Talk:Defense Distributed/Archive 1

Normative ethics
Hmm disseminating information regarding how to make guns...how is that different to giving out information on how to break into people's homes, hack computers or make crystal meth? From Wikipedia's POV policy how is this any different? 86.160.194.59 (talk) 15:50, 6 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Making guns isn't illegal? Beyond that, this article doesn't give out any information, it is merely discussing a company that does. There are many articles about hackers, robbers, and drug manufacturers on wikipedia, so I'm not sure what your point is. Gaijin42 (talk) 18:15, 7 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Agree with Gaijin42. WP:Wikipedia is not censored.  As long as this organization is notable (and it is, very clearly so, in recent weeks) and the information in the article is verifiable, then this article describing the entity is just fine.  The world has lots of stuff in it; all of us don't like some of it.  But it may all be described on Wikipedia.  Cheers.  N2e (talk) 21:16, 7 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia's POV policy is to have no POV. Describing the goals of an organization without labelling them as right or wrong is the only way to follow this. Besides, with two of the types of information you mention (breaking into homes and black hat hacking) it is absolutely essential that they be made public. How do you plug security vulnerabilities if you don't know what they are? Connor Behan (talk) 22:13, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Additional information at sisterlinks
Please see commons:Category:Defense Distributed.

Interesting info including:
 * File:3-D Printing Technology of Firearms - ATF.pdf
 * File:Letter-from-Department-of-State-to-Defense-Distributed.pdf

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 06:27, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Licensing status of Defense Distributed software products
This is confirmed as per source: Just putting here as an FYI. I believe this conforms to Wikimedia Commons licensing requirements.
 * "Permission is granted to anyone to use this software for any purpose, including commercial applications, and to alter it and redistribute it freely ..."

Cheers, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 19:51, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

In need of support: I can't get a new and imho important fact in the arcticle
---8<-- In December 2012, the first idea of the "Liberator" gun emerged from @propagare the German member of Defense Distributed in his Twitter timeline. @Propagare tweeted the idea to Cody Wilson's Twitter account @Radomysisky on the 4th of December 2012. -->8--- — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.198.80.176 (talk) 13:33, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Interesting. We would need to get consensus that this is not WP:ORIGINALRESEARCH, as the twitter account is a WP:PRIMARYSOURCE and nobody has reliably commented on this fact. Also, That a tweet was sent does not mean a tweet was read, or that they didn't already have the idea from some other source etc. (Im not saying it is so, I am just saying as an encyclopedia, we can't jump to conclusions). propagare is a listed member of DD in about us, but we don't have knowledge of the internal decision making processes etc.  I do not firmly object to inclusion, but would like to see what others say first.  Gaijin42 (talk) 13:45, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

FYI: It seems that pedantic Wikipedia Germany already included this information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.198.80.176 (talk) 11:49, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

forbes article discussing "Streisand Effect" and open source modifications being made to Liberator
http://www.forbes.com/sites/andygreenberg/2013/05/14/diy-firearms-makers-already-replicating-and-remixing-the-3d-printed-gun-photos/ Gaijin42 (talk) 16:52, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
 * A most interesting development, thank you, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:07, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

Interesting image from whitehouse.gov


Here's an interesting image from whitehouse.gov: File:2013 May 14 Allow DEFCAD to resume distributing their files.jpg.

Might be useful source info for this article.

&mdash; Cirt (talk) 03:42, 15 May 2013 (UTC)


 * This petition has apparently been removed. I am unable to find it anymore. In any case, it wouldn't be notable unless it got a lot of sigs, or was covered by reliable sources Gaijin42 (talk) 12:24, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm still finding it active there now. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:05, 15 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Interesting. I can get there via the link from the image, but if you do a search by issue for Firearms, it is not listed, nor can I find it via text search. Gaijin42 (talk) 17:20, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Odd, not sure why, maybe it's just not proliferating quite yet through the media. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 17:37, 15 May 2013 (UTC)