I'm not deep into electricity pricing dynamics, but based on my intuition, shouldn't that rather have a dampening effect on electrification, as the gap widens?
High gas prices + gap is small -> Big opportunity to undercut via cheaper methods like solar -> attractive investment -> more new builds
High gas prices + gap is wide and widening -> Smaller and smaller opportunity to invest in solar, as the market is already dominated by solar prices -> less attractive investment -> less new builds
Almost all technological choices I made as a teen were driven by "what hosting can I get for free, as my parents sure as hell won't put down their payment information for that". Back then that usually meant PHP and a max. 50MB MySQL.
I have been the service provider who had to paywall just to stop the spammers and you're right. But it's also true that kids will be collateral damage (or anyone without a credit card).
In my case, and it was the 90s, I took the time to setup a way to pay by calling a premium (1-900) for $1.49 number so the barrier to entry even for kids was still reasonable.
Maybe in modern day the equivalent is adding Google pay and Apple pay then you cover some kids at least (gift cards and such).
Quite the hassle for the provider, and it will turn away any person who cares about privacy. There's no way to win anymore.
I'm not deep into the topic, but AFAIK there generally isn't a warm connection between the CCC and the BND in Germany (in the recent years mostly due to the BNDs involvement ins spying on German citizens, but I think there is also deeper history there). If a hacker collaborates with the BND they do run a risk of many of their peers not wanting to collaborate with them anymore.
It also has something to do with the so called "Hackerparagraph" [1] under which whitehat hacking is basically impossible in Germany. Even writing a program that could potentially be used for hacking is a crime. If you followed the law word for word the authors of e.g. curl could be charged under this law.
> If you followed the law word for word the authors of e.g. curl could be charged under this law.
They really couldn't. BVerfG (Germany's constitutional court) has clearly said that dual use tools have a presumption of not being tools to break the law. It's been very clear that mens rea matters. And that a narrow reading of the law is the only constitutional reading.
The problem here is taking "word for word" as "by dictionary meaning", which is never how laws are read.
It's still a problematic law (together with §202a/b) because it doesn't clearly carve out space for grey-hat activities (white-hat attacks with authorization really don't fall under it even with creative reading).
On the upside, Germany is considering fixing that. On the downside, it moves with the speed of classic German bureaucracy and is being "discussed" since 2024.
> The problem here is taking "word for word" as "by dictionary meaning", which is never how laws are read.
Back in the days of "smart contracts" and "DAOS" this was something many well-meaning technical people struggeled with. Humans and their societies are flexible and therefore laws must be flexible as well (to a certain degree before it becomes damaging).
It's also why a lawyer/expert is usually recommended when engaged with legal matters: We as layman lack all the context around seemingly "simple" concepts, procedures and definitions. You can learn all of that or hire a professional.
Isn’t that by design so governments can prosecute citizens they don’t like? For example, curl is probably ok but that one annoying Kim Dotcom guy is probably going to catch a case under some dubious law.
The pirate bay case, one of the laws cited by the judges was an law written to target biker bars and their owners. It only takes a bit of creative work to bend laws and prior cases to match an already made conclusion, if that conclusion has enough political support.
In that way, I don't really think the government need to design laws to have loop holes in them. With enough political pressure they can get the judges to make any decision they like.
> some countries find such creative ways to stifle innovation while they look to be caring about safety or what not
I'm not sure white-hat hacking is broadly compatible with German culture. Keep in mind that going bankrupt in Germany permanently closes off lots of avenues, from future lending to whether you can be in senior management at a public company.
Bankruptcy does not usually permanently bar you from loans or holding senior management position, there are temporary restrictions, unless grossly negligent. But your point still stands I guess, when compared to the US
>There (...) isn't a warm connection between the CCC and the BND in Germany
Fun fact: In the 1990s, the CCC e.V. was declared a terrorist organization by the BND. Also, a lot of members have been sued for Landesverrat (high treason) for disclosing found vulnerabilities and/or doing journalistic work.
For example, the netzpolitik guys have been sued for high treason twice.
Just as a side note on how competent the German state is to use their existing talent to work on issues in cyber security.
> If a hacker collaborates with the BND they do run a risk of many of their peers not wanting to collaborate with them anymore.
Another fun fact: There is no effective witness protection program in Germany. You have to have been attacked almost murdered twice (with legal cases leading to prosecution) before you can apply for the witness protection program.
And they're asking themselves why all the witnesses in high profile cases from Europol/Interpol keep disappearing ...
Well at least the german state can collaborate with russian agents in projects like wirecard and not violate any laws when threatening journalists reporting on its collaborations.
It's very difficult to stop them doing this. The extent to which it happens varies a lot, and some countries and places have a much worse problem than others, but fundamentally if you "cause trouble" to "respectable people and companies" you're going to get hassled by law enforcement. Yes, the sarcasm quotes are important.
Sadly, there is a rift now since quite a few hackers are left leaning and therefore are by definition activists.
80th, 90th were the last time were hacking was a means to an end. C64 and Amiga scene had skindheads showing up at copy parties but no one cared really.
Some were a bit unsure but the moment they talked about their craft there was no divide but hacker spirit.
In recent years this would be unimaginable. And guess what? Talking to each other made the skins disappear.
It was more of a niche expression without doing harm. Popper, Goths, Ted’s, Rockers - in comparison to today there was more unity than today.
Hooligans were the same. Many local groups that fought each other due to political stances befriended each other later because it was more of a ritual than ideology.
It is a bit sad because politics doesn’t belong to hacking, and never did.
Hacking is Boolean only in the sense of it either works or it doesn’t. Or does a computer care about left or right?
And BtW that’s why I find local attempts in Europe for “Go EU” pathetic. It is about ideology, not improvement.
Computers don't care whether they are used for good or for evil. I would rather have a culture that encourages using computers for good, and there is nothing sad about such culture existing. Computers are already used for evil on a much larger scale by meta, palantir, etc.
It is a mostly pointless exercise if the goal is trying to contain negative impact of AI agents (e.g. OpenClaw).
It is a very necessary building block for many common features that can be steered in a more deterministic way, e.g. "code interpreter" feature for data analysis or file creation like commonly seen in chat web UIs.
Yes, the way this is being pushed online seems like there is a competitor involved. If not in the initial disclosure, then in the daily rehashing of it.
It's also still unclear to me how much fraud they actually were involved in, and how much of the fault falls on them. SOC2 Type II and ISO 27001 are not audited by them, but by actual accredited auditors (apparently mainly Accorp and Gradient), which must have been just as complicit/negligent. As customers of Delve are free to chose their auditors I'm wondering how this hasn't blown up earlier.
If there were not a manipulative competitor, if people just found fraud and abuse of open source compelling and the story was circulating organically, how would that look different? What do you observe that leads you to believe a manipulative competitor is a better hypothesis?
And if you look closely at the usernames, you see that the same engineer from link 2 that said "nah it’s just a bonus 2x, it’s not that deep" (just two week ago) is now saying "we're going to throttle you during peak hours" (as predicted).
Yes, it was FUD, but ended up being correct. With the track record that Anthropic has (e.g. months long denial of dumbed down models last year, just to later confirm it as a "bug"), this just continues to erode trust, and such predictions are the result of that.
Anthropic fixing that bug way faster than Apple fixing iOS keyboard "bug". Anthropic even acknowledged it, Apple gave us the silent treatment for years.
I'm not sure it's a rug pull when their stats show 7% and 2% subscription-level impacts. We're back in the ISP days, and they never said unlimited.
> If they rewrote the entire thing with $400 of Claude tokens it couldn't have been that big.
The original is ~10k lines of JS + a few hundred for a test harness. You can probably oneshot this with a $20/month Codex subscription and not even use up your daily allowance.
High gas prices + gap is small -> Big opportunity to undercut via cheaper methods like solar -> attractive investment -> more new builds
High gas prices + gap is wide and widening -> Smaller and smaller opportunity to invest in solar, as the market is already dominated by solar prices -> less attractive investment -> less new builds
Am I missing something here?
reply