DagAgren

The business model is to charge both a delivery fee and a commission on the sales price. That way, you can make it profitable, even when paying a fair price to couriers, as long as you can keep your business lean and your delivery routing efficient.

I don't get the feeling you've really given it a fair chance, or tried to understand why it does what it does.

Swift really is much more readable than Objective-C, too.

Doesn't seem like there would be much demand to run legacy Objective-C code on other platforms, as it would most likely be strongly tied into macOS or iOS APIs that would be availble anyway.

Agreed. I have not seen any other language that is as pleasant to use. It is not perfect, but everything else is even further from perfect.

> But somehow after nearly 6 years Objective-C stills feels better

This experience is shared by basically nobody? I used to love Objective-C, which was unusual even before Swift, but I would not in a million years switch back to using it. Swift is so much better in every single way.

Both. If you have only one, you have a shit product nobody wants.

Instead of wasting everyone's time arguing pointless semantics, have you considered actually engaging in constructive discussion?

This is just in no way a realistic attack scenario. It gains you nearly nothing for a massive amount of work.

If you have those resources, there are far more effective ways to track people that do not require relying on the contact tracing system.

Yes, and you reveal your keys for the past when you are diagnosed, and then you go inside, stay inside, and do not reveal any further keys.

This is not useful for stalking.

If you have COVID you should not be distributing your daily keys, you should be staying the fuck inside.

Yes, because they actually designed their system so that it can not be used for stalking. Go read up about it.

> You can't steal physical objects via TCP due to censorship resistance.

You can steal money, and passwords. And you can steal things in the physical world and sell them over the internet.

> If anything censorship resistance helps prevent fraud

The entire Bitcoin economy gives a massive counterexample of this.

> I do not see how censorship resistance has anything to do with blackmail.

Censorship-resistant digital currencies like Bitcoin are massively used for ransomware and other forms blackmail.

> I do not see how censorship resistance can help a criminal rape children via TCP.

You are not so stupid that you would think anyone was ever making that argument. Do not feign stupidity, that never makes you look clever or convince anyone of your argument. I am ignoring this one and giving you a second chance to give a good-faith answer.

> How is it not?

Because it helps criminals commit crimes. Not crimes as in "oh the government doesn't like you doing this", crimes as in theft, fraud, blackmail and child rape.

> Most people have an intuition about particles

That intuition is also most likely completely wrong.

That maybe "censorship resistance" isn't the universal good some people make it out as. Maybe the people who benefit the most from it, and who make up the majority of those who actually benefit, are criminals. Maybe it's not a great idea to make tools that make it easier for criminals to commit crimes.

Pretty sure my point still stands.

I think I understand monads less now.

Well, that is exactly what they are doing here too.

And they are mainly used for breaking the law.

I'll just point out that neither of you have managed to really take a single step towards actually explaining monads.

Yes, well, good example.

"Giving out money for free" isn't really something that make me think something is LESS of a scam. Giving out free money is literally what every every cryptocurrency scam does at first.

I am convinced that monads induce a very specific kind of brain damage that makes a person incapable of ever explaining monads.

In practice, meaning, let's let him kill a few of them before we jump to conclusions?

> Oh they are, I just prefer to focus on good things rather than bad things.

If you can afford not to focus on them, then trust me, they are absolutely not focused on doing that. Your experiences is very different from those who are actually suffering from them.

> Things are pretty good for me, but it's not because of politics.

Only because you class those things that go in your favour as "not politics" and only those that challenge your position as "politics".

That would mean either implementing your entire API twice, or adding layers of pointless indirection, for extremely little gain. It is just not reasonable.

I know, this site is for having horrible political opinions and never being challenged on them because that is a "flamewar".

It doesn't. You can access all Objective-C features from C, it's just a bit of a pain. There is a C interface to the Objective-C runtime.

iOS still exists.