So I just saw the latest amazing demo of 3d printers, and what really impressed me was that they could scan a physical object with moving parts and use that data to print a near-perfect replica. If modern day scientists can recreate a wrench or any other simple tools, why couldn't Eclipse Phase tech recreate something slightly more complex like a gun? Sure, it might be tricky to get something that is compatible with a smartgun link or other fancy accessories, but a gun doesn't need those perks to be a deadly weapon. Many explosives have fairly simple chemical formulas, and that's all you need to make bullets and bombs.
Beyond the modern-day tech, we have a pretty hazy idea how most gear in Eclipse Phase is made. Still, even complex stuff like a synth morph is probably just a collection of lots and lots of fine-tuned components; the most complex part is probably the cyberbrain and "nervous system," but the rest might be pretty straightforward if you could trade for those blueprints. With that logic, would a basic synth be that much harder to build than a reaper? If anything, a human-like hand should be a lot harder to build than a weapon mount. For example, a tank is much more expensive than a truck, but a tank probably wouldn't be that much harder to reverse engineer -if you're mainly interested in something that moves and shoots, it might even be easier. It true that there might be specialized nanotech and smart materials involved in most Eclipse Phase gear, but if you can "scan" the entire contents of a human brain with nanotech, why couldn't you do just as detailed a scan of any mechanical device?
I know that there have already been several other threads on the powers and limitations of making the gear you want with nanofabbers. But I'm specifically interested in what people think about the possibilities of reverse-engineering gear. I personally think that reverse-engineering most items should be possible if you're willing to put in the time and have the appropriate engineering skills. Your model probably won't work quite as well (minus 10% to all rolls) and will fail at inopportune times (lemon trait), but it will probably get the job done most of the time.
Welcome! These forums will be deactivated by the end of this year. The conversation continues in a new morph over on Discord! Please join us there for a more active conversation and the occasional opportunity to ask developers questions directly! Go to the PS+ Discord Server.
Reverse-engineering Nanofab Blueprints
Fri, 2011-07-15 13:16
#1
adept42
Reverse-engineering Nanofab Blueprints
Fri, 2011-07-15 13:25
#2
CodeBreaker
Re: Reverse-engineering Nanofab Blueprints
Just so you know, that particular video was staged to look more advanced than it actually is. Although the outer façade was scanned in as shown, it was then taken into a CAD program where an engineer altered it so that the wrench still worked as it should. Nothing else to add, might be a small threadcrap. Sorry about that :p
(Edit, that had nothing much to do with the topic, just thought you might be curious)
—
-
Fri, 2011-07-15 22:29
#3
BOMherren
Re: Reverse-engineering Nanofab Blueprints
The Eye fanzine presents some optional rules for nanofabrication [url=http://www.firewall-darkcast.com/theeye/expanding-role-nanofabrication]h..., including nanocopying. I think that they are pretty good, but that nanofabrication materials should be a little cheaper (lower limit of the listed cost categories, perhaps?), and that tolerance should be upwards-adjustable at the time of actual fabrication (that is, even if your blueprint specifies that it requires time-consuming precision manufacturing, you should still be able to override that setting on the fly and without Programming rolls, if you need to quickly "speed-print" a shoddy unit).
If you don't like those rules, then I suggest treating copying as basically similar to original schematic Programming, but with a circumstance bonus to the Programming Test and greatly reduced time requirements. Essentially, having a well-made prototype for your schematic on hand means that you won't have to spend as much time testing and fixing problems with your design.
—
[img]http://boxall.no-ip.org/img/aa_userbar.jpg[/img]
[img]http://boxall.no-ip.org/img/open_userbar.jpg[/img]
[img]http://boxall.no-ip.org/img/immort_userbar.jpg[/img]
Sat, 2011-07-16 04:43
#4
Arenamontanus
Re: Reverse-engineering Nanofab Blueprints
Maybe the price for overriding the precision manufacturing requirements is to give the trait Lemon to the object?
Copying requires that you can measure all relevant details of the object, and this might be tricky for many enclosed devices with "no user serviceable parts". Opening enclosed spaces might make certain functions break, because they were deliberately manufactured to be tamper proof. For example, there might be a complex system of rods in compression inside a chamber that will spring out when opened, yet their exact initial configuration is necessary for the function of the device.
Real reverse engineering involves understanding what the object does. This is much harder and requires real intelligence. It can also be made harder: some subsystems may be evolved using genetic algorithms that create solutions that make no real sense, yet work.
However, I think the main problem is not the physical structure but the software. The code is what gives any object "life", and it determines its performance a lot. Just consider brakes on cars these days - most of their performance is due to the embedded software, not the physical device: if you just copied it without the software you would get a very crummy system. And software can be embedded into trusted computing frameworks, encrypted and obfuscated. When you print your new railgun and boot it up for the first time, it will call home to check that all product activations keys are correct and that you had the right to print it. If not, it won't download the essential information needed to get key parts of code running, and you merely have a mean looking paperweight. Spoofing or hacking this step requires some serious hacking (and is no doubt a cottage industry across the solar system).
—
Sat, 2011-07-16 12:56
#5
Yerameyahu
Re: Reverse-engineering Nanofab Blueprints
I like that. It's important to remember that every cool trick you can do has an 'evil twin' preventing, hindering, or punishing it. And games are only fun with balance, natch.