[dogcomplex]

This person has a point. We should put a thin layer of collective consumer organization (regional, statewide, national, global, or some other user-defined organization) that's programmatically (smart-contract-based) guaranteed to hunt for better bulk deals with the supplier within certain convenience parameters (e.g. "I want to buy mine within the month"). If these were open-source programs (ideally run in trustless blockchain envs) then the competition to create a popular one would undercut their middleman profits to optimally-tiny percentages due to arbitrage.

As it stands, we are an unorganized mob who the middlemen and manufacturers are squabbling over and each making a profit. But it's becoming pretty clear we'll be able to program the middlemen cheaper/better in the near future (or services can just offer direct-online shopping), so should that remaining profit go to the manufacturer or the consumer? Tesla's being pretty generous now (or appears to be), but future (and present) direct online shippers may benefit greatly from the organizational imbalance. This is the same argument for collectively-purchased (government) healthcare, I believe.

(And yes, companies obviously should be compensated according to their risk and willingness to invest at scarce times - Tesla certainly deserves big praise from many angles - but examining this relationship from a societal standpoint and collectively bargaining for the end consumer (advocating for the poorest of us) is important too)

[awad]

Well, in this case, there is no middleman. And, with Tesla, there never has been AFAIK. So not sure if applicable. But assuming a general statement, I have to bite...why smart contract?