FSF Approves TAZ 3 Printer As Privacy Respecting

sfcrazy writes "The Free Software Foundation has approved TAZ 3 as privacy-respecting, and awarded it 'Respects Your Freedom' certification. TAZ 3 is the fifth model in the LulzBot line of 3D printers by Aleph Objects, Inc. FSF has certified other models of LulzBot 3D printer for respecting privacy as well."

Comments

Isn't that illegal?

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought printers was mandated to print its identification number on everything it printed, so that the police could trace counterfeit copies.

Re:Isn't that illegal?

[cduffy]

Typical paper-targeting color printers, yes. Not sure that that applies to 3D printers, and it doesn't apply to black-and-white printers either.

"lulzbot"

[Anonymous Coward]

That business sounds like it's going to be really successful. Businesses up and down the country are going to take it very seriously. Techies speaking in budgeting meetings are not going to have any trouble selling that brand at all.

Re:"lulzbot"

[gl4ss]

well.

it's a reprap.

but you know why it's certified? because they paid for it to be.

coincidentally it's one of the most expensive mendel90 style repraps you can buy(albeit a pretty good one).

Re:"lulzbot"

[Anonymous Coward]

That business sounds like it's going to be really successful.

If they're even half as successful as "Snuggie", I'm sure the owners will be quite pleased.

Shit names are not indicative of failure; quite the opposite.

Re:"lulzbot"

[jellomizer]

Well it will work out just as well if you try to push a product based on its actually features, quality reputation, and performance.

All they really care is How Much will it cost, and how much will it cost to maintain.

Re:"lulzbot"

[shadowrat]

That business sounds like it's going to be really successful. Businesses up and down the country are going to take it very seriously. Techies speaking in budgeting meetings are not going to have any trouble selling that brand at all.

kleenex probably didn't sound like something you want to put on your face at first either. coke doesn't sound appetizing at all. google is a typo.

If a product is good enough, people will see the name as defining the industry rather than anything else. Unless your name is Gimp. That's never going to work.

Re:"lulzbot"

[allsorts46]

As someone trying to compete by building a 'Better Product'... unfortunately this is true.

Re: "lulzbot"

[BitZtream]

Kleenex makes perfect sense when you know where came from, and yes it would inspire you to rub it on your face.

https://www.kleenex.com/FAQ.as...

Re: "lulzbot"

[gmhowell]

How did Kleenex® Facial Tissue get its name?

To explain how Kleenex® facial tissue got its name, it is necessary to go back to 1920 and the development of our first consumer product, Kotex® feminine napkins. Our Kotex® trademark was derived from the words "cotton texture" and met our requirements for being short, easy to say, easy to remember and easy to explain. Kleenex® tissue was originally designed in 1924 as a cold cream remover; hence, the "Kleen" portion of the word was coined to convey the cleansing purpose. We then added the "ex" from Kotex® in order to convey what was the beginning of a family of products. In 1930, the name was changed from Kleenex® Cleansing Tissue to Kleenex® Facial Tissue.

Re:"lulzbot"

[BillX]

My work bought one. We were looking for a consumer-level (RepRap-level) FDM printer for quick prototyping; Lulzbot TAZ came pre-assembled and calibrated (no need to spend billable hours fiddling with it before first print), had a large build area and unlike some other RepRap-derived designs, is truly open-source.

Suits might care about a silly name; engineers not so much :-)

Privacy? 3D printer?

[PPH]

What sorts of information are you afraid they'll share? Printing anatomically correct "recreational appliances" and then having your printer publish the small dimensions?

Re:Privacy? 3D printer?

[Anonymous Coward]

This rock is certified privacy respecting. $10 anyone?

Headline got me excited

[Anonymous Coward]

For a moment I thought this was a normal 2d printer which had been certified as privacy-respecting. With the insane quantity of crapware you end up installing with most modern (2d) printers, god only knows what kind of "anonymized analytics" they are reporting home.

Re:Headline got me excited

[Anonymous Coward]

For a moment I thought this was a normal 2d printer which had been certified as privacy-respecting. With the insane quantity of crapware you end up installing with most modern (2d) printers, god only knows what kind of "anonymized analytics" they are reporting home.

Strange, the print drivers that came with my open source Linux distribution don't phone home. It's as though you just discovered a downside to your choice of OS and have to decide if putting up with such things is worth enjoying the upsides.

Re:Headline got me excited

[wolrahnaes]

Funny how the real reason for the "privacy respecting" certification is that many of the most popular color printers will not print exactly what you sent, open source driver or not, but instead will add "microdot" coding that uniquely identifies the actual printer used. This is officially to track down counterfeiters, but given how obvious a printed counterfeit really is compared to a properly stamped bill I don't see that justification as legitimate.

Re:Headline got me excited

[Anonymous Coward]

Funny how the real reason for the "privacy respecting" certification is that many of the most popular color printers will not print exactly what you sent, open source driver or not, but instead will add "microdot" coding that uniquely identifies the actual printer used. This is officially to track down counterfeiters, but given how obvious a printed counterfeit really is compared to a properly stamped bill I don't see that justification as legitimate.

You realize the GP was talking about proprietary print drivers for Windows that include a bunch of crapware and report usage stats to the companies that made them, right? You know open source print drivers don't do that, right?

The microdots are a separate issue. The printer does that in hardware. That's why your post, while factually correct, is not germane.

What does this mean?

