I won't blame VCs but the 0% interest rate environment.
When money had no "price" to it, it made absolute sense to borrow as much as possible from the future, and thus delaying profits for growth.
That's why we start seeing this world change now, rates are no longer 0 and money isn't free. You have to pay now, and so you have to have some cash flow now.
Isn't the content and licensing costs are the majority of their costs? Honestly asking, I never assumed infrastructure and bandwidth might be the majority
It depends on the service. For Disney and Paramount+ they already own the IP and the costs then would be storage + bandwidth + metadata/transcoding servers + engineer time. Of those, the bulk would be bandwidth.
Similar for content that’s owned by the platform. Netflix, Apple, and others invested in to original programming and in those cases there’s again no need to license.
However the prices of all those are similar. By this interpretation, either Disney does a very bad and expensive engineering job, or Netflix is losing big money. And I don't think either is the case... so there must be something else (and I can't tell what).
In this case you can’t look at prices as an indicator of profitability. Pricing is all marketing right now, and only barely connected to real business numbers.
What happens in Gaza is both justified war and a massacre, because Israel does not fulfill its obligations under international law to protect Palestinian civilians.
More specifically Israel did not:
1. offer a refuge to Palestinian civilians with necessary infrastructure on the territory secured and controlled by its own military (i.e. on its own territory);
2. organize evacuation of people from war zone;
3. ensure safe passage for humanitarian aid in a sufficient volume;
4. start planning reconstruction and aid to help Palestinians building independent democratic state under the two-state solution.
I don’t want to start a long discussion on why this didn’t happen, just to state the fact that it did not and as a result numerous war crimes were committed, which could have altered the relationship with Arab states, but they didn’t. And that is a notable fact to me with regards to the specific person and company.
Israeli invasion killed alread > 1% of total population of Gaza, further 2-3% have been iniured.
According to you, did Israel get a blank check? Are they justified to do literally anything? Whst if the killed percentage will go to 5, 10 %. Still fine?
Out of curiosity I looked for a relevant reference, apparently in WWII, civilian casualties to allied air raids were 0.6% of the total population and twice that for wounded, so around half the numbers you cite for Gaza (though IIUC you are including both civilian and militant deaths in your counts so not perfectly comparable). Given that Hamas seeks to maximize their civilian deaths I'm not sure how to take that comparison.
Looking at WWI is a bit more confusing, similar numbers of dead Germans due to malnutrition and disease (excluding the pandemic), but overall 1.1% civilian deaths due to military action for the Central Powers.
While personally I feel that the ideal number of civilian deaths is obviously 0 (on both sides), I do feel like counting the dead is not a particularly convincing metric when considering who (if any) is doing right since the relevant information is in the rightness of concrete actions taken rather than the results. Bombing a hospital is bad even if there are almost no civilian casualties. Bombing a military HQ is right even if it unintentionally involved civilian casualties (assuming you did act to minimize them). Bombing a military HQ that is directly under a hospital - ask me later please, but I don't think I'd judge solely on who is dead at the end.
I'm obviously a bit biased here, but just reading https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_and_gender-based_violen... I can't see how Israel can stop the war as long as Hamas has any form of influence in the area. For now, except for Netanyahu which should be rotting in a jail cell, I'm reserving my judgement until we can see the final results.
What do you expect them to do? Throw up their arms and let Hamas continue to lob bombs into Israel for the next 500 years? I think they are trying to balance casualty minimization vs the troops dying on the ground. I know which one that any country will likely do. The Gazans could speed up the demise of Hamas by helping the Israel troops root out the terrorists but at least 75% still continue to support Hamas being Hamas.
My first suggestion would be to not sponsor those terrorists by the Israeli government currently in power. [1] That would be a good start.
I have some other ideas, like stopping the apartheid regime in West Bank and blockade of Gaza. Maybe even acknowledging that Palestinians want, and deserve, their own state.
so, stopping the "apartheid regime" would stop the rocket fire from Gaza you believe? was there also "apartheid" in gaza before October 7?
like, literally, now, while hostages are in the tunnels and they launched 10k rockets into Israel, they should be stopping the apartheid regime? AND blockade of Gaza, so Iran, Turkey, Russia etc. can bring in weapons unchecked, right? That’s what’s gonna make everyone safe, and bring in the democratic process the that the world believes will resolve the conflict?
Because most of the Muslim world shares false propaganda against them, and they are billions of people against ~10 million?
Why does tech used have any effect on what is true? If you don't fear the truth, you should be happy that the minority has the tools to get more data out.
Israelis on TikTok and Israeli leadership make the best case against Zionism. They’re openly racist and genocidal. As someone who’s not religious it’s clear the Palestinians have the moral high ground by a long shot.
Palestinians have the moral high ground because it was their land that was invaded in 1948 and they been oppressed by Israel ever since. The “rapes” have been discredited over and over. One of the many things Israel does that is very obvious to outside observers is to lie constantly in the most obvious of fashions.
When money had no "price" to it, it made absolute sense to borrow as much as possible from the future, and thus delaying profits for growth.
That's why we start seeing this world change now, rates are no longer 0 and money isn't free. You have to pay now, and so you have to have some cash flow now.