This scenario doesn't have any particular features that make access to energy or mining bitcoin the differentiating factor. Illicit fiat and extortion can be used in order to launder illicit fiat in many ways.

The underlying problem actually lies in the fiat system, not the Bitcoin one.

> The underlying problem actually lies in the fiat system, not the Bitcoin one.

How so?

> How so?

Fiat currencies are exceptionally good instruments for exchange value for illicit purposes. Primarily this is because it is unknown what the total supply of fiat is (although there are reasonable models for estimation) and it's transactional history is impossible to define.

Both of these properties combined (although other factors undoubtably are at play) mean it's very easy for large amounts of fiat to exchange hands without any third parties knowing (i.e cash transactions).

This is the underlying issue that allows fiat currencies to be the best method for transacting for illicit purposes.

Wouldn‘t the money already need to be laundered to buy energy with it in the first place?

Iran doesn't need to launder money to buy electricity in their own country.

Click tracking

That sums up the dilemma.

Killing the pipeline will help but not in a vacuum. Continued policy/pressure needs to be applied to move away from oil, which is probably best for the sake of the world.

Exactly, what's the catch?

How does Microsoft come to own all of open-source? That's the plan, right?

Presumably it's like I'm assuming Win10 is, a slow burn.

Coax people slowly over time to give up other options until there's nothing else to choose, then flick the switch and fleece them harder than hardness itself.

Based on past performance I just assume we're in an elaborate version of the 'fleece tourists with inordinate drinks bills' con trick.

#GetOffMyLawn

Ouch. What's a good docker alternative? Something with similar dockerfile semantics but can be linux only for sure.

IIRC RedHat offers podman

The cost-per-search is negligible even if every user had to pay. Instead of running the search the government could implement policies that make search advertising illegal and thus forcing another business model.

Pay-per-search would be cheap enough for municipalities to negotiate subscriptions for their entire broadband network as a part of broadband service.

What an awful idea. A municipality would probably only have one search engine, search engines would serve municipalities which could pressure them to suppress stories, there'd probably be one search engine targeting republican municipalities and one targeting democrat ones, there'd be pressure groups trying to get municipalities to use another search engine that doesn't show results they don't like and it would be incredibly hard to start a new search engine.

> Pay-per-search

Yeah, the last thing I would want my search history to be tied to is my payment information.

> How can something on the internet be a common carrier when the internet itself is not a common carrier?

Because it hasn't happened yet doesn't mean that it shouldn't happen.

Maybe Google is the last straw that leads to proper governance of utilities in the public's interest.

The problem is that the Republicans trying to declare tech companies "common carriers" pretty much lied through their teeth 4 years ago when they argued that ISPs are absolutely not common carriers, in opposition of overwhelming popular opinion to the contrary.

ISPs aren’t censoring people, Big Tech is, and BigTech were always exempt from all net neutrality laws.

So your comment is factually wrong.

Am I "censoring people" if I ask a customer to leave my restaurant and never return while he is in the middle of a loud racist rant?

Facebook and Twitter are not critical infrastructure. Nobody has to use them. They are private platforms their owners invited you to. I choose not to use these services, and anyone else who doesn't like them is free to do the same.

People do not have the choice to avoid using telephone or mail services, which is why they are regulated as common carriers. It is nearly impossible to function in modern society without access to mail and telephone service. The argument for net neutrality rests on the idea that general internet access is also a requirement in order to be a functional member of society.

Yes, the problem is Republicans. And yes, that problem has yet to be solved.

Republicans are a problem, but so are Democrats. We need more than two parties.

It’s kind of analogous to the way TCP can be a reliable service built on unreliable IP.

Is that true though? "Ordinary people" also have to pay additional fees (ex. Mortgage insurance), have higher interest rates, and have access to fewer high-interest investment opportunities.

I mean, I'm glad I didn't HELOC my way to a few Bitcoin last month, so maybe it's best we leave these tricks to the rich folk anyway.

> Don’t use runtime CSS-in-JS if you care about the load performance of your site. Simply less JS = Faster Site. There isn’t much we can do about it. But if you want to see some numbers, continue reading.

Studies show computers running less code perform faster

loop {}