Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | Jensson's commentslogin

Its the only video game developer that didn't ruin their franchises with bullshit so far, they have stuck around in the industry with a good reputation for quality for 40 years for this reason. No other developer has stayed around that long with consistent quality sequels.

Almost every other big video game developer deserves to get fucked over much harder for ruining their franchises with cheap sequels and adding endless micro transactions and pay to win everywhere.


> There is also no risks for capitalists

So you argue no capitalists ever lost money? It happens all the time, the risk is real.


The risk is absolutely real, and varies immensely, as does its significance.

Consider the risks of VC backed initiatives, which far more often than not, return less than market salary to entrepreneurs, and less than the S&P 500 to capitalists.

For a shot at the jackpot, entrepreneurs are risking substandard salaries, and capitalists substandard returns.

You could argue that the capitalist’s risk is more significant than the entrepreneur’s. Even in failure, a VC initiative can afford the entrepreneur greater networking and professional experience than other roles, which increases their future earning potential and offsets their risk of substandard salary.

Hard to say the same for the capitalist, who is also, of course, risking a far greater amount of currency than anyone else.

But a risk’s significance is not determined by the amount wagered; it is determined by the consequences of losing the wager. As well as the consequences of participation, or lack thereof.

Median American lifetime earnings are somewhere between one and two million dollars; let’s say an entire life costs two million. A capitalist capable of investing a billion dollars could risk an entire lifetime’s money on a venture every other month, for eighty years, cradle to grave, and if they suffered complete losses every time, they’d still die with enough money for 1600 years of life in a wealthy nation.

The sum risked is immense. But the consequences of losing it are null.

It is, of course, more nuanced than that. Many businesses are funded by people with far less than a billion dollars, and many of them fail. There's also 3,000 billionaires, and an overwhelming majority of human lives that cost far less than American's.


> Consider the risks of VC backed initiatives, which far more often than not, return less than market salary to entrepreneurs, and less than the S&P 500 to capitalists.

once people get honest about this - that VC losses tend to be tax write-offs

& that prior to the VC model - you investors with skin in the game via equity | debt.

then maybe people will stop hyping up VCs and start doing things in a sustainable manner.

but to the gilet wearing hierarchy on the coasts - I'm being a heretic.


If you look at election outcomes you can see there are a lot of real ones, no need for sock puppets.

Chicken and egg. How did those voters get that way? Some governments and rich people fund sock puppets to influence our national discourse, to muddy the truth if not outright spread lies. They wouldn't do it if it didn't work.

But sure, sock puppets also follow the crowd. Good money in it: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cj38m11218xo


And remember Christianity come from the middle east.

Jesus would have foreseen the blockage of the Strait of Hormuz before launching a war of choice on the Persians.

You mean 13? You have to count the net contributors as well or its very misleading...

No its because hitting women with sticks as punishment is illegal in Singapore but its legal to do to men.

> Why only males are eligible to be caned?

Because Singapore outlaw caning women, the schools cannot cane girls without changing other laws but they can cane boys.

The article says this, if it was legal to cane the girls they would also do that but they can't.


That just raises the exact same question.

But also “we would cane more kids if only it weren’t for those pesky laws” is crazy. The world seems to be on a speedrun to rid itself of all civility. I guess that’s its default state, but where did the civilizing forces go?!


Ram prices went up, normally they go down.

Yeah, given everything I'm not entirely surprised - I'm just curious if this is literally the first time a console has gone up in price post-release, or if I just wasn't paying attention the other times.

Why should it be illegal to help people for profit? That is what doctors do, they profit a lot when they help people, they could live on much smaller salaries than they currently have but of course market economics makes it so we want to pay doctors higher salaries than they really need.

People don't seem medical services because they want to, they do it when they need them. It is the only industry where there price list might as well be replaced with "we will take as much as you can afford". No one can afford to be stingy with money with health and live of their loved ones on stake. It is very asymmetric situation, so it is clear to me why someone would want to ban for profit hospitals.

Nothing you said there is related to for profit hospitals, I live in Sweden and we also have for profit hospitals here, wanting to ban for profit hospitals is just stupid. There have been many in Sweden who want to ban profits in healthcare so that you can't go and get a private doctor, do you really want to do that?

If you want to make progress in USA you must separate the crazy left from the moderate left, if you defend the people who want to ban private medicine then you aren't going anywhere. Those aren't your allies even if they pull in a similar direction, even if they sit in the same party in the two party system.


> we will take as much as you can afford

This is only true where medical service providers have no competition. In fact, the state often facilitates this lack of competition.


I think you’re addressing a different point than the person you responded to. They are asking for a positive argument regarding why healthcare itself should make a profit. That doesn’t imply banning profit, or that doctors aren’t compensated at market value

> They are asking for a positive argument regarding why healthcare itself should make a profit. That doesn’t imply banning profit, or that doctors aren’t compensated at market value

That is what it implies, there are many in the world who want to ban for profit healthcare and end pay discrimination between jobs. Nobody would ask that question in earnest, its just a rhetorical question to make a point.


> The right wing is doing whatever it can to marginalize and disenfranchise anyone it doesn't like

No it doesn't, do you mean the American right? There are so many right wing parties in this world, the American right is just a small fraction of them. Maybe we mean the Switzerland right? There aren't many poor people in Switzerland.


The right is defined by its opposition to progressive ideas. No matter if it's American or Swiss or whatever. It will always champion reactionary ideals, seeking to marginalize some groups to further its appeal.

It's funny you mention Switzerland, surely you must have seen their far right's party compaign posters? The ones with the sheeps or rotting apples? How is that not marginalization and stigmatization?


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: