|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

How LWN is faring in 2025

Just over six months ago, The Economist described the US economy as "the envy of the world". That headline would be unlikely to appear now. The economic boom referenced in that article feels like a distant memory, markets are falling, and uncertainty is at an all-time high. Like everybody else, LWN is affected by the current turbulence in the political and economic spheres; we expect to get through this period, but there will be some challenges.

To put it bluntly: starting around the beginning of March, we have observed a distinct drop in both new subscriptions and renewals. That timing roughly corresponds with the US administration's increasing attacks on the global system of trade and the economic downturn that has been its result. As it stands, this subscription drop does not pose an existential threat to LWN — or to the salaries of its writers — but it is a matter of concern.

We are responding by tightening our belt where we can, but otherwise working to provide the best coverage of the Linux and free-software communities, as we always have. Readers can help, of course, by subscribing if they have not already done so. Encouraging your employer to set up a group subscription is especially helpful. Subscriptions are the only thing that has kept LWN operating for all these years.

Beyond the immediate situation, there are a number of potential problems to be concerned about. For example, inflation did not stop after our price increase in 2022, with the result that subscription dollars buy significantly less then they once did. We are not considering a price increase at this time but, if the situation worsens, we may have to go there.

For better or worse, LWN is a US-based company, but a large portion of our subscription sales come from outside the country. If the backlash against US companies grows, we are unlikely to escape its effects entirely. Further attacks on global trade could make it more difficult for us to accept payments from outside the country, even when the buyer is willing. In a truly terrible world, there may be attempts to reduce US participation in (and support for) free software; the probability of that seems low, but not zero.

Those are all future worries, though. For now, we will focus on getting through the current economic storms. The good news is that LWN has been here since 1998, which is long enough to have been through more than one difficult cycle. We are still here, thanks entirely to the steady support from you, our readers. Our subscribers, especially, have our gratitude; if you have not yet subscribed to LWN, please consider doing so now.

Meanwhile our primary focus will remain being worthy of the support you all have given us since the beginning. It is the least we can do for all of you who have made our existence possible for the last 27 years.


to post comments

Increased subscription

Posted Apr 30, 2025 14:57 UTC (Wed) by tjasper (subscriber, #4310) [Link] (10 responses)

Hi Jon.

I don't post here much, but I am an avid reader. I am subscribed, and I for one would be willing to pay a higher fee for that subscription. So you have my vote to increase prices if that keeps the quality and content flowing. My $0.02

Increased subscription

Posted Apr 30, 2025 15:13 UTC (Wed) by mathstuf (subscriber, #69389) [Link] (2 responses)

If you have a subscription already, you can just bump yourself up a tier or two. It will eat through your last subscription's funds faster rather than requiring a new payment.

Increased subscription

Posted Apr 30, 2025 17:30 UTC (Wed) by gclaugus (subscriber, #107042) [Link] (1 responses)

For what it's worth, I bumped up my sub a tier and extended by 12 months, and I encourage others in a good financial position to do the same.

Increased subscription

Posted May 3, 2025 17:29 UTC (Sat) by linuxlizard (subscriber, #105283) [Link]

Done and done! I bumped up to the next level and pushed my subscription out until 2026. Worth it. If prices go up before then, I'll re-up again. LWN is too valuable to me to let it go.

Increased subscription

Posted Apr 30, 2025 15:16 UTC (Wed) by dowdle (subscriber, #659) [Link]

I second the motion although admittedly I go with the low budget plan in the first place.

Increased subscription

Posted Apr 30, 2025 16:10 UTC (Wed) by iabervon (subscriber, #722) [Link] (5 responses)

One possibility, if your payment processor will allow it, would be to have custom prices within tiers that don't have different effects from the minimum for the tier. That way, people who feel they could handle a 20% price increase can just add 20% without needing to make a bigger increase to get to a new tier.

Increased subscription

Posted May 2, 2025 3:22 UTC (Fri) by apoelstra (subscriber, #75205) [Link] (3 responses)

I would like to second this. Even if you can't do a fully custom option, just adding a second tier at $15 or $20/mo would probably get a lot of upgrades from people who are happy to pay more than the $9 "professional hacker" rate but unwilling to pay the $50 "maniacal supporter" rate.

Several years ago in a similar thread I suggested people subscribe annually at the $9 rate, then switch to the $50 one after five months, which would eat the remaining balance in the following month. By repeating this twice a year you can roughly approximate a $18/mo subscription rate. (However, in addition to this requiring a lot of manual work, Jon replied to my suggestion saying he'd prefer people pay less than to have them create workflows based around quirks of the LWN payment code. :))

Increased subscription

Posted May 2, 2025 3:59 UTC (Fri) by andyc (subscriber, #1130) [Link]

> just adding a second tier at $15 or $20/mo

There's already a $16/month 'Project Leader' level.

Increased subscription

Posted May 2, 2025 13:53 UTC (Fri) by jake (editor, #205) [Link] (1 responses)

We have four levels of subscription, so hopefully that covers most. In particular, the project leader tier at $16/month does most of what you are trying to do with a lot less effort :)

starving hacker $5/month
professional hacker $9/month
project leader $16/month
maniacal supporter $50/month

thanks for supporting LWN!

jake

Increased subscription

Posted May 2, 2025 15:22 UTC (Fri) by Wol (subscriber, #4433) [Link]

Looks like you need a "team leader" at $30. A three-fold jump from project leader to maniacal supporter is a bit of a jump.

I think I'm down as professional hacker, so jumping up a level wouldn't hurt (too much), but jumping up to the level after that is painful ...

Cheers,
Wol

Increased subscription

Posted May 2, 2025 4:55 UTC (Fri) by dfa (✭ supporter ✭, #6767) [Link]

The irony of the timing of this !
I, too, second this if it reasonably possible, now.
As others have mentioned, the projects I have worked for
have greatly benefitted from the timely and often detailed
reporting I encounter first here ! Many thanks, Jon et al. !

Backlash

Posted Apr 30, 2025 15:17 UTC (Wed) by pwfxq (subscriber, #84695) [Link] (19 responses)

> If the backlash against US companies grows, we are unlikely to escape its effects entirely

As someone from outside the USA, the backlash is more against the (big) corporations that are tying their flags to certain flagpoles.

Backlash

Posted Apr 30, 2025 16:21 UTC (Wed) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link] (17 responses)

That's a western-centric view. There are huge sections of the world that have been made painfully aware that the US administration itself has *long* viewed them as an economic threat and will do what it can to suppress their own economy (rather than just compete). Leading to them adopting policies to minimise dependencies on the USA - including the strategic goal to reimplement all significant technologies whose current suppliers are subject to US control.

Backlash

Posted May 1, 2025 4:47 UTC (Thu) by rsidd (subscriber, #2582) [Link] (16 responses)

You are talking about China, and only China, probably.

I am in India and I don't see any anti-US sentiment here at the consumer product level; that said, there are very few products purchased or consumed here that are made in the US (there are plenty of American brands of course).

I plan to renew my LWN subscription when it expires, but I sympathise with those (especially people from Canada) who till months ago thought of the US as a friendly country and are now at the receiving end of Trump's venom. I hope they won't boycott LWN but I'm all for boycotting American bourbon and that sort of thing. In fact if I were a Canadian I wouldn't be able to imagine willingly buying an American product at the market.

My sympathies with the large number of Americans who never voted for or wanted this nonsense.

Backlash

Posted May 1, 2025 9:43 UTC (Thu) by NRArnot (subscriber, #3033) [Link] (13 responses)

Yes. I'm not going to go mad and start boycotting LWN, Thunderbird, Wikipedia, or any USA-based not-for-profit organisation. I'm fairly sympathetic to small US corporations as well.

What I am doing is becoming a lot more brand-aware and dumping the brands owned by big US corporations in favour of competitors that aren't US owned. This involves quite a bit of Googling -- "Who owns <brand>" then who owns whatever that comes up with, until I get to the top of the ownership chain. For example, discovering that my favorite sort of baked beans were owned by Crosse and Blackwell, and that "Crosse and Blackwell" brands are shared between three corporations -- an Italian one in Europe, a US one in North America, and an Asian one in Asia.

Backlash

Posted May 1, 2025 11:57 UTC (Thu) by Wol (subscriber, #4433) [Link]

> were owned by Crosse and Blackwell, and that "Crosse and Blackwell" brands are shared between three corporations -- an Italian one in Europe, a US one in North America, and an Asian one in Asia.

And this for a company that one thinks of as quintessentially British ... :-)

Cheers,
Wol

Backlash

Posted May 1, 2025 12:42 UTC (Thu) by tcabot (subscriber, #6656) [Link] (11 responses)

What I am doing is becoming a lot more brand-aware and dumping the brands owned by big US corporations in favour of competitors that aren't US owned. This involves quite a bit of Googling

Backlash

Posted May 1, 2025 13:13 UTC (Thu) by Wol (subscriber, #4433) [Link] (10 responses)

The problem there is finding an alternative ...

What non-US search engines are there? (although Wikipedia is probably a good reference if you know what you're looking for)

Cheers,
Wol

Backlash

Posted May 1, 2025 13:35 UTC (Thu) by farnz (subscriber, #17727) [Link] (3 responses)

Following European news sources from England, I'm aware of the following (just off the top of my head):

This is not an endorsement of any of these options - they're merely the ones I've seen in European news sources over the last 5 years or so, and I have put zero effort into looking into whether or not there are issues with them; they could all be worse than US search engines on all criteria you care about, or they could be better.

You could also, if aiming to diversify away from US sources, consider metasearch engines, which run your query on multiple search engines and combine those results for you; I've not paid attention to what's out there in the way of metasearch options.

Backlash

Posted May 1, 2025 13:45 UTC (Thu) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link] (1 responses)

Ecosia and Qwant are basically meta-search engines, as is DuckDuckGo. AIUI at least.

Ecosia & Qwant joint venture

Posted May 4, 2025 7:05 UTC (Sun) by benjamir (subscriber, #133607) [Link]

Ecosia and Qwant at least try to build their own index in a joint venture:
https://betterweb.qwant.com/en/2024/11/08/ecosia-and-qwan...

That seems a plus, compared to DDG.

Backlash

Posted May 1, 2025 13:58 UTC (Thu) by pizza (subscriber, #46) [Link]

> You could also, if aiming to diversify away from US sources, consider metasearch engines, which run your query on multiple search engines and combine those results for you; I've not paid attention to what's out there in the way of metasearch options.

FWIW, since everyone and their dog now seems to have a (usually pretty badly behaved) web crawler [1], I don't think I'm alone in having some pretty extensive search engine block lists just to keep my systems from being DoS'd. It would be one thing if those bots ever led to referral traffic, but... they nearly never do.

[1] Bing was particularly egregious in is misbehavior, and that was in the pre-AI days.

Backlash

Posted May 1, 2025 13:44 UTC (Thu) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link]

DuckDuckGo is probably one of the better, purportedly more privacy focused ones.

It gathers results from other search engines. It is these days largely a front-end to Microsoft Bing, I gather. There are some other Bing front-ends, with different objectives, like Ecosia.

Backlash

Posted May 1, 2025 14:36 UTC (Thu) by dskoll (subscriber, #1630) [Link] (4 responses)

Startpage is based in The Netherlands. I believe it uses Google as a back-end; however, it's still better than using Google directly because (1) there are no ads and (2) it doesn't provide the AI slop that Google does.

Backlash

Posted May 1, 2025 16:32 UTC (Thu) by Wol (subscriber, #4433) [Link] (3 responses)

IFF the "AI slop" actually understands the question, it's not too bad.

Where it gets frustrating is where the search engine completely misunderstands what's being asked, and insists on answering a completely different question instead. Mind you, that was common enough even before the AI slop. It would help if AI had a basic grasp of English grammar, and could actually tell the difference between subject and object, for example ...

Cheers,
Wol

Backlash

Posted May 1, 2025 17:46 UTC (Thu) by dskoll (subscriber, #1630) [Link] (2 responses)

Sure, but when I do a web search, I want a web search. If I want AI to answer a question, I'll ask an AI chatbot the question. I don't like the blurring of the lines that seems to be all the rage.

Backlash

Posted May 1, 2025 19:29 UTC (Thu) by Wol (subscriber, #4433) [Link] (1 responses)

yup.

If I'm typing in the address bar, I'm typing an address, not a search term!

Cheers,
Wol

Backlash

Posted May 1, 2025 20:22 UTC (Thu) by pizza (subscriber, #46) [Link]

> If I'm typing in the address bar, I'm typing an address, not a search term!

Sure, but that presupposes it's only an "address bar" and not a combo "address/search" bar. The latter is what every significant browser has used for more than a decade [1]. And at this point, it is what the overwhelming majority of users are used to (and expect)

[1] MS IE has worked this way since v7 (2006). Chrome has always worked this way (v1 in 2008). Firefox switched in v6 (2011). Apple switched in v6 (2012).

Backlash

Posted May 1, 2025 10:02 UTC (Thu) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link]

I'm not sure why, but this is the second reply to my comments on this article that interpreted my comments on the geo-economic-political games the US has been playing as some kind of attack on, or a call to boycott, LWN. To be clear, USA != LWN, they are different entities. ;)

Nothing like that was intended. I have long supported LWN, and will continue doing so, given the excellent resource that it is.

Backlash

Posted May 2, 2025 15:18 UTC (Fri) by Wol (subscriber, #4433) [Link]

>> That's a western-centric view. There are huge sections of the world that have been made painfully aware that the US administration itself has *long* viewed them as an economic threat and will do what it can to suppress their own economy (rather than just compete).

> You are talking about China, and only China, probably.

Paul certainly shouldn't be. I have LONG mistrusted the US's economic policies towards Europe. And given the current war IN Europe, we should certainly be taking the exact same steps to reduce our reliance on America - especially as far as munitions go. By the way, one of the things that massively helped the US to economic dominance was the support they threw at the military. Do they really want to see us take a leaf out of that book?

I can't speak for other countries, but one shining light that's happened in the UK is the government seizing control of that blast furnace in ?Sunderland? Our last remaining steel production facility, I believe. "National Security threat" was the reason, and we need a lot more European governments taking that attitude. Maybe they've learnt from Mariupol, where its destruction by the Russians led to a major steel shortage of certain types, because that was the only European supplier ...

Cheers,
Wol

Backlash

Posted May 5, 2025 2:02 UTC (Mon) by jmalcolm (subscriber, #8876) [Link]

I am not in the US but I am certainly not in China either.

Where I am, there is a tremendous wave of anti-US sentiment. Many people are actively trying to boycott US companies. As far as global impact, US tourism is probably suffering more than most industries but those numbers are easy to check and that data seems to indicate widespread negative opinion.

All that said, I certainly hope that a smaller online business like LWN who ethics are easy to judge will remain relatively unaffected. I may choose to stop ordering from Amazon, watching Netflix, or buying coffee from Starbuck's but I will probably increase my subscription to LWN.

Additional payment options for European readers

Posted Apr 30, 2025 16:15 UTC (Wed) by hailfinger (subscriber, #76962) [Link] (31 responses)

One thing which surprises me as a European is the US-centric list of payment options for LWN.
Bank transfers (SEPA credit transfer) in the Eurozone are fast, reliable and cheap (usually 20-50 cents per transaction) and one of the most common payment options supported by merchants in the Eurozone. Transfers only support Euros as currency, but this payment method may enable LWN to accept payments from people who are unwilling or unable (for various reasons) to use Paypal or credit cards.
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_Euro_Payments_Area for details.

Additional payment options for European readers

Posted Apr 30, 2025 16:21 UTC (Wed) by corbet (editor, #1) [Link] (30 responses)

We can accept SEPA transfers. They require manual processing, though, so we have not emphasized that mode; it is used mostly for group subscriptions. If that is the way that would work best for you, drop us a note and we'll work it out.

Additional payment options for European readers

Posted Apr 30, 2025 19:55 UTC (Wed) by hailfinger (subscriber, #76962) [Link]

Thank you for clarifying that. Mentioning SEPA as an option (even if it is not preferred) in https://lwn.net/subscribe/Info would be helpful, though.

Additional payment options for European readers

Posted Apr 30, 2025 21:19 UTC (Wed) by DemiMarie (subscriber, #164188) [Link] (5 responses)

Would it be possible to automate the processing?

Additional payment options for European readers

Posted Apr 30, 2025 21:26 UTC (Wed) by corbet (editor, #1) [Link] (4 responses)

Anything is possible given enough time and money. Looking into this particular issue was on my list of things to do anyway, but no promises as to when results may appear.

Additional payment options for European readers

Posted May 1, 2025 10:24 UTC (Thu) by Wol (subscriber, #4433) [Link] (3 responses)

Not sure how easy it is to do, but I would have thought an "offshore" Euro account in somewhere like the Channel Islands would be an option.

So long as it's a savings (and not a cheque) account, you can publish the bank details, and tell Europeans "please deposit Euros in this account and mail me", and you can then credit their subscription with you. Get and process an online statement once a week or so.

This likely also has the advantage that you can either open a dollar account with the same bank, or withdraw the money as dollars, and in doing so you'll probably also reduce the currency exchange charges. I'm sure I've heard of multi-currency accounts, so Europeans could deposit Euros, Brits could deposit pounds, and you could withdraw dollars.

If you want somewhere closer to home, there are probably Caribbean or Bermudan banks you could use that have those sort of links with the European banking systems. Or even a Canadian bank?

Cheers,
Wol

Additional payment options for European readers

Posted May 1, 2025 13:28 UTC (Thu) by daroc (editor, #160859) [Link] (2 responses)

We've been looking into what would be needed to have a European presence that can accept payments. Unfortunately, it's not as straightforward as one might wish for tax reasons. Although I'm not sure if we had actually looked at a multi-currency account, which might help with some of the complexity. I'll have to ask Jon. Thanks for the suggestion!

Additional payment options for European readers

Posted May 1, 2025 13:47 UTC (Thu) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link]

Have a look perhaps at Wise. They do good multi-currency stuff, and have a very wide range of payment paths, and they can setup accounts for US residents/businesses.

I would not keep much currency with Wise, nor with any other FinTech multi-currency company.

Additional payment options for European readers

Posted May 1, 2025 14:16 UTC (Thu) by Wol (subscriber, #4433) [Link]

That's why I suggested the Channel Islands. I think all the major UK banks have a presence there, and as long as you can get a DEPOSIT account, with a UK and/or European clearing bank account number, it should be pretty easy to pay in and take out. The other option is Isle of Man. (I'm sure other nationals will be able to suggest more options, but those two are part of the British Isles (but not the UK) and are very much "tax havens".) So while I think regs are much tighter than they used to be, provided you declare yourself properly they're used to dealing with all sorts of foreign entities who want access to the European banking system(s).

Cheers,
Wol

ACH transfers in the USA

Posted May 1, 2025 22:02 UTC (Thu) by marcH (subscriber, #57642) [Link] (22 responses)

They are not as universal, seamless and popular as SEPA, but ACH transfers in the USA are very similar and also free. Just a bit slower and less convenient. I suspect there are two reasons why ACH is not popular and not accepted by LWN either:

1. ACH likely requires the same, semi-automated processing than SEPA transfers. That is: correctly matching payments with payees. Confirm?

2. The other, likely reason is more US-centric: the common confusion between ID and password. That confusion incredibly assumes that a Social Security Number or a bank account number can be kept secret! So merely knowing those is "proof" (don't laugh) that you must be their owner and that you're allowed to draw funds, open a credit line, etc. When you combine this with a lack of customer protection, it becomes not fun at all being a victim of so-called "identity theft": harassment from debts collectors etc.

Banks also have Zelle which is more modern and sensible but afraid it's not allowed for businesses?

For a longer look at how archaic banking is in the US:
https://www.npr.org/transcripts/229224964
https://www.redcompasslabs.com/insights/what-can-banks-in...
etc.

ACH transfers in the USA

Posted May 1, 2025 22:56 UTC (Thu) by marcH (subscriber, #57642) [Link]

Corrections, apologies

> and not accepted by LWN either:

and not ADVERTISED by LWN either:

> correctly matching payments with payees.

correctly matching payments with payeRs.

ACH transfers in the USA

Posted May 2, 2025 5:14 UTC (Fri) by corbet (editor, #1) [Link] (20 responses)

ACH is not free, though it is far cheaper than credit card processing. It is also normally initiated from the payee side, so automated processing is not a problem.

We have never really considered it for a couple of reasons. One is that it would only be applicable to a subset of our readers. The bigger reason, though, may be my own discomfort. I use ACH rarely because I don't like giving companies the key to my bank account and saying "feel free to take some money whenever you think I owe you some". So I've never been in a hurry to ask the same of others.

ACH could perhaps be added if there is a demand for it, especially if we can arrange it so that we don't store the account numbers ourselves.

ACH transfers in the USA

Posted May 2, 2025 6:03 UTC (Fri) by marcH (subscriber, #57642) [Link] (19 responses)

In a good system (like SEPA, UPI and others), only payees need to share their ID (ACH or else) and everyone _sends_ money to that. _Taking_ money is extremely restricted and rare or even inexistent. Afraid ACH is not a "good" system from that perspective. Neither are payment cards from that give/take perspective but they tend to have good "rollback" policies.

ACH transfers have always been free for me and I have not been aware of fees on the payee side but maybe it's not true for businesses, or it depends on the bank, your contract, volume etc.

ACH transfers in the USA

Posted May 2, 2025 8:07 UTC (Fri) by corbet (editor, #1) [Link] (8 responses)

If you want to know how "not good" the system is, here's a bit of an embarrassing story...many years ago, I was setting up the ACH transfer to pay the monthly health-insurance bill for LWN. Through my own inattention, I managed to fat-finger the account number, and didn't notice until the expected withdrawal didn't show up.

What happened, of course, is that the (substantial) premium payment was taken out of some random third party's account. Once I figured that out I called both the insurance company and the bank to try to get it undone, but was told that there was nothing to do. The only possibility was to wait until the victim noticed the problem and forced a rollback; I can only hope that they were able to do that without having to clean up a bunch of bounced checks and such.

That's the kind of mess that can be made through negligence; imagine the possibilities for outright malice. So no, it's not a great system.

ACH transfers in the USA

Posted May 2, 2025 10:51 UTC (Fri) by neilbrown (subscriber, #359) [Link] (7 responses)

> Through my own inattention, I managed to fat-finger the account number,

Surely account numbers have check digits to defeat that problem? I guess not.

I really like Australia's PayID system. You register your email or phone number. Who ever is pay or asking for money likely has used that already so can select from contacts. But even if not, when you enter the PayID the system replies with the registered name so a mistake is easily caught.
Unfortunately very few businesses are using it yet and some banks impose ridiculous limits.

ACH transfers in the USA

Posted May 2, 2025 18:26 UTC (Fri) by marcH (subscriber, #57642) [Link]

In the US Venmo and Zelle work like PayID. Paypal is similar, not sure why it was never as popular?

In Europe you'll find Lydia, Wero and probably others. This area is evolving rapidly and there is hope.

In the US, Venmo and Zelle are modern enough to be be designed correctly: they do not allow random and uncontrolled "pulls". But unlike the Great Credit Card Ripoff[*], these new services are "too cheap". They don't make enough profit, so:

- With the free version of Venmo you really are the product _exactly_ like social media and with all the same data abuse. Which is why so many people love it! /s "Venmo business" charges fees.
- US banks dragged their feet and started Zelle to reluctantly counter Venmo and similar. It works but the software tends to be clumsy and slow. The basic, universal version is not allowed for businesses, which could also explain what you just wrote about PayID.

BUT I just discovered right now that a number of US banks support "Zelle for (small) business" and it seems free! If the overhead is reasonable, maybe it could be a convenient option for LWN? Zelle supports payment "requests" which in theory could reduce tracking overhead? There are transaction limits but they are well above the price of LWN subscription. My... 2 cents.

[*] Search "who pays for credit card rewards". To be fair: credit cards also have the best rollback policies.

ACH transfers in the USA

Posted May 2, 2025 20:01 UTC (Fri) by dskoll (subscriber, #1630) [Link] (3 responses)

Canada has Interac e-transfers. You send money to an email address. E-transfers are free for both senders and recipients and have become extremely popular. The daily, weekly and monthly limits are pretty generous, too.

I wish banks could get together and come up with a cheap, international system to make these kinds of payments easier, but alas...

ACH transfers in the USA

Posted May 2, 2025 21:01 UTC (Fri) by marcH (subscriber, #57642) [Link] (2 responses)

Afraid it's a getting off-topic but for international transfers wise.com is pretty good.

Never ask your bank to perform an international transfer. No matter what they claim, they will always screw you on the currency change. Even the worst credit cards tend to have cheaper conversion.

ACH transfers in the USA

Posted May 3, 2025 14:52 UTC (Sat) by dskoll (subscriber, #1630) [Link] (1 responses)

Yes, Wise is very good. You can even get a Wise debit card that works in many different countries just like a local debit card. @LWN, perhaps you should look into Wise? They have business plans as well.

Wise

Posted May 3, 2025 16:04 UTC (Sat) by corbet (editor, #1) [Link]

We have been using Wise for quite a few years - it's how we pay most non-US authors, among other things, and how we accept the occasional SEPA payment.

ACH transfers in the USA

Posted May 4, 2025 3:38 UTC (Sun) by NYKevin (subscriber, #129325) [Link] (1 responses)

In the US, routing numbers (which identify banks) are standardized and have check digits. Account numbers (which identify accounts) are not even all the same length (each bank issues numbers in whatever manner it chooses), so I very much doubt they have a standard check digit (but a bank obviously could implement a check digit if it wished to do so).

ACH transfers in the USA

Posted May 4, 2025 5:59 UTC (Sun) by zdzichu (subscriber, #17118) [Link]

This is shocking when one spent whole life surrounded by standardised 26 digit account numbers (https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numer_Rachunku_Bankowego curiously no English version of this article exists). It's even trivially converted into IBAN.

US banking system is so alien...

ACH transfers in the USA

Posted May 2, 2025 8:47 UTC (Fri) by Wol (subscriber, #4433) [Link] (3 responses)

> In a good system (like SEPA, UPI and others), only payees need to share their ID (ACH or else) and everyone _sends_ money to that. _Taking_ money is extremely restricted and rare or even inexistent.

That's why I said use a UK-style deposit account. If I know the account number I can *push* money into the account (and the bank will ask me for the account name so it can check I'm sending it where I think I am!), but the only person who can get money out of the account is the account holder.

So basically, it's down to the payER to get things right.

Cheers,
Wol

ACH transfers in the USA

Posted May 2, 2025 10:20 UTC (Fri) by farnz (subscriber, #17727) [Link] (2 responses)

There's no account type in the UK where I cannot pull money out of the account given the sort code and account number, using the Direct Debit system; with "deposit" accounts, the protection you have is that the bank will always reverse a Direct Debit from that account on request, and will flag to me as the debiting party that this is the case, and because too many reversed Direct Debits results in you losing access to the system, most debiting parties will refuse to set up a Direct Debit instruction for such accounts.

As a result, there is always a manual process of checking for surprise transactions, and asking the bank to reverse any that aren't valid; the twp big differences to the US's ACH system are that our system requires that "pull" transactions are reversible from both payer and payee end, and our system punishes payees who take "pull" transactions if they're reversed from the payer's end, which means that payees can and do clear things up when mistakes are made, because they don't want to lose their access to take "pull" transactions.

ACH transfers in the USA

Posted May 2, 2025 10:40 UTC (Fri) by Wol (subscriber, #4433) [Link] (1 responses)

> There's no account type in the UK where I cannot pull money out of the account given the sort code and account number, using the Direct Debit system;

So why do banks always say you can't set up direct debits on savings accounts? I can't even set up a standing order on my savings accounts (Barclays), so I'm sure some random Tommy would be blocked from setting up a direct debit.

Alternatively, use a building society, then you need that 3rd piece of info called a "reference", and my building society will not allow me to withdraw money into anything other than a pre-arranged account (although setting that account to be a foreign account might be problematic ...)

Cheers,
Wol

Direct Debit details in the UK

Posted May 2, 2025 11:34 UTC (Fri) by farnz (subscriber, #17727) [Link]

Because you can't set up a Direct Debit instruction against a savings account; but you can pull using Direct Debit without an instruction in place.

The Direct Debit system always lets you pull from an account; and when a Direct Debit payment is reversed, a penalty is applied against you. Too many penalties, and you lose access to the system completely. You can ask to set up a Direct Debit Instruction via the system; this can fail, but if it succeeds, you get the ability to have penalties removed from your record where you can show that you acted in accordance with the Direct Debit Guarantee. You will be notified if the Direct Debit Instruction is cancelled, and any pulls after that notification are guaranteed to result in a penalty if they're reversed.

In practice, this means that it's very unusual for you to have a Direct Debit taken from a savings account; the risk to the payee is high, and the mechanism in the DD scheme for them to reduce that risk is blocked off. But it's entirely possible for it to happen as a result of an error by the payee, in which case when you reverse it (which Barclays did for me circa 2005 without complaint), the payee is in trouble.

ACH transfers in the USA

Posted May 2, 2025 9:45 UTC (Fri) by PhilippWendler (subscriber, #126612) [Link] (5 responses)

SEPA Direct Debit exists and is extremely common in Germany. Basically everyone has all their recurring payments set up this way: power, gas, water, municipal taxes and fees, all insurances, television fee, newspaper and magazine subscriptions, public transport subscriptions, membership fees of stuff like gyms, clubs, etc. Probably 99% if this is paid by direct debit. It is also somewhat common for online shopping, but less so due to the risk of fraud for merchants. Nobody I know would have any problem sharing their IBAN with a company they are doing business with, just as nobody in the US has problems sharing their CC number with companies they are doing business with, which makes sense because the risk is basically the same. A company could misuse the data, but you can simply revert charges, and the company would get problems if they try too often, so they don't.

ACH transfers in the USA

Posted May 4, 2025 0:25 UTC (Sun) by intgr (subscriber, #39733) [Link] (4 responses)

(Sorry, can't resist going off topic)

> SEPA Direct Debit exists and is extremely common in Germany. [...] Nobody I know would have any problem sharing their IBAN with a company they are doing business with, just as nobody in the US has problems sharing their CC number.

As a European not from Germany, I am extremely uncomfortable and embarrassed that this exists. Exactly because it repeats the security mistake that was the credit card system: knowing my identity (account number) should not be enough to take my money.

