economists don't use math as a tool to describe reality
They can't. economic realities predicated upon hysteresis or long term analytical trends are constructed with touchstones of bogus equations founded on wild conjecture. a sizeable component of many modern economies are unquantifiable, having been intentionally obscured by human interest. Why did the fed hold reserve rates? what is the nature of a cyclical economy when infused with more than one trillion dollars of emergency funding to prevent an uncodifiable collapse? what factor or theorem transmogrifies and determines the value of liabilites as assets? So much of what economics seeks to do is undermined by the fact that most economies work by the rules of human nature. the Federal reserve practically has its own language to communicate change or lack thereof, and it is intentionally designed to avoid concrete resolution or effable transmission of meaningful information.
Marx as an economist is one of the few to provide a very broad overview of the concept as it applies to modern capitalism. he describes the capitalist economy as a cycle similar to a bird with a broken wing. it builds, booms, collapses and in turn affords a widely acceptable cycle of observed failure. From the great depression to the lincoln savings and loan scandal to the United States Failed leveraged buyout of United Airlines to the dotcom bubble and finally the great recession of 2007 we've all grown to accept this cycle as normative.
The goal is to deter infringement
and avoid judicial scrutiny. The RIAA for example has long had an infringement website where you can "pay" your "settlement" should you receive one and dont wish to be burdened by your constitutional right to a trial by jury for what --unless all those DVD warnings are wrong-- is a federal felony.
the problem is if this becomes a federal trial, media companies and their attorneys have to do things like disclose evidence. depending on the nature, and how far down the rabbit hole defense wants to go, media companies understand they can eventually begin to risk the legality or constitutionality of the DMCA itself. They can call severe attention to the disparaging, clandestine, and overzealous nature of copyright itself and in turn through a simple federal case could open the door to the possibility of copyright reform. In some cases, like the well published instances where media companies file lawsuits totalling in the millions against child plaintiffs or single mothers, the damages can be knocked down to a fraction of what it costs them to prosecute something like this or worse, thrown out entirely.
None of that requires more than F-15s to solve, and lots of politics. Something that may be beyond your capacity to understand.
Why do you need an F15 to solve attacks made with Twitter?
the actual enemies we have now use twitter and guerilla tactics
He is facing persecution for practicing journalism. Open your eyes
No, he's facing some heat for Sweden over dodging investigators looking into his alleged sexual abuse of two women.
Statistics means never having to say you're certain.