It's been like 90% glue since perl took over.

Signed senders?

Is the advantage corporate money lining their pockets?

Or is there another one?

Dozens of different lobbies means there’s no clear cut list of advantages.

Unless you just want an exhaustive enumeration of every possible human desire.

It's easy-ish to verify someone is human and of-age without needing any intrusive agent. One big problem is that the folk pushing for surveillance via verification hate that model and have capital to crush the idea. Another is adoption of some system that works; where the perfect blocks what's good which results in no progress.

IMO a big disservice to the universe has been done with the recurring revenue drive. Many services could/should offer a one-shot option, with the highest margin. Somehow the world got stuck on SaaS model so hard that one off is completely ignored.

I know why the capital class loves MRR I'm just mad that OTC is ignored.

I am struggling with finding a good model for desktop apps. The subscription model always seems to yield the most money, but I too dislike subscriptions.

One-shot option seems attractive, but the desktop (MacOS at least) app market is actually so niche that the SAM is somewhere in the low thousands. So, if I would offer a one-time 100$ app, I'd have 100k$ before taxes. And for that revenue, there's developing, marketing, plus support and maintenance. So to match a dev's salary, I'd need to make 2-3 successful apps a year, that I'd also have to maintain for a long time.

I think maybe there's a mid-ground with buy forever, 1 year updates, so people get the product they paid for, and if they want updates or support the development they can re-buy, however I'm yet to hear opinions on this model.

> I think maybe there's a mid-ground with buy forever, 1 year updates, so people get the product they paid for, and if they want updates or support the development they can re-buy, however I'm yet to hear opinions on this model.

As far as desktop software is concerned, I think this a commonly accepted approach. Sublime Text is probably the most notable example.

Isn't that just how most software used to be sold? If you buy Photoshop CS5 or MS Office 2023 you get the product as it's released and maybe a year of bugfix releases (but no new features). If you want the new features buy Photopshop CS6 or MS Office 2024

Personally I like the model, as long as old versions stay truly static and don't get enshittification updates. It aligns incentives on feature development far better than subscription models: if you make genuine improvements you get recurring sales, if you don't then existing users will just stay on the old version. And existing users are protected from features or UI changes they disagree with

There are some new key-trap ApIs that can handle that, IIRC FF don't handle that part as well as Chrome.

Has been my experience. Like, orders of magnitude slower.

For flipping around a few seconds of video it's ok - but it's only processing (on my machine) like 2fps.

How could that experiment work?

Resolve the hostnames but don’t visit the sites. RefrigeratorFixit.com, StoveBrand.com, ConsumerReports.org.

See that you start getting ads for kitchen appliances.