|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||
よく一緒に購入されている商品
商品の説明
内容説明
What if you could someday put the manufacturing power of an automobile plant on your desktop? According to Neil Gershenfeld, the renowned MIT scientist and inventor, the next big thing is personal fabrication-the ability to design and produce your own products, in your own home, with a machine that combines consumer electronics and industrial tools. Personal fabricators are about to revolutionize the world just as personal computers did a generation ago, and Fab shows us how.
From Publishers Weekly
Gershenfeld, who runs MIT's Center for Bits and Atoms, foresees a time when computers will upgrade from PCs to PFs, or personal fabricators. This eye-opening survey of "fab labs" completes the progression in Gershenfeld's earlier studies of the overlapping of computer science and physical science, such as When Things Start to Think (1999). A programmable PF, predicts Gershenfeld, will make it possible for users to design and create their own objects, instead of shopping for existing products. Interest in such cybercrafting became evident in 1998, Gershenfeld says, when an overwhelming number of students took MIT's How to Make (Almost) Anything course, aimed at "fulfilling individual desires rather than merely meeting mass-market needs." After inspecting those students' unique creations, Gershenfeld offers a history of how things are designed and made, from the Renaissance to industrialized automation, and then offers an overview of the technology and social implications this science involves. The 150 illustrations aid in clarifying some abstract concepts. Gershenfeld's extrapolation of these futuristic wonders is a visionary tour of technology, tools and pioneering PFers, making this an important update to Stewart Brand's 1987 The Media Lab. However, a "self-reproducing" PF that can make anything, including itself, is a chilling reminder of Philip K. Dick's 1955 Autofac, with its frightening prospect of an automated factory system beyond human control. Agent, John Brockman.
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. --このテキストは、絶版本またはこのタイトルには設定されていない版型に関連付けられています。
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. --このテキストは、絶版本またはこのタイトルには設定されていない版型に関連付けられています。
登録情報
|
この商品を見た後に買っているのは？
カスタマーレビュー
Amazon.com で最も参考になったカスタマーレビュー (beta)
Amazon.com:
20個のレビュー
50 人中、48人の方が、｢このレビューが参考になった｣と投票しています。
Important Vision Mixed with Haphazard Hype
2005/4/23
形式:ハードカバー
This book brings welcome attention to the neglected field of personal, general-purpose manufacturing. He argues that the technology is at roughly the stage that computing was when minicomputers were the leading edge, is good enough to tell us something about how full-fledged assemblers as envisioned by Drexler will be used, and that the main obstacle to people using it to build what they want is ignorance of what can be accomplished.
The book presents interesting examples of people building things that most would assume were beyond their ability. But he does not do a good job of explaining what can and can't be accomplished. Too much of the book sounds like a fund-raising appeal for a charity, describing a needy person who was helped rather than focusing on the technology or design process. He is rather thoughtless about choosing what technical details to provide, giving examples of assembly language (something widely known, and hard enough to use that most of his target users will be deterred from making designs which need it), but when he describes novel ideas such as "printing" a kit that can be assembled into a house he is too cryptic for me to guess whether that method would improve on standard methods.
I've tried thinking of things I might want to build, and I'm usually no closer to guessing whether it's feasible than before I read the book. For example, it would be nice if I could make a prototype of a seastead several feet in diameter, but none of the examples the book gives appear to involve methods which could make sturdy cylinders or hemispheres that large.
The index leaves much to be desired - minicomputers are indexed under computers, and open source is indexed under software, when I expected to find them under m and o.
And despite the lip service he pays to open source software, the CAM software he wrote comes with a vague license that doesn't meet the standard definition of open source.
The book presents interesting examples of people building things that most would assume were beyond their ability. But he does not do a good job of explaining what can and can't be accomplished. Too much of the book sounds like a fund-raising appeal for a charity, describing a needy person who was helped rather than focusing on the technology or design process. He is rather thoughtless about choosing what technical details to provide, giving examples of assembly language (something widely known, and hard enough to use that most of his target users will be deterred from making designs which need it), but when he describes novel ideas such as "printing" a kit that can be assembled into a house he is too cryptic for me to guess whether that method would improve on standard methods.
I've tried thinking of things I might want to build, and I'm usually no closer to guessing whether it's feasible than before I read the book. For example, it would be nice if I could make a prototype of a seastead several feet in diameter, but none of the examples the book gives appear to involve methods which could make sturdy cylinders or hemispheres that large.
The index leaves much to be desired - minicomputers are indexed under computers, and open source is indexed under software, when I expected to find them under m and o.
And despite the lip service he pays to open source software, the CAM software he wrote comes with a vague license that doesn't meet the standard definition of open source.
