Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
Some Future Day evaluates technology at the intersection of culture & law.
Join Marc Beckman and his esteemed guests for insider knowledge surrounding how you can use new technologies to positively impact your life, career, and family. Marc Beckman is Senior Fellow of Emerging Technologies and an Adjunct Professor at NYU, CEO of DMA United, and a member of the New York State Bar Association’s Task Force on Cryptocurrency and Digital Assets.
Marc Beckman: Cody Wilson, it's a pleasure to have you. Thank you for joining me on Some Future Day.
Cody Wilson: Thanks for the invitation, Marc.
Marc Beckman: Cody, people describe you as a gun rights activist. People describe you as a crypto anarchist, as a freedom of speech advocate. Uh, how would you, how would you, uh, describe yourself? Where, where do you fit in as it relates to these various descriptors?
Cody Wilson: Uh, some of those people include me, uh, for those descriptions, but I mean. When we used that term crypto anarchy and crypto anarchist 10 years ago, it felt futuristic. It felt like it was a way of suggesting Bitcoin was gonna take over and become this kind of column central spine of like internet technology and, and all that stuff happened.
And so now there's almost like a retro futurism to crypto anarchy. It's like you're. It's almost like you're intentionally participating in, in something science fictional to continue to use the word because so much of what we predicted is now just fact and life, and so do I need to be a crypto anarchist now to just say that like, yeah, I believe in Bitcoin and I believe that Bitcoin will like overcome the state.
I mean, that's a mainstream position, so I guess I'm saying I'm just a mainstream guy now.
Marc Beckman: Are you a mainstream guy? Are you like a.
Cody Wilson: Strong guy. You know, I'm the consequence of what, you know, if you take the internet and internet policy seriously, you end up becoming either me or, uh, there's, there's not many good options. Uh, I'm, I'm one of the available outcomes in the choose your own adventure on the internet.
Marc Beckman: So would you say the system broke you? Are you a stallion that like a combination of, uh, federalists. Federal, state and local government issues, lawmakers, uh, getting into corporate, uh, your, I know your business looks like, at least from an outsider's perspective, is very successful. Um, have, have you become, uh, you know, a, a, a, a byproduct of the system.
Cody Wilson: That's a fair question. I feel like the system has also been broken in a little bit ever so slightly by me. So there's a kind of mutual breaking in or you know, a kind of synthesis. So, so much of the success of our companies ended up becoming the fact that the State Department. And public policy itself absorbed what we were doing and then tried to retranslate it into the law as a way of kind of containing encapsulating, pretending that it had anticipated and understood what we were doing.
So that's also an insight of mine. You can start from any radical or vanguard position with enough success. And I mean, even like from a Marxist point of view, with enough success, the system, and this is a kind of cynical point of view, can find a way to absorb. And, and, and basically try to represent you.
Marc Beckman: Well, I think that's an interesting, uh, declaration because certainly with the advent of technology coupled with your vision of the world going back, you know, 15 years ago or so, perhaps we pushed out this moment in time where like the federal government of the state government, because of your philosophy.
Again, coupled with emerging technologies in this like second phase, this new generation of gun control, but yet it doesn't seem like they're able to, uh, keep up with it. I don't think that lawmakers have the ability to understand what you're doing as it relates to 3D printing and ghost guns. I don't think that they are working fast enough, as fast as the technology to, um.
Protect individual rights coupled with, uh, people on the street. Uh, I also don't think law enforcement is capable of detecting 3D printed guns and now even 3D printed ammunition. So perhaps we're in this moment in time where because of what you've done and the old system, we're in this second generation of gun control.
But, uh, the, the lawmakers and the lawmaking ecosystem, the legal ecosystem can't, can't keep up yet. They don't understand it yet.
Cody Wilson: I think the categories you use are correct. I was more optimistic about law enforcement and, you know, legislatures not understanding 3D guns five to seven years ago. But it seems in a, in important ways that they truly do. And even if they can't get the technology right and write laws that truly under, you know, reflect that understanding, they use the kind of the standard gun control scare tactics in a science fictional, you know, anticipatory dimension. And then they create like more despotic, you know, reactionary laws.
So like for example, California understands the Glock switch problem that you can 3D print a little, a little knickknack that makes your pistol into a machine gun rather than try to understand the intricacies of how to. Filter that as a file or on the internet or something that you can't possess in California.
California just decides to ban the entire Glock, which, which was always the goal of generation one gun control. Uh, in fact, you know, the, the Brady campaign began as handgun control incorporated at the advent of the Glock pistol. So there's a way that like we've kind of horseshoe back around through second generation.
Lazy gun control politics back to universal or global gun control solutions, which may not stand up in the end, but there's such a fracturing happening at the level of federal courts and you know, a kind of dis, a disrespect for the Supreme Court that you'll end up seeing like in the ninth circuit you probably can't have a Glock five years from now, which is a consequence of 3D printed guns and a consequence of the fact that these legislatures can't actually handle the problem.
But in the face of understanding that they can't handle the problem, it actually emboldens them from more. Let's say like a less constitutional, more despotic solution.
Marc Beckman: So if you were gonna hone over an area in the country, whether it's a, you know, state or even like, if you wanna expand federal, who do you think is doing it right
Cody Wilson: Who's doing
Marc Beckman: government side?
Cody Wilson: gun control? Right. Uh, I mean, I have opinions about this, but I mean the very worst defenders have been the very worst defenders when it comes to guns. That's, that's New Jersey. California maintains a kind of shred of, you know, legalistic credibility or something. But, uh, New York, New Jersey are, are always doing scary things.
