Hacker Fab

https://docs.hackerfab.org/hacker-fab-space

by ipnon • 2 years ago

441 137 2 years ago

docs.hackerfab.org

Tepix• 2 years ago

Looks like it costs slightly above $50,000 just in hardware devices to setup such a Hacker Lab. Here's hoping costs will come down some more soon.

atrus2• 2 years ago

I mean, all things considered that feels pretty cheap for a mix of new and diy equipment to do this.

nxobject2• 2 years ago

With luck, as a pedagogical tool it'll be accessible to academic institutions all over the world with $50k, at least. I hope this effort succeeds, but I don't know about the catches involved here.

zusammen• 2 years ago

That’s still a massive sum by academic standards. Administrators can afford expenses of that size, but educators will balk.

cweagans• 2 years ago

How much is custom silicon from an established fab for the average person? I suspect that even a small run would be more than $50k, but I don’t have any point of reference.

andrewla2• 2 years ago

When we saw a rise in 3d printing, I was very hopeful that a hobbyist movement towards fabricating large-feature ICs would soon arise. Nobody's doing 4nm fabrication in their garage, I reasoned, but surely we could get to ~10um.

As I read more about the dark art of IC fabrication, though, I realized that even this was a faint dream. I had imagined a world of lasers carving troughs, and print heads carefully placing down the lines and doping the silicon, an elegant symphony of modern technology.

But the real world is much messier -- every stage involves dangerous and toxic chemicals, processes that are spoiled by a spec of dust in the wrong place, either causing a cascade of reagent failures or a physical impediment to correctness; distressingly analog and oh so messy and built by trial and error and refined by domain experts in ways that are intensely hard to replicate because all the same lessons need to be learned again each time.

I'm glad to see the work being done here for hobbyist fabrication, but barring huge leaps and bounds, the gap between the neat lines in Magic and the shiny silicon discs is a vast chasm owned by the material scientists, not the electrical engineers or the software engineers.

foobarian• 2 years ago

but surely we could get to ~10um.

Well, why not 100um then? It's still way better than discrete components.

teucris• 2 years ago

I’m convinced this is the way to go. Rather than imitating commercial fab techniques, let’s find something that works without the toxic chemistry or vacuum chambers, even if it’s janky at first. 3D printers were janky at first too.

qwezxcrty3• 2 years ago

100 um is 4mil, which is the resolution one can get from the cheapest PCB offerings. (e.g. for single digit $ from JLCPCB).

Lerc2• 2 years ago

If you could fit even 9 logic gates into 1 square mm with a construction mechanism that scaled up to 2cm by 2cm you could build a rather capable 8-bit CPU.

I do wonder if taking this approach would work better with a novel construction method. Lithography and nasty chemicals are easier for resolution, but nasty chemicals.

On the other hand there will always be someone standing by to tell you an FPGA could have done that.

blackguardx• 2 years ago

Thin-film transistor circuits can probably approach more of what you are envisioning than silicon integrated circuits. There are even organic semiconductor versions of TFTs that use lower temperatures and liquid chemistry for layer deposition.

atrus2• 2 years ago

It's really expensive or difficult to have a one off object made though, and that's where 3D printing thrived. It fulfills that rapid prototyping itch.

People don't even really etch their own pcbs anymore, it's so fast and cheap, let alone spend $10k+ to manufacture a six cent item (maybe!), so there never was enough motivation for a diy movement to make ICs and other nanofabbed stuff

BizarroLand• 2 years ago

Especially when the goal is not the 6 cent item but rather the thing the six cent item makes possible.

I would whip out the credit card if I could make 555 timers at home for fun for $1,000.

Not sure if I put a second mortgage on my house to have a chance at maybe making one if I didn't screw up too much.

ysofunny• 2 years ago

you're spot on!

clearly a big part of why all these tech has been so succesful is also how it's all about investing a lot up front, but eventually being able to mass produce in a ridiculous scale, few industries have such a ratio (possibly pharma?)

so it's all about making chips by the hundreds of thousands. it requires a very different approach from any tech intended to make chips by the handful

marcosdumay2• 2 years ago

Nobody ever created a reliable self-contained foolproof PCB etching procedure. That's why nobody etches their own PCBs.

If there was a box that received supplies and outputted usable PCBs with minimum external mess, a lot of people that currently buy boards would use it instead.

(And well, PCB manufacturing is basically the same process as chip fabrication, without the miniaturization. If nobody managed to create a "PCB printer", why do people keep hopping for a "chip printer"?)

kiba• 2 years ago

Sure, that's the initial niche of 3D printing. But now people want to be able to repeatedly print something else again and again without having to do some sort of maintenance on the machine.

Now, you're getting those massive print farms that are able to change what they produce on the next print.

duped2• 2 years ago

University labs (with the right funding) can totally do this, it's just not cheap. My university sold all its fab hardware to another university the year before I was able to take a VLSI class which at the time, had a practical lab. *

As I read more about the dark art of IC fabrication

I want to push back on this being a "dark art" - there is no magic in engineering (nb4, any sufficiently advanced technology etc etc). It's a skillset that requires education, experience, and expertise on par with anything we do in other areas of engineering. The stakes are just a little higher than software because you're dealing with the physical world and physical things have tangible costs and/or danger.

The thing that may trip people up is that IC fabrication is one of those things that doesn't really have a hobbyist tier. Anything beyond a toy requires multiple people and support staff in addition to gear and raw materials that are hard to get as any old civilian - in addition to the clean room facilities. Like the reason my university closed their lab was partly because the grad/PhD students and professors had moved on, and partly because it was becoming more difficult to source wafers for research institutions that they could actually use (everyone got hired by labs in industry, where they were making their own wafers or buying them wholesale afaict).

* iirc only the penultimate project got taped out and fabbed with terrible yields due to time contraints

jancsika• 2 years ago

I want to push back on this being a "dark art" - there is no magic in engineering (nb4, any sufficiently advanced technology etc etc). It's a skillset that requires education, experience, and expertise on par with anything we do in other areas of engineering. The stakes are just a little higher than software because you're dealing with the physical world and physical things have tangible costs and/or danger.

I think "engineering" in software generally means optimizing a path to a targeted set of behaviors so that the piles of garbage underneath don't end up blocking their execution for eternity.

Our starting point is therefore different. You ought to somehow be working around all the physical piles of dust and patchwork of fires that must be constantly igniting inside your laser machinery. I picture it something like the mad surgeon in Minority Report, creating a small transient sterile environment to do illegal eye surgery in a room full of filth.

In that light your "art" looks "dark."

ackbar03• 2 years ago

I don't really know much about ic manufacturing.

Are you sure university labs are really able to to this? If so how come only a few companies like tsmc and that one Dutch company are able to manufacture microchips? Or are those two completely different things and I'm just confusing myself?

shawndrost• 2 years ago

It seems you have convinced me that IC fabrication is a dark art, despite your intentions.

UnFleshedOne• 2 years ago

When there is a need (remote space colonies for example), they might need to develop a more robust process that would trade off size and speed of chips for ease of manufacturing.

ben_w3• 2 years ago

OTOH, remote space colonies get zero-g manufacturing, along with free vaccum so hard that makes our best artificial vaccum systems seem like a Florida garden during a hurricane in comparison.

What they get to do may not help with DIY in a garage on Earth.

Palomides• 2 years ago

there's no chance of DIY silicon fabs taking off, but the industry becoming more accessible to hobbyists is way more plausible

imho, the deeper problem is that there are just very few situations where you need a custom chip that can't be covered by existing options or FPGAs, and vanishingly few people have the expertise to get anything interesting done even if they had cheap access to fabs

(check out tiny tapeout, though!)

Joel_Mckay2• 2 years ago

Sure, if one assumes people will focus on traditional CMOS design, and high-volume rapid fab processes.

Most people can't even make FPGA that work properly, and YOLO the simulation given metastability is beyond their users understanding.

few people have the expertise to get anything interesting done even if they had cheap access to fabs

Chicken or egg problem... a walled garden simply gets fewer visitors, and people with expensive toys tend not to share. =3

didip• 2 years ago

Engineering problems can be solved with engineering solutions, e.g. better material science that's not toxic (PLA is common now but it was an engineering marvel).

