Wikipedia claims that "Some states, including California, Hawaii, Maryland, New York, and Oregon, have banned chlorpyrifos on food grown and sold in their jurisdictions. Those bans remain in effect." It's also 100% banned in foods sold in EU area.
So, not that hard to avoid depending on where you live. Apparently corn, soybeans, wheat, fruit trees are some of the most common crops it's used on.
If it’s banned in all those places, does that have a knock-on effect of limiting its profitability thereby causing the market to produce less of it to sell elsewhere?
This specific pesticide might not be used on organic crops, but plenty of other even-less-well-safety-tested "organic pesticides" may be used instead on organic crops.
The word "organic" is largely a marketing gimmick.
While organic might currently be a "marketing gimmick" purchasing organic is an important signal to the market that consumers consider it important. I'll gladly be a first adopter if it helps move the industry and regulations in the right direction.
Looking at your HN history, your PayPal situation is not at all surprising.
Before this one, your most recent comment on HN was written ten months ago, promoting your website. One person replied to that comment. This is what they wrote:
“I signed up on profilepicture.ai and paid, but have changed my mind before uploading photos. There is no way to contact you through the site for a refund because the live chat isn't working and there isn't a support email. Also, when I search the help desk no content is returned. How can I reach you?”
You ignored that person.
It’s no wonder you are getting lots of chargebacks.
Hamas is the elected body of Gaza. It also has over 75% support according to several polls post 10/7. By all means it represents the interest of Gaza’s people whether anyone wants to admit that or not.
> Pulling off acquisitions at this scale takes a way more than you are giving it credit for.
I don't think anyone is denying that skill is involved, but skill is often orthogonal to utility. Skill can be abused. Con men, burglars, and pickpockets all have skill. Malware authors have skill. Torturers have skill. I'm not saying sales is equivalent to any of those (OK maybe con men) but the point should still be crystal clear. What people are saying is that Fivetran hasn't succeeded in creating any value, and might even have destroyed value. When a big company "succeeds" by acquiring competitors they quite rightly get antitrust scrutiny because that's bad for competition and innovation. The principle doesn't really change for smaller predators.
I think what they were saying is this company puts off snake oil vibes. It's like calling Microsoft a success in the game industry when they bought companies or products to position themselves as a leader of the industry when the argument can be made that they couldn't build it back up if it went under.
You seem to be focused on software development as the only 'legitimate' avenue to building a company/business; if this is true, why? Are VCs 'illegitimate' for being unable to run the companies and develop the corresponding products they profit from? Are software developers 'snake oil' vibe-y for being unable to create the hardware they rely on?
