Or put your server in front of a CDN / Nginx, set cache headers for 30 seconds ;)

Without the safety net of the larger company these companies would go bankrupt in the real world and not exist.

Star developers mostly have figured out which teams are / are not going bankrupt and direct their internal business to those teams / figure out how to couch a problem in terms that make it seem like it should be given to a team not going bankrupt.

eg. If your web team is shit, but app team is rock stars then the UI should be an app, to prevent the web team from getting the job add a feature such as something with the camera/gps that makes it feel app ish.

Samething with an airliner, autopilot will not avoid another aircraft.

Also the whole thing about thing being an opinion sounds as dumb as when someone says gravity is just a theory...

A lot of the value in things like the stock market is to disseminate the various information asymmetries in the form of price.

There's a reason guys like Paul Krugman write books on economics rather than trade the market.

It seems that at best there will be a small amount of information asymmetry and that should the randomness of bag prices get too bad, someone will be incentivized by the market to publish bag prices.

At worst, it will lead to something like GasBuddy where consumers input what flight they took and how much the bag cost.

The idea that the market for airlines will completely break down because there is no regulation on bag fees seems a little... far fetched.

I can't even find much on the subject compared to information asymmetry.

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

   func viewDidAppear(){ 
     super.viewDidAppear() 
     passwordField.becomeFirstResponder()
   }

    - (void) viewDidAppear{
       [super viewDidAppear];
       [self.passwordfield becomeFirstResponder];
    }

Here's a decent summary: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming_hiatus

'climate is classically averaged over 30-year periods.[5]'

'Publicity has surrounded claims of a global warming hiatus during the period 1998–2013. The exceptionally warm El Niño year of 1998 was an outlier from the continuing temperature trend, and so subsequent annual temperatures gave the appearance of a hiatus: by January 2006, it appeared to some that global warming had stopped or paused.[2] A 2009 study showed that decades without warming were not exceptional,[6] and in 2011 a study showed that if allowances were made for known variability, the rising temperature trend continued unabated.'

Essentially in 5 years we'll have enough data to confirm / deny the 1992 predictions, currently it's an unproven theory because of a lack of forward data. We're essentially using consensus as a proxy for a falsification of the null hypo

I believe it's not happening to the degree the IPCC said it was in 1992 which is why in the 2000s they observed a warming 'hiatus'. This is why people talk about consensus rather than data, or falsifications of the null hypothesis.