I cannot recall last time I printed something.

I started out printing complex claude plans to go through them in a different setting, make notes, think about it, modify, then tell it to execute.

But website printing in general, I see less of a need.

Just last night I noticed that one tiny thing LM Studio has over the otherwise absolutely glorious Unsloth Desktop is that transcripts print really nicely out of the app.

I do it for reading sometimes mostly papers, I just find it a bit easier to read through something without distraction and easier on the eyes. That and it sits on my desk until I actually read it.

Did you try e-ink / e-paper ? (Remarkable etc.)

With paper I can put two or three pages side by side. Imagine needing 2 or 3 synchronized e-readers like that. And I can immediately draw on them, not worrying about what mode I'm in, what brush is selected blablabla. I can flip back and forth with my fingers etc. Downside is no search, no zoom no copy paste.

You can still copy paste and zoom.

Magnifying glass? Copy is hard, cut and paste, glue etc sure.

Yes to magnifying glass for zoom.

You copy with a pen or pencil, like the monks did.

Yes to cut and paste with scissor and glues.

I've enjoyed ink displays, but my kindle has been dead for some time and it was always kind of a pain to load stuff on too, most papers would require some kind of zoom as well although I'm sure they're better these days.

I do love an e-ink display, but I just like holding a sheet of paper, and not having to jump through menus to read something especially if I'm actively referring to it and revisiting it. Plus I can use my coloured fineliner on it, whereas the PDF viewer on my iPad crashes sometimes crashes if you look at it funny.

I used to work for a vehicle listing site, and over and over again when we talked to real users they would tell us how they would make spreadsheets and print out our vehicle pages (and from other sites too) so they could compare everything together on their kitchen table.

We had just completed yet another other redesign and our (React) pages printed completely mangled and users hated it. We regularly got feedback about it.

And yet it was so low priority that me (UX designer) and a developer had to team up and get off the record permission to spend a few days fixing it in CSS alone while our managers covered for us.

When people for whom $29,000 is an enormous expense are purchasing a car, you can bet they are printing stuff and very, very carefully considering their purchase. Primary demographic was not young, tech native people.

Property search websites too. Boggles my mind that Rightmove can make it possible for you to add notes on a property page but still has a shit print view.

I think we all know the real reason, which I knew at the time as well: if you print the page, you aren’t seeing new ads.

I don't really print. I do make quite a lot of archive PDFs of articles by simply printing to PDF. Sometimes a design both breaks reader mode (which often makes a better PDF) and frustrates printing from the ordinary view.

For a couple of applications I have built recently, an offline view of the data in print form has been part of the design requirement. It's still reasonably common in situations where people will meet in real life and a physical clipboard will be needed with a register or some physical signatures are needed, or in situations where paper goes home with people from meetings for them to read and sign. So, lots of school/community/disclaimer tasks where you can't presume people have devices (or a device wouldn't be usable/practical/useful, especially in outdoor contexts).

These days PDFs are also useful for marking up in some devices.

For my own work, making an app printable is a basic thing I always do — it's part of the normal process.

But that often means little more than disabling headers/footers/sidebars, rendering simple text where a logo was, putting in page break guidance at sensible points, perhaps overriding a few text colours, maybe a couple of media queries for items that need to only appear/not appear in print. Basic stuff. From there, most "print this" views are little more than a slightly simpler template.

The cool thing about is that printability often comes up late in the requirements, and it's a thing people try before they ask you about it — they try to print from the demo. So it's an easy positive surprise if the print view does more or less what the user would hope for, right from the beginning.

Making it so all of an interface is at least basically printable is actually easy if you plan for it, and it's a good way of keeping focussed on broader usability.

Same. It rankles when I have to - usually because of some sort of antiquated approach to bureaucracy, like contracts or CDAs that demand a wet signature (despite then accepting an emailed poor quality scan of said wet signature).

I've been trying to print a sewing pattern today, but apparently 2d printers are even less reliable than 3d printers, somehow

I do a lot of printing for TTRPG's.

Generally speaking, if you are in any group situation where you meet in person and want to share something, paper is still king. Easiest to share and no distracting electronic devices.

Also for learning I often prefer physical books and printed out worksheets. It helps engage the spatial memory plus you can write on them with an actual pen which also helps recall compared to typing.

