Nope I haven't forget the fact that ads also generate revenue. There are two problems.
I do not want to get into long lecture type ranting, but in short, online ads are not reliable revenue streams, you need click records or some percent of the length of ad to be watched by user without backing out, thus they tend to oscillate and different than subscriber fees which is paid regularly as long as subscriber does not get irritated enough to cancel service (and ads are the greatest irritator), this is one.
And the other is with subscription type services, which by their nature very routine, your customer become accustomed to see you name on the credit card bill and do not question the amount etc.the most dangerous thing to do is to change the service, even if it is reducing cost or adding some "free gift" to the package.
For example an ISP I used to work, which was also providing a free e-mail service to customers, once added an alias domain to our primary domain, thus (marketing dreamed) they would add a new value to the service at no cost to company and at no cost to customers, for advertisement... I might be wrong, but I seem to remember we lost more than 10% users to a competitor, and leaving customers kept their "free" mail addresses, all because customers had problems while configuring alias domain to their mail clients. So we and up with serving customers, while they are paying to our competitor. It is dangerous to shake regular subscription services.

Researchers performing survey were also naive. regardless of percentage, ads would cost some subscribers to netflix and they would need to rise prices in order to compensate for the lost users, not the other way around.
I am just a (ex-)user and have never sold streaming services in a professional capacity so my observation based on my experience as a user and PPV seller to hotels, and in short netflix seems to be doomed. Content providers are entering streaming market, netflix's library (both their own productions and licensed products) is loosing attraction, and they are becoming more costly for users, either by price hikes or because of ads. I wonder what yours and other people's experience, but I had dropped my subscription some months ago, because I could not find anything to watch in their library. And yes; Their UI is terrible and was getting worst by the day. For example despite claims of being operable on all platforms, some programs was not playing on Safari, some had problems on Apple TV etc. :( Pity...

If you check OP he is making comparison of "hard money" versus "easy money", not "hard currency" versus "paper currency".

Interesting take on the situation. Thanks I hadn't think about this from that aspect, I would look into that for a while.
One point however, in my opinion "hard" is a weak adjective for actual transactions of Bitcoin. My background is quite mixed so as a programmer with security focus and knowing how networks work over radio (yea quite mixed) I for example shiver in fear seeing people using RFID credit cards. That much ease does not worth the risk. I am not looking for that. But one need to be able to pay in a minute at most for a restaurant bill, in a market queue you have maybe 30 seconds before people behind you starts grumbling. Bitcoin "lost" the opportunity to become an actual payment tool and turned into an investment tool.

Investment tools however either have an actual intrinsic value, or are some kind of derivative value that can be (at least in theory) recovered. All the actual value Bitcoin carries is the energy and time spent on producing it and that is not recoverable. One other property of investment tools is that they are more "elite" financial instruments. You can give a five dollar bill to a beggar but you do not give a below the nominal investment bond of a failing company valued at five to a beggar. I think Bitcoin in its current position become a tool helping nerds to talk as investors, out of the system, as I am doing right now.
"We are COOL dude!!!"

Probably buying something with gold is a more recent event for me than Bitcoin.
Also this is comparing apples and oranges. Gold's claim to fame is not "freedom" but "actual value". You buy gold in order to invest assuming its value is very unlikely to drop and quick to recover if fell down. Bitcoin OTOH, has a claim to be "independent means of payment". Gold is not independent, be it a gold coin or bullion first thing you check on it is an authorised mint or refinery's stamp and a serial number for bigger ones. Gold and Bitcoin are not comparable in anyway.

When was the last time you actually buy something using Bitcoin? When was the last time somebody, some organisation you know bought something using bitcoin, with the exception of paying out ransom for a hacker in order to recover their data.
Bitcoin was perfect for a while, when it become a speculative tool of finance instead of a currency with actual daily usage it lost all its "actual" value. I do not know you but last transaction I made was confirmed in three hours or so, with.the regular transaction fee used by my exchange. Can you imagine waiting in a restaurant for three hours for your CC payment to be processed?
Bitcoin become a very expensive financial speculation tool with lots of inexperienced players and high volatility. It does not provide any freedom as it is almost impossible these days to be used as a routine payment tool. Also four or five years ago most people I know used to carry a full copy of ledger in their notebooks with their actual wallet, so they had an actual control on their own money. These days keeping a wallet in sync with the network became a full time job and most people are using online wallets, to which you need to trust with your money. How free you feel when it is possible to an online wallet can be hacked, DDoSed or just outright can get lost with all coins in storage?

Do not lie to yourself.

And mandatory ps: Most fanbois are blaming me with being a sore loser when I tell things like above issues. I made money from Bitcoin, never got hacked or money stolen from me etc. The risks I mentioned was not mostly valid for me as I was running my own node for storage. It does not worth time spent, energy consumed...

I guess I (and probably you too) fell for the clickbait part. There is no difficulty described in TFA, except in the title. Also there is no "attempt" described in TFA at all, only in /. title.
I do not know which was the bigger shame, clickbait being there or "a researcher" is not aware that government(s) have his/her facial recognition data already provided by him/herself with biometric picture. So if there is a privacy issue (and there actually is one in my opinion) that is long pass since governments all over the world switched to chipped and biometric picture containing passports, which I guess more than a decade ago.

If that client is programmer behind the web site generating misformatted, problematic content and is trying to debug the code. I simply need to use two or three debugging environments at the same time by default, and in addition I need to access Safari's Develop menu, just for clearing cache. It is not the best development environment, when I am not debugging CSS or some such browser related aspect of my programs.

Safari Development tools are very good if you are using them for CSS and/or dynamic content issues, BTW. Although firefox's development tools had improved in time, I find Safari is superior for my taste, only with that clear cache issue...

You are right on the spot. I need to protect (or not lose it unnecessarily at the least) my history while deleting some or all problematic content, usually generated by my own programs during debug sessions.

Same here, with a secondary backup OS/browser combo as Linux/Lynx. I hate MacOs's more persistent than necessary, difficult to flush resolver and Safari's buried deep (well not so deep, but why I need to use development menu for such a mundane thing) cache clear option. Sometimes Apple is acting as its user base has lower than average IQ :(

I used to use Chrome as backup before switching to Firefox, but Chrome is somehow more prone to problems, and losing performance in the long run.

Yep, "I was just following orders" is another variant. Idiots and bad people always have a curtain to hide behind. AI and especially ML is the new high performance type of excuse.

BTW as a third world shit hole country, which escaped that labelling by the virtue of hosting some investments of a real estate mogul(!?!) here in Turkey it is forbidden to track workers in the way that was described in TFA due to privacy laws. How in the pinnacle of western democracy some employees can be subjected to such applications? Is not there some kind of law to protect people?

According to Smart Dictionary

1. Buzzword heavy articles usually lack in meaning
2. ML is not AI, corollary AI is not intelligent in the way a human especially a scientist is
3. There is little difference between statistical lying and ML training, if intentions are bad
4. "Cloud based" is not a significant adjective while discussing technical or scientific quality of an application. It can be only used while describing additional problems to be prepared for or reduced costs, especially in HR
5. Humans are not mechanical machines, they are flexible, so they can perform better than some rigid model "that is trained based on other people's data" expects/assumes

Where you are wrong is that; Karma is the only important metric in /. So "within this closed paradigm" AC means somebody who is not willing to lose only fiat currency they have access to, while expressing what they want to express, which can be a simple political view or an extreme racist insult or intentional or nor misleading IT advice.Outside world connectivity to identities is meaningless as long as /. management does not confirm identities like blue badge users in twitter. Any other way can be fake and misleading. Assuming you, in person, and you sound like somebody who really does not need to hear that from me; Given how unreliable is the nature of mail servers and domain registration today, cannot prove your own, let alone a third person's identification, if an official trusted third party is not involved. Surely there are well known people with certain identities but it is not the rule. So only local paradigms are valid under almost all non professional and most professional circumstances.

Well sorry I would not go on musing about online identities, as this unfortunately is not old /. As such I do not see so much use in this. I understand what you are telling while not agreeing on your basic assumptions. There is not need to try to convince you/me/everybody/anybody.

However I would like to thank you, as this is a rare type of conversation in /. these days, besides Apple product announcements, simple introductory level technical sound bites, and popular science articles, take care.

Sorry to bother you sire in your slumber. These days most AC messages are either swastikas, insults on several racial minorities and clueless IT commentators. GP is in the last category I believe, you naturally are to your opinion, and I really thank you expressing them with your actual username whatever you choose it to be.