Because of edit wars and encyclopedic tone requirements. See also: Wikipedia.

Thus OurBigBook.com.

Generally, if something is labelled as "e-learning", it's not a good sign, as it implies that it adheres to the "teacher"/"student" separation which Ciro Santilli much despises: E-learning websites must allow students to create learning content.

Some people have been creating YouTube channels that just post and go over a large number of Stack Exchange questions, some of them with a quick random intro video. Perfectly legal due to CC BY-SA but really weird stuff!

Ciro Santilli does the same via Google searches and Twitter/Reddit searches for himself, you can't invent anything new nowadays:

Other mentions of "Denis Petrov":

God, Ciro Santilli respects this guy.

Watching www.youtube.com/watch?v=-SbZZPX-y9g in 2022, who was one of his inspirations, made Ciro miss his guitar so much... one day, maybe, one day.

Like Reddit (option to allow it per community added in late 2021) and support.google.com/.

And of course, 4chan just takes that to a whole new level, usually closing on the same day, and then getting deleted within a week. Why would anyone contribute non-illegal content to that king of system?!

Ridiculous, so when new information comes out, we just duplicate all the old comments on a new thread again?

Remember, Ciro Santilli is the Necromancer God.

Dan Dascalescu agrees for Reddit specifically: www.reddit.com/r/TheoryOfReddit/comments/9oujwf/why_archiving_old_threads_is_a_bigger_problem/

Described for example in lecture 1.

The current system is dominated by government action, so fixing problems often requires even more government action. This does not say anything as to the feasibility of a fully libertarian system. Private entities take time to develop and immediately dismantling entire government institutions may not be the best move, hence why companies benefitting from government aid and intellectual property also need antitrust legislation, and why suddenly cutting subsidies/welfare can hurt a lot of people.

When a company begins selling a product, the price starts off higher to recoup the cost of development, advertising, equipment, land, etc. Some costs don't increase proportionately to the number of units sold, so the cost of making each unit goes down as more are made. Thus a new company entering the market will have to charge higher prices. Does this mean that the existing companies will be able to get away with charging high prices forever because the barrier to entry is even higher?

Let's say that a company needs to charge a total of $100M more than their final prices to recoup initial costs. But by using investor funds to pay said costs, the new company can collect this $100M over, say 10 or more years, instead of 2 or 5, making the additional cost of each unit from the final price very small. Thus they can beat the overcharging company. Big investors are surprisingly ready buy billions worth of stock of companies that have been losing billions every year, if they believe it's a necessary sacrifice that will more than make up for it in the future.