Beko

I like the idea. I am facing this problem right now. I have been washing my clothes by hand because my washing machine is kill-switched. Every component works (proven by hotwiring) but the controller refuses to run programs.

Though it must be a huge project. An ESP32 is just the microcontroller. So I would have to buy several relays that it controls and write all the software from scratch, correct? I suppose the relays are the easy part… but the sensors are likely somewhat unique. Different pressure sensors probably give different voltages. And different tachometers probably give different voltages too, I would think.

I think that’s an easy choice today. But what happens when your washing machine breaks, and it has a kill switch that artificially blocks you from repair, so you are forced into the marketplace to buy a machine – and you find that non-smart washing machines no longer exist? Would you buy this manual crank machine or a washboard?

indeed that’s what I do. Lurch does not (b/c they are “so 90s”).

It’s a criminal offense to posses equipment that can counterfeit banknotes.

I’ll have a look at that directive¹ when I get a chance but I have to wonder if it’s then illegal to write your own FOSS f/w for a printer which has no proactive measures – which you would need to do in order to escape the tyranny of manufacturer ink shenanigans and anti-features.

The quality of most consumer printers is insufficient for counterfiets to begin with, but most certainly they aren’t going to handle the holograms.

¹ strange that it would be a directive considering the EU has exclusive competency over the euro.
(update)

Unless you are doing scientific analysis, it’s hard to find much less measure. You know it’s there, print a ‘blank’ page take a picture and upload an image of the dots.

The dots show up easily under a blacklight or blue LED. Which means if you are creating artwork for a blacklit party venue, the noise ruins the artwork.

Update

I had a look at EU Directive 2014/62. This seems to be the relavent bit:

Article 3 - Offences

1. Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that the following conduct is punishable as a criminal offence, when committed intentionally: (a) any fraudulent making or altering of currency, whatever means are employed; (b) the fraudulent uttering of counterfeit currency; © the import, export, transport, receiving or obtaining of counterfeit currency with a view to uttering the same and with knowledge that it is counterfeit; (d) the fraudulent making, receiving, obtaining or possession of (i) instruments, articles, computer programs and data, and any other means peculiarly adapted for the counterfeiting or altering of currency; or (ii) security features, such as holograms, watermarks or other components of currency which serve to protect against counterfeiting.

I do not interpret anything there as requiring printer makers to pro-actively produce tracker dots.

I’m not providing a source - this was all well-known by the mid-90’s,

The citation needed is not for what you’ve said here, but for the claim that ALL printers do it without exceptions, despite lack of regulations requiring them to do so.

some of us were there and experimented to try to get around it.

Did you witness any Oki printers using stego? Note Oki printers are no longer on the US market, but when they were I regarded them as the most ethical of all options. To date I’ve seen no one catch Oki doing stego.

Every manufactured color imaging device does this.

Citation needed. (edit: I’ve only seen hand-waving speculation that “they all do it”. Oki and Samsung printers have not been caught AFAIK, so I would like to see something concrete on those)

Printers got good enough a long time ago that you could make realistic money from them.

Try printing a note euro . It either won’t or it will mess it up.

These statements are contradictory. I have heard of the limitation of printers deliberately refusing to reproduce colors that exactly match that of currency. Is that a hoax? If not, then there is no need for stego.

I would love to have a printer that can create holograms.

It doesn’t affect print quality.

It does, obviously. You have unintended noise in the printout.

How do you communicate with your government? Electronically? When your gov outsources their email to Microsoft or Google and they provide no public key, and they give no means of communication other than a postal address, do you lick boots by sending data in-the-clear via the recipient’s MitM of choice?

How do you do your anonymous whistle blowing when you cannot control the recipient’s means of communication?

I would of course frame some poor sucker by using their color Canon printer. I think all the Canons have the yellow tracker dots.

Otherwise a black Samsung or Oki would perhaps be safest.

BTW, why do you mention laser printers specifically? AFAIK the trackers are generally with yellow pigment, and most laser printers are not color.

Was your email verified? I’m confused because github never sent me anything by email after that step, and passkey being the highest security possible, your scenario should not happen.

MS does not get my IP address. I ensure every single login is over Tor. MS makes sure ~97% of logins require plaintext email 2FA. On a few very rare occasions over the past several years, I was able to login without the email bullshit. Maybe once per year I got lucky like that (which is perhaps comparable to the odds of getting a fresh new exit node that MS does not know about). I thought I was getting that shitty treatment for being on Tor but some non-Tor users told me they have to do the email verify every time as well, so I figured it was imposed on everyone not just Tor users.

Passkeys and/or 2FA.

It’s unclear what you mean. I have my username and passkey (1FA). I did not setup any kind of 2FA (I have nothing I care to protect on their shit site), but MS imposes email verification as a forced-2FA.

But I agree that a token in one email is insecure.

Not at all. Security policy is designed for a purpose. You can never have absolute security. You can only have something that is secure enough for a task and for the assets under protection in light of threat risks. The token via email was OVERLY secure in the case at hand – and as a consequence security was lost (specifically, availability was lost, which is part of security).

Anyway ure Codeberg next time.

