Half-way through the article: "When the sugi and hinoki forests were first planted in the 1950s and 60s, they weren't meant to stand forever. At the time, it was assumed they would be gradually cut down and replanted over time, as had been the case before the war. But as Japan's economy boomed in the late 60s and 70s, major cities like Kobe and Tokyo grew rapidly, and it ended up being cheaper to import wood from other countries such as Malaysia and Indonesia."

As often in environmental health, the cost-benefit ratio is calculated after the exposure is widespread, i.e. too late.

I'm a bit proud of having suggested the author to add the 2019 entry (thanks to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19798678).

Hopefully there's another repo of Internet stories somewhere else?

Back in time I also complained about this, but do you know that if you copy (CMD+C) then do CMD+ALT+V, then copy&paste becomes cut&paste ?

Another issue is the carbon/energetic cost of spamming. I'm no expert, but given the probably high figures, should this issue be escalated to a higher level, e.g. an international agreement along with heavy penalty if caught running a larger spamming farm? Compared to the difficult issues of drug trafficking etc. I don't see how there could not be a consensus for spam.

[edit: I didn't realize the original article was from 2002. I agree the article is a bit obsolete at that point.]

I was a bit disappointed when I saw EFF's 1-page "pocket guide" which IMO does not provide real advice while at the border: https://www.eff.org/document/eff-border-search-pocket-guide