×
Matter’s latest update doubles down on stability and pushes the platforms to play better together

Matter’s latest update doubles down on stability and pushes the platforms to play better together

For Matter, this year was never going to be about flashy new features. Other than support for security cameras, which I hear should finally arrive this fall, 2025 is all about fixing problems. And with Matter 1.4.2, announced today, the smart home standard is taking an encouraging step forward.

Back in January, Tobin Richardson, president and CEO of the Connectivity Standards Alliance (the organization that runs Matter), told me this year would be all about “focusing on fixing these reliability and performance issues.” Now, over halfway through 2025, the CSA is finally looking to make good on that promise, and showing signs that it’s prepared to push the platforms harder to work together and adopt these new specs sooner.

Matter 1.4.2 brings more standardization, so devices behave the same whether you’re using Amazon Alexa, Apple Home, Google Home, or any Matter platform; improvements to how devices communicate, which should mean fewer random disconnects and faster responses; and a big reliability push.

The CSA is pushing the platforms to work together better and adopt these new specs sooner

And where does reliability in the smart home start? With your Wi-Fi router.

Home routers and access points were added to Matter in 1.4, and the latest spec lays the foundations for Matter ecosystems to automatically optimize router settings to help your gadgets get connected and stay connected to your network. This includes things like managing multicast traffic (a way devices communicate over a network) and storing Thread network credentials to help devices connect to the right Thread network.

While there aren’t any Matter-certified routers yet, the potential here is huge. Router settings are one of the most common reasons a device won’t connect to a network, and the user is normally left to figure that out. With this feature, your smart home platform could potentially fix these problems before they arise.

The spec sets new minimum standards for how many devices a router can support, including at least 150 Thread devices and 100 Wi-Fi devices. It also adds support for Target Wake Time to help battery-powered devices conserve energy.

Another big change is that 1.4.2 brings Wi-Fi-only commissioning. Currently, Bluetooth is the only way to onboard a device to Matter, so every Matter device has to have a Bluetooth radio that may only be used during setup. With Wi-Fi commissioning, manufacturers won’t need to build Bluetooth into every device, which could mean cheaper gadgets. The onboarding experience would be the same, though: scan the Matter code into your ecosystem app.

Your smart home platform could potentially fix connectivity problems before they arise

It will be a while until we see manufacturers taking advantage of this, as Matter Controllers — which you need to add a device to Matter and can be smart speakers or set-top boxes like an Apple TV — need a firmware upgrade to support Wi-Fi onboarding.

Several network management tweaks in 1.4.2 should help keep devices online and communicating more efficiently. These include updates around how often and why devices need to “check in,” which should help reduce traffic. This could prolong battery life for some devices and mean faster response times for all devices, as they’re not fighting to be heard. Gadgets that don’t need to report in often, like a water leak sensor, should now be able to stay “asleep” for longer without being dropped off the network.

Security updates with 1.4.2 bring protections for a growing concern in IoT: cloning. “We’ve added the ability to revoke the unique ID every Matter device has,” explains Steve Hanna of Infineon. This means if you try to add a device that has been identified as cloned or counterfeit, you’ll get a warning that it’s not secure.

Developed by Apple, Amazon, Google, Samsung, and others, Matter is an open-sourced, IP-based connectivity software layer for smart home devices. It works over Wi-Fi, Ethernet, and Thread.

Thread is a low-power, wireless mesh protocol. It operates on the same 2.4GHz spectrum as Zigbee and is designed for low-power devices, such as sensors, light bulbs, plugs, and shades. IP-based, Thread devices can communicate directly with each other, the internet, and with other networks using a Thread Border Router.

Today, Matter supports most of the main device types in the home, including lighting, thermostats, locks, robot vacuums, refrigerators, dishwashers, dryers, ovens, smoke alarms, air quality monitors, EV chargers, and more.

A smart home gadget with the Matter logo can be set up and used with any Matter-compatible ecosystem via a Matter controller and controlled by more than one ecosystem with a feature called multi-admin.

Amazon Alexa, Google Home, Samsung SmartThings, Apple Home, Home Assistant, Ikea, and Aqara are among the well-known smart home companies supporting Matter, along with hundreds of device manufacturers.

Matter Controllers will also now be able to cryptographically verify they are what they say they are, again to ensure nothing counterfeit and potentially dangerous can get onto your Matter network. “This is considered an industry best practice,” says Hanna. “We’ve not seen this in the wild, but we’re focused on being proactive.”

The spec also adds new security features for Matter routers, including Access Restriction Lists (ARLs). While platforms can now access settings on your router, this limits them to what they can do, ideally preventing them from messing up your Netflix streaming.

There are also some quality-of-life updates for users in the new release, which are focused on standardizing the experience across smart home ecosystem platforms.

Better scenes: Matter Scenes now have a standardized way for platforms to activate them. This means you can create scenes using just Matter devices in your smart home app, and they should respond faster and still work when the internet is down, compared to scenes with devices on other protocols. Scenes also now support time-based actions. So, for example, you can create a wakeup scene where lights could slowly brighten over 30 minutes.

Cleaner device identification: Matter platforms will recognize when a device has been added to them twice — say, through a cloud connection and through Matter — and just show it once in their app. Devices with multiple functions, like a power strip with four smart outlets or a sensor with multiple capabilities, will be more reliably identified across ecosystems.

Automatic adding: 1.4.2 standardizes how devices inform a Matter ecosystem about their presence or new capabilities. So, if you add a new light to your Hue bridge, or if a gadget receives a new feature from a firmware update, your smart home app can alert you to the new device/capability automatically without any additional setup.

Standardized robot vacuum behavior: Another update to make things work the same way, no matter which ecosystem app you’re using, vacuum commands are getting updated. Now, a job won’t have to be canceled before a new one can be started.

While all of this sounds encouraging for the smart home standard, these improvements rely on ecosystems and device manufacturers rolling out updates or building new hardware (there are still no Matter-enabled Wi-Fi routers).

All these improvements rely on ecosystems and device manufacturers rolling out updates

One of Matter’s biggest problems has been the slow adoption of new specs by some of the major players, which in turn deters manufacturers from investing in updates and new hardware. Tobin Richardson tells me the CSA has developed fast-track programs that make it easier, faster, and cheaper to update to the most recent code, which might lead to quicker uptake.

When Matter launched almost three years ago, it seemed the hope was that the big players here – Apple, Amazon, Google, and Samsung – would just take it and run with it. That’s not been the case. The resulting setbacks and slowdowns have frustrated customers and manufacturers alike.

Taken as a whole, the Matter 1.4 updates have a clear focus on nudging the ecosystems forward, giving them better tools to make it easier for them to create better experiences. Let’s hope they use them.

Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.


Source link
#Matters #latest #update #doubles #stability #pushes #platforms #play

How to choose a red light face mask: Look at wavelength first

There are some ways to tell that a red light face mask won’t be effective before you buy it and use it for a few months.

Wavelength is the first factor anyone will tell you to consider. You want to find products that emit light within the therapeutic window, or the range of wavelengths that can be effective when treating common skin conditions. There is now an abundance of evidence that specific wavelengths of red light can be effective for:

  • Reduction of fine lines, dark circles, and crow’s feet

  • Improving skin texture

  • Fighting wrinkles

  • Boosting collagen production

  • Reducing inflammation and redness

To be effective, the light coming from the mask must penetrate different layers of your skin. There are optimal wavelengths for each type of light a face mask emits, and any reputable brand will put their mask’s wavelengths front and center in the listing. These carefully chosen ranges are strong enough to penetrate your skin, but gentle enough to avoid over-activating delicate face skin.

Red light does its work in the middle layer (dermis) of your skin, requiring wavelengths between 630 and 633 nm to reach past the top layer. There, red light stimulates cells to produce rejuvenating proteins like collagen and elastin, evening out surface redness, and preventing scarring or post-pimple red spots.

Best red light masks tested: 6 winners, 2 to avoid in 2026
                                                    How to choose a red light face mask: Look at wavelength firstThere are some ways to tell that a red light face mask won’t be effective before you buy it and use it for a few months. Wavelength is the first factor anyone will tell you to consider. You want to find products that emit light within the therapeutic window, or the range of wavelengths that can be effective when treating common skin conditions. There is now an abundance of evidence that specific wavelengths of red light can be effective for:Reduction of fine lines, dark circles, and crow’s feetImproving skin textureFighting wrinklesBoosting collagen productionReducing inflammation and rednessTo be effective, the light coming from the mask must penetrate different layers of your skin. There are optimal wavelengths for each type of light a face mask emits, and any reputable brand will put their mask’s wavelengths front and center in the listing. These carefully chosen ranges are strong enough to penetrate your skin, but gentle enough to avoid over-activating delicate face skin.Red light does its work in the middle layer (dermis) of your skin, requiring wavelengths between 630 and 633 nm to reach past the top layer. There, red light stimulates cells to produce rejuvenating proteins like collagen and elastin, evening out surface redness, and preventing scarring or post-pimple red spots.
        
        
                                        
                
                                            The Shark CryoGlow’s Better Aging routine combines red and near-infrared light.
                                                                Credit: Leah Stodart / Mashable
                                    
                    
        
                                        
                
                                            The Shark CryoGlow’s Skin Clearing routine uses a special sequence of red, near-infrared, and blue light.
                                                                Credit: Leah Stodart / Mashable
                                    
                    
    

Most red light masks also use near-infrared red light therapy, which requires longer wavelengths to travel further than regular red light. Near-infrared light between 830 and 850 nm reaches into tissue under the dermis to further stimulate cell turnover, firm skin, and heal deep-seated spots or stubborn dark circles.What about blue light therapy?Blue light is often used to target acne, and some of the best red light masks use a combination of blue and red light therapy.Blue light operates on the top layer (epidermis) of your skin, so its ideal wavelength is shorter than either red light standard. Blue light at 415nm has an antimicrobial effect, ideally killing the bacteria that cause acne before a breakout starts. If hellbent bacterial acne makes it past the blue light phase — or if you’re also dealing with hormonal or cystic acne not caused by bacteria — red light swoops in to neutralize inflammation and speed up the healing process. The thing is, most mainstream LED face masks hit those wavelength marks. So, how do you choose between masks if their wavelength numbers are all the same?The importance of irradianceIrradiance is another major element that determines whether or not a red light mask actually works. While wavelength refers to the length the light can travel, irradiance refers to the amount of light energy that’s actually reaching your skin per session (not just the intensity of light being generated at the bulb). If wavelength numbers are correct but irradiance is low, the mask will still be kind of a dud.
        
