60% seems pretty good though? Like 40% for everyone else still sounds like alot of garlic to go around.
thanks_shakey_snake
This is the most parsimonious hypothesis so far.
You don't think companies would opt into letting Google manage "dynamic pricing" for them on a per-user basis? Travel sites already offer this for airlines after you signal intent, such as a destination and date range... And sellers on Amazon already use tools like Sellery to algorithmically reprice items without human supervision. Some products change price hundreds of times per day as a result.
Big retailers like Walmart are trying to make "personalized pricing" work, which tries to anticipate price tolerance based on past shopping behavior on an individual basis.
So it's not a stretch at all IMO to imagine Google offering a "personalized pricing" service that you can install on any website, right under the script tag for Google Analytics. Or Amazon, or Walmart, or whoever-- They all have mountains of data on us.
I don't understand Jim's deal. He wanted to charge our protagonist MORE money per bulb than he would charge someone buying less garlic? Why?
Was it a deeply shortsighted, cynical attempt to turn a quick buck? Was Jim weirded out by the dynamic forming with TokyoSunbather and was trying to put some distance between them? Was there some sort of subtle dynamic occurring where TokyoSunbather would take the best bulbs and leave only shitty ones behind, and that was causing subsequent customers to perceive Jim's stock as low-quality, thereby negatively affecting his reputation?
I don't understand. Something is missing. TokyoSunbather is either holding something back, or is overlooking a key detail. Either way I want to know. It doesn't make sense. Jim doesn't make sense. What is the missing piece I need to know.
You know, I knew from the other comment what to expect, but the picture still caught me off guard and cracked me up.
Let me know if you find out lol
it all worked out
ARGH DON'T JINX IT
Interesting. How do you find that out?
And in fact, they never did.
Mine is that, except they DON'T complain. Like when someone is showing me a YouTube video on their device and an ad shows up 30 seconds in... I lunge for the mute button while I scan the room for a blanket, clipboard, or other item to shield us, yelling "AVERT YOUR EYES!!" but next to all of my commotion, they're just nodding along placidly like "Oh Coinbase, interesting."
Like... Aren't you affronted that some company paid another company to make it less convenient to do the thing you're trying to do?! Does the gaudy, pushy tone change to too-loud propaganda designed to coax you away from your money not gall you?!
"Idk sometimes the ads are interesting. Free month sounds good."
Jesus christ he's too far gone.
So does "dump fuel" literally mean "sprinkle a large volume of jet fuel over a large swathe of countryside?" Does it become diffuse enough that the environmental impact is negligible, or do we get a big splash that kills everything in an AoE?
Like... I'm surprised the fuel cost is the focus here, and not the environmental impact of releasing jet fuel just... into the air I guess? But maybe it doesn't work the way I'm picturing.
Thanks... Yeah that makes sense. I can understand that sometimes the trade-off would make dumping fuel the right choice... I just wonder if the environmental impact factor in.