Impossible to use Codeberg to submit a bug report or comment on existing bug reports that are MS Github hosted. I would never voluntarily use MS Github for any project that I control.

I only use GH to collaborate on other people’s projects. And even then, I simply do not report many bugs because I cannot be bothered to dance for Microsoft and deal with their garbage. But now it looks like I will not be reporting /any/ bugs to any GH projects.

BTW, it’s bizarre that you suggest using Codeberg just after saying email-based 2FA is “insecure”. Codeberg allows 1FA (and rightfully so).

Thanks. I’ll have a look at some of those approaches.

(edit) I used a feature in the KOMAscript pkg to produce circles that reach the edge of the paper. I also used one of the approaches in your link to create a frame at the point where the /expected/ boundary is, so that if the frame has any missing lines it would indicate where the specs may be wrong. But I must say I don’t trust LaTeX to produce an accurate frame because some lines are closer to the edge than others even though I asked for 4.2mm on all sides.

The staff at the shop I use the most did not know. But the self-service printers are different than the printers used by the staff. They might know for the printers they use, which is naturally more costly.

Creating something with symbols going all the way to edge seems like a good idea. I would not want any spacing between the symbols though, so I guess it would be non-trivial code.

I could flood the page with color, then place a white box on top of that that covers all but 20mm around the border knowing that the unprintable region would not be bigger than that.

What I had in mind was many lines terminating at many positions around the border, each line marked with how much gap it leaves. Then the first line to not go as far as the others would be the penultimate one. Your idea sounds a lot easier. But ideally the ideas could be combined if the doc were to be published for many to use for that purpose.

Art.3 has this definition:

(5)‘audiovisual media services’ means services as defined in point (a) of Article 1(1) of Directive 2010/13/EU;

which leads to:

1. For the purposes of this Directive, the following definitions shall apply: (a) ‘audiovisual media service’ means: (i) a service as defined by Articles 56 and 57 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union which is under the editorial responsibility of a media service provider and the principal purpose of which is the provision of programmes, in order to inform, entertain or educate, to the general public by electronic communications networks within the meaning of point (a) of Article 2 of Directive 2002/21/EC. Such an audiovisual media service is either a television broadcast as defined in point (e) of this paragraph or an on-demand audiovisual media service as defined in point (g) of this paragraph;

(ii) audiovisual commercial communication;

(e) ‘television broadcasting’ or ‘television broadcast’ (i.e. a linear audiovisual media service) means an audiovisual media service provided by a media service provider for simultaneous viewing of programmes on the basis of a programme schedule;

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2010/13/oj/eng

So perhaps not… though strictly speaking audiovisual ≠ ‘audiovisual media service’, so it’s left undefined. Perhaps one could argue that DAB has JPEG album art and therefore delivers both.

Note as well that the spirit of the accessibility law is to push suppliers to provide information and access in multiple different formats so that some impaired demographics are not unnecessarily excluded.

My version is older than 120.

It’s very repeatable, so exit node would not be at issue. I guess the user agent string is being rejected.

I’ve seen it consistently fail using ungoogled chromium over tor. But when I just now tried Firefox over tor, no issue. I know that U/C is fussy about timing, but the response time seems quick when I use firefox, so I don’t think it’s a problem of lagging.

I am not really satisfied with any radio receiver because none of them attach to the LAN as a server. I got a bit spoiled with a terrestrial broadcast TV tuner that attaches to ethernet and is compatible with MythTV, which is an open source DVR. It pulls the schedules from the air (thus requires no Internet), and gives you way to prioritise programs you want recorded. It’s great in particular for unplugged folks. It even cuts out commercials – if there are any… none where I use it.

Radio has nothing comparable. But it is somewhat cool that some DAB radios have an LCD that shows album art and text info like the track and program that is playing, and time and date set automatically by the air waves.

still down for me. Maybe it’s a tor-hostile node. My machine only works over Tor.

Thanks! I would be installing linux instead of MacOS, but it does look like the hardware is compromised by this. The page you link specifically mentions these as having the feature:

• All Mac computers with Apple silicon
• MacBook Pro computers with Touch Bar (2016 and 2017) that contain the Apple T1 Chip

It does not say /all/ macbook pros. So I wonder which MacBook pros do not have that T1 chip.

I also somewhat distrust that /all/ mac computers w/Apple silicon. Surely the really old hardware like G3 wouldn’t?¹

The most interesting would be old 2nd-hand hardware that is free from this secure enclave, but still new enough to run recent MacOS if I want to occasionally boot MacOS for hardware testing purposes. I heard the next couple generations of MacOS will require at least an M1 chip. Guess I need to research where that stands w.r.t secure enclave.

(edit) The T2 chip page lists:

• MacBook Pro (13-inch, 2018, Four Thunderbolt 3 ports)

I think the macbook pros that feature non-x86 MacOS would run on were described as having Four Thunderbolt 3 ports, so I guess that rules out macbook pros. IOW, no macbook pro is spychip-free and simultaneously capable of supporting the next MacOS.

¹ I assumed Apple Silicon referred to Motorola chips, but the wikipedia page says Apple Silicon refers to arm chips.