Why not simultaneously shrink at the rate the market will bear AND increase the price to what the market will bear AND decrease the cocoa to what the market will bear
Well… for one, your competitors would have an instant marketable advantage over you.
What “the market will bear” isn’t what you think it is. Mars and Hersey and … idk is there another candy company?… don’t meet in a smoke filled room figuring how best to make you poor and fat. “What the market will bear” in a free market much more means what you can offer as a value before you introduce a opportunity more competition or an alternative to your product.
If your industry does meet in a smoke filled room, that is neither capitalism nor a free market.
I suggest everyone read Sowell’s Basic Economics at least once as an adult.
Who said anything about trying to make anyone poor and/or fat? I’m saying they try to maximize profits. Why does the room have to have smoke in it? They meet in a room — and now you’re doing “no true Scotsman”
Atom Computing | Many posititions | Boulder, CO/Austin, TX/Berkeley, CA | Some ONSITE, Some HYBRID
We're hiring software engineers, hardware engineers, RF engineers, FPGA and ASIC engineers, Optics/Mechanical/Optomech engineers, and Physicists with a background in atomic physics and/or characterization of quantum systems.
We trap Ytterbium atoms with lasers, and then use each atom as a qubit in a quantum register. A flash of green light accomplishes the quantum analog of a NOT gate. Two atoms held sufficiently close followed by a flash of UV light accomplishes the quantum analog of an XOR gate. The company is well funded and growing quickly. We have an endless supply of rich and interesting signal processing challenges. Atoms, famously used in atomic clocks, are very precise and sensitive to all the imperfections in your system. This makes for very demanding signal paths. Compiling programs for this architecture also involves interesting compiler challenges/optimizations. You'll have fun.
is this the author's attempt at washing their hands of the damage they've done? Smart enough to win all these prestigious economics awards and hold all these prestigious positions but too naive to be able to predict the consequences of what they've been fighting for? Things that were, in my opinion, very easy to predict, given all the regulation in place around existing markets. What does this say about the author and the field of economics? Every day we get to play the "dumb or awful?" game.
Cyberpunk isn't as far off as I thought.
My life has already turned into punk
So, I want to put in a little more effort
to help others reach the cyber utopia.
I've noticed that tech people will respond to an encroachment on civil rights with a technological alternative. I think this is a mistake, because the excuse is presented in bad faith, and to present an alternative is to accept their framing. The correct response is something to the effect of "I know what you're trying to do, fuck off."
reply