Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | lemoncucumber's commentslogin

And an LLM named Motherbrain perhaps?


> Issue is what happens to retirees on a fixed income when value of their property increases?

That’s not specific to a land value tax, the same thing can happen with traditional property taxes when the property is re-assessed.

California tried to “solve” exactly that scenario with Prop 13 limiting how much the assessed value of property can increase without a change in ownership and it’s been a disaster (and a contributing factor to the housing crisis, albeit far from the only one).


Apple does the same thing as Google, the button is only labeled "Get" for free apps, for paid apps it's labeled with the price.

Paid apps largely failed as a business model though (why would a consumer take a risk on buying a paid app that they can't try before they buy) so most apps that you pay for are free apps with IAP subscriptions... which I guess makes it a little more explicit that you're renting the app, for better or worse.


I think we've also moved towards subscriptions as apps become clients for a backend service.

EG. A mapping app that includes a one time bundle of maps that don’t get updated can be sold as a one time purchase. If you provide continuous updates, which most people expect now, pulling off a one time purchase business model is HARD. The other option is versioned access or time limited support, which is really just a subscription model by a different name. That said I wish versioned access was still a thing. Photoshop CS is still fine for what I want, I’m happy to pay for an upgrade when it makes sense, but a continuing subscription to software that hasn’t substantially changed in a decade sucks.


I do this myself (albeit pretty rarely) since the rear camera is significantly better than the front camera, especially in low light.


The Trader Joe's model is an interesting comparison with the Costco model.

Similarities:

* Like you said, both have fewer choices than a conventional grocery store: if you want ketchup or peanut butter, there's only going to be one brand and one size.

* Both of them don't have scales at the registers: unlike at a conventional grocery store, nothing is sold by weight (which I'm sure provides another small efficiency gain).

* Both of them are cheaper than your typical grocery store.

Differences:

* I feel like Trader Joe's leans on store brand / white-labeling items more than Costco -- yes Kirkland Signature is a thing but Trader Joe's takes it further.

* The shopping experience is pretty different both in terms of the in-store experience and the quantities things are sold in.

* Costco requires a membership, Trader Joe's doesn't.

I wonder which elements of the two models would work best for a public grocery store.


Trader Joe is owned by one of the two German Aldi groups (two brother split original business to have one each) And both of them employ the same model globally.

They are huge - ~15,000 stores worldwide and growing fast

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aldi


> unlike at a conventional grocery store, nothing is sold by weight

Costco and TJs both sell items like meat by weight, they're just pre-labeled so they can be scanned rather than weighed at the register. Things like produce that might be weighed elsewhere are sold by each or container though.


And regular grocery stores like Kroger do much the same thing. Aside from picking out individual produce items, and even then a lot of times it is per-item pricing. Nearly all of the by-weight stuff is pre-labeled


Trader Joe's stores are tiny compared to Costco, and only sell food.


[2016]


~10e2/3 is a very unclear what of writing whatever number you're trying to write


100-1000 years order of magnitude. I can't remember exactly, but it's well within our ability to engineer and manage, rather than the signs that try to answer the "how do we communicate danger to later species" types of timelines


That is a not solved timeframe, at all. We might have a war at a storage facility for years and everything falls apart.


To my ears it “since years” sounds like it’s missing an “ago” after it (or like the GP said “for years” sounds even more natural).

It makes me think of another similar one: I've noticed that British English speakers will say e.g. "the new iPhone will be available from September 20th"

To my ears that sounds like it's missing an “onwards” after it (or “starting September 20th” would sound even more natural).


Is the meaning different? I'm struggling to see how "from September 20th" would have a different implication to "starting from September 20th" (or similar) given the context.


The meaning is the same, it just sounds weird to my ears in the same way that “since years” does

(Also I just noticed the extra “it” in my previous comment, oops).


This one drives me nuts. I get it if it’s a single page app, but in many cases right-clicking the same link and choosing “open in new tab” works fine so that’s not the issue.


Early Quakers rejected using different 2nd person pronouns for different people since it violated their principle of egalitarianism so they called everyone thee/thou (and got into trouble for it as you might expect).

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/16/opinion/sunday/pronouns-q...


There's a wonderful story about William Penn (yes, the William Penn who founded Pennsylvania and after whom it was named) nearly getting into trouble for his Quaker beliefs, except that King Charles II graciously forgave him. The story made it into a biography of Charles's mistress Eleanor "Nell" Gwyn, and can be read here: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Story_of_Nell_Gwyn/Chapte...

Briefly, William Penn refused to take his hat off in the presence of King Charles, due to his Quaker beliefs in egalitarianism. This would have gotten him into very serious trouble for lèse-majesté, except that the king took his own hat off. "Friend Charles," said Penn (who had apparently never heard of the saying that when you're in a hole you should stop digging), "why dost thou not keep on thy hat?" And King Charles II replied, "'Tis the custom of this place that only one person should be covered at a time." Of course, normally it was the king who would keep his crown on. But after Charles said that, nobody in the court could bring a charge of lèse-majesté against William Penn for the incident.


Thanks for sharing! That was a fantastic read.

For anyone not wanting to read through it all, the story in the conclusion of the chapter was a particularly good laugh:

> I have referred in a former chapter to the King's partiality for his dogs; one species of which is still celebrated among the fancy as King Charles's breed. On the occasion of an entry into Salisbury, an honest Cavalier pressed forward to see him, and came so near the coach that his Majesty cautioned the poor man not to cling too close to the door lest one of the little black spaniels in the coach should chance to bite him. The loyalist still persisting in being near, a spaniel seized him by the finger, and the sufferer cried with a loud voice, "God bless your Majesty, but G—d d—n your dogs!"


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: