2 ms·
This makes sense to me, and I think you explain it better than the author. However, this is basically just the idea of opportunity costs, and pointing out that
by cortesoft 5y ago
This makes sense to me, and I think you explain it better than the author.
However, this is basically just the idea of opportunity costs, and pointing out that they apply to more than just the money spent, but also the time.
- infogulch 5y agoThere are 2 costs: 1. Cost in money to purchase, 2. Cost in time to use and manage. By paying these costs you gain a benefit (of any kind, monetary, pure enjoyment, etc). These are given. So far this is pretty easy to agree on, and could be stated in several ways including probably in terms of opportunity costs. The article's point is that there's a particular relationship between these costs and benefits. Namely, that the first cost only enables you to gain the benefit, but that you can't actually receive the benefit until you pay into the second, time cost. This is interesting because it's easy to forget or miscalculate that second cost, and because the second cost gates the benefit that means you may not be getting the full benefit from paying the first cost.