Who's doing it right when you ask me that question? Well, it's, it's people who aren't, you know, it's people who have a certain demographic and they're not concerned about gun politics on this level. They don't, they don't think about it. They think of it maybe in the oldest Republican sense that like, well, popular ownership of arms is obviously like a, a fundamental of, of civic participation in this.
In this country, very few states really have that opinion or really reflect that opinion in their lawmaking. So far be it for me. I mean, even Texas has got kind of mid gun laws, but of course, I guess you'd expect someone like me to say that.
Marc Beckman: For sure. But it's interesting, um, when you talk about lazy lawmaking, because there really is a slippery slope when you talk about this nuance with regards to. To the Glock leading perhaps, uh, to the total, um, elimination of that firearm in five years. What you're talking about is, in my opinion, either a total lack of understanding of the nuance itself from the lawmakers, or they get it, but they're using this opportunity, they're being opportunistic to shut it down.
Cody Wilson: Yeah, I, I think they get it enough and I've actually watched California legislative sessions track with the changes to my own terms and conditions and products year to year. And so like, you know, the, this is not just because, uh, uh, the politicians have got it. It's also because K Street's got it. The R Street Institute's got it.
That every time for gun safety in the modern gun control movement work on this almost subscription basis where they are the kind of Rand Institute for Gun Control and they will have up to the minute papers and ideas and symposia and they will export that very capably, um, to their. You know, to their representative lawmakers or to their, I mean, Mark Kelly got elected to the US Senate.
I mean, he did that on a gun control policy. So there's more astute gun control, like, let's say policy to or, or, or, uh, think tank to policy pipeline for gun control these days. Some of that was perfected in the Biden years. Remember, the White House during the Biden presidency had an office of Gun Violence prevention in the building.
They've, they've not slackened in important respects, institutional respects.
Marc Beckman: Yeah. That's interesting. So do you think in your opinion that the, um, the, the. Democrat, the, the liberal perspective as it relates to, uh, 3D printed guns. Um, ghost guns will actually ultimately have this chilling effect on Iron Pistols, or let's say the legacy hardware.
Cody Wilson: Yeah. I, I do, because. Generation 1 gun control. I, I, I really like your generational definition. Earlier, gen one Gun Control was all about, hmm, how do we scare people enough about, you know, assault weapons and, and undetectable pistols and stuff that didn't really work, but gen 2 gun control, it can kind of like incorporate this, um, I don't know, cybernetic dimension and it can bring in things like white nationalist terrorism and the kind of latest specters of the day.
Synthesize 'em all together and say like, well, there's this deep web phenomenon going on and it's even worse than you can imagine. And it all seems to work better that way, at least at the state level. And so you actually end up getting state policy, which far outruns what is possible to achieve at the federal level, which is all the same anyway, because of course these federal laws would be almost be more swiftly taken down in federal court, but good luck going to New Jersey State Court and breaking any New Jersey gun law. It's not gonna happen. You gotta go die for years and then maybe you can escape into the federal system.
So gun control gen 2 gun control seems to understand and reflect this. There was a strategic pause and now most of the advancements and experimentation are happening at the state level with, you know, super majorities, which know that their law really can't be credibly challenged in their state court systems.
Marc Beckman: So, Cody, let me ask you a question. I know that, uh, you have this, you've built like this really, like incredible cult following in, in, in many ways. You're like a modern day mythical figure as it relates to, uh, the First Amendment, the Second Amendment, guns innovation, uh, et cetera. But then we, we started the conversation, we talked about the synthesis between, uh, the legal system, technology, and your philosophy.
Um, and then how you're also operating as a suc, a very successful business person. Would you take your legal mind? I know you had two years of education in law school, but clearly you understand how to, um, let's say game the system as it relates to law making. Interpreting the law and creating your policy, your terms and conditions and beyond.
Would you ever consider working with the, uh, federal government or the state government to bring your knowledge base, uh, to assist them in making, uh, in creating laws that are better for, uh, gun owners?
Cody Wilson: That's such a great question because I'm so occulted now in my own space, I'm such a cult figure that actually there are a layer, there's a, there's a whole iceberg to this now where many people hearing your question would say he already does work with the feds. It, it's actually, there's so much, um, synchronicity or things that like can't be coincidences that I'm actually accused of, which is a common thing on the internet these days.
I'm accused of already working with
Marc Beckman: I see that like some of your followers, your, your, like most loyal followers are, are upset with
Cody Wilson: Oh, absolutely.
Marc Beckman: which to me was mind blowing when I was doing the research to, to meet you today. I was like, oh my God, when did this
Cody Wilson: there's a deep form of like love and passion, which ends up becoming a, a suspicion, or you could say like that form of hate really is like the most loyal kind of following and. Of course, there's no evidence of this, but like, you know, how did this guy get his money?
How does this guy keep anticipating things this way? And it, it's like, none of this can be coincidence. And like, how did he beat, you know, how did he beat those charges? He got, didn't this guy get like captured in Taiwan and brought back to the states? And, and of course some of their guys go down, one of their guys just went down in New York, you know, with like a thousand state charges and they go, well that's what would've really happened to him, you know, if he wasn't an asset.
And because 3D printed gun people are now starting to get to hammer across the country. And so it begins to look even more suspect that like somehow I can just kinda ride the wave here or the clouds or like stick around. I understand it on some level. And yet, like you say, like I think cult is the word.
Like I also now retreat from. Explicating my business or my plans or like, uh, what I'm, what I'm really trying to do. Because really that's the only way that it, to maintain its energy. I can't be on Twitter engagement farming constantly and somehow still hoping that that maintains any strategic advantage for me.
Uh, so, you know, there's a huge suspicion, I'm not really answering your question, but I'm answering it in spirit, like, uh, would I consider it, well, yeah, sure. I'd consider it.
