There's a difference between re-defining one's local monetary system to use 'chunks of time' instead of money, and variably pricing select goods and services in terms of 'how much money you make in an hour.'
The former scheme is hard because time, as the Ithaca HOURS currency experiment shows, isn't exactly fungible in the same way that money is. Being able to redeem 'an hour' assumes that all people can do the same level of work at all tasks.
The latter, however, requires a different way of thinking about pricing.
For instance, service providers might set their rates as multiples of one's hourly wage: a tennis teacher might charge 1x, a pro-tennis teacher might charge 3x, and a low-income psychotherapist might charge .85x... Such a scheme could work with a sufficient number of clients -- essentially one is sampling from the income distribution -- but the system is more equitable to income differences.
From this point, one can think of more complex schemes, like a non-linear mapping function that can prevent high-income individuals for paying drastically more than others.
Yes, one big issue is one of trust and verification of income... but if it were a culturally accepted practice, it could work. The other issue is the incentive to only target high-income people. Perhaps there could be a set of tax breaks for those whose distribution of client's incomes met some basic requirements.
On behalf of all us, thanks for your work. Does the distance between the two surfaces at different temperatures matter? I'm sure this has occurred to you and your team, but the ambient temperature inside of a bedroom, beneath the roof, could provide a greater temperature differential.
Yes that distance matters in so far as getting the heat to the thermoelectric can be a bit more challenging. However I believe this has been investigated before and there are likely ways of doing it at least somewhat well.
> “The two most coveted symbols online are an Instagram verification and being on Forbes 30 Under 30,” said Taylor Offer, founder of an apparel startup called Feat Socks, who mentions his Forbes win (class of 2018) in his Instagram bio. “It’s a mark of validation.”
A little digging reveals that Feat Socks sells socks and hoodies. (https://featsocks.com/)
>“Hell yeah, it’s better than going to Harvard or Stanford,” said entrepreneur Katelyn O’Shaughnessy, who didn’t attend either school.
For what, the social validation? O'Shaughnessy's business (https://doctours.com) appears to be a get-healthcare-in-another-country-and-have-a-vacation travel agency.
>“I wanted to throw up at the entire thing,” said Andy Sparks, an entrepreneur who was on this year’s list, describing his reaction to the Summit, a Forbes event that celebrates the Under 30 community. “I had an existential crisis coming back from it. I wondered why I wanted to get on the list and be a part of this community in the first place.”
Ah! A critical thinker.
> Corporate sponsors such as The Macallan whiskey and Courtyard by Marriott pay big fees to get their brands in front of the young professionals who flock to the events. In 2016, Ocean Spray created a cranberry bog in a wading pool in Boston during the event, partly to highlight the fruit as an ingredient in cocktails.
> O'Shaughnessy's business (https://doctours.com) appears to be a get-healthcare-in-another-country-and-have-a-vacation travel agency
To be fair, that's not a bad idea or business. Medical tourism is a big industry[1] and finding trusted healthcare providers in a foreign country is a tough task.
> In 2016, Ocean Spray created a cranberry bog in a wading pool in Boston during the event, partly to highlight the fruit as an ingredient in cocktails.
I'll admit that part was kinda fun and silly to wade in the pool
Every time I read a new climate change article or headline, I think about how much of a squandered opportunity the MIT Media Lab represents. It has a budget of $80MM, access to some of the best minds on the planet, and not beholden to the perverse incentives that afflict politicians and corporate executives. Are we supposed to believe it's impossible to generate useful and commercializable IP while simultaneously tackling climate change?
If anyone wants to brainstorm... what would it take for universities to announce cross-campus climate change initiatives dedicated to rethinking basic social systems? The California-China Climate Change Institute is the only one that I know of (1).
> One day, he proposed, the company could “solve the problem of children without parents,” and from there go onto other causes such as eradicating world hunger.
>Mr. Neumann has told several people over the past two years that a personal goal is to become the world’s first trillionaire.
Am I the only person to think these two ambitions may be somewhat at odds? Or rather, they both seem to be egomaniacal in nature, and being an egomaniac doesn't seem to lend itself to solving nearly impossibly hard problems.
Maybe after he has his exit, he'll put his money with his mouth is and start working full time on a foundation like Bill Gates.
Maybe he wants to grind up all the orphans in the world and tirn their blood serum into an elixir of youth, thereby solving the problem of their existence
They may not! But there is information asymmetry between the advertisers and us individuals. Also, if enough people signed it, such a pledge could be used as a collective bargaining chip, one that could be used to convince C-suite executives to change how they do things.
The former scheme is hard because time, as the Ithaca HOURS currency experiment shows, isn't exactly fungible in the same way that money is. Being able to redeem 'an hour' assumes that all people can do the same level of work at all tasks.
The latter, however, requires a different way of thinking about pricing.
For instance, service providers might set their rates as multiples of one's hourly wage: a tennis teacher might charge 1x, a pro-tennis teacher might charge 3x, and a low-income psychotherapist might charge .85x... Such a scheme could work with a sufficient number of clients -- essentially one is sampling from the income distribution -- but the system is more equitable to income differences.
From this point, one can think of more complex schemes, like a non-linear mapping function that can prevent high-income individuals for paying drastically more than others.
Yes, one big issue is one of trust and verification of income... but if it were a culturally accepted practice, it could work. The other issue is the incentive to only target high-income people. Perhaps there could be a set of tax breaks for those whose distribution of client's incomes met some basic requirements.