I also run the good news blog Reasons for Hope. Here you can find links and info on direction action, organizing, etc. that doesn't necessarily fit on a good news blog. Plus info and awareness posts, as well as my own activism, thoughts, and takes, also about things that don't fit well on a good news blog.
Filter the tag "dafh potentially triggering" if you don't want to see posts that are talking about really fucking up stuff. If my/those posts are making you spiral, I so genuinely encourage you to filter it. Doing what you can to help is more important than being aware of everything.
"We must not let the perfect become the enemy of the good."
There IS hope and I so truly believe that we CAN heal ourselves and the world.
I love Solarpunk so fucking much. It’s the most late 2010s ass genre humanly possible. A genre consisting entirely of Pinterest concept art boards and a yogurt commercial. Aggressively political with no actual political stance or statement other than “climate change is bad.” genuinely incredible levels of sucking
Solarpunk started out as a concept of imagining a sustainable future without capitalism cooked up by Brazilian anarchists, to my understanding. (There's a whole timeline I found here if anyone wants to flip through it.) Something of a humanist/naturalist contrast from transhumanist and singularity/"rationalist" views of the future. And, of course, contrast from the gritty dark hypercorporate crapsack worlds of cyberpunk. A few novels were written, but overall the literary movement fizzled out because it turns out writing compelling stories in utopian settings with solely interpersonal conflict is pretty hard, actually.
From there the political aspect of it got picked up by climate doomerist types who pushed it as an antidote to the impending apocalypse. Alas, being fanatically worried about climate change seems to have fallen out of fashion since COVID for whatever reason. I believe a lot of these people have moved on to walkable urbanism and anti-AI movements.
And the aesthetic side of it started off with a particularly influential Tumblr post from 2014 that had quite a few neat ideas. All of those were sanded down over time into a vision of skyscrapers with moss and solar panels, coupled with some recycled cottagecore material and a bunch of Ghibli screencaps.
And then Chobani comes in and makes a yogurt commercial that's just futurist luxury automated cottagecore in a Ghibli aesthetic, complete with some vague handwaves at a spunky DIY attitude and a whole bunch of small-scale renewable electric generators. And from there the movement, whatever it was, merged with "Frutiger Aero" and completely fell apart into bland nothingness.
I suspect the Brazilian anarchist sci-fi writers who were hoping for some kind of cultural counterpart to thinking that Isaac Asimov's "The Last Question" was literally going to come true are rather disappointed in this turn of events.
It turns out that praxis leading to solarpunk future and solarpunk presence is million skills with million names and acquiring and practicing these skills don't look particularly like solarpunk aesthetic. It looks punk. But to give it a distinct visual language, both consistent and recognizable at a glance, you need to put a strictly aesthetic effort on top of everything else.
Praxis itself? It looks like disability activism. It looks like attending local town council meetings. It looks like diving into super specific debate on local law requirements on water-permeable surfaces percentage. It looks like keeping in contact with local priest to snoothly distribute furniture from well-off middle class finishing renovation to 18yo orphans ageing out of the system. It looks like negotating with local cultural activity center how to organise half-illegal craft workshops because paperwork for fully legal ones excludes the most neglected demographic. It looks like lobbying for health insurance to put "replacing batteries in the implant surgery" on the list of covered medical services, so people don't need to surgically replace whole implants. It looks like million other specific things.
People who got inspired by solarpunk tend to spend some time looking at art, then turn around, ask "okay but what can be done now that I can engage with" and then go do it. And then what they do stops looking like solarpunk aesthetic.
Of course there's also that thing that before Covid, lots of climate collapse containment issues were literally "we know that business-as-usual is cheapest short-term but can we focus on how it's killing us long-term". Covid era showed that business-as-usual is unsustainable now, mid-term and short-term and today and yesterday; and also that goverments can simply decide to act and it create tangible effects. Suddenly, it wasn't "solar would be better if your gas import was ever endangered", it's "we build all the solar for yesterday because we cannot afford keeping to gas". Creating inspiring narratives is optional when cost of business-as-usual is visible to naked eye. Lots of people who used to share inspiring pictures of solar on background of green hills either went to install solar and negotiate specifics of grid inclusion, or moved on to the next issue.
Central idea of solarpunk aesthetic was to give people tools to imagine sustainable future; to create visual and narrative shorthands allowing people to engage with vision of non-apocalyptic future.