Marc Beckman: Well look it through this lens, Cody, look it through this lens. So you get all these like tech guys that are pretty big and, and, and let's say if we wanna focus for a minute on the AI piece or even on the crypto piece, like they jumped into Congress, they worked with Congress, they wanna create, obviously for their businesses a moat.
So you're looking at people like Zuckerberg, Altman, like all those guys lined up during the Biden administration and you know, they're all, uh, amassing together, uh, around Trump obviously. For me, I was always saying, look, these guys really are, are looking to align with the federal government so that they could protect their business interest and effectively push away the little entrepreneurs that are like nibbling.
You know, that could become competition eventually, but they could just knock 'em out by creating a deeper moat with the federal and state government. So would you take that approach where you align with the lawmakers to give them true insight for legal making so that you can strengthen your business and strengthen the overall industry?
Cody Wilson: You know, again, to, and I acknowledge your question entirely again, I think that's been the accusation for me. I, I run a service called DEFCAD, which is the largest 3D printing gun. File service on the internet, and people say, well, the only reason it succeeds is because he's integrated with lawmakers and the lawmaking as it is, and he adjusts the policy of that website per state.
You know, and, and, and tailors it to their policies sometimes as they're developed before they're developed, like, you know, I'm watching the New York State legislature, which has twice tried to create a kind of anti 3D gun download law, which anticipates my website and my legal challenges and tries to talk about CDA 230 and all this stuff.
So that accusation is there in the specific way You mean it? To answer your question, you know, I was more involved with the government in the beginning. Uh, you know, there's what was called the Congressional Second Amendment Caucus. It still exists in some form, but at, at that time, it was led by Thomas Massey, who has a larger profile now than he did then.
And these guys actually wanted to know, Ted Cruz was involved in this too. Um, these guys wanted to know about the specifics of what I was doing, the technology and how to, how to tailor policy or how to block Democrat policy. There's less interest in it now, in fact. Even though Trump has won and, and it's preferable to have Trump and his alternative in the election, the Department of Justice is against automatic Glock as much as California is and public policy from a Republican perspective, senatorial perspective depends on how you, perhaps even the White House does not, doesn't, does not hope for a, a brand new 3D printed gun future. Like there are lawsuits we're trying to settle right now, even after the Supreme Court's decision at Vander stock. Or the Department of Justice does not wanna settle these suits with us, even though this is ostensibly a friendly department.
So I can simply say this is remaining neutral. The government has less of an interest now in, in talking to me. They know where I'm going and what I want to do, and in so many ways, I'm waiting on some things to go wrong for the government and they know that like I, I don't, I don't wanna settle and create a kind of stable policy position.
I wanna see how far we can get understanding that that pushes not just the Overton window, but what becomes possible.
Marc Beckman: So it's interesting you mentioned DEFCAD. I think that's an. Uh, segue into the legal issue that you're dealing with surrounding, uh, your platform, DEFCAD and, and how you, um, work strategically with regards to looking at, uh, federal and state law and then tailoring a business model against it. Um, I guess the, the big issue here, just to keep it very simple, is whether or not 3D printed guns can be copyrighted.
You wanna talk a little bit about that DEFCAD lawsuit?
Cody Wilson: That does become, that's probably the biggest question this year about 3D guns, although it remains a, again, a bit occulted because people are afraid to give public opinions about it from the 3D gun side. Uh, obviously I'll, I'll represent the position that 3D guns begin with an anti copyright position.
All the, all the files are released with when they are released with licenses, copy, left licenses because 3D printed guns were trying to, and defense distributed companies like mine were trying to claim the legacy of open source and free software. Which begins with copy left, you know, the, the canoe public licenses, open source licenses.
We were trying to say this, this is the same type of thing. Software development in this space is, is also something that should be free and open source. That's been the first solid 10 years of 3D gun development. Only with the development of a mass public, let's say, of of a huge hobby now a huge, uh, array of business interests.
Enough people can come in and say, you know what, like traditional gun industry, actually my designs aren't open source. And in fact, my designs are protected by federal law or state law, and you can't just copy my stuff without my permission. I have an authorial interest. That's, that's a symptom of the fact that, you know, there's enough money at stake now and enough people involved in the economy of 3D guns, um, that that difference has arisen.
Marc Beckman: So this is what the plaintiff in the lawsuit in Florida is arguing effectively that DEFCAD is stealing the, uh, I, I think his name is Matthew La I butcher his last name. Is it la?
Cody Wilson: Everyone does.
Marc Beckman: But, uh, that he's, that you're stealing, that DEFCAD is stealing. I think they might have pulled you into it individually too, but they, that, uh, you're stealing the, um, copyright, his copyright designs and selling them without permission.
Um, and it's kind of interesting, like just focusing in on DEFCAD $60 per year subscription, right? So you get a membership, you're paying for the membership, but you could still, you could still upload for free. Open source, upload all of the designs for free. Right. But aren't you playing a little bit with the $60 a year subscription?
Isn't that really just a way to, um, kind of put a veil over, uh, you know what's really happening?
Cody Wilson: That's the right question, I think. Um, but where copyright wasn't the first legal question in 3D guns, you know, export law was at the time, and this is probably my best known lawsuit, you know, I was fighting the US State Department over the question of dual use of the technology. And whether the articles themselves, the files were defense articles, okay?
If they are, and the State Department still regards many of them to be, uh, under the ITAR, you have to provide positive proof that the people that you're allowing to download are US persons or else you've committed an export violation. And, you know, this is no joke. This is like huge, huge fines. You know, six figure fines, you know, double figure like decades in jail, all
Marc Beckman: Under ITAR?
