coffeewithalex

joined 1 year ago
[–] coffeewithalex@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If you think so, you should explain where exactly the 1.624 trillions $ value of Google is, given that its net assets are about 267 billions $ and they had about 118 billions $ in cash (or cash equivalent)

You can sell a cow for $1000 on the meat market. Or you can keep that cow, so that it produces milk for many years and earns you a total of $5000. This is the difference between net asset value and valuation. If you were to buy a cow, and producing a cow was next to impossible (cows are one of a kind, like unicorns), then the price of the cow would be closer to the valuation than its net asset value. And once you have that cow, as a responsible farmer you will milk it to the last drop, to get the most out of your money.

Now I'm sorry for the cow, but a business isn't a living creature so exploiting it is ok.

The company isn't necessarily expected to grow. Companies are expected to be milked. Sometimes companies don't grow and that's ok, they're still being milked. The only requirement is that the owners of the cow, at any age of the cow, will believe that there's milk in there somewhere some day.

It's not a loan, it's actual ownership. And the expectation is that people get something out of it.

YouTube would exist almost as a hobbyist site that has issues scaling its users and monetizing its activity. At some point it would have failed because people would find it frustrating to face the lags, and the owners (who by the way are still owners, who still invested in it, so actually very little changes in this mechanic) would introduce subscription fees or something in order to use the platform. Would it have become a ubiquitous platform as it exists today? Would you have it on your tablet, tv, phone? Probably not, but any of its competitors would have gone on a very similar journey and you'd be complaining about a different company, because you need investments in order to grow, become better, more attractive, and become both the way that people choose to upload content, and the way that people choose to consume content. And it would have been YouTube who couldn't have afforded to keep the lights on at this moment.

A loan without the need to repay it.

I'm sorry, but that statement is as false as "developers get paid to much simply to press buttons. Anyone can do that".

At the heart of this statement sits a conviction that you understand the topic, while you are missing some fundamental facts about it.

Why don't you play a few thought experiments? Put yourself in other people's shoes. If you were someone who had money, why would you put it in a loan that doesn't have a need to be repaid? If you're suggesting that the entire stock market rests on the "greater fool" principle, then maybe you don't know about the end goal? Did you consider the "return on investment"? This literally is the very thing that powers the farmer who buys a baby cow, and what makes trillion dollar companies. Literally, the same instruments and calculations that financiers and CEOs of huge companies use day to day, my acquaintances who literally run their own pig farm, use every year - from options on feed, to futures on meat before even buying the piglets. The only thing they don't do of this equation is stocks, since it's a small farm and it's owned fully by the family, and they don't need to scale.

[–] coffeewithalex@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

Stock prices are one element of what makes business possible. Youtube would not even exist without this mechanic.

It's like complaining that people have sex.

It's a core facet of running a business. It's a requirement and an expectation. This is part of "keeping the lights on".

[–] coffeewithalex@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

We all know that Youtube need to get rid off of AdBlockers because they want to make more money than what they are making now.

Making money by charging for completely optional services is not only not wrong, but the very reason why we have most of the good stuff that we have.

If they just need to cover business costs they could just make the service subscription only, make the fee high enough to keep the site running and earn something and allow to see only the first 10-15% of each video to not subscribed users and forget all this charade about AdBlockers.

Awesome! Submit your resume or send it as a proposal. If they didn't think of this first and discarded it because of reasons that you haven't considered, this might be an opportunity to benefit everyone.

[–] coffeewithalex@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago (7 children)

So you're openly hating on people for being normal, without offering a single alternative of a video platform that's not all of those things that you labeled as evil.

There are alternatives, they've been posted many times over in this thread and similar ones.

The alternative to shopping isn't shoplifting. The usual things that people list are client side apps that circumvent intended operation of the platform, reaping as many benefits without paying the cost. But hosting isn't free. Running a business isn't free. And hating the people who literally subsidize your unauthorized use of the platform is hypocrisy.

[–] coffeewithalex@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Because it costs nothing to run data centers, employ thousands of people, distribute exabytes of data.

[–] coffeewithalex@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Me too. And I'd rather not look it up, to not give them more measured attention. I'd rather ask people who experienced it :D

[–] coffeewithalex@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It didn't take a lot for me. I clicked on the link, took a look at the first post and there you go! Advocating for terrorism and defending genocide, and every comment is full of hate, using mostly language that is particular to dark corners of the internet where incels and fascists thrive.

The comments weren't responses to comments they didn't agree with so it's not like they got provoked or anything. The hate is inherent. Imagine what it looks like when someone tries to contradict them.

For me, I'd like to be as far away from such resources as possible. They give too many negative vibes, and I'd rather spend my time and energy in places that have a possibility of a constructive discourse.

[–] coffeewithalex@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I had a cat which responded vocally with "mrrr" when hearing his name. Saying the name repeatedly had an 80% chance of summoning my cat, and a 20% chance that he would come running and jumping up into my hug. I loved that cat so much. Smart loving bastard who liked to also chew on my wife's foot on her way to the bathroom at night, and lovingly hump his towel when he was bored.

[–] coffeewithalex@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago

5 babies and parts of their bodies hidden by other babies are all accounted for.

[–] coffeewithalex@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

On Linux, I'd just build my own Python binaries and make them available. But you can also use pyenv for the same thing if you're ok with it.

Then, using poetry, I have different projects with isolated environments.

[–] coffeewithalex@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The important difference is that you don't need to import anything in order to quickly use list type. This wins in the majority of the cases, unless I'm building something that will be imported by multiple other modules and it really pays to be that explicit.

view more: next ›