Chet: Interesting posts. The answers to this will by nature be largely personal preferences...
1) it is true that very high stakes continuous losses have a way of taking care of themselves. Either the player busts out or tires of the continuous losses or seeks help...
2) If they didn't get into a chronic loss spiral on that particular platform they'd probably find another...
3) Personally I think the gaming industry has had the right answer to this for a long time: a) spread whatever limits people want to play AND b) offer a link to G.A. and other support services if the player has a problem.
4) And the biggest question in my mind, is it legal? I can't speak to the legality of this particular game, by this particular player, at this particular player's location. If it isn't legal, then I don't approve of it, regardless of the stakes...
5) As far as it being good for the game, well it does draw attention. I'd ask "is it real"... just like the stories about Andy Beal's ultra-high-stake poker games with Vegas pros, it does draw attention. Presumably most observers know that these are very atypical games...
6) From the point of view of player strategy, bankroll management is crucial, you have to ask what percent of their bankrolls these players are risking on every tournament. Different players have different comfort zones but once you get much past 10% of your b.r. on any event you're risking more than even a very aggressive pro would be comfortable with. For many more conservative types, 1 or 2 percent is much more like it. If these players are putting their entire b.r. on the line each time they play they likely won't be doing it very long. I guess that's a very long-winded way of saying that gambling speculation like speculation in any market has a way of taking care of itself.