Today, my only two devices consist of an Android 17 Pixel, and a Chromebook. The printer drivers in each of these OS are shockingly rudimentary. Like, there is no affordance to connect to the printer and configure its settings, or monitor its status, or run tests or anything. The only printout options are so basic: I can perhaps choose 2-sided, and perhaps what size paper, but there are, max, about 5 parameters on the Print dialog.

This was something that sort of escaped my notice until I finally had to replace my 2011-era HP printer. I chose a SOHO HP printer, and basically, it can't properly print anything, not even 2-sided, unless I go through the Linux subsystem on the Chromebook. This is fine, because I seldom print stuff, but it's just emblematic that neither ChromeOS nor Android really wants anyone to print anything, ever at all.

When choosing to replace my printer with a modern one, my other option was to not replace it at all. I could easily upload documents and print them at the UPS Store, or Staples, or FedEx Kinko's, the public library, or a pharmacy photo department or something. There is not a shortage of outsourced print shops around here. Perhaps I spent way too much money on a SOHO model. But at least I can scream and rage at the printer drivers in the comfort of my own home!

Chromebook printing is just literal CUPS with an even worse interface. You can use manual configuration with a custom CUPS PPD, it’s just a pain. Also the driver definitions are restricted and can’t use executables, so PPDs that require an external filter don’t work.

My read is that a lot of content - specifically of the infinite-scroll variety - is very intentionally not designed to be printed.

There are a number of Slack and Discord conversations I'd have liked to export off to PDF, for instance (where a solid 90% of my "prints" go). I'm reminded that one of Slack's boot messages used to be, "Consider the environment before printing this Slack."

If I'm totally honest, this feels like somethign that'd be quite low on my priority list. I'd muchrather focus on the on-screen UX and accessibility if I have limited time. I think making things printable makessense in certain contexts, and I think could actually replace a lot of the pDF generation sites do for things like tickets, invoices, etc.

This is precisely why I do make things basically printable right from the start.

For one, it often entirely heads off the requirement for "can we have it so the user can download a PDF of this?" (because users generally know how to print things!)

And for another, it broadens your options for implementing those PDFs if that requirement doesn't go away. You may not have to restrict your markup to that which some PDF generator library can work with, because printing any page in a headless browser is easier.

You often don't have to do much in a CSS stylesheet to get a modern site to render well, because we've moved away from so many layout hacks in general.

And with light/dark mode support and CSS variables the colours in a print mode should be easy to define and support.

So you're primarily left with hiding content that shouldn't be printed (like navigation or menu buttons), defining page breaks, and some other quality of life changes for printing.

Yeah. And out in the real world people are pretty tolerant of minor issues with printing (imperfect page breaks) because it's a miracle when any website prints at all!

I was recently surprised to notice a PDF download link on a blog post from Anthropic. My first thought was "would anybody want to read a blog post in PDF rather than HTML format?"

This comment suggests the answer is yes.

I think on corporate blog posts, they have regulatory impact, so that is perhaps additionally about legal teams — printouts of web pages end up in legal filings and discussed in meetings etc.?

Happy paralegals are a finite resource.

But yeah. Someone, somewhere, is printing your web pages for their own reasons, and you may never know whether poor printability cost you.

Absolutely yes. It’s offline friendly, free of distractions, stays on page between reading sessions, and easy for marks and annotations.

In some countries, printable tickets and other things once delivered as elaborate PDFs, are increasingly replaced by a QR code that can be printed from a barebones webpage, or even delivered outside of the web like to one's WhatsApp.

fun fact: you can use mm/cm or freedom units in CSS [1]. YMMV outside of printing though, at least on low-DPI devices the rendering results might not make too much sense. If you're really adventurous, CSS offers even more dedicated printing functions such as pagination [2].

[1] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/Reference/V...

[2] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/Guides/Frag...

Websites should be usable first. Open this one on a phone and see what happens

I did. It’s perfectly readable. What was the issue you experienced on your phone?

The screenshot does not scale to fit, so you get a horizontal scroll.

It's not the end of the world.

But as it goes, not everyone has the motor control to _only_ scroll a phone view vertically; unexpected horizontal scroll can be frustrating, especially when one very wide element leaves the screen otherwise confusingly blank elsewhere on the page.

(I've actually witnessed this frustration from an older user in real life)

Having horizontal scroll is annoying, yes, but I don’t think it makes a website unusable on a mobile device.