Cody Wilson: Under ITAR. And that was a big long lawsuit. You know, New York Times, all this stuff. I got Weinberg and NYU involved. I mean, all these people were involved. Public knowledge. Okay. In the end, there was a, a settlement. It maybe wasn't that satisfying, but. At the same time in 2018, the law was changed and reflected that settlement in the actual code of federal regulations saying, okay, there may be some speech value to some of these guns.
Nevertheless, most of the guns, most of the files for their receivers either fall on the commodity classification list or the ITAR, which means only US persons can download them, which means the only legal way that you can put these files on the internet to this day is through some kind of service or platform, which checks who's downloading.
Does that mean you have to charge money? It doesn't mean that, but of course making those checks costs some money. Uh, and so I've built a way that like largely offsets those costs and, uh, is the equivalent of something like $5 a month to access these files and continue to take the risk that, you know, I'm only serving US persons and continue to, to defend against that risk.
That's the way that the platform is built and why, and I haven't really changed, you know, how much we're charging in years.
Marc Beckman: I mean, it seems reasonable. $5 a month isn't outrageous. Types of services? Um, uh, or, or, or goods or what's the benefit? If I'm a member, what do I get?
Cody Wilson: You would think I'd killed Christ though, at that figure. If you, if you look,
Marc Beckman: Um, it's not gonna make you rich brother.
Cody Wilson: you know, like $60, well that is some, you know, that is worse than rape. Uh, if you, if you ask some of the people in my, in my space.
Marc Beckman: We have this spirit, right, Cody, where like, uh, capitalism is bad now, right? We've gone through this major phase where like if you're self-made, you make a lot of money, that's bad. If you're capitalistic, that's bad. And there are only certain sets of individuals who should be able to really, uh, capitalize within the American
Cody Wilson: Yes, and it's.
Marc Beckman: So you're charging $5 a month. What do I get if I'm a member at DEFCAD? What do I get for $5 a month?
Cody Wilson: You get the access to the repo, which is the single largest repository you get access to that repo in unlimited downloads, you'd say, well, so what will mini services charge you a similar amount or more for less? Of course, we try to add other value, you know, to that subscription. Uh, that subscription lasts a year.
Um, we don't ever raise anyone's prices on. If they've come in at a certain level. But I wanna take your initial rhetorical point, which is that, you know, the only people criticizing, uh, this financial arrangement, uh, are, are those who pretend to be anti-capitalist, but are in fact themselves connected to a competing business, which is the whole basis of, of my current copyright lawsuit.
This was just a competing form of, of a 3D gun business trying to kind of relegate my business, uh, as impossible to advantage their own.
Marc Beckman: Well, look, your reputation as it relates to 3D printed guns and ghost guns is at the top of the pyramid. So, uh, not withstanding the fact that you're saying maybe some of the competition is charging less, you should probably theoretically be able to charge more because I would want to be a part of that culture that you've established,
Cody Wilson: Hey, believe me, I mean, look, the membership numbers don't lie. I mean, you know. There's a, an appetite in a market and I'm certainly willing to charge more, especially in a changed policy scenario. But I don't know. I've kind of tuned this to how, you know, it's relatively stable right now, and I'll take stability where I can get it because of course I don't just anticipate a, a copyright lawsuit or some kind of IP lawsuit.
We've had a trademark lawsuit in the Southern District of New York, but I anticipate states themselves to sue me like we've been discussing earlier about the way that I've built the site. So I'm always trying to, I don't know, I need enough users and I need it to be popular and still somehow kind of soften or understand the popular prejudices against paying money.
There's a, you know, there's a diplomatic reason that I'm pricing it the way I am. I'm not just being a, a totally naked capitalist about it.
Marc Beckman: How many members do you have?
Cody Wilson: Gosh, that's a, that's a big question. Um, depending upon how you cut it, I would say DEFCAD has, you know, six to 8,000 members. You know, some of those members are, I'm saying paying members.
Marc Beckman: Yeah, sure. That's what I'm talking about too, like, but is that list at risk, if those people want to maintain a certain level of anonymity, um, you know, you, you are, you know, to a certain extent you have a, um, you know, a target on your back, no pun intended. Uh, if you have state and federal, uh, uh, lawsuits coming at you all day long, uh, is it possible that that list is going to be exposed?
Cody Wilson: Yes. In fact, that's one of the popular, uh, accusations about DEFCAD. Well, you shouldn't use it. You know, your, your customer info will, will be exposed, or customer info in the past has been exposed. Of course, this is not true. That customer info has never been stored at def. It's never been. Available. There has been no lists to be leaked or to be hacked, but I can understand that people, you know, when we build the site, people want a privacy experience or some kind of guarantee it's too risky and find like the, the open Internet's changing in, in the way that we knew it, you know, 20 years ago.
You, you basically have to use an ID to use almost anything kind of spicy on the internet these days. And that's a shame and it includes 3D printed guns. But, you know, should it be that way? I, I don't want it to be that way. And I would say if you want. Privacy. You know, you don't need to use my website.
That's not me saying that your information is somehow preserved. I'm simply saying there are many alternatives to my website where you don't need to use a credit card or like risk, you know, any communicate, any identifiable information. The biggest.
Marc Beckman: amazing how like you put yourself out from the outset as you know, such a pioneer, such a quote unquote rebel, you know, risking so much personally, and now you have all of these, um, you know. Let's say cult Cody Wilson cult members who are like, all of a sudden the red flag goes up and they're like, well, you know, maybe he's helping the government too much.
He has access to our information. Is it at risk? Uh, there are fake names included on the list or, or fake names within the DEFCAD community. Section 230 should be activated. Like it's crazy how you've gone on such a path where like you were literally the. Only individual that I've read about that was putting everything at stake, everything at risk from the outset.
