• Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      18 days ago

      I think I read it like you did first, that fining him billions would be more than half of his net worth, which is wrong.

      But I think they mean that if you have billions, taking away half wouldnt change your life. I’d also say thats wrong for musk though because his money is tied up in companies. If he had to pay a cash fine of a huge amount, that likely would cause discomfort.

    • blind3rdeye@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      18 days ago

      While I disagree that “billions is beyond being halved”, there is some truth to the idea that numbers can get so big that halving doesn’t make much difference. That seems very very counter-intuitive, so I’ll try to briefly explain.

      Consider (10^10 + 2). That’s 10000000000+2. I think it’s fair to say that the +2 doesn’t make a lot of difference. It’s still approximately 10^10.

      So then, consider 10^(10^10)×100. That’s a huge number, too big to type here, then multiplied by 100. So the result is 100 times bigger than the huge number. But… writing it down we see this:

      10^(10^10)×100 = 10^(10^10+2) ≈ 10^(10^10).

      So although ×100 does make it one hundred times bigger… that just doesn’t really make a lot of difference to a number as big as that one. As numbers get bigger and bigger, they start to take on properties a bit like ‘infinity’. Addition stops being important, then multiplication, then for even bigger numbers exponentiation doesn’t huge much of an impact either.

      Mathematically, I think this is really cool and interesting. But I don’t think 1 billion is that big. 10^9 is big enough that +2 doesn’t matter much, but not so big that ×2 doesn’t matter.

      [edit] (I’m struggling to get the nested powers to look right… So hopefully my meaning is clear enough anyway.)

      • ByteJunk@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        18 days ago

        Interesting concept, thank you!

        Have you ever played idle champions of the forgotten realms? At some point you start to get this feeling.

        • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          18 days ago

          Happens in MMOs too, world of Warcraft was bad with it over the years on and off.

          They’ve reduced the numbers down multiple times so that people start to feel progression again.

          • ByteJunk@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            18 days ago

            I’m not too familiar with WoW, but I think it’s a bit different.

            In the idle clicker, you quickly get to exponential numbers, so when you’re optimizing the party and you have a choice of say, something that doubles your base damage or something, it really feels irrelevant because after all the other multipliers your hero is already dealing 2x10^(102), and going to 4x10^(102) is nothing

            • Rekorse@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              17 days ago

              Yeah I think that can happen at different scales, and of course MMOs didnt just increase the numbers higher and higher, they added more damage sources per second, per target.

              It gets to the point you need a meter and graph to really tell much of a difference with anything, but you won’t be able to create enough data points to make a real determinstion.

              So the end result I think is the same you are describing. You get a new upgrade and it looks like it will be a substantial difference but you end up not being able to tell.

              The game you are talking about, is the exponential increase a feature of the game? It sounds like it goes up very quick from what you described.

      • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        18 days ago

        A single billion, when put in terms of money, is enough that - simply invested in GICs and bonds, earning a very, very conservative 1% interest - it would earn you ten million dollars a year in interest alone.

        I would challenge you to even come up with a reasonable way to spend ten million dollars a year. By my back of the napkin math you could vacation every single day, living in hotels and eating at fancy restaurants, and still not make a dent in that.

        Musk has an estimated net worth of $247 billion. You could fine him 99% of his current wealth, and he would still struggle to spend enough that he wouldn’t end up increasing his remaining wealth every year.

        • PugJesus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          18 days ago

          I would challenge you to even come up with a reasonable way to spend ten million dollars a year.

          I would fund multiple forms of art media and have them released for free every year while living on ramen in my leaky apartment

          Hello to any billionaires looking for a worthy heir

          • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            18 days ago

            Now imagine a world where, instead of there being billionaires, everyone had their basic needs met, so artists could afford to focus on creating their art instead of relying on handouts from a capricious god.

        • blind3rdeye@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          18 days ago

          And this is why it is ludicrous to believe that ultra-rich people earn their fortune with hard work or good ideas. Being rich generates its own money. Being poor is expensive. There should be no billionaires, for any reason. Such concentrated wealth is very bad.

    • Drusenija@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      18 days ago

      I think they’re just saying that if you’re a multi billionaire and get a 50% net worth fine, you’re still a billionaire once it’s done.

    • gedhrel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      18 days ago

      I’m a mathematician too. They’re probably speaking from an intuitive grasp of utility.