Ahhhh, thank you. It is a video that does not work with Safari on Mac or iOS. It works great on Firefox, and I presume Chrome based on the lack of complaints :)
Revenue, while it would solve the fact that profit-taking vs reinvestment is arbitrary there are other flaws. For one that would make it disproportionately ruinous on low margin businesses. If the fix was so simple I suspect that we would see it tried in more places.
This happens to some extent via punitive damages, which are designed to be large enough to get the attention of the offender. I don't think it happens outside of punitive damages though.
Countries should take stock equity over fines. It dilutes the owners share value and punishes stockholders who don't make a company's' boards accountable. With ownership, the government also then has the ability to 'peer behind the veil' more easily and make sure management is behaving. Finally, if a company continues to misbehave the government over time takes ownership and can then replace the board (think a corporate equiv to a death penalty, since under the law corporations are treated as people).
> With ownership, the government also then has the ability to 'peer behind the veil' more easily and make sure management is behaving
You want every politician you don’t like in the country having this power?
> if a company continues to misbehave the government over time takes ownership and can then replace the board
This is expropriation. (It’s also fines with extra steps and ongoing costs.)
> think a corporate equiv to a death penalty
Corporate death penalties are fines with extra steps. They’re a red herring to avoid what companies actually fear, massive fines that force them into liquidation. Anything you want with a corporate death penalty, massive fines achieve more cleanly. The only function bringing the former up has is to distract from the latter.
Is that really true? CDP stops the operation. Massive fines would allow the company to continue operating sold off. The fines may be financially worse for the owner but in terms of the unlawful and antisocial behavior the death penalty would more directly end the conduct by ending their operation.
In many cases this would be preferable I think: the owners may well have been unaware of the bad conduct and at least individually unable to prevent it. In that case, ending operations and unwinding the company and returning whatever wealth can be recovered to the owners may be a more fair thing to do.
What do you do with the assets? If you’re reorganizing them, this is no different from putting e.g. the automakers through bankruptcy. If you’re taking them over, it’s no different from a bail-out. If you’re liquidating them, why are you liquidating them? Just fine them and let them sort out the selling of assets.
> ending operations and unwinding the company and returning whatever wealth can be recovered to the owners
They’d just reconstitute the company. Presumably they weren’t seeking liquidation beforehand, and see the combined assets worth more than them individually.
Corporate death penalty is a distracting term from massive fines (and license revocations). Fines are a possibility. Corporate death penalties are needlessly, some might say intentionally, over complicated in a way that makes them far favourable to massive fines or revocations.
> reduces corporate power enough we might actually be able to get some trustworthy people into office
If what did? The history of expropriation is one way: the rulers and their families accumulate the jewels. OpenAI gets fined and given to Biden, Meta gets fined and given to Trump. The economy gets divided by the people who have the power to seize.
This is pretty naive about the reality of stock ownership. If you're an investor in the US, you probably own the S&P 500. You want me to hold 500 different companies accountable? And, failing that, you're going to dilute my shares?
The reality is that shares are absolutely useless as a distribution of responsibility. Shareholder decisions are dominated by a few majority shareholders who likely hold shares as part of a portfolio, and in the context of a portfolio, it's the whole thing that matters, so it may even be good to tank the share price of one company if it benefits the value of other holdings. Minority shareholders are held responsible for majority decisions they may have directly opposed. And shareholders are limited in what they can do to hold people responsible anyway: if approve a bonus check to the CEO for a successful quarter and then find out that the success was built on murdering toddlers, the CEO still has the bonus check and there's nothing the shareholders can do to retract it.
I think a better solution is to admit the basic fact that people, not corporations, make decisions, and when people make unethical decisions, hold those people personally responsible. Stop trying to fiddle the knobs of your economic Rube Goldberg machine to get the invisible hand to hold people responsible, and hold people responsible.
I was told that in Monaco, if you are caught speeding in a supercar, your fine is much more than if you are caught speeding on your moped. I thought that seemed fair to me. Whether it is true or not is something I never looked up as I will never be in the situation of needing to know. If it's not true, then seems like a waste of a good idea that people seem to want to be true.
Speeding fines are often based on how much over the limit you are going, which is perfectly sensible given that reflects the danger and discourages petty over-enforcement of very low margin speeding.
Adding mass of the vehicle as a component to fines would also be a sensible measure to make the fine reflect the hazard.
You can't. In a Capitalistic world, companies, large companies control the world. You are asking for the hand to cut itself. It might work for a few countries but is unthinkable for any medium-large countries when companies are allowed to grow to a certain extent.
