2 centuries ago. Ever-shrinking machine shops. Use a conventional machine shop to build a smaller machine shop. Use that to build an even smaller machine shop. Etc. An iterative process. Its success requires that mechanical error tolerances become smaller as the machines become smaller.

At present there exist conventional machine shops and nanodevices fabricated on chips. There does not exist anything of in-between size.

Could 3D printers of differing manufacturers and differing design principles, be teamed together to make the next smaller size family of 3D printers? The next smaller size 3D printers need not look the same or even work the same as their larger forbears. They just need to be of practical use. It would be nice if they were complete enough to make even smaller 3D printers.

[Mjolinor]

This is a completely separate idea that I got from a science fiction story when I was young, seemingly 2 centuries ago. Ever-shrinking machine shops. Use a conventional machine shop to build a smaller machine shop. Use that to build an even smaller machine shop. Etc. An iterative process. Its success requires that mechanical error tolerances become smaller as the machines become smaller.

At present there exist conventional machine shops and nanodevices fabricated on chips. There does not exist anything of in-between size.

Could 3D printers of differing manufacturers and differing design principles, be teamed together to make the next smaller size family of 3D printers? The next smaller size 3D printers need not look the same or even work the same as their larger forbears. They just need to be of practical use. It would be nice if they were complete enough to make even smaller 3D printers.

May I have some of whatever you are smoking?

[Daniel Ross]

May I have some of whatever you are smoking?

At present we lack fabrication methods for arbitrary electromechanical devices in thr 1/100 inch to 1/1000 inch size range, that are made of components 1 to 2 orders of magnitude smaller.

These devices could (1) circulate in the human body and (1a) locate tumors and cut off their blood supply, (1b) repair broken nerve fibers in the spine, (1c) perform eye surgery beyond what can be done with laser surgery, (1d) act as radio transducers in the brains of people with Parkinson's disease or epilepsy, (2) medicate marine mammals, (3) circulate in plants and attack fungal and other infections and infestations, (4) kill the parasites that are killing bees, (5) what more is needed to convince you of their value?

[Daniel Ross]

Ever-shrinking machine shops ... success requires that mechanical error tolerances become smaller as the machines become smaller

Make many copies of the same widget, select the most accurate one. Statistics work in your favor. There are microscopes that can resolve very small images, to help in selection. The microscopes are expensive, rent microscope time.

Maybe the techniques that stabilize microscope images, can be applied to 3D printer stability. The microscopes are not mass produced. Maybe 3D printing can reduce the cost of the microscopes. Contact Rich Didday rich@indecsystems.com . Tell him Dan sent you. He is very tolerant.