3 ms·
"In the best case the programmer and the company will both think they are getting a good deal." IMO that is far from the best case. That allows "ignorance is b
by iandanforth 11y ago
"In the best case the programmer and the company will both think they are getting a good deal."
IMO that is far from the best case. That allows "ignorance is bliss" and, at the other end of the malice spectrum, for one party to be taking advantage of the other.
I once sold a rare trading card for $50. I thought I was getting a good deal, the other person knew it was worth much more than that and thought they were getting a good deal. Was this situation optimal?
I once sold a laptop to a person over craigslist for a fair price. He thought he was getting a good deal as well. When I got home I discovered that model had just been obsoleted and so a brand new one was as cheap as the used one I'd just sold. Was this situation optimal?
- xiaoma 11y agoWhat do you believe the best case is?
- iandanforth 11y agoAs with most negotiated agreements, neither side should feel like it's a good deal, but all should have sufficient, accurate information such that they can agree on what the limiting externalities are and how they necessarily shape the final deal. Edit: I should note that this assumes a somewhat unlimited self-interest on both sides. Real people might not take all they can get even if it's offered, and real companies might not mind paying more than necessary even if they're not asked.
- masterzora 11y ago"In the best case the programmer and the company will both think they are getting a good deal" is not the same as "if both the programmer and the company both think they are getting a good deal it is the best case." TFA says the former but your post is really about the latter.