[VorpalWay]

This is interesting, but it seems to be a crowdfunding campaign only. I wish them the best of luck (the cause is worthy for sure), but buyer beware at this point.

(I myself don't 2D print enough that an ink based printer makes sense for me. Ink tends to dry, so for me a laser printer that can sit for months at a time makes more sense. I use the scanner as well as my 3D printer far more often.)

I wonder how they will handle the nonsense around yellow tracking dots[1] etc. Hopefully that doesn't become a problem.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Printer_tracking_dots

[15155]

> I wonder how they will handle the nonsense around yellow tracking dots[1] etc. Hopefully that doesn't become a problem.

What's there to handle? They just don't include them and there's no statute that requires them to.

[VorpalWay]

Hm, I guess there is no law. But why would so many manufacturers include this unless there is some legal reason or other pressure on them to do so?

[t-3]

National security letters or old boys network or maybe just fat bribes to the right engineer. Could be a requirement for government procurement too, so not a law, just the requirement of a huge customer with deep pockets and negative price sensitivity.

[Dibby053]

>or other pressure on them

Counterfeiting was a big worry as high-resolution color printers became cheap. They did it motu proprio just like today ~all AI gen services watermark their outputs.

[culi]

Unfortunately they mainly use Discord and Instagram. They post updates on Instagram regularly but are quite active on Discord and often ask for community feedback there and post updates there as well. I've been closely following them for a few months

The printer surveillance is my main draw to this project. EFF basically came to the conclusion that all Western printers likely have some sort of surveillance like that. I've confirmed with them on the Discord that they are not required to implement any such surveillance