And you have all these, uh, people shooting arrows at you now.
Cody Wilson: Well, it was like that in the beginning too. That's, I, I think that's what people forget. People think it's just real sunny at the top of the pyramid as you described, but it was never that way. You're always feeling the point of the pyramid in your asshole, okay? No matter, no matter how big that pyramid is.
Uh, so. Look, it was always this way. And the gun, gun, the gun culture hated it more in the beginning. People don't know this. They, they can't even conceive this anymore. But, you know, mainstream gun culture, never wanted this, never liked this, always thought I was suspicious and an outsider for doing this and doing it this, this way.
And in many respects that's never changed, but. In another respect, this is what I want. Okay? Like Zarathustra doesn't want followers, okay? He wants to be denied. He wants to be disavowed, alright? And you should surpass and overcome somebody like me. I mean, that's the only way you know. Yes. Am I the leader of this thing, still the leader of this thing?
No one's been able to overcome me, but I don't want followers. You understand?
Marc Beckman: Right. So how does 230 play into this whole copyright situation in Florida?
Cody Wilson: Well, 230 is more of a like a defense against state laws, like, um. Congress had basically said be, you know, we privilege online platforms and, and we want to give them safe harbor and all this other, these advantages on the open internet. A state law should not be able to touch, um, you know, state censorship.
Things like that shouldn't be able to touch. The way a, a, a platform works on the open internet. That's some of how 230 has evolved. Does 230 really matter in a, in a private civil action in federal court for copyright? No. 'cause federal actions, you know, 230 doesn't really help you in, in most types of federal actions.
So they're not really related.
Marc Beckman: Aren't some of your colleagues arguing, uh, that you've, uh, used, uh, created personas that aren't actually them, uh, to add legitimacy to DEFCAD? And that's where, uh, 230 is coming into play.
Cody Wilson: They have argued that it's, it's just that,
Marc Beckman: You explain that a little bit 'cause I know I'm butchering
Cody Wilson: I can explain it, but you, you, you're not butchering it worse than they are, you know, to accuse me of using false personas or something on, on deaf head is not a federal claim. It doesn't give you a cause of action in federal court. Uh, you have no, you know, there's nothing to do about.
Marc Beckman: there's no standing, okay. Legally there's no standing. But you know, if you're doing that, it's not, it's not cool.
Cody Wilson: No, no, I, I, in fact, I completely disagree and one, I'm not admitting doing that. That's not something that I'm doing most often. What you see, like in my current case, is them saying, well, we didn't upload some of these files and he's pretending like we did. And then of course that's not true, uh, for. Almost all the files at issue in this case, uh, that motherfucker uploaded those files.
You know, it's, it's really funny. So it's kind of their own way of, of bending the facts and bending. Bending public perception. Everyone's arguing about, you know, not history and not the facts, but the memory of that history, and they wanna shape public perception of, of how it went down. That's why this guy, Jay Stark, you know, his body basically, he's the biggest football in 3D printed guns.
And people argue about what his philosophy was, what his life was, what it meant, what he believed, and what he would think. Now, this is true like religious tribal activity, uh, because no one wants to know the truth. People just wanna argue about what it all meant.
Marc Beckman: Why don't people wanna know the truth? Cody?
Cody Wilson: Hey, the truth's a dangerous thing, right? Let's, let's bring Nietzche into the situation, right? You know, a lot of people can't handle the truth. It's a poisonous thing. Or like Churchill said, the truth is so fragile that it requires a bodyguard of lies. That's the tribal position of, of communities just like 3D printed gun communities.
There's no special claim to the truth here, just because you're doing 3D printed gun work. In fact, the behavior is worse. I actually prefer the genteel, you know, respectability of, of gun control lawyers in court compared to just the skullduggery that I've seen from these people.
Marc Beckman: Wow, that's remarkable. I wanna go back to the, um, United States Department of State, uh, issue that you raised before you, we were talking about it started in the Department of State, right? The um, the ITAR matter.
Cody Wilson: It did during the Obama, the second Obama.
Marc Beckman: Yeah. So something that I find interesting as it relates to that situation, and I'm curious if you can shine some light on it, please. Is they settled? They took themselves out of the equation, the depart. It started with the Department of State because we were looking at like, I think a way to regulate guns.
3D printed guns, ghost guns. They said, okay, let's start with the Department of state because it gives us this, um, reason to, um, to behave this way because of the international component, the, the exporting of code effectively. Um, but then they moved away from it and that. To me means something like, it seems like you were like hovering over a bigger issue there.
Is there a reason why the State Department doesn't want to be involved? Like why, why would they back off of it? Yeah.
Cody Wilson: Yes. I, I think historically there's a reason, and then at the time that we settled, there were were clear political reasons which disfavor pushing the question and OLC, and, and people gave opinions saying, look, we, you guys shouldn't keep pushing this. This is gonna go. There's a, there's a risk. This won't go our way, and there will be some kind of big first amendment thing, which will, you know, prevent us from doing further stuff in the future for technologies that we actually care about, regulating technologies of the future, you know, drone tech and all this other weird stuff.
I don't know, you, you, you risked a lot. So the state department kind of opted out because it didn't actually think 3D printed guns were a serious, you know, dual use technology with, with actual national security significance. That's the real answer. That's the answer that we discovered at the time we were settling.
But the State Department actually also knew that export control reform was happening and, and all this stuff was being deregulated anyway, and that deregulation began with the second. Um, w Bush administration. Um, this had been a kind of longstanding policy goal, kind of independent of, of party politics, and you could say we're just a beneficiary of that process, finally ending.
