I am in no way suggesting we shouldn’t be wary and not investigate. Crappy 3rd party engineering could be an issue. Placing a declarative title with no qualification as truth (because nobody reads the article) despite the quote from the corporation itself denying it in the article shouldn’t be done. Like I said, too much of that happening these days.
There is no official report of Brother doing what it’s accused of. Only a couple people having issues with a few cartridges, no analysis of whether the flaw was in the third party cartridge or an actual firmware issue, but we should get out the pitchforks and torches and leave a completely unproven statement up? I completely disagree. There’s too much BS passed off as objective truth as it is.
If you read the article:
We are aware of the recent false claims suggesting that a Brother firmware update may have restricted the use of third-party ink cartridges. Please be assured that Brother firmware updates do not block the use of third-party ink in our machines.
So there’s no reason to leave an inflammatory and likely wrong title unchanged or otherwise without notation. The title is completely readable. I’m all for wrong information being flagged, and a strikethrough is a fine method of doing so.
Maybe thanks to tariffs the importation of components made overseas will become cost prohibitive vs any expected potential gains from further development of LLM/AI. Or, perhaps in addition, an expected economic downturn has caused them to re-evaluate large investments in the immediate future. Or maybe they think AI is dumb.
Yes…the engineering could have been in the chip.
The rest, we’re on the same page.