Show HN: Onflood, a location-specific social network - <AUTHOR>

I decided to spend part of this weekend exploring short-term, location-specific social networks. Here's what I came up with:
http://onflood.com/
Onflood grabs your location using the HTML5 geolocation API. It then creates an adhoc messageboard based on the number of messages in your area - the more messages there are near to you, the more closely-focused on your geographic location the system will be. So you shouldn't ever see a blank page. I don't want anyone to feel lonely!
Possible use cases include:
- Conference back-channels
- Communication during protests and demonstrations
- Finding out what's going on in a strange town
There's a lot more I'd like to do with this (ActivityStreams, its own API, login via OpenID, Facebook, etc), but I thought I'd pour myself a whiskey and open this up for feedback right now. Let me know what you think! <comment><USER2> Just an idea: since the utility of this is so dependent on the number/quality of the people using it in a certain location, you might want to start with hyper-focused groups (e.g. conference-goers, college cohorts, permaculturalists, church members) and then grow from there.

Otherwise, if random person A visits the site and sees posts from other random people with whom s/he feels no connection, they probably aren't coming back.

Good luck!

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> Clickable: <http://onflood.com/>

And some hotlinks to different floodboards:

San Francisco: <http://onflood.com/location/manual/?37.7789601,-122.419199>

Austin: <http://onflood.com/location/manual/?30.2674473,-97.7425618>

Edinburgh, UK: <http://onflood.com/location/manual/?55.9483399,-3.1932723></comment>


History of Egghead Software Stores - <AUTHOR> http://www.fundinguniverse.com/company-histories/egghead-com-inc-history/ <comment><USER2> Have fond memories of Egghead in the 90s. Their focus may have been corporate sales, but they still had a large selection of computer games in the stores I frequented. Likely would have not come across some of my favorite games at the time if not for Egghead.

</comment><comment><USER3> Ah, I remember when seeing your software on the shelf of Egghead meant you'd made it.

Of course we had to give up 50% of revenues, and then pay them tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars on top of that for "co-marketing", all while spending $10 a unit on packaging and disk duplication, while providing an expensive phone support team.

I guess I don't miss it that much, come on Apple take your 30%!

<comment><USER4> It's odd to me that people seem to have completely forgotten what the experience of selling your software in brick and mortar stores was like.

Most of the time, you also had to work through a software distributor middle man (who took a cut) because the large chains wouldn't deal with you directly.

<comment><USER3> Yea, I forgot about Ingram MicroD. They took 50%, and when it came time to get paid,

"We don't cut checks on Tuesday, only on Monday"

"Oh I know what she said about cutting checks on Monday, but Sarah is out till Thursday"

"Oh, Sarah is back but we only cut checks on Mondays"

"I don't know who told you we cut checks on Monday, we only do that on Friday. Sarah? Sarah doesn't work here any more"

</comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> I randomly remembered going to this store as a young boy and wondered what had happened to it. This led me to read the rather sad story of the company. Seems like there are some good lessons there-- for one, don't make low prices the major focus of your company unless you have some structural reasons why your costs will be lower than the competition. If they had instead focused on a higher-touch, more consultative sales approach at a higher price point, they would have been able to better withstand the competitive threat from computer superstores like CompUSA. Also, it makes you realize how little margin for error there is when you are in a low-margin, hyper competitive business. Their mistake of stocking up heavily on Windows 3.1 really hurt them.

</comment><comment><USER5> I recall they had plenty of 2nd rate software in very expensive packaging, and a lenient return policy.

</comment><comment><USER6> Visited this very store in Menlo Park.

Mac user at the time.

I would walk between Egghead and large bookstore, Kepler?. A bookstore, reading about cool easter eggs in Mac OS 7.1. Tried new sega games at a nearby game store.

At newegg bought a virus software for $60. It was first software ever bought. Looking back. LOL.

</comment><comment><USER7> Huh. I had always assumed newegg.com was a re-boot of Egghead.

<comment><USER8> Same mistake I made when I first found newegg. Was that intentional? I certainly gave newegg some unearned goodwill until I found out that they were unrelated.

<comment><USER7> I give newegg my goodwill and business anyway because their website makes it easy to find what I want, and the prices are competitive. They've earned it.

<comment><USER9> Are you a time traveler from 2010? IME Newegg has allowed itself to turn into another marketplace wasteland.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: What you wish had existed in/with your sneakers? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> A random unique number (such as a serial number) printed somewhere inconspicuous (such as on an inner label).

I typically purchase more than one identical pair of shoes at a time. I want them to wear out evenly. So it would help to have a means of pairing them after they wind up in a pile.</comment>


Ask HN: How to keep focus during work day? - <AUTHOR> I think nowadays especially if you are working on computer, it's really hard to keep focus on the work. It's just too darn easy and tempting to check email, talk to friends, watch cat videos and read news during your work day. I have done this, I know most of you have done this, but the question is how to prevent this? And how to keep focus on the work? In the end we want to keep our jobs and be better employees.<p>I have few tricks for this, but before revealing my tricks, I would be more than happy to hear some of yours! and what do you think about this problem? <comment><USER2> I'd work on the core issue of motivation; the rest is — as you say — "just" tricks.

<comment><USER3> I have reasonably decent motivation, but sometimes I run into situations at work where I get frustrated by some problem, take what I think will be a short break, and end up tumbling down a rabbit hole of distractions. To address that, I changed the hosts file on my computer at work to redirect HN to 127.0.0.1. My impression (after a few months) is that it makes me more productive (which puts me in a better mood).</comment></comment>


Nature journal subscription sale (from $10-50) - <AUTHOR> http://www.nature.com/content/npg/High_Impact/index.html

<comment><USER2> If you are wondering about the odd price structure, compare the price and the 2010 impact factor (from Wikipedia):

Nature $36, impact factor 36.1

Nature Biotechnology $31, impact factor 31.1

Nature Cell Biology $19, impact factor 19.4

Nature Chemical Biology $15, impact factor 15.8

Nature Chemistry $17, impact factor 17.9

and the list goes on! at least they round down...

<comment><USER3> It's amazing how big IF has become over the years. I don't recall a single discussion in grad school (in the late 90's) where we ever sat down and discussed the IF of journals we wanted to publish in.

Unfortunately I am not sure all the current altmetrics efforts quite address the problem either.</comment></comment>


Google UX=Dismal - <AUTHOR> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/google-uxdismal-jim-jensen

<comment><USER2> _But because the field jumps and the Google Search button disappears, it serves absolutely no purpose on the page. If you try clicking on it before typing a search argument, it does nothing._

The fact an element doesn't do anything isn't necessarily a reason to remove it. The 'useless' Google Search button serves an important purpose - it acts as a design continuation, connecting the Google search page of the past with the Google of today. If the button wasn't there a user who doesn't visit Google very often (eg most users, because the Google homepage isn't the main entry point to search any more) would wonder how to submit the form before they typed anything, and consequently might not type anything because they'd be thinking "what do I do once I've typed something?"

The "useless" button is essentially a placebo that makes the user think nothing has changed. That is far from useless.

<comment><USER3> You never get to click it though, unless you disable "Google Instant predictions". But it's not the default on majority of the devices out there so it is in fact technically useless. But sure, it's a placebo and for that reason Google's UI won't change. Comments on LinkedIn clearly show that people conflate habits with good UI. But I don't think it's fair to say that search button's existence is useful. It... just is there, that's all. :)

<comment><USER2> An element is useful if it _does something_. In the case of the non- functioning Google Search button, what it does is help the user feel that the box they're about to interact with leads somewhere. Effectively it turns the text entry box in to a search feature. It's a cognitive shortcut - rather than Google labelling the text entry box, they've included a button that tells the user "This text box functions the same as it always has" while the real functionality has changed. That, in my opinion, is useful.</comment></comment></comment>


A Model of Your Inbox - <AUTHOR> http://www.gaborcselle.com/blog/2008/11/model-of-your-inbox.html

<comment><USER3> The problem with this is that it isn't a model of an inbox -- it's a model of a to-do list to which anybody but you can add items. What you _really_ want to do is process an email into something besides an email -- by quickly responding to it, by rephrasing it as a to-do item, by trashing it, or by 'hitting snooze' and getting a reminder in a day or a week.

Your inbox is for messages; it's a way to see what people are _saying to you_. As messages leave the inbox, they should be transformed into something that tells you what people _want from you_.

<comment><USER4> I have been wanting this functionality for my mailbox since quite sometime.

