2 months
You must log in or register to comment.
2 monthsHey this was actually some good news in regards to US laws for once.
Here in the state of California, we still have the qualified in regulatory positions. Hell, I think we already reintegrated with the WHO.
- AeronMelon@lemmy.worldEnglish2 months
Cool, now ban the countdown chips that brick ink and printers that are still perfectly serviceable.
- certified_expert@lemmy.worldEnglish2 months
Repeat after me: plastic does not recycle. It inevitably degrades in the process.
Regarding printers… ink tanks is the only sensible answer.
- crank0271@lemmy.worldEnglish2 months
Community ink tanks, with pipelines to transmit the ink from where it is mined to substations, and on and on.
- errer@lemmy.worldEnglish2 months
Water pipelines to the home. Gas pipelines to the home. Ink pipelines to the home. It just makes sense.
- 2 months
Laser is the answer. Inkjet dries and clogs the jets if not used often like back when it was invented. Hardly anyone prints like that anymore.
Only problem with laser is the desk size for color laser. If you don’t print very often, and you want color, a laser can take up space.
If you don’t print very often and you want color, inkjet is terrible because of the short lifespan of the cartridges. Your library will probably have a printing service available for cheap or free. I think mine does color too. I get $35 of print credit every month just for living in the county. Otherwise there’s always commercial print shops like FedEx.
Totally agree. I’ve been keeping ink tanks in ziplock bags so they don’t dry out.
I think I might cut over to a B&W inkjet. There are tiny versions of those now, and I can print color elsewhere.
We also need some sort of way to prevent heads from drying out so quickly.
Printer companies know heads dry out, and they ship tanks with caps / tape for prevent dry out on retail store shelves. But once the tanks are installed, printers just leave the heads exposed to the air. Like a pen without a cap, the tanks dry out.
I print like 5 times a year. So 90% of the time, when I’m replacing a tank, it’s because the damn head dried out.
- 2 months
Laser printers don’t have this problem. Their medium is already a dry powder!
- Meron35@lemmy.worldEnglish2 months
Laser toner is literally micro plastic powder that gets rolled onto paper then baked, mmm
- Meron35@lemmy.worldEnglish2 months
Yep, laser toner is literally plastic dust that gets rolled on then baked. That’s why it doesn’t smudge or rub off when wet - it’s plastic.
That’s why there’s so many large warnings to properly recycle toner cartridges.
Tbf as long as the toner doesn’t spill anywhere, the risk is lower than other background sources like tyre dust. Still gives me the hereby jeebies though.
How printer dust is polluting the air? – TCTEC® Innovation - https://tctecinnovation.com/blogs/daily-blog/how-printer-dust-is-polluting-the-air
Only problem is size. Color lasers are chonky compared to a color inkjet. And a small printer is nice if you only print a handful of times a year. They’re easier to shove in a drawer or closer.
The days of me dedicating 24/7 desk space to a printer is over in my house.
- babyfarmer@lemmy.worldEnglish2 months
I remember years ago seeing a list of the “most expensive liquids in the world”, and black printer ink was near the top of the list.
Other things on the list were scorpion venom, cobra venom, crab blood, insulin, things of that nature.
- 2 months
Kodak is to blame for that. Printers used to be expensive and ink cheap but then Kodak flipped the business model and made a ton of sales. Other printer companies were losing out, so they followed. I guess also blame falls on the consumers of that time for choosing that model as well
- tux7350@lemmy.worldEnglish2 months
Looking into the history of Kodak is crazy. They used a 13 month calendar and secretly kept a nuclear reactor in the basement for years.
People forget that Kodak was a chemical company, not just photography.
- Peffse@lemmy.worldEnglish2 months
Funny, I had a Kodak printer for years since they had the cheapest ink by a large margin. HP was always the most expensive.
What year did that flip?
- 2 months
Started building their desktop inkjet printer business in 2005 & introduced in early 2007
NBC article from February 2007
From the Kodak Wikipedia
Kodak began another strategy shift after Antonio M. Pérez became CEO in 2005.
Pérez invested heavily in digital technologies and new services that capitalized on its technology innovation to boost profit margins.[114] He also spent hundreds of millions of dollars to build up a high-margin printer ink business to replace falling film sales, a move which was widely criticized due to the amount of competition present in the printer market, which would make expansion difficult.[128] Kodak’s ink strategy rejected the razor and blades business model used by dominant market leader Hewlett-Packard by selling expensive printers with cheaper ink cartridges.[129] In 2011, these new lines of inkjet printers were said to be on verge of turning a profit, although some analysts were skeptical as printouts had been replaced gradually by electronic copies on computers, tablets, and smartphones.[129] Inkjet printers continued to be viewed as one of the company’s anchors after it entered bankruptcy proceedings.
- Peffse@lemmy.worldEnglish2 months
That’s wild!
I had my inkjet from around 2011 to 2015. I think it was a C310 but I can’t find any proof of that. I only know it took the 30B/C cartridges.
They were $25-30 for a bundle on a retailer’s shelf while everything else was closer to $50-70 for a bundle on a retailer’s shelf. There was a 20% yield difference between the two, but that’s no 20% markup! I vaguely recall a 30B double pack that was only $15 total, and that’s what I used to buy once or twice a year. None of that hidden “Cyan mixed in the black to make it blacker” crap that HP did either.
How ironic that Kodak rigged the game to make ink expensive, and then others beat them at it.
- Peffse@lemmy.worldEnglish2 months
wait wait… reading comprehension fail on my part. Both that NBC article and Wikipedia are saying that Kodak went against the grain by selling more expensive printers with cheaper ink.
Eastman Kodak Co. is introducing a line of desktop printers and low cost replacement inks on Tuesday, as the photography company takes on a market dominated by Hewlett-Packard.
Just FYI to people that you can get remanufactured ink cartridges for a fraction of the price (around half) of OEM. They are sometimes modified to contain more ink in the same body. The company I purchased from included a prepaid bag to send used cartridges back for reuse.
Also while I’m in PSA mode “REDUCE, REUSE, and then recycle”. Sometimes we skip over the first two steps since reducing is not marketable and reusing rarely is (although reusing printer cartridges appears to be a sustainable business).
- iglou@programming.devEnglish2 months
Or even better, get printers that work with ink tanks rather than ink cartridges :)
- 𝔳𝔢𝔩𝔲𝔪𝔪𝔬𝔯𝔱𝔦𝔰@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish2 months
It’s all fun and games until your printer holds you hostage with their DRM nonsense
- 2 months
You’re not wrong. Just have to be selective which brand printer you buy - and I say that with the awareness that a company can enshittify an online printer capable of monitoring cartridge use/ID at their whim. BS Proprietary cartridges that know when they’ve been used up and tattle someone’s refilled them and refuse to work (looking at you, HP).
- 2 months
I’m in favor of ordnance targeting printers in general.
- Sunspear@piefed.socialEnglish2 months
TIL ordnance and ordinance are two distinct words with distinct meanings
- 2 months
I don’t want to be in the center of an ordnance drop. It’s a statement of fact and a way to remember which of the words has an ‘i’ somewhere around the middle.
- RipLemmDotEE@lemmy.todayEnglish2 months
I love the idea but I don’t see how it will be enforceable. Companies routinely ignore California laws if they only exist in California.
- ooterness@lemmy.worldEnglish2 months
This is just for city of Los Angeles, which is a small portion of Los Angeles county, let alone the entire state of California.
- Danquebec@sh.itjust.worksEnglish2 months
That’s good, but it pales in comparison to the effect we could gain by reducing the amount of paper that gets printed, especially in business.
Incredibly, a lot of time I spend is spent scanning shit that was produced using a computer, then printed, sent to me, only for me to then bring it back into a computer!
Which in practice will simply drive up the price: like refundable deposits
- AA5B@lemmy.worldEnglish2 months
Seems like the headline and article itself are missing the main point
printer cartridges that can’t be refilled or that don’t have a take-back program offered by the vendor.
It may be barely mentioned but I read this are requiring a program to take back cartridges
- Zorque@lemmy.worldEnglish2 months
Are there requirements for these programs? Or can they make it as onerous as possible to disincentivize usage of said program? (More rhetorical than anything)
Excellent podcast on the issue : https://www.npr.org/2021/02/17/968704526/why-printers-are-the-worst
- foenix@lemmy.radioEnglish2 months
I believe the cost is more to do with the electronic components. Ink cartridges are kind of like the OG disposable electronics and now we have disposable vapes.
- AA5B@lemmy.worldEnglish2 months
Probably, but we also need to take every chance to reduce unnecessary plastic in the environment
