Greedy Goblin

Monday, December 21, 2009

The limit of free market 1

Me being guild master challenged my belief in free market more than anything before. The free market idea is simply:
  1. everyone is free to follow his ideas (unless it directly hurt someone's rights)
  2. everyone is free to make money (= power) from selling the products of his ideas
  3. the customers select between the competing products, making the smart powerful and the dumb powerless
  4. the powerless is powerless because his idea was wrong (moron) or because he didn't work according to it (slacker), so deserves no sympathy or aid
  5. without aid, the powerless is forced to change into either more laborious or smarter person
Logically it's perfect. However, if you look around in the world, you can easily tell it doesn't work.

Let's see how I encountered this in the guild. You know it's a project to raid in blue gear. I try to run it as free-market as it could be. The original plan was: everyone is invited and on 80 either promoted to raider or kicked based on his performance at the dummy.

Then they start to come. Blood elf melees, undead DPS or other wrongfully chosen races. Of course race doesn't make or break the game. If an Undead rogue would transfer because he get bored of being gladiator and wants a change, I'd welcome him warmly. I'm blood elf myself, the troll or orc racials would be better for a mage. I started this alt for a special purpose (arcane in TBC) without knowing his future. But to start a new character to a raiding project where stats from gear are greatly limited with sub-par race? Now why would you go and do something like that?

At first I thought that on 80 they will have their well-deserved punishment for damaging less than "proper" characters. The market would decide against them (the DPS meter is unbiased) and I would show them no sympathy for sure. They would be forced to be better players.

However the more and more came, I started to realize that it won't happen. They simply won't see their mistake, when the inevitable end reaches them, they won't know what was the choice that put them into their misery. In lack of this knowledge, they would simply blame the "luck" or me for being "mean". Would I mind being considered mean? No. Would this experience do any good to them? Would it force them to be "better players"? No. They would be just as dumb as before.

The free market needs a special kind of person, the rational who makes choices. When I started my first character I was pretty uninformed about WoW. Yet I checked the class descriptions and the racials and decided that the best race for my priest (lived 30 levels) is undead, since undead has highest spirit and second highest intellect, stats needed for a priest. While it wasn't a good choice, it was a choice. I was aware of it, I knew my reasons and when I noticed the problems, I could recognize that I made a wrong choice. I could correct it accordingly. (Actually it's not the race, but the class that was inappropriate for my playstyle and I rolled a druid, now with much more knowledge).

When I have options, I make a choice. I'm aware of it and so I can link it to the consequences. If I succeed, I'll know it was a good choice. If I fail, I'll know it was bad.

If someone said: "I know that UD is not the best race for a mage, but I hope that my skills are enough to beat this handicap, rather then leveling a new mage", he makes a choice. If the dummy proves he was wrong, he learns something (that in competition with other skilled people every little bit counts). While he has financial losses (the time gearing up to blues), he gained experience and next time he'll do better, just as the free market theory says.

On the other hand the guy who says: "I dunno UD kinda cool" did not make a choice. He followed either some peer, tossed a coin or followed the ape-subroutines in his head (undead = fearsome = powerful = good DPS). He cannot learn from his fate.

So instead of stepping aside and just let the inevitable happen, I tried to explain the people that they just made a choice. Like this:


Such explanations can make the person be more aware of the choices he make, therefore make him able to learn from the consequences.

Well, "Education is good!" is not a very original and new idea. But here comes the problem: who shall pay for it? I spent time (= money) with them. I could just blindly invite them with a click to kick them at 80 with another, or simply send them away with a "you're not the kind of player we're looking for" macro. I was motivated to understand this - once. Maybe I have (vain) hopes that they stay that way and I can use their contribution in the blue runs. But usually (as anyone who sold arrows in 100 can testify), it's much more profitable to exploit these people than teaching them.

I won't get into education financing models, I just say free market can't do it. Those will pay for it (instead of spending that money on "fun") who are already smart, aware of the fact that they need to learn. Those who need education the most are not even aware how much they need it. Education therefore must be non-free-market unless we want to run with even more morons.

Of course, there is another way where the free market can enforce and spread proper choices, even among those who did not make choices with their brains. But that's for tomorrow.


Update: I wish I have read this article when I wrote my "present" post.

54 comments:

Anonymous said...