[jandrese]

In what way does a regular 3D printer not respect someone's privacy?

Re:What does this mean?

[Anonymous Coward]

What does this mean?

It means that we have come to the point where a company that respects privacy is newsworthy.

Re:What does this mean?

[suutar]

The emphasis on privacy came from muktware. The FSF notice says that the RYF certification is about freedom, control over the product, and privacy, and of the three I'd say (like you mention) that for a printer privacy is the least likely to be an issue. (Though it does relate to the 'nothing we'd call spyware' requirement.)

Re:What does this mean?

[Obfuscant]

It sure would be nice if the links in a summary of an article actually described what was being presented instead of simply linking to a press release saying exactly the same thing that the summary says. Respects privacy? In what way does ANY printer not respect your privacy? Is anyone seriously suggesting that my printer goes online to look up my bank account details after I print a statement that contains my account number?

The FACT is that the "award" is Respect Your Freedom, not Respect Your Privacy, and it is because the system meets whatever criteria the OSF has for that award for open software.

This kind of hype makes me look askance at the company that produces it.

Re:What does this mean?

[Anonymous Coward]

In what way does ANY printer not respect your privacy?

Any printer? Well, 2d printers do print out information that basically can't be seen by the eye that will identify the printer that printed it. I would say that's a violation of privacy.

Re:What does this mean?

[king neckbeard]

Actually, most printers have some identifying marks printed subtly on the paper. Nominally, the purpose is to help catch counterfeiters, but I don't think any moderately successful counterfeiter is using a printer they bought at Staples.

Re:What does this mean?

[gIobaljustin]

Nominally, the purpose is to help catch counterfeiters

Which wouldn't justify such a thing even if it were effective.

Re:What does this mean?

[jmcvetta]

Actually, the purpose is to help identify dissidents

FTFY

Re:What does this mean?

[king neckbeard]

No need to fix that. I said 'nominally' for a reason.

Re:What does this mean?

[Anonymous Coward]

> Actually, most printers have some identifying marks printed subtly on the paper. Nominally, the purpose is to help catch counterfeiters, but I don't think any
> moderately successful counterfeiter is using a printer they bought at Staples.

I've heard the same story, but how is it even supposed to work? Like nearly everybody, I buy my printers from whatever local shop that sells them cheaply on the date that I need a new printer. I usually pick up the printer off the shelf, take it to the checkout and might even pay for it with cash. When I get it home and hook it up, it's extremely unlikely that I'll fill out anything like a warranty card, register my printer online for the benefit of getting on a whole new set of mailing lists, or anything to log the fact that the printer itself is in fact owned and operated by yours truly. The Good Guys(TM) could probably work out that I own a specific *model* of printer (e.g. when I go to download driver updates), but not the actual printer itself.

Even if they could, at some point I'll think to myself "need more shiny", buy a new printer (process outlined above) and pass the old one on to some passing hobo (often disguised as a family member).

So when my strictly-hypothetical counterfeit dollar bills start turning up with the damning "ABC123" hidden code printed on the paper, how are the Good Guys supposed to trace it back to my underground bunker?

Re:What does this mean?

[Anonymous Coward]

They know where it's shipped, so they know what staples you bought it from. From there, it's footwork. Hope you pay with cash and they catch on long after the security footage is overwritten; that should slow them down.

Now how about a privacy respecting laser printer?

[jonwil]

Given that it was a laser printer that caused RMS to start the whole "Free Software" thing, why cant I find a decent laser printer (or even inkjet) that doesn't require piles of driver crap and does all sorts of useless stuff I dont need.

Where is the company willing to make a 2D printer that respects my freedom and privacy?

Thank god

[Nam-Ereh-Won]

Finally, a printer that won't peek on me in the shower.

Re:Now how about a privacy respecting laser printe

[Anonymous Coward]

Given that it was a laser printer that caused RMS to start the whole "Free Software" thing, why cant I find a decent laser printer (or even inkjet) that doesn't require piles of driver crap and does all sorts of useless stuff I dont need.

I thought you were actually going somewhere but then you talked about drivers.

The real privacy destroying part of laser and inkjet printers are the microdot patterns they include on every page you print. Most printers include their model, brand and serial number in a dot pattern that is too small to see with the naked eye on every printed page that can be used to trace the page back to the printer that printed it.

Re:Now how about a privacy respecting laser printe

[Anonymous Coward]

In what way does that destroy privacy?

About software freedom everywhere.

[jbn-o]

Any device's software can do things you don't want. If that device requires software which runs on your computer, then that software can do anything your OS lets it do.

This means a program running with your credentials (running as you) on a networked home computer can upload copies of files you can read, launch a program to spy on you as you work, or possibly install some software that does nasty things to any user of that computer. The possibilities are too numerous to list. And this program can be something that computer users might view as necessary or innocent like a device driver program, or some other program needed to let users control the added device.

So what users who value their privacy and software freedom want has little to do with 3D printing per se because these users make the same demand regardless of the purpose of the new device. One such user avoids devices that run non-free software, or require non-free software to be installed elsewhere to work. That way one can run a 100% free software system (right now that means a free BIOS, free software OS, and nothing but free software programs installed atop that) and use the new device fully.

Re:Now how about a privacy respecting laser printe

[guises]

It's a unique, traceable, watermark printed on every page that comes out of your printer, whether you want it to or not. If you can't see how that compromises your privacy, then I'm not sure what we're talking about.