But twice I had interrupted it by being a little too showy and running my mouth and the press and things like that. So you could also say that like, I, I was my own biggest, you know, obstacle to this settlement and that there would've even been cleaner policy if I hadn't gotten involved, you know?
Marc Beckman: So what about from an ethical perspective? Then if we pull, you know, we, we pull that thread through and we get back into the, um, Supreme Court cases and everything. I mean, we have this, the. There's this issue, I know this, people are talking to you about this quite a bit, but I want you to share with my audience, um, this issue of, of free speech, right?
The information versus, um, when that information produces, uh, like a, like a, a, a physical effect, a gun, uh, how do you morally justify, uh, the, like, at at what point for you personally does the moral justification. Cross go too. When, when does it cross beyond where we are? Like, uh, if, if, for example, artificial intelligence can create, you go online and you can create a virus that can infect, you know, an entire community or you can, uh.
Go online and use AI to attack, uh, critical infrastructure for a city, putting, you know, hospitals at risk and, you know, uh, hurting the water supply at, at what point does it go a little too far in your personal opinion?
Cody Wilson: Really good question and I, I think maybe the first question I've, I've been asked, you know, since I started, the most consistent question I've been asked, and my answer is, change. Like, I do think, I, I, I know virus researchers and, and gray hat hackers using AI to construct like some of the most vicious malware possible.
And you could extend what they're doing to biotech and to weapons very easily, and it's being done. And so there's one this like direct acknowledgement that of course this is being done. So what would you just define all this activity as a state secret cabinet that way and say that the American people themselves have no private right to engage in it, but of course it's something that must be done.
You know, we must, in the same way, like we developed organophosphates, like consciously as weapons or something. Look, we know they'll be developed. Um, I try to, in a most serious way, it's like I'm not trying to create a soundbite. I think of younger, I think of like, well, new subjectivities are possible.
There's more to hope for. This is an old Bo yard position. There's more to hope for in a world of nuclear weapons and not a world of, of absolute deterrence and a world that could kind of enforce or summon the terrorism required and terrorism's the right word to police every aspect of this. And this is kind of what Peter Thiel's saying to create the kind of counter AI that could stop you from doing this.
And the, the level of policing required on the internet to prevent this. Is the bigger moral crime is the antichrist. So I would say that, you know, there are relevant moral questions. I'm a bit of an amoralist about them. I don't think morality is, is the sovereign impulse. I don't think it's the right way to even frame the questions when it comes to like 3D guns, for example.
But I think it's a relevant question. I just think, you know, when we define these things, we risk creating a world that's worse because of the fear.
Marc Beckman: So it's interesting you say that because obviously, uh, I would assume you're a free speech absolutist, right?
Cody Wilson: I, I try to be.
Marc Beckman: Right. And there are reports that I read about recently, uh, I read a report in Germany that show that, um, in Germany, the, uh, the idea of being antisemitic, expressing antisemitism is illegal and as a result, um, antisemitism is on the rise.
And I wonder. Um, you know, when we talk about the issue that you're going through right now with YouTube, if it's a similar situation whereby YouTube is suppressing your freedom of speech by taking down your content surrounding 3D printed guns and gun culture, um, but that might actually have a, uh, uh, chilling effect and, and, uh, create more, uh, more 3D gun, uh, production and manufacturing and usage.
Cody Wilson: It seems to like every single time I've been shut down, for example, in, in a big way, that ends up becoming an impetus for a much larger participation in the culture. Same thing with Mangione and the, you know. Uh, the Kamala Harris people had planned all this new 3D gun crackdowns, which would've made it much more cool and popular online.
And again, I, I agree the censorship on YouTube makes it more attractive, makes it cooler than it is. And look, 3D printed gun people are not cool. They're, they're getting, uh, some, some benefit from the fact that it's dangerous or unlawful in many cases, to, to engage in the hobby. But if they were left to their own devices, it'd just be, you know, another species of redditer.
And so like. It's actually more cool and attractive because it's opposed, and this works on multiple levels. Like, you know, I'm only interested in it anymore because it's so difficult to do. Like I, I, I am. That gradient of opposition is the only thing keeping even me attracted to it.
Marc Beckman: Interesting. You know, it's inter, it's also interesting when you talk about the hobbyist because now there are kids, like here in New York City, I'm sure you heard about this case where like there was a teenage boy that I think on the Upper East Side that um, I. It was recently, uh, he created a 3D printed gun, and I, I think it was over here in New York City where he shot his friend.
There was another kid here in New York City that was like trading for Fentanyl and uh, ended up dying from the Fentanyl himself, right? He, he, he gave the gun to a drug dealer and was paid in fentanyl. He wasn't going to use the Fentanyl. Um, so you have these individuals that I, I think some of them are really just not cognizant, they're not capable of adult-like decisions as it relates to, um, you know, being a gun owner or working with, you know, creating a gun. And I guess, what's your que what's your standing as it relates to that younger generation? They have access to the files. They're, you know, they're into tech.
Maybe it is to a certain extent a, a hobby for them, but you know, they're tinkering in their apartment in New York City and then somebody ends up dead. How do you think we should deal with those issues?
Cody Wilson: I think this is an obvious consequence of 3D printing. You know, in 2013, 14, people are saying, well, this is revolutionary. That revolution included this dimension. I mean, probably a lot of teenagers first contact with pistols will be because they had a 3D printer. That's a fact. That's just how it is now. And because, you know, we know that teenagers are internet natives, like, you know, early technology adopters.
I mean, I have seen firsthand many accounts of people saying, my very first gun I made myself with a 3D printer. That was the first way they did it. Um, it's not fictional anymore. It's just, um, a fact of life. And that means fact of young life and like how people will understand themselves. Create identity and, and grow up come, come of age.
Marc Beckman: Cody, do you think it would make sense for, um, these individuals, like young kids, uh, to have some kind of, uh, level of regulation on 3D printed guns? Like I, I, I don't know what it is, I'm just spit balling with you, but like, imagine like if they, if they create a gun and that has, that gun has to be registered or something like
Cody Wilson: I, I would say in fact, there's, you know, there's been another a century of, of gun control regulation and, and in fact in large part, this regulation's already there. The laws are already there. You know, you certainly can't buy a gun at that age. You know, for, for probably good reasons, good social reasons, which, you know, I respect at, at the same time you can make a gun.
And so maybe the law should change. And I know New York and, and major metros are trying to change the law in many major metros. You cannot 3D print a gun. You can no longer 3D print a gun. And this is probably, you know, from their point of view, an obvious and inevitable part of public policy. But it's also, you know, a reflection and a symptom I think of.
Uh, what Ideological decay, demographic problems? You know, like I, I don't think there are the same amount of teenagers killing each other and dying of fentanyl, like in El Paso, Texas as there are in like Oakland, California. Alright, well, you know, this is to to mention that there are social and civilizational mismatches happening and the gun thing is a symptom of those things, not a cause.
Marc Beckman: So you think it's part of, um, on a local level, that community, it's part of that community's culture? Or, uh, is it part of, uh, frustration and angst with the system? Is it, uh, desperation? Where is it coming from?
Cody Wilson: I mean, this answer certainly requires a transdisciplinary perspective, right? And, and I'm not gonna be. One of the most reasonable voices here. Okay. But I am part of the collaborative research, okay? And I, I know for a fact who's downloading, who wants this stuff? Who buys it? Who the most popular polymer 80 customer was?
There are separate gun cultures in this country. There was a separate black urban youth gun culture. All right? I, you can go on Instagram right now and watch like a 6-year-old wave a clock. Okay? He didn't 3D print it, but like he can pull it out of his pants just like, you know, an older boy that he saw on the block.
I mean. There are specific new distinct young cultures and 3D printing is a part of that and will accelerate ferment those cultures, uh, and allow them to, to go in the direction they were already going.
Marc Beckman: Do you think, um, I know again, this is like a, a, a tough answer big because there's so many different markets that it applies to across the country, but do you think lawmakers and law enforcement are understanding the nuances of each community and the way that you envision. In it.
Cody Wilson: You know, I think New York. And we actually had mentioned this before, but I think New York has got some of the best intelligence and is doing some of the best research, whether they're actually interdicting on the ground in any meaningful way, I don't know that's being used. What they are doing is being used, I think, effectively by New York state lawmakers, um, and to some degree nationally, but you know, the ghost gun problem, quote unquote amplified new techniques.
And of course there's a, there's state. Law enforcement participation with ATF and these intelligence rings like they've got a hold of the problem. And yet we just went to a, a gun show in Fort Worth. Everybody in their dog man was selling super safeties. And I've been going to gun shows for a long time.
Did we Are in a new place. Okay. People without websites, uh, with just a phone number on a back of like a baggie or selling. A thing which is in this legal no man's land, which is effectively a machine gun conversion device and like it's easy money. There's video of them like selling 'em to each other at gas stations and stuff.
I mean, this is accelerated to a dimension where even if New York law enforcement intelligence understand the problem, there is not the manpower or the funding the time or the will or the scale to stop what is happening.
Marc Beckman: That's pretty scary. So at what point do you think we crossed the Rubic, the Rubicon? Are we, are we there already? Are we at a point now?
Cody Wilson: Yeah, we crossed it in 2015. I mean, we crossed it in. Depends on how you slice it. If you're talking about 3D guns, I mean ship is sailed.
Marc Beckman: Yeah. How long will it take until we see legacy, the legacy gun industry basically fade away? Because I would imagine as the technology continues to improve, I understand now there are 3D printed bullets that are, um, you know, extremely effective EXPLO 3D printed explosives that are extremely effective. When you see Legacy Iron Pistols, um, you know, those incredible American brands, Beretta, et cetera, just disappearing.
Cody Wilson: I don't know that you do. And, and you know, obviously Beretta is, is even older than America. I mean, it's a, it's a much older continental brand, but for example, so what, that's an 800 year old gun brand. I, I don't think it's gonna disappear. It's like, it's rather Lindy. Right. You know, the longer a gun company's been around, the longer it'll be around, is what I think.
But, you know, obviously the gun company sustain themselves on, on big public. Contracts. Um, so companies like Glock get sued for reasons of state. Glock is not an American company, and so Glock ends up becoming kind of punching bag, um, in the United States, for example, for state policy reasons. These are, this is complicated because at the same time, these gun control agencies, they don't, and, and institutions, they don't really want guns themselves and the gun industry to dissolve because they see the, the gun industry itself now as the, as the right way to do it.
They just want a, a correctly policed substantial in, you know, gun industry. What they don't want is this quasi industrial thing where kind of anybody has got a, a desktop manufacturing mode at their disposal. They do not want that. And, but, but I'm not a Marxist, I don't think, uh, you know, wither capitalism wither, wither gun capitalism.
I, I don't think it goes away because of 3D printing. What I've seen is it hybridizes people sell certain components that go into your already commercially manufactured gun and it. You know, it extends a certain degree of customization.
Marc Beckman: Do you think the Second Amendment is at risk?
Cody Wilson: The Second Amendment, as we have mythologized it and propped it up in cultural memory, probably never existed and therefore is always at risk and therefore exists by always being at risk in that way. Uh, and so no, the Second Amendment is probably perfectly safe as an American myth of, you know, sovereign individualism or kind of frontier mentality.
The Second Amendment, as some people had hoped it would exist in the eighties and nineties, it may be at risk. I just don't know that there will be a country of people who will even share that understanding of the Second Amendment 30 years from now.
Marc Beckman: Interesting. What do you think, um, Kash Patel and Pam Bondi are doing, uh, right now as it relates to, uh, just gun regulation in general? Uh, and then, and then segueing into like their point of view as it relates to 3D printed guns.
Cody Wilson: You know, I, I think Pam Bondi is not necessarily a Pro Second Amendment person. That doesn't mean she's anti-gun. I think Kash is, he's definitely more, a validly pro Second Amendment. What I have seen from Pam Bondi's Department of Justice is mixed. There were, there are good amicus briefs I've seen from the department saying that they believe the AR-15 is a part of the arms and common use and should be protected by the Second Amendment.
That's great. Um, I don't know how well that will do. I would expect her Department of Justice to settle more cases than she has to stop fighting them. Um, but it really hasn't, so I don't know. I, I see a Second Amendment, which does actually reflect the Trump personality to a degree where, you know, it's, it's a cosmopolitan New York mentality doesn't really want, you know, a total free for all in, in gun rights.
But it will say the right things and it'll say the right things about the big issues that maintain the base, like the AR-15. So, you know, it's good. Is it great? No. Uh, are these people really doing what they should for the Second Amendment? Not really by any Second Amendment radicals standard.
Marc Beckman: I mean, you gotta, like when you, when you talk about like a, a city person, you mentioned Trump, but you know, I'm a city person too. You gotta realize that like it's a little bit different, right? Like, you know, I am pro Second Amendment. I'm very public about it, but it's a little different in living in such a densely populated area when most of the gun crimes are occurring.
From, you know, quote unquote the bad guys, right? Like a, a big majority. I think it's like north of 80% of the gun crimes in, in New York City. I, I think it might even be closer to 90%. You might know better than me, Cody, but like, I think it's around 80, 90% of the crimes, gun crimes are all the way, like at that level.
So, um, you know, there's gotta be some kind of, uh, situation here that makes sense. Where, where the, the right people, um. Have in, in a densely populated area like New York City are the ones you know that are armed in, in, I, I know that this might, uh, set you off, right? I I could hear your, but like, but like, you know, my, my business partner for example, he lives, you know, hours north of the city in an area where the, the local police won't get to his home in time to stop a crime.
He should definitely have a gun there. He should live with a gun. There's no doubt about it. But, um, you know, and I know everything I'm, I'm, I'm localizing on one issue, but it's different. Like, you can't blame Trump for having that type of perspective
Cody Wilson: No, I, I don't, in fact, I don't
Marc Beckman: his kids here. You know, it's.
Cody Wilson: Trump, Trump is who he is and, you know, in so many ways is, is a total genius. His instincts are proven correct time and time again. You know, I, I, I don't really criticize him beyond, I'm just calling it as I see it, and my own study of the development of the Second Amendment and the development of gun control in the 20th century tells me that like gun control itself is this almost necessary phenomenon because of all the required municipal.
Compromise, uh, where you just, you know, you have all these people living on top of each other and you have something like racial and civil war conditions in our, in our 20th century. You still have them now? Uh, okay, well, you know, you're, you're going, there's going to be gun control. Uh, that's just an inevitable consequence of these almost unprecedented urban scenario.
So I understand it. Um, at the same time, like any city person's going to understand, there's gonna be. Crazy, random people like me who like persist in the internet and are difficult to deal with and like, will make guns downloadable and this becomes a another problem for the city, for the metropol.
Marc Beckman: For sure.
Cody Wilson: you know, and here we are, ghosts, ghosts in the shell.
Man.
Marc Beckman: Yeah, that's it. Cody, is there anything that you wanna talk about that, uh, we haven't touched on?
Cody Wilson: I think this is an accurate representation of what's going on these days. Like a lot of people wanna maintain. Like the, a Second Amendment conversation in romantic kind of backward looking terms, like looking in the rear view mirror. Like, oh, well let's talk about the people who need their shotguns and need their hunting rifles and, right, like you said, law enforcement's 20 minutes away and it's like, well, no, you know, I'm, I'm interested in this, this cyberpunk frontier and these cyberpunk conditions, and punk is the right word, you know, like the criminal.
Mentality. The criminal persona is actually what's developing the most interesting technology here. And I'm not complimenting myself. Uh, I'm saying that the Glock switch and the super safety and these, um, interstitial, specifically criminal spaces is where we're actually seeing the technology being used.
And that's a good thing.
Marc Beckman: Cody, everyone who joins my show, um, uh, participates in this fun little way that I ended. I basically lead, uh, with a sentence, the beginning of a sentence, and my guest finishes it. Are you game?
Cody Wilson: Was that, was that the beginning of the sentence? Yeah, let's do it. Yeah.
Marc Beckman: All right, in some future day, 3D guns. In New York City will become
Cody Wilson: The distant past.
Marc Beckman: Wow. The distance, the distant path past. I can't speak. This is why I don't practice law the distant past. That's incredible. Why do you think think it's growing that quickly? That it's just gonna accelerate and, and there's gonna be a new innovation that comes?
Cody Wilson: Yeah. I mean, isn't that a, that's like the more optimistic cultural point of view, right? Like humanity itself is one of these ideas, which may, uh, we may leave on the roadside.
Marc Beckman: Spoken like a true punk. I love it. Cody, thank you so much for joining me today. Truly. It's been very insightful and and enjoyable to meet you.
Cody Wilson: Uh, likewise. I hope we can do it again.