As long as there's a problem and there's money to be made, these things you mentioned can be solved.

readyplayernull• 2 years ago

I would be happy if electronics companies started offering more dense circuits printed on film instead of thick 1mm PCB. There's too much volume wasted on tracks, that could be reduced layering discrete components and there is film that can isolate the heat.

tdeck2• 2 years ago

You can get flexible printed circuits (FPC) from vendors like JLCPCB and PCBWay, which are essentially what you describe.

https://jlcpcb.com/blog/flex-pcb-available-at-jlcpcb-from-sp...

https://www.pcbway.com/fpc-rigid-flex-pcb/flex-pcb.html

And in case folks reading this don't already know it, multi-layer rigid printed circuit boards are a common technology based on laminating together multiple very thin rigid layers with each layer carrying separate traces.

bob1029• 2 years ago

oh so messy and built by trial and error

Not only built by trial and error, but also continuously adapted in near real time to deal with new sources of error.

The most complicated aspects of semiconductor manufacturing utilize statistical process control to determine the best course of action by relying on large sample sizes. You probably couldn't start up a modern manufacturing line without already having a manufacturing line due to this. Finding viable "hyperparameters" for a photo tool makes training an LLM look like a tutorial. Bootstrapping all of this required direct human involvement with ever-so-careful incremental offloading of these concerns to automation over a period of decades.

cxr2• 2 years ago

Finding viable "hyperparameters" for a photo tool makes training an LLM look like a tutorial.

There's generally an unstated (and occasionally explicit, as in this case) reverence from software people for the kind of mythical engineering that goes on in fabs. In reality, if you've had any direct experience with the manufacturing process—and I'm talking about current- or next-gen processes for the most sophisticated mass market devices like those going into flagship smartphones, mining ASICs, GPUs, and critical applications like use in EVs—you know that a bunch of it is in the hands of folks whose most desirable asset in a prospective worker is that they'll accept low pay to eventually get the necessary work done to the prevailing standard best described as "adequate".

Valley types especially, but even other software folks would be really surprised by how much of what goes on in fabs is basically the sort of thing that you would expect to see from people plucked from amateur hour. I've posted about this before on HN. Where improvement to existing chipmaker operations is concerned, the fruit hangs so, so low.

Elon's biggest, dumbest misstep is not just buying Twitter; it's buying Twitter and not putting an equal or lesser amount of resources instead into gaining control over how his own (and others') chips are made—doing the same thing for the industry that he did with SpaceX for aerospace.

Again, because it cannot be emphasized enough: what passes for acceptable in fab operations is bonkers.

CamperBob2• 2 years ago

Training an LLM is a rudimentary exercise at this point, so maybe not the best example.

ash-ali• 2 years ago

If anyone is interested in future small fabs: https://atomicsemi.com/ Looks very promising. Founder is an interesting person.

LargoLasskhyfv• 2 years ago

Can they beat https://www.minimalfab.com/update/news_en/244 along with https://www.minimalfab.com/update/news_en/226 & https://github.com/mineda-support/ICPS2023_5 -> https://mole99.uber.space/2024/NAND_tutorial/Design%20of%20a... -> https://mole99.uber.space/2023/Minimal_Fab/About%20Minimal%2... ?

bozhark• 2 years ago

metrix had a laser etching rapid pcb prototyping laser in 2013 in seattle. trace routes down to 1mil

dvdkon• 2 years ago

There are multiple approaches to easily making basic single-sided PCBs at home, but the rest is hard: Multi-layer PCBs, vias, through-hole plating, solder mask... Those are all things that even hobbyists need, but generally require annoying chemicals and multiple manual stages.

All these things have been done by hobbyists before, but I suppose doing all of this for a single PCB just isn't attractive.

pragma_x• 2 years ago

FWIW, there _is_ work being done on the hobby front for IC fabrication "at home". We're still far from buying a miniature chip-fab-in-a-box product, but current technology makes yesterday's tech far more affordable. We're on our way.

Example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RuVS7MsQk4Y

hammock• 2 years ago

How big is a spec of dust? What size can you do if you don’t worry about dust? 1000nm? Smaller?

rnewme2• 2 years ago

Dust isn't just a single size, it's a giant range[1], and no, even 1 μm process requires a cleanroom, let alone anything smaller.

[1] https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/particle-sizes-d_934.html

samatman• 2 years ago

Teaching rocks to think is not for the faint of heart.

tonetegeatinst• 2 years ago

Another issue is the insane cost for test/fan equipment. Not even for semiconductor stuff but even material testing.

Vacuum chambers and vacuum pumps....metrology microscopes....

