Paper printers today are far from flawless. They consume a good portion of IT time (in companies and for those of us who are the family tech support).
I'm a tad skeptical of a universal printer. The reliability to print anything of a complex nature (beyond simple plastic molds) is a major concern.
Doing this at scale (putting this in each persons home) is a nice idea, I just don't think it's reliable enough.
I hope I'm wrong.
Somewhat related: Some of Vigor Vinge's touch on the problem of the "universal assembler" and how humanity couldn't substitute a universal assembler for a specialist economy.
Beyond that, there's the problem of creating items to be printed, or even of modifying existing items. For the most part, the proliferation of laser printers and inkjet printers into homes has led to the creation of a lot of disastrous-looking fliers with horrible fonts and banded,posterized, poorly color-controlled photographs that quickly fade to blue.
Think for a minute about the photo-finishing industry. In theory, almost every home with a computer and digital camera also has an inkjet printer capable of producing photos. In practice, by the time you get the printer set up and properly calibrated, buy the right paper from the store, and finish color-correcting your images, it STILL COSTS MORE to print a snapshot at home than it does to get it made by the local Target or Wal-Mart. The exception is for pro or semi-pro artists who are printing canvas wraps or large-scale enlargements, in which case the investment on a large-format inkjet becomes pretty substantial.
The problem with the "maker proliferation" theory of society is that not everyone wants to be a maker -- in fact, I'd argue that not even 10% of people want to be makers. This is what the One Laptop Per Child project ultimately found out -- even most curious children don't really want to hack their computers, or build their own word processor.
If we end up with 3D printers in every home, I can guarantee that for the most part, we'll end up with a lot of crappy, expensive Christmas ornaments and paperweights.
Think farther. Photos aren't a good example, since it's only one type of thing you're creating, and you don't create them that often. This is more meta: it's a device to create a wide variety of things, that you will likely be creating often. One can imagine a world where the entire setup is simply a service, like internet access, where the owner can partake in any balance of consumption or creation they desire.
Also, how do you distribute the basic materials to each home?
How do you print an ipad let alone a lithium ion battery pack without lithium?
You would need a true "universal assembler" convert one element into another. At that point...I don't think you are worrying about a "jobless" economy.
I'm a tad skeptical of a universal printer. The reliability to print anything of a complex nature (beyond simple plastic molds) is a major concern.
Doing this at scale (putting this in each persons home) is a nice idea, I just don't think it's reliable enough.
I hope I'm wrong.
Somewhat related: Some of Vigor Vinge's touch on the problem of the "universal assembler" and how humanity couldn't substitute a universal assembler for a specialist economy.