I managed to get a very small fraction of it done in Thunderbird through tagging and filters. I pretty much generate a Todo list out of the messages by tagging. But I want more: reminders for these items; setting a deadlines and the amount of time it takes to finish items so that they will get auto- arranged and they present themselves when I have to pay attention.

It should not be that hard to get this done by integrating calendar right into the inbox. I have thought of doing this as a Thunderbird add-on, just haven't gotten around to doing it.

<comment><USER5> <http://gtdsupport.netcentrics.com/learn/productTour.php> (sadly, only for outlook)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> One of the topics I saw among the comments was a means of distinguishing something that needed to be done and done now (urgent / important).

I propose a solution. Allow people to send you what I call a PEmail. This is an email with a very specific project outlined. Instead of just a subject line, the PEmail has a subject line for the project's name and a time due line. Your email client then automatically organizes the incoming PEmails by when the project is due.

</comment><comment><USER7> There's only two quadrants for me: important or unimportant.

An important email is something work-related or an email from a significant other.

If it's important I read/respond immediately then archive it. All unimportant emails get archived instantly. This keeps my inbox empty and my mind at ease.

If I'm bored, I'll read the unimportant emails.

This system is simple and makes life a little less complicated.

</comment><comment><USER8> On a related note: I'm running an experiment on what people miss most in an email client. Currently Snooze This Message and the ability to add private notes to emails are winning.

Would be interesting to see what a more tech oriented crowd thinks, so feel free to vote - or add your own ideas.

<http://ideas.vapormarket.com>

<comment><USER9> For snoozing I use <http://www.iwantsandy.com>. Works really well - <USER2> forward the email and add "r me in two days", and two days later you get an email with a reminder. For private notes, I forward the mail to myself and add notes in the body, and Gmail recognizes it as part of the same conversation.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> To deal with emails like "cake on my desk", how about a "not relevant after $TIME" tag?

I know the cake won't last, so why I would tag it for automatic deletion after 3 hours. Anyone who misses the email won't have to waste time deleting it later.

</comment><comment><USER11> Give me a "move email up/down" feature and you solve half of my problems.

<comment><USER3> A reddit/slinkset/news.arc-based mail reader would actually be really interesting.

<comment><USER11> Exactly. A simple vote up and down system has completely changed the way news are shared online. The same can be done for your email. I am sure someone has already developed such a plugin for her/himself, or is currently working on it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Basically Stephen Covey's time management matrix applied on emails.

<comment><USER13> With the caveat that only one of the two dimensions can be determined easily.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> A categorized Twitter could be the answer to too much email!

Allow me to group followers into categories. Business, family & friends, social media community, etc. It forces us to get to the point in 140 characters and should continue such, but add a link to view more of what the communication received from a follower says(still keeping a character limit)... if I choose to do so.

</comment><comment><USER15> A similar thing was covered in Randy Pausch's lecture on time management.</comment>


Intel Management Engine JTAG Proof of Concept - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/ptresearch/IntelTXE-PoC <comment><USER2> Why does Intel encrypt the code? It is unlikely that anyone would steal it because it is useable only with Intel CPUs and is protected with copyright. So the reasons are either Intel wants to hide something (a code that changes CPU behaviour when a benchmark is detected?) or wants to have some features that cannot be disabled or modified by the user.

It is difficult to believe that there is no backdoor.

<comment><USER3> There's two reasons I've seen companies obfuscate as much of their hardware and firmware as possible:

1\. Protecting their trade secrets. Even if it's eventually leaked or copied, the time between introducing the product and a clone happening might represent billions in sales.

2\. Reducing patent damages. Hardware is a patent minefield with suits and licensing deals pretty common. The companies that want to troll need to see clearly that their patents were infringed. Making the product as opaque as possible reduces the number that will notice in the first place and/or how certain their claim will look. Patent suits are the single, greatest threat to open-source, hardware companies that operate in an existing ecosystem.

<comment><USER4> IANAL, but I find 2. weird, my first thought was that it obfuscation would give the opposing litigant an argument for willfulness potentially increasing patent damages.

i.e. it may reduce the total sum of patent damages across all potential cases by reducing the number that result in litigation, while increasing likelihood of increased damages for an unsuccessful defense.

Can't help but think 2. really seems to me a double edged sword.

<comment><USER3> Well, I know they do No 2 and it seems to work a bit. My guess is they never bring up that motivation. Just say they hid their design to stop Chinese copycats and delay hackers.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Does this help with reversing the intel ME and/or figurring out how to disable to potential spyware parts of it?

<comment><USER6> Tremendously. It is a huge first step. I worked on BIOS stuff before. I decided to wait until AMT was more exploitable to come back to the scene.

This is big news. It should be #1 on HN, instead of the failed pentest story.

Right now I am ordering a GB-BPCE-3350C to replicate their work and see how to extend it to other platforms. Intel will limit the vulnerability. No time to wait.

A modern AMT free laptop would be of great value.

<comment><USER7> This isn't as highly upvoted because it's old news from two months ago.

I remember this being very well received when it was first published on Twitter.

<comment><USER6> I should have followed more closely.

I get most news here now.

<comment><USER8> Consider multiple news sources. Getting info only from HN must leave you with a feeling of 'Facebook rules the world, blockchain all the things, ICO or GTFO, apps are only written in Go or Rust, Tesla Tesla Tesla'

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Can we disable Management Engine entirely in order to don't waste energy, in addition to not having stuff that you don't know so that it will not run all of the stuff you do not need.

<comment><USER10> Only partially for new machines. For pre-Nehalem ones, you can disable it fully. You may be interested in this: [https://github.com/corna/me_cleaner](https://github.com/corna/me_cleaner)

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> That was a fun read. Interesting trick with the debug USB cable with some of the pins isolated.

<comment><USER12> I don't quite get how it works. A quick search tells me that USB 3.0 indeed allows A-A crossover cables to connect two hosts: [https://superuser.com/a/945523](https://superuser.com/a/945523)

...but this leaves only a single conductor to do the entire thing?

<comment><USER13> A USB3 A connector has 9 pins, not 4 like USB2, so there are still 6 left.

<comment><USER14> And those 6 pins are separate TX and RX pairs, and 2 grounds. The pins disconnected are 5V, which would potentially damage things or cause an overcurrent flag to trip (turning off both ports) if this was connected on both ends, and D+/D-, which is the bidirectional USB2.0 data pair that normally has fixed host/device roles and needs a special controller (like the one in your phone) to be dual role, so it's easier to just disconnect it. The USB3.0 TX/RX pairs are only one way each (think like RS232 null modem but much faster), so it's much easier.

This is a good example of how USB3.0 works almost like a separate, parallel bus to USB2.0.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> So do we finally have reliable backdoors into any and all chips?

</comment><comment><USER16> is there any specific reason for using python 2 instead of 3 or it is just how you guys do it

<comment><USER17> Python 3 is ten (!) years old and perfectly usable, but it suffers from a well-known, but curious problem where people who occasionally use Python for some light scripting tend to go for Python 2.7. Rarely it's a choice made because of library availability, more often it is because of the perceived ubiquity of Python 2.7 installs on the target user's computer or simply because of a mindset where Python 2.7 is good enough and getting the hang of Python 3 seems like a huge obstacle (it isn't).

I'd love to know why this project specifically chose Python 2.7 too. Python 2 reaches its end of life in 2020, any new Python code should really be written in Python 3.

By the way, if you want to prevent getting a bunch of downvotes like your comment did, be polite! Not including any capitalization or punctuation is considered downright rude by many. Your text reads like a robot's printout.

<comment><USER18> You forgot one reason not to switch from 2 to 3: Zero benefit. Nothing python 3 does would benefit my scripts to any extend over just using python 2 as I always did. Is learning 3 a huge hurdle? No, it is however in some cases completely unnecessary.

<comment><USER19> Yeah, for writing scripts like this - python 2: 0% chance of thinking about Unicode. python 3: 5% chance i have to waste time debugging some random str decoding issue, no benefits. why bother?

<comment><USER20> This might be true if you're an english speaker, running the script on an english platform and only consuming data from english services. And also you are sure that no non-english speaker will ever take over the development of your script and you will never have to localize it to other languages. Otherwise, it's exactly the opposite. Python 3 is what you should be using if you want 0% chance of being stopped by a string encoding issue.

Python 3 might occasionally require some extra steps when consuming strings compared to Python 2, but the reality is that those steps were always necessary. Python 2 just hid those details in a way that was only really safe for english-exclusive development. That doesn't mean that Python 2 is easier to use or less brittle. In fact I would say it means the opposite.