Misconception: Police are trained to investigate and solve crime
Reality: Police absolutely hate doing the "boring" parts of their jobs. Property crime clearance rate is an abysmal ~10% and everyone knows a handful of people who reported a theft, large or otherwise, and got nothing but a police report.
Meanwhile they had plenty of time to come to our local supermarket and harass a 6 year old that tried to pocket a candybar. They took him into the security camera room and hassled this kid for several hours, zero parents involved.
The American police do not feel required to do their damn jobs, unless it involves physical activity or a gun. The boring stuff, like submitting hundreds of stored rape kits to labs to literally catch rapists, doesn't get done, ever.
On any given day, in any police department in the nation, 15 percent of officers will do the right thing no matter what is happening. Fifteen percent of officers will abuse their authority at every opportunity. The remaining 70 percent could go either way depending on whom they are working with.
> Fifteen percent of officers will abuse their authority at every opportunity. The remaining 70 percent could go either way depending on whom they are working with.
This is why I find it bizarre that the behavior of bad cops is minimized by calling them "a few bad apples", when the entire aphorism is "one bad apple spoils the bunch".
Because the ones saying it ARE the bad apples. It's important to realize millions of Americans see a cop pull a gun and shoot a black guy in a traffic stop after he informs the cop he owns a firearm LIKE YOU ARE SUPPOSED TO DO and just go on with their day.
If you enjoy Wintergatan’s clever marble videos, check out Ivan Miranda’s marble clock project: https://youtu.be/JLD_Nl12oac. Ivan relies on 3d printing vs. Martin’s emphasis on machining and welding, but they are both charming and instructive creators.
Though these two guys could not be more different from each other. Ivan actually has a toy marble machine video which he seemingly build over the course of a few weeks. I feel like he could design and build from scratch a fully featured MMX in not much more than that.
I enjoyed watching his videos for a few years, but I eventually had to stop because it was so hard to watch what you describe. You put it very kindly; I would have called it a channel documenting a slow descent into madness. Maybe it was my own latent perfectionism that made me so uncomfortable watching him obsess, repeatedly restart, second-guess, overanalyze, self deprecate, etc. It’s a hard thing to relive vicariously.
Exactly how I feel about it. When he made his video about engineering principles from Elon Musk (who I admire as an engineer), my heart just sank. I recognised that he'd begun setting standards for himself that are necessary for mission critical projects like space flight and driving, but lost touch with why we are interested in his Marble Machine - which is fun.
He was always clear on his expectations. He wants to make a machine he can take on a world tour. That's his stated goal.
The consequence of that is that it has to be reliable enough to play through a full concert without maintenance or breakdown, and it has to be robust enough that it can be transported from place to place. These are his hard requirements.
Then there are some less well defined requirements. Which is that the machine has to play nice music and has to be a marble machine as Martin understands it.
This last is the real constraint. Otherwise he could just buy a midi keyboard which would fulfil all the requirements about reliability, robustness and quality of music, but would fail the spirit of the endeavour.
All the things you describe, are all reasonable constraints and goals. However, the issue is in chasing sub millisecond standard deviations. Which is amusingly the point at which you might as well buy a midi keyboard.
I count that under the first of the two fuzzy constraints I wrote about: “the machine has to play nice music”
I agree that there Martin seems to be aiming for a very high degree of repeatability in timing, but it also seems that he has designs which meet those expectations of his and this was not the reason why he abandoned the second attempt. (Ad far as i can tell based on the videos.)
Many of the digital sequencing and notation products I've worked with went out of their way (arguably) to play "less-tight music" through various "humanizing" features.
Yes, we want music that is sufficiently accurate and "tight"... but within the confines of human capability. The slight errors of both time and intonation in some cases give music a much more human feel. Now to be fair, I don't want to suggest that this sort of human inaccuracy is mere randomness either: it's typically not just random error... there's usually a bias and it definitely within limits (unless you're a bad musician of course :-) ).
He actually just posted a video in which he admits he lost the plot, and forgot that the real goal is something that is fun. I hope he finds his way back to that!
Some people will say it's common-sense stuff but it is stuff I see everyday writing software and it's so hard to change. It's refreshing to see a spaceship company having the same issues haha.
How interesting. Does that mean the same is true for deployment_mode? As in, assuming 'customer 2' was originally made 'dedicated', is this how we'd move them back to shared deployment mode?
update tenants set deployment_mode = 'shared' where name = 'customer 2';
Does that mean some downtime or broken connections for that tenant while data is shuffled around?
Just a guess, maybe it's the VideoFrame API? It was the only video-related feature I could find that Chrome and Safari have and FF doesn't.
https://caniuse.com/mdn-api_videoframe