That generates more supply (mechanics) not less demand (volume of broken cars). Sometimes having excess demand is ideal to keep the market balanced in your favor.
Increasing price would just move up the demand curve (less people willing to spend the increased amount on fixing their broken car) and the mechanic would earn more.
ofc overtime it's likely more mechanics enter the market to compete, but that wouldn't be instant. and when it does happen the table stakes would be that everyone's phone call get's answered
Could he not just increase the price until the number of calls matches the time he has?
I know it's not that simple, but my gut says theres value to at least hearing out the people taking action to call you. Especially if that's automated and low cost to you.
I've had an increasing amount of interactions with other professionals who send me a clearly copy/pasted result of their own chat session without any effort to give clarity that I wanted to define a term to describe my pain.
Complexity costs come from backwards compatibility. Backwards compatibility is essential because otherwise the change potentially confiscates users funds.
Assuming compatibility is required softforks generally reduce complexity because they relax the requirement for synchronization between participants.
Softforks reduce deployment complexity but increase overall complexity.
A softfork is like internet access over phone-lines. If you pick up the line, participants that aren't on the latest code will often hear a bunch of garbage that they can't make sense of. Someone might even send them money but they won't be able to make sense of it or accept it since it's now encapsulated.
From an overall network perspective, this may be a worse state of affairs vs. just making everyone upgrade (hard-fork).
You can't just "make everyone upgrade", not without a time machine-- because there are transactions which may have been written arbitrarily far in the past, already signed, potentially lock-timed, whos signers (or at least their keys) have sailed off into the sunset.
If compatibility with their signatures is dropped those funds will be irreparably and irrecoverably destroyed.
So, for example, BCash deployed an earlier version of our schnorr signature spec (from before the taproot part was finished) in a "hardfork" but preventing destroying funds meant that they had to keep the ECDSA support around (duo to presigned transactions, hardware security modules, etc.) -- so they didn't escape any complexity in that change, they introduced a disruptive flag-day which introduced its own extra complexity.
> often hear a bunch of garbage that they can't make sense of
The changes are compatible so you know those extra fields are stuff "from the future" which you don't understand and know you can ignore.
> but they won't be able to make sense of it or accept
The recipient of funds always specifies their own rules, you'll never specify rules that you don't understand so there isn't any issue with not being able to accept it.
It's not artistry, it's overly complex hackery to satiate some weird technological obsession.
Even with a soft fork, everyone still needs to update their nodes to maintain consensus. BIP100 signalling would have fixed everything and avoided so much drama.
> It's not artistry, it's overly complex hackery to satiate some weird technological obsession.
Also known as... backwards compatibility.
>Even with a soft fork, everyone still needs to update their nodes to maintain consensus
Not really. If you decide to not upgrade your node you're not going to get kicked off the network. Your node won't be enforcing the new rules (which is bad), but you're probably not going to lose money due to herd immunity and/or game theory. Specifically, your client will blindly accept taproot transactions (without checking for them) if they make it into a block. An evil miner could possibly use this to send you fraudulent transfers, however:
1. you need to somehow amass the hashpower necessary to generate such a block. this is non-trivial given the network difficulty
2. the block would be considered invalid by the rest of the network, so you'll be forfeiting the regular block reward of ~6.25 BTC
3. other miners won't build on top of this block, so it will take forever to get to 6 confirms
4. in addition to the above, your fork will get overtaken by the legitimate chain and will be ignored
5. if it turns out that your victim did upgrade his wallet software, you just spent a bunch of resources for nothing.
It seems that their calculations use metformin. At what age should we start using it for health-span extension? I'm already using it to avoid glucose spikes, even though I'm not even prediabetic, but I'm curious if it's known how powerful is the health-span effect is younger humans.
If glucose spikes are bad for you, why not just exclude all foods with a glycemic index? That’s what I’ve done and find my mental health and energy levels have improved substantially.
It was crazy how the same time this was happening there was a space shuttle battle going on over on the dark side of the moon because the Americans were bringing nukes and the Soviet’s were also launching a spec ops raid on the American lunar base to recover a potential defector. That was one crazy day y’all.
There are many threads on reddit filled with comments like that. This doesn't really work here on HN and I was sad to find this as the top comment. I have no clue what you are referring to.
Down syndrome continues to be the most common chromosomal disorder. Each year, about 6,000 babies are born with Down syndrome, which is about 1 in every 700 babies born.
Between 1979 and 2003, the number of babies born with Down syndrome increased by about 30%.
Older mothers are more likely to have a baby affected by Down syndrome than younger mothers. In other words, the prevalence of Down syndrome increases as the mother’s age increases. Prevalence is an estimate of how often a condition occurs among a certain group of people. To estimate the prevalence of Down syndrome, the number of pregnancies affected by Down syndrome is compared to the total number of live births.
This is an interesting approach. Do you think some algorithm could be used instead or together with a human curator?
What about generating images not completely randomly, but with some initial image / program?
States within the US are an interesting example however. The timber lands of southern states (e.g. Alabama, Mississippi) are some of the most profitable in the world, yet you have some of the worst poverty. I'm also thinking of the coal fields of Appalachia. And off the top of my head, major oil and gas regions are also relatively poor (e.g. Texas panhandle, the Dakotas, the Louisiana petrochemical alley).
I don't see any mention of how in reality its because the profits are cordoned off by a select few. Consider the Alaska Permanent fund - Appalachia and its industry could provide for its poor, but it doesn't.
I am not surprised in the slightest. One of the worst company on this planet.
This is outrageous:
NSO declined to sell Pegasus to Facebook, but it still built and launched Onavo without Pegasus as a spyware tool in early 2018 under the misleading pretense of being a VPN app.
