A couple of fascinating articles I ran across, one from Slate.com (not to be confused with Salon.com) and the other from Salon.com (not to be confused with Slate.com).

The first article is by Andrew Leonard and can be found on Salon.com.  It concerns the new 3D printing technology and the fact that it might render any gun control legislation moot:

http://www.salon.com/2013/01/25/will_computers_kill_gun_control/

Absolutely loved the article and, moving past the implications of 3D printing regarding gun control, one begins to wonder about what other things the future of 3D printing might impact as well.  Will there come a time, for example, when 3D printing technology will become so advanced (ie able to make items made of metal) that one might be able, for example, to create a new sink for one’s house?  A hose?  A TV set?  If all we need are the raw materials and a program/schematic to print what we want, what effect will this have on industry?  Like MP3s, will there be websites containing downloadable schematics for just about everything we need?  And, returning to the weapon debate, will we be able to “make” our own rocket launcher?

Or perhaps there will come a time when there will be 3D printer “stores” with really big 3D printers within and one could show up with a schematic for your favorite car and, within the day, they might be able to “print” you all the parts to assemble the car on your own at home.

Again, where does this technology leave industry?  And employment?

The second article can be found on Slate.com and is by Mark O’Connell.  It concerns the writing of one Amanda McKittrick Ros, whom many peers (and, apparently, modern readers as well) consider one of the worst writers ever.  A very amusing article:

http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/culturebox/2013/01/was_amanda_mckittrick_ros_the_worst_novelist_in_history.html

Reading about Ms. Ros made me think of what is possibly her counterpart in the movie business, the notorious Ed Wood.  I loved this line by Mr. O’Connell which describes the level of “badness” of Ms. Ros’ work:

Ros’ writing is not just bad, in other words; its badness is so potent that it seems to undermine the very idea of literature, to expose the whole endeavor of making art out of language as essentially and irredeemably fraudulent—and, even worse, silly.

Oh my…