alt Hacker NewsRight. That is not a paradox as stated.
The paradox would be:
* a TV used to be really expensive. So a home just had one
* over time TVs become half the price.
* now a home has 3 TVs, i.e paying 150% of what they initially payed.Right. That is not a paradox as stated.
The paradox would be:
* a TV used to be really expensive. So a home just had one
* over time TVs become half the price.
* now a home has 3 TVs, i.e paying 150% of what they initially payed.
It is a paradox. The paradox is that increasing the efficiency of resource usage can lead to more resource usage.
If you think that isn't a paradox because you can fairly easily explain why that is the case, you need to go and check what "paradox" means.