Central idea of solarpunk philosophy is that apocalypse is anything but inevitable and the main challenge isn't lack of means and tools, but widespread cultural pessimism. You cannot change anything if you believe change is impossible. Therefore, for change to be possible, you need to envision the world that can be changed.
Basically, if solarpunk art convinced anyone that there is achievable alternative to doom, it have already succeeded.
You absolutely can merge in one all the issues ever discussed in context of exploring how sustainable climate-proofed non-capitalistic world can work and how it can be achieved, with the attempt to design a distinctive and consistent visual language for it.
And you absolutely can blame whichever aspect of that merged entity for the fact that detailed fact-based solutions are difficult to derive from visual language or using visual design tools.
You can! Totally! You're just going to sound silly.
I saw the post about wanting to read more afro-latin@ books, I'd like to recomend 'hiding in plain sight: Black women, the law and the making of a white Argentine republic' by Dr Erika Edwards! written by a Black Porteña woman about our history focused on the Black women who helped make the country. I think it would be fun to read with the blog!
Argentina promotes itself as a country of European immigrants. This makes it an exception to other Latin American countries, which embrace a more mixed—African, Indian, European—heritage. Hiding in Plain Sight: Black Women, the Law, and the Making of a White Argentine Republic (University of Alabama Press, 2020) traces the origins of what some white Argentines mischaracterize as a “black disappearance” by delving into the intimate lives of black women and explaining how they contributed to the making of a “white” Argentina.
Erika Denise Edwards has produced the first comprehensive study in English of the history of African descendants outside of Buenos Aires in the late colonial and early republican periods, with a focus on how these women sought whiteness to better their lives and that of their children. Erika Edwards argues that attempts by black women to escape the stigma of blackness by recategorizing themselves and their descendants as white began as early as the late eighteenth century, challenging scholars who assert that the black population drastically declined at the end of the nineteenth century because of the whitening or modernization process.
She further contends that in Córdoba, Argentina, women of African descent (such as wives, mothers, daughters, and concubines) were instrumental in shaping their own racial reclassifications and destinies. This volume makes use of a wealth of sources to relate these women’s choices. The sources consulted include city censuses and notarial and probate records that deal with free and enslaved African descendants; criminal, ecclesiastical, and civil court cases; marriages and baptisms records and newsletters. These varied sources provide information about the day-to-day activities of cordobés society and how women of African descent lived, formed relationships, thrived, and partook in the transformation of racial identities in Argentina.
And it's crazy because the part of "attempts by black women to escape the stigma of blackness by recategorizing themselves and their descendants as white" to me is the part that is still an act of white supremacy, even if done with good intent. Because why would someone feel the need to assimilate so drastically, unless the culture clearly indicated which category would be treated as the most valuable? Wish you'd sent this at the beginning of this Six Day Battle 😭 You know what, this one is it, this is the one we'll read after Beloved. Thank you for the rec!
it must be so freeing to be as stupid as a ceo. not a single thought echoing through that hollowed out skull. you get paid more money in 20 minutes than a handful of small countries make in a year combined to say the biggest number you can think of and if your company doesn’t hit that number you get to fire all of them
Straight and gay men regularly sexually abuse trans women because they only see us as body parts. It's not okay to joke about homo- and transphobic politicians secretly liking us. The dehumanization and rape of trans women is not a punchline.
this is about the death penalty and its also about call out posts about people who have already apologized for things they did a long time ago and it’s also about using ‘toxic’ or ‘abuser’ as if its an immutable class of person, and its also about any other circumstance with permanent consequences or wherein you assume someone is still the same person they were.
Girlies I'm gonna be honest why are we putting hrt start dates in our bios. That is not info u gotta share with the public. That is medical info. That is confidential medical information.
I'm not, for example. I am extremely trans masc - and I am nonbinary. I have always been nonbinary.
I am still not a man, and calling me a man is still misgendering me.
Stop assuming people's genders/pronouns based on ~vibes~~ and stop reducing nonbinary and trans identities down to whatever category you find most convenient
Also, not all trans mascs AREN'T men, I've seen the flip side assumed as well. Like, I am trans masc before being non-binary, doesn't make me not a man if I don't always use trans man. I use all interchangably actually. But I am a man.
Labels are vehicles for communication, you don't know much about anybody just by what car they're in.
