lq9AJ8yrfs

"Easement" is a term that means this [1]. You can give someone an easement allowing them to use your property somehow, and you can make the offer contingent on something in return, such as payment. It's a type of contract and not uncommon to see for things like utilities or nature preserves.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Easement.

> There’s a positive externality of readily available childcare: one adult to many children is more efficient than home care,

An externality [1] happens when there is some additional uncaptured aspect of a transaction, a "missing market". It seems implausible that there is a missing market in child care-- there are plenty of choices out there, different service levels and pricing. And when you put your child into child care and are now freed of child care responsibility for working hours, you can directly participate in the labor market, right?

Instead of externality maybe you could support intervention instead by arguing that there are facets of the child-care market that you don't like, resulting in the observed market outcome, such as capital overheads, barriers to entry, transportation barriers, or regulation.

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Externality

Marking a defect as critical in typical large co control governance leads promptly toward re-prioritizing work and sometimes disabling otherwise-online and profit-generating systems.

Some buyers insist on this in contracts with technology providers.

That feels very much like burning cash, even if it's lost profits and not technically destroying a tangible object.

Not all bread has

* added sugar

* preservatives

* texturizers

Cut these out and you're on the right side concerning processed foods.

The urge to scold seems pretty innate, and socially reinforced from an early age. Seems tied to the parental instinct, and maybe this is related to the demographics of its presentation.

Could we not engineer a substitute, or even a better scolding experience for these scolds, a safe outlet? One without the obvious detrimental impacts, or at least one that tends toward self-limiting. A lot of contemporary tech and even older stuff probably could be used to satisfy the scolding urge.

The principle is the seller appropriating for themselves a value-driver that was previously part of the consumer surplus, without offering to exchange something of commensurate and enduring or time-series value in proportion to the time series of payments. It reeks of friction and parlor tricks to get you to miscalculate the cost / benefit situation.

Compare to a "land grab" or "rent-seeking" behavior. Also compare to "financing". It may be economically efficient to establish bargaining over the value but it matters asymmetrically to the parties to the transaction who is assigned property rights and who is renting.

There are model risk analysis services among big-4 and boutique firms, and these fit into conventional audit processes as domain-experts. Similar services be bought apart from audit services as risk consulting from the same firms or alternately the familiar names in management consulting.

Can you keep going on this? Is it a slippery slope fallacy to lump in app store, handset, cloud, web browser, instruction set architecture? Only half teasing - seems like there should be a measure of platforms. Like the Gini coefficient, except for platforms instead of countries.

This. Plus different sellers have different motivations and different pricing strategies. Stubhub based on their volume has a sense of where the market is, and if they see a seller underpricing versus what Stubhub thinks the ticket will sell for, they may swoop in and try to capture some of the upside.

There's no such thing as a ticker feed for the resale markets -- the market is characterized by "imperfect information". Artists and venues making it hard to buy and sell basically widens the spread for the secondaries to play with.

In the US that sounds roughly consistent with part of the probate process, which is the way that estates are closed out.

More or less you publish a letter in a journal of record saying legal boilerplate to the effect of 'so and so has died, if they owed you money now is the time to bring it up'. Any claims on the estate not brought up timely will more or less be extinguished, the estate is eventually closed, and life goes on.

In the US it's allowed [1] to add bromate to the flour, which helps with the texture apparently. Brominated flour probably counts as highly processed.

1. https://www.kingarthurbaking.com/pro/reference/bromate

Probably a lot of the same emotional manipulation that goes into spycraft? IDK all I know about spycraft comes from novels.

Hey we see your true potential, we know your exec team and we can help shape the company so you and the company succeed together. And we can coach you so that you know how and when and who to deliver your message to when the time is right.

It worked both ways. Revolving door with clients was absolutely encouraged wherever it wasn't forbidden by law or regulation. Implicitly as an employee in good standing it felt like this was a standing offer should you decide to switch to an industry role, and I saw it often.

It's substantially true, at least in part. Source: I worked at one of them for a few years.

In my preferred niche I was surrounded by a mixed bag of peers senior and junior. In turn I wrote proposals, sold work, and was staffed on projects outside my niche I wasn't experienced or qualified in, but if you squinted hard enough you could say I had transferable skills toward.

For the most part my projects were successful, in the sense of we didn't get fired overall and the customer paid for the work. The biggest ways to screw up were the easily caught stuff like missing deadlines, exceeding the expenses policy or padding hours, which was harder to catch but some folks were brazen and/or cunning about it.

"Yes we're an expert in that" was a phrase that wasn't ever taught but I heard often. Saying yes to anything buys you time to find the solution either by skilling up or connecting to someone with actual knowledge across the very large and well-connected employee base, or fake it if you can't. Saying no ends the opportunity.

Some of the work was mutually convenient, hey can you take care of this one weird project for me, cheaper and easier to go with a fudged service from an existing and recognizable supplier than to wade into an unfamiliar niche, go through the trouble of onboarding the supplier, and not know whether you're getting good service or not. Go with the big 4 and you'll likely get a solid C or if you're lucky a B grade service. Just the act of getting a new consultant onboarded as a supplier can take months or years at large companies. The big 4 are on the supplier lists everywhere already.

Tbh a lot of this contract and relationships stuff is valuable, you're much less likely to get a complete service delivery or billing nightmare out of one of these large firms. You can call them up in the middle of the night and they'll sell you anything. It's a little like Alibaba or Amazon but for business services.

Probably the weirdest part was finding the land and expand playbooks, in some of which they'd find and dine a "type b" personality and prop up their career in exchange for a steady stream of contracts. Basically quid pro quo, but none of it made explicit or overtly conditional, more an open handed game theory type of thing.

I took this mentality with me to a boutique shop. It works pretty well.

Text is here: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtm...

The California governor must sign the before 9/30 for the bill to become law, iiui

Here is a positive story.

I live in an upper middle class neighborhood in the suburbs of a major US Midwestern city. The community is diverse and split evenly between families with young kids and retirees. We pay $500 / year in fees, which goes toward holiday decorations and minor block party events, and a management company that mainly enforces code such as keeping lawns weed and pest free.

My neighbors on both sides each had major weed control issues that were spreading to my lawn and garden, resulting in about twice the weeding effort on my part, but eventually the HOA kicked in and they both developed a sudden interest in lawn care and hired local companies to do the basics. We also started sharing with our neighbors extra bulbs that our garden produces anyway, now that our neighbors and their gardens became receptive.

We have had a couple notices from the HOA about code items ourselves, and it was stuff that we were going to fix anyway that the HOA noticed. They were cordial about it and thanked us for letting them know we were in front of it. There were no threats or fines, except what is implicit in the bylaws.

The main bylaws are cosmetic, things like keeping paint, mailboxes, and trim in shape. We have made several requests, just a one page letter, for accommodations to the HOA and they have approved each one.

The board of the HOA are just other neighbors down the street, and I am very grateful to them donating their time and effort unpaid to keep order in the neighborhood. Property sells very quickly and several of our friends have complimented us on our neighborhood when they visit.

This was our first HOA experience, and I was skittish about entering into it but cannot think of any complaint. I find it very effective.

There have been houses in the neighborhood that have been neglected to the point of becoming unlivable and it is great to have a framework to recover them and fill them with happy families that we can befriend, up to and including seizing the property if it ever came to that, but to my knowledge it never has and hopefully never will.