The only thing i want is DIY paper printer with open source driver + DIY ink cartridges.
It’s kinda weird to me because i can find DIY 3d printer + it’s driver (open source) online, but no company made DIY paper printer with DIY cartridges until now
Fuck HP, Epson, Canon, or whatever big company printers out there
Well what’s different with 3d printer ?
I think 3d printer it’s very complicated compared to paper printer because 3d printer can print objects in 3d (need to calibrated in x,y,z position just to make it right) but paper printer just 2d
I think the right answer because no one want to make it because the business model of selling paper printer itself already at profit loss, printer company made profits from selling ink cartridges not from selling the printer itself
Pen plotters are also much slower than inkjet printers, can’t effectively mix inks for composite colors, and are significantly lower resolution than any other 2D print technology. Pen plotters existed before ink or laser jet, they lost their market share for good reasons.
The pulses of the laser and the pitch of those LEDs is generally way finer than what your run of the mill 3D printer is able to achieve reliably. And definitely finer than any nozzle you could put onto a 3D printer.
Theoretically you could DIY the spinning mirror approach, but it would be difficult to source the optical parts, and calibrating it would be a gigantic pain in the ass. Not to mention that it would likely be significantly more expensive than an off-the-shelf laser printer.
Also, guess what happens if you don’t have toner cartridge and print drum as one sealed unit. The printing medium is so fine it gets everywhere, ask anyone who ever tried reloading one of those cartridges.
Square Singer explained the difference with InkJet above.
Modern paper printers are deceptively advanced machines. They’d be pretty impressive if not for the greed of the manufacturers. High-precision parts made just right so that you could print out whatever annoying document your employer wants you to actually sign and bring in physically.
A 3D printer is comparatively slow and generally prints in one colour. As I said, you can make a plotter easily by swapping out the print head for a pen, but then you have a single-colour printer that’s significantly slower than modern laser printers, that can be upgraded to have multiple colours with a toolchanger but won’t produce anything near the resolution of an inkjet (or even a laser printer, tbh).
I feel like theoretically it maybe could be possible to turn an SLA printer into a paper printer, with resin solidifying on a page? But then how would you keep the rest of the page from being smudged?
Well we don’t know if no one start to made it it
I think it’s good if someone out there trying to make open source driver, imagine if we can add more features to our printers (like duplex A5 printing for your case) & especially if you can bypass HP printers that can broken printer if you used aftermarket ink
You can buy a DIY opensource 3D printer that can print on paper by putting a pen where the extruder is and use some open source software to convert text in GCODE.
If such a thing exists (DIY paper printers), I would like to know more, because the level of frustration I have with all the major printer mfrs I’ve used, is too damn high.
Bonus points if it’s a laser printer, extra bonus points if the components for the printer can be 3D printed (with obvious exceptions).
I just want a good, wired, network printer for everyday crap that I can use once in a blue moon for stupid documents that someone wants me to print, sign, scan and send back to them because they haven’t figured out how to do e-signatures yet… And the odd extra thing I need to print. Every time I print it seems like I need to reinstall the printer or update something to make it work. I buy laser printers so the ink doesn’t dry out before I can use it. The whole thing is so damned frustrating. Also, bluntly, unless you’re doing photo work, never buy an inkjet. They’re cheap, and there’s a reason they’re cheap. Inkjet has better color representation, so photo printers should probably be inkjet, for everything else, do yourself a favor and buy a laser printer. Toner lasts much, much, longer.
Although It’s less about guns and more about paying/donating to projects on GPL. If you don’t know where to donate, start with Firefox. Every £ matters
Mozilla do spend a lot of money on software development, 220 million last year, out of total expenses of 425 million which came from a taking of 593 million of which 81% comes from Google.
The rest of the money goes into fighting for software freedom, developing infrastructure tools and other things they’re very open about.
