Also, learn the difference between may and will. Yes, there are certain situations where adding resources makes it worse. However, there are also situations (probably more situations) where adding resources makes it better. Therefore, the statement 'adding resources makes it worse' is false.

I have read it. What it says is that if you are time constrained, more developers does not necessarily speed up the process, and may lead to quality problems if you keep the same time constraints. It does NOT say that more resources is always a problem. Time is a resource, does adding time to a project mean it is going to be worse? Money is a resource, does hiring some top developers, and paying them accordingly, lead to a worse outcome? Good leadership is a resource, same question. Does having 10 people looking for bugs lead to a worse outcome than 1?

The Mythical Man Month only really discusses using more resources to shorten delivery time (doesn't work). It does not say more resources cause a worse outcome.

I read it multiple times. Still can't see the point.

While the system is running you are making backups and no data is being lost. If your SSD is powered off for an extended period it starts to lose data. If you have any sort of reasonable data management you would now assume the data on the SSD to be unreliable and restore the backups before it is used. What, exactly, is the problem? Or do you think 'bring it online and wait til someone complains before restoring backups' is a reasonable data management technique?

The bit rot happens when the drives have been powered off for an extended period. The backups are taken before the power is removed.

So the guy who overturned his Winnebago is a 'douchebag', but YOUR problems are purely mechanical, beyond your control? Gotcha.

Except for the fact that their insurance is only in effect when there is a passenger in the car.

The 'regular driver' is INSURED, so the victim is compensated. An Uber driver on his way to pick someone up is driving for commercial purposes so his 'regular' insurance will not pay, and neither will Ubers insurance as it is in effect only when there is a passenger. Yes, this has happened more than once.

Medallions and liquor licenses are not usually 'priced' (especially for high-dollar ones like you state), they are auctioned. The price goes that high because someone thinks it is worth it. Not that difficult of a concept.

Of course, in many places there is not a single auction, there are different auctions for different classes of bidders (fleet operators vs owner/drivers, etc). Naturally the price of a owner/driver medallion is usually much less than you quote, but that never gets mentioned.

Could they do it another way? Certainly. They could have a lottery for instance. However, having an auction does two things - nets more money, and insures that the purchaser is going to do what they must to protect their very valuable asset. In other words, comply with the taxi regulations and don't run a nusiance bar. These are generally things that are good for the public.

So SOME types of unregulated cabs should not exist, but Uber is special so it gets a free pass? The law does not work that way.

Also, the primary purpose of these laws in not to prevent murder and rape of fares, it is to protect the safety of the public who are NOT fares. For instance, your wonderful GPS (and Ubers much-ballyhooed 'insurance') does nothing for the poor schlub who gets mowed down by an Uber driver on the way to pick up a fare.

You don't think there were tragedies, news reports, public outrage about unregulated cabs? I suggest you do some research.

Medalliions cost what they cost because they are limited. They are limitied because there is only so much taxi service a city can handle. Adding more cars to the street doesn't move more people, it just creates more congestion. And congestion leads to aggressive driving and such stupity as using the sidewalk as a way around traffic. A glut of taxis means aggresive actions in trying to get fares (like picking up on the wrong side of the street, etc). A glut of taxis also means it is difficult for any particular taxi service to make enough money to stay in business. Who will survive? The one that spends the least money on luxuries like proper maintenance.

Yes, this describes conditions before the taxi laws were introduced. It is why the people wanted regulation.

There are good reasons for the taxi regulations and the medallion system. Just because you want to pretend they don't exist does not mean the don't exist in reality.

Yeah, the 'transportation industry' wrote those laws. Just like the meat packing industry wrote the meat packing laws, the building industry wrote the fire codes, the coal industry wrote the clean air laws, the mining industry wrote the mining safety laws, the restaurant industry wrote the health codes, etc.

Maybe you should read up on what conditions were like before those laws (and still are in some places), then maybe you could understand why the PEOPLE wanted those laws.

By the time it gets to this stage they have already given up on trying to find you. You are already on your way to a default judgement, this is just a courtesy to you to give you an opportunity to defend yourself. Getting rid of your Facebook account would do absolutely nothing to help you, it would just make it more likely you would never see a notice.

You do realize that the standard way of getting notices to people who can't be found is by posting a notice in the newspaper, don't you? Look in a newspaper in the classified ad section for 'legal notices'. You will find all kinds of things: taxes owed, foreclosure notices, divorces, lawsuits, etc.