The way to handle elements wide enough to induce horizontal scrolling is to put them in a <div> (or make CSS for the tag in question) and make CSS with overflow-x: scroll; for just that element. An example from one of my webpages:

  pre {max-width: 90vw; overflow-x: scroll;}

> but I don’t think it makes a website unusable on a mobile device

For you :-) Now imagine you have to use a mobile device but have limited control over your hands, and it's difficult for you to do a vertical scrolling gesture without some horizontal drift.

I've seen this in real life. Why not make things easier for that person when you can? Accessibility is for everyone. (General accessibility rule I like — if it's a persistent minor annoyance for me, it's possibly a dealbreaker for someone with an accessibility requirement I've not thought of)

Your suggestion for constraining horizontal scroll to unavoidably overflowing elements is good, though — I do that too, and I've ended up figuring out how to add affordances so it's clear that scroll is possible (shadows that appear and disappear)

If I have to zoom on mobile, I go straight to Reader mode. If that doesn't work, I close the page.

Author here, I don't personally use my phone to access websites often, so I forget to check on things like this. My bad! I'll take a look into it when I get a chance.

The most common avoidable annoyance is the forced huge margins, like it's assumed you always fullscreen the webpage. However, making things printable would fix that and all sorts of usability problems too.

I have used CSS for print layouts before. My stance on this is: If you can reasonably expect someone will print your website or (more likely) parts of it, because of its nature, add a nice add free, no tracking cookie print layout. If not, don't.

I often have to print for example online shopping baskets so others can decide which offer they will take. Meaning how your shopping basket looks print absolutely will have an impact by annoying or pleasing the people who make the decisions. Needless to say, 99% of all shopping baskets look like trash when printed out.

If you have a blog, it would be reasonably that someone might want to read your article offline or store it for archival purposes. Having that look decent is not a bad thing. And it is not that hard.

One issue with making websites printable is that printing, by default, removes background colors and images. So, for the chess diagrams I have on my webpage, I use background colors to have the chessboard be a checkerboard instead of a white background (the chess pieces are a color webfont)—but since web printing removes backgrounds, the chessboards have white backgrounds unless the person printing the webpage chooses “print backgrounds”.

The only way to work around this is to have two sets of chess pieces in the font, one with a white background for pieces on light squares, and one with a colored background for pieces on dark squares.

Printing web pages is rare enough I just assume someone doing that will also click on “print backgrounds”.

(The reason to not use images for the chessboard diagrams is because they use more bandwidth and can’t have usable “dark mode” colors)

Sounds like SVGs would work well for this.

The advantage of a COLR font over SVGs is that they are functionally identical for this use case (indeed, the font in question was converted from SVG vector files) and a good deal more compact to boot.

You might be able to fix this with a few simple print CSS rules though.

I fixed it with print-color-adjust:

  background: #eee;
  print-color-adjust: exact;
  -webkit-print-color-adjust: exact;

But it's only by default. So the super easy workaround is to check the "Print backgrounds" box when printing.

I politely disagree. The original intent Tim Berners Lee had [1] was to create a navigable way of finding documents and information. Not printable. The entire issue we have today is that we have blurred both the navigable and the printable concepts. A website should just be a simple clean space for easily navigating and conveying intended information. To print, we have latex and other markup methods that are perfect for that.

[1] https://info.cern.ch/hypertext/WWW/TheProject.html

Don Quixote, is that you?

I politely disagree. What does Tim Berners Lee’s opinion of anything have to do with anything? What use is Latex when I want a readable hardcopy of a web page?

Well, I want to retire and not have to work for another 30+ years, but I guess we do not always get what we want :(

What a good point! The web would be much nicer looking if browsers accepted pages written in LaTeX as well as pages written in HTML.

After all TeX is all about high quality printing on paper.

Browsers already accept PDF. TeX files aren't portable.

Not portable in what way?

In the unless-you-bring-the-development-machine-along-with-it kind of way.

And as if browsers don't have enough bugs already -- now we include TeX?

Don has had the longest-running bug bounty of them all!

Exactly. That's why they should handle device independent output.

MathML?

A TeX distribution on my computer (mactex) is like 4 gigabytes. Definitely not "bundle-with-a-web-browser" worthy.

