Earlier this week, following the attempted assassination of Donald Trump, StickerMule sent out a bizarre email to its customers calling for everyone to dial the political hatred back, and stating that many in the company (including/especially the CEO) are staunch Trump supporters and have been afraid to be vocal about this support for fear of being ostracized. Anyone with half a brain could predict how this would go, and now I’m seeing lots of suggestions floating by on Mastodon for competing companies who support more progressive causes (or at a minimum, I suppose, don’t openly support a fascist candidate).

While conducting business with companies that are more aligned with your own values and principles is essential, I must admit that I’m surprised that so many in the do-it-yourself/hacktivist/maker communities don’t want to just roll up their sleeves and make these stickers themselves. The materials and tools for this are out there and readily available. I wouldn’t call them affordable, but they aren’t any more expensive than even the most inexpensive 3D printer, and the sticker paper is far cheaper than even a single spool of 3D filament. So why are so many in the free software/open source communities enthralled with 3D printing, but not with computer-controlled cutting machines?

I think it comes down to the market being almost entirely owned by one brand of cutter, namely Cricut. Cricut is a commercial machine, and the software necessary to control it (“Design Space”) is entirely proprietary and only works on Windows, Mac, Android, and iOS. Not only that, but to actually use the software you are limited to only 20 new designs per month. More than that, and Cricut expects you to open up your wallet.

It boggles my mind that there isn’t a good alternative to the Cricut machines, let alone ones that work with Linux and are generally more open.

Cricut, in many ways, radiates with the same energy as 3D printing, yet the latter seems to have a more prominent space in the hearts and minds of tech enthusiasts. I might argue, with absolutely no evidence to back up said argument, that there are more useful things that can be made with a Cricut-like device for most day-to-day needs than a 3D printer.

The most obvious benefit of a Cricut is that you can design and print your own stickers. Pretty much every dyed in the wool geek I know, save for the most hardcore minimalists, adorn their various systems with as many stickers as they can get their hands on. By being able to print your own vinyl stickers, you can rep a plethora of projects, apps, and services. I can also see this being a potential (albeit small) revenue stream for projects. Rather than partnering with another company to make stickers, or getting them produced in bulk, you can do on-demand printing of swag and have a higher profit margin.

Aside from stickers, I can imagine lots of other uses folks might get out of a cutting machine:

  • Customized labels
  • T-Shirts (iron-on)
  • Coffee mugs

Generally, they can be handy for making the sort of swag that you would sell in a merch store or give away at conferences so folks can represent or get the word out for your project.

So how do we get more open cutting machines? I don’t know, I’m doing the thing where you ask the question with no idea how to actually pull it off. I imagine that the answer lies in some combination of reverse-engineering the protocols that the proprietary applications use to talk with existing machines, and then creating a competing piece of software. That would at least let you control the machines out there on the market. That doesn’t help with the overall marketshare issue. The solution there, I imagine, involves hardware hackers building their own bespoke prototypes and sharing their builds. Maybe it even involves existing hardware makers (I’m thinking 3D printer manufacturers like Prusa or Creality) expanding their offerings to include cutters.

Whatever it takes, I really hope to see the market expand beyond Cricut. A little competition could only be a good thing.