LESSWRONG
LW

willbradshaw
76010800
Message
Dialogue
Subscribe

Posts

Sorted by New

Wikitag Contributions

Comments

Sorted by
Newest
No wikitag contributions to display.
Far-UVC Light Update: No, LEDs are not around the corner (tweetstorm)
willbradshaw3y160

That's the old limit; it was changed last year. See e.g. this figure from Blatchley et al. 

Reply
Far-UVC Light Update: No, LEDs are not around the corner (tweetstorm)
willbradshaw3y202

Also, if I were going to put a UV lamp in an air duct, I wouldn't make it 222nm. IIRC other wavelengths (e.g. 254nm) are more effectively germicidal and are mainly bottlenecked by safety issues, which don't apply in this context.

Reply
Far-UVC Light Update: No, LEDs are not around the corner (tweetstorm)
willbradshaw3y200

I have a couple disagreements with this:

  1. Regarding regulatory approval, 222nm far UV-C irradiation is already legal (in the US) to levels that probably significantly reduce transmission (8-hour limit of 479 mJ/cm2 for skin). Various people I know think that the limits should be much higher, but even irradiation at current US limits seems very valuable -- & very safe -- to me.
  2. While KrCl lamps are expensive, I think this post overstates how unviable they are. I think an interested organisation could afford to install & run a bunch of these in an office (within the legal limits) basically right now, and see benefits that are worth the cost. (Someone throwing cost numbers at me could ofc change my mind here.)

I agree that the LEDs seem pretty hard.

Reply
Final Version Perfected: An Underused Execution Algorithm
willbradshaw4y30

I use Complice, so this is exciting news for me!

Reply
Common knowledge about Leverage Research 1.0
willbradshaw4y160

Only admitting the mistake at comments and not in a more visible manner also doesn't feel like you treat it seriously enough. It likely deserves the same treatment as the mistakes on https://www.centreforeffectivealtruism.org/our-mistakes

For what it's worth, I do think this is probably a serious enough mistake to go on this page.

Reply
Are PS5 scalpers actually bad?
willbradshaw4y20

I admit I'm pretty unsure how my beliefs change as the % of PS5s grabbed by scalpers changes.

Like, the more PS5s scalpers get, the higher the time cost for anyone trying to buy at RRP in the short term, but the faster the scalpers will run through the population of people willing to pay high markups?

This is where I realise that I don't know how scalpers actually react to that situation – maybe for some reason they just drip-feed their PS5 hauls? Maybe (probably) they're more patient than most of the people trying to win drops, so they sell off their PS5s more slowly (and so remove competitors from the pool at a lower rate than otherwise would be the case)?

I think there's a pretty strong chance I'm just misunderstanding something here.

Reply
Are PS5 scalpers actually bad?
willbradshaw4y20

As I said in my reply to Dave Orr above, I now suspect that my opinion on the goodness or badness here is probably dominated by the net effect on the deadweight loss of time. (I'm not sure how much I think this should be weighted by the economic and/or social value of each person's time.)

So my main questions now are (1) what is the net effect, and (2) what would the net effect be, if people were more rational about how much they value their time? (I'm also not sure how much the answer to (2) would change my view.)

It sounds like you think the answer to (1) is positive?

Sure, it might not be textbook rent-seeking, but it's pretty close.

One important difference from classic pro-price-gouging arguments here, that I didn't really crystallise until now, is that the scalpers aren't really doing anything (AFAIK) to increase supply. So we lack the cutting-down-logs-with-chainsaws angle.

Reply
Are PS5 scalpers actually bad?
willbradshaw4y20

Just to check I understand this, this is roughly the same objection as my (b) above, right?

If so, I think this is plausible, though I'm not sure how bad it is. I think the overall badness would mainly depend on the total effect on the deadweight loss of wasted time.

(I also think that most people who can afford a PS5 should probably value their time much more than they do, but that's a different story.)

Reply
Are PS5 scalpers actually bad?
willbradshaw4y30

There's currently a global shortage in computer chips, which limits the amount of PS5s that can be manufactured. Presumably Sony is churning them out as fast as it can (see e.g. sxae's comment elsewhere) but that is slower than everyone would like.

The recent extreme shortage was also caused in part by trade disruptions due to the Ever Given crisis, but I assume that'll work its way out of the system fairly soon.

Reply
Are PS5 scalpers actually bad?
willbradshaw4y20

Thanks for this. I agree that it's plausibly rational of Sony not to raise the RRP here.

Presumably the retailers would love to increase the price here, but they ain't the ones setting the RRP...

it's possible they're enjoying a situation where demand is so high that there's arbitrage to be done

Could you clarify what you mean by arbitrage here? What arbitrage is available to Sony in this situation?

Reply
Load More
23Are PS5 scalpers actually bad?
4y
28
33Gifts as free exploration
5y
2
103Final Version Perfected: An Underused Execution Algorithm
5y
34
89Why We Age, Part 2: Non-adaptive theories
5y
22
18An addendum on effective population size
5y
0
55Why We Age, Part 1: What ageing is and is not
5y
5
37Evolution is sampling error
5y
2
68Some quick notes on hand hygiene
5y
52
5What are the best self-help book summaries you've read?
Q
6y
Q
10
24Should I floss?
Q
6y
Q
11
Load More