I mean, this strategy exists for a lot of consumer industries, right? Sell at a loss for years to flood the market, then once people are bought in and competition is left scrambling to catch up or worse, jack up the prices to start making a profit. But preventing competition so you can sustain a jacked up automobile market is also anti-consumer especially if domestic car companies are making record profit margins in the meantime. But this is the EU and I’m from the US where consumer protections are laughable, so maybe vehicles are actually affordable over there and this would be a good decision.

If their EVs are so good/affordable that it would destroy all domestic EV car competition, couldn’t non-chinese car companies just make better/more affordable EVs? Nah, gotta side with automotive corporations and against consumer choice.

This is the kind of garbage move that creates things like the Chicken Tax in the US, which is a big reason Americans drive around tanks now instead of regular sized pick-up trucks.

I was more of a Zork Nemesis kid, but I’ll definitely be getting this.

But what makes the infinite versions of you bound to a range of 1-2 rather than infinity itself?

If “>2 and <1” in this scenario are dimensions where you don’t exist, wouldn’t the range of 1-2 cover every possibility of who you could be?