        
                                        
                
                                            Bulb placement is one of the key factors we considered in our test.
                                                                Credit: Leah Stodart / Mashable
                                    
                    
        
                                        
                
                                            Comfort is another key factor, as consistent use is key to results.
                                                                Credit: Miller Kern / Mashable
                                    
                    
    

Irradiance is officially expressed as milliwatts per square centimeter. The optimal irradiance range for a red light face mask is pretty wide (anywhere between 30 and 100 mW/cm²), though many brands don’t directly provide that number.Most brands do note the length of each session, which is one way to quickly gauge irradiance without getting into calculations. Dr. Mamina Turegano sums it up best on her YouTube account: “Higher irradiance means more effective energy delivery per minute of use.” Longer sessions don’t automatically mean that results will be more powerful — a mask with sessions that last for less than 10 minutes has higher irradiance than a mask with sessions that last for 20 to 30 minutes. Since a mask with lower irradiance needs to sit on your face for longer, you might be less likely to keep up with wearing it. Are bulb count and bulb placement a big deal?The number of bulbs and the placement of bulbs inside the mask can also impact efficacy, especially if you’re expecting results on a specific area of your face. Masks with more bulbs packed evenly across the face will provide more even coverage across every inch of your face than masks with more sporadically-placed bulbs. Some masks also provide more light sources overall by emitting both red and blue light simultaneously from every single bulb, like the Shark CryoGlow. This would be a better option for full-face acne prevention than masks with blue and red LEDs only concentrated in certain spots, like the Dr. Dennis Gross DRx SpectraLite.What red light masks worked for us?Of course, you probably didn’t come here for a science lesson. You want to find the best red light masks Mashable’s testers used and loved.After trying out 11 different products, we ultimately found six that we can recommend. These masks delivered visible results for our product testers.Remember: Consistency is essential for the best results (or any results)with LED face masks. You’ll need to wear your mask consistently for at least 1-2 months.
                        
                    #red #light #masks #tested #winners #avoid

The Shark CryoGlow’s Better Aging routine combines red and near-infrared light. Credit: Leah Stodart / Mashable

Hand holding Shark red light mask featuring blue and black setting on screen

The Shark CryoGlow’s Skin Clearing routine uses a special sequence of red, near-infrared, and blue light. Credit: Leah Stodart / Mashable

Most red light masks also use near-infrared red light therapy, which requires longer wavelengths to travel further than regular red light. Near-infrared light between 830 and 850 nm reaches into tissue under the dermis to further stimulate cell turnover, firm skin, and heal deep-seated spots or stubborn dark circles.

What about blue light therapy?

Blue light is often used to target acne, and some of the best red light masks use a combination of blue and red light therapy.

Blue light operates on the top layer (epidermis) of your skin, so its ideal wavelength is shorter than either red light standard. Blue light at 415nm has an antimicrobial effect, ideally killing the bacteria that cause acne before a breakout starts. If hellbent bacterial acne makes it past the blue light phase — or if you’re also dealing with hormonal or cystic acne not caused by bacteria — red light swoops in to neutralize inflammation and speed up the healing process.

The thing is, most mainstream LED face masks hit those wavelength marks. So, how do you choose between masks if their wavelength numbers are all the same?

The importance of irradiance

Irradiance is another major element that determines whether or not a red light mask actually works. While wavelength refers to the length the light can travel, irradiance refers to the amount of light energy that’s actually reaching your skin per session (not just the intensity of light being generated at the bulb). If wavelength numbers are correct but irradiance is low, the mask will still be kind of a dud.

Inside of Shark CryoGlow face mask lit up pink

Bulb placement is one of the key factors we considered in our test. Credit: Leah Stodart / Mashable

woman wearing therabody led face mask

Comfort is another key factor, as consistent use is key to results. Credit: Miller Kern / Mashable

Irradiance is officially expressed as milliwatts per square centimeter. The optimal irradiance range for a red light face mask is pretty wide (anywhere between 30 and 100 mW/cm²), though many brands don’t directly provide that number.

Most brands do note the length of each session, which is one way to quickly gauge irradiance without getting into calculations. Dr. Mamina Turegano sums it up best on her YouTube account: “Higher irradiance means more effective energy delivery per minute of use.” Longer sessions don’t automatically mean that results will be more powerful — a mask with sessions that last for less than 10 minutes has higher irradiance than a mask with sessions that last for 20 to 30 minutes. Since a mask with lower irradiance needs to sit on your face for longer, you might be less likely to keep up with wearing it.

Are bulb count and bulb placement a big deal?

The number of bulbs and the placement of bulbs inside the mask can also impact efficacy, especially if you’re expecting results on a specific area of your face. Masks with more bulbs packed evenly across the face will provide more even coverage across every inch of your face than masks with more sporadically-placed bulbs.

Some masks also provide more light sources overall by emitting both red and blue light simultaneously from every single bulb, like the Shark CryoGlow. This would be a better option for full-face acne prevention than masks with blue and red LEDs only concentrated in certain spots, like the Dr. Dennis Gross DRx SpectraLite.

What red light masks worked for us?

Of course, you probably didn’t come here for a science lesson. You want to find the best red light masks Mashable’s testers used and loved.

After trying out 11 different products, we ultimately found six that we can recommend. These masks delivered visible results for our product testers.

Remember: Consistency is essential for the best results (or any results)with LED face masks. You’ll need to wear your mask consistently for at least 1-2 months.

#red #light #masks #tested #winners #avoid">Best red light masks tested: 6 winners, 2 to avoid in 2026
                                                    How to choose a red light face mask: Look at wavelength firstThere are some ways to tell that a red light face mask won’t be effective before you buy it and use it for a few months. Wavelength is the first factor anyone will tell you to consider. You want to find products that emit light within the therapeutic window, or the range of wavelengths that can be effective when treating common skin conditions. There is now an abundance of evidence that specific wavelengths of red light can be effective for:Reduction of fine lines, dark circles, and crow’s feetImproving skin textureFighting wrinklesBoosting collagen productionReducing inflammation and rednessTo be effective, the light coming from the mask must penetrate different layers of your skin. There are optimal wavelengths for each type of light a face mask emits, and any reputable brand will put their mask’s wavelengths front and center in the listing. These carefully chosen ranges are strong enough to penetrate your skin, but gentle enough to avoid over-activating delicate face skin.Red light does its work in the middle layer (dermis) of your skin, requiring wavelengths between 630 and 633 nm to reach past the top layer. There, red light stimulates cells to produce rejuvenating proteins like collagen and elastin, evening out surface redness, and preventing scarring or post-pimple red spots.
        
        
                                        
                
                                            The Shark CryoGlow’s Better Aging routine combines red and near-infrared light.
                                                                Credit: Leah Stodart / Mashable
                                    
                    
        
                                        
                
                                            The Shark CryoGlow’s Skin Clearing routine uses a special sequence of red, near-infrared, and blue light.
                                                                Credit: Leah Stodart / Mashable
                                    
                    
    

Most red light masks also use near-infrared red light therapy, which requires longer wavelengths to travel further than regular red light. Near-infrared light between 830 and 850 nm reaches into tissue under the dermis to further stimulate cell turnover, firm skin, and heal deep-seated spots or stubborn dark circles.What about blue light therapy?Blue light is often used to target acne, and some of the best red light masks use a combination of blue and red light therapy.Blue light operates on the top layer (epidermis) of your skin, so its ideal wavelength is shorter than either red light standard. Blue light at 415nm has an antimicrobial effect, ideally killing the bacteria that cause acne before a breakout starts. If hellbent bacterial acne makes it past the blue light phase — or if you’re also dealing with hormonal or cystic acne not caused by bacteria — red light swoops in to neutralize inflammation and speed up the healing process. The thing is, most mainstream LED face masks hit those wavelength marks. So, how do you choose between masks if their wavelength numbers are all the same?The importance of irradianceIrradiance is another major element that determines whether or not a red light mask actually works. While wavelength refers to the length the light can travel, irradiance refers to the amount of light energy that’s actually reaching your skin per session (not just the intensity of light being generated at the bulb). If wavelength numbers are correct but irradiance is low, the mask will still be kind of a dud.
        
        
                                        
                
                                            Bulb placement is one of the key factors we considered in our test.
                                                                Credit: Leah Stodart / Mashable
                                    
                    
        
                                        
                
                                            Comfort is another key factor, as consistent use is key to results.
                                                                Credit: Miller Kern / Mashable
                                    
                    
    

Irradiance is officially expressed as milliwatts per square centimeter. The optimal irradiance range for a red light face mask is pretty wide (anywhere between 30 and 100 mW/cm²), though many brands don’t directly provide that number.Most brands do note the length of each session, which is one way to quickly gauge irradiance without getting into calculations. Dr. Mamina Turegano sums it up best on her YouTube account: “Higher irradiance means more effective energy delivery per minute of use.” Longer sessions don’t automatically mean that results will be more powerful — a mask with sessions that last for less than 10 minutes has higher irradiance than a mask with sessions that last for 20 to 30 minutes. Since a mask with lower irradiance needs to sit on your face for longer, you might be less likely to keep up with wearing it. Are bulb count and bulb placement a big deal?The number of bulbs and the placement of bulbs inside the mask can also impact efficacy, especially if you’re expecting results on a specific area of your face. Masks with more bulbs packed evenly across the face will provide more even coverage across every inch of your face than masks with more sporadically-placed bulbs. Some masks also provide more light sources overall by emitting both red and blue light simultaneously from every single bulb, like the Shark CryoGlow. This would be a better option for full-face acne prevention than masks with blue and red LEDs only concentrated in certain spots, like the Dr. Dennis Gross DRx SpectraLite.What red light masks worked for us?Of course, you probably didn’t come here for a science lesson. You want to find the best red light masks Mashable’s testers used and loved.After trying out 11 different products, we ultimately found six that we can recommend. These masks delivered visible results for our product testers.Remember: Consistency is essential for the best results (or any results)with LED face masks. You’ll need to wear your mask consistently for at least 1-2 months.
                        
                    #red #light #masks #tested #winners #avoid

abundance of evidence that specific wavelengths of red light can be effective for:

  • Reduction of fine lines, dark circles, and crow’s feet

  • Improving skin texture

  • Fighting wrinkles

  • Boosting collagen production

  • Reducing inflammation and redness

To be effective, the light coming from the mask must penetrate different layers of your skin. There are optimal wavelengths for each type of light a face mask emits, and any reputable brand will put their mask’s wavelengths front and center in the listing. These carefully chosen ranges are strong enough to penetrate your skin, but gentle enough to avoid over-activating delicate face skin.

Red light does its work in the middle layer (dermis) of your skin, requiring wavelengths between 630 and 633 nm to reach past the top layer. There, red light stimulates cells to produce rejuvenating proteins like collagen and elastin, evening out surface redness, and preventing scarring or post-pimple red spots.

Best red light masks tested: 6 winners, 2 to avoid in 2026
                                                    How to choose a red light face mask: Look at wavelength firstThere are some ways to tell that a red light face mask won’t be effective before you buy it and use it for a few months. Wavelength is the first factor anyone will tell you to consider. You want to find products that emit light within the therapeutic window, or the range of wavelengths that can be effective when treating common skin conditions. There is now an abundance of evidence that specific wavelengths of red light can be effective for:Reduction of fine lines, dark circles, and crow’s feetImproving skin textureFighting wrinklesBoosting collagen productionReducing inflammation and rednessTo be effective, the light coming from the mask must penetrate different layers of your skin. There are optimal wavelengths for each type of light a face mask emits, and any reputable brand will put their mask’s wavelengths front and center in the listing. These carefully chosen ranges are strong enough to penetrate your skin, but gentle enough to avoid over-activating delicate face skin.Red light does its work in the middle layer (dermis) of your skin, requiring wavelengths between 630 and 633 nm to reach past the top layer. There, red light stimulates cells to produce rejuvenating proteins like collagen and elastin, evening out surface redness, and preventing scarring or post-pimple red spots.
        
        
                                        
                
                                            The Shark CryoGlow’s Better Aging routine combines red and near-infrared light.
                                                                Credit: Leah Stodart / Mashable
                                    
                    
        
                                        
                
                                            The Shark CryoGlow’s Skin Clearing routine uses a special sequence of red, near-infrared, and blue light.
                                                                Credit: Leah Stodart / Mashable
                                    
                    
    

Most red light masks also use near-infrared red light therapy, which requires longer wavelengths to travel further than regular red light. Near-infrared light between 830 and 850 nm reaches into tissue under the dermis to further stimulate cell turnover, firm skin, and heal deep-seated spots or stubborn dark circles.What about blue light therapy?Blue light is often used to target acne, and some of the best red light masks use a combination of blue and red light therapy.Blue light operates on the top layer (epidermis) of your skin, so its ideal wavelength is shorter than either red light standard. Blue light at 415nm has an antimicrobial effect, ideally killing the bacteria that cause acne before a breakout starts. If hellbent bacterial acne makes it past the blue light phase — or if you’re also dealing with hormonal or cystic acne not caused by bacteria — red light swoops in to neutralize inflammation and speed up the healing process. The thing is, most mainstream LED face masks hit those wavelength marks. So, how do you choose between masks if their wavelength numbers are all the same?The importance of irradianceIrradiance is another major element that determines whether or not a red light mask actually works. While wavelength refers to the length the light can travel, irradiance refers to the amount of light energy that’s actually reaching your skin per session (not just the intensity of light being generated at the bulb). If wavelength numbers are correct but irradiance is low, the mask will still be kind of a dud.
        
        
                                        
                
                                            Bulb placement is one of the key factors we considered in our test.
                                                                Credit: Leah Stodart / Mashable
                                    
                    
        
                                        
                
                                            Comfort is another key factor, as consistent use is key to results.
                                                                Credit: Miller Kern / Mashable
                                    
                    
    

Irradiance is officially expressed as milliwatts per square centimeter. The optimal irradiance range for a red light face mask is pretty wide (anywhere between 30 and 100 mW/cm²), though many brands don’t directly provide that number.Most brands do note the length of each session, which is one way to quickly gauge irradiance without getting into calculations. Dr. Mamina Turegano sums it up best on her YouTube account: “Higher irradiance means more effective energy delivery per minute of use.” Longer sessions don’t automatically mean that results will be more powerful — a mask with sessions that last for less than 10 minutes has higher irradiance than a mask with sessions that last for 20 to 30 minutes. Since a mask with lower irradiance needs to sit on your face for longer, you might be less likely to keep up with wearing it. Are bulb count and bulb placement a big deal?The number of bulbs and the placement of bulbs inside the mask can also impact efficacy, especially if you’re expecting results on a specific area of your face. Masks with more bulbs packed evenly across the face will provide more even coverage across every inch of your face than masks with more sporadically-placed bulbs. Some masks also provide more light sources overall by emitting both red and blue light simultaneously from every single bulb, like the Shark CryoGlow. This would be a better option for full-face acne prevention than masks with blue and red LEDs only concentrated in certain spots, like the Dr. Dennis Gross DRx SpectraLite.What red light masks worked for us?Of course, you probably didn’t come here for a science lesson. You want to find the best red light masks Mashable’s testers used and loved.After trying out 11 different products, we ultimately found six that we can recommend. These masks delivered visible results for our product testers.Remember: Consistency is essential for the best results (or any results)with LED face masks. You’ll need to wear your mask consistently for at least 1-2 months.
                        
                    #red #light #masks #tested #winners #avoid

The Shark CryoGlow’s Better Aging routine combines red and near-infrared light. Credit: Leah Stodart / Mashable

Hand holding Shark red light mask featuring blue and black setting on screen

The Shark CryoGlow’s Skin Clearing routine uses a special sequence of red, near-infrared, and blue light. Credit: Leah Stodart / Mashable

Most red light masks also use near-infrared red light therapy, which requires longer wavelengths to travel further than regular red light. Near-infrared light between 830 and 850 nm reaches into tissue under the dermis to further stimulate cell turnover, firm skin, and heal deep-seated spots or stubborn dark circles.

What about blue light therapy?

Blue light is often used to target acne, and some of the best red light masks use a combination of blue and red light therapy.

Blue light operates on the top layer (epidermis) of your skin, so its ideal wavelength is shorter than either red light standard. Blue light at 415nm has an antimicrobial effect, ideally killing the bacteria that cause acne before a breakout starts. If hellbent bacterial acne makes it past the blue light phase — or if you’re also dealing with hormonal or cystic acne not caused by bacteria — red light swoops in to neutralize inflammation and speed up the healing process.

The thing is, most mainstream LED face masks hit those wavelength marks. So, how do you choose between masks if their wavelength numbers are all the same?

The importance of irradiance

Irradiance is another major element that determines whether or not a red light mask actually works. While wavelength refers to the length the light can travel, irradiance refers to the amount of light energy that’s actually reaching your skin per session (not just the intensity of light being generated at the bulb). If wavelength numbers are correct but irradiance is low, the mask will still be kind of a dud.

Inside of Shark CryoGlow face mask lit up pink

Bulb placement is one of the key factors we considered in our test. Credit: Leah Stodart / Mashable

woman wearing therabody led face mask

Comfort is another key factor, as consistent use is key to results. Credit: Miller Kern / Mashable

Irradiance is officially expressed as milliwatts per square centimeter. The optimal irradiance range for a red light face mask is pretty wide (anywhere between 30 and 100 mW/cm²), though many brands don’t directly provide that number.

Most brands do note the length of each session, which is one way to quickly gauge irradiance without getting into calculations. Dr. Mamina Turegano sums it up best on her YouTube account: “Higher irradiance means more effective energy delivery per minute of use.” Longer sessions don’t automatically mean that results will be more powerful — a mask with sessions that last for less than 10 minutes has higher irradiance than a mask with sessions that last for 20 to 30 minutes. Since a mask with lower irradiance needs to sit on your face for longer, you might be less likely to keep up with wearing it.

Are bulb count and bulb placement a big deal?

The number of bulbs and the placement of bulbs inside the mask can also impact efficacy, especially if you’re expecting results on a specific area of your face. Masks with more bulbs packed evenly across the face will provide more even coverage across every inch of your face than masks with more sporadically-placed bulbs.

Some masks also provide more light sources overall by emitting both red and blue light simultaneously from every single bulb, like the Shark CryoGlow. This would be a better option for full-face acne prevention than masks with blue and red LEDs only concentrated in certain spots, like the Dr. Dennis Gross DRx SpectraLite.

What red light masks worked for us?

Of course, you probably didn’t come here for a science lesson. You want to find the best red light masks Mashable’s testers used and loved.

