My cat will attempt to eat anything he thinks is intended to be food, so I have to wrestle him down. Be glad yours only sniffs.

While I do agree these people exist, most people are some mixture of benefiting from, and being harmed by the status quo. To erode support for a mode of production takes both fighting those who are directly against your class interests, and convincing the majority of people that their class interests align with your actions. Often those who feel the most precarity under the current system are it’s most ardent defenders, simply because their afraid of loosing what little status they have eked out for themselves.

Corbyn was sabotaged both by people who rightly saw him as a threat, and by those who didn’t see the benefit he could bring them.

A mixed system which starts with changing the most socially egregious examples is probably the only politically viable transition; lots of people fear disruption, and it takes time and proving to them that the changes are beneficial.

I’d suggest beginning with something like Corbyn’s Labor had proposed; if a capitalist business is sold or fails, the workers are given first right of refusal and a govt loan is given for them to purchase as a worker cooperative.

They made a smart call that has probably increased the long term privacy of their users.

People were using port forwarding to host illegal shit, and governments were getting pissed off about it. Mullvad has been able to prove in court that they don’t keep logs, but that’s not a perfect deterrent; a properly motivated government, perhaps if somebody is using Mullvad to host CSAM, might attempt to legally force Mullvad to put logging in and add anti-canary clauses.

Preventing port forwarding keeps customers as consumers rather than hosters, and avoids this issue.

Not necessarily, plenty of good programs written in C89 for example.

With something that is heavily library dependent, having a more recent development stack may mean better maintained libraries but definitely not a sure thing.