Correct, There is only 1 Dakota, stop gaslighting yourself into thinking there are 2

Production, most likely

I did. They reported $31.5 Billion in revenue for 2023.

Im not finding any concrete report on their expenses, but I did find some best guesses as speculated by users. This reddit thread from 7 years ago, is estimating about $2 billion in expenses.

Let’s assume that since this was 7 years ago things have gotten drastically more expensive for YouTube, and throw an additional buffer on top of that since we can’t be 100% sure. Let’s pentuple their proposed operating costs, and, hell, let’s also be VERY generous and say that they keep a work force of 5,000 people who each make… Let’s say $120,000/yr?

That would come out to about $10.6 billion/yr in business expenses. Even if you factor in the payments to top earning YouTubers, those only measure in the 10s of millions… Okay… Let’s be reeeeal generous to YouTube here and assume that this guy from r/theydidthemath 7 years ago was WAY off. Let’s assume he was off by half of YouTubers actual expenses. Following our (absolutely ludicrous) estimates of their expenses going up by a factor of 5 and their 5,000 employees averaging out to $120,000/yr salaries; YouTube would still be reporting under $21 billion a year in expenses. That means they are net profit $10 billion a year even with the insanely expensive operating costs we assigned them here.

$10 billion. Let me put that into perspective. 10 million seconds is about 115 days. So 10 million seconds in the past was just about the new Year. 10 billion seconds however was 317 years ago.

This idea that YouTube isn’t profitable is equal parts ridiculous and hilarious. I just sat here for 15 minutes waxing accountant at you, but none of that was even necessary. YouTube is a business (technically it’s Google but you get the point), if it wasn’t profitable, it wouldn’t exist. Period.

I’m a Windows user and have bwen for many many years. I recently started learning Linux so I can hopefully one day be competent enough to justify never having to buy Microsoft ^TM branded lube again.

My partner, and much of my friend group, are a Mac users.

I am a programmer so I know many many Linux people.

It is Shocking how accurate this meme is LOL

I have some opinions about 4, but nothing like the vitriol you feel towards it lol. Could I get an example of some things they removed in your opinion?

My complaints mostly boil down to how mediocre the story, world, and characters are. But I can’t think of anything they removed necessarily, just poorly implemented

Oh shit, there’s a working open source switch emulator out there? Thanks Nintendo!

Aaaaaaaand downloaded the source code, Windows Installer, and Linux installer. Thanks again Nintendo, I really can’t express how thankful I am you brought attention to this!

I mean if we’re gonna take this goofy post at face value and get addmitedly WAY too into the breakdown…

The context of if they are agitated or otherwise hostile for some external reason is actually kinda critically important here lol.

In a situation where they are just passively existing and you need to choose which species to just co-habitate with I’m choosing the monkey FOR SURE.

• Any snake is going to be hard to spot, an ambush predator, specifically one (or 5!) as deadly and teritorial as a black mamba, is going to be nigh impossible to keep track of, sneaking around and catching prey off-guard is literally their whole thing. On top of that, while gorilla’s vary greatly in personality (just like humans) odds are decent that if you just leave them alone they will leave you alone.

• Hell, maybe if you manage to find some fruit you might even be able to AT A GREAT DISTANCE establish some sort of basic report with the Silverback. Like, don’t pet the guy, but if they know you don’t have hostile intentions and occasionally provide snacks they probably will keep their “territory” reasonably small, letting you scavenge more areas.

But if the script is flipped and we are in a full blown survival setting? Where for one reason or another the animal(s) has our number from the moment we step foot in the mall? You are fucking insane if you choose the Silverback Gorilla.

• Those things are ludicrously fast, Huge, have great senses, and will literally rip you in half. You would be dead within minutes of entering the mall no matter how far away that gorilla starts from you.

• Snakes you can at the very least survive longer, if not outright just escape them and hide somewhere relatively hermeticly sealed. Maybe find a cabinet you can squeeze into and close the doors to let oxygen in but too small for snakes, maybe find a tall shelf or rafter and collapse the furniture used to climb on your way up to prevent the snakes climbing it as well.

• A Silverback gorilla however is not only far faster both climbing and on land, but has enormous fucking gorilla arms to rip away any sort of door or cover you try to use to hide.

If we’re being generous and assuming this is taking place in the largest mall in the USA, The Mall of America, and the gorilla starts on the opposite side of the mall from where you enter. It would need to clear roughly 1 mile (assuming the 1 mile-ish exterior wall of the mall is circular (it’s not but just humor me), in order to get to you. A silverback gorilla’s top land speed is roughly 25mph, that means 2200 feet per minute, that means you have just over 2 minutes to get into a meat freezer or something equally tough before it catches you. So you not only need to know where one is, but it needs to be close enough to get to in such a short time. Hell no, I’m taking the snakes.

