A strange game. The only winning move is not to play. How about a nice game of chess?

Even with fission, nuclear is a panacea of energy with almost no waste for modern reactors. I can see there being an initial rise in energy costs to get those projects built out though. If they are phasing out nuclear, that would be dumb.

Additionally, researchers at MIT recently found that you can evaporate water without heat, so that should hopefully be a thing in the near future.

I was about to write back that we are not far off the advances to make these affordable and then did a google search and found that you can get a distilled unit on Amazon for $180 that is capable of making a gallon in 5 hours for about $.45 worth of electricity. That is far less than what it costs to buy distilled water at the store, which is around $1 a gallon. If you look at this from a break-even analysis, you technically start to reap the rewards of ownership after about 800 uses since the first 400 uses basically cost you $1.45 per gallon, then the next 400 costs you $.45 per gallon, but you are recouping that extra cost over the $1 retail price, so by the 800th use, you are getting water at less than half the price of the store.

Not necessarily. It just requires excitation at a molecular level. You can get creative with your source. They have been playing around with low energy methods like LED or even just using the sun, geothermal, etc.

Distill water, then add minerals back into it, and bottle in glass, profit.

What if that tent was firing rockets though.

Shouldn’t we get their side of the story?

If he needs to pay the real estate business to get started and if he needs to recruit other people, it is likely MLM (pyramid scheme). There is a database of those here.

I don’t know many open air prisons that have a defacto government that can declare war and has a military in the tens of thousands.

It’s not a war crime to stop doing business with a “country”.

Makes sense to me. The defacto government of Gaza waged war with Israel. Gaza clearly had a sustainable plan of action to do such bold measures. Either that or they are idiots.

I have it on good authority that they spend lots on new content. Plus the actors and writers are going to be paid more. The customers fund the business. That’s how it works.

The fact of the matter is that $7 a month for what they are investing in content is not a sustainable business model. People will pay the extra without batting an eye. If an extra few $20’s out of your pocket is that big a deal in a calendar year, you probably are not their target demographic anyways and shouldn’t be paying for streaming services since you need to focus on living expenses.

I had been using it for porn, but honestly it was easier to just refine my searches on PornHub.

I only go to Reddit for porn since they lose money when I do that.

I don’t get ads. I don’t know why. I have YouTubeTV and get the splash when opening the app to buy Premium, but nonetheless don’t get any ads ever. I’m not looking a gift horse in the mouth and not questioning it.

I am finding that the people that are starting to rise to the top of my company are backstabbers. It wasn’t always like this, but the company keeps absorbing other companies and some of their cultures are toxic in a passive aggressive way.

I’ll tell you that the teacher was an attorney who worked for a very reputable business consulting firm to help businesses make unsavory decisions. A key takeaway from the class is that you can do anything that you can get away with and if you don’t, your competitors will. They basically said that you need to get away with it in the eyes of the law, but also your customers. They may be the ones forcing you to do the right thing. You also have to do good in the eyes of your employee culture. If your employees don’t like the direction of the company’s values, then that can prove detrimental. So, in many respects, you can be forced by external factors to act an ethical manner.

lol. I’m sticking with the typo.

When I was in business school, one of our lecturers in our ethics class was one of the main consultants that worked the Steam project to create regional price differences and other geofencing. It was a very interesting class. The takeaway is that it can be seen as morally responsible to charge someone is a poorer country less for the same game. It is called price discrimination and it is done in many industries including air travel and pharmaceuticals. Otherwise, you would price an entire market out of a product. In many respects, the richer countries are subsidizing the poorer countries. The argument that the price should be the lowest one on the board anywhere is not realistic because a company needs to generate margins high enough to make the opportunity worthwhile otherwise it is not going to produce the product. In other words, Companies will not make a product if they are going to lose monkey selling it, but they will charge one market more to sell to another market at a loss if there is other intrinsic value like user adoption to create a community. They are selling digital content in this instance, but it still took money to make and money to distribute, so the argument that the product is easy to replicate over and over again is a moot point. Getting some money in a market versus no money is beneficial. If people pirate that games en masse by even just purchasing them VPN at a lower rate hurts the developers. I believe in some piracy under certain circumstances, such as when you truly can’t afford something when you are growing up. It is in the marketers best interest to let kids get hooked at a young age.