When Direct Debit was introduced, they already had the hindsight to learn from the CC fraud problem. I should not have to go through all transactions periodically and try to remember which ones are legit or fraudulent.

Solution: the account owner must be in the loop to approve transfers. Heck, even online CC payments have such robust authentication now.

In Estonia we have a system of "e-invoices": any company can send an invoice to my bank account. When I log in to my online bank, I can see a list of invoices, pay manually or set up automatic payments with a monthly limit. Important part is: if I do nothing, no money leaves my account.

I do wonder if other countries are using this system or if it works cross borders at all.

ACH transfers in the USA

Posted May 4, 2025 8:43 UTC (Sun) by Wol (subscriber, #4433) [Link]

> When Direct Debit was introduced, they already had the hindsight to learn from the CC fraud problem. I should not have to go through all transactions periodically and try to remember which ones are legit or fraudulent.

I really don't like the fact that - in the UK - customers are actively pushed to direct debit. Coupled with the government's push to force poor people to take control of their financial affairs (why are these people poor? Unfortunately, the obvious cause is the majority of them are a slice short of a sandwich!).

So we have people who have often shown they are financially incompetent, forced to take control of their finances, and denied a tool (standing orders) that I found INCREDIBLY useful when I was a youngster. When I got paid, all my bills went out one or two days later (because *I* was in control of the payment date), and whatever was left at the start of the month was all I had to see me through the month.

Now, with bills going out monthly, money coming in fortnightly or four-weekly, so many people are faced with the decision "I have money in the bank for next week's rent payment, do I use it to feed my kids today because we're starving".

The standing order put the customer *completely* in control. The adverts "direct debits give you control" are a complete untruth. All they do is give you a legal guarantee that the bank is liable if it's not your mistake.

What we need is either a requirement that says utilities et al MUST take the money on the date you want them to, or a bank account that says "direct debits WILL be paid provided they add up to less than the income coming in". So a direct debit would be able (and expected) to put an allegedly "non overdraft" account into overdraft. WITHOUT crippling fees.

Cheers,
Wol

ACH transfers in the USA

Posted May 4, 2025 14:20 UTC (Sun) by NAR (subscriber, #1313) [Link]

Heck, even online CC payments have such robust authentication now.

It has a funny side effect that when I order online from the phone, I have to accept the push request received on the very same phone I'm making the transaction.

In Estonia we have a system of "e-invoices": any company can send an invoice to my bank account

There's a similar system in Hungary. For some reason it never got popular, I only heard it used by scammers who send out random invoices and hope that some clueless user accepts them. It's at least one step longer process than (credit) card payment, so that might be reason why it didn't become popular.

ACH transfers in the USA

Posted May 4, 2025 19:07 UTC (Sun) by Wol (subscriber, #4433) [Link] (1 responses)

> In Estonia we have a system of "e-invoices": any company can send an invoice to my bank account. When I log in to my online bank, I can see a list of invoices, pay manually or set up automatic payments with a monthly limit. Important part is: if I do nothing, no money leaves my account.

What happens if you don't have online access to your account? I don't mean "the bank doesn't provide it", I mean "you are disabled / learning difficulties / don't understand etc etc".

As I've repeatedly said, I have multiple family members who through age or disability can not (any longer) cope with much modern technology.

Oh - and giving a third person access on their behalf should be a no-no on data protection / fraud / whatever grounds.

Cheers,
Wol

ACH transfers in the USA

Posted May 5, 2025 9:56 UTC (Mon) by NAR (subscriber, #1313) [Link]

What happens if you don't have online access to your account? I don't mean "the bank doesn't provide it", I mean "you are disabled / learning difficulties / don't understand etc etc".

Then they do not choose this payment method. Anyway, I guess that the overwhelming majority of these people don't shop online either due to the same problems.

Or others reduce their participation in US-affiliated Free Software - definitely ocurring

Posted Apr 30, 2025 16:16 UTC (Wed) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link] (3 responses)

> In a truly terrible world, there may be attempts to reduce US participation in (and support for) free software; the probability of that seems low, but not zero.

The probability that there are other economies - very large ones - which now have it as a major strategic objective to significantly reduce, if not completely eliminate, any dependencies (inc. indirect) on companies/technologies that the US can exert control over is not low, the probability is *1*. It is 100% for certain that one of the world's largest economies has this as an objective. I.e., China. As part of this, Chinese technology companies are minimising their dependence on Free Software whose leadership is demonstrably subject to US control. E.g., Linux Foundation projects, Google, etc. There are major Chinese technology companies who are now working (slowly but surely) to remove their dependence on not just Android, but also the Linux kernel.

This did *not* start under the current Trump administration.

As an aside, on " In a truly terrible world, there may be attempts to reduce US participation" - the US has for a while been doing this to other countries. If it is terrible when done to the USA, perhaps the USA should not have done this itself to others.

Or others reduce their participation in US-affiliated Free Software - definitely ocurring

Posted Apr 30, 2025 16:23 UTC (Wed) by corbet (editor, #1) [Link]

For the record, I was thinking about efforts within the US, sorry if that was not clear.

Or others reduce their participation in US-affiliated Free Software - definitely ocurring

Posted Apr 30, 2025 16:49 UTC (Wed) by rbtree (guest, #129790) [Link] (1 responses)

> If it is terrible when done to the USA, perhaps the USA should not have done this itself to others.

As someone who's been on the receiving side of this, you're barking up the wrong tree. LWN has consistently been one of the very few outlets regretfully reporting on breaking down of international collaboration, regardless of who suffers, with zero jingoistic glee.

Do let us know if things get really bad *before* the point of no return. I can't support the site anymore because our economy went down the tube in 2020 and never recovered (think Great Depression if you're American), but if the alternative is LWN going away, I'll scrape together a few bucks. The readers have already saved the show once, a couple of decades ago.

Or others reduce their participation in US-affiliated Free Software - definitely ocurring

Posted May 1, 2025 9:56 UTC (Thu) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link]

Agreed on your first paragraph. Where I wrote "USA", I consider that an entirely different entity than LWN - I'd have written "LWN" or "USA and LWN" if I'd meant that to reflect on LWN!

I do think Free Software devs in the west have kind of let this attack on global collaboration slide largely. I assume out of feelings of "not really my fight, and I have other fights to prioritise my resources for first" sense - which is not wrong of itself. However, it is a shame.

View from the outside

Posted Apr 30, 2025 16:55 UTC (Wed) by dskoll (subscriber, #1630) [Link] (3 responses)

Hi, Jon.

I am a longtime subscriber, and a Canadian. The anger at the Trump administration here in Canada is deep and visceral, but I don't believe it extends to Americans as a whole.

While I am minimizing my purchases of US products and services, and completely avoiding travel to or through the USA, I certainly won't be boycotting LWN. The quality of your content is excellent and an equivalent to LWN really doesn't exist anywhere else. I'd encourage anyone who might be upset at the USA right now to take a nuanced view and not hurt the "good guys" for things that are outside of their control.

View from the outside

Posted Apr 30, 2025 18:25 UTC (Wed) by Wol (subscriber, #4433) [Link]

> I am a longtime subscriber, and a Canadian. The anger at the Trump administration here in Canada is deep and visceral, but I don't believe it extends to Americans as a whole.

Agreed.

The public face of America seems to have changed little from the days of the Wild West, where might is right, and the little guy just gets trampled. Just look at all these big businessmen. Justice and truth seem to be the losers.

Mind you, we can't talk. As a Brit, I find the public face of England pretty awful too. Click-bait journalism with no interest in facts and truth.

That's why LWN stands out. Good, properly researched articles by reporters you know and trust (even if you don't always agree with them).

