How Supercell responds has yet to be seen, but the experience of other game industry players suggests their long standing cash cow may be in danger of turning negative.
What's the sacrifice though? Having cars that either get really excellent fuel economy or run on battery power? Forcing electrical utilities to switch to separate billing for grid-tie and power consumption, so that customers that want to put solar panels on their roofs aren't shafted in order to have overnight electrical service from base-load power? Mandating emissions inspections based on original standards at the time of manufacture on all vehicles newer than 30 years, so that gross-polluting vehicles that are not running right are either fixed or taken off the road? Most of these things don't have all that much cost, and for some of them, they're a cost that the individual should have borne anyway.
So basically you don't see people having to sacrifice what they want, because you expect to decide for them what they should want. Anything that begins with "forcing people to do X" or "mandating X" is the antithesis of freedom. You may argue that it's in a good cause, but you can't simply redefine sacrifice to only mean sacrifice from those desires that you prefer to impose on others.
...it doesn't prove a single thing about how black holes behave - because he did not create one.
The research value may be lower, but discouraging physicists from creating actual black holes on the surface of the earth (or really anywhere near the solar system) seems like a sound idea.
"Pascal is Pascal is Pascal is dog meat." -- M. Devine and P. Larson, Computer Science 340