It’s the calculation problem. Always has, always will be:
By arbitrarily changing existing markets for internet service, regulators risk corrupting the fragile preconditions necessary for firms and consumers to calculate rationally, and the incentives necessary to lure investment and risk-laden innovative enterprises. The result could be excess demand in the market for internet service if regulations force prices too low, excess supply if regulations force prices too high, or stilted innovation in ISP technology altogether.
tl;dr version: Corporate stakeholders spend their lizard-brain lives nailing the range of right price(s) at any given time. They don’t know much, but bureaucrats know even less. I would even argue their knowledge of right prices is always approaching zero, since their knowledge is downstream from price determination; they know what corporations are doing only after stakeholder calculations are complete, and how markets (aka: consumers) react to them.
Therefore, all policy regarding prices is arbitrary, and given a long enough duration and holding all else constant, policy will cause higher prices or massive supply shortages—probably the latter. If you though the gas shortages in the 1970’s were bad, wait until millennials can’t post a drunk selfie to Instagram during SXSW, or binge-watch the latest edgy one-hour drama on Netflix, because of inevitable bandwidth restrictions.
I think Jill took it down (or it takes itself down after a while), but she mentioned me in one of her Periscope broadcasts. Thank ye!
Top 10 Science Fiction Films of All Time
Pretty good list. I personally would take Contact out—I like the movie but the tropey characterizations were almost unwatchable—and Prestige, since I’ve never heard of it. I’d replace them with Bladerunner and The Empire Strikes Back.
Listen in as a few bourgeoisie agents and academics get upset about not meeting aliens. Why was it ever labeled a paradox, anyways? It’s just an unanswered question with plenty of plausible explanations.
What is a good explanation of Boltzmann Brains?
I find these more fascinating.
Marathon man preps for second live stream, with multiple iPhones, iPad
It’s an old story, but the guy’s narcissism called to me from beyond the void.
Could Donald Trump Save the Internet?
Net “Neutrality” is retarded and is the worst idea since adult coloring books or California.
SpecFaith Reviews: Wonder Woman: The Heroine We Need
Eh? I guess. Unless the writer styles herself a goddess, it’s odd to claim Wonder Woman is an accurate representation. No one claims Thor as such for men; that would be silly. I do, because I’m tall, sexy, buff, blue-eyed Nordsman*.
Low-carb diet can have similar effect on brain as ecstasy
I have never experienced this. Warning: this is a Daily Mail link and the page load time is astronomical.
The Only Way to Fix Healthcare Insurance in the U.S.
Eh, not really. The big reason GitHub works is because the results are immediately testable, as application code normally goes. Scott Adams is just proposing a glorified suggestion box. The best way to “fix” healthcare is to remove the bureaucracy from the equation: person A pays person B for a good or service, then person B gives it to them. It works for shoes, bananas, and Oriental rugs.
NASA announces the Kepler space telescope has identified 219 potential new worlds
Speaking of bureaucrats, there has to be at least one of these worlds with life that exists without any bureaucrats at all. Imagine that…
I remember one of my communications professors slipping and mentioning stuff like this once in a while, and Rashad’s career was part of those non grata unmentionables of media politics.
* One and a half of these things are true.
Oopsies at Yahoo:
In the [discrimination] suit, as reported by The Mercury News, Ard alleges Mayer encouraged the use of an employee performance rating system to “accommodate management’s subjective biases and personal opinions, to the detriment of Yahoo’s male employees.”
Ard also accuses Kathy Savitt, Yahoo’s former chief marketing officer, and Megan Liberman, the current editor-in-chief of Yahoo News, of discriminating against men. As evidence, the lawsuit alleges women accounted for less than 20 percent of the “top managers … including the chief editors of the verticals and magazines” reporting to Savitt when she started with the company.
You might think, because I’m a dude who provides for his family by working in tech, that I’d be upset about this. I’m not. Hiring (and firing) managers should be free to hire whomever they want to hire, for whatever reasons. whether they are good or bad for the actual business. Only actual stakeholders have moral authority in setting that policy and decision-making, not any unaccountable third party.
In the same way Net Neutrality was stupid because no one, ever, at any point in history, has treated all information the same, trying to stamp out discrimination through public policy is stupid. Not just stupid, but impossible. It’s like asking someone to not see the color red; it’s quite literally not in a human’s epistemological makeup to not discriminate. It’s how healthy brains operate.
Mitigating effects of discrimination through state fiat is also impossible, since only certain groups in good favor with the bureaucracy will be benefit in these discrimination suits. Men qua men ain’t likely going to be one of those favored demographics.
Good luck, guy.