Cheers,
Wol

View from the outside

Posted May 3, 2025 19:06 UTC (Sat) by danieldk (subscriber, #27876) [Link]

> While I am minimizing my purchases of US products and services, and completely avoiding travel to or through the USA, I certainly won't be boycotting LWN.

Same. I will support small, good businesses like LWN that are hit by this insanity (while at the same time reducing reliance on big US companies). Keep up the good work!

View from the outside

Posted Jun 9, 2025 19:09 UTC (Mon) by davecb (subscriber, #1574) [Link]

> I am a longtime subscriber, and a Canadian. The anger at the Trump administration here in Canada is deep and visceral, but I don't believe it extends to Americans as a whole.

Agreed. I've been encouraging Americans to vacation here (and also to transfer here if their employer supports doing so).

Like many, I've been avoiding buying American goods, but that doesn't include LWN. And, if worst comes to worst, LWN can do like the internet archive and create a https://internetarchivecanada.org/

--dave

People

Posted Apr 30, 2025 17:01 UTC (Wed) by tialaramex (subscriber, #21167) [Link]

I expect to continue to support LWN the organisation with money - but the present US administration is also a direct threat to some individuals in the US much more than others, non-citizen residents being an obvious category but also journalists which could include LWN contributors. LWN is nothing without its people. In general it's better to have a plan and never need it than to need it but find yourself without a plan. So with that in mind I encourage anybody affected to make plans to leave even if you don't expect to use them.

Thank you for all you do!

Posted Apr 30, 2025 18:39 UTC (Wed) by shreyansdoshi (subscriber, #169964) [Link]

Truly appreciate you and your team providing us with this service.

Sponsored subscriptions?

Posted Apr 30, 2025 19:05 UTC (Wed) by salimma (subscriber, #34460) [Link] (2 responses)

I am already in two group subscriptions (via an open source project and via work) - but is there a way to basically buy a subscription for other people? Would be happy to send "matching funds" for subsidized subscriptions.

Sponsored subscriptions?

Posted May 1, 2025 14:59 UTC (Thu) by daenzer (subscriber, #7050) [Link]

FWIW, I'm using my own personal subscription at the "project leader" level, even though I could use my employer's group subscription, based on the assumption this is better for LWN's bottom line.

Sponsored subscriptions?

Posted May 1, 2025 16:12 UTC (Thu) by jzb (editor, #7867) [Link]

You're thinking of contributing to a pool of money to offer subscriptions to individuals, or were you thinking of something else?

Currently we don't have a way for individuals to contribute to a pool for individual subscriptions. That's a nice idea, but there would be a fair number of details that would need to be sorted out with the payment processing and deciding who to confer those subscriptions to. We do have gift certificates if you want to provide a subscription to someone you know. That's also a good mechanism for employers who want to provide subscriptions to their team, but don't have enough employees for a group subscription to make sense.

If a company or other organization wanted to sponsor subscriptions for, say, an open-source project we can happily work out the details for that. Just drop us a note to subs@lwn.net and we can likely figure something out.

My 2c.

Posted Apr 30, 2025 21:44 UTC (Wed) by NCunningham (guest, #6457) [Link]

Morning Jon and everyone else.

I've been a subscriber for a long time, but let my subscription lapse in the last little while because I've been living off savings. The job market for Drupal developers here in Australia has died a horrible death since the end of 2022.

I want to thank you for all that you do and assure you that in my mind too, at least, there's no generic anti-US backlash. People here are recognising that it's the Trump administration that's causing all of this upheaval - that and the fallout from governments overspending during Covid and now having to drastically tighten their belts to repay spiralling debt (at least that's what's happening here).

Nij

Subscription levels by geographic region?

Posted Apr 30, 2025 22:01 UTC (Wed) by ClaudeRubinson (subscriber, #11921) [Link] (1 responses)

Thanks for the continued transparency, which is always refreshing and one of many reasons that LWN remains so trustworthy.

I'm particularly interested and worried by the observation that renewals have also dropped. Is there a geographic pattern to this? If regions with weaker economies aren't renewing, perhaps offering reduced rates for them could help?

Subscription levels by geographic region?

Posted May 1, 2025 13:48 UTC (Thu) by daroc (editor, #160859) [Link]

Part of our commitment to user privacy is that we don't collect a lot of information that other sites collect as a matter of course. To put it bluntly: we don't know where in the world our readers are.

We can't look it up by credit card number, because we don't store those — we use an external credit card processor. We can see what IP addresses are hitting the site, but I don't think we have a way to link those logs to subscriptions. We could get a rough approximation by looking at traffic to subscriber-locked articles, but that's going to be pretty noisy because not every subscriber necessarily reads every article, and getting geographic information from IP addresses is hit-and-miss anyway.

So it's an interesting question, but not one that I can answer.

Subscribed from China

Posted Apr 30, 2025 23:52 UTC (Wed) by boboliu (subscriber, #177228) [Link] (12 responses)

I am a Chinese reader who doesn't visit often, but I have just subscribed, hoping this can help you continue operating.
Although the Chinese open-source community may not frequently appear in the comment section here due to language and expression habits, many of us have been paying attention to this site.

I saw that a reader from Europe mentioned SEPA earlier, and the thing I am very concerned about is:
Although a considerable number of members in the Chinese open-source community possess at least one card with Visa/Mastercard/AMEX mark on it, we are uncertain how long these payment organizations (along with PayPal CN, which accepts UnionPay) will be permitted to operate in China under the current economic policies of Trump. Have you considered accepting cryptocurrency payments or selling gift cards through cryptocurrency, thereby allowing contacts/distributors to sell to local users via local payment methods in China?

Subscribed from China

Posted May 1, 2025 10:10 UTC (Thu) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link] (11 responses)

Second this on crypto-payments. The international financial system is just b0rken, in ways that those readers privileged to live their lives in the west havn't experienced. And a lot of that is due to geo-politics. Crypto payments are the most robust solution to that problem.

There are open-source payment gateways, like MoneroPay (bonus, provides privacy, and not subject to the "but can you explain that transaction 8 steps upstream from your payment?" problem that transparent block-chains like Bitcoin have when it comes to payments).

Subscribed from China

Posted May 1, 2025 10:12 UTC (Thu) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link]

Oh, BTCPayServer would be a BTC equivalent I think.

Subscribed from China

Posted May 5, 2025 12:19 UTC (Mon) by micka (subscriber, #38720) [Link] (9 responses)

As long as they are not of the "proof of work" kind, are are making doubly sure there won't be liveable conditions soon. Thoses don't need publicity.
The other kind I stilm reserve m'y opinion.

Subscribed from China

Posted May 5, 2025 14:29 UTC (Mon) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link] (8 responses)

I presume your view is based on energy use. There is a view out there that views energy use as "bad" in environmental terms, because of CO₂ emissions and anthropogenic global warmng (AGW), i.e. the component of global warming due to human CO₂ emissions. This is simply a completely wrong-headed view, and one which is utterly detrimental to the cause of minimising (if not eliminating) AGW. This simplistic "energy use bad" idea equates energy use with CO₂. To let that guide us leads to a world-view where humanity is meant to somehow not just stabilise energy use, but _reduce_ energy use. That kind of thinking is utterly fantastical. Energy == quality of life. That kind of thinking not only demands that the (relatively) comfortable developed world /stops/ increasing its overall quality of life, despite the fact quality-of-life is not at all equally well-distributed and many in the developed world still aspire to levels of quality-of-life enjoyed by a great many of their fellow citizens; but it also demands that the remainder of the world, that lives well below those levels of quality-of-life simply must accept they will forever be denied it. Indeed, in seeking to reduce global energy use significantly, the demand is that many people in the world must accept lower levels of quality of life - and the way the world works, that means the better off in the world will force those cuts on others (this will happen of itself organically, by economic power, if not by other less savoury and potentially more violent means).

