188
this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2023
188 points (94.8% liked)
Steam Deck
15070 readers
122 users here now
A place to discuss and support all things Steam Deck.
Replacement for r/steamdeck_linux.
As Lemmy doesn't have flairs yet, you can use these prefixes to indicate what type of post you have made, eg:
[Flair] My post title
The following is a list of suggested flairs:
[Discussion] - General discussion.
[Help] - A request for help or support.
[News] - News about the deck.
[PSA] - Sharing important information.
[Game] - News / info about a game on the deck.
[Update] - An update to a previous post.
[Meta] - Discussion about this community.
Some more Steam Deck specific flairs:
[Boot Screen] - Custom boot screens/videos.
[Selling] - If you are selling your deck.
These are not enforced, but they are encouraged.
Rules:
- Follow the rules of Sopuli
- Posts must be related to the Steam Deck in an obvious way.
- No piracy, there are other communities for that.
- Discussion of emulators are allowed, but no discussion on how to illegally acquire ROMs.
- This is a place of civil discussion, no trolling.
- Have fun.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The issue is the perpetual ownership.
If I lend you money, you only own me the money I've lended+interest. I'm not going to have a stake on your future businesses, nor have any decision power over you, it isn't in my power to make sure you squeeze the most money possible over your job. You pay the money back and we are done.
The problem with that is lending money to a business that needs money also means you're risking if the business fails that you're never getting your money back. No one wants to risk their $100,000 in hopes of getting back $108,000 a year from now.
Even then you can just add a higher interest rate. You absolutely don't need to held the company hostage until the heat death of the universe.
Are… Are you suggesting that there are potential ways a public company system could’ve actually been handled better, rather than the concept itself being flawed by nature?
I’m not saying I disagree, I’m just saying that possibility never occurred to me for some reason. (Maybe it’s my justice sensitivity complex acting up)
Yesn't?
Like, the whole point of a public traded company is that anyone can come in and give money to the company and, in turn, they get money when the company is doing well, so the money you've paid is, hopefully, not lost.
I don't know about you, but on paper, that sounds like bonds and basically every type of debt in existence.
The difference is the perpetual ownership of the company by shareholders. Consider someone who lent a company 20k, they now have an asset that grew immensely in value, it gives them money quarterly/yearly/whatever, AND they have decision power on the company, despite the fact that they have earned 100x what they lent.
Just changing the idea of stock to be something with an expiration date would remove most of the weirdness of the system, but at that point it isn't really a public-traded company, is it?