@hughlaurie@jan_murray I loved 2 things about House.
1 - Dr. House was a "nice" sociopath. I identified with that.
2 - The show clearly demonstrated the diagnostic process. As a software engineer, I found it beautiful.
The question was about fairness. I tried to clarify the terms of the fairness equation.
Usually the question is sidestepped. Investors risk loss of their entire investment in exchange for claiming all the profits. The workers get guaranteed pay for the work they do, but incur no risk.
@RealPostFolder "The chief difference between a man and a dog is, if you find a starving dog, and feed him, and make him prosperous, he will not bite you."
- Samuel Clemens
@ChadWhit1k@SydneyLWatson@gothgfdotrip If nobody performs poorly, the film has a good chance of getting the budget covered, and maybe some profit. See the condition for success.
@MoviesMerica@SydneyLWatson@gothgfdotrip Not a direct answer, no.
If everybody has to contribute quality, it may be fair to share the profits. If any one person can create a catastrophic failure point, how can one hold everyone else responsible?
@Gemjam42069@SydneyLWatson@gothgfdotrip Depending on your definition of success, I will admit that some roles have more impact than others. The sound editor, for example, must do a truly appalling job to have a significant negative effect. And yet it can be done.
@trumplicans2024 No. If someone who intends to harm me has a capability, I need equal or greater capability to prevent that harm. The Second Amendment is not about firearms. It is about the right to stay alive.