Besides providing verbatim records of who said what, there is a second can of worms in forming any sort of binding agreement if the two sides of the agreement are having two different conversations.
I think this is what the part about the missed nuance means.
That’s why the button says “purchase” instead of “buy”
First off, they’re synonyms
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/purchase#synonyms
Now, I’m certainly no expert on the US legal system. It certainly seems silly if you could circumvent entire laws just by using synonyms but what do I know.
However I have been talking about other countries where that is not the case and where the language is not English.
So It really doesn’t matter whether it say “buy” or “purchase” in English when it’s “kaufen” in German or “acheter” in French.
First Robot President
Is Nixon available ?
You typically don’t get “ownership rights” when you purchase a game on Steam. You’ll typically be purchasing a licence to play the game, which could be taken away at any point.
That is certainly what Valve thinks and writes in their TOS but if their store has a big button that says “BUY HALO” then courts may very well decide that you actually bought Halo.
And many countries have a strict legal definition of what buying means that cannot be overruled by some company’s TOS.
This is explicitly against their TOS. Whether or not you’ll be found out is a whole other matter
Also whether or not those TOS are legally enforceable in every single country Valve operates in.
Piracy is a service problem
“Mao wasn’t a communist in 1953 because his country hadn’t completed its first five year plan yet” is one hell of a claim.
One hell of a straw man, you mean.
At what point have I denied that people are communists?
Mao may be a communist and follow a philosophy called communism but China has not established a social order called communism as envisioned by communists.
A country […] under a revolutionary socialist government is still communist
I would argue that in a world where the terms are not synonymous, socialist countries are in fact socialist, not communist.
at least in so far as its following the roadmap
Following a roadmap to some target literally means that you have not yet achieved that target.
The argument is not that their are no communists, the argument is that they have not established actual communism, therefore the states they govern are not communist states.
Whether or not they want to establish communism does not factor into it.
To claim otherwise would be akin to claiming that a company on a roadmap to profitability is already profitable, while actually still losing money.
I mean, OP asked specifically why comments don’t come from
people that never lived in a communist state
So I addressed the non-existence of communist states.
True, there can be smaller communist societies but I think OP was asking more on a USSR level scale and not 12 hippies living on a farm together.
You’re not going to break the Cuban blockade. You’re not going to settle the endless territorial disputes plaguing Vietnam. You’re not going to undo the legacy of generations of apartheid in South Africa overnight. You’re not going to Make the USSR Great Again.
So maybe save yourself some angst and stop trying to tell Nicholas Maduro and Kim Jung Un how to do their jobs
All these "you"s make me think that you might addressing me personally.
I make no claim to solve anything, nor how anyone should do their job.
I have provided an (incomplete) explanation as to what communism is, why it does not actually exist in practice and why therefore people commenting cannot be from a communist state.
every “communist” when pushed will take position on atrocities committed by various communists regimes… they gonna do that thing that “fascists” do: “well he really did not do it but if he did, they clearly deserved it”
I have never encountered that argument. Is that something Tankies say?
What I have seen is the often mocked argument, that these regimes were not communist in the first place.
Actual communism has never existed and probably never will.
There are however plenty of communists that will openly denounce stalinism. That is the entire premise of Animal Farm, btw.
Communism is by definition a society without a state, so nobody has ever lived in a communist state and I doubt there has ever been a communist society in recorded history.
One should acknowledge that this is not on Netflix alone.
Other media companies pulling their content to set up their own streaming services has fractured the market and made each individual service much worse in the process.
and dissent must not be tolerated, as they can lead to chaos and rebellion
The party is always right
When did we start becoming concerned with a public service being “profitable”?
Late 80s, early 90s, with the rise of the rise of the Chicago School of neoliberalism.
The Wirtschaftswunder also had a lot to do with the Social Market Economy which, along with our train network, has been crippled by decades of neoliberal reforms.
I hate the word race as well, but Germans are an ethnic group (the definition is somewhat vague anyway).
Racism derives from the outdated race concept but sadly does not depend on its validity to exist.
the content you like
The content I like is on youtube though
why didn’t they decide to “phase out coal” instead?
23 years ago, under Schröder they wanted to phase out both and massively subsidize renewables.
Later those plans were largely axed under Merkel.
The reason why coal has a strong standing in Germany is that it is one of the few natural resources the country has.
It has long been a staple in certain political circles to justify coal subsidies by pointing to the many jobs tied to coal mining.
Nevermind that they had no problem throwing jobs in the solar industry under the bus when they cut subsidies for that.
That has already become outdated, at least according to some economists.
Banks can just create loans out of thin air without having to check their own reserves first.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Money_creation#Credit_theory_of_money