>>1406662this is a very interesting angle I will go with
>gaben says that combating piracy is a losing battle>gaben says that instead he needs to offer a more convenient paid service than the free pirate service>gaben makes the games easily accessible, with a bunch of features to encourage users to continue using his service over pirating or going elsewhere>penalties for pirating are already very high, but does it really make piracy inconvenient?(competition is good for consumers, and legit businesses are in competition with pirates)
let's ignore who gaben is and whether he actually delivers, and instead go back to fare evasion:
>how do you make paying for the fare a more convenient option?>higher penaltiescertainly a decrease in evading, but how many evaders convert to paying commuters?
are higher penalties making the service more convenient?
does the decrease in fare evaders make the service more convenient for paying commuters and potential paying commuters?
are fare evaders who turn into paying commuters are neither a loss or gain in convenience for other commuters overall?
>lower faressome evaders will become paying commuters because it is more convenient to pay the fare than risk a penalty?
but now that the fare is more convenient to pay for, are there new paying commuters who had before found both the fare and the penalty so inconvenient?
who are these new paying commuters and does their presence make the service change how convenient the service is for existing paying commuters?
>higher penalty, lower faresis this really the best of both worlds?
does the absence of people who find both the lower fare and the higher penalty inconvenient make the service more convenient for existing paying commuters and the new commuters who now find the lower fare more convenient?
