They’ll probably cost $3,000 (if not more) but they will sell truckloads of them

So layoffs are bad, but not doing layoffs is bad too?

A blockchain is only as secure as the amount of work (= processing power) that goes into it. Anyone with 51% of the processing power invested in a blockchain can attack it and essentially steal from other people. For cryptocurrencies it’s a problem that solves itself, because every person that possesses some of the cryptocurrency is incentivized to mine to keep it secure (and to earn some at the same time). The more your cryptocurrency is valuable, the more people will want to mine it and the more secure it will be.

For anything other than cryptocurrencies, you can’t incentivize a huge number of people to commit computing power to secure your blockchain. So you have to protect it some other way, for example only allowing you and some trusted people to write on it. But then it doesn’t really need to be a blockchain anymore, just a write-only database (which will perform better and occupy less space).

If it requires no work to generate a block at the end of your blockchain, any attacker can generate malicious ones.

If you never use medicine that was developed with the help of animal testing I guess you could. If you do use pretty much any kind of antibiotics though, or are unfortunately diabetic and have to use insulin, then it would be pretty hypocritical.

BG3 had a day-one patch, and is at its 6th hotfix now. Does it make it a broken game?

With the scale of modern AAA games it is inevitable, if a studio had to wait until every bug in a game the size of Starfield was fixed to release it, it would simply never release. You have to decide at some point that the game is in a releasable state, and at this moment you start printing discs, then you keep working on it and fixing bugs and that constitues the day-one patch. And don’t worry about the expansion, they started working on it long before the release.

A day-one patch is the day of the release, so it counts as included in the release in my books.

It doesn’t mean « they haven’t done enough testing before physical production », it means they took advantage of the inevitable several weeks or months between start of physical printing and release.

And of course a patch 1 year after release is fine. What I’m saying is that I prefer a broken game that is fixed on release day over a broken game that is fixed 1 year later.

What’s the problem with day-one patches? I’d much rather have a game with a day-one patch than a game that needs a patch 1 year after its release

Game + day-one patch is essentially the initial state of the game