Agreed. Here's are some more questions to add some nuance:

Should these organizations be stopped from getting "too big" so that they can fail without taking down the entire economy/internet/industry? If so, that would mean reigning in "boom" economies and industries, thereby risking the accusation of "stifling innovation" (the most common retort of large-scale financial scammers).

Should their failure be managed to ensure a soft landing? This was the practice for Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns, Washington Mutual, Wachovia which all collapsed during the Mortgage Crash/Crisis.

You are a hero.

Even with antifreeze, attempts to thaw bodies prepared that way have resulted in massive widespread organ cracking.

Who is willing to provide an option for those without a 404 Media account?

It DID crash the economy, but then the federal government stepped in, implemented the "too big to fail" doctrine, and blunted the damage into a recession instead of a depression. In that process, though, they exposed their weakness: the government will step in to rescue companies on which the US economy most relies.

This is particularly relevant when, amidst a widely acknowledged AI investment bubble, Google CEO Sundar Pichai says in the same breath that AI investment is at least partially irrational and regarding a bursting bubble "I think no company is going to be immune." That's not a warning... that's a threat and a dogwhistle to the government effectively saying, "If you allow this bubble to burst, everyone will suffer".

This is that "moral hazard" about which economists and political scientists warned during the mortgage crisis. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_hazard) They know that they won't bear the harm of the risks they've taken.

I think it's a good key indicator to include in evaluating the health of the lived economy (not the stock market). Here's what I watch:

1. Credit card delinquency (https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/DRCCLACBS_
2. Sub-prime car loan delinquency (https://www.marketplace.org/story/2025/11/12/a-record-number-of-americans-are-behind-on-their-auto-loans)
2. BNPL companies like Klarna not meeting earnings expectations from their PRIMARY business (as opposed to propping up the business with speculative investment). Incidentally, Klarna has an earnings call tomorrow.

In California, New York, Hawai`i, and other high-cost areas, you'd be spending 4x on electricity to run this thing could expect to return in revenue.

Could also run some World Community Grid tasks on BOINC, that's what I do.

But if you just want to heat your house nothing beats a heat pump for efficiency.

I don't think we should expect to see steady progress toward a climate solution, I think it's going to happen quite suddenly after some combination of the technology to do it getting cheap enough and the climate producing enough "shit's getting real" moments for a large fraction of the first-world population. At that point either we'll get our asses in gear and set up oceanic and atmospheric carbon sequestration megastructures all over the planet with maybe a little SRM sprinkled on top, or we'll be too distracted or impoverished to do anything about it for some silly reason or another and all the disastrous predictions will come true because this is a problem we're collectively too stupid as a species to solve. That's a real possibility.

Am I the only one that sees the irony that a company called Robinhood is preparing to deliver wads of riches to well-off too lazy people and hoping someone doesn't attempt to rob said rich people and give to themselves?

They could've instead named this thing "Wut is sequential access and why is it bad!?!?"

Context is Everything! Before people start going off about how dumb of an idea this is, this is about SINGAPORE.

In the US, light-duty trucks (pickup trucks) emit nearly 5x the total annual GHG than commercial air travel and a huge proportion of those pick-up trucks are vanity vehicles. This airline levy isn't nor should it be a high-priority levy for the US.

For Singapore, where it's very difficult to own a car ($20k/yr + fuel + parking), vehicle emissions aren't really their focus and commercial air is.

It's also worth noting that NAFTA obliterated Mexico's smaller farmers which massively ramped up illegal migration from Mexico to the US.

I think the actual winners of this AI bubble will be whoever wastes the least money on this folly.

An ILLEGAL monopoly (in the USA) requires a person/organization to use anti-competitive measures to attain and/or retain monopolistic control over an industry. This can include predatory pricing, predatory mergers, intentionally driving competitors out of business, and the refusal to deal in normal circumstances.

Steam is a LEGAL monopoly that gained its market share by getting in early and being consistently foresightful, considerate of their customers' needs, and competitive in the industry.

So why is an article at all? Because of the distribution fees. You pay two ways to distribute a game on Steam. First, you pay a one-time $100, but you get that back after $1,000 in sales. Second, You pay a 30% commission on all sales, but that drops to 25% after you bring in $10 million and 20% after $50 million.

Is that unfair? Probably not. Consider how much it would cost to print a bunch of CDs/DVDs, boxes, get stores to carry your game, etc. And if you don't want to do that (no one does), compare it to the cost to distribute your game elsewhere and what features that system has (or more likely, doesn't have).

GOG, Microsoft, XBox, Playstation, Nintendo, has no one-time fee, but has a similar revenue share at 30%.

EPIC Games has a $100 listing fee but has the lowest revenue share I could find at 12%.

So Steam is comparably priced, has a MASSIVE marketshare, isn't attempting to absorb smaller competitors, and they provide a great, stable product.

So is there a problem?