After trying out 11 different products, we ultimately found six that we can recommend. These masks delivered visible results for our product testers.

Remember: Consistency is essential for the best results (or any results)with LED face masks. You’ll need to wear your mask consistently for at least 1-2 months.

#red #light #masks #tested #winners #avoid">Best red light masks tested: 6 winners, 2 to avoid in 2026

How to choose a red light face mask: Look at wavelength first

There are some ways to tell that a red light face mask won’t be effective before you buy it and use it for a few months.

Wavelength is the first factor anyone will tell you to consider. You want to find products that emit light within the therapeutic window, or the range of wavelengths that can be effective when treating common skin conditions. There is now an abundance of evidence that specific wavelengths of red light can be effective for:

  • Reduction of fine lines, dark circles, and crow’s feet

  • Improving skin texture

  • Fighting wrinkles

  • Boosting collagen production

  • Reducing inflammation and redness

To be effective, the light coming from the mask must penetrate different layers of your skin. There are optimal wavelengths for each type of light a face mask emits, and any reputable brand will put their mask’s wavelengths front and center in the listing. These carefully chosen ranges are strong enough to penetrate your skin, but gentle enough to avoid over-activating delicate face skin.

Red light does its work in the middle layer (dermis) of your skin, requiring wavelengths between 630 and 633 nm to reach past the top layer. There, red light stimulates cells to produce rejuvenating proteins like collagen and elastin, evening out surface redness, and preventing scarring or post-pimple red spots.

Best red light masks tested: 6 winners, 2 to avoid in 2026
                                                    How to choose a red light face mask: Look at wavelength firstThere are some ways to tell that a red light face mask won’t be effective before you buy it and use it for a few months. Wavelength is the first factor anyone will tell you to consider. You want to find products that emit light within the therapeutic window, or the range of wavelengths that can be effective when treating common skin conditions. There is now an abundance of evidence that specific wavelengths of red light can be effective for:Reduction of fine lines, dark circles, and crow’s feetImproving skin textureFighting wrinklesBoosting collagen productionReducing inflammation and rednessTo be effective, the light coming from the mask must penetrate different layers of your skin. There are optimal wavelengths for each type of light a face mask emits, and any reputable brand will put their mask’s wavelengths front and center in the listing. These carefully chosen ranges are strong enough to penetrate your skin, but gentle enough to avoid over-activating delicate face skin.Red light does its work in the middle layer (dermis) of your skin, requiring wavelengths between 630 and 633 nm to reach past the top layer. There, red light stimulates cells to produce rejuvenating proteins like collagen and elastin, evening out surface redness, and preventing scarring or post-pimple red spots.
        
        
                                        
                
                                            The Shark CryoGlow’s Better Aging routine combines red and near-infrared light.
                                                                Credit: Leah Stodart / Mashable
                                    
                    
        
                                        
                
                                            The Shark CryoGlow’s Skin Clearing routine uses a special sequence of red, near-infrared, and blue light.
                                                                Credit: Leah Stodart / Mashable
                                    
                    
    

Most red light masks also use near-infrared red light therapy, which requires longer wavelengths to travel further than regular red light. Near-infrared light between 830 and 850 nm reaches into tissue under the dermis to further stimulate cell turnover, firm skin, and heal deep-seated spots or stubborn dark circles.What about blue light therapy?Blue light is often used to target acne, and some of the best red light masks use a combination of blue and red light therapy.Blue light operates on the top layer (epidermis) of your skin, so its ideal wavelength is shorter than either red light standard. Blue light at 415nm has an antimicrobial effect, ideally killing the bacteria that cause acne before a breakout starts. If hellbent bacterial acne makes it past the blue light phase — or if you’re also dealing with hormonal or cystic acne not caused by bacteria — red light swoops in to neutralize inflammation and speed up the healing process. The thing is, most mainstream LED face masks hit those wavelength marks. So, how do you choose between masks if their wavelength numbers are all the same?The importance of irradianceIrradiance is another major element that determines whether or not a red light mask actually works. While wavelength refers to the length the light can travel, irradiance refers to the amount of light energy that’s actually reaching your skin per session (not just the intensity of light being generated at the bulb). If wavelength numbers are correct but irradiance is low, the mask will still be kind of a dud.
        
        
                                        
                
                                            Bulb placement is one of the key factors we considered in our test.
                                                                Credit: Leah Stodart / Mashable
                                    
                    
        
                                        
                
                                            Comfort is another key factor, as consistent use is key to results.
                                                                Credit: Miller Kern / Mashable
                                    
                    
    

Irradiance is officially expressed as milliwatts per square centimeter. The optimal irradiance range for a red light face mask is pretty wide (anywhere between 30 and 100 mW/cm²), though many brands don’t directly provide that number.Most brands do note the length of each session, which is one way to quickly gauge irradiance without getting into calculations. Dr. Mamina Turegano sums it up best on her YouTube account: “Higher irradiance means more effective energy delivery per minute of use.” Longer sessions don’t automatically mean that results will be more powerful — a mask with sessions that last for less than 10 minutes has higher irradiance than a mask with sessions that last for 20 to 30 minutes. Since a mask with lower irradiance needs to sit on your face for longer, you might be less likely to keep up with wearing it. Are bulb count and bulb placement a big deal?The number of bulbs and the placement of bulbs inside the mask can also impact efficacy, especially if you’re expecting results on a specific area of your face. Masks with more bulbs packed evenly across the face will provide more even coverage across every inch of your face than masks with more sporadically-placed bulbs. Some masks also provide more light sources overall by emitting both red and blue light simultaneously from every single bulb, like the Shark CryoGlow. This would be a better option for full-face acne prevention than masks with blue and red LEDs only concentrated in certain spots, like the Dr. Dennis Gross DRx SpectraLite.What red light masks worked for us?Of course, you probably didn’t come here for a science lesson. You want to find the best red light masks Mashable’s testers used and loved.After trying out 11 different products, we ultimately found six that we can recommend. These masks delivered visible results for our product testers.Remember: Consistency is essential for the best results (or any results)with LED face masks. You’ll need to wear your mask consistently for at least 1-2 months.
                        
                    #red #light #masks #tested #winners #avoid

The Shark CryoGlow’s Better Aging routine combines red and near-infrared light. Credit: Leah Stodart / Mashable

Hand holding Shark red light mask featuring blue and black setting on screen

The Shark CryoGlow’s Skin Clearing routine uses a special sequence of red, near-infrared, and blue light. Credit: Leah Stodart / Mashable

Most red light masks also use near-infrared red light therapy, which requires longer wavelengths to travel further than regular red light. Near-infrared light between 830 and 850 nm reaches into tissue under the dermis to further stimulate cell turnover, firm skin, and heal deep-seated spots or stubborn dark circles.

What about blue light therapy?

Blue light is often used to target acne, and some of the best red light masks use a combination of blue and red light therapy.

Blue light operates on the top layer (epidermis) of your skin, so its ideal wavelength is shorter than either red light standard. Blue light at 415nm has an antimicrobial effect, ideally killing the bacteria that cause acne before a breakout starts. If hellbent bacterial acne makes it past the blue light phase — or if you’re also dealing with hormonal or cystic acne not caused by bacteria — red light swoops in to neutralize inflammation and speed up the healing process.

The thing is, most mainstream LED face masks hit those wavelength marks. So, how do you choose between masks if their wavelength numbers are all the same?

The importance of irradiance

Irradiance is another major element that determines whether or not a red light mask actually works. While wavelength refers to the length the light can travel, irradiance refers to the amount of light energy that’s actually reaching your skin per session (not just the intensity of light being generated at the bulb). If wavelength numbers are correct but irradiance is low, the mask will still be kind of a dud.

Inside of Shark CryoGlow face mask lit up pink

Bulb placement is one of the key factors we considered in our test. Credit: Leah Stodart / Mashable

woman wearing therabody led face mask

Comfort is another key factor, as consistent use is key to results. Credit: Miller Kern / Mashable

Irradiance is officially expressed as milliwatts per square centimeter. The optimal irradiance range for a red light face mask is pretty wide (anywhere between 30 and 100 mW/cm²), though many brands don’t directly provide that number.

Most brands do note the length of each session, which is one way to quickly gauge irradiance without getting into calculations. Dr. Mamina Turegano sums it up best on her YouTube account: “Higher irradiance means more effective energy delivery per minute of use.” Longer sessions don’t automatically mean that results will be more powerful — a mask with sessions that last for less than 10 minutes has higher irradiance than a mask with sessions that last for 20 to 30 minutes. Since a mask with lower irradiance needs to sit on your face for longer, you might be less likely to keep up with wearing it.

Are bulb count and bulb placement a big deal?

The number of bulbs and the placement of bulbs inside the mask can also impact efficacy, especially if you’re expecting results on a specific area of your face. Masks with more bulbs packed evenly across the face will provide more even coverage across every inch of your face than masks with more sporadically-placed bulbs.

Some masks also provide more light sources overall by emitting both red and blue light simultaneously from every single bulb, like the Shark CryoGlow. This would be a better option for full-face acne prevention than masks with blue and red LEDs only concentrated in certain spots, like the Dr. Dennis Gross DRx SpectraLite.

What red light masks worked for us?

Of course, you probably didn’t come here for a science lesson. You want to find the best red light masks Mashable’s testers used and loved.

After trying out 11 different products, we ultimately found six that we can recommend. These masks delivered visible results for our product testers.

Remember: Consistency is essential for the best results (or any results)with LED face masks. You’ll need to wear your mask consistently for at least 1-2 months.

#red #light #masks #tested #winners #avoid

Is an e-reader case as dangerous as a Glock 19?