Cost to grow single crystal boules is insane.

Etc....

matheusmoreira• 2 years ago

We still need this, no matter how hard it is. If we can't make our own computers, we're stuck with the computers made by big companies and those come pwned right off the factory. We'll never be truly free unless we can make our own free computers at home, just like how we can make our own free software at home.

123pie123• 2 years ago

you could always have a go a programming a FPGA - it's still cool and fairly cheap now

eg these guys are putting retro games on to FPGA https://www.analogue.co/developer

mcdow• 2 years ago

Assumption: the dream primary value of something like this is the ability for individuals to fab chips on their own. Like 3D printing, it’s for rapid iteration in prototyping. Then once you have a design you have one of the big players manufacture it in the traditional manner.

If my assumption is true, how is this better than FPGAs?

TeMPOraL• 2 years ago

Then once you have a design you have one of the big players manufacture it in the traditional manner.

Why? Assuming this is ignoring a good chunk of individual interest. It's similar to people mentioning ordering PCBs instead of making your own: sure, making a thousand copies of a PCB is now cheap enough on the margin to be accessible. But what about making five? Or just one?

Not every human sees a hobby as an investment into business. Not everyone does projects with a sellable product in mind. Many just want to test their ideas, have fun, scratch their own itch, build something so it exists, and not to sell it.

The primary value of a home fab to me would be to enable fabbing a single task-specific chip (or a tiny amount of them) for any random need I have, whenever it occurs.

kragen9• 2 years ago

Every other YouTube video I watch tells me two or three times that Their Sponsor JLCPCB (or, equivalently, their competitor PCBWay) will fabricate five copies of your PCB for US$10 and ship them to you in a week, though the non-promotional price seems to be more like US$80. Tiny Tapeout, MOSIS, and CMP do similar things for chips, at a much higher cost and longer timescale.

zokier2• 2 years ago

It's similar to people mentioning ordering PCBs instead of making your own: sure, making a thousand copies of a PCB is now cheap enough on the margin to be accessible. But what about making five? Or just one?

For example JLCPCB is currently offering 5 PCBs (2L, 100x100mm) for $2 + $1.52 shipping. That's why people are saying that making your own PCBs is not economical.

eschneider2• 2 years ago

FPGA is clearly more _practical_ if you're trying to bang out some commercial functionality. Still, making your own chip fab is cool to do in it's own right. :)

kragen9• 2 years ago

FPGAs mostly aren't useful for analog.

zokier2• 2 years ago

If my assumption is true, how is this better than FPGAs?

For starters, you can make analog/mixed-signal chips

marcosdumay2• 2 years ago

Then once you have a design you have one of the big players manufacture it in the traditional manner.

That doesn't even work very well with 3D printing. You have no chance at all of transferring something from 10µm chips into a commercial fab.

kragen9• 2 years ago

Not the actual chip layout, no, but you can very plausibly get the circuit design to work. If you're doing this you presumably want something you can't do on an FPGA, which probably means analog, so you probably don't want the super-high-end process nodes like 10nm, 7nm, or 4nm anyway; those are generally not going to be very useful for analog signals.

Right now Tiny Tapeout seems to be the best option.

koeng3• 2 years ago

Analog I guess. I'm trying to make a chip for DNA synthesis, and so need physical contact with the real world, with electrodes, where electricity from the circuit will cause localized pH changes, which you can use for precise control of biological reactions. FPGAs can't do that kind of analog work.

fragmede3• 2 years ago

Sounds fascinating! What sort of ADC and DAC do you need to do for that where traditional techniques fall short?

nrclark2• 2 years ago

It's true that most FPGAs have limited built-in analog capabilities. But good DACs and ADCs aren't too expensive, and an FPGA can control them with exceptional precision. Does your process have some kind of input / output that can't be handled that way?

Dedicated DACs/ADCs will almost always offer better performance than the ones you'd find on a microcontroller or even an ASIC.

__MatrixMan__3• 2 years ago

I hope they succeed but making micro/nanoscale structures with humanscale machines has always been a hard thing, even for those with better funding than the hobbyist.

I recently learned about DNA-directed crystal growth and was excited by the idea that it might be a more tractable approach to being a big thing and making a small thing (like an integrated circuit). I'm not sure how one would go about it in their garage, but programming the fine-control-needed steps into the chemical rather than into the machine feels like a win.

