In short, the author thinks it's the same reason that a half empty club will keep a line waiting outside: it inflates demand. Reality is probably that's one of the reasons only some of the time.
There’s a bakery around here that actively works to make their line as long as possible. They might have the best croissants in the city, but they also have one person bagging them up at a snail’s pace and chatty cashier that wants to verify with every customer that yes, indeed, it is a beautiful day outside and the weather this week is supposed to be sunny with maybe some rain on Tuesday and she hopes it doesn’t rain on Tuesday because that’s her day off and she was thinking of going on a hike.
It may have been true in a bygone era when it was a crapshoot to "wing" plans and change mid-adventure, when the people standing in line couldn't just check the slab in their pocket to find alternative options such as venues without a line.
> thinks it's the same reason that a half empty club will keep a line waiting outside
Yeah, one of the most famous club in Berlin used to pull that trick, now it is about to close because the owners are not making enough money. People aren't fooled by these tactics anymore.
Berlin has hundreds of clubs, half of which are constantly about to close. But berghain has sufficient clout it will remain for decades even if it continues to be mediocre and hostile to its customers.
I suspect that as the value a company provides is more than its code, then increasing code churn does not lead to an equivalent increase in revenue. Even for a tech company, a business' concept, connections, knowledge, assets, non-coding staff, etc.. are a significant value and increasing code doesn't increase the throughput of that value. For non-tech companies code is the grease in the gears, not the gears themselves.
This is one of the nice things about the juggling community: it's one of the open, sharing communities where people are willing to freely share and teach. It's no cost/low cost entry. The juggling community has been a really important part of my life, so I see it as giving back to teach others.
This is nothing new, history repeats. Prior to the invasions of Afghanistan & Iraq there were numerous regional experts warning that the result would be chaos, failed states, a rise in extremism and long term instability in the region and indirectly the rest of the world. Millions of us marched through the streets, asking our governments not to make what was obviously a massive mistake.
The US & UK governments were convinced that they would recreate the liberation of Europe, with cheering crowds, flowers in their hair, Mission Accomplished banners and then simply totally dismantle a government & civil service and recreate a new one to their favour. Groupthink is a powerful thing.
In the case of Israel, destabilisation and creation of a region of neighbouring failed states is absolutely it's aim as that is an exploitable situation. Iran was the only real opposition to Israel's long term colonial expansion and ethnic cleansing and more recent outright genocide. It was also opposed to Israel's existence and funded terrorism, etc... (whatever caveat the reader needs to understand I'm not a cheerleader of Iran) but historically it is not alone in this and is not the only country ever to be hostile to another. The majority of such situations resolve over time through diplomacy and reason, and yes, significant amounts of violence but it is rare to resolve such an international dispute purely through war. Israel, its government and military have long been clear that they don't seek a status quo, but a chaotic forever war they use to justify their literal bulldozing of surrounding nations.
Elections are already being used for collectively applying "justice", just not the type that stops corruption. Instead it's right wing mob "justice" against the woke and immigrants and all the liberal tears are the prize the braying mob that voted for autocracy wants and they're happy to accept corruption as long as they don't think it affects them. Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all types we've tried.
The framers of the constitution acknowledged the flaws and vulnerabilities of democracy and cited education as a prevention mechanism for an ill informed population voting against their own best interest. It’s no coincidence that public education has been under constant assault from the right since Reagan.
Good liars are able to avoid these tells and I reckon no system is perfect but the last point, trusting your gut, is probably the best as it combines a lot of conscious and subconscious observations into a judgement. I'm often unable to articulate why I trust or distrust a person but feedback from my close friends is that they'll look to me for signs about a new person we meet. You do also need to be willing to constant reevaluate and change opinions as more evidence is gathered.
I find that it's like telling twins apart. If you don't know them they may be very similar, but once you spend some time with them it can become very obvious as to who is who.
We all have our own rules that we've built up over our lifetime and some of us have definitely spent more time watching people and/or are just better at the subtle clues.
But having said that, there are often people that just break all the conventional rules or just doesn't trigger any of the things that you are looking for. Like most things you can probably draw a bell curve where we can easily spot the people in the middle, but then it becomes geometrically more difficult as you move to the sides.
Now I've got small children, we fly instead of taking the long bus, train or boat journey. But the long bus, train and boat journeys and the places we experienced along the way are half of what my wife and I talk about when we reminisce about our travels. In the UK at least we call it "going travelling", which to me acknowledges that the actual travelling is important, not just destination hopping.
Trump/Miller/whomever don't need to be actively involved in every decision. They have defined an approach to strong arm problem solving and weaponisation of the government that anyone that works for them is implicitly allowed to use. The supposed controls that were meant to prevent this have crumbled or aligned.
> They have defined an approach to strong arm problem solving and weaponisation of the government that anyone that works for them is implicitly allowed to use
And one of the few constraints in their approach is not to fuck with the Dow. Expropriating Anthropic’s IP would trash the AI sector, and by extension, the Dow. (Even designating it a supply-chain risk sets a material precedent that a future administration could use against OpenAI and xAI.)
Hegseth is bluffing on his most destructive fronts, even if he doesn’t know it.
reply