Fun fact: In the early days, website projects were mostly allocated at the top level of an organisation. As top-level officers used to consume the Web in printouts, the print view was also the default customer view and thus of utter importance.

Also in my experience, the higher you go in an organisation, the greater the chance of finding an older person of great ability with tired eyes and well-masked dyslexia who just wants to print your thing and go through it with a highlighter and a sharpie, and whose PA just used to always do that for them without anyone finding out.

Even now this is not that uncommon; I have worked with an entrepreneur masking significant dyslexia in just the last five years. Printability was just something he needed so he could properly scrutinise.

Print is still an accessibility thing, I think.

The original design of the WWW has morphed a dozen times between what he built and what we have today. And while I don’t love every innovation, there are plenty of things we take for granted today that wasn’t possibly with HTML1, such as banking apps.

So I don’t think there’s much merit arguing about what doesn’t exist any longer.

Banking apps are not “websites” by coincidence they happen to be apps using same technology to show the interface but there is huge difference between website and web app.

This distinction is important especially because people are notoriously confusing the two and expect web apps to be like websites and conversely implement websites with tech that is supposed to be used to build web applications bloating internet pipes with JS where HTML and CSS would be sufficient.

There is a big difference, one is spelt “website” and the other “web app”.

Beyond that, the distinction is purely arbitrary. Same tech stacks, same delivery methods, and the same client-side display tools.

Not a facetious question, but you don't build websites for a living, I think?

This kind of fairly idealistic thinking is so far from the ordinary web development norm that you have to go past "supporting that version of IE with 0.7% market share" to get to it.

I used to. Apologies if it came on too strong, but it wasn't idealistic thinking. For print, I find that I can easily use AI to turn a web page into a nice clean LaTeX and offer that as a PDF for those that want to print or read offline.

But that's impractical (not to mention non-deterministic and a bit of a privacy risk) for any kind of online printability of dynamic information.

Most "I need a printout of this" information is timely and dynamic and needs fixing in a physical form.

A print stylesheet seems like something you could get an LLM to write.

It’s weird that you’re opposed to a few lines of CSS but happy to boil the ocean to implement the same thing via non-deterministic AI.

I mean, everyone has their own workflow preferences so I wouldn’t criticise you for wanting to use AI in your own personal set up. But it feels like your two statements there should be moral opposites of each other.

TBL’s vision is the starting point, not a straitjacket.

And that's the crux!

> The entire issue we have today is that we have blurred both the navigable and the printable concepts.

I politely disagree, the problem is we have made websites a javascript hellscape with all that original intent broken by design.

I think that's an orthogonal issue. A webpage can be crazy with loads of JS stuff, but still print nicely or behave well defined when it comes to semantics, screen readers etc.

While what you say is correct, the point is that the excessive use of JS is what makes nowadays the print command the only way to save most Web pages.

Years ago I was never using the "print" command in browsers. I used the "save" command. But now the "save" command is useless for most sites, because the saved scripts frequently do not work offline or they do not work even online, but from local files. So the only alternative is "print", which is extraordinarily buggy in both Firefox and Chrome, but their developers do not give a ****, so there are many years or perhaps decades since printing in Firefox or Chrome renders completely incorrectly almost all Web pages.

As a workaround for the stupid rendering in Firefox and Chrome, I frequently print twice a Web page, once in Portrait and once in Landscape, because the corrupted parts of the printed page will typically occur in different locations. Moreover, I may have to fiddle with other printing parameters, e.g. whether to print backgrounds or not, or with different margins and paper sizes, because it is unpredictable which settings will work best with a given site.

The idea of printing out one of those documents does not conflict with this.

>I politely disagree. The original intent Tim Berners Lee had [1] was to create a navigable way of finding documents and information. Not printable.

And I politely disagree right back. My particular problem with this has to do with purchasing. When I make a purchase at work, I need something I can attach to a purchase request as a quote. Note that this is often not a formal quote, but rather evidence of what whatever I want to buy will cost.

A simple way to do this is to print a shopping cart to PDF and attach that to the PR. Some web sites do this just fine and others do it horribly. They should do better.

This might be more of an edge case than people who complain about websites that require JS, which is itself a number that rounds to basically zero.

Maybe you could capture the full height of the website as a screenshot? There are extensions that do this, and there is some degree of native support for the feature nowadays.