<comment><USER18> For most strings I don't care about language, encoding or related overhead. In my scripts they are best dealt with as ophaque bytes with a few specific byte patterns that are the same in ascii and utf8, as well as various other encodings.

Last unicode issue I had was on a system german characters, because some library assumed it had to explicitly perform encoding with a bad default setting. If the library didn't try to be smart the program would have worked independently of system or language, instead it failed on any non english system by trying to convert a perfectly fine, system specific encoding to utf8.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Scheme in Ruby. - <AUTHOR> http://github.com/jcoglan/heist

<comment><USER2> I wrote a lengthy post about this earlier but it seems like i have closed the browser before posting :-/

Long story short, this one is exceptionally well done and the author seems like an actual Schemer, which is a major plus.

The interpreter doesn't have a prompt, so it looks stuck ;-)

I would use it if I was stuck in a Ruby shop; this is industrial strength stuff.

</comment><comment><USER3> Heist is definitely one of the better-designed interpreter I've seen. I've been a James Coglan-fan ever since I stumbled upon it!

He also has an excellent video where he creates a Scheme interpreter in 15 minutes (no sound unfortunately): <http://vimeo.com/4339116>

</comment><comment><USER4> Wow, that seems...backwards.

<comment><USER4> That was funny, the comment got upvoted and then downvoted. So perhaps I'm not the only one who would be interested to hear examples of situations in which one would want a Scheme interpreter implemented in Ruby. There isn't much of a rationale in the README. On the other hand, a Ruby interpreter implemented in Scheme would be interesting as an attempt to nail down the ever-elusive semantics of Ruby, if nothing else.

If, as another commenter mentioned, there are "Ruby shops" where one would have to sneak Scheme in through this mechanism, then I guess Ruby has truly reached the mainstream.

<comment><USER5> The rationale is that I wanted to learn how to write an interpreter, particularly some of the more challenging parts like tail recursion, macros, continuations and laziness. It's in Ruby because that's what I know best; it's not intended for production use as a replacement for Ruby, though I have used it myself to do a little code transformation and testing in Ruby apps.

So basically it's a toy, but one that I hope others can learn something from.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> (

(

      (

        (

          (cool)

        )

       )

      )

    )

<comment><USER7> Your parentheses look lonely :(.</comment></comment>


Open source Evernote replacement based on Electron - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/Laverna/laverna <comment><AUTHOR> Since the Evernote announcement, I've been trying to find an open source alternative. This one is the closest I could find. Notable features:

\- Markdown \- Image in Markdown \- Notebooks and tags and searching \- Encryption \- Dropbox sync \- Open source and built on Github Electron

Missing features: \- Mobile support (android coming, iOS client missing?) \- Better searching \- Importing Evernote notes \- OCR?

Would be interested in what's coming up. What replacements have you been using?

<comment><USER2> What was the evernote announcement? Was there a breach?

<comment><USER3> I think the reference is to the pricing changes announced at the end of June 2016 [1]

[1] [https://blog.evernote.com/blog/2016/06/28/changes-to- evernot...](https://blog.evernote.com/blog/2016/06/28/changes-to-evernotes- pricing-plans/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Right now I'm tracking LightPaper[0] and Typora[1]. Both support Markdown and saving as text, i.e. normal .md files. Quiver, which I'm using daily, stores files with a custom format.

I'm very excited about Typora, but for me to use regularly it needs a file navigator similar to LightPaper's.

[0] [http://lightpaper.42squares.in/](http://lightpaper.42squares.in/)

[1] [https://www.typora.io](https://www.typora.io) and [https://github.com/typora/typora-issues](https://github.com/typora/typora- issues)

</comment><comment><USER5> I never used Evernote, but I read people talking about the changes and I started using Turtl - [https://turtl.it/](https://turtl.it/). GPL3 and you can run your own server it seems.

</comment><comment><USER6> This still seems to have a water to go, but it looks quite promising. Thanks.</comment>


Me vs Backspace: my war against a rogue character - <AUTHOR> http://lbrandy.com/blog/2010/07/me-vs-backspace/ <comment><USER2> This would be a good time to point out that OSX supports Emacs bindings in all Cocoa text fields.

For example, you can press ctrl+a to go to the beginning of the line and ctrl+e to go to the end of the line. The "Meta" modifier can be accessed via alt+ctrl, so you can alt+ctrl+f to go forward a word, or alt+ctrl+b to go back a word. Any motion can be combined with shift to select the text.

These are especially useful with the laptop keyboards. Bonus points if you convert your caps lock key into an additional ctrl key: <http://mkaz.com/archives/86/disable-caps-lock-on-mac-os-x/>

<comment><USER3> Jacob Rus has an excellent and thorough write up of the Cocoa Text system: [http://www.hcs.harvard.edu/~jrus/Site/Cocoa%20Text%20System....](http://www.hcs.harvard.edu/~jrus/Site/Cocoa%20Text%20System.html)

He provides a custom DefaultKeyBinding.dict which adds more emacs keybindings to Cocoa text controls. I've been using it for years: [http://www.hcs.harvard.edu/~jrus/Site/KeyBindings/Emacs%20Es...](http://www.hcs.harvard.edu/~jrus/Site/KeyBindings/Emacs%20Esc%20Bindings.dict)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Reminds me of finding out the hard way that "paste" is bound to Mouse3 by default in Gnome and that on some mice I'll occasionally scroll the wheel violently enough to trigger clicks.

Took a few times of finding random text in my code to realize what was happening, and even longer to figure out how.

<comment><USER5> Another hilarious consequence. Firefox, if you try to middle click a link and miss, would try to interpret whatever is in your paste buffer as an url. It would do an i'm feeling lucky search on google and send you to that page.

For a long time I thought that opening links in a new tab would sometimes take you instead to a random page on the internet.

<comment><USER6> You can get around this by turning on the "autoscroll" feature, since that's activated by a middle-click. I've often wondered just who exactly Mozilla thought the "paste in window goes to URL" feature was for; feels like the sort of thing that gets left in because its fanbase includes one of the developers.

<comment><USER7> It's a Unix thing, and AFAIK, only exists in the Linux version of Firefox. By the way, you don't have to disable the autoscroll feature to disable this; just go to about:config and toggle middlemouse.contentLoadURL to false.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I've verified this issue using TextEdit saving the file and printing it using "od -a".

I've also submitted it to bugreport.apple.com as bug # 8223684

</comment><comment><USER9> Interesting. In my text editor (TextMate), I can reproduce this pretty reliably using that key sequence.

<comment><USER9> Video: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLMNin-2p6A>

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Here is another article I found on this, "Mac Delete Key Bug Demonstration".

<http://gunther.web66.com/crossjava/Bugs/deletekeybug/>

<comment><USER9> That's a different bug and is only relevant for Java apps. On a Mac, the backspace key is labeled "delete", and the key associated with the action most people refer to as "delete" is labeled with the delete special character[1]. Apple refers to this as the "forward delete" key. The bug described at the link you provided does not require the shift or arrow keys to be pressed and produces a different control character.

1 - <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delete_key>

<comment><USER3> Fun historical note: The original Mac keyboard had a Backspace key rather than a Delete key. [http://www.vectronicsappleworld.com/collection/articlepics/5...](http://www.vectronicsappleworld.com/collection/articlepics/512ke/snap21.jpg)

The current Mac "Delete" key was inherited from the Apple IIgs ADB keyboard, and it stuck around.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> _I decided to wipe my Mac, reinstall the OS, and see if that fixed it._

So reinstalling the whole OS was higher up the troubleshooting chain than just trying it out from your wife's computer? Err...

<comment><USER12> Piffle. Sure you can make that criticism _after_ he told you the answer. Could you have told him _before_?

If you've never done the equivalent, it's only because you haven't been around computers very long.

<comment><USER11> _If you've never done the equivalent, it's only because you haven't been around computers very long._

Dude, in twenty years with computers I have never re-installed an OS to fix a problem (obviously this is distinct from installing a _new_ version of the OS which could legitimately have a fix for it). For me rebooting the computer is even a last act of desperation that I am ashamed to take.

But then I am a unix/Linux user. I grant you the possibility that this may somehow have been a rational act for MacOS, though if true I find that disappointing.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I do all the shift+arrow text marking with my right hand solely, incl. cmd+backspace (delete) - and so, I never run into the problem of accidentally inserting the $08 character anywhere.

