Rockstar co-founder [Dan Houser] compares AI to 'mad cow disease,' and says the execs pushing it aren't 'fully-rounded humans'
-
Imagine having hundreds of millions of dollars, having this amazing creative vision, seeing staff under you getting fired… and remaining without resigning, publicly speaking out against the actions, or doing absolutely anything for the people under you.
But hey, I understand you simply disagree and think they are awesome. That’s great.
I mean the guy in question quit 5 years BEFORE the staff was fired?
-
But they were fired in 2025, we were talking about pre 2020 conditions. Who knows what their work was actually like? They do, we don’t.
Let’s DEMAND Dan Houser answer us then!
In the meantime, all capitalists are bastards.
-
He literally might not know, he was working on another continent lmao
Like I said, the only people who can tell you if they were forced to sign whatever employment contracts they signed or what those contracts entailed, are the people who were fired. I don’t think they’ll be speaking up about any of that, though, given that the union busting is an ongoing legal matter and there’s still a non-zero chance of getting their jobs reinstated.
-
Strawman is arguing against a different argument than the one you are presenting.
I’m saying you’re not presenting an argument at all.
-
When did the union busting happen?
-
Stupid question: if you think it’s a good idea but don’t know when the price will go up, you just buy stock and wait. But if you think it’s a bad idea and don’t know when the price will go down, is there any long-term alternative to shorting that doesn’t require betting on the date?
Holding cash is a position. It also gives you the most flexibility, and low risk, but also low reward.
-
Strawman is arguing against a different argument than the one you are presenting.
I’m saying you’re not presenting an argument at all.
Cool. My argument is Dan Houser exploited employees when he worked at RGS.
-
When did the union busting happen?
When did the formation of an union discussion started?
-
This post did not contain any content.
Agreed. Moo.
-
-
That’s a statement, not an argument. If you’re going to start citing fallacies then I’m going to start expecting properly formed arguments.
-
That statement seems to be based exclusively on him being a union buster, despite the union busting happening 5 years after he left.
-
-
I don’t know, when?
-
Humanity and creativity are not on the CEO’s resumeé. Making shareholders happy by increasing profits and padding the CEO’s ego certainly is.
Making shareholders happy by increasing profits and padding the CEO’s egoTheft and corruption certainly is. -
-
That’s a statement, not an argument. If you’re going to start citing fallacies then I’m going to start expecting properly formed arguments.
-
That statement seems to be based exclusively on him being a union buster, despite the union busting happening 5 years after he left.
Reread my first post.
-
-
I don’t know, when?
Scroll up to the youtube video I linked.
-
You can hold a short position by repeatedly borrowing more stock – but you run the risk of running out of money completely, because short positions have (theoretically) infinite downside risk.
Financial risks can, by themselves, never be infinite. They are by nature quite finite. Also, risks are always alluding to a downside. Otherwise they’re called chances.
-
So he’s going to rehire the visa dependent labourers RG fired?
That’s neither a statement nor an argument, and is complete nonsense.
-
tl, dw. When did the discussion start?
-
Financial risks can, by themselves, never be infinite. They are by nature quite finite. Also, risks are always alluding to a downside. Otherwise they’re called chances.
Granted. “Arbitrarily large” would probably be a better phrasing: if I buy a stock for $100 and the value drops to $0, I’m out $100. Can’t lose more money than I put in. What I meant is that short positions, by their nature, don’t have this ceiling on the amount of money you lose.
