I read this entire article but I’m still confused. What exactly is the financial motivation for keeping units empty? And is the concern the fact that the units are empty or are they concerned about the conditions of the empty units?
It's because of laws against charging the market price, which unsurprisingly has led to perverse outcomes. From the article:
Landlord groups don’t dispute that thousands of rent-regulated apartments are vacant, and blame 2019 changes to state rent laws that severely limit how much they can charge new tenants for after longtime renters move out.
The financial motivation is in keeping rents high. The units are empty because no more people want to pay as much as they are charging. Then it becomes a balancing act. An empty unit might cost you X, but to find a tenant for it might require you to lower rent by Y. If X * # of empty units is less than Y * # of occupied units, then it makes more sense to leave them empty.
No it doesn't. It assumes some of the units have correlated prices, because units are, to some extent, fungible - if there are no one-bedroom apartments in the price range, then you'll drive up the price of pricier two-bedroom apartments due to the increased competition.
I wasn't suggesting that the net result was false, just that the model suggested in the comment I was replying to wasn't accurate, because landlords do sell the same model of apartment to different people at different prices based on when their lease started.
You make more money by raising prices higher even when that means pricing some people out. More people will pay the higher price than will get priced out.
“Love-hate relationship” were the exact words that I used when I used go professionally every day.
I could complain all day about things the language does obviously wrong, often in the name of simplicity. But after all my complaints I still admit it’s a very good choice for certain kinds of software and software companies.
I don’t remember NYT. But I recall the other major poll site Real Clear Politics had an election map with a percentage chance for each state and they had Hillary at 99%.
Their mistake was that they treated each state as an independent event. Treating each state as a separate biased coin toss leads you to put Hillary at 99%.
Nate knew that these are not independent events and if republicans are being under polled in one state, it is more likely they’re being under polled in all of the states.
I see “blocklist” becoming more popular in programming. But it just occurred to me how bizarre and out of place it would be if the parent comment said “a blocklisted word”.
Has someone made a faithful representation of ssh over quic? You could use quic’s built in certificates and multiple streams of data and create something very similar to ssh. Is anyone doing that?
To be more clear, here is a quote from another article
> The company said it would publish 17 of the author's books in their original form as The Roald Dahl Classic Collection along with the planned edited versions so "readers will be free to choose which version of Dahl's stories they prefer."
To me, it feels like a way to quell anger but still proceed forward and possibly even make money. I bet that the “classic” editions will be quietly discontinued in a few years.
> I bet that the “classic” editions will be quietly discontinued in a few years.
So buy them now, before they go out of copyright.
This feels like a way to drum up publicity and sell more books. Many grandparents will be reading this outrage in the express and buying the full original set for their children this christmas.
(it seems that copyright will last until 2060, which is crazy - 100 years after they were written)
Copyright in general is far longer than most people expect. In most of the world it's at least 70 years after the death of the author. Most people will not live to see even their grandparents' generation's work enter the public domain.
Copyright lasts much longer than necessary to incentivize creators. The last Civil War veteran died in 1956. Imagine he had written a memoir of his wartime experience and that current copyright laws had always been in effect. That means a book about events from the 1850s would still be under copyright!
I think copyright should last long enough to encourage the following type of creation: An author writes a fantasy book series. The author publishes books in this fantasy world for the next 25 years. Then she signs a deal for the movie rights and the studio spends 15 years producing a trilogy. If copyright only lasted 50 years, the entire fantasy world would still be under copyright for a decade after the last movie was released (and that movie would be protected for 50 years).
Now think of the benefit to society. The '60s and '70s produced a wealth of cultural content, and modern culture would benefit from seeing that material enter the public domain.
Nonsense. Disney would make plenty of money on Frozen 17 with Snow White in the public domain. Extreme copyright lifetimes just stifle public creativity and are an excuse to implement draconian and authoritarian practices.
I know, but they don't. Outside of creative tech/art spheres, most people don't know much of anything about copyright, and telling them about "works expiring into the public domain" seems to violate their preconceived ideas about "property". It's tragic.
Actually I think this is their way of extending copyright isn't it? If they publish newly revised books doesn't copyright end sooner for the older version? Speaking of US law.
But since the original version gets into public domain, it will be hard to make money on the “improved” version. Unless there is a huge demand for the sanitized text.
I live in the UK and can’t stand that crackpot layout that thinks the paragraph mark and the negation sign trump bacquote and tilde, so I buy my laptops from the US, except for Apple who allow you to choose your keyboard layout as an option.