But, yes, you are right, holding shift+any arrow key, while hitting backspace, inserts a $08 by the OS X IME. This does depend on what kind of dialog you are writing in (NSTextField, NSTextInput etc.), however, as not all of them accepts this input. You can't input a backspace character this way in Terminal.app, f.e.</comment>


Show HN: Spacewar! featuring the original "Minskytron Hyperspace" - <AUTHOR> http://www.masswerk.at/spacewar/?version=spacewar2x

<comment><AUTHOR> I finally managed to identify Martin Graetz's original hyperspace routine, featuring the "hyperspace Minskytron signature" (as described and depicted in "Origin of Spacewar"). This was actually a patch (hyperspace85.bin) to "Spacewar! 2B".

This was actually the first hyperspace in history (in the very first digital video game) – and what a nice one!

<comment><USER2> The Origin of Spacewar, by J. M. Graetz:

[http://www.wheels.org/spacewar/creative/SpacewarOrigin.html](http://www.wheels.org/spacewar/creative/SpacewarOrigin.html)

<comment><AUTHOR> See also [http://www.masswerk.at/spacewar/SpacewarOrigin.html](http://www.masswerk.at/spacewar/SpacewarOrigin.html) (corrected and annotated version, including additional interviews and images).

Some of my own analysis: [http://www.masswerk.at/spacewar/inside/](http://www.masswerk.at/spacewar/inside/)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> I hope it's ok if I plug my own little "Spacewar!" hobby project. It's not as true to the original, but it automatically matches people connecting to the game to have them play against each other:

[http://orbital.lewix.eu/](http://orbital.lewix.eu/)

<comment><AUTHOR> Totally ok :-) I was always thinking of doing this with the original game via WebRTC DataChannels (that's also a reason for the emulation running the display asynchronously, so one could be driving the other).

BTW: By this Spacewar! would then become Orbitwar (Silas Warner, 1974 / PATO network).

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Nice! Playing spacewar on the real hardware was one of the big highlights of my last visit to the Mountain View Computer History Museum (the other one being seeing the recreation of the Difference Engine actually working).

</comment><comment><USER5> Is it meant to work in Firefox? I'm getting the classic JS error "SyntaxError: numbers starting with 0 followed by a digit are octals and can't contain 9".

<comment><AUTHOR> Just tested with FF 29.0.1 -- Please reload and try again ...

<comment><USER5> Working, thanks :)</comment></comment></comment>


'Capitalism generates a lot of wealth depending on the situation' - <AUTHOR> https://techcrunch.com/2020/02/15/capitalism-generates-a-lot-of-wealth-depending-on-the-situation/ <comment><USER2> I have starting looking for software engineering jobs for the first time in a few years, and I'm looking at it through a more socially conscious lens than I did a few years ago.

I'm not opposed to commerce or people making money, but so many of the startup I see are based on business plans that just seem dystopian.

Software can solve real problems, but right now capital seems to be choosing some really unsettling applications. Things like using ML to inform "behavioral nudges" for asset manager, many of the healthcare tech startups, and all of the surveillance and spying tech.

</comment><comment><USER3> This article is a paywalled interview with Ben Tarnoff, but the preface links this non-paywalled opinion piece from him which is interesting: [https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/sep/17/tech- clim...](https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/sep/17/tech-climate- change-luddites-data)

I agree that "Luddite" is a label we shouldn't be afraid of - at the very least, it should be within the Overton window of acceptable, debatable ideas. It is not an impractical and kneejerk opposition to technology; it is a principled belief that some particular technology, while it might make other people rich, hurts me and others like me, and we have the right to defend ourselves. It is certainly not a mere fear of unfamiliar technology.

One thing I'm noticing from the world around me is the extent to which political campaigning is a zero-sum game. We've poured billions of dollars into the US presidential campaigns, funding everything from microtargeted advertising to (probably) machine learning to figure out who to microtarget, and the effect is that _each candidate_ spends tons of money on it, fighting each other. It's not clear that overall outcomes have improved (e.g., "does the elected president more accurately represent what the people actually want, because they're better informed about positions and issues"), and it certainly seems like if you could magically prevent everyone from spending piles of money, we wouldn't be any worse for it - but it's very hard to do that in any meaningful sense (there's enough ways to spend money on influence, on get-out- the-vote campaigns targeting specific neighborhoods, etc.), so it's irrational for anyone to voluntarily back down. And a huge chunk of this money, in turn, is spent on computers (and electricity and emissions) and not on human jobs.

> _Decomputerization doesn't mean no computers. It means that not all spheres > of life should be rendered into data and computed upon. Ubiquitous > "smartness" largely serves to enrich and empower the few at the expense of > the many, while inflicting ecological harm that will threaten the survival > and flourishing of billions of people._

<comment><USER4> > the effect is that each candidate spends tons of money on it, fighting each > other

I've been following Brexit since 2016 and my impression from the materials/research available is that microtargeting via social networks is in fact cheaper than the "analog" campaigning. Let alone money spent on political ads are easier to dodge and thus not even report as campaign spending. But in any case microtargeting being cheaper _is_ the reason it's being increasingly used in politics.

Now taking the price into account, I'm not so sure energy consumption is greater for digital campaigns compared to the "analog" ones: consider rallies, talks other events that have a similar impact to microtargeting.

That is not to say digital campaigning is better in any sense of the word, it is scary because it can be far more manipulative (take Brexit as an example), just that the carbon footprint argument is not very convincing to me in this case.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> This is why we need to evolve to a more human centered capitalism. We need to put stakeholders back ahead of shareholders. We need to realize that growth is not limitless and to stop worshiping it. And we need to stop measuring our success as a nation based on macroeconomic metrics like GDP and focus more on metrics that indicate the wellbeing of our citizens. We can not abandon capitalism but we cannot stagnate either.

<comment><USER6> > This is why we need to evolve to a more human centered capitalism

If it's human-centered, it's not capitalism. If it's capitalism, it's not human-centered. You can't have a "more four-sided triangle".

<comment><USER4> Human-centered capitalism is perfectly possible with some of the alternative forms of stock ownership and company governance. You can start and build a company that's employee-governed through elections, optionally also employee- owned in the economic sense, though the latter is optional. There are many examples of various types of ownership among some famous companies too, from Ikea to Bosch and Zeiss. What they have in common is, there are no absentee owners and therefore no pressure of profit maximization at all costs on the company.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER2> I'm guessing the actual interview is behind a paywall, but it can't really tell. It just seems like the article ends abruptly.

<comment><USER3> Your ad blocker might be saving you from seeing " _You 've landed on an Extra Crunch exclusive. Select a plan to continue reading. Already a member? Sign in._" where it cuts off.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> > Capitalism generates a lot of wealth depending on the situation

Isn't communism in the same "depending on the situation" boat?

<comment><USER8> Sure but in capitalism, the wealth goes to individual value holders (landlords and rent seekers are derogatory terms for this). In true communism, the wealth goes to the state.

The difference to most employees is honestly pretty small, working for McDonald's versus being a janitor for the post office are functionally the same, no one really cares who the guy at the top of the chain is.

The main benefit of capitalism is the dream of being the wealthy person, if you're a janitor it's almost impossible, but the dream is there

<comment><USER3> > _The main benefit of capitalism is the dream of being the wealthy person, if > you 're a janitor it's almost impossible, but the dream is there_

Would you prefer to be a poverty-line worker with a realistic but unlikely dream of being wealthy, or a worker who can support a 4-person family comfortably and retire at age 60 but has no chance of ever making any more money?

(This is not a rhetorical question, I think there are genuinely lots of possible answers there.)

<comment><USER8> How realistic are we talking here?

<comment><USER3> Let's say a 1% chance, and no amount of trying hard can change that percentage, it's a pure dice roll.

(This is proxy for limited opportunity, tough facts like "you have a family that relies on you so you cannot spend 5 years trying and failing at startups," discrimination, economic downturns, the fact that the world cannot sustain more than a few Bill Gateses, and all sorts of other things that are beyond your control even in a capitalist society. On the other hand, I think 1% is significantly _above_ the number of actual janitors who actually strike it rich in real capitalist societies.)</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Alzheimer website slowly disappearing - <AUTHOR> http://i-remember.fr/en <comment><USER2> The website's performance is a metaphor for the article's title.

</comment><comment><USER3> FFS. The comments on here are really breaking my heart.

This is a BEAUTIFUL website. "Booh, autoplay!" "Booh, performance!" "Booh, webgl bloat!"

Holy crap guys. 24 comments, only TWO positive ones.

<comment><USER4> if the app was fast , i'm sure everybody would be positive. IT is not.I dont even get 1 fps on my MCBOOK PRO. Explain me how i can enjoy beauty that way.