Actually I'm curious: Super informal but hopefully not too reductive poll / surgey
Note: Results will not be representative of the whole population, irl or on tumblr, due to sampling bias and the, shall we say, abbreviated study design lmao
I know a lot of people identify in more than one way; I certainly do. For the purposes of this poll, please put what you identify with most, or most often, or most strongly, or simply whatever calls to you most
Hey trans mascs! How do you most / most often identify?
Trans man
Trans masc
Nonbinary
I'm multigender and trans masc
I'm genderfluid and trans masc
Genderqueer / similar
Genderfucked / genderweird / similar
I don't even know tbh
Something else not listed here (say more in the notes if you'd like!)
I'm not trans masc and I want to push a button !
See results (aka no label implications on this one whatsoever)
Remaining time: 5 days 9 hours
Please reblog for sample size! Also, happy to run followup polls on here if there's interest, so let me know if there's some other super informal census poll along these lines that would be interesting!
Things like overdraft fees, late fees, parking tickets, fines, subscription renewals, legal fees, penalty fees, sales and discounts, lawsuits - these are things that all cease to matter in any material way once you have enough money
My wealthiest aunt credits her fortune to her financial acumen. Last year, her husband died (making her even wealthier), and as she was grieving her children stepped up to help her out with things.
Turns out she is terrible with money. Like, she had multiple copies of the same subscriptions, was overpaying to keep multiple homes maintained, and generally can't budget to save her life. Also, so many things that she assumed were "perks" of her credit card program were actually just her husband paying for upgrades behind her back.
But it doesn't matter because she already has enough money to make problems go away. She can afford to be stupid with it and still think of herself as smart and poor people as dumb.
I can't stand this shit. This is the kind of rich person behavior that simultaneously makes me envious and angry.
I don't care that they have more stuff than I do, but I do envy that they have more slack. That they can afford to forget things, to be inefficient, or wasteful, and it doesn't matter.
Which is fine by me if you are properly grateful and understand that's what's happening, but good lord it drives me up the wall when people who are terrible with money castigate the poor for being bad at money. When the person who has a bunch of duplicate subscription services they forgot about lectures the destitute about how irresponsible it is to order Doordash, I get enraged.
"Do as I say, not as I do" has infuriated me since I was a child and that irritation has never left me.
I do wonder if there is some kind of repressed self-hatred there.
Like a kind of guilt that if you had all this wealth and privilege without "earning" it that would somehow be immoral, or a lingering sense that it's only luck that you are where you are, so you try to build this synthetic world where actually you did earn it and the reason you're better off than other people is that you deserve to be.
This is also why I can't stand Republican approaches to medicaid and food stamps and all that shit, they are so obsessed with taking away slack from the destitute.
A long time ago, I don't even remember what social media I saw this on, but I saw somebody talking about how they grew up really poor, but had gotten a good job, and how incredible it felt the first time they bought a book because they felt like buying a book.
Because there are a lot of people out there who are going to overdraw their checking account if they spend that $8 on a paperback without carefully looking over their budget.
And I can relate to that. I cannot tell you how much it improved my mental health when I got to the point where I could buy a latte or a paperback and not have to worry that I had completely destroyed my budget for the next month.
I know at least one person who spends as much money as she gets without realizing it, but when I got the freedom to buy a latte if I felt like it?
It got easier not to buy lattes. Because it was my choice, because I could think about putting the money away as savings, not as a choice, and because I knew I could change my mind later, the decision seemed less momentous.
I mean, can you imagine if people sometimes shopped less because of a direct material need, and more as a psychological effort to exert control over their lives?
Why, if that were the case, things like restricting what you can buy with food stamps might actually be counterproductive. But fortunately we live in a world where all economic activity is rational attempts to meet material needs, so that's not a problem.
I was looking for a parking spot in the lot I have a permit for, and a co-worker from a much different background said that she usually just parks illegally because "What's the worst that can happen? You get a couple of parking tickets a week?"
Ma'am, I cannot be paying $350 a month in parking tickets. The hell?
You know what else is a crazy amount of slack that people don’t account for? Homeownership. You can afford to be dumb when you don’t have the risk of losing your home looming over you on a month to month basis. I am about to pay off my house next year and let me tell you, as someone who did NOT come to this part of my life easily, the idea that I could, say, quit my job because I’m not 150% satisfied, without immediately risking homelessness…it is a temptation I am going to have to fight on a daily basis.
some people like to get mad at disability benefits because they think its unfair people who dont work get a payout from the government while they have to work 50 hours at the human suffering factory every week. but if you tell them "yeah that sucks i think you should also get a universal allowance and not have to work 50 hours at the human suffering factory every week" thats apparently the wrong answer.