Last month, Louisville, Kentucky-based creator Luke The Maker showed off a bizarre, 3D-printed, pistol-shaped case design for the popular minimalist Xteink X4 e-reader. The X4 lies vertically atop the plastic gun’s slide, with a cutout on the side to access its buttons. Though the frame was digitally modeled after a real gun, this “case” can’t shoot bullets. Squeezing the trigger does nothing at all. He calls his contraption the “Gundle.”

In a post showing off the wacky accessory, Luke (whose last name is Blackford) can be seen flipping through Cormac McCarthy’s Blood Meridian and J.D. Salinger’s The Catcher in the Rye before tossing the gun e-reader case in his car’s center console.

“The perfect e-reader for public reading,” text reads over the clip.

But even though this internet experiment is clearly intended as a joke or commentary, it’s possible future 3D printers won’t see it that way. Lawmakers in multiple states are pushing for laws mandating gun-blocking software on all new printers sold. This still-evolving technology would, in theory, scan every file before it’s physically printed and try to algorithmically determine whether it’s a firearm or firearm part. If the software decides that the thing being printed looks enough like a gun, it stops the printer from completing the job. That is, if it even works. Lawmakers in New York and California are leaving it up to a panel of industry experts to weigh whether the proposed vision is even technically feasible. Despite that cloud of uncertainty, legislation mandating this blocking tech has already become law in New York and passed California’s state assembly.

“I didn’t want it to be so publicly available. I just didn’t want tons of them out there.”

That may sound reasonable enough, but makers and industry experts previously told The Verge that the tech is underdeveloped and risks introducing false positives where non-guns that look gun-like get unnecessarily blocked. Blackford’s e-reader case falls directly in that detection gray area. Blackford says he didn’t explicitly make the Gundle to challenge the proposed laws, but he also didn’t shy away from expressing his opinion about them.

“I’m not for that kind of thing because I’m big into open software,” Blackford says. “It’s just a wild frontier right now, so I definitely don’t trust [gun blueprint scanning tech] now.”

“If people want to 3D print a gun, they’re going to do it,” he adds. “I don’t think it’s up to the people making the slicers to control that kind of thing.”

Those pushing for these mandates, meanwhile, wouldn’t say whether their proposed tech would stop Blackford from making a harmless case. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul’s office didn’t respond to questions about Blackford’s device specifically, or the implications false positives could have for a maker’s ability to freely express themself.

“Governor Hochul is laser-focused on improving public safety and reducing gun violence in New York,” deputy communications director at the Office of Governor Kathy Hochul and spokesperson Jess D’Amelia tells The Verge. “This law relies on the expertise of leading subject matter experts to evaluate and harness emerging technologies while addressing the real and growing threat of ghost guns and illegally manufactured weapons of war. The Governor is confident these measures will make all New York communities safer.”

“The intent of the law is not to block prints like this, but I think this print is a really good example of why that’s hard.”

Cliff Braun, associate director of technology policy and research at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, who has spoken critically of California’s proposal, says it’s unclear whether the proposed system would flag Blackford’s design. While the technology exists, Braun says it’s currently in a “limited form.” Critics say a more cautious detection system that relies on hashes to flag known firearms and parts from a database could be trivially easy to sidestep by simply making small changes to a file’s design. A more expansive approach using AI to analyze a file’s geometry and predict if it’s a gun, by contrast, may be more prone to mistakes. Things that look gun-ish but aren’t, in other words, might get swept up. Lawmakers in both states are leaving it to expert panels to iron out the details of implementation, but the final result, Braun says, will have to grapple with an unavoidable tradeoff between false positives and false negatives.

“The intent of the law is not to block prints like this, but I think this print is a really good example of why that’s hard,” Braun says.

Handguns like the one Blackford modeled his design on are particularly problematic. In 2022, the ATF updated its rules clarifying that the only parts of a firearm that legally require a serial number are those that provide the housing or structure for the weapon’s “primary fire control component.” In AR-15s and other long guns, that’s the receiver. Braun notes that the shapes of receivers are relatively unique and distinguishable, as are machine gun conversion devices. That’s not quite the same with a handgun. There, the part that requires a serial number is the frame. And unlike receivers, frames are visually far more ambiguous. Water hoses, toy guns, and power tools all share somewhat similar shapes.

Dartmouth College associate professor of engineering Solomon Diamond tells The Verge that whether Blackford’s e-reader case gets blocked really depends on the type of technology that particular printer deploys. A more conservative hashing approach would fall flat because Blackford’s device wouldn’t match one of the exact hashes on a database of prohibited files. A different system using computer vision and AI to evaluate where an object likely resembles a gun, however, could flag it by mistake.

“Basing blocking tech on visual resemblance is where the false positive concerns arise because a prop and a real functional firearm resemble one another,” Diamond told The Verge. “The technical challenge here is that depending on training data and algorithms used, setting decision thresholds that have acceptably low false positive rates might have unacceptably high false negative rates and vice versa.”

“Visual resemblance might be fooled by [the] gun-shaped e-reader case,” he added.

Diamond noted a third option, “geometric identification,” could potentially thread the needle. This approach, which is currently being deployed to guide quality control in manufacturing, can be fine-tuned for what Diamond refers to as “exact geometric match,” where a zero false-positive rate is at least theoretically possible. This approach is still relatively new when it comes to 3D print blocking tech.

“Geometric Identification would not be fooled by your gun-shaped e-reader case,” he said.

3D printer manufacturers and the experts setting the standards for how blocking software mandates will work are then left with a complex choice. Requiring systems that are both actually effective at detecting guns and technically feasible to introduce in the near future will necessarily mean some non-guns get caught in the crossfire. Pretty quickly, that starts limiting how makers, hobbyists, and artists can express themselves.

“If you’re going to try and block all of those wonderfully creative humans, you’re going to make it very hard to print props or make social commentary,” Braun said.

Blackford says making the Gundle was relatively straightforward. He first went online and did a simple search for “free gun model,” which turned up the blueprints for the gun shell part of the case. He then uploaded that to Fusion 360, his preferred modeling program, and added the e-reader on top and built the case around it. The Xteink X4 is one of the cheaper e-readers on the market, and though it has limited functionality, its devoted community regularly works to improve it. With the digital design finalized, Blackford sent it off to his Bambu Lab H2D printer. The entire process, from initial idea to printed product, took less than 24 hours.

Even though the device doesn’t shoot, Blackford says he still hasn’t taken it out in public. He’s since published the files on his website, where anyone with a 3D printer can download them and make their own. Blackford admits he did this with some hesitation. The case isn’t a gun, but it looks enough like one that someone brandishing it in the open, or revealing it during a confrontation with law enforcement, could find themselves in a seriously dangerous misunderstanding. He talked things over with his wife before publishing, and ultimately decided to avoid larger marketplaces like Thingiverse or Printables so it wouldn’t spread too widely. This way, he says, people can still find it if they are interested but won’t randomly stumble upon it.

“I didn’t want it to be so publicly available,” Blackford says. “I just didn’t want tons of them out there.”

“If you’re going to try and block all of those wonderfully creative humans, you’re going to make it very hard to print props or make social commentary.”

There’s also some question as to whether walking around with the case would violate already existing federal laws requiring toys or other “look-alike firearms” to have distinctive markings. These so-called “orange tip laws” are why fake guns and airsoft guns have blaze-orange plastic tips attached to their muzzles when they are manufactured and sold. But the e-reader case isn’t really a toy or a fake gun, but an art project.

Regardless, Blackford says if he ever did take it out in public, he’d print a version in a different color to make clear it isn’t imitating a real weapon. That’s not an overreaction. Walking around in public with something that resembles a gun, even if it is functionally useless, can make interactions with police and other gun owners dangerous, or even deadly. In 2014, Cleveland police shot and killed a 12-year-old boy named Tamir Rice after he reached for a toy gun. A 2016 Washington Post report estimated that over the span of two years, police shot and killed 86 people who were holding realistic-looking toy weapons and pellet and airsoft guns.

Supporters of blueprint scanning mandates say it’s necessary to close an enforcement gap that’s giving those with felony convictions and others access to guns when they shouldn’t have them. Various laws prohibiting the manufacture and sale of 3D-printed ghost guns (untraceable firearms without serial numbers) already exist across the country. But people print in the privacy of their own homes, making enforcing those laws nearly impossible. Hochul has called this dynamic the “plastic pipeline” and warns of criminals printing guns on their kitchen tables. Mandating scanning software would shift the responsibility onto printer manufacturers, stopping the illegal guns before they are ever made.

Whether the threat posed by 3D-printed guns actually justifies such a transformative change to how printers work remains up for debate. The guns are certainly getting better in terms of performance. There are also more of them. In 2024, the NYPD said it recovered 109 mostly 3D-printed guns from crime scenes. That’s up from just one recorded three years prior. A separate 2024 report from the gun control advocacy group Everytown found similar results in 20 other cities.

All of that is a drop in the bucket compared to conventional guns collected at crime scenes. In 2025 alone, then-Mayor Eric Adams claimed the NYPD seized more than 5,200 illegal guns. The total number of firearms in the country more broadly has been estimated to outnumber people.

But Blackford says he wasn’t convinced 3D-printed guns pose an especially immediate danger. In his view, they are still primarily made by tinkerers and gun enthusiasts with a passion for the process and plenty of time on their hands. In most cases, he’s convinced, getting a real gun is still much easier than printing one.

3D printing, Blackford says, “is too much of a pain in the ass.”

And if legislation like New York’s or California’s ever reaches Kentucky, Blackford says he’s ready to get creative, either by using VPNs or figuring out some other workaround. He’s likely not alone.

“Some companies are going to be putting those locks in place, but I think open-source software is always going to prevail,” Blackford says.

Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.
#ereader #case #gunTech">Is this e-reader case a gun?Is an e-reader case as dangerous as a Glock 19?Last month, Louisville, Kentucky-based creator Luke The Maker showed off a bizarre, 3D-printed, pistol-shaped case design for the popular minimalist Xteink X4 e-reader. The X4 lies vertically atop the plastic gun’s slide, with a cutout on the side to access its buttons. Though the frame was digitally modeled after a real gun, this “case” can’t shoot bullets. Squeezing the trigger does nothing at all. He calls his contraption the “Gundle.”In a post showing off the wacky accessory, Luke (whose last name is Blackford) can be seen flipping through Cormac McCarthy’s Blood Meridian and J.D. Salinger’s The Catcher in the Rye before tossing the gun e-reader case in his car’s center console.“The perfect e-reader for public reading,” text reads over the clip.But even though this internet experiment is clearly intended as a joke or commentary, it’s possible future 3D printers won’t see it that way. Lawmakers in multiple states are pushing for laws mandating gun-blocking software on all new printers sold. This still-evolving technology would, in theory, scan every file before it’s physically printed and try to algorithmically determine whether it’s a firearm or firearm part. If the software decides that the thing being printed looks enough like a gun, it stops the printer from completing the job. That is, if it even works. Lawmakers in New York and California are leaving it up to a panel of industry experts to weigh whether the proposed vision is even technically feasible. Despite that cloud of uncertainty, legislation mandating this blocking tech has already become law in New York and passed California’s state assembly.“I didn’t want it to be so publicly available. I just didn’t want tons of them out there.” That may sound reasonable enough, but makers and industry experts previously told The Verge that the tech is underdeveloped and risks introducing false positives where non-guns that look gun-like get unnecessarily blocked. Blackford’s e-reader case falls directly in that detection gray area. Blackford says he didn’t explicitly make the Gundle to challenge the proposed laws, but he also didn’t shy away from expressing his opinion about them.“I’m not for that kind of thing because I’m big into open software,” Blackford says. “It’s just a wild frontier right now, so I definitely don’t trust [gun blueprint scanning tech] now.”“If people want to 3D print a gun, they’re going to do it,” he adds. “I don’t think it’s up to the people making the slicers to control that kind of thing.”Those pushing for these mandates, meanwhile, wouldn’t say whether their proposed tech would stop Blackford from making a harmless case. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul’s office didn’t respond to questions about Blackford’s device specifically, or the implications false positives could have for a maker’s ability to freely express themself.“Governor Hochul is laser-focused on improving public safety and reducing gun violence in New York,” deputy communications director at the Office of Governor Kathy Hochul and spokesperson Jess D’Amelia tells The Verge. “This law relies on the expertise of leading subject matter experts to evaluate and harness emerging technologies while addressing the real and growing threat of ghost guns and illegally manufactured weapons of war. The Governor is confident these measures will make all New York communities safer.”“The intent of the law is not to block prints like this, but I think this print is a really good example of why that’s hard.”Cliff Braun, associate director of technology policy and research at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, who has spoken critically of California’s proposal, says it’s unclear whether the proposed system would flag Blackford’s design. While the technology exists, Braun says it’s currently in a “limited form.” Critics say a more cautious detection system that relies on hashes to flag known firearms and parts from a database could be trivially easy to sidestep by simply making small changes to a file’s design. A more expansive approach using AI to analyze a file’s geometry and predict if it’s a gun, by contrast, may be more prone to mistakes. Things that look gun-ish but aren’t, in other words, might get swept up. Lawmakers in both states are leaving it to expert panels to iron out the details of implementation, but the final result, Braun says, will have to grapple with an unavoidable tradeoff between false positives and false negatives.“The intent of the law is not to block prints like this, but I think this print is a really good example of why that’s hard,” Braun says.Handguns like the one Blackford modeled his design on are particularly problematic. In 2022, the ATF updated its rules clarifying that the only parts of a firearm that legally require a serial number are those that provide the housing or structure for the weapon’s “primary fire control component.” In AR-15s and other long guns, that’s the receiver. Braun notes that the shapes of receivers are relatively unique and distinguishable, as are machine gun conversion devices. That’s not quite the same with a handgun. There, the part that requires a serial number is the frame. And unlike receivers, frames are visually far more ambiguous. Water hoses, toy guns, and power tools all share somewhat similar shapes.Dartmouth College associate professor of engineering Solomon Diamond tells The Verge that whether Blackford’s e-reader case gets blocked really depends on the type of technology that particular printer deploys. A more conservative hashing approach would fall flat because Blackford’s device wouldn’t match one of the exact hashes on a database of prohibited files. A different system using computer vision and AI to evaluate where an object likely resembles a gun, however, could flag it by mistake.“Basing blocking tech on visual resemblance is where the false positive concerns arise because a prop and a real functional firearm resemble one another,” Diamond told The Verge. “The technical challenge here is that depending on training data and algorithms used, setting decision thresholds that have acceptably low false positive rates might have unacceptably high false negative rates and vice versa.”“Visual resemblance might be fooled by [the] gun-shaped e-reader case,” he added.Diamond noted a third option, “geometric identification,” could potentially thread the needle. This approach, which is currently being deployed to guide quality control in manufacturing, can be fine-tuned for what Diamond refers to as “exact geometric match,” where a zero false-positive rate is at least theoretically possible. This approach is still relatively new when it comes to 3D print blocking tech.“Geometric Identification would not be fooled by your gun-shaped e-reader case,” he said.3D printer manufacturers and the experts setting the standards for how blocking software mandates will work are then left with a complex choice. Requiring systems that are both actually effective at detecting guns and technically feasible to introduce in the near future will necessarily mean some non-guns get caught in the crossfire. Pretty quickly, that starts limiting how makers, hobbyists, and artists can express themselves.“If you’re going to try and block all of those wonderfully creative humans, you’re going to make it very hard to print props or make social commentary,” Braun said.Blackford says making the Gundle was relatively straightforward. He first went online and did a simple search for “free gun model,” which turned up the blueprints for the gun shell part of the case. He then uploaded that to Fusion 360, his preferred modeling program, and added the e-reader on top and built the case around it. The Xteink X4 is one of the cheaper e-readers on the market, and though it has limited functionality, its devoted community regularly works to improve it. With the digital design finalized, Blackford sent it off to his Bambu Lab H2D printer. The entire process, from initial idea to printed product, took less than 24 hours.Even though the device doesn’t shoot, Blackford says he still hasn’t taken it out in public. He’s since published the files on his website, where anyone with a 3D printer can download them and make their own. Blackford admits he did this with some hesitation. The case isn’t a gun, but it looks enough like one that someone brandishing it in the open, or revealing it during a confrontation with law enforcement, could find themselves in a seriously dangerous misunderstanding. He talked things over with his wife before publishing, and ultimately decided to avoid larger marketplaces like Thingiverse or Printables so it wouldn’t spread too widely. This way, he says, people can still find it if they are interested but won’t randomly stumble upon it.“I didn’t want it to be so publicly available,” Blackford says. “I just didn’t want tons of them out there.”“If you’re going to try and block all of those wonderfully creative humans, you’re going to make it very hard to print props or make social commentary.”There’s also some question as to whether walking around with the case would violate already existing federal laws requiring toys or other “look-alike firearms” to have distinctive markings. These so-called “orange tip laws” are why fake guns and airsoft guns have blaze-orange plastic tips attached to their muzzles when they are manufactured and sold. But the e-reader case isn’t really a toy or a fake gun, but an art project.Regardless, Blackford says if he ever did take it out in public, he’d print a version in a different color to make clear it isn’t imitating a real weapon. That’s not an overreaction. Walking around in public with something that resembles a gun, even if it is functionally useless, can make interactions with police and other gun owners dangerous, or even deadly. In 2014, Cleveland police shot and killed a 12-year-old boy named Tamir Rice after he reached for a toy gun. A 2016 Washington Post report estimated that over the span of two years, police shot and killed 86 people who were holding realistic-looking toy weapons and pellet and airsoft guns.Supporters of blueprint scanning mandates say it’s necessary to close an enforcement gap that’s giving those with felony convictions and others access to guns when they shouldn’t have them. Various laws prohibiting the manufacture and sale of 3D-printed ghost guns (untraceable firearms without serial numbers) already exist across the country. But people print in the privacy of their own homes, making enforcing those laws nearly impossible. Hochul has called this dynamic the “plastic pipeline” and warns of criminals printing guns on their kitchen tables. Mandating scanning software would shift the responsibility onto printer manufacturers, stopping the illegal guns before they are ever made.Whether the threat posed by 3D-printed guns actually justifies such a transformative change to how printers work remains up for debate. The guns are certainly getting better in terms of performance. There are also more of them. In 2024, the NYPD said it recovered 109 mostly 3D-printed guns from crime scenes. That’s up from just one recorded three years prior. A separate 2024 report from the gun control advocacy group Everytown found similar results in 20 other cities.All of that is a drop in the bucket compared to conventional guns collected at crime scenes. In 2025 alone, then-Mayor Eric Adams claimed the NYPD seized more than 5,200 illegal guns. The total number of firearms in the country more broadly has been estimated to outnumber people.But Blackford says he wasn’t convinced 3D-printed guns pose an especially immediate danger. In his view, they are still primarily made by tinkerers and gun enthusiasts with a passion for the process and plenty of time on their hands. In most cases, he’s convinced, getting a real gun is still much easier than printing one.3D printing, Blackford says, “is too much of a pain in the ass.”And if legislation like New York’s or California’s ever reaches Kentucky, Blackford says he’s ready to get creative, either by using VPNs or figuring out some other workaround. He’s likely not alone.“Some companies are going to be putting those locks in place, but I think open-source software is always going to prevail,” Blackford says.Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.Mack DeGeurinCloseMack DeGeurinPosts from this author will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All by Mack DeGeurinTechCloseTechPosts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and your homepage feed.FollowFollowSee All Tech#ereader #case #gunTech

Luke The Maker showed off a bizarre, 3D-printed, pistol-shaped case design for the popular minimalist Xteink X4 e-reader. The X4 lies vertically atop the plastic gun’s slide, with a cutout on the side to access its buttons. Though the frame was digitally modeled after a real gun, this “case” can’t shoot bullets. Squeezing the trigger does nothing at all. He calls his contraption the “Gundle.”