<comment><USER5> I would be worried about the health of your computer. My work's T420 lenovo doesn't seem to lag THAT much, in fact, I hadn't noticed much of it until I got to read the comments here...

Scratch that, just after I wrote last paragraph I opened the site on Chrome (Instead of FF) and it lags heavily in there. I don't know if it might be because some FF plug ins block third party things like facebook connect and Google analytics...

I find it weird, the difference of fps between Chrome and FF with this site is HUGE in my computer.

<comment><USER3> FWIW: 33.0.1750.152 (Developer Build 256984) - the site runs smooth as butter.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> ultra slow on my laptop, unfortunatly.

WebGL is fancy,but performances are just not there yet. How long most people will stay on that site given how slow it is?and i have a pretty good computer(Macbook pro). it's not a geek website, webdevs should test performances seriously and ask themself if these kind of stunts are worth the effort. So yeah, there is a wow effect, but if i was the client,i'd be afraid of a pretty high bounce rate.

The message is clearly lost here,due to performance problems.

<comment><USER6> The problem isn't so much with WebGL performance. WebGL is easily fast enough for simple particles like this (although 2D canvas could probably also manage it). The problem is that a lot of web devs don't have a full understanding of the OpenGL pipeline, and how using tools and effects in one way rather than another can lead to crippling performance issues. That entire scene could probably be batched into a single render call.

WebGL has lots of potential to be lightweight and non-intrusive. I've started writing a series on the topic to try and dispel some myths of WebGL being slow and bloated.

[https://medium.com/p/abf669857722](https://medium.com/p/abf669857722)

Part 1 of the technical aspects: [https://medium.com/p/cebd176c281d](https://medium.com/p/cebd176c281d)

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> I'm taking a break in an office environment. I scan various sites for interesting stories which I open in new tabs, then I read the stories of interest.

During the scan-and-open process, I started to hear bizarre enviro-music and was wondering who was being so inconsiderate.

Fortunately, this page was one of the first I'd opened, so it didn't take too long for my obnoxious self to stop bothering everyone.

(Just ranting about sites with autoplay sound, it's only been a bad idea since day one.)

<comment><USER8> After the chrome update (adding sound indicator on tabs), that isn't much issue now.

<comment><USER9> No, it is still an issue. Those icons are fairly small, if I have many tabs open it can take a moment for my eyes to scan across the tabs to locate the playing icon.

What chrome _should_ do is take the capability that lets them know if a tab is playing sound and use it to _mute_ that sound, unless the user requests otherwise or _perhaps_ unless the tab is actually being displayed to the user.

What web developers should do is stop autoplaying things with sound. Unless your website is dedicated to things with sound and your user already knows that _(read: unless your site is youtube, or vimeo)_ then autoplaying sound is always the wrong thing to do.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> Is it just me or is the website really slow . It feels very laggy on Chrome 33.0.1750.152 Mac OSX 10.9 mavericks.

<comment><USER11> Same system, same versions but it's fine for me. Still power hungry though.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Nice, kind of reminds me of that movie; memento I think it was called :)

[http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0209144/](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0209144/)

</comment><comment><USER13> I'm a bit confused as to what it means by disappearing, or how to stop it. Does the site chronologically delete memories or does it all go down as memories aren't added?

</comment><comment><USER14> Anyone having issues with performance, try opening it in Firefox. It was very laggy for me in Chrome, but Firefox runs it perfectly.

<comment> josh-wrale Locked up my Firefox 28 for a few minutes on fully-updated Fedora 20, Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-3770 CPU @ 3.40GHz, Radeon HD 6350, 16GB RAM.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Amazing website. It could also be a place to speak out secrets.

</comment><comment><USER16> I've yet to meet a high-end 3D game that my machine can't run at 40fps+. I'm really impressed that they've managed to make it chug along at 3fps displaying glowy dots.

<comment><USER4> what hardware do you have?

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Really cool and well done, slow loading aside.</comment>


Bitcoin has everything it needs to become a major speculative bubble - <AUTHOR> http://www.businessinsider.com/im-raising-my-bitcoin-price-target-to-400-2013-4

<comment><USER2> Can we stop with the bitcoin topics that are solely about the price? Sure, if a company starts accepting it it's news, if something happens to bitcoin network it's news, but not this. This is getting crazy. This is not 'pimp your currency' news (yes, I say that as a bitcoin dev). I'm sure everyone one HN has made their mind about it by now anyway...

<comment><AUTHOR> Hacker News: for when all you really want to talk about is Bitcoin and Aaron Swartz.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> I'm raising my LOL target to over 9000.

Also, mtgox is down; has been for about an hour.

<comment><USER4> api is still working…

<http://data.mtgox.com/api/1/BTCUSD/depth/fetch>

<comment><USER3> That's been displaying the same price ($141.32001) for the past hour, though.

<comment><USER5> Price doesn't change because mtgox is down and people cannot trade.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I like the part about bitcoin 'not having amy fundamentals to fall back to'. As if fiat currencies are any different.

<comment><USER7> The USD has the US government behind it. Whatever you think of that, it's not nothing.

<comment><USER8> "The USD has the US government behind it"

What does that even mean?

Also, the US government doesn't really have anything to do with the USD; the USD is managed solely by the Federal Reserve, and the Federal Reserve is _not_ a branch of the US government (it's a privately held bank; look it up).

"it's not nothing"

It's worse than nothing. The Federal Reserve can and does change the value of the dollar at will (it's called inflation). That's why you can buy a loaf of bread with your 5 bucks now, but in 10 years your 5 bucks probably won't even buy a candy bar.

Contrast that with gold. In 1913 (the year the Federal Reserve was created), you could buy a house with 100 ounces of gold. 100 1913 dollars is worth roughly 2 2013 dollars, but 100 1913 ounces of gold is worth exactly 100 2013 ounces of gold, and you can still buy a house with it (100 ounces of gold is $156,740 USD; no, this won't buy you a house in New York, but it will in most other parts of the country). That's what it means for a currency to be backed by something of value. Value doesn't change.

<comment><USER9> Just to pick some other dates: 100 ounces of gold in 2000 was worth ~$28k which wouldn't buy much house anywhere.

Also, comparing gold @ ~$20/oz in 1913 to a dollar stuffed under a mattress in the same year is a bit of a false comparison. The Compounding the same $20 in 10year Tbonds (a decent 'risk free rate' starting in 1928 (the first year I could find data) would yield ~$679 in 2000 (outperforming gold by over 2x) and ~$1385 in 2012 (underperforming slightly, but with almost no volatility).

<comment><USER8> You can't compare gold just sitting there with USD gaining interest in an investment for 90 years. Well you can, but then you'd be making a ridiculous comparison.

<comment><USER9> What is ridiculous about that?

Tbonds are pretty much the definition of the "risk free rate of return" for USD. Is there an alternate (non-zero) "risk free rate" for gold that you would like use instead to make comparisons?

<comment><USER8> Because you're comparing the value of one thing over time against the rate at which you would gain value in a different investment over time. I can see an argument for why you might say tbonds have been a better _investment_ than gold, per se, but that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the necessary volatility of fiat money because _it's not backed by anything of real, unchanging value_. I'm talking about the purchasing power of the same amount of gold and USD over time.

<comment><USER9> > it's not backed by anything of real, unchanging value.

Are you actually arguing that gold's value does not change?

Also, what are you using to measure the "volatility" you claim fiat money has so much of?

<comment><USER8> "what are you using to measure the "volatility" you claim fiat money has so much of"

Inflation.

And 'unchanging' wasn't the best choice of words, but my point is that gold is not subject to the whims of monetary policy makers because you can't create more gold. Gold's value only changes when more gold is discovered.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> It seems like a price target of $400 misses the point.

Bitcoin is likely making order of magnitude changes in value, one direction or another.

Edit: Oops, didn't read the article first, the author isn't actually setting a price target because he doesn't like Bitcoin, but I still stick by my statement.

</comment><comment><USER11> I'm sticking to my price target of $2 by late June/early July[1].

Still no sign of adoption by any popular retailers, the majority of demand is coming from speculators, and the exchanges are getting slower every day (MtGox is down as I write this and the queue to open an account is several days deep).

At this point, BitCoin is still more of a toy than a currency.

[1] <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5324722>

<comment><USER12> A toy with a 1.4 bn market cap.

Of course no one - including you - will remember your prophecy come August, but I am pretty sure you are wrong. Why? Because history does not repeat itself, esp. not when it comes to speculation.

<comment><USER13> _Why? Because history does not repeat itself, esp. not when it comes to speculation._

Haha, that's funny. See tulips, housing, Iraqi Dinar, CO Silver industry crash, gold in the 80s, the list goes on.

