Saledovil

Reviews are mixed: not a great start

More than not a great start: Only people who have bought the game are allowed to review it, so reviewers are already biased towards liking the game, because only somebody who thinks they would enjoy the game would spend money on it. It's basically impossible to get a strong negative score by just being run of the mill awful. So "mixed" means that about 50% of people who though they would enjoy the game, didn't, which is quite damning.

Depends on how resourceful you are. You don't automatically die once you run out of money. Also, no amount of money grants immortality.

Thing about wishlist is, I treat it more as a "Games I found vaguely interesting at first glance" rather than a "Games I want to play" list. I assume I'm not alone in this matter. Of 214 games on my wishlist, there's like 3 I'd play right now if they were gifted to me. 2 that I'd buy. So, assuming 1% of people who wishlisted a game will buy it on launch, that would have been 1368 sales (rounding up). Assuming the game cost 20$ at launch (it currently costs ~14$), that would be 27360$ from launch day sales. Nice payday, but not if you have to work 10 years to get it (also taxes and steam's cut, so that number would actually be much lower)

Thing is, just because you worked hard on something doesn't guarantee that it will be good and/or popular.

What if we're not smart enough to build something like that?

Language simply changes over time.

Problem with Starlink is that the satellites need to be replaced every 5 years or so.

Yeah, but my point was that our current economic system can't deal with, not that we can't deal with it in general. Migrating away from the current system would require the powerful to give up their power, which they won't do willingly, even as the walls are closing in. (In fact, when it comes to global warming, the walls are closing in).

So, why are declining birth rates not a problem?

It's not shrinking yet, the birth rate is declining, and the world population is projected to start declining 2050.

Maybe. Could also be that humans never invent anything that comes close to a biological brain. Either because we simply aren't smart enough, or because civilization regresses before we get there. And there's several trends going on currently which could cause civilization to regress. For example, climate change and declining birth rates (While we could set up an economic system that can deal with a shrinking and aging population, our current one cannot).

So, you admit that it was funny?

I'd ask you to read the Wikipedia disambiguation page on scaling (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scaling), but you're likely too scared to consider anything that doesn't conform to your simplistic worldview.