zlacker

>>pangor+(OP)
See also: https://www.eff.org/pages/list-printers-which-do-or-do-not-d... (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14501894)

Some of the documents that we previously received through FOIA suggested that all major manufacturers of color laser printers entered a secret agreement with governments to ensure that the output of those printers is forensically traceable.

>>fsflov+A
Yes. But this is unrelated to the question they asked.

>>cocoap+O5
I don't think so. The current situation suggests that we really need an open-source printer, because otherwise there is no privacy at all.

>>fsflov+ne
The question wasn’t whether there was a need. The question was why there isn’t one. That agreement doesn’t prevent you or anyone else from making your own design.

>>kube-s+vh
A common answer to "the question" is that passably good printers are dirt cheap, and excellent printers are highly complex multidisciplinary efforts. Things don't exist in the open source world unless somebody has a need, or passion, to make it happen.

Given the availability and complexity, the question becomes "why bother." Microdots are an answer to that.

Then I'd ask, is there a legitimate purpose? Supposing the end goal is a totally open source chip foundry: yeah, you don't want microdots on your masks. Edit: oh god, and printers that won't do b&w without yellow dye available.