321–330 of 363 posts
Another commercial for eliminating cash and moving to 100% digital currency!
Because then it would be impossible to do transactions on paper when the computer system goes down? That doesn't sound like an advantage.
Related note: car stealerships are a relic of the past. There is no reason why a middleman should exist when buying a car. Consumers should have the option to purchase directly from the manufacturer. I am personally not a fan of Tesla as a vehicle, but I admire the business model of buying directly from Tesla. Stealerships are a drain on the consumer. All that land they own can be used for productive economic activit…
> All that land they own can be used for productive economic activity or housing. No it can't. You still need places where cars can be repaired as well as storage for parts/cars inventory. The only way you reclaim some land is if service gets worse. Edit: For example, Tesla sells direct to consumers but there's still a Tesla "showroom" in my town. In terms of footprint/appearance it's basically a dealership. So where…
Towns don’t all need one Unilever store to sell your Ben&Jerry’s, your Dove body wash, and your Hellmans Mayo, then a separate Procter and Gamble store that sells Tide, Pampers and Bounty.
Why can’t you just get all the main car brands at Costco?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I go to the dealership. Half the time, the neighborhood guy sucks. I've almost never had luck with local guys.
Yea, I was always a "never get your car serviced at the stealership" snob, until I moved homes. Now I'm in a different city and I haven't found a trustable mechanic yet, so for things I can't repair myself, I'm going to bring it to the dealership.
I'm reminded of the opening line of the second Mistborn novel: > I write these words in steel, for anything not set in metal cannot be trusted. The digital world feels increasingly dangerous and ephemeral. If I have something written with ink on paper I have certain guarantees: I know that it's accessible even if the power is completely out. I know that it won't randomly get deleted if my hard drive suddenly dies. I…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's what a nonzero number of Americans hear. You're talking to one, who knows others. Democracy as defined is a goal we have. Not something all (maybe most!) Americans would claim to enjoy.
Goalposts shift from > most people to > a nonzero number of Americans Holy motte and bailey, Batman.
> "Shouldn't it be very easy to vote to fix that in a democracy?"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Debate whatever you want, we do not have a direct democracy, which is what most people hear when they hear "Democracy". It's Representative Democracy. Supposedly.
> we do not have a direct democracy, which is what most people hear when they hear "Democracy". That hasn't been the dominant use of the term for centuries, but, sure, you keep pretending.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's interesting, because in theory the requirement for independent dealerships could promote competition - they can compete to offer the lowest markup over MSRP, offer different addons, or offer better service. Just like going to a specialist shop for computer parts or audio gear or whatnot. But instead we ended up with a system where car dealerships basically own local lawmakers and got laws passed that not only pr…
> But instead we ended up with a system where car dealerships basically own local lawmakers and got laws passed that not only prevent the manufacturer from competing with them, but make it really hard for people to start new dealerships to compete with them. There are practical reasons for this. People buy expensive items and expect to be able to get those items maintained and serviced. If the business was cutthroat,…
So, more competition is bad for the consumer?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> With digital systems, this can be mitigated (rate limiting, encryption and least privilege information sharing, audit logs etc.) to an extent. None of those measures do anything to prevent someone from taking a picture of the screen, which is the same sinking boat you describe. I think you are insightful in identifying care as the key principle. My argument would be that care is more easily achieved by smaller grou…
> None of those measures do anything to prevent someone from taking a picture of the screen, which is the same sinking boat you describe. But it's relatively easy to only have the people that need specific information to have it. Receptionist only has your names and contact information; doctor only has your relevant medical information; etc etc. With paper, either everything will be together in a big file, or it woul…
Which brings us back to...
> "Privacy" until a disgruntled staffer copies or takes a picture or just takes the pieces of paper and publishes them.
With paper, it's primarily about the trust you place in people.
With digital it is not only the trust you place in people, you add the trust required for the systems you use; not only the ones you select, but the ones they depend on.
Across a range of systems, we are seeing that we haven't yet mastered complexity.
> Many a small company has been caught with terrible physical or digital security, because nobody cares and at their scale dedicated people to care don't make sense.
Which brings me back to those boutique firms... with paper-only you reduce the problems to one that have been well-understood for hundreds of years. Air-gapped systems seem like an attractive option, but even then, you're depending on both the trust you place in the hardware, OS, and package vendors and in the practice of the new field of digital hygiene by the staff. My prediction is that some clientele somewhere - actors, politicians, billionaires - will decide that their private data should be as private as they can possibly make it, and that it will be the old-fashioned way.
I'm trying to buy two cars right now, and this has put a big wrench in the process. The dealership can't tell me what's on their lot compared to what's on their Website, except by going out and searching.