I’d probably push back on requiring model disclosure. Tons of games use purchased assets, and a full accounting of all the relevant software in that chain seems challenging. Additionally, any user-generated content is going to be very difficult to audit for similar reasons.
Meanwhile, it seems like this would make for a relatively easy way for spiteful individuals to attack developers for “failure to accurately disclose” sorts of things.
A safe withdrawal rate on funds invested is usually 3-4%, not 6%.
Not that $300k isn’t more than sufficient for a high quality lifestyle. Your point is more than valid.
Rich people decide that bribing the local oligarch is not required to spend whatever time in the US that they wish.
A lot of these calculations solve this by using a lower expected growth rate, to offset the expected inflation. It lets you have the more simple conversations in today’s currency values, which are easier to reason about.
That’s not the case in this particular example, and you’ve correctly identified a deficiency. I raise the point for the benefit of any curious readers who look into other conversations on the topic.
A futurist is someone who has an interest in or studies the possible futures of our world, and who generates work related to their predictions of the same. It’s a pretty broad term, and would encompass certain academics, as well as writers and other enthusiasts. Their basis in evidentiary processes is obviously going to vary greatly, by it’s not necessarily accurate to say that they are simply guessing. It’s not a licensed term, but neither is “author” or “crypto-bro” or “politico” and yet one can certainly be any of those without any credentials.
There are certainly some elements of guesswork and hypothesis in any predictive field. Certainly there will be authors out there who might style themselves as futurists, but whose works are much closer to fantasy than speculative science fiction. I (personally) think it would be grossly inaccurate to call Star Wars a futurist work, for example. But I think one can easily look at the history of technological and social developments and create something that is a reasonable prediction of the future. I think Weir does a respectable job of portraying a mostly-plausible scenario in The Martian, by comparison. Asimov’s work has various examples that could probably be called Futurist, as well.
Why might a director or script writer consult with such individuals? Well, partially I suspect it’s to claim that they did. It’s a headline and marketing thing, of course. But also, because they’re making a piece of media that’s not necessarily in an area that they’re intimately familiar with. Even if you’ve made several science fiction movies before, I think it’s probably obvious that taking advice from someone who has spent thousands of hours considering the minor nuances and smaller details of something would have some useful insights.