Things like overdraft fees, late fees, parking tickets, fines, subscription renewals, legal fees, penalty fees, sales and discounts, lawsuits - these are things that all cease to matter in any material way once you have enough money
My wealthiest aunt credits her fortune to her financial acumen. Last year, her husband died (making her even wealthier), and as she was grieving her children stepped up to help her out with things.
Turns out she is terrible with money. Like, she had multiple copies of the same subscriptions, was overpaying to keep multiple homes maintained, and generally can't budget to save her life. Also, so many things that she assumed were "perks" of her credit card program were actually just her husband paying for upgrades behind her back.
But it doesn't matter because she already has enough money to make problems go away. She can afford to be stupid with it and still think of herself as smart and poor people as dumb.
I can't stand this shit. This is the kind of rich person behavior that simultaneously makes me envious and angry.
I don't care that they have more stuff than I do, but I do envy that they have more slack. That they can afford to forget things, to be inefficient, or wasteful, and it doesn't matter.
Which is fine by me if you are properly grateful and understand that's what's happening, but good lord it drives me up the wall when people who are terrible with money castigate the poor for being bad at money. When the person who has a bunch of duplicate subscription services they forgot about lectures the destitute about how irresponsible it is to order Doordash, I get enraged.
"Do as I say, not as I do" has infuriated me since I was a child and that irritation has never left me.
I do wonder if there is some kind of repressed self-hatred there.
Like a kind of guilt that if you had all this wealth and privilege without "earning" it that would somehow be immoral, or a lingering sense that it's only luck that you are where you are, so you try to build this synthetic world where actually you did earn it and the reason you're better off than other people is that you deserve to be.
This is also why I can't stand Republican approaches to medicaid and food stamps and all that shit, they are so obsessed with taking away slack from the destitute.
A long time ago, I don't even remember what social media I saw this on, but I saw somebody talking about how they grew up really poor, but had gotten a good job, and how incredible it felt the first time they bought a book because they felt like buying a book.
Because there are a lot of people out there who are going to overdraw their checking account if they spend that $8 on a paperback without carefully looking over their budget.
And I can relate to that. I cannot tell you how much it improved my mental health when I got to the point where I could buy a latte or a paperback and not have to worry that I had completely destroyed my budget for the next month.
I know at least one person who spends as much money as she gets without realizing it, but when I got the freedom to buy a latte if I felt like it?
It got easier not to buy lattes. Because it was my choice, because I could think about putting the money away as savings, not as a choice, and because I knew I could change my mind later, the decision seemed less momentous.
I mean, can you imagine if people sometimes shopped less because of a direct material need, and more as a psychological effort to exert control over their lives?
Why, if that were the case, things like restricting what you can buy with food stamps might actually be counterproductive. But fortunately we live in a world where all economic activity is rational attempts to meet material needs, so that's not a problem.
Hey, UK folks! Waterstones is having a 3-day pre-order sale that includes the UK paperback of Enshittification (which drops on Sept 1). Use SUMMER26 to get 25% off.
Data brokers are a cancer. There's a direct line from the unrestricted collection, retention and processing of our data to a host of evils, from deepfake porn to phishing scams; from racial discrimination in hiring to ICE roundups of migrants; from targeted election interference to identity theft:
Why do data brokers exist? Because we let them. Congress hasn't passed a new federal consumer privacy law since 1988, when they made it illegal for video stores to disclose your VHS rentals. All other acts of consumer surveillance are legal. Data brokers spy on us for the same reason your dog licks its balls: because they can, and we don't stop them:
Getting rid of data brokers wouldn't solve all our problems, but it sure would go a long way to solving many of them. Rather than legally requiring platforms to spy on kids (to exclude them from being targeted by platforms' algorithms), we could prohibit platforms from spying on anyone, including kids, meaning kids couldn't be identified (much less targeted) by algorithms or ads:
Data brokers produce mountains of raw material used for every form of scam and torture. It's data brokers who power the gig economy's "algorithmic wage discrimination" system, where nurses and other workers are offered less pay based on how much credit card debt they're carrying:
So the feds (both Congress and the executive branch) have surrendered, and that leaves states alone on the battlefield fighting the privacy wars alone. State legislatures have taken some big steps, but – crucially – they've stopped short of banning data brokers from operating within their borders. Having taken a ban on data brokers off the table, states are left with complex, often unworkable "compromises" that go nowhere.
This is where DROP comes in. DROP stands for "Delete Request and Opt-out Platform," and it's a new phase of California's privacy regime that kicks off next month. Under DROP, you fill in some paperwork and then the state requires every data brokerage operating in California to delete your data, as well as any inferences they've made about you based on that data:
Implementing DROP is nowhere near as good as banning data brokers. The idea that data brokers should be able to collect, retain and process your data unless you tell them not to implies that everyone starts off wanting to be spied on, and therefore data brokers should assume that unless they hear otherwise, we're delighted to be the subject of commercial surveillance. This is an incredibly stupid supposition, contradicted by all available evidence. For example, when Apple offered iPhone owners a one-click option to block Facebook from spying on them, 96% of iPhone owners clicked the button:
Indeed, given this fact, one wonders why Apple bothers with the "don't spy on me" button at all. Why not have a "do spy on me" button that is unchecked by default, and leave users to dig through their settings to find the option to opt in to being surveilled? Of course, then it would make the fact that Apple spies on its customers and uses the data to target ads (with no way to opt out) a little awkward:
In the absence of a ban on surveillance without explicit, opt-in consent, we are left with the bizarre fiction that most of us want to be spied on, a fiction that pervades the DROP process, making the entire procedure nearly impossible to complete.
To start the DROP process, you must first create a Login.gov ID. This is an incredibly invasive process that involves photographing multiple pieces of ID and taking several selfies using special apps and webpages that hijack your device's camera and processor in a bid to prevent bad actors from spoofing the process. There's a plausible reason for this rigmarole: Login.gov is the authentication system for multiple federal, state and local IT systems in the US, so a fake or stolen Login.gov ID could be used to access your IRS, Social Security, and other very sensitive accounts.
The corollary of this is the promise of Login.gov: once you create your ID (a lengthy, multi-stage process) you won't have to jump through lots of painful bureaucratic hoops to access a wide variety of government services.
DROP didn't get the memo.
After you log in to DROP via Login.gov, you are sent a text message – to the phone number in your Login.gov profile – with a link to access a "secure" website that takes over your camera to let you take a "secure" photo of the front and back of your California driver's license or your US passport. What if you don't have either of those? I guess that means you want to be spied on by data brokers.
Note that these are the same credentials you have to supply to get the Login.gov ID that you've just used to get to this step in the process. In other words, in order to get to the stage where they ask you to photograph your driver's license, you have to have already photographed and validated your driver's license.
Once you complete this (pointless, redundant) step, you're directed back to your computer, where the process continues. Here, you must fill in all kinds of biographical detail, as well as specialized pieces of information, including your car's VIN. This is a piece of information that most people don't have – but which the California DMV does have and could auto-feed into the system, given that you've repeatedly affirmatively identified yourself to the service.
You also have to provide your mobile advertising identifier, a long, unique number that you may or may not be able to extract from your phone, depending on the model and the OS version. If you can't get it that way, you can install an app like AAID, which comes with a long list of – you guessed it – permissions to extract, store and process your private information.
Here's the thing: the whole point of a mobile ad identifier is that apps can access it (this is how they identify and track you). That step, where the system made you switch to your phone and use your camera to photograph your driver's license? That step could have automatically pulled this data off your device. That's the whole fucking point of this exercise: that web-pages and apps can request your mobile ad identifier.
Instead, DROP wants users to dig through their phone's deepest settings and/or install an app to retrieve a 32-digit number, which they then must key into a webform on their computer or in a different app on their phone.
Once you've done this, you must fill in another page of biographical information, including information that you've already provided to Login.gov and information you've already filled in on previous screens.
On this screen, you must also verify your phone number by sending yourself a text and then pasting in a unique number the system sends to you. But remember how this whole thing started? The first step is that you authenticate with Login.gov, which sends a text to your phone so you can take a (redundant) picture of your driver's license. There is no way you could get this far in the process unless you controlled the phone number you've just "verified" with the system.
Next, you must verify your email address, by receiving an email with a unique code in it and keying or pasting that into the webform, too. Again, remember how this process started: with you logging in with Login.gov, using your email address, which the system has already treated as verified since the very start of this (very) long and (very) complicated process.
This whole thing is terrible, and it is predicated on the absurd premise that Californians have to be defended from the threat of strangers who pretend to be them in order to sneakily opt them out of surveillance. DROP requires stronger authentication than any other US government system I've ever interacted with. I file my tax returns with fewer authentication steps. I renew my car's DMV registration with fewer authentication steps. I became a US citizen with fewer authentication steps.
This is either a system with no coherent threat model, or (far more probably), its threat model is that people will use it. This is California's answer to "a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying 'Beware of the Leopard'":
It's especially instructive to compare this process to the steps you have to take in order to "opt in" to having a data broker open a file on you and stuff it full of your sensitive, personal information, which is then sold to all comers:
Step one: Exist.
Step two: There is no step two.
It's also instructive to compare this process to the steps a data broker has to take to spy on you and sell your data:
Step one: Exist.
Step two: There is no step two.
Though there are many obvious ways this could be made better, I want to stress here that you shouldn't have to do this at all. It's entirely backwards. The process for not being spied on should look like this:
Step one: Exist.
Step two: There is no step two.
If anyone is going to be forced to jump through hoops to participate in the mass collection and catastrophic mishandling of private data, it should be the data brokers, not the people they spy on.
This kind of malicious compliance is the inevitable outcome of a process that starts by taking the obvious best measure off the table. The answer to the problem of data brokers is banning data brokers, not creating a demented hairball of form-filling that maintains the fiction that data broker surveillance is consensual.
In its own way, this process reminds me of the whole "carbon credit" fiasco. The answer to too many carbon emissions is to democratically decide to ban certain kinds of carbon emissions. But that would require states to do things, rather than simply "nudging" a process that is guided by "the market." So we end up with these junk "credits" that companies manufacture by promising not to log forests, many of which are already wildlife preserves and/or subsequently burn down:
The best critique of this whole thing came in 2021 from the Climate Ad Project, who produced a short video in which people were allowed to kill one another provided they purchased "murder offsets":
In a state of nature, murder exists. We, as a society, have decided this is bad. Rather than creating "incentives" not to murder, we just banned murder. Admittedly, we still get some murders, but when these happen, we don't treat it as "a mispricing of the anti-murder incentive" – we treat it as a crime.
The commercial surveillance industry may not be a criminal enterprise (yet), but it is the source of a torrent of crime, a flood of crime, a tsunami of crime. Every piece of your information that a data broker possesses exposes you to the risk of being victimized by a criminal. For this reason, I strongly believe that you should go through the tedious, performatively difficult DROP process:
https://consumer.drop.privacy.ca.gov/
But let's not pretend that this is good – or even adequate. There is no demand for being spied on. There is no basis for taking such enormous care in making sure people aren't maliciously removed from surveillance databases. If these databases exist at all (they should not), then we should make spies go through all this paperwork, to prove that you do want to be spied on, and unless they manage it, then spying on us should be treated as the crime it is.
If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:
if u make a tumblr post abt antiblackness or fatphobia or ableism they engineer the most annoying ppl on this earth in a lab just to come to ur post and fuck with u
black ppl make aave or aave related joke > use aave with the community > we r all having fun > white and nonblack ppl find it > they start using it wrong and throwing it into random sentences > it gets bastardized and used as if it’s just a random Funnysound in a sentence > within a month people are mocking and attacking black people for “still” using aave that is now deemed corny meme speech > the cycle repeats
Finally, an open hardware printer you can actually understand, repair, and upgrade
Open Printer is an open-source, repairable inkjet printer designed for makers, artists, and anyone tired of throwaway hardware. Built with standard mechanical components and modular parts, it’s easy to assemble, modify, and repair. You can print on standard sheets or paper rolls and choose between black or color cartridges, refillable at your convenience.
This project aims to reclaim our everyday tools. As such, it features no proprietary drivers, no cartridge DRM that locks you to a single vendor and is designed to never become obsolete. The Open Printer is built for longevity and customizability, ensuring that it remains fully under your control.
Direct Action for Hope @directactionforhope - Tumblr Blog | Tumgag
ellievsbear
yousharknotpass
dailybridgerton
stormborns
germansingergirl
pixelskylines
gummygunk
