Earlier this year Japanese lawmakers were shocked to realize that illegal consumption of manga cost the industry around 1 trillion yen.
Why do articles quoting shit like this never contextualize it?
I assume these numbers are, like they always are, a consumption = loss of buy equation, which is not a realistic calculation at all.
The article talks at length about accessibility, yet fails to point to that issue when quoting these "cost" numbers.
It's not like they're hosting any of those. It's not costing them anything. At most it should be labeled loss, but an equation makes no sense then either.
This doesn't make sense.
They say "endpoint in the UK" and "VPN Server in the UK", and that they could not confirm whether outside the UK would still block.
Cloudflare blocks UK requests. If you use a VPN you choose which country you send the requests from.
Cloudflare as a separate entity from the VPN provider can't know where requests originally came from. That's the whole point of the VPN.
There is nothing new here. The article seems to misunderstand and to misrepresent.