That’s why the button says “purchase” instead of “buy”

First off, they’re synonyms
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/purchase#synonyms

Now, I’m certainly no expert on the US legal system. It certainly seems silly if you could circumvent entire laws just by using synonyms but what do I know.
However I have been talking about other countries where that is not the case and where the language is not English.
So It really doesn’t matter whether it say “buy” or “purchase” in English when it’s “kaufen” in German or “acheter” in French.

Naja, sowas wie “unser Krankenhaus hat aktuell x Fälle von Covid” lässt sich sehr einfach anonym ausdrücken und mit Forschern teilen.
Man muss ja nicht gleich die gesamte Krankenakte veröffentlichen.

Alena Buyx, Vorsitzende des Ethikrats, reibt sich an einem grundlegenden Prinzip der Datenschutz-Grundverordnung (DSGVO): “Datensparsamkeit ist in der heutigen Zeit eine irrsinnige Idee”, […]
“Wir klicken 48 Seiten Cookie-Erklärungen weg”, argumentierte Buyx.

Die Cookie-Erklärungen sind doch kein Resultat von Datensparsamkeit. Sie sind Resultat der Datengier von Websitebetreibern und deren Lobbyarbeit um eine pauschales Blockieren der Datensammlung zu verhindern.
Wer keine persönlichen Daten von seinen Nutzern erhebt braucht auch nicht nach deren Einverständnis fragen.

Zugleich sei es nötig, im Gesundheitssektor etwa durch gemeinwohlorientierte Forschungskonsortien “üppig” Daten zu nutzen:

Da spricht doch nichts dagegen, die dürfen gerne anonym alle Daten haben die sie wollen. Für statistische Erhebungen in der Gesundheitsforschung sind aber weder mein Name, noch meine Kontaktdaten nötig.

Viele Menschen gingen hierzulande davon aus, “bestimmte Daten können wir gar nicht nutzen”.

Auch kein Problem der Datensparsamkeit, sondern ein Problem, dass Leute nicht kapieren was persönliche, geschützte Daten sind und was nicht.
Die Frau scheint kein Ahnung zu haben wovon sie redet.

Der andere Diskusionspartner scheint da deutlich Sachverständiger:

Man dürfe die Vorgabe aus der DSGVO zur “Minimierung” persönlicher Daten “nicht mit Sparsamkeit verwechseln”, hielt Kelber dagegen. Das Motto laute also nicht: “Alles wegwerfen.” Vielmehr gehe es darum, nichts zu erheben, was man nicht für eine konkrete Datenverarbeitung brauche. Wolle man persönliche Informationen für andere Zwecke wie etwa die Forschung im Gesundheitsbereich weiterverwenden (“Sekundärnutzung”), ermöglichten technische Schutzmechanismen wie die Pseudonymisierung “alles”.
[…]
“Deutschland ist gefährlich unterdigitalisiert”, wird Kelber nicht müde zu unterstreichen […]
Nicht nur während der Pandemie hatten “die, die bei der Digitalisierung nicht vorankommen” und “im Föderalismus ersticken” eine “einfache Ausrede mit dem Datenschutz”.

You typically don’t get “ownership rights” when you purchase a game on Steam. You’ll typically be purchasing a licence to play the game, which could be taken away at any point.

That is certainly what Valve thinks and writes in their TOS but if their store has a big button that says “BUY HALO” then courts may very well decide that you actually bought Halo.
And many countries have a strict legal definition of what buying means that cannot be overruled by some company’s TOS.

This is explicitly against their TOS. Whether or not you’ll be found out is a whole other matter

Also whether or not those TOS are legally enforceable in every single country Valve operates in.

Piracy is a service problem

“Mao wasn’t a communist in 1953 because his country hadn’t completed its first five year plan yet” is one hell of a claim.

One hell of a straw man, you mean.
At what point have I denied that people are communists?
Mao may be a communist and follow a philosophy called communism but China has not established a social order called communism as envisioned by communists.

A country […] under a revolutionary socialist government is still communist

I would argue that in a world where the terms are not synonymous, socialist countries are in fact socialist, not communist.

at least in so far as its following the roadmap

Following a roadmap to some target literally means that you have not yet achieved that target.
The argument is not that their are no communists, the argument is that they have not established actual communism, therefore the states they govern are not communist states.
Whether or not they want to establish communism does not factor into it.

To claim otherwise would be akin to claiming that a company on a roadmap to profitability is already profitable, while actually still losing money.

I mean, OP asked specifically why comments don’t come from

people that never lived in a communist state

So I addressed the non-existence of communist states.

True, there can be smaller communist societies but I think OP was asking more on a USSR level scale and not 12 hippies living on a farm together.

You’re not going to break the Cuban blockade. You’re not going to settle the endless territorial disputes plaguing Vietnam. You’re not going to undo the legacy of generations of apartheid in South Africa overnight. You’re not going to Make the USSR Great Again.

So maybe save yourself some angst and stop trying to tell Nicholas Maduro and Kim Jung Un how to do their jobs

All these "you"s make me think that you might addressing me personally.
I make no claim to solve anything, nor how anyone should do their job.
I have provided an (incomplete) explanation as to what communism is, why it does not actually exist in practice and why therefore people commenting cannot be from a communist state.

every “communist” when pushed will take position on atrocities committed by various communists regimes… they gonna do that thing that “fascists” do: “well he really did not do it but if he did, they clearly deserved it”

I have never encountered that argument. Is that something Tankies say?
What I have seen is the often mocked argument, that these regimes were not communist in the first place.
Actual communism has never existed and probably never will.
There are however plenty of communists that will openly denounce stalinism. That is the entire premise of Animal Farm, btw.

Communism is by definition a society without a state, so nobody has ever lived in a communist state and I doubt there has ever been a communist society in recorded history.

Communism is a society without social classes, money, or a state.
Feel free to name one so-called communist country that implemented that.

The eastern block was as communist as North Korea is democratic.
They did however socialize ownership of factories etc, so they did have an authoritarian form of socialism.

Nicht ganz ohne Probleme.
Soweit ich das sehen kann, funktionieren Bilderposts auf feddit.de immer noch nicht.

Take Ellen Ripley for example: strong woman. Can’t be played by a man as the character no longer makes sense.

Ripley was originally not even written as a woman.
There is not a single scene in the original Alien where her being a woman is in any way relevant.

There’s an xkcd for that:
https://xkcd.com/311/

But at least pronunciation is mostly consistent.
In English two words can be written almost exactly the same but sound wildly different.
Looking at you, words with “ough”

Try to pronounce the letter G. What does it sound like? Hard or soft G?

According to wikipedia the phonetic usage includes:
[g] [d͡ʒ] [ʒ] [ŋ] [j] [ɣ~ʝ] [x~χ] [d͡z] [ɟ] [k] [ɠ] [ɢ] /dʒiː/

For English pronunciation it lists:
/dʒ/ /ɡ/ /ʒ/ and silent

I’m saying that there are no consistent rules so language learners have to learn each word individually.
If you learn languages by memorizing every singe vowel shift since proto-indo-european then be my guest but for someone who just wants to speak the language and has to learn the difference between plough, through, though etc, it seems pretty damn arbitrary.

Yes, but we’re not talking about the linguistic history of how words developed.
We’re talking about learning a language and the lack of consistent rules can make that quite difficult.