Joel_Mckay2• 2 years ago

One has to admire their efforts, as the upfront costs of a fab lab are ridiculously high. As with any technology the Metrology becomes the predominant problem domain. i.e. Answering the question "Where do we get the repeatable precision?"

There are low-volume lab processes around that can hit below <234nm feature sizes, but a clean room must be considered part of the machine... And it can take years to figure out how to maintain atmospheres and gas mass-flow-control.

Pretty cheeky selling community designed hardware without citing the original hobbyists. Nothing they posted looks remotely new or novel. Meh =3

nzrrsm• 2 years ago

I've been thinking about this a bunch lately and very much agree. We really need a way to build these nanodevices that doesn't involve lithography. Using something like DNA to carry information to the surface seems way easier and more effective/robust as we continue to scale down and out.

__MatrixMan__3• 2 years ago

I wouldn't go so far as "way easier". It's just difficult for a single reason that's easy to imagine a solution to rather than 100 different reasons which are not. I'm not in the field, but I'm under the impression that our ability to encode our wishes into DNA is closer to:

make me a 1um tall pyramid out of nanoparticles which are all the same type

...than it is to:

make me a NAND gate out of this solution of nanoparticles, some are doped in different ways than others.

Most miracles involving DNA are heavily inspired by nature, and there's not a lot of natural code available for the construction of logic gates. I'm not sure which of these is harder:

1. make biochemical systems which construct arbitrary solid state circuits

2. abandon solid state and do our computing in living tissue

What I like about the former is that there are a lot of other things that investment in that area might produce, things which aren't a hassle to keep alive, even if a general purpose circuit constructor happens to be out of reach.

mNovak• 2 years ago

This looks really fun, and I'm hopeful for low cost prototyping to come to IC development. But I think 3D printing is the wrong comparison -- the much closer example is PCBs, and while we can DIY PCBs (I did this in college) it's not even necessary as they're just so cheap because of the rise of aggregators and high volume scaling in China.

I have to wonder if there's not more that can be done on this front for low cost IC prototyping. I don't think the fixed infrastructure is necessarily the problem (i.e. building the fab) as there's enough capacity for cheap chips in volume, meaning each additional wafer isn't the cost limiting factor. There are multi-project wafers (like PCB aggregators), but my understanding is that the hard cost limit currently is the NRE of making the mask set, which isn't getting amortized over a sufficient number of devices in a prototype run.

So cheap masks (or fewer masks) would be an area I'd be interested to see development.

tdeck2• 2 years ago

As an impatient person who likes prototyping I still wish DIY PCBs were easier and less messy. The turnaround time of DIY can't be beat, but every process I have seen has something I don't like about it, except maybe fiber lasers (which I'm not too well acquainted with).

rnewme2• 2 years ago

If you're referring to fiber laser pcb production, it's shiete because burnt fr4 becomes conductive, and plethora of other reasons, really.

oscillonoscope3• 2 years ago

It's also tooling. Professional grade PCB design software can be acquired for a few kilobucks per year and OSS versions (KiCAD) are pretty useable. Professional grade IC design software is hundreds of thousands per year and open source competitors are barely usable in comparison. I do share your hopes though, democratizing IC design even a little would be a huge boon to hardware development.

151556• 2 years ago

OSS versions (KiCAD) are pretty useable

Until you actually need to route DDR, run any signal simulation model, etc.

isawczuk2• 2 years ago

Low cost home IC development is something very needed for agriculture. If we think about current and future farming equipment, it's digital. We need to provide them the ability to repair themselves and mod.

stackghost• 2 years ago

My father grew up on a farm and I wholeheartedly agree. Unfortunately, this is a step in the right direction but the goal is still a long ways off. Farmers don't have a spare $50k sitting around to build hobbyist IC fabs in the barn.

therein2• 2 years ago

How about we let them flash the ICs that they have first? Or allow them to change the maximum speed on the vehicle without having to go to the service center and paying 300 to 500$.

Why are we talking about low cost at home IC development for farmers while we don't let them do even that.

isawczuk2• 2 years ago

Forcing companies to open source their software is not possible, but making sure we can replace each component after warranty? There are strong right to repair movements, it's just matter of time.

singron• 2 years ago

Any IC that would be practical to DIY is available for <$1 and you could probably get something 1000x more powerful for nearly the same price. Making chips isn't the issue here.

klysm2• 2 years ago

Unfortunately I don’t think this has any relevance to that at all.

echoangle• 2 years ago

You can just get finished Microcontrollers that you can program yourself for a fraction of a fraction of the price to make them yourself, and orders of magnitude more capable. You will not be able to make a chip more capable than an ESP32 for less than $2, so how would making an IC yourself help you?

__MatrixMan__3• 2 years ago

I imagine it would be in preparedness for a time when you could no longer get such powerful chips so cheaply and quickly, or for one where you no longer trusted the chips you could get for some reason.

hooverd2• 2 years ago

Heh, now they have two yields to worry about. What's stopping them from doing this with the various commercial-off-the-shelf system-on-a-chips?

151556• 2 years ago

Does John Deere use ICs of its own manufacture?

ur-whale3• 2 years ago

Very interesting project, but ...

We communicate entirely over Discord.

Walled garden, unsearchable content, for what strikes me as an open source like DYI endeavor.

Why ?

satiric4• 2 years ago

Discord is searchable.

ur-whale3• 2 years ago

Discord is searchable.

From Google ?

getcrunk• 2 years ago

Not from the outside

georgeburdell• 2 years ago

Just IMO as a semiconductor expert, but to try and scale down the existing semiconductor process is not the right approach. It’s just too complex. There need to be new tools optimized for simplicity of reagents, like no toxic photoresist and developers, no deadly plasma gases, etc. Or, if those steps are required, that they can be decoupled from the local lab. Example: you can just buy silicon wafers coated with oxide or metal today

151556• 2 years ago

This is likely the correct take: large fabs will allow cheaper and easier shuttles long before DIY ASICs become a thing.

Taniwha• 2 years ago

Maybe step back to 1980s gate arrays - a sea of nand gates just waiting for metal layers - wiring could just be done with fibs/insulation

nwiswell• 2 years ago

While I'm sympathetic to democratizing access to simple fabrication technology, I have serious misgivings about hobbyists getting involved.

There's the obvious stuff: you can't avoid HF, and it's nasty stuff. You can die. But that's not what I'm the most worried about; people can make smart decisions to reduce risk, and ultimately people can make their own decisions about their risk tolerance.

What I'm worried about is the SF6 for the RIE. Kg for kg, that stuff has a global warming potential of more than 24,000 TIMES the warming potential of CO2. If it's all broken down in the plasma chamber, or there's exhaust scrubbers involved like you'd have at an industrial fab, then it's no issue.

But hobbyists are going to be spilling and purging a bunch of unmodified SF6. It's kind of an ecological catastrophe. Some things are better not done at home.

satiric4• 2 years ago

"you can't avoid HF, and that's nasty stuff" do you mean High Voltage?

fragmede3• 2 years ago

Hydrogen Fluoride

Animats• 2 years ago

Nobody seems to have mentioned electron beam lithography. Hobbyists have done that.[1]

E-beam lithography has been used since the 1970s. It's slow; it might take a day to make a CPU. That's why it's not used as a production process. But as a prototype process, it works fine. There are a few hobbyists doing this.[1]

E-beam systems are basically scanning electron microscopes with more power. There's a vacuum chamber, means for focusing and steering an electron beam similar to what's inside a CRT, and control equipment. It's all computer-controlled, of course.

This has many advantages. Software can correct for nonlinearities in the scanning. The machine can inspect what it's written by scanning at low power.

You still have to coat and etch; it's not a dry process. The beam just exposes photoresist.

The equipment is the size of a desk. Here's a machine at CMU.[2] Many universities have such machines.

[1] https://hackaday.com/2024/08/06/creating-1%c2%b5m-features-t...

[2] https://nanofab.ece.cmu.edu/facilities-equipment/fei-sirion....

klysm2• 2 years ago

The machine can inspect what it's written by scanning at low power.

This is a fascinating property that seems very powerful

femto• 2 years ago

What about ion implantation? Any hope there?

numpad0• 2 years ago

Is there really no way around wet etching at all, like a laser cutter under microscope?

hoseja• 2 years ago

Surely the end state of advanced computational hardware production cannot be glorified color photography? It's really weird nobody has come up with a better process.

itomato• 2 years ago

Discord, though?

Hacker Fab

Related Stories