16 人中、13人の方が、｢このレビューが参考になった｣と投票しています。
Not Focused enough
2005/7/18
形式:ハードカバー
In general the book was interesting, however it seemed unfocused. Often Gershenfeld seemed to be rambling from one point to another without a logical transition. Indeed, sometimes a whole section seemed to lack a discreet point, but instead was just a series of observations.
If you enjoy the topic the book will be interesting, but it lacks enough detail to be useable as a reference and the writing isn't quite focused enough to be IMHO a good read.
If you enjoy the topic the book will be interesting, but it lacks enough detail to be useable as a reference and the writing isn't quite focused enough to be IMHO a good read.
77 人中、57人の方が、｢このレビューが参考になった｣と投票しています。
FAB - Personal Destop Fabrication
2005/6/6
形式:ハードカバー|Amazonが確認した購入
After the robot duplicating IEEE Spectrum review of 'FAB' I had to run out and pick up the book, but, as a 30yr Engineering Vet/MBA, I found it less than useful. The first 17 pages and the chapter on "The Future" was almost worth the price of the book because of its more advanced and stimulating content, however the middle 95% of the book is a rehash of decades old computer and manufacturing technology. While the book is a good introduction for kids and people new to computer technology... Explaining ASCII, 1s/0s, quoting: "RISC design...that doesn't mean they are dangerous...", an Engineer will glaze over (even with our propensity for "dry" work as noted by Gershenfeld in the text).
In reference to hydroelectric production in Ghana... "In 1996 about one gigawatt was produced for the whole country...". I would have hoped that author or some of the more clever MIT grad student proofreaders would have had the knowledge and/or diligence to differentiate between power and energy. GW-H maybe? (Myhrvold...did you open this book?)
I also feel Neil's disdain of "shady business" capitalism does his students and world citizens a disservice. Money is neutral, neither good or bad, proper management can do good things. Journalists only publish the evil that discourages. Basic business mgmt certainly isn't rocket science. I would call for the Academic Community to get involved in active competitive entrepreneurship...and be the beacon in the wilderness.
My disatisfaction was complete with the PC reference to how the advent of firearms was an "immoral" change on the battlefield...(as if murder by a closer sword was somehow moral). But the amusing part was where he later recounted a technology briefing with military/industrial complex Generals. One suggested that the fab technology should be controlled/export limited. The author was on the side that controls on his technology should not be instituted...as he agreed that the "bad guys would get their hands on it regardless of any attempted limits..." I somehow suspect that Neil is not a card carrying NRA member marching to preserve the 2nd Amendment and would still find a way to argue that a "fabbed" instrument of death is "moral" in comparison to my (locked up, but very capable) home defense Beretta. Nothing like holding two opposing thoughts in one mind.
After being teased then insulted...I am left just seeing the missed opportunity for something concrete that would move our country ahead...other than book profits.
Even though I can't afford to send my budding ME student to MIT, it is nice that we both can occasionally get to look at the OpenClassWare being sent overseas to our competitors for free. I know...I know...I am just unenlightend...sorry.
In reference to hydroelectric production in Ghana... "In 1996 about one gigawatt was produced for the whole country...". I would have hoped that author or some of the more clever MIT grad student proofreaders would have had the knowledge and/or diligence to differentiate between power and energy. GW-H maybe? (Myhrvold...did you open this book?)
I also feel Neil's disdain of "shady business" capitalism does his students and world citizens a disservice. Money is neutral, neither good or bad, proper management can do good things. Journalists only publish the evil that discourages. Basic business mgmt certainly isn't rocket science. I would call for the Academic Community to get involved in active competitive entrepreneurship...and be the beacon in the wilderness.
My disatisfaction was complete with the PC reference to how the advent of firearms was an "immoral" change on the battlefield...(as if murder by a closer sword was somehow moral). But the amusing part was where he later recounted a technology briefing with military/industrial complex Generals. One suggested that the fab technology should be controlled/export limited. The author was on the side that controls on his technology should not be instituted...as he agreed that the "bad guys would get their hands on it regardless of any attempted limits..." I somehow suspect that Neil is not a card carrying NRA member marching to preserve the 2nd Amendment and would still find a way to argue that a "fabbed" instrument of death is "moral" in comparison to my (locked up, but very capable) home defense Beretta. Nothing like holding two opposing thoughts in one mind.
After being teased then insulted...I am left just seeing the missed opportunity for something concrete that would move our country ahead...other than book profits.
Even though I can't afford to send my budding ME student to MIT, it is nice that we both can occasionally get to look at the OpenClassWare being sent overseas to our competitors for free. I know...I know...I am just unenlightend...sorry.
これらのレビューは参考になりましたか？
ご意見はクチコミでお聞かせください。
リストマニア
|
|
関連商品を探す
同じキーワードの商品を探す
フィードバック
- カタログ情報、または画像について報告
- 著者からのコメント
- 出版社からのコメント
|
