That graphic is limited to a comparison of emissions from use of roads only.
That graphic is limited to a comparison of emissions from use of roads only.
There is no neutral role, everything can be made partisan.
If the people don’t like the actions of an elected official, they can either try to vote them out in the next election or try to force a recall and replace them.
The point the other person is trying to make is that if a person wants to watch something, but the price is higher than they value or can afford for the experience they will not pay the price, so the company will not profit. If the person then pirates the content to view it, the company has lost nothing additional.
However, one could also make the argument that the viewer having the ability to pirate lowers what they are willing to pay, thus the company does lose some amount of profit in aggregate over time. This though is not necessarily true for those who lack the means to pay, rather than just the willingness.
Ultimately for people who do have the means, piracy is a symptom more of a service issue rather than a price issue. People generally will follow the path of least resistance to acquire what they desire. For most people a small payment and easy access will lead them not to pirate, but as prices rise, content fractures and UIs enshitify, the aggregate effort crosses the line and they start to withdraw and turn to other methods.
Everyone has their own willingness to pay for things on the demand curve, if companies pick an optimal price, they maximize profits, and aren’t harmed by people who cannot or will not pay that price utilizing a non-consumable resource without payment.
If you really want a caving incident that’ll give you nightmares… Nutty Putty
That’s all within 100 miles of any airport that lands international flights and any coastal boundaries, regardless of distance from another country’s border.
Some of us play XCOM, 95% chance to hit might as well be 0% when you need 100%, usually means it’s time for a grenade.