Umm... Pre-WOTLK Human was the best alliance race. For all classes. Due to the basically required rep grind. and 1-3 int or spirit will most likely be +1-2 DPS, likely less. So really, while every bit counts, 2498 DPS is about as good as 2500 DPS. Unless its a race cooldown, the base stats make next to no difference even in blues.
Also, it seems to be that "not harming anyone" goes against "exploiting them".

Hirvox said...

What you have here is someone trying to unlearn something that the entire game has been teaching him so far. In general, one can offset stat differences between the races with new gear. This holds true until getting new gear is no longer an option, like bleeding-edge raiding, top-rank Arena and.. self-imposed challenges like twinking. Which is what you're doing.

Anonymous said...

I wonder what Gevlon's wardrobe looks like since most likely he'd think fashion and style are "ape-sub routines" that offer no inherit advantages. If a guy wants to roll a UD-mage b/c they look cool then I'm happy for him; screw the min-maxers. I'd rather not live in a world where we're all wearing white to reflect UV-light in order to cut down on skin cancer.

Daniel said...

Brief race distribution -
Tanks = taurens.
Melee DPS = Orc (usualy the best for melee and most of the casters)
Healers = have no idea. never played one.

Anonymous said...

That reminds me the ye olde days when all Warriors were either tank or pvp, tanks had to be Tauren and pvp ones were Orcs, Troll Warriors were non-existant and Undead Warriors were laughed at.

And now I understand why I got a bit sad when Blizzard announced in cataclysm we'll get new races for some classes.

Sometimes having a choice is bad. What I liked about my Night Elf Druid and Blood Elf Paladin no one in the respective factions could accuse me I rolled the wrong race, they were simply the only option, period.

japj said...

Seeing that you have a blood elf (and working on leveling an undead) mage, what character are you going to raid this with and are you going to replace yourself if you are not 'on-par' with the rest of the damage dealers?

Gevlon said...

@japj: since I run the show, I shamelessly include myself unless there is a 10-20% DPS advance of another arcane mage.

Anonymous said...

there is another component to the whole thing:
the 'i like what i'm doing'. if i just don't want to look at some ugly-ass undead or fat cow character, i won't play it. sure, if the motivation is very, very good (do it or become unemployed), then i would definetly do it, but other than that, i rather sacrifice 20 dps or 100 hp or similar.
sure, 'everything counts' but when i can go around and fuck some idiots who say i'm totally undergeard (shown lvl 183 -> lvl+quest items and 6 pdc normal) as be-warlock in archavon and ony by doing 2.5-3k dps the day i turn 80... then it just makes no significance.

in the end, i guess it's a matter of motivation and 'need for superlative'.

Anonymous said...

You're making the stupid assumption that the "best" race for a class won't change. Maybe in Cataclysm undead will get a +5% bonus to shadow damage along with a bunch of other bonuses for other races. Suddenly the "moron" who rolled an undead warlock doesn't look so stupid if that were to happen.

Plus, if the "M&S" are as plentiful as you claim someone with a suboptimal race should still be able to beat the morons who pick the best race according to EJ.

Anonymous said...

I'm pretty sure for this experiment the racial bonuses won't change. Considering it's basically a one-time only thing, and will end before cataclysm comes around.

Anonymous said...

The above post is ridiculous... they are not rolling characters for cataclysm... they are rolling TODAY a character intended to be played at lvl 80 within a month...

I'm part of the project and some of the peeps who have joined are in it for all the wrong reasons...

Come on... I have read peeps saying it is nice we won't have to farm our stuff to raid... I don't think they grasp the concept of tweaking a character to its best possible value on blue gear... best in slots items will be a pain to get to grab that couple of stats points you will need to be able to beat the game.

Same goes for peeps who have neer even seen the raid content... Gevlon said to roll a class you are not used too... but I believe he expected people to have at least some raid experience... Raiding in blues is doable... it is not a walk in the park...

Okrane S. said...

Hmmm, interesting.
Well lets think about what a racial bonus means for a change.
Lets take the example of an undead mage over a troll mage.
Lets assume that in blues witout any cooldowns used a mage at that level does 2k dps.

So in 20 seconds a mage will do 40k damage. By using berserking this value will increase by 20% so that is 48k dmg.

Therefore in 3 minutes a troll Mage will do 48k + 80k + 2 * 120k = 368k damage. Which in dps numbers translates into 368k / 180 = 2044dps.

Well... I must say its equivalent to profession bonuses...

Dmitry said...

@ Okrane S.:

While the main idea behind your post (that the racials are far from being game-breaking) is right, your math fails in more than one way.

