> What makes you so sure that IP blocking countries will have any effect because it did work in the EU as one example (that is, if complemented with other thi

> What makes you so sure that IP blocking countries will have any effect because it did work in the EU as one example (that is, if complemented with other things I would have to look up. E.g. a lot of phone fraud is illegal in the country it comes from too, which opens up many possibilities for cross country cooperations (or pressure) to shut them down you) Mainly you have to - not thinking in absolutes, rarely can a problem be perfectly 100% be removed, but that doesn't matter making something much better is already a huge step forward. - identifying likely path to improve things, and then trying it - if it fails, give it a proper fact based analysis so that future tries can learn from it instead of just saying "see can't be solved" But what I see a lot is: - solutions having shown to cause improvements aren't tried "because they aren't airtight/perfect" - no proper analysis is done, instead of looking what works people look what "feels like it could work" - a single solutions is very half assed/incompletely tried and after it predictably fails people argue "see nothing can be done so let's not even try" instead of actually analyzing why it failed