3 ms·
iPads are famously not a commodity. They are a branded good. And just to be clear, people still eat squab all the time. The fact that it’s a different species
by RC_ITR 5y ago
iPads are famously not a commodity. They are a branded good.
And just to be clear, people still eat squab all the time. The fact that it’s a different species of pigeon likely has 0 impact on consumer welfare.
Is your point that resources are finite? I agree. And I also agree that fact is a major forward looking risk that could drive inflation, but if your argument is that there are numerous desirable things from the 17th Century that we do not have access to, then I’d have to disagree. Human innovation has just been too rapid over that period.
- Retric 5y agoMany extinct species where known for being quite tasty without any surviving equivalents. Being unusually tasty is in fact why many species are extinct because people put extra effort into hunting them. Now you personally may not particularly care but most species have a rather distinct flavor which is why flounder, salmon, etc are listed differently on a menu rather than as generic fish. PS: Among my circle of friends Tablets/iPads are into the whole Tissue/Kleenex brand as synonyms with category.
- RC_ITR 5y agoI mean, it's sort of great that now this is just a back and forth about the specifics of squab, but I assure you, most squab farmed today will taste far better than 'game' passenger pigeon. Not to blow up my own spot, but if you want better metaphors against arguments like mine, the Ansault pear and Gros Michel banana are better candidates.
- CRConrad 5y ago> I mean, it's sort of great that now this is just a back and forth about the specifics of squab, but I assure you, most squab farmed today will taste far better than 'game' passenger pigeon. How?!? How can you assure anyone of that, when the passenger pigeon has been extinct for over a century? (If you're talking from experience, you're easily the oldest HN poster.)