Maybe it's a weird, unusual edge case but maybe not. Lots of people need to keep records of various things for various reasons. In my personal life, I also "print" lots of stuff from various web sites to PDF for record-keeping purposes. This is absolutely routine for me, I do it all the time.

Thankfully, most of the web sites for which I want to do this — banks and other financial institutions, but others also — have easy ways to create printable receipts because they know that people want to do things like this.

And you can disagree, but when I come across some e-commerce site where printing what I want or need to PDF doesn't work because the site just makes a horrible unreadable mess out of it, I think, well here's a set of "web developers" who are just not good at what they do.

(And yes, I fall back to screen shots when I must.)

The resolution of screenshots is typically unacceptable for most uses, especially when the bitmap were scaled, which would introduce blurring.

The biggest problem is that we went to mobile-first design along with a horrible split between backend and frontend functionality. If you hit view source on a lot of sites these days a page will be just a stub for calling javascript that actually puts the html on the page. It's not so much a function of hiding what the site does as it is web developers are afraid to write html and instead punt that into their javascript framework-of-frameworks.

The Web is meant to have links and interactive content and be navigated, sure.

But to expect every author also upload a PDF? I mean, TeX is great for what it is, but there's a reason _the web_ adapted print stylesheets.

Even if (La)TeX (or Typst, or Postscript or anything else) were easy to learn, you're left with maintaining 2 copies or a compilation system which is also a challenge.

I personally think printing unless absolutely necessary is a waste of resources.

Printing also covers things like exporting to PDF, or rendering in an eBook format (EPUB, Kindle, etc.) for reading the content offline while travelling, etc.

It is. But sometimes it is absolutely necessary for something to be printable, and PDFs are useful. Sensible OSes can generate PDFs from the print dialogue.

Considering trends in CVEs, printing is only growing importance. Printing has the unique advantage of giving you a record of data that's durable, unhackable, and possible to read without computers. If you print something, you can be confident that it's still going to be the same when you read it later.

Bring back the auth.warn paper trail!

this.

read books too.

if anyone thinks msdn, github, reddit, stackoverflow, and soon if not now (hosted) llm's don't export and mine their users queries for architectural goodies...

developers ALL have targets on their backs, it's just the way the world has evolved.

Assuming no one surreptitiously swaps out the pages!

You still gotta keep it secure. ;)

Or uses white-out and splices numbers into different places. It's happened before.

I agree that unnecessary printing is wasteful. But i would see this just as anecdotal: Having information structured consistently and a easily accessible format. That makes a difference in the long run

Must be horrifying for you to walk into a barnes and noble. Don’t go read up on how bitcoin works or hell nascar. Seems pretty unnecessary that we drive cars around in a circle for countless hours. I will take books and people making physical copies of whatever they want over many other things you would probably pile on your list of wasting resources.

>> I will take books...

and you can, without attacking the GP statement about their PERSONAL preference, or clumsily trying to tar them with some sort of pejorative NASCAR paintbrush.

* I don't feel that's a charitable interpretation of the OP's comment. I have seen people print emails just to read them, including a page of CCs they discard, or 37 version of the draft slide decks, etc. And that's on their own printer - the office printer pre-COVID was just always printing random pointless stuff (as witnessed by the volume of it that was never even picked up!:). I don't have particular urge to print randomly, so I probably fit into the "unless absolutely necessary" group, but goodness there's a lot, and I mean a LOT of paper waste that doesn't provide entertainment value of nascar or B&N.

* (Bitcoin, I'll agree, is an even more massively irrational and wasteful human endevour, but that doesn't mean all printing is awesome:)

* This is not to say that some webpages shouldn't be printable, I agree that they should - for a lot of the webpages focused on displaying information rather than interaction, making them print consumable is good. Just that parent's comment doesn't make them the buzz-kill party-pooper, necessarily :)

In the early 90s, I would print out usenet posts so I could read them on the commuter train. Seemed a good idea at the time and I probably read them with more attention than my current online practices.

No, I'd consider books absolutely necessary.

I personally think the things you enjoy that aren't absolutely necessary are a waste of resources too.

You might be discounting the electricity and battery wear on devices down to zero, and inflating the cost of prints in your mind. Paper is EXTREMELY cheap and efficient.

When there is a website that I want to save indefinitely, I will print it to pdf. It means I can go back in a few years after the site is offline or has rearranged its urls (thus breaking bookmarks.)

I mostly do this with order confirmation pages when I order off of random e-commerce sites, and with my bank when I use online bill pay. (And then if someone claims I didn't pay them, I go back through the pdfs and see if I made a mistake.)

More importantly, I "print to pdf" recipes that I want to save. Every year I print out the same turkey recipe, from a pdf, and then I don't need to worry about getting my phone or computer gross by interacting with it while I prep the turkey.

If a tree falls in the woods and there's not a hacker around to complain about it and demand government regulation against it, does it make a sound?

Sure.

Did they mean specifically printing to paper? Unfortunately the term is overloaded to include exporting to pdf, ePub, etc...

Or do you mean even exporting is a waste of resources?

Printable does not mean it will be printed, if a page is printable one can assume the creator hasn't fucked with the scroll wheel for example, or forced you to sit through unnecessary animations.

I often print things that I do not want but need to read, and go outside with it.

Cuts well on procrastination.

Maybe only websites with content that should be printed... Like sudoku and puzzles and stuff. As for the rest of them... IDK if I don't intend on reading something on an airplane there's no reason for me to print it

https://tuhat.net allows you to set a page size for your post and input hidden page breaks for when people download the epub version or print your posts, it doesn't affect the web version.

There is also a zine booklet mode which works out page imposition to print out a zine (eg. double sided, folded in half)

Click the printer icon on any tuhat post.

this is for the authors/publishers of tuhat writing platform you mean?

Inserting the page breaks is for the authors, its a button in the editor when creating a post. The download epub / create printable pdf are on the posts for readers.

Everybody is focusing on responding to the title

but I thought this bit was far more interesting:

> I read a lot of printed papers these days. While I enjoy reading on a laptop as much as the next guy, marking up a printed document engages me better. Also, there's something about sitting with a whiteboard and a printed document that makes me rightly feel like I'm doing something important.

would be interesting to consider a totally new workflow of automatically printing off any "read later" stuff, including interesting HN posts.. and then actually sit down and read the paper, no distractions.

When I want to save a page for myself I usually use the PrintFriendly (https://www.printfriendly.com/) plugin to save to PDF, minus the cruft of images and ads.

This way, I've built an archchive of useful pdf's that are now (since they are clean text) fully indexed and searchable on my devices.

I'm currently working on rebuilding my personal blog from Jekyll set up about 10 years ago in Astro. One of the things I've also been doing is setting up a resume page designed to print to PDF, which I find a lot easier to maintain and format than the LaTeX resume I've been using forever.

Hilariously, when I hit CMD-P on this specific website, I end up with 4x pages: the first is 80% blank, the 2nd page is fairly nice, the 3rd page contains just the CSS code sample as a thin strip on the left-hand side, and the last page is again mostly blank space...

I also attempted something like this, but only to format my resume[1], since many employers require it to be submitted as a PDF

[1]: https://www.trist.am/resume/

Which browser do you use? Unsurprisingly supporting media print queries hasn't been top priority for some browsers. It makes total sense, but when you suddenly need it for something it does suck.

That was on Safari, but I just tried on Brave (Chromium-based), and the result is pretty similar

I'm looking on Chrome for Windows and it looks just like the web view.

I am with those disagreeing with the original proposal that websites should be printable. There are so many things that go into showing you a web page and so many things that go into preparing that page for print. Even something basic like this isn't consistent.

Unfortunately I just tried Chrome for Mac, and it too insists on inserting a spurious page-break to keep the giant screenshot on the 2nd page. I couldn't find a CSS incantation to prevent this.

I see the same thing. It looks like the height of the "My accidental pnmp forkbomb" screenshot is causing it to jump to the second page

One of the lovely things about html/css as print medium, is that interpretation of page break seems to vary between browsers, and while you can use CSS to prevent a particular page break, you can't use CSS to force one inside an element like an img tag

I've fixed a lot of this now. Ironically, I forgot to check the print output after I added the screenshot in, and it messed with a lot of things.

Can't the website just lay itself out for print differently?

Yes, with css media queries, but just as with all css, its very quircky.

> Here's the functions this does for me, in order:

Is for anyone else, the text that follows, unreadable black on almost black background?

yes, if you highlight it you can see what it's meant to be

I love the irony of an article about being able to print properly doesn't even appear correctly in the browser. Perhaps we should start with the basics...