metal

Attention over time

7-day rolling share of analyzed posts/comments mentioning this entity · 90 daily points ending 2026-09-01

Final complete day: 2026-09-01. Attention was 0.4% — this entity appeared in 64 of 17,943 analyzed posts/comments in the seven days ending that day (82 mentions).

Each point is a seven-day rolling window of complete UTC days; a point is comparable only when at least 100 analyzed posts or comments fall inside it. A day with no analyzed records counts as zero; missing coverage is marked and never shown as zero. The series ends at the latest complete analyzed day — it never extends into the current incomplete day. How attention is measured.

Recent mentions

1. 2026-09-01 23:22 UTCComment

   >IIRC the bill allows citizens to sue 3d printer companies that don’t block the specified items if those items are used in an attack. I'm highly skeptical that will survive legal tests. People have been trying to sue gun manufacturers for decades, and getting very little traction. Our system is designed to protect companies from suits over their products when used for unintended purposes. IIRC, the only traction these suits have found is suing over marketing, and even then, they haven't really gotten traction. If a 3D printer company never advertises their printer as being able to make weapons, it'll be very difficult to home then liable. > you buy a kit If the kit is fully complete, it'll likely need to comply with the law. If you buy a kit car, that doesn't mean the car doesn't have to be road legal. If it is a kit that includes everything, then I would expect it would need to comply. Of course, this opens a whole can of worms of "what part finally makes it a printer; what part could they exclude and reasonably argue they don't need to comply?". I would expect it to be the motor control board, but who knows. >unless you are selling those weapons, in which case you’re gonna have bigger issues, you don’t need to worry about it. Then you only run into issues for one of two reasons: 1. You don't have the appropriate FFL from the ATF to sell what you're selling. 2. You're making "undetectable" firearms (i.e. not a single piece of metal in it) Because that is another place where laws like this run into trouble. If you have an FFL, are making firearms on a mill or CNC for sale, and everything is above board, what right does the state have to say that you can't also use a 3D printer to make components for your firearms? I would expect to see a challenge here, too.

2. 2026-09-01 22:26 UTCComment

   Honestly there isnt much reason to use one if you are printing on PEI and have good temps or are using a sacrifical surface. Like PETG and tape who cares, and clean PEI (ezpecially flex plates) and proper temp control removes the need for glue which is the only way to have a bad stick really. If im really in for it then metal is the only way to go and just don't be a moron. Your goal is to break the metaphorical seal. Its a lot like using a scaper blade to clean a painted surface, flex it to be just a BCH off the plate and get under the layer until you can pop it.

3. 2026-09-01 21:48 UTCComment

   Metal lasts and is reusable. Plastic breaks quickly and is a polluting plague. Then again this is 3D printing, so... lol. Guess that ship has kind of sailed for a lot of people using the technology in a wasteful way to begin with.

4. 2026-09-01 21:46 UTCComment

   This is exactly what I always recommend to people. Works better than any scraper tool (metal or plastic,) doesn't scratch the build plate, removes prints super easily, and is cheap to replace should it get damaged.

5. 2026-09-01 20:49 UTCComment

   I only use the metal one, i even sent them to the knife shop, to sharpen them.