First, Berserking lasts 10 seconds, not 20.

Second, to assume that an Arcane mage's damage scales 1:1 with haste scaling is a bit... naively optimistic.

Third, if a mage does 2k DPS in best-in-slot blues, then he, frankly, sucks.

Nils said...

You followed an ape sub-routine when you educated your potential guild member. It's a helpful subroutine at the level of society(guild), but a stupid subroutine for yourself.

Unless, of course, you have an interest in society (the guild). In that case the subroutine helped you per definition. Butr, it's still an ape-routine.

Gevlon said...

@Nils: I'm fully aware that I did something that was not profitable for me. I even wrote about it. The motivation was to explore this field and write about it and - yes - also to help someone who rerolled for the purpose of helping my project.

That's exactly why free market fails in education: I'm not motivated to teach them.

Stone said...

Okay, from what I've gathered here is that everyone can join, but at 80 they'll have to prove themselves at a target dummy/show the proper rotation. Now, I see how that would work for a DPS.

But what about healers and tanks? How can they prove themselves, outside of an actual raid/instance?

Nils said...

You could have the healers do an anonymous vote about the tank. Tanks with aggro problems are kicked instantly, I guess :)

You can have look at the heal meter and in addition test healers. For example you can go to an open world arena where everybody can attack everybody and assign different heals to heal a number of people that are auto attacked by other team members.
Auto attack, so it is reproduceable.

@Gevlon:
I'm pretty sure that you will learn a lot about the limits of free-markets when you try to maximize the welfare of a guild and not the welfare of yourself. Free markets are a tool that can be applied to increase welfare in a lot of situations. They are not a religion.

Gevlon said...

@Stone: I already figured out the tank&healer testings: blue 5-mans in the ICC instances.

@Nils: the main problem with tanks is not aggro (that really shouldn't be a problem) but avoidance-mitigation.

Francesco said...

I rolled troll for my DK.

If I rolled Tauren in my tank spec/gear I would have 1%more hp according to my spreadsheet,
If I rolled Orc in my dps spec/gear I would have 1% more TEORETICAL dps.

So the difference is pretty much negligible.

If I will be benched it will be because I suck (or I'm not good enough). Not because of race selection.

Doora

Anonymous said...

How are you going to proove people were actually wearing blues? Through the epic achievement, denying members equipping ilevel>200 items?

Niz said...

"Pre-WOTLK Human was the best alliance race. For all classes. Due to the basically required rep grind"

This made my day ;) It would be like if a race awarded 10% faster levelling.
After the grind, what is/was left? Nothing. This would make it the worst choice.

Nils said...

the main problem with tanks is not aggro (that really shouldn't be a problem) but avoidance-mitigation.

And, of course
1) Smart usage of cooldowns and,

2) depending on the encounter: movement.

Anonymous said...

I remember an older post where you advised players to use green gems instead of blue ones, as the prices difference was unwarranted.

Racial differences are probably even smaller at level 80 than green vs blue gems, so I doubt whether you will be able to detect the effects of a race choice in your guild members. Just getting that one ilvl 200 item that the other didn't get yet, will correct for race differences.

Zan said...

There are some things you just won't be able to judge with a target dummy. Situational awareness and ability to think outside the box are also necessary. You won't be able to tell from the target dummy if someone's gonna die to the stupid.

Your BE rogue might do slightly less damage than someone else in on a dummy, but if he plays intelligently, thinks fast, and uses all the tools at his disposal, he could make the difference between success and failure in an encounter.

Arcane torrent an infernal on Lord J or interrupting a heal at a critical moment in Faction Champions when all the other interrupts are down.

Don't be too quick to kick based only on race and target dummy action. Watch to see who plays well and who's just a derp when things go awry.

samuil said...

I think you messed up concepts of being smart and educated. If people are not smart enough to understand they might need education, educating them will not make them smarter. I suppose they even won't be able to use their new skills apart from cases they were directly shown in process of education. Spending money on their education is therefore a waste, because you could spend it on someone else (smarter) and profit more.

Anonymous said...

This made my day ;) It would be like if a race awarded 10% faster levelling. After the grind, what is/was left? Nothing. This would make it the worst choice.

Nice way to throw a blanket statement about a racial that you obviously know nothing about and since this guild will be Horde centric why are you people even discussing Alliance racials?

