If all the negative externalities were properly priced in, a lot of bottom-feeding crap at all layers of the stack will die off, but advertising itself will remain and would actually become better as a result for all parties involved.

He committed these crimes because he thought he wouldn't get any sentence - which is true because online fraud and mischief has been effectively decriminalized aside from a few edge-cases like this one. You'll notice he didn't even try to be sneaky about it after all.

What's needed is merely to bring back actual enforcement to make it clear that online crime does not pay and would-be criminals will not get away with it. That will be the deterrent.

The vast majority of consent flows ("cookie banners") out there are not compliant and they do absolutely nothing about it. It's very unlikely this would be any different.

The ICO is all bark and no bite.

From their perspective, the blocking of power users with unusual setups is actually a happy coincidence, as those are unlikely to "engage" with the product in the desired way (they run ad & spyware blockers, don't fall for dark patterns, and are more likely to fight back if they get defrauded by the corporation).

Being on the same provider will remove a lot of the variable delays in internet delivery. Scheduled send could also mean your email actually arrives in the destination inbox ahead of time but is just hidden until the required time (as it may all be one database under the hood).

If you can get 2 accounts on said provider, you can also test various strategies against your own accounts.

This is even more pronounced thanks to the efforts to roll out passkeys to the masses. Most of them don't understand what they're getting into and are most likely gonna get themselves locked out quite quickly, which may mean recovery flows need to actually become more relaxed than they currently are.

Which is very likely happening. I read that there are two manifestos going around, one real and one fake. The real one is much easier to get behind and sympathize with than the fake one. Yet somehow the fake one is being published in most places and publications refuse to answer the question as to why they're refusing to publish the real one.

Isn't this already the case? Crimes affecting high profile people get prioritized.

In some places police doesn't even come out for property crimes anymore, but that's only for the plebs. You are likely to get a much better response if you're rich and/or well-connected.

Furthermore, due to the complexity of the law, access to justice requires significant lawyer efforts, which you can afford if you're rich. If you're not, you get to try your luck with the overworked public defender.

> specifying and enforcing intellectual property rights

The incentive to care and participate in the real-world, court-enforced intellectual property system is that if you don't and you piss off enough people, goons with guns will show up and take you/your stuff/money away. Those goons can behave like that because they have the legal system's approval to do so and thus don't risk their own freedom.

Let's say this thing existed - what's the incentive for someone to care and participate into that system? Do you have your own goons with guns? Do you convince the conventional legal system to send their own goons? In both cases, why not just skip the blockchain then and let you run a conventional database, since what actually matters is your choice to send goons to enforce the desired state (and their willingness to do so), and not necessarily what some blockchain says?

My point was to disprove that "cloud" is simpler than conventional sysadmin - it is not, and it involves similar effort, complexity and manpower requirements.

This bullshit also happens in Barcelona Sants for the long-distance trains.