> It would also cost hundreds of billions of dollars and a decade to build.
Doesn't do much for seeing Uncle John next Tuesday.
You just described the building of the interstate highway system, but I doubt there’s a person alive who would say it wasn’t worthwhile.
I fear Americans are simple to selfish to have any desire to do time consuming expensive things that will improve their country long term. They just want benefits for themselves , now.
I don't think it is neither education nor awareness, our core problem and what is an eventual doom of this country lies in the fact that with the two political parties that we have and extremely non-functional government we are no longer capable of doing long-term things. whatever party X tries to do, they get a few years and then when party Y takes over their first order of business is to dismantle everything that party X did (tried to do) in the previous two years. while china can create "10-year plan" the america is no longer capable of creating any such thing and this is destroying the country, little by little...
"Gaming"[0] companies are audited for the expected value each coin toss/slot machine roll etc. has - typically it's a high and unusually precise percentage, like e.g. 95.1681%.
The scam in is advertising, that emphasizes how much you can potentially win, even though obviously on average the house takes those few percent each time.
[0] A term they like to use to describe themselves.
Even then they're playing fuck fuck games. People have pushed on this and been told "We won't actually upgrade your hardware until you pay for FSD first" which is also horseshit. It wasn't "contains all the hardware necessary for FSD, provided you've bought it", it was "contains all the hardware necessary for FSD, full stop".
I get why Tesla will resist this, but a part of me admires the pettiness (but reasonableness) of a bunch of owners demanding the hardware upgrade and then never buying FSD.
Yes, but those are per category not per consumer, which is a meaningful difference here and one you can't just ignore. Imagine a price label with a small camera that sends your facial image to a classifier of moods. Hungry? Pay 15% more. As you remove the item from the shelf, the tag reads the GUID from the item and records the price in the stores DB. Then, when you checkout, you pay that price. Someone else comes in get one price, balks, walks away. Comes back and ponders a while. They only get 5% above the base. Someone runs up and grabs and item without really looking at the tag, they pay 50% more. Now imagine that it gets it wrong half the time.
Sure but they weren't trying to price per category, they were trying to grab as much of the area under the demand curve as possible. Given what was possible, that's all they could do.
There is a market solution to this - don't shop at places which do it. If I go to the supermarket and they jack up the price of bread because I'm in a rush and 40 something wearing a suit I'm likely to spew venom, pay that one time, and never, ever come back.
Just seems like a difference of degree. You have n price tiers in both situations. Traditionally, the complexity of n_prices = n_customers (or even n_prices = n_customer_contexts) was too painful to be worth it. But they were always approximating this up until now. 'Categories' are just wider buckets over individualized prices.
reply