A big question is, how many sales are actually lost to pirates, or, how many pirates would have bought the game if they couldn’t pirate it. The answer is neither zero, nor all of them, but I don’t know what the actual answer is.

The reason why DMR tends to get cracked is that the concept is inherently flawed. If the entire game runs on your machine, then everything needed to run the game has to be on your machine at some point. DMR is security by obscurity.

Idea: Governments maintain a list of entities that are evading the law like that, and then doesn’t prosecute people who are accused of crimes against such entities. The idea being that if you place yourself outside of the law’s reach, you also place yourself outside of the law’s protection.

I figure with Lemmy having much fewer users, there’s less potential for toxic communities to form.

So, in the post you’re replying to, it’s laid out how insurance wouldn’t work, and your reply is “Have you considered insurance?”

Well, given time, prices will move to where the businesses make the most profit. If relationship between price and demand is linear, then an increase in expenses will move the ideal price point by half as much.

Assuming a linear relationship between price and demand, then if you increase the cost of product, the price where the most profit is generated moves by half of this amount.

I suppose that’s true. But it just bothers me when people talk about the market cap like it’s an amount of money that exists somewhere, instead of being an abstract valuation.

Looking at a different example, Ford’s market cap is $42.61e9, and its revenue is $47.81e9, while the profit is $1.83e9, 20 times of which is $36.6e9. If we average both of them we get $42.205e9. So Ford seems to have about the right valuation.

Market Cap of a company is sort of a meaningless number. As in, it’s shares in existence times price per share, which is just another way of saying its the share price. If somebody were to sell $100 Billion worth of Tesla shares, the market price would plummet and he’d not get the $100 Billion the shares were originally worth.

Of course, a rule of thumb is that a company is worth 20 times it’s annual profit, or its revenue. So, by that valuation, Tesla is worth 28 Billion dollars, or 25.5 Billion dollars if we go by revenue. (I’m surprised that both approaches lead to results so close to each other) Compare with a market cap of 682,47 billion, we can see that Tesla is ridiculously overvalued. So, I guess you should go and buy puts on Tesla. Or sell your shares if you have any.

How so? Can you list some examples of upvoted things that are wildly wrong?

I’d say it could go either way. You could publish a positive piece on a company and then buy stock in them. They can make a profit whether their research turns out positive or negative. This would however give them an incentive to sensationalize their results, to exaggerate their findings, be they positive or negative.

Likely whoever made it didn’t know how this scene would look like.

In this scenario, it would probably be the rational path forward, as you’re in a situation where you’re guaranteed to die either way. So why not make your death as painless as possible?

Kinetic kill vehicle.

Eh, both permanent space habitation as well as generation ships are so comically far out of our reach that any effort to escape would be doomed. All the billionaires would have accomplished is that they’d die slower. Unless we had decades of advanced warning and even then it would be a stretch. Additionally, in the latter case there’s no need to keep it secret. The world is going to end in 50 years just wouldn’t cause as much panic.

Secondly, if you look at the picture, the projectile directly pierces the earth. So it would have to be going extremely fast to accomplish this. So chances are we wouldn’t see it coming to begin with.

Thirdly, this sort of direct hit implies intelligence. So, chances are whatever wants us dead would then follow through to ensure they get any survivors. Or not, as I pointed out earlier, all survivors are screwed either way.

4 hours in, can still read it. Agree with your assessment, too.

That’s a quite thorough debunk. Can you provide some sources for your claims?

It’s sort of a strange approach, because this will leave you with the workers who can’t find employment elsewhere.

Yes.