In a post showing off the wacky accessory, Luke (whose last name is Blackford) can be seen flipping through Cormac McCarthy’s Blood Meridian and J.D. Salinger’s The Catcher in the Rye before tossing the gun e-reader case in his car’s center console.

“The perfect e-reader for public reading,” text reads over the clip.

But even though this internet experiment is clearly intended as a joke or commentary, it’s possible future 3D printers won’t see it that way. Lawmakers in multiple states are pushing for laws mandating gun-blocking software on all new printers sold. This still-evolving technology would, in theory, scan every file before it’s physically printed and try to algorithmically determine whether it’s a firearm or firearm part. If the software decides that the thing being printed looks enough like a gun, it stops the printer from completing the job. That is, if it even works. Lawmakers in New York and California are leaving it up to a panel of industry experts to weigh whether the proposed vision is even technically feasible. Despite that cloud of uncertainty, legislation mandating this blocking tech has already become law in New York and passed California’s state assembly.

“I didn’t want it to be so publicly available. I just didn’t want tons of them out there.”

That may sound reasonable enough, but makers and industry experts previously told The Verge that the tech is underdeveloped and risks introducing false positives where non-guns that look gun-like get unnecessarily blocked. Blackford’s e-reader case falls directly in that detection gray area. Blackford says he didn’t explicitly make the Gundle to challenge the proposed laws, but he also didn’t shy away from expressing his opinion about them.

“I’m not for that kind of thing because I’m big into open software,” Blackford says. “It’s just a wild frontier right now, so I definitely don’t trust [gun blueprint scanning tech] now.”

“If people want to 3D print a gun, they’re going to do it,” he adds. “I don’t think it’s up to the people making the slicers to control that kind of thing.”

Those pushing for these mandates, meanwhile, wouldn’t say whether their proposed tech would stop Blackford from making a harmless case. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul’s office didn’t respond to questions about Blackford’s device specifically, or the implications false positives could have for a maker’s ability to freely express themself.

“Governor Hochul is laser-focused on improving public safety and reducing gun violence in New York,” deputy communications director at the Office of Governor Kathy Hochul and spokesperson Jess D’Amelia tells The Verge. “This law relies on the expertise of leading subject matter experts to evaluate and harness emerging technologies while addressing the real and growing threat of ghost guns and illegally manufactured weapons of war. The Governor is confident these measures will make all New York communities safer.”

“The intent of the law is not to block prints like this, but I think this print is a really good example of why that’s hard.”

Cliff Braun, associate director of technology policy and research at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, who has spoken critically of California’s proposal, says it’s unclear whether the proposed system would flag Blackford’s design. While the technology exists, Braun says it’s currently in a “limited form.” Critics say a more cautious detection system that relies on hashes to flag known firearms and parts from a database could be trivially easy to sidestep by simply making small changes to a file’s design. A more expansive approach using AI to analyze a file’s geometry and predict if it’s a gun, by contrast, may be more prone to mistakes. Things that look gun-ish but aren’t, in other words, might get swept up. Lawmakers in both states are leaving it to expert panels to iron out the details of implementation, but the final result, Braun says, will have to grapple with an unavoidable tradeoff between false positives and false negatives.

“The intent of the law is not to block prints like this, but I think this print is a really good example of why that’s hard,” Braun says.

Handguns like the one Blackford modeled his design on are particularly problematic. In 2022, the ATF updated its rules clarifying that the only parts of a firearm that legally require a serial number are those that provide the housing or structure for the weapon’s “primary fire control component.” In AR-15s and other long guns, that’s the receiver. Braun notes that the shapes of receivers are relatively unique and distinguishable, as are machine gun conversion devices. That’s not quite the same with a handgun. There, the part that requires a serial number is the frame. And unlike receivers, frames are visually far more ambiguous. Water hoses, toy guns, and power tools all share somewhat similar shapes.

Dartmouth College associate professor of engineering Solomon Diamond tells The Verge that whether Blackford’s e-reader case gets blocked really depends on the type of technology that particular printer deploys. A more conservative hashing approach would fall flat because Blackford’s device wouldn’t match one of the exact hashes on a database of prohibited files. A different system using computer vision and AI to evaluate where an object likely resembles a gun, however, could flag it by mistake.

“Basing blocking tech on visual resemblance is where the false positive concerns arise because a prop and a real functional firearm resemble one another,” Diamond told The Verge. “The technical challenge here is that depending on training data and algorithms used, setting decision thresholds that have acceptably low false positive rates might have unacceptably high false negative rates and vice versa.”

“Visual resemblance might be fooled by [the] gun-shaped e-reader case,” he added.

Diamond noted a third option, “geometric identification,” could potentially thread the needle. This approach, which is currently being deployed to guide quality control in manufacturing, can be fine-tuned for what Diamond refers to as “exact geometric match,” where a zero false-positive rate is at least theoretically possible. This approach is still relatively new when it comes to 3D print blocking tech.

“Geometric Identification would not be fooled by your gun-shaped e-reader case,” he said.

3D printer manufacturers and the experts setting the standards for how blocking software mandates will work are then left with a complex choice. Requiring systems that are both actually effective at detecting guns and technically feasible to introduce in the near future will necessarily mean some non-guns get caught in the crossfire. Pretty quickly, that starts limiting how makers, hobbyists, and artists can express themselves.

“If you’re going to try and block all of those wonderfully creative humans, you’re going to make it very hard to print props or make social commentary,” Braun said.

Blackford says making the Gundle was relatively straightforward. He first went online and did a simple search for “free gun model,” which turned up the blueprints for the gun shell part of the case. He then uploaded that to Fusion 360, his preferred modeling program, and added the e-reader on top and built the case around it. The Xteink X4 is one of the cheaper e-readers on the market, and though it has limited functionality, its devoted community regularly works to improve it. With the digital design finalized, Blackford sent it off to his Bambu Lab H2D printer. The entire process, from initial idea to printed product, took less than 24 hours.

Even though the device doesn’t shoot, Blackford says he still hasn’t taken it out in public. He’s since published the files on his website, where anyone with a 3D printer can download them and make their own. Blackford admits he did this with some hesitation. The case isn’t a gun, but it looks enough like one that someone brandishing it in the open, or revealing it during a confrontation with law enforcement, could find themselves in a seriously dangerous misunderstanding. He talked things over with his wife before publishing, and ultimately decided to avoid larger marketplaces like Thingiverse or Printables so it wouldn’t spread too widely. This way, he says, people can still find it if they are interested but won’t randomly stumble upon it.

“I didn’t want it to be so publicly available,” Blackford says. “I just didn’t want tons of them out there.”

“If you’re going to try and block all of those wonderfully creative humans, you’re going to make it very hard to print props or make social commentary.”

There’s also some question as to whether walking around with the case would violate already existing federal laws requiring toys or other “look-alike firearms” to have distinctive markings. These so-called “orange tip laws” are why fake guns and airsoft guns have blaze-orange plastic tips attached to their muzzles when they are manufactured and sold. But the e-reader case isn’t really a toy or a fake gun, but an art project.

Regardless, Blackford says if he ever did take it out in public, he’d print a version in a different color to make clear it isn’t imitating a real weapon. That’s not an overreaction. Walking around in public with something that resembles a gun, even if it is functionally useless, can make interactions with police and other gun owners dangerous, or even deadly. In 2014, Cleveland police shot and killed a 12-year-old boy named Tamir Rice after he reached for a toy gun. A 2016 Washington Post report estimated that over the span of two years, police shot and killed 86 people who were holding realistic-looking toy weapons and pellet and airsoft guns.

Supporters of blueprint scanning mandates say it’s necessary to close an enforcement gap that’s giving those with felony convictions and others access to guns when they shouldn’t have them. Various laws prohibiting the manufacture and sale of 3D-printed ghost guns (untraceable firearms without serial numbers) already exist across the country. But people print in the privacy of their own homes, making enforcing those laws nearly impossible. Hochul has called this dynamic the “plastic pipeline” and warns of criminals printing guns on their kitchen tables. Mandating scanning software would shift the responsibility onto printer manufacturers, stopping the illegal guns before they are ever made.

Whether the threat posed by 3D-printed guns actually justifies such a transformative change to how printers work remains up for debate. The guns are certainly getting better in terms of performance. There are also more of them. In 2024, the NYPD said it recovered 109 mostly 3D-printed guns from crime scenes. That’s up from just one recorded three years prior. A separate 2024 report from the gun control advocacy group Everytown found similar results in 20 other cities.

All of that is a drop in the bucket compared to conventional guns collected at crime scenes. In 2025 alone, then-Mayor Eric Adams claimed the NYPD seized more than 5,200 illegal guns. The total number of firearms in the country more broadly has been estimated to outnumber people.

But Blackford says he wasn’t convinced 3D-printed guns pose an especially immediate danger. In his view, they are still primarily made by tinkerers and gun enthusiasts with a passion for the process and plenty of time on their hands. In most cases, he’s convinced, getting a real gun is still much easier than printing one.

3D printing, Blackford says, “is too much of a pain in the ass.”

And if legislation like New York’s or California’s ever reaches Kentucky, Blackford says he’s ready to get creative, either by using VPNs or figuring out some other workaround. He’s likely not alone.

“Some companies are going to be putting those locks in place, but I think open-source software is always going to prevail,” Blackford says.

Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.

#ereader #case #gunTech">Is this e-reader case a gun?

Is an e-reader case as dangerous as a Glock 19?

Last month, Louisville, Kentucky-based creator Luke The Maker showed off a bizarre, 3D-printed, pistol-shaped case design for the popular minimalist Xteink X4 e-reader. The X4 lies vertically atop the plastic gun’s slide, with a cutout on the side to access its buttons. Though the frame was digitally modeled after a real gun, this “case” can’t shoot bullets. Squeezing the trigger does nothing at all. He calls his contraption the “Gundle.”

In a post showing off the wacky accessory, Luke (whose last name is Blackford) can be seen flipping through Cormac McCarthy’s Blood Meridian and J.D. Salinger’s The Catcher in the Rye before tossing the gun e-reader case in his car’s center console.

“The perfect e-reader for public reading,” text reads over the clip.

But even though this internet experiment is clearly intended as a joke or commentary, it’s possible future 3D printers won’t see it that way. Lawmakers in multiple states are pushing for laws mandating gun-blocking software on all new printers sold. This still-evolving technology would, in theory, scan every file before it’s physically printed and try to algorithmically determine whether it’s a firearm or firearm part. If the software decides that the thing being printed looks enough like a gun, it stops the printer from completing the job. That is, if it even works. Lawmakers in New York and California are leaving it up to a panel of industry experts to weigh whether the proposed vision is even technically feasible. Despite that cloud of uncertainty, legislation mandating this blocking tech has already become law in New York and passed California’s state assembly.

“I didn’t want it to be so publicly available. I just didn’t want tons of them out there.”

That may sound reasonable enough, but makers and industry experts previously told The Verge that the tech is underdeveloped and risks introducing false positives where non-guns that look gun-like get unnecessarily blocked. Blackford’s e-reader case falls directly in that detection gray area. Blackford says he didn’t explicitly make the Gundle to challenge the proposed laws, but he also didn’t shy away from expressing his opinion about them.

“I’m not for that kind of thing because I’m big into open software,” Blackford says. “It’s just a wild frontier right now, so I definitely don’t trust [gun blueprint scanning tech] now.”

“If people want to 3D print a gun, they’re going to do it,” he adds. “I don’t think it’s up to the people making the slicers to control that kind of thing.”

Those pushing for these mandates, meanwhile, wouldn’t say whether their proposed tech would stop Blackford from making a harmless case. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul’s office didn’t respond to questions about Blackford’s device specifically, or the implications false positives could have for a maker’s ability to freely express themself.

“Governor Hochul is laser-focused on improving public safety and reducing gun violence in New York,” deputy communications director at the Office of Governor Kathy Hochul and spokesperson Jess D’Amelia tells The Verge. “This law relies on the expertise of leading subject matter experts to evaluate and harness emerging technologies while addressing the real and growing threat of ghost guns and illegally manufactured weapons of war. The Governor is confident these measures will make all New York communities safer.”

“The intent of the law is not to block prints like this, but I think this print is a really good example of why that’s hard.”

Cliff Braun, associate director of technology policy and research at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, who has spoken critically of California’s proposal, says it’s unclear whether the proposed system would flag Blackford’s design. While the technology exists, Braun says it’s currently in a “limited form.” Critics say a more cautious detection system that relies on hashes to flag known firearms and parts from a database could be trivially easy to sidestep by simply making small changes to a file’s design. A more expansive approach using AI to analyze a file’s geometry and predict if it’s a gun, by contrast, may be more prone to mistakes. Things that look gun-ish but aren’t, in other words, might get swept up. Lawmakers in both states are leaving it to expert panels to iron out the details of implementation, but the final result, Braun says, will have to grapple with an unavoidable tradeoff between false positives and false negatives.

“The intent of the law is not to block prints like this, but I think this print is a really good example of why that’s hard,” Braun says.

Handguns like the one Blackford modeled his design on are particularly problematic. In 2022, the ATF updated its rules clarifying that the only parts of a firearm that legally require a serial number are those that provide the housing or structure for the weapon’s “primary fire control component.” In AR-15s and other long guns, that’s the receiver. Braun notes that the shapes of receivers are relatively unique and distinguishable, as are machine gun conversion devices. That’s not quite the same with a handgun. There, the part that requires a serial number is the frame. And unlike receivers, frames are visually far more ambiguous. Water hoses, toy guns, and power tools all share somewhat similar shapes.

Dartmouth College associate professor of engineering Solomon Diamond tells The Verge that whether Blackford’s e-reader case gets blocked really depends on the type of technology that particular printer deploys. A more conservative hashing approach would fall flat because Blackford’s device wouldn’t match one of the exact hashes on a database of prohibited files. A different system using computer vision and AI to evaluate where an object likely resembles a gun, however, could flag it by mistake.

“Basing blocking tech on visual resemblance is where the false positive concerns arise because a prop and a real functional firearm resemble one another,” Diamond told The Verge. “The technical challenge here is that depending on training data and algorithms used, setting decision thresholds that have acceptably low false positive rates might have unacceptably high false negative rates and vice versa.”

“Visual resemblance might be fooled by [the] gun-shaped e-reader case,” he added.

Diamond noted a third option, “geometric identification,” could potentially thread the needle. This approach, which is currently being deployed to guide quality control in manufacturing, can be fine-tuned for what Diamond refers to as “exact geometric match,” where a zero false-positive rate is at least theoretically possible. This approach is still relatively new when it comes to 3D print blocking tech.

“Geometric Identification would not be fooled by your gun-shaped e-reader case,” he said.

3D printer manufacturers and the experts setting the standards for how blocking software mandates will work are then left with a complex choice. Requiring systems that are both actually effective at detecting guns and technically feasible to introduce in the near future will necessarily mean some non-guns get caught in the crossfire. Pretty quickly, that starts limiting how makers, hobbyists, and artists can express themselves.

“If you’re going to try and block all of those wonderfully creative humans, you’re going to make it very hard to print props or make social commentary,” Braun said.

Blackford says making the Gundle was relatively straightforward. He first went online and did a simple search for “free gun model,” which turned up the blueprints for the gun shell part of the case. He then uploaded that to Fusion 360, his preferred modeling program, and added the e-reader on top and built the case around it. The Xteink X4 is one of the cheaper e-readers on the market, and though it has limited functionality, its devoted community regularly works to improve it. With the digital design finalized, Blackford sent it off to his Bambu Lab H2D printer. The entire process, from initial idea to printed product, took less than 24 hours.

Even though the device doesn’t shoot, Blackford says he still hasn’t taken it out in public. He’s since published the files on his website, where anyone with a 3D printer can download them and make their own. Blackford admits he did this with some hesitation. The case isn’t a gun, but it looks enough like one that someone brandishing it in the open, or revealing it during a confrontation with law enforcement, could find themselves in a seriously dangerous misunderstanding. He talked things over with his wife before publishing, and ultimately decided to avoid larger marketplaces like Thingiverse or Printables so it wouldn’t spread too widely. This way, he says, people can still find it if they are interested but won’t randomly stumble upon it.

“I didn’t want it to be so publicly available,” Blackford says. “I just didn’t want tons of them out there.”

“If you’re going to try and block all of those wonderfully creative humans, you’re going to make it very hard to print props or make social commentary.”

There’s also some question as to whether walking around with the case would violate already existing federal laws requiring toys or other “look-alike firearms” to have distinctive markings. These so-called “orange tip laws” are why fake guns and airsoft guns have blaze-orange plastic tips attached to their muzzles when they are manufactured and sold. But the e-reader case isn’t really a toy or a fake gun, but an art project.

Regardless, Blackford says if he ever did take it out in public, he’d print a version in a different color to make clear it isn’t imitating a real weapon. That’s not an overreaction. Walking around in public with something that resembles a gun, even if it is functionally useless, can make interactions with police and other gun owners dangerous, or even deadly. In 2014, Cleveland police shot and killed a 12-year-old boy named Tamir Rice after he reached for a toy gun. A 2016 Washington Post report estimated that over the span of two years, police shot and killed 86 people who were holding realistic-looking toy weapons and pellet and airsoft guns.

Supporters of blueprint scanning mandates say it’s necessary to close an enforcement gap that’s giving those with felony convictions and others access to guns when they shouldn’t have them. Various laws prohibiting the manufacture and sale of 3D-printed ghost guns (untraceable firearms without serial numbers) already exist across the country. But people print in the privacy of their own homes, making enforcing those laws nearly impossible. Hochul has called this dynamic the “plastic pipeline” and warns of criminals printing guns on their kitchen tables. Mandating scanning software would shift the responsibility onto printer manufacturers, stopping the illegal guns before they are ever made.

Whether the threat posed by 3D-printed guns actually justifies such a transformative change to how printers work remains up for debate. The guns are certainly getting better in terms of performance. There are also more of them. In 2024, the NYPD said it recovered 109 mostly 3D-printed guns from crime scenes. That’s up from just one recorded three years prior. A separate 2024 report from the gun control advocacy group Everytown found similar results in 20 other cities.

All of that is a drop in the bucket compared to conventional guns collected at crime scenes. In 2025 alone, then-Mayor Eric Adams claimed the NYPD seized more than 5,200 illegal guns. The total number of firearms in the country more broadly has been estimated to outnumber people.

But Blackford says he wasn’t convinced 3D-printed guns pose an especially immediate danger. In his view, they are still primarily made by tinkerers and gun enthusiasts with a passion for the process and plenty of time on their hands. In most cases, he’s convinced, getting a real gun is still much easier than printing one.

3D printing, Blackford says, “is too much of a pain in the ass.”

And if legislation like New York’s or California’s ever reaches Kentucky, Blackford says he’s ready to get creative, either by using VPNs or figuring out some other workaround. He’s likely not alone.

“Some companies are going to be putting those locks in place, but I think open-source software is always going to prevail,” Blackford says.

Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this in your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.
#ereader #case #gunTech

Post Comment