4 ms·
Ignoring the broader economic arguments that paradoxically justify this as productive, (b) seems worse because it’s literally destructive. They’re producing som
by wrs 5y ago
Ignoring the broader economic arguments that paradoxically justify this as productive, (b) seems worse because it’s literally destructive. They’re producing something of value and then deliberately damaging it.
- thayne 5y agoIs creating something of value, then prohibiting someone from using it any better though? FWIW, I find both b and c objectionable.
- fragmede 5y agoIt may feel antithetical to the very core of your being, but that's where engineering meets capitalism. Intel is a business (because it has to be), and businesses want to maximize profits, and where b and c aren't materially different, taking something and making it worse is the same failing of capitalism as communism - human nature. I can make 10 widgets for 10 customers to buy, but between those 10 customers, 2 of them want the cheapest version, 6 of them want the medium option, and the last 2 want the most expensive option. The way to maximize profit is to produce that same distribution, divorced from the actual yield of the production process. Pricing a product is a dark art but looking a bit closer at it, there's a huge psychological or human nature element to it.