Anyway thanks for coming to my Ted Talk

But if we are talking strictly biologically speaking then we’ve got two sexes.

Not really though, I mean intersex people kinda disprove that by themselves right? Unless we aren’t defining sex by what you have between your legs but instead more of just a genetic makeup, which would mean that the 2 sexes theory is disproven by any of the millions of people who have the “wrong” chromosome pair.

The 2 biological sexes thing works as a very broad generalization but it really doesn’t hold up under scrutiny. I used to say the exact same thing until I got a dump truck of examples thrown at me lol

It’s so easy for the propagandists to convince western racists that DPRK is backwards and underdeveloped.

This you?

https://lemmy.ml/comment/7111152

I can guarantee there is a significant number of people who do want more AI crap.

Hell I can understand why. If it was done ethically and with user privacy as a core tenant of its implementation I would probably love having convenient access to AI tools like that… But this is Microsoft so I think I’m gonna instead go the opposite direction and add this to the list of reasons my next PC will be Linux

Pretty sure they say wally in England/Australia.

That or I’m an idiot, that could be it too

This is… A weird spread of awards…

Like BG3 winning GOTY and story rich makes total sense.

But RDR2 won labor of love? What? Lol. Have they been putting out massive updates lately or something?

Atomic heart won visual style… Sure? I mean I guess it’s atmospheric but I wouldn’t call it particularly stylized.

Lethal company getting better with friends is a solid pick

Hogwarts Legacy is best on deck? The fuck? Lol I suppose i haven’t played this one but I was under the impression the game was like… Fine? Kinda boring after a while but still playable? It’s not horribly offensive but how does a game like that win an award for being the most beloved steam deck game lol

STARFIELD WON FUCKING WHAT??? Okay, I was not as big a starfield hater as some. I thought it was boring as shit for sure but I don’t think it’s completely without merit on the whole… But Innovative? Fucking LOL! Starfield innovated exactly 0 things, hell it retroactively made things from 2011 seem new by comparison. I don’t think theres a single fresh idea in that entire game. Starfield winning most innovative game paints a very uncomfortable picture of the steam awards. There is CLEAR tampering going on here, either by bots vote spamming, or just a behind the curtain dealings with Bethesda. To be honest every single other award here feels tenuous at best just by Starfield winning that specific award. If that boring ass rehash of 2007 gameplay can be called the most innovative game on steam then I’m not sure I can trust any of these games actually got nominated by real players for any of their respective awards. What a fucking joke

Okay but forcing someone to pay you $550k (averaging your values) to not die maybe is still incredibly fucking awful, so it’s really not hard to be better than that.

I can respect that developing a personalized vaccine might take a lot of work but I’m not a chemist. I don’t know how much work it actually takes, nor do I know how many vaccines a person would realistically need to cure their cancer be it stage 1 up to stage 4?

What I do know is that if this vaccine ends up being more effective than the traditional method then it is a wonderful discovery, but if it leads to life-long medical debt and subsequent financial ruin all the same your life is still fucked… I guess I’d rather be poor and alive, but I’d also rather not be destitute.

… I would like to hear more about this secret name…

Counterpoint: Warzone.

Did you even read my initial comment?

I explicitly said that I have never been let down by a GTA campaign. What I was saying was that RDR2 is a different series that plays by different rules. For that reason I don’t feel like it’s necessarily fair to use RDR2 as an example of how they will treat GTA with the respect the series deserves.

I agree. It’s just that this is the same series… Idk maybe it will kick ass, I’m just overly cynical I guess lol

Knowing Rockstar put off development of this game for as long as they did just so they could milk GTAO for every last penny makes me hesitant at best.

I have never been let down by a GTA campaign, but they know where the money is, I’m hesitant to believe they will give this one the attention it deserves after seeing the profits from GTAO. Or maybe I’m just pessimistic

I mean yeah but the point is that technological advancement was still a common occurance. Like, yeah a sensationalized article about self driving cars would blow some minds but to most i think it wouldn’t really make any bigger waves then basic cars already were at the time. How can they be blown away by the concept of self driving when the vehicle itself is so new and interesting you know? AI is so abstract that even today most people don’t understand it, 100 years ago it’d just be “another new thing” just like it is today… We are actually less accustomed to ground shaking new inventions so I’d argue that 100 years ago a lot of our modern tech would be less exciting given the regularity in which things were changing then.

Social upheaval however is ALWAYS a huge deal, especially for the time. Bear in mind that Progressivism is a fairly new ideology in the States. For literally hundreds of years social change came at a snails pace and took serious, concerted effort. Nowadays we are on average much more open to change and accepting of diversity in all it’s forms, but there’s a reason everyone remembers the name Martin Luther King Jr., versus… Ruth Bader Ginsburg I guess?

Which ones cyborg