This was really interesting, thank you. I found myself playing "would i really ignore this color or would i ignore any color given the contrasting castles etc that are drawing your attention" in all the pictures
This was his Tweet from several weeks ago, which I thought was insightful, both from a technical as well as socieconomic perspective when you think about data usage etc in these models - "Caterpillars extract nutrients which are then converted into butterflies. People have extracted billions of nuggets of understanding and GPT-4 is humanity's butterfly."
Did he see enough in the past 6 weeks that made him change his mind?
So the real complaint is dynamic pricing, which is essentially raising prices to what the market will bear, instead of having (what was formerly artificially) low prices that get scalped. Now the extra money that used to go to scalpers goes to TM instead, and the downside is that some % of fans that could previously luck out and get cheap tickets no longer can.
Isnt this...not a bad thing? There's fundamentally just a supply and demand problem, with more people wanting to see these concerts than there are concerts. The article mentions that Garth brooks solved this by doing more concerts (e.g. 9 in a row in the same city!), but that's obviously not viable for everyone. Is there a better solution? Even if there were 5 different companies selling concert tickets, wouldnt they inevitably move to dynamic pricing for the same reason?
Won’t the industry change to adopt that massive price cut/productivity gain?