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
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
For preserving GPL let me suggest donating to Software Freedom Conservancy which is directly related to fighting abuses of open source / free software / libre software licences.
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.
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.
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...
Write some code to have it play, at the loudest possible volume, a pure sine wave at 18000hz to 19000hz, just outside of the range nearly all humans can consciously be aware of hearing a sound, but within the range that prolonged exposure to this sound can cause humans to become panicked, irritable, delusional, sometimes even hallucinatory, and have immense difficulty sleeping.
Leave the phone somewhere.
Obviously, do not actually do this.
Probably this would be considered terrorism, and get you in about as much trouble as fucking about with your conception of what could be used as a sort of crap tier EM jammer.
You don't need a phone at all to do this. Or code. Or silicon. Just a cheap RC oscillator circuit tuned to that frequency and connected to a battery and a tweeter speaker.
AliExpress bots have probably already read this comment and put together a 'panic inducer top quality rechargeable usb frequency tweeter for wedding, birthday, sonic warfare, corporate and special event' which you can buy for five dollars
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.
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.
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.
Heck, if only the firmware running on the modem itself was nonfree/proprietary I wouldn't much care, but the drivers and device specifications itself are commonly secret too!
Like, they sell a modem and do not tell how it even should be used, just throwing a garbage Android binary blob driver or posting the messy driver to Microsoft developer account and they don't care if anyone else is able to use the devices.
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.)
Just an FYI, that's not illegal because it falls under the U.S. Constitutional protection of free speech; so also is printing and constructing them. Selling them or distributing guns as physical products is not protected, and is in fact illegal.
Wait are you telling me it is legal to construct and possess a fully automatic firearm without a class three license?
Or say, already own a firearm, and then construct a modification that makes it fall out of compliance with local laws by making it fully auto, having a magazine that is too large, or a bump stock or things like that?
I am certain the situation is more complex than you seem to think, hence the semi-ironic disclaimer.
While NFA items are a different story, you're generally allowed to manufacture anything you could legally buy in a store. So no suppressors / SBRs / destructive devices without the appropriate paperwork & tax stamps, no machine guns without all that and a time machine, and no fun allowed if you're a prohibited person. Other than that, there's nothing* stopping you from printing, say, a semi-automatic rifle with a 16 inch barrel or a glock frame.
*Federally. Also, I am a dumbass and not a lawyer, do your own research.
Just an FYI, that's not illegal because it falls under the U.S. Constitutional protection of free speech; so also is printing and constructing them. Selling them or distributing guns as physical products is not protected, and is in fact illegal.
'3d printed guns' includes fully automatic guns.
You then said printing or constructing them is not illegal and is protected by Freedom of Speech.
Then I pointed out that 3d printed guns includes automatic weapons.
At this point, I do not actually know if you are aware that you /can/ find designs for fully automatic weapons on some 3d printed gun sites, and that there are, as I mentioned, a lot of people who are very adamant about that being fine and totally legal.
Again, hence my semi-ironic disclaimer to the FBI/ATF.
How do you think I know there are 3d printed full auto designs, usually in .22lr?
I say 'Semi-Ironic' because I may actually be on a relatively low priority watch list simply for browsing such sites.
They're legal, they can suck a fat one even if you do have them. You can even have the files for a DIAS (but if you print a DIAS and get caught you'll be in prison for 10yr.) You can print guns just fine legally though, but only for you they are not* transferrable.
*There is some contention over whether or not it would be legal to transfer. The law specifies intent which is hard to prove, and lends itself to the "well I intended to build it for me, but then eventually I let go of it when I wanted to upgrade..." argument. Thus far I don't think precedent has been set and I certainly don't want to be the case that sets it.
Mhm, theres tons of people who have been imprisoned who have done what you outlined in your asterisk there and it did not work out for them in court.
Regardless of how it /should be/, I am worried about /existing reality/, sure seems like this whole situation is astoundingly technical, complex, constantly changing with different rules being interpreted differently by different judges according to different laws in different locales which pass different relevant laws pretty frequently.
Sure seems like a blanket statement covering guns without a huge write up of specific disclaimers, or a general added comment joking about the complexity of the situation by disavowing being possibly in possession of things that may possibly lead to incarceration is warranted.
Mhm, theres tons of people who have been imprisoned who have done what you outlined in your asterisk there and it did not work out for them in court.
There are also people who the DA neglected to bring charges against at all, and people sometimes get acquitted for the same crimes another gets convicted for, with the same or similar evidence, because the jurors voted differently or the lawyers in one were better than the other. Welcome to the American justice system. I notice you glossed over the part where I said "but I wouldn't try that myself" too, interesting.
Regardless of how it /should be/, I am worried about /existing reality/,
Ok, well as reality currently exists you can manufacture any arms you can legally own for yourself. You can even manufacture suppressors if you do the right forms, engrave the relevant info, and pay your $200 extortion fee. Yes "all those other laws that apply still apply, you can't legally murder someone with it either, duh, and your entire comment is just Mr. Obvious bullshit."
All the laws regarding all firearms are everchanging because people keep attempting pointless feature bans and the ATF who cannot legally regulate as they are not a regularory agency keeps changing their "rules" that totally aren't "laws" even though they carry 10+yr prison sentances specifically to make gun ownership undesirable. Welcome to gun ownership "ghost" or otherwise. This doesn't make the statement that "actually gun files are legal to have, you can even legally print them" false just because you read into it too hard and assume that means it allows you to break other laws.
