I didn't say that there was a way to do it in the short run. I laid out what the test is to determine if there's cartel-like behavior or competitive-market-like behavior.

I will say, in a market with only 3 players and very high cap-ex cost, my prior is that you're likely to see more cartel-like behavior than competitive-market-like behavior, but that's still to be determined.

I said:

> the test isn't "how much is price going up" it's "how aggressively are the RAM producers expanding supply production"

The question is how quickly the supply adjusts. In a free market, the suppliers would respond to the price signal by quickly expanding their production to meet the elevated demand.

But a market captured by a cartel will be much slower to expand the supply.

So, the test isn't "how much is price going up" it's "how aggressively are the RAM producers expanding supply production"

I still pay my taxes by physical check, because they won’t let me pay digitally unless I sign in with ID.me.

I’m really sad to see that’s yet another thing the current administration is destroying

ID.me is a private third party system, that I won’t ever use.

My memory is the DSP itself is not required to be exclusive to Amazon, but an Amazon branded vehicle can’t be used for purposes other than Amazon deliveries.

What if the DSP is a single-person company? Then the DSP and the driver are the same person. In that case, is it Amazon or the DSP requiring the driver to wear Amazon livery?

Yes, delaying pension contributions was absolutely a fudge, but it’s not like that was 100% of the gap for going from a large deficit to a balanced budget.

They’ve problem is that most of these are not really small businesses, in the same way that most Uber drivers aren’t really a small business.

They don’t drive a generic truck, they drive an Amazon branded truck, often an Amazon financed truck, often a vehicle specific to Amazon deliveries.

Can they use the Amazon-truck they financed from Amazon for non-Amazon deliveries?

It’s an attempt to build political support for passing a specific piece of legislation. It’s not “vaguely defined”, it refers to a specific bill that he wants to pass that has legislative text available on the internet.

Using a cheap model, I usually spend < $1-$2 per day (on API billing) using it a model like.

- here's the problem I'm trying to solve:

- here's my initial plan for the design:

- is there anything I'm not thinking about or my plan is missing?

It'll occasionally pop out a suggestion that I like more than my original plan, or it'll give me some new angles to think through the original plan.

> It is not fast — about 16 seconds per token on our M1 Max

If supply was not artificially restricted (through patents), then competitors would be able to manufacture the drug, supply would expand, the price would collapse, and the original inventor would not be able to recover their R&D costs.

My point was to whether it was artificial not whether it was bad.

We can have artificial interventions in markets, and that can be a net benefit and a good thing.

I’m not sure why everyone is responding as if “artificial” and “bad” are the same thing

That's a Big Fucking Deal, and is absolutely a significant part of the story.

Was that in the headline?

That's just not true.

From the article:

> According to official documents and accounts provided by the girl’s parents, the hospital had allowed Qiu’s experimental treatment to proceed under a regulatory provision that does not require approval from national regulators. After the child’s death, the hospital paid a modest fine to a local health authority but Qiu was not publicly sanctioned.

That's not in the headline, but is an important part of the story. Also from the article:

> Seven experts in fields including genetics, virology, and bioethics who reviewed details of the Nature study and the clinical trial for Science and Retraction Watch expressed concern that Qiu and his team downplayed the trial’s risks in describing them to the parents, overlooked safety signals in animal studies, and proceeded even though success was unlikely.

Also not in the headline, but also an important part of the story. Finally:

> The girl’s parents, who requested that Science use pseudonyms for them and their daughter for privacy reasons, have decided to tell her story now because they are angry about what they feel is a lack of accountability by the researchers and the institutions. “Learning the reality of these missing safeguards has fundamentally changed how we now view the entire project,” says the father, a software engineer. He asked that he be called Jason, his wife Linda, and their daughter Mei (Chinese for “beautiful”). “We did not realize how unusual and dangerous many of the arrangements were.”

Also not in the headline, also an important part of the story.