This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
A profit maximizing monopolist increases production and lowers prices when their marginal costs decrease, the same as in a competitive market.
Yeah, but how much a monopoly lowers those prices depends on how the elasticity of demand varies with price, and I'm not sure what they can count on there. Over the past few years they've managed to double their number of commercial+government launches in part by being the cheapest option around, but still the majority of their launches are now Starlink. Bezos wants to put most of the Kuiper satellites up on New Glenn, and China's putting the Thousand Sails constellation up on Long March, and all the other satellite constellation plans out there are for tens or maybe hundreds of satellites, not thousands, so there's not a big external market in the wings that they can sweep up.
They can probably keep Starship busy with more internal payloads, which will be great for them, since they've got a more powerful Starlink design waiting on Starship because it's too big for Falcon, but this doesn't affect their prices to others. To have incentive to cut prices they need the cuts to essentially create new markets. New markets would be awesome if they happened, I admit. The first "12 universities design a nanosat and we launch the winner" programs started up shortly after I left undergrad, which was awe inspiring, and at Starship costs we could afford "1000 high schools design a nanosat and we launch the winning 100" instead. But that only scales so far, and most markets with lots of room for growth are very speculative. The one obvious growth market right now is high-bandwidth low-latency communication, but Musk+Bezos+China seem to have that sewn up already.
On the other hand, prices here aren't determined by a spherical monopolist, but by Musk. He actually seems to be serious about the cities-on-Mars thing, and Starlink seems to be lucrative enough to pay for it even if he doesn't maximize profit from other customers, so it wouldn't be completely out of character for him to just lower short-term profit margins speculatively, on the theory that even if the short-run demand elasticity isn't there it's more important to create new markets in the long run.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link