Gevlon this is still all about min / maxing your bis gear, be it blues or whatever. When you get down to it you could do the same thing with greens or twinking at a certain level and if you have skilled players your guild will be successful - if not you will as has many other guilds - Fail.

This blue guild idea is totally pointless and serves no purpose other than expanding an already enormous ego of a closet socialite.

Anonymous said...

Gevlon, your thinking about the free market is confused here. Your original solution to the "problem" was correct. If the choice of a sub-optimal race indeed costs this person their raid spot, you are correct to bench them in favor of a higher dps competitor. This is a fundamental tenet of capitalism. This process is related to Schumpeter's idea of creative destruction. People have to learn to cope with the world around them. This challenge allows many to innovate and some to fail. From the successes, our society becomes improved. From the failures, we identify inferior options and rule them out.

What does this have to do with the free market? Well, a free market allows this creative destruction process to occur. The free market also depends on people to fail and to succeed. This is why social guilds (communists) are terrible raiders. In a social guild, your participation is not related to your performance. You are being subsidized.

You are criticizing the free market for not properly educating people, where the free market is absolutely the very best way for individuals to educate themselves. Only in a free market can the true consequences of actions actually be felt. (And society happens to benefit from this education process enormously.)

Anonymous said...

You put far too much stock into racial abilities. they are not game breaking enough to impede someone's performance to a degree that you seem to think. think of it as such - would a bad player be better with epic gems instead of blues? not really. racial abilities are exactly the same way, they might give a very good player a bit of extra edge but they will not make or break their performance.

the only area of the game the edge they give can actually make a difference is pvp (and even then, Blizzard has been deliberately changing racial abilities to minimize that edge - witness the nerf to will of the forsaken and changes to mana tap/arcane torrent). But since your project is raiding not pvp? race shouldn't make any difference.

that said, I'd be curious to see how you'd handle encounters like, oh lord Marrowgar where so much of your possible success hinges on your tanks surviving through his cleaves.

Newton said...

When you're undergearing the content, every little bit counts. The math doesn't lie and min/maxing is more important with this project than it is when you're doing gear appropriate content and progression.

The US undergeared project is Alliance, so I'll just throw out some examples of races you shouldn't choose based on your class AND the goals of this project.

Hunters can be Night Elf or Dwarf. The racials for Night Elf are increased stealth, shadowmeld and 2% chance to be missed (effective dodge). Dwarf racials are +1% crit with guns, stoneform, and +5 expertise with 1h and 2h maces. Of those two, which one would a smart player choose to min/max their hunter, for raiding level 80 content, while undergeared? The Night Elf racials give no benefit to a hunter in a PvE raid. Since patch 3.0.8, Shadowmeld is no longer an aggro dump, so it has lost its use as a free feign death.

Other race/class choices are much more difficult, such as Mages choosing between +5% intellect as a gnome or +3% spirit as a human or +1% hit as a draenei (part-wide buff).

Given that all of these benefits are a known quantity, they can and have been plugged into spreadsheets to calculate the 'best' choice.

Gevlon said...

@Anonymous with Schumpeter: wait for tomorrow

@Anonymous 2: I don't put too much weight on races. I'm a blood elf myself. I'm just saying that the guy did not came to the conclusion: "racials are overrated". He just randomly picked a race.

@Newton: while every little bit counts, I seriously doubt that I will have to kick a 2300 totem DPS rogue because a 2350 and a 2360 DPS rogues are available.

Anonymous said...

"orc racials would be better for a mage"

That's a neat trick considering orc mages aren't allowed. Min-maxing only stretches so far.

Gevlon said...

@Last anonymous: and you just won the "first to notice it". I convinced half dozen mages and warlocks to reroll orcs or trolls respectively.

Nielas said...

While I normally find this type of min-maxing to be fairly ridiculous, it makes sense for this experiment. The point of it is to wring the smallest bit of value out of every aspect of a character since you cannot rely on gear making stuff like that an effective 'wash'.

While I really do not consider racials to be much to worry about in general, in this scenario one should worry about the smallest margins.

jack said...

any race played well is ok for warlocks.

jack said...

Locks can play well as any race depending on the player.

Also you will not be able to tank ICC with blues only. Your healers will struggle over and over and will not be able to keep the tanks alive.

Strutt said...

Though in this Guild I do see why you might need to worry about squeezing everything you can out of your toons since you'll be in all blues, so everylittle bit counts. But the lose in DPS from choosing the right/wrong racial, could be easily made up or lost with a missed GCD, or accidential mess up of rotaion or hell, just the latency of "clickers"

Nuff said...

