iiiiiiitttttttttttt

That is NOT the reason. FFS. If that was the case, you couldn't switch to B&W only printing when you're out of one of the cartridges, and, shocker!, you almost always can (assuming that you don't have the absolutely worst printer driver in existence).

I work in commercial printing, and I print in CMYK every single day. Almost nothing is absolutely pure cyan, magenta, yellow, or black. Printing pure black ends up looking like a very washed out charcoal grey. If you want 'rich black'--which is what most people think of as black, you need to us C,M, and Y. If you had a spectrophotometer and were creating color profiles for your printer, you'd be able to very, very quickly see that. (You'd also be able to see that the colors used in most inks and toners isn't strictly linear, and that you can start getting weird 'hooking' in colors once you exceed a certain ink volume. Some inks are much worse than others in that respect.) Depending on the RIP software that you're using, and how you create the color profile for the printer, you can specify exactly where greys switch from being monochromatic (K only) to using the full gamut.

It used to be really apparent with our old Roland printers, where you could easily see the individual pixels with a magnifying glass. Now we're using printers that are higher resolution--I think 600ppi natively, but I see enough dot gain in what we're printing on that anything past 150ppi is irrelevant--you can't see them.

There's a collection of images that I have to print regularly from one of our corporate clients. This collection of images is always sent as greyscale .tif files. When you look at them on-screen, they look fine. When you print them, they're washed out. The issue is that the RIP software sees the images in greyscale, and defaults to using K only. If I convert the images to RGB (which, yes, I know, it's weird that I print in RGB when the printer is CMYK, but trust me, it improves color slightly), then the printed image looks like the image on screen.

I hate modern printers.

Specifically, it mostly uses yellow in very faint dots imperceptible to the eye. I actually don’t know if it needs every color, or if it’s just yellow, or if it varies by printer.

Scanners and printers will also detect a pattern of dots which indicates “this is money,” embedded in various clever ways in the design of the art of the money of most countries, and refuse to have anything to do with the images.

You don’t own your devices anymore. And it will, steadily, get worse.

Tracking dots, right?

Do anyone know a printer that doesn’t do that?

So my black and white printer is untraceable!

Fun fact: your electronic devices that render graphics are completely capable and in my opinion almost certainly do this as well. We use a business version of it at our enterprise and while it is additional software layered over windows, it's completely imperceptible to the naked eye and I doubt such technology wouldn't be immediately rolled out as quickly as possible by pretty much everyone at a "top secret" level.

those use yellow ink afaik.

the yellow went down when printing b/w only (which we usually did) on our old officejet pro that had separate tanks for each color.