That thinking is a fantastical fallacy. It is the kind of thinking that only those blessed with plenty, and with sufficient privilege that they will be the more insulated from the logical effects of such thinking than many others, could hold. I.e. it is a "privileged belief".

Humanity will NOT reduce its energy useage. It is certain to _increase_ its energy use. Any environmentalist capable of even a modicum of higher-order thinking must accept this, and argue for policies that achieve their AGW-reduction aims while also _accommodating_ the need for more energy. Anything else is simply waffle that achieves little else but to make the proposer feel less guilty about the cars they drive, the plane journeys they take, the AI tools they use, etc.

On to PoW. The fundamental economics behind PoW mean it seeks out the cheapest energy possible. The cheapest energy is generally energy that will be expended regardless, but will otherwise be wasted - free energy that is a sunk cost. This is often renewable power at off-peak times. In some cases, it is power that isn't even connected to the grid (dams for water management in remote areas, which have a turbine just to provide power for dam systems, and have a significant excess). Further, the earth has a _vast_ amount of energy raining down on it from the Sun. The idea we can't use PoW cause "energy CO₂ bad" is just ridiculous.

Human life is energy. Economy is energy. Quality of life is energy. We will only increase our energy use. PoW simply uses our economy to distribute a consensus function, leveraging the fundamental, inescapable, root input into economy. PoW systems did _NOT_ cause AGW, and banning PoW system will _NOT_ address AGW in any way, nor stop the increasing demands for energy. The part PoW systems can play in the energy economy is orthogonal to the carbon emissions. Indeed, PoW systems can play a _very beneficial_ role in _increasing_ the economic utility of some 0-carbon power generation, by being able to convert excess/otherwise-unused power into economic benefit - hence increasing the economic attractiveness of such power generation!

FWIW, I do a tiny bit of mining. It's powered largely off solar power. Excluding air travel (though, I don't travel hugely, if you travel by air sometimes too we might not be different there), and assuming you live a western developed life-style, I probably have a lower CO₂ output than you - I rarely drive, most of my KMs each year are by bike, and the car use I do have is powered in part by Solar too (carbon input into car production is another matter, but lifetime an EV still should have a lower carbon footprint).

Subscribed from China

Posted May 5, 2025 14:37 UTC (Mon) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link]

Oh, the claim in my first paragraph, as to why that thinking is detrimental to the cause - didn't spell it out clearly, but if you're telling the world to reudce its quality of life then it's simply not going to happen. Most of the world will just keep buying stuff, will keep consuming, and your policies will get lip-service at best with token-implementations, and ignored otherwise.

Even most of the people in the developed world who hold these views do not /actually/ reduce their own energy use year over year. They can't even walk their own talk. Their views are simply emotional comfort blankets, to assuage their guilt, while day to day they keep making the same "using more energy than 80% of the rest of the planet can afford" life choices as before.

The efficiency of energy use matters

Posted May 5, 2025 15:07 UTC (Mon) by kleptog (subscriber, #1183) [Link] (5 responses)

The missing factor is efficiency.

Europe uses less energy than 20 years ago because it using the same energy more efficiently to do actual work. Our quality of life depends on the work done using energy, not on the actual amount of energy used.

Peak EU energy usage was in 2006 and has been declining since, [1] because we've been increasing efficiency. Like for example not wasting the 70% of the energy in fossil fuels in ICEs.

Hence why PoW is dumb. You can get exactly the same results, the same quality of life, using a fraction of the energy. And in the specific case of Europe where one-third of all exports are only to pay for imported energy, raising efficiency literally increases our quality of life.
Because it means we can consume those products ourselves rather than exporting them.

[1] https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index....

The efficiency of energy use matters

Posted May 5, 2025 15:19 UTC (Mon) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link] (1 responses)

Efficiency gains are a series of one-offs, and increasingly harder to squeeze out.

We are not going to reduce global energy useage, even if the EU reduced somewhat. And PoW is still orthogonal to efficiency. Regardless of efficiency gains, we still have energy production systems that generate excess electricity which can neither be transmitted, nor stored (we may increase storage over time, but we don't have much at moment - away from some pumped hydro-power stations, they tend to be self-contained).

The efficiency of energy use matters

Posted May 5, 2025 15:25 UTC (Mon) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link]

Oh, and some of the change in energy use in Europe is attributable to reduction of energy intensive industries, as per the Eurostat energy report, and I assume that is explained by loss to foreign competition due to the high energy prices in Europe. I can't find a good breakdown though of this (in that report or elsewhere). That loss is in part to Germany _closing down_ near-0-carbon nuclear power plants!

The efficiency of energy use matters

Posted May 5, 2025 16:43 UTC (Mon) by Wol (subscriber, #4433) [Link] (2 responses)

> The missing factor is efficiency.

And computing is probably one of the most inefficient industries?

> Europe uses less energy than 20 years ago because it using the same energy more efficiently to do actual work. Our quality of life depends on the work done using energy, not on the actual amount of energy used.

I'm afraid here I agree with paulj, Europe has lost a lot of energy intensive industry - our clean steel industry for example has shut down, to replaced by "dirty" steel from China ...

What paulj is missing, however, is that nature doesn't care whether we are rich or poor. Island nations are going to be flooded. Continental hinterlands are turning to desert. For heavens sake, for a country that is forever complaining about the rain, I believe we've had two major wildfires this year! We had a mini-wildfire close to me a couple of years back.

Where is all the money going to come from to rebuild Los Angeles? To renew the Sicilian orange groves? To fix the Austrailian cities? At some point in the not too distant future either people will stop buying insurance because they can't afford it, or the insurance industry will collapse.

In the not too distant future, all this wasteful energy use (and yes, I don't include solar, tidal, nuclear etc - the problem is fossil fuels) is going to bankrupt Western civilisation, and then we're ALL going to be relegated to a subsistence lifestyle again ... the question is are we going to fix it before nature fixes it for us ...

Cheers,
Wol

The efficiency of energy use matters

Posted May 5, 2025 19:30 UTC (Mon) by paulj (subscriber, #341) [Link] (1 responses)

> What paulj is missing, however, is that nature doesn't care whether we are rich or poor. Island nations are going to be flooded. Continental hinterlands are turning to desert. For heavens sake, for a country that is forever complaining about the rain, I believe we've had two major wildfires this year! We had a mini-wildfire close to me a couple of years back.

I think you have misunderstood me. It very much was part of my point in my previous comment that the effects of AGW _will_ hit those with fewer resources harder than those with more. I refer to that with:

> It is the kind of thinking that only those blessed with plenty, and with sufficient privilege that they will be the more insulated from the logical effects of such thinking than many others, could hold.

I am very aware the effects will hit the poorer parts of the world much harder, and I think it is wrong. And I very much think we in the developed world need to do a lot more. Unfortunately, part of the problem is that many in the developed world appear utterly unwilling to change anything of substance - instead clinging to "privileged beliefs" (and I'm aware that term is sometimes also used by types of people who are on sides of issues that you and I might strongly disagree with, however that is a very apt term in many cases - including here), as a feel-good sop. The objection to PoW on AGW grounds is such a sop, in one way, IMO. I suspect many who make that argument do not themselves do much about AGW in other parts of their lives.

The efficiency of energy use matters

Posted May 5, 2025 22:55 UTC (Mon) by Wol (subscriber, #4433) [Link]

> I think you have misunderstood me. It very much was part of my point in my previous comment that the effects of AGW _will_ hit those with fewer resources harder than those with more. I refer to that with:

You mean Western Europe?

The wealthy may think they're okay, but much of Europe seems to be ablaze these days (that, or rivers bursting their banks and destroying towns).