Race choice is utterly meaningless for your performance. 100% utterly meaningless. The simple fact of the matter is the latency of your internet connection will affect your dps more than your race choice.

Tonus said...

I agree with the anon that said that the market dynamics can work as the best type of education. Although I think it really works by separating the people who will make the effort to be better informed, versus the ones who will either shrug their shoulders and quit, or angrily demand that they be rewarded for being sub-par.

Not everyone learns, but that is not necessarily a fault of the free market.

Kraazyhealz said...

Wow, the first dumb post I have seen from you! If you really think that the "race" of a given character will untimately decide the difference between who goes and who stays you are going to be sadly mistaken. Infact I HOPE TO GOD that some of your most skilled players choose to roll a UD melee just to prove that it's not that big of a deal. Your biggest issue you will have Gelvon isn't going to be "dps at the stake" it will be dps on the boss fights. Did you forget that a dead 7k dps isn't as good as the 1000dps that is still alive at the end? Ahh this isn't just your problem, but I have time and time again see people pull HUGE numbers on the "stake" and then in boss fights do 75% of that. Between movement, chaos, and system performance (lag and the computer that can't keep up) it just kills them. Anyways I still like your idea, but this last post was full of one-sided thinking.

Kraazyhealz said...

I hope your "people" really know how to min/max thier specs. Going in all blues and having the same talents as someone with much better gear is completely different. I really doubt that the cookie cutter talent trees are the best choices when your in blues. You will really see the difference in your pro-players vs. tards.

Breevok said...

Hmmm... I dont place horde so I cant comment. However of the three Hunter Classes on the Alliance side - Draenai would be considered the 'wrong choice'.

In fact the 1% crit with guns for the dwarf race is considered by many the best of the three - until 3.3 came out. Suddenly a crossbow becomes the most easily accessible ranged weapon (From PoS) until stage three of ICC.

At this point the dwarf racial bonus is nulled. But still the draenai heroic presence saves that point in focused aim, or that extra hit gem.

Dont dismiss the racial bonus of all races - you never know when what was an advantage will be completely cancelled out.

Jimmy said...

Hmm I'm not quite sure but I think that you always previously stated that you don't care about BiS and having epic gems or the ultimate enchant as long as you could get away with something cheap. Sorry if I'm wrong but I cba to waste time on finding those posts. Anyway, why all this crap about morons that rolls "the wrong" race? Are you even sure that they rolled it randomly? An UD is an excellent choice for pvp, and not everyone does 100% pve and zero pvp and vice versa. Even if orcs are superior in a pve situation with their pet and blood fury racial UD would be a far better race to pvp with because of WotF. So even if the guy in this post seemed to have rolled a random race don't assume everyone does and btw, I doubt that "noob" would be that much better if he just checked which race that gives the best stats, he would probably still suck unless he learns the important things, what stats he needs and what rotation he should use.

Daniel said...

@Nuff - yeah right. That why there are equal amounts of troll and orc PVE warriors. Orc racials in the game are best for pve. If any class has orc - roll it.

+5 Expertise with axes = yes please. There are lots of nice one and 2 hander axes nowadays.

+ 5% pet damage - your huntards locks and unholy DK say yes please.

+ Free AP/SP trinket - yes please.

Lets compare BE and ORC unholy DKs with the same gear. orc will have 3-4% higher dmg based on racials alone.

Newton said...

For the people that say race doesn't matter, 'its how you play', that's not quite true. If the ONLY thing you change is the race, then the racial bonuses matter. In the hands of the same player, a dwarf hunter has a numeric advantage over a night elf hunter. If you're good with a night elf hunter, you'll be better with a dwarf hunter. +1% crit > +0% crit

Tree said...

It's true; Education is a field where the free market simply doesn't work. This is of course not limited to formal education but includes the sort of dynamic you discuss.

What makes things even more difficult is that many of these people may well be what you would describe as "rationals". Experience and expertise are essential to the making of optimum decisions. A "rational" who has spent the bulk of his or her time running a business or researching physics is unlikely to have much to draw on when choosing a race in World of Warcraft.

Their performance will only improve as they learn. If left to their own devices, no doubt some of them eventually would, but not in a timeframe suitable to your challenge.

Even in "rationals", in order to be effective lessons require a degree of prior learning. For example, you would not expect even a truly brilliant first-year undergraduate in physics to learn much from failing a fourth-year final examination (other than perhaps a general life lesson in knowing ones limits). The exercise can only become valuable once the student has developed the essential tools they need to engage with it.

This does not mean they are driven by ape subroutines or are "social". However their performance may well be terrible if that groundwork has not been laid.

Anonymous said...

I'm confused.

The whole purpose of this process is to show that skill vastly outweighs quality of gear....that upgrading an ilevel or two is not a necessary part of normal-mode raiding...the extra 1% crit or 30 AP won't suddenly make you skilled.

...but the trivial stat differences between races will?

Gear is a crutch, racial selection is an informed choice and indicative of skill. Can you explain that disconnect for me?

Ball said...

The simple fact of the matter is the latency of your internet connection will affect your dps more than your race choice.

While this may be true, race choice is something you can control, latency is not. Paying taxes costs more than my electric bill, but that doesn't mean I shouldn't try to optimize my energy usage.

Gevlon said...

@Last anonymous: gear must be FARMED, while selecting race is a click. Choosing orc does not cost you more than choosing undead. Farming gear for minimal improvement is not cost-effective. Making a single click instead of another click is.

Before you'd say "but research cost time": you have to research your class anyway or you'll be skilless. If you research your spec, choosing the right race does not take extra time. I mean if you already know that your class has no mana problems but benefit from haste than it's obvious that troll is better than blood elf.

japj said...

Hmm.. looking at the few days that I'm in this project now, I have now a couple of questions.

1) since this is an experiment that has "never" been done before, how exactly is someone going to research 'the best' into their class/spec with the blue gear limit and since this will be a complete new class/spec for a lot of people? (i.e. I have never played a mage, so how am I going to know exactly what is important for this specific experiment so I can perform at best? I know my priest in and out, but I've been playing her for 2 years now)

2) how do you measure "the sum is better than its parts", i.e. someone has a certain spec that is not 'optimal dps', but improves raid buffing in such a way that the overall dps increases (or damage is reduced, whatever). The main focus until now has been to 'maximize' a single dps class, but what if the 'best solution' has to do with a different raid/class/talent tree composition for a certain fight?

Gevlon said...

@japj: you can research how the specs scale with stats. For example I can tell you without thinking that any rotation that includes hot streak will suck in blue gear.

The "buffer specs" will be competed similarly. There will be for example a "+3% spell hit buff spot". You obviously have to be balance druid or shadow priest to get this spot.

The spot itself is protected: if the best moonkin is 500 DPS below the 4th best rogue, he still gets the spot. But he must beat all other moonkins and shadow priests.

Strutt said...

@Breevok
Having a Hunter as a Draenai isnt all that great, with the way Blizz is covering us in Hit it is sad. The 1% hit bonus might be good for the rest of the raid but Hunter Gears is drenched in Hit it sucks...

csdx said...

OK, I'm late to this dog and pony show of a topic but here's my bait: Why does point one apply? I mean if I can hire a guy to go murder my rivals for $X, isn't that the free market? Now if everyone is trying to stop him, that X will have to be very big for him to take that risk, but then that's simply market forces driving the price. That scenario is just a bit more direct than say pushing someone out of a business and maintaining a monopoly (say in a field that has a high barrier to entry so it's possible to do). So I contend that 1) no action/product is already without harm, and that 2) this harm can be priced into the product. E.g. something very toxic to make costs more because of the harm it does to workers (the employer has to pay for their healthcare, thus the harm their job causes). So why this arbitrary non-goblin restriction. I mean is worrying about how the moron you're driving out of business is going to feed his family really going to stop you? If it isn't then the first point of the free market is really false.

Gevlon said...

@Csdx: murdering your rivals is simply dumb. If you can't outcompete them, simply someone else take his place. You can't get the whole world murdered.

Why should I care about the defeated moron's living? That part simply doesn't make sense!

csdx said...

Firstly, nitpick: Actually killing your rivals can really be damn effective, especially if you can then force everyone else in line with threats. Look at some world governments. Heck Stalin lived to 74. You can't say Capone and many others weren't successful in their day, and their modern day counterparts are equally well off.

Even if I completely conceded that point, that murder is not the most efficient way to get money, why mix morality (which you do with the first point about free markets (not hurting anyone)) in? How is that a core tennent of free-markets, and not just some random side clause, like "buying high and selling low is stupid"? Why include it and not all the other stupid things people could do? What makes it more important that you'd include it?