Increasingly so, the more experienced I get…

Knowledge is a curse!

No worries, I didn’t take it that way.

Mine injects some functionality in a specific government website that I frequently use so it’s a very narrow use-case anyway. I only published it “because why not”. Not going to link it because I did so under my real name to be able to add it to my CV.

The main thing I had to wrap my head around was the difference between content and background scripts. Other than that, of course, reading the steps to publish the add-on at Mozilla.

*Looks at his own add-on with exactly 1 user*

😥

One reason I can think off the top of my head is archiving: Nothing prevents the owner of a repo from simply deleting it.

Social Security […] gets called a “pyramid scheme”

I assume people arguing this also don’t have any other form of insurances?

for a goth girl.

Big Titty Goth Girl! FTFY

Dare we say it …?

If they’d post links to hit pieces or sites such as RT maybe.

Yes, we have stuff like HTTPS nowadays, but I think that given a certain importance of an application, transfered data should be encrypted on the application level as well.

One thing that comes to mind is that you might find a lot of instances with only a few or even one user because they are intended as personal mirrors.

I guess one way to counter this is to check whether registration is enabled.

I’ve recently noticed a lot of new accounts which post a whole series of news articles and then get deleted. Notot fake news or conspiracies but mostly reputable sites. No idea what’s going on there.

What’s your experience with the vaccination so far? I’ve heard it can be pretty brutal in terms of side effects such as fever and more.

Uhm, why not go to true and trusted Wikipedia? TM 31-210 Improvised Munitions Handbook

I.e. the TV channel Arte, which is a cooperation of French and German state media has a multipart documentary called Work, Salary, Profit that touches on a lot of fundamentals.

Of course there is always the option just to straight up read the original works by Marx, Smith and so on, but they are not for the feint of heart.

Well, to me that sounds a little like you prefer the term swimming over being called a swimmer.

Well, if you assume the farmer excludes others from using the means of production i.e. the fields, then yes you can argue that they are acting as capitalist. But you have to make the distinction between private and personal ownership: Private ownership of the land and personal ownership of the produce. The former is what communists reject. The latter is fine in their books.

It would certainly help a lot if you could tone down your condescending attitude a little.

I fail to see where anything you write is an actual argument against my distinction between different forms of working with the means to produce something. Yes, I’ve misread your vendor as a farmer, but that’s not a reason to go ad hominem.

All companies work that way, or they risk to fail. The maximization of profit stems from the need to stay competitive. If your competitor can produce the same amount of goods for a lower price, you won’t be able to sell yours for a cost-covering price and therefore go bankrupt. Instead, you then have to find a way to be more efficient by investing in your business. To be able to invest, you have to have created profit. Once you have done that, your competitor has to do the same and the cycle starts anew. That’s the idea of modern capitalism.

By my reading you’re taking the use of the first term and then saying they are using the second term. I think this is called equivocation.

I am not sure what you mean by that. I tried to show that just because someone sells something, they are not necessarily a capitalist.

I’m not sure why people always insist if money is involved that it’s capitalism. Money is an abstract form of trade. No one is suggesting that trade will cease to exists in a world without capitalism.

What does a farmer having inputs have to do with my argument being removed from reality?