Personally I don’t donate because I prefer to help small open source efforts where a little money makes a big difference, especially protects which I believe could help emerging open source communities grow or inspire more cc content. I’m glad Mozilla exist and that they get so much money from Google and donations
It’s about everything. Computers, phones, the computer that makes your car work. Every bit of electronics that boots - that probably includes your smoke detector and oven
I can’t remember where I read this but I saw somewhere that open firmware is forbidden in things like cellular modems because it might be abused to disrupt communications. I think that’s bullshite, though.
Isn’t this actually more likely to happen if it’s closed-source, since the code isn’t visible to third-parties like security researchers? That’s why zero days are a thing.
In additional to the other comment, I think there’s also a traditional fear of corruption in open source. If the code is public then malicious parties are free to read and take advantage of holes in the security. Secondly it would be possible to contribute code with secret functionality that goes unnoticed. These are fairly easily debunked but seem to remain in people’s heads.
Ugh I hate these arguments about giving bad actors easier access. Bad actors are going to figure out flaws and security holes whether it’s open source or not. Security through obfuscation is a temporary measure and having more eyes on the source means more chances for good actors to find flaws and publicize them for fixes.
Different countries regulate the radio spectrum differently, so transmitting on a certain frequency might be legal in country A but illegal in country B. They don’t bother making different radios for different countries, though; instead, they just build hardware capable of transmitting on all the frequencies and then restrict what it can do via the firmware. The argument goes, if they allow device owners to modify the firmware, then they might modify the radio to transmit illegally. Never mind that there are myriad other ways an attacker could do that, that are almost as cheap and easy…
In theory, yes, you could make a mess, and any firmware is supposed to be certified to allow the device to be used.
In practice, this has been a convenient excuse to keep a whole chip with a separate OS in every smartphone, and it is very difficult to isolate from the rest of the system (see Graphene OS efforts).
I say all firmware should be opensource. Whether you’re allowed to change them or not is a separate question… for now.
If everything that might cause disruption was forbidden, we wouldn’t be allowed to do anything. Even normal user traffic in high enough quantities can cause services to go down. No malicious intent involved.
Easy, since it’s open source, anyone could, if they’re inclined, edit the code to do something just differently enough to cause a problem, or unlock features they’re not supposed to have access to, or spoof something that they shouldn’t be able to spoof.
This was a big argument against Windows getting a full Unix style socket in Windows 10, I believe. MS did it anyway and basically nothing changed. The blunt realty is that if an attacker is so inclined, they will find a way. Whether anyone wants them to or not. In the case of Unix style sockets, simply pushing the attack onto a Linux VM running on the windows system is usually enough, at most, moving the attack to a Linux or Unix system is also pretty easy but requires additional hardware (even a raspberry Pi) to complete.
As simply as I can, there’s enough software defined radios out there that you can hack to accurately spoof a genuine (closed source) device with enough effort, that this argument dies on the table to anyone with the technical knowledge to know what it actually means. It’s the same argument as outlawing guns. If you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns; which is also total horseshit in it’s own right, but makes a point. They’re making it hard for people (the non-malicious public) to get access to services in the way they want on the basis that it would “make it easier” for hackers to do the illegal. While it may be true that hackers will be able to do some things easier, by not requiring specialized hardware to do whatever malicious thing they want, they’re effectively punishing thousands or hundreds of thousands of people who are not malicious and want open source by prohibiting it, just to make the small number of hackers work harder to do things.
Fact is, if they allow it, they need to invest time and effort into implementing safeguards to ensure that any abuse is caught and stopped. They don’t want to put in that effort. The idiotic thing is that they need to put in those safeguards anyways because other tools exist that can still attack in the same manner. So they’ve saved themselves nothing in the prohibition, made the job of malicious hackers “harder”, and punished a large percentage of their client base for no good reason.
My laptop (well, ships in Q2, so I can’t do a damn thing yet anyway) doesn’t support libreboot (but I believe they’re working on it?) Framework. I was more focused on the upgradability/fixibility of the hardware, because I’m tired of the typical hardware and it’s anti-consumer features. Hopefully an option soon exists for the AMD 7 (or whatever the hell processor I chose for the 16.)
Add comment