<comment><USER12> All different asset classes. The last gold bubble was in the 80s, 30 years from now.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Noob question: as I understand Bitcoins are linked to values of other currencies. Is it possible to link it to a stable non-currency value/index? (I'm thinking about the Big Mac index here: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Mac_Index>)

Or to put it in another way: it it possible to link a Bitcoin value (or any currency) to an index not influenced by greed? Could it be linked to the number of people alive for example?

<comment><USER15> You can only determine the Bitcoin value in another index if there are trades being made of Bitcoins for the item being indexed.

So if you want to create a BTC/Number of People Alive exchange rate, you need people trading lives for Bitcoins, which is a bit macabre.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> I post about my beliefs relating to bitcoin/cryptocurrency right here: <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5486245>

Would love to see much discussion about the topics.

Anyway the post (posted 2 hours ago) is not in the front page anymore.

</comment><comment><USER17> I'm sure Business Insider's _31 posts about Bitcoin in the last week_ has nothing to do with it... [http://www.businessinsider.com/s?q=bitcoin&vertical=&...](http://www.businessinsider.com/s?q=bitcoin&vertical=&author=&contributed=1&sort=date)

</comment><comment><USER18> So - if the bitcoins quadrupled in value for a month this means two things:

We have 4 times as many goods and services offered for bitcoins or speculative bubble.

So unless we have lots of new businesses that accept them ... the market for bitcoins will be as fun as the Apple one.

</comment><comment><USER19> Slightly away from the crux of the article, I've seen a few people mention hacking as a reason why BitCoin is still risky. Are they talking about hacking of BitCoin at the low level, or hacks on BitCoin repositories?

<comment><USER20> repos

</comment></comment><comment> k-i-m during the first bubble i bought about a hundred bitcoins (2k usd worth), just after few days the bubble unfortunately popped and the price was back to 4-5, and i decided to sell them (it was my first "trading" experience, the stress of the losing was high), after a while (late 2012) i bought back what i had left for $9 and sold them for $13, now I just wish that I kept them instead when i bought them initially :-(

</comment><comment><USER21> The number doesn't matter, the experiment was a success.

</comment><comment><USER22> So the author just bought his first bitcoins, eh? :D

</comment><comment><USER23> Bitcoin price increase lacks the necessary volume element. So little people are buying and selling at this price.

</comment><comment><USER24> MTGox is down? Price jump $40 in a night - things getting crazy!

<comment><USER25> not here [http://bitcoinity.org/markets?currency=EUR&exchange=mtgo...](http://bitcoinity.org/markets?currency=EUR&exchange=mtgox)

I really would like to buy more, but I am unsure if it is normalizing soon (back to 100$) or hiking like gold did last year.

<comment><USER26> Don't know if we can trust that link at the moment: it's showing the last trade as "an hour ago".

<comment><USER27> It's right; MtGox has been down/frozen for the past hour (at the time of this post). Bitcoinity is a pretty solid site in my experience.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


The Not-So-Secret Life of Terrence Malick - <AUTHOR> http://www.texasmonthly.com/the-culture/the-not-so-secret-life-of-terrence-malick/ <comment><USER2> Days of Heaven is my favorite film, I recommend it to anyone with an appreciation for visual storytelling. Those 95 or so minutes are the perfect balance between conventional storytelling a lá Badlands and the disjointed, introspective narrative of The Thin Red Line and onwards.</comment>


So Long, and Thanks for All the Fish - <AUTHOR> https://aralbalkan.com/notes/so-long-and-thanks-for-all-the-fish/ <comment><USER2> Honestly, good luck to you and bai!

I am happy for all those that voted Tory. The country would have been a complete shambles had Labour got in. Do you people have short memories of the last Labour Goverment?

There was no money left.

Immigration was out of control.

There were musings of ditching the pound and having the euro as the currency.

Giving more powers to the EU.

Complete madness. Labour would not have been more happier if the UK was sold off like Greece.

Now under a Tory parliament, the UK has a chance of being great again. Being fiscally responsible and fostering a climate for more jobs for people and better wages. Last I heard the UK was outpacing Germany!

It's funny, where will you go. Yeah, no-where IS perfect.

<comment><USER3> You are being downvoted (and probably me to follow) because you said something 'unpopular' in a context of a quite lefty post. To be honest I think the British public voted for the better candidate out of the existing options. They were not presented with stellar choices, so they had to make do. Online privacy, I believe was not why most people voted or did not vote Tory.

Yes, apps like Aral's (which good on him, I support it), have a _chance_ of being affected. Maybe. Its just as likely that it won't be. Who knows? The whole world is snooping and listening so it might as well be happening wherever he goes.

However, had Labour won you'd see the exact same post created by someone else, leaving the country because Labour had won, stating his/hers reasons and telling the public to be ashamed of themselves. This is how democracy works. half the people will be unhappy.

<comment><USER4> Labour is increasingly right wing, but you're wrong about Tory's being a good option.

Tories now have majority rule in the house of commons for 5 years, which means they can push whatever they want as long as they're aligned without being reigned in. Last time this happened the gap between rich and poor deepened massively, benefits were slashed, our rail system was privatised and Libraries closed- oh, and Miners went on strike due to terrible conditions.

38% is not a Majority vote, in my mind, and leveraging young voters because they "don't know better" and have very little consideration to other issues that do not affect young fit workers is a very American thing to do.

honestly, growing up poor has taught me to respect socialist ideals such as public free healthcare and benefits for the unable. - But there was a time in my teen years where even I would have voted conservative because "these issues" wouldn't have affected me as a young worker- but they will one day and people should be quick to recognise that.

Tories scare the life out of me, they have a history of being self-serving. :\ and you're right about the choices not being stellar.

I'd suggest creating another party- but we have so many!

<comment><USER3> By the way, I don't' see myself as left or right wing. I look at an issue, and sometimes the left has a good solution, sometimes the right does. What we need is not a new party - we need a new way of governance which is issue based, not 'time' based. Maybe one day technology will be advanced and easy enough to allow safe referendums from your mobile device. Continuous referendums...

<comment><USER5> Continuous referendums... mind blown. Anyone working on this?

<comment><USER6> This is what libertarians would like.

We would also like that the "consent of the governed" be unanimous. Or at least very high.

Just because %60 of the population, for instance, wants to ban gay marriage, they should't be able to. IT should take %95 or something like that.

We no longer have the multi-week latency between our hometown and washington. Votes can be instantaneous-- and in the 1990s MIT made software that would allow anyone to audit an election and prove it was legitimate, and prove that their vote was counted, electronically. Everyone could do a recount in a few minutes. Things like the blockchain might even be a better way to do the same thing.

So we no longer need "representatives" that don't even represent us-- because they are picked by the two party heads in a system that keeps any other party out, structurally with "election rules"\-- not even getting into the shenanigans that keep them out of debates, and off the ballots in many cases.

Frankly, I think our election system is deeply compromised (whoever controls the software controls the outcome) and representational government is no longer necessary.

<comment><USER7> So, rewind 10 years or so, when there was a de facto ban on gay marriage. Would you have required the same 90% margin to repeal the ban?

How about to pass a budget?

In a direct democracy, who writes the bills?

Should people be taking 10 hours out of their week to read and vote on all of the items that would be put before them?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> > Our list includes Germany (Berlin, Hamburg?)

Seriously? I'm a German and I'm simply surprised no one is out on the streets or that there is no nationwide strike after the revelation that our current government has:

\- blatantly lied to us wrt NSA "no-spy deal"

\- the BND tries to conceal just how deep they were up the NSA's butthole

\- Heckler&Koch tried to get MAD (the military's (counter)-espionage agency) to silence the press over the G36 scandal.

As soon as I got some money together, I'm out. That's not what I consider an acceptable environment here, and I honestly don't see any political force trying to change the way things run (or those who try have no serious hope of ever gaining power).

<comment><USER9> Where are you going to go, though... all of the western countries seem to have this exact same problem. My home, Australia, is just as secretive if not worse, the UK is bust, and more and more info is coming out showing that no government is immune. It's really disheartening.

The worst part is, the Australian government really did foil a possible terrorist attack. Guess where the info on the perp came from? Mass surveillance? Their new metadata retention laws (okay, that's a cheap shot as it hasn't been implemented yet)?

Nope. It was a tip-off to the national security hotline.

<comment><USER10> >> the Australian government really did foil a possible terrorist attack

If you buy that.

<comment><USER9> I dunno, I'm as skeptical as anyone else I know but this time I don't see why it'd be worth lying about -- considering it was the tip-off not the other surveillance programs that led them to him, and it's public knowledge.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Aral Balkan gave a superlative talk a few days ago at re:publica 2015, called Beyond The Camera Panopticon: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jh8supIUj6c](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jh8supIUj6c)

It's a broad overview the current state of the internet as seen through a cyberpunk, pro- freedom, human rights, and privacy perspective. Aral is a dynamic speaker and delivers it with a delightfully dark and sardonic voice. Really one of the best talks I've seen on the topic.

<comment><USER12> This was an absolutely disgusting talk.

I prefer this style:

[http://dontbubble.us/](http://dontbubble.us/) [http://donttrack.us/](http://donttrack.us/)

You know... the kind of talks that don't constantly disparage audience members for being white, or religious... or those who have slightly political views.

<comment><USER13> "constantly disparage audience members for being white or religious.."

Hyperbole much? He may have been disparaging of religions (once in the talk, mind you) but never white people.

The talk's great.

<comment><USER12> [https://youtu.be/jh8supIUj6c?t=16m13s](https://youtu.be/jh8supIUj6c?t=16m13s)

No one but the White man can bring the Internet to you.

Dude, I'm not even white and I find it disparaging. The talk is terrible. It is politically charged when it really shouldn't be. The issue is simple: Privacy concerns are not being respected by Facebook or Google.

I don't know why he keeps bringing up "White People" conquering nations, or "The White Dude who lives in a Cloud and watches over Us" , or any of the other disparaging remarks. What the hell? How many times does he call Mark Zuckerberg _white_? Why have any emphasis there at all?

If it were a black man in charge of Facebook violating our privacy, it'd be just as bad. Why did he have to bring Mark Zuckerberg's race into this?

Its one thing to be against the system, or to expose the system's flaws to the world. But disparaging the audience is not the answer. His harmful speech is going to hurt the cause in the long term.

<comment><USER13> "I don't know why he keeps bringing up "White People" conquering nations, or "The White Dude who lives in a Cloud and watches over Us" , or any of the other disparaging remarks. What the hell? How many times does he call Mark Zuckerberg white? Why have any emphasis there at all?"

You obviously don't understand the main point he is driving at. It's about colonialism. And throughout history, the White Man is typically the colonizer. He's just furthering his point.

I am* white and I don't find it disparaging.

<comment><USER12> > You obviously don't understand the main point he is driving at. It's about > colonialism. And throughout history, the White Man is typically the > colonizer. He's just furthering his point.

When Google starts to suck the blood out of southeast Asian coolies (to make it harder for them to run away) and furthers the Opium trade to establish economic dominance over China, then he can start comparing modern companies to 1800s-style century colonialism.

Mind you, the East India Company was a privately owned enterprise. And as far as I can tell, that's what he's implicitly comparing Google to.

And as he compares Google to 1800s colonialism, he is making a _complete_ mockery of history. Are you freaking serious? Free Internet offered on balloons is equivalent to EIC-style Imperialism / Colonialism ?

It's equivalent to murdering hundreds-of-thousands of Zulu spearmen with Gatling Guns to establish South Africa Diamond Trade?

His arguments are a _mockery_ of history, and anyone who knows the brutal history of colonialism can only shake their head at the comparison. You are a FOOL to even attempt to draw an equivalency here.

Again, I _agree_ with the point he is _trying_ to make. The problem is that he's an absolutely horrible speaker and horrible arguer. I told you, I _refuse_ to use Facebook or Twitter on privacy grounds. And I've switched my search engine to DDG.gg. I'm living the practice dude, I take online privacy very seriously.

But the hyperbolic elitist aura eminated from Aral Balkan is going to harm the privacy cause in the long run. I prefer to see people on my side of the argument making solid points. Again: Search Bubble. Search privacy. Metadata collection. It is pretty easy to point out the issues of the modern internet: you don't need to make a mockery of history to make good points here.

<comment><USER13> > "And as he compares Google to 1800s colonialism, he is making a _complete_ > mockery of history. Are you freaking serious? Free Internet offered on > balloons is equivalent to EIC-style Imperialism / Colonialism ?"

Colonialism comes in many forms. Sure, there are obvious forms such as enslaving a population and making them mine ore from a mountain so that the colonist can get physical goods. Then there are less obvious forms, cultural imperialism as an example (or as Aral calls it, Digital Imperialism).

Open your mind a bit and criticize him for what he's really saying. You're fighting a straw-man here.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I do think this is a fairly silly example of throwing your toys out of the pram. Yes, we should be concerned about threats to civil liberties and human rights - which exist under governments of every shade (hi, Obama). A citizen's response to this, as opposed to a globe-trotting metic's, is to fight diligently and patiently to minimize harm and make small improvements. The threat to ind.ie's business model seems remote; presumably whether they might be forced to backdoor their products would depend on whether they sell them in the UK, not where the code was written.

As for "feeling ashamed of myself" and "being held responsible" by these chaps, who "don't want to hear my excuses" for voting Tory: ha ha ha, sorry stranger but why should I give two hoots?

</comment><comment><USER15> I have long been convinced that people throwing meaningless public temper tantrums like this was an American habit. Nice to see people across the pond slam the door too.

<comment><USER16> SOPA.

Edit: down votes? What exactly is the problem with pointing out a huge victory for "meaningless public temper tantrums?"

<comment><USER6> Well, I didn't vote you up or down, I'm replying instead-- but SOPA was passed... when they tried again and called it "net neutrality". Everyone was for it, but did you read the 800 pages?

<comment><USER17> The actual "rules" part of the Open Internet order is 8 pages long.

<comment><USER18> And the rest, part that is explanations and cites and summaries of the comments received during the commentary period isn't anywhere near 800 pages.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Welfare cuts, privatization, etc. "widen the already unsustainable systemic inequality that poses an existential threat for our entire species."? That's insanely hyperbolic, and it makes it difficult for me to take the rest of the article seriously. If our species disappears any time soon, it's not going to be because of welfare cuts.

<comment><USER20> That's not what Aral is saying, though. He's saying "unsustainable systemic inequality" poses an existential threat, and that welfare cuts contribute to that. He is clearly not talking about welfare cuts alone.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> Good for him!

Fortunately, he can work anywhere in the EU. If the UK leaves the EU, it will be too late for UK subjects. (Under this government, "subjects" is more than a historical reference).

<comment><USER22> His pro-EU argument and the notion of staying in the EU and short listing places like surveillance state Sweden undermines the credibility of most of his arguments.

The corrupt, undemocratic super state the EU, inventors of the data retention law and other shit, strives for is a far worse prospect than a UK that has survived Thatcher and will survive Cameron because at least it's still a democracy.

The possibility of blowing up the EU is the only good thing that might come out of this UK government.

If he wants freedom, democracy and no surveillance state, he should get out of the EU.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> Interesting to read--best of luck to Aral. Nationalism seems to be spreading all over Europe, so I can understand why "where to go next" is a tough decision.

<comment><USER24> As a german with not a iota of patriotism, aside from a little pride in the social institutions still maintained here, i'm honestly curious:

Where do you see nationalism increasing in germany?

<comment><USER25> > _Where do you see nationalism increasing in germany?_

In Germany's behavior within the E.U. and open desire to rule Europe?

In their characterizing of Southern countries (even in popular media read by millions, etc) with terms used in the past to describe Jews? (from "lazy" and "pests" to "traitors" and "PIIGS").

In the frequent verbal attacks immigrants from Greece (for example) face in Germany, in shops and public spaces?

<comment><USER26> > In Germany's behavior within the E.U. and open desire to rule Europe?

Citation needed. It's Germany's money that's bankrolling the bailouts, and as far as I can tell (from quite some distance away, mind you), the public opinion is less "We need Lebensraum! Let's take over southern Europe!" and more "Fund Greece & co with my tax money? NOPE NOPE NOPE."

<comment><USER25> > _Citation needed.It 's Germany's money that's bankrolling the bailouts, and > as far as I can tell (from quite some distance away, mind you)_

First, it's not just about the current bailout. It's a pattern of behavior going back to the eighties, and especially evident after the re-union with East Germany, and it has to do with control of EU directives and policies (including, but not limited to, monetary policies).

(Or rather, one could say, it's a pattern of behavior going back to the first and second world wars, as the whole European Union, as an initiative was thought up to constrain future German foul-play ( [http://www.amazon.com/The- New-World-Perry-Anderson/dp/184467...](http://www.amazon.com/The-New-World- Perry-Anderson/dp/1844677214) )).

> _It 's Germany's money that's bankrolling the bailouts, and as far as I can > tell_

Not really. In fact they could care less about Greece or the South in general, it's about saving their banks and using tax-payer money to siphon it to the German (and French etc) equivalent of Wall Street:

[http://www.economist.com/node/18560535](http://www.economist.com/node/18560535)

[http://speri.dept.shef.ac.uk/2013/11/11/dirty-secret-euro- zo...](http://speri.dept.shef.ac.uk/2013/11/11/dirty-secret-euro-zone-crisis- german-banks/)

[http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/2013-09-12/is- germany-r...](http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/2013-09-12/is-germany- responsible-for-the-euro-crisis)

[http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-06-11/crisis- sav...](http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-06-11/crisis-saves- germany-about-100-billion-kiel-institute-says)

[http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/germany- profiting...](http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/germany-profiting- from-euro-crisis-through-low-interest-rates-a-917296.html)

[https://euobserver.com/economic/114231](https://euobserver.com/economic/114231)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> Nice if you can do it. I swore I'd leave if the Tories got in in 2010. But I didn't... I have roots in the UK with family and friends, and they are difficult bonds to break. A few hundred miles from some people already feels like it is too wide a gulf.

</comment><comment><USER28> The author does have a choice as to whether to stay or leave. (They are actually in a very fortunate position if they can just leave the country.) It's also premature to presume that all of the Tory policies will actually be implemented. An alternative course of action would be to stay and campaign against the referenced policies.

<comment><USER29> I'm not sure what your point is here. Yes, he has a choice and that's a good thing. Why do you bring that up? They are making a choice based off fundamental disagreements with policies that the now-ruling party stands for. Of course it's impossible to work out exactly what policy will be implemented, that's not really the point.

<comment><USER28> No, the author claims he has no choice: "By voting in a Tory government, you basically did not leave us any other choice." This feels like a dishonest representation of the situation.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> Sorry. Here's the dissonance: we're building tools (including secure messaging) that are government snooping safe. We care deeply about the privacy and security of our users. And the web page that tells us that has mixed content warnings on ssl.

Maybe nitpicking, but security and OPSEC in particular requires insane focus and attention to every little detail. If you can trip up on the small things, I could hardly trust you to get the hard things right.

<comment><USER31> To be fair, the script is "[http://localhost:35729/livereload.js"](http://localhost:35729/livereload.js"). That shouldn't leak anything to an adversary, if the request doesn't leave the client's computer.

Still should be fixed though, so the HTTPS warning can serve its function and call out real threats.

<comment><USER30> You're 100% right. It's just that security is so hard to get right. Only (maybe not even) the paranoid survive on that front. All it takes is one tiny detail to screw everything up. Leaving development artifacts on your live server is not very tranquilizing on that front.

<comment><USER32> Indeed :) And thanks for the heads up, Arthur. Was a bit of debugging code left in by mistake. Fixed it when I was skimming these comments yesterday but haven't had a chance to reply and say thanks until now :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> When your vision is:

>> While Apple is a closed, proprietary company, they are not a spyware company like Google.

>> Together, we can build a future where we have independent alternatives to the spyware of companies like Google and Facebook.

I can just say... good luck and good bye!

</comment><comment><USER34> Good luck!

I wonder if similar actions would be considered in Canada if C-51 passes the Supreme Court.

</comment><comment><USER35> How about Costa Rica? Fast Internet. Good weather. Beautiful country. Friendly people. And they don't even have a military.

<comment><USER36> Your are good at avoiding the US immigration system why do you help out lelf

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> I am not quite sure I understand the ramifications for the indie phone with something like the snoopers charter.

I would hope there was no such thing as an indie cloud (all your address book, call history, online searches etc. tucked away in some silo that is ripe for picking), but rather a decentralised system that was impervious to snooping.

<comment><USER37> Speaking as a friend of Aral (living abroad) here; Indie Cloud _is_ planned to have a completely decentralized storage infrastructure, which makes it impervious to snooping. However, if Aral remains in the UK there's a pretty big, let's say 100%, chance that the Cameron government will force him or anyone else working on Indie in the UK to either place backdoors in the code or the completely optional hosting services (which can be used while you, as the customer, are still in possession and control of your own data). That's why he's leaving -- if he stays he simply cannot build a organization and service portfolio based on the principles Indie has.

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> Why didn't he mention the Netherlands?

<comment><USER39> I don't know, but I can't say the Netherlands is that much more progressive when it comes to privacy.

The data retention law has been put on hold, but the ruling VVD is looking for ways to get it back.

Bits for Freedom is an organisation worth checking out; [https://www.bof.nl/category/english/](https://www.bof.nl/category/english/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> The only way you always get the government want is when you are a dictator in North Korea. Instead of throwing a tantrum that has no real result, spread the word about your beliefs in a non-condescending way. You might even get some people to change their minds.

</comment><comment><USER41> You might have to leave the planet.

Every country with the ability has it's citizens under surveillance.

Some of my clients are in counter-terrorism roles in my country ( Western, democratic ) and they confirm that they have extensive extra-judicial surveillance abilities.

<comment><USER42> I'm pretty sure you broke ~20 laws just there.

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> I'm curious - will leaving the country affect eligibility for the ind.ie domain?

<comment><USER44> .ie is Ireland's TLD.

<comment><USER43> Yes, but does UK citizenship / resident-alien status / locality have anything to do with eligibility for .ie TLD registration?

The description of who can use *.ie is slightly vague on Wikipedia, but indicates there has to be a "tie" to Ireland. Moving the company out of the country seems like it might break whatever tie was there if it's based on any of the above criteria.

It's already too complicated to me as an Ugly American to differentiate Ireland, Northern Ireland, the UK, (Great) Britain and/or England, I'm hoping someone with more expertise can comment.

<comment><USER45> Ireland is not part of the UK, but it is part of Britain.

Northern Ireland is part of the UK, but that's a completely different country from Ireland. Being UK born or based gives you no privileges over the .ie domain at all.

The best thing to do is to watch this great, quick and witty primer on the whole thing Britain/UK/England thing: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNu8XDBSn10](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNu8XDBSn10)

<comment><USER46> > Ireland is not part of the UK, but it is part of Britain.

Ireland is part of the British Isles, not Britain (which is England, Scotland & Wales).

<comment><USER45> Blargh.. of course, perfect time to have a brain fart :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER47> > It's quite possible that all this will backfire spectacularly as England > shifts ever further right in its xenophobia and that the British will vote > to leave the EU.

Referendum on EU exit == xenophoby? Seriously?

<comment><USER48> Brits aren't xenophobic at all. Just classist. If you're poor AND and immigrant, that really sucks. If you're a well off immigrant that's fine.

</comment></comment><comment><USER49> Why not Ireland? You do have a .ie domain, afterall!

</comment><comment><USER50> Have you considered NZ?

<comment><USER51> New Zealand is part of the 'Five eyes' intelligence network, which also includes Australia, Britain, Canada and the US. I can't imagine things are any better here, despite our government's claim that it does not participate in mass surveillance.

<comment><USER52> And the evidence that is never "right", but never explained why.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER53> Why not Greece?

</comment><comment><USER54> Dolphins are the smart ones....42</comment>


Majority of Renters Are Not Saving for Down Payment: Freddie - <AUTHOR> http://www.nationalmortgagenews.com/news/origination/majority-of-renters-are-not-saving-for-down-payment-freddie-1066194-1.html <comment><USER2> I could probably save for a down payment, and I even have a kid now, but I have so many reasons why buying a house doesn't matter to me right now.

Most of my savings goes to retirement, which is now in the realm of being a down payment for a nicer house. Assuming my portfolio does the same as the worst 25 years of the S&P 500, it will still beat buying a house. When I'm older, and I'm not trying to play catch up on my retirement account, like so many 40 and 50 year olds end up doing, more of my income can go to other things, maybe even a house.

I'm super focused on my career and family right now. Why would I want to buy what amounts to a giant time sink?

Bottom line, by focusing my time and money on personal growth. I'll be in a much better position than if I bought a home.

When you just do the game theory on the American Dream, it makes no sense at all. Taking compound interest into account, buying a house when your young amounts to flushing hundreds of thousands of dollars down the toilet.

<comment><USER3> A lifetime of hearing "rent is just throwing your money away" propaganda from my family convinced me to buy a condo just before the housing market crash.

Result: That condo is worth half what I paid. I got married and had children so we bought a house, but I am now a landlord for the foreseeable future. It sucks.

I really wish I'd thrown my money away all those years - I wouldