Consider the gray pixel in the center a placeholder, much like Escher's place holder in the above image (because he couldn't think of how to realistically depict what turns out to be the infinite fractal nature of the center)
> An edge, no matter how small breaks the cross.
My very weak intuition says that an edge of infinite smallness would not.
"... an edge of infinite smallness ..." is not a well-defined concept, and is not allowed in the original formation of the problem. Otherwise take a circle and divide it into N segments "like a pizza". They all meet in the middle in an "edge of infinite smallness", so that would require N colours.
Now make N as large as you like.
So allowing this makes the problem uninteresting, and precluding it makes the problem interesting and hard.
(I don't recall details - but the preconditions of the Four Colour Theorem rule out all the fuzzy sets, infinitely crooked lines, "this region is all points with one rational and one irrational coordinate", and other trickery that folks who've had a bit of math might otherwise be tempted by.)
I actually don't think of this as a consumer issue at all. You probably shouldn't care, but I can see why some consumers might care (e.g. how many entities have their credit card on file, concerns about privacy, a desire to allocate as much money as possible to artists...).
I think of this as a developer issue. There's good money being the middle man for transactions. Did consumers really care about the Epic/Apple IAP issue? Were there iOS users clamoring to use Epic's payment platform? I never really heard the consumer voice in that discussion. I did hear a lot of developer voices that cared about their right to charge consumers without Apple's 30% transaction cut.
I see, thanks. So why would Spotify agree to this if they were able to handle premium subscriptions outside of Google? They expect they will make more money this way even after having to give a cut to Google?
reply