In maybe 20 years, I suspect we will be spending billions to try and avoid catastrophic floods in London. The arctic ice has gone - the Humbolt Current and Gulf Stream are both failing - that's going to play havoc with Western Europe and the US Eastern Seaboard. The glaciers feed many of our major rivers - what happens when the Alpine, Himalayan and Andean ice caps melt? Will India, the Amazon Basin, and much of central Europe become dust bowls?

I personally don't think AGW is going to hit the poorest hardest - I think it's going to hit the rich far worse. How are we going to cope when nature takes out all our life support systems? That catastrophic flood I mention in London - how are we going to rebuild when the world is in chaos and the West is bankrupt?

Cheers,
Wol

Subscribed from China

Posted May 5, 2025 16:14 UTC (Mon) by mathstuf (subscriber, #69389) [Link]

> The fundamental economics behind PoW mean it seeks out the cheapest energy possible.

While that might be the *ideal*, as long as the speculation prices are higher than operating costs, there can be new demand to keep existing coal plants running (or even *reopening* them). This was the case even in 2022[1]. I can only imagine that whatever flailing about the current US administration does to "save" coal will only make the economics even enticing to keep the things online longer than necessary. I need to check if NY instituted that sensible "don't reopen fossil fuel plants just to mine digital numbers" bill, but I can't imagine every state (or, ha!, the federal) government doing something like that.

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/05/19/cryptocurrency-m...

Just found out about LWN recently

Posted May 1, 2025 3:55 UTC (Thu) by iteru (subscriber, #176604) [Link]

If increases are necessary I will support you guys no matter what. Thanks for all of the work you guys do!

Readers outside US should look at US$ exchange rate

Posted May 1, 2025 9:24 UTC (Thu) by NRArnot (subscriber, #3033) [Link]

If you are forced to put up your prices by high US inflation, I'd encourage international readers to check what they are paying in their local currency before doing anything drastic. I'm no economist, but it seems likely to me that the US is headed for a lot of inflation caused by the once-mighty dollar depreciating against most other currencies.

You can do an instant check by Googling "Convert <number> USD to <currency>"

Unfortunately it also doesn't seem likely that the effects of the current US administration will remain confined to the US. There may be more "starving hackers" in days to come.

Corporate subscriptions…

Posted May 1, 2025 12:30 UTC (Thu) by Baughn (subscriber, #124425) [Link] (2 responses)

I have a corporate subscription to LWN.

Would you get more if I detached my account and paid personally? And if so, at what tier?

Though it might be preferable to just send a donation…

Corporate subscriptions…

Posted May 1, 2025 13:42 UTC (Thu) by daroc (editor, #160859) [Link] (1 responses)

Corporate subscriptions get a group discount, so we would make slightly more if you bought a personal subscription instead, especially at a higher tier.

That said, I don't think we want to encourage people on corporate subscriptions to change, just because corporate subscriptions are A) pretty reliable, as a source of income, and B) also a good way to get new readers. It's a lot easier to justify a corporate subscription renewal when we can say "X of your employees were actively using their subscriptions last year" — and people tend to share LWN articles with their coworkers, which gets them added to the corporate subscription, etc.

So if you want to help support LWN in that way, go right ahead; we definitely appreciate it. But other users on a corporate subscription: don't feel as though you have to. Justifying your subscription to your organization definitely also helps.

In regards to donations: our payment processor has previously given us some trouble about donations (according to Jon; I wasn't here for that), so where possible we prefer to sell higher-tier subscriptions. We get more money, and you get advanced site features as a thank you. If you want to, you can buy a single month at a higher tier for a relatively small amount. As always, we don't automatically renew subscriptions, so you don't need to worry about upgrading and then forgetting about it.

Corporate subscriptions…

Posted May 1, 2025 16:35 UTC (Thu) by tbird20d (subscriber, #1901) [Link]

Long-time subscriber here. I'd like to say a very big "Thank You" for being a site that does not use dark patterns (e.g. auto-subscriptions) to bolster their finances. It's refreshing to not have to worry about that when so many other sites do use these tactics.

On a separate note, for many years I've handed out LWN.net subscriptions as prizes during our closing game at Embedded Linux Conference.
I'll plan to give out a few more than usual this year to help out.

Why I did not renew

Posted May 2, 2025 13:46 UTC (Fri) by epg (guest, #34047) [Link] (3 responses)

> US administration's increasing attacks on the global system of trade

This is why I stopped subscribing. I saw Corbet posting like this on mastodon and, assuming he is human, knew LWN could not help but reflect it.

I had expected it to be subtle, though. Thanks for making it unambiguous and soothing my qualms.

Why I did not renew

Posted May 2, 2025 14:08 UTC (Fri) by pizza (subscriber, #46) [Link] (2 responses)

>> US administration's increasing attacks on the global system of trade
>This is why I stopped subscribing.

So... you stopped subscribing because you don't like it when unambiguous facts are plainly stated?

...Good riddance.

Why I did not renew

Posted May 2, 2025 17:01 UTC (Fri) by corbet (editor, #1) [Link]

Let's not chase away former subscribers...we appreciate their past support and hope that they will come back!

I do wonder what I wrote to offend, though. My mastodon presence is rarely updated at best, and tends to be dominated by rants against AI scrapers. The text quoted here can be found in a quite similar form in the updated earnings guidance from many major US corporations. Oh well.

Why I did not renew

Posted Jun 9, 2025 19:17 UTC (Mon) by davecb (subscriber, #1574) [Link]

Are you sure he hadn't stopped subscribing because he disapproved of the attacks on trade?

Alternately, could you expand on what you meant when you said "unambiguous facts are plainly stated"? As far as I can see, LWN has always plainly stated unambiguous facts...

Devaluation the silver lining?

Posted May 3, 2025 17:11 UTC (Sat) by xman (subscriber, #46972) [Link] (1 responses)

I guess there's hope for you in the form of USD devaluation, which would make LWN a more attractive service to people outside the US?

Devaluation the silver lining?

Posted May 3, 2025 21:09 UTC (Sat) by zmower (subscriber, #3005) [Link]

It's a duel-edged sword. The subscription becomes cheaper for foreign users but those dollars buy less foreign goods and services in the US. And then there's the effects of the tariffs which are yet to become apparent.

Might be an idea to look into bitcoin and the lightning network. It's all opensource so entirely on topic.

It is a matter of principles

Posted May 8, 2025 21:06 UTC (Thu) by surinameclubcard (guest, #139470) [Link] (1 responses)

I guess it is a matter of principles. I'm from Europe and decided not support the US economy anywhere I can. So I cancelled all my US based subscriptions and replaced them with European based subscriptions. I guess you should call your government representative to explain this to him. John Wick said it best: "Consequences".

It is a matter of principles

Posted May 8, 2025 21:47 UTC (Thu) by pizza (subscriber, #46) [Link]

> I guess you should call your government representative to explain this to him.

I can't speak for our editors', but the representative for my district (along with 219 others) has wholeheartedly endorsed these policies, despite how they directly (and massively at that) screw over the overwhelming majority of her constituents. My senators (along with about 50 others) are even more complicit, as they voted to confirm the folks dismantling the governmental agencies they were placed in charge of.

> John Wick said it best: "Consequences".

You do understand that (1) John Wick is a fictional character, (2) those "Consequences" came in the form of a massive pile of dead bodies that were (3) somehow completely (and conveniently) ignored by every law enforcement agency world-wide?

Meanwhile, in the real world, when it comes to political violence, the body count consists nearly entirely of completely innocent people.

Went back to being a paid subscriber

Posted May 11, 2025 19:10 UTC (Sun) by ssavitzky (subscriber, #2855) [Link]

... at the Professional Hacker rate. Feels good to be able to pay my full share again.


Copyright © 2025, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds