Switch to Fulfilled by 3D Hubs announcement

3Dsolidfactory · 2018-09-12T14:57:10.399Z

I had a similar thought about building a replacement but what I was envisaging was more a single-tenant system which each small business could host their own version of. In fact one of the key points would be making it open and usable by all - i.e. all the things which made 3D Hubs what it was that they’ve turned their back on.

If there was a way to build both - a central site which could become a trusted destination but which could bring together a load of federated ordering platforms (each of which would be usable by itself also)… well… that would be quite something. Almost like what would happen if you took the current 3D Hubs platform, with each hub having their own site with an order widget on it, and turned it inside-out.

Literally just thinking out loud at this stage but I’m a developer so would definitely contribute what little time I could to building out something like this…

I love this idea

digitalirony · 2018-09-12T14:59:46.247Z

The only similar site I know of is makexyz, but I don’t get any where near as many orders from them

Torvast · 2018-09-12T15:07:20.609Z

The only alternative i’ve found is Treatstock.com with a widget like 3dhubs.

markembling · 2018-09-12T15:08:46.837Z

Of course that supposes we’re beggars… not a viewpoint I subscribe to

You are right and your point is valid nonetheless, however I think perhaps now we’ve seen it go wrong (i.e. how the ultra-centralisation model can turn sour), we can redo it again but without this weakness.

markembling · 2018-09-12T15:13:56.026Z

Odense3DPrint:

what i meant is that since 3dhubs have bend us over and BLIIIIIPPPPPPP us in the BEEEEEEP

any alternative would be a good one

Don’t worry, your choice of words was absolutely fine

I agree that any solution is a good one at this point but what I mean is going forward I’d like us to find the right solution. Any solution would be good to get us there, but we should be careful to try and avoid reliance and lock-in now that we’ve seen how it can go bad.

markembling · 2018-09-12T15:14:33.812Z

Odense3DPrint:

that is why i thought if there is a middle ground option of those that would like to have both their own site and a central one that could feed the other?

That would be my perfect solution and one I definitely want to persue

3Dsolidfactory · 2018-09-12T15:19:44.514Z

It would be great to have some form of web applet to compute in real time the volume, the infill and the support material of the file, convert that to price and then this company would basically intermediate the payment between the customer and the 3D printing service.

markembling · 2018-09-12T15:26:27.316Z

Interesting.

I utterly agree with you about the STL volume/infill/material/price calculation stuff and unfortunately I think getting something like that right and reliable is going to be the most challenging part.

In terms of payment though, my thoughts are that each hub (we need another name, but you know what I mean) would do their own. I.e. I could have my ‘hub’ site process payments through Paypal or Stripe or whatever. Then they could have their own processes etc and handle their own business and not have any weird rules about VAT or whether you’ve got the right kind of company…

markembling · 2018-09-12T15:31:57.276Z

Maybe we need both options, with it up to each hub to choose if they handle their own payments or if the central authority does it, or if they’re happy to handle either case. Customers could use that as part of their decision as to who to choose if they feel strongly one way or another.

3Dsolidfactory · 2018-09-12T15:32:29.190Z

Yeah, this is a really good idea!
If there was only a way to harness the price calculation routines of Simplify 3D…

markembling · 2018-09-12T15:35:55.017Z

Or if 3D Hubs bequeathed a solution to us as suggested on Twitter. Frankly I think it’s unlikely but I’d happily take a version of their algorithm from a couple of years back gifted to the open source community. It would take the sting out a bit for sure.

digitalirony · 2018-09-12T15:43:18.580Z

Does it actually have to slice? I mean the 3dhubs one doesn’t. Or at least doesn’t allow for producing gcode. I suppose it has to slice somewhat to calculate price tho. But it would only need to be very simple(or perhaps go all the way with it, to make your offering that much better).

digitalirony · 2018-09-12T15:47:35.503Z

Well, Speed would depend on quite a lot of variables. I don’t think that would be accurate unless the ‘hub’ can input their print speeds, acceleration etc.

digitalirony · 2018-09-12T15:52:29.023Z

Also, I think the current model of cost per volume of plastic isn’t ideal. It doesn’t take into account time spent printing etc.

If there was someway to maybe make octoprint plugin that keeps track of time of a print, then connect that to user account/hub. Then could charge by time spent on the print, and not just volume.
Also with a raspberry pi camera hooked up, could provide a stop motion video of the customers object being built.

digitalirony · 2018-09-12T15:56:51.987Z

I think letting the hubs input time spent could lead to dishonesty. And customers may not trust that either. I think if there was some sort of time tracking tool it would be much better, and more accurate. Also would allow for gathering actual data that could in turn be used for something.

digitalirony · 2018-09-12T16:04:56.344Z

Well. I was thinking maybe you have the slicer calculate volume, and make a charge based on that. And let customers know that there will be additional charge at the end for time. And that once they put in their CC, they will be charged time at the end. And maybe give some sort of estimate.

Then only allow customers to dispute, or request refund for part. But they agreed to pay a rate for time at the beginning and are given an estimate then to. Just like any sort of hourly contact work.

tero_koyhajoki · 2018-09-12T16:07:00.928Z

Hi
I also want to join in this discussion after hearing this ridiculous news from hub.

calculating volume would work (calculate volume and estimate it to be with infill of 30% example or 40%) it would be doable I believe. (oh and this volume slicing can be done with python at least)

cobnut · 2018-09-12T16:28:06.041Z

Folks, at the risk of being shouted down, I do think that if you continue to use this thread to only discuss your own plans for building another platform, 3DHubs would be within their rights to delete/lock it. Given that the thread was provided specifically to talk about the 3DHubs change after complaints of threads being deleted, it’d be kinda silly to get it restricted because of your own actions.

Personally, if you are thinking of building your own Hub, then this thread would be a useful place to talk about/consider why 3DHubs are making these changes. Putting aside accusations, it’s entirely possible that what 3DHubs have learned from trying to operate as a local/small Hub provision service could be very important learning if you’re thinking of starting down that route.

Richard_Beck · 2018-09-12T17:10:12.652Z

I wonder what would happen if a friend made several orders to you this month that you responded instantly and filled them. That could get you to the qualifying scores.

I am convinced there are Hubs that did just this thing in the past to get their numbers up with easy prints and low balled rates. Just saying this IMHO. I think the response time grade was silly. Some small businesses and even large ones do not respond to orders at night and on weekends.

the3DMill · 2018-09-12T17:10:24.591Z

I just think it is a strange and unfair way to close a service for people that have a 26min response time and let hubs with a 25min response time the possibility to continue the hub. For the customer it is no difference and a hub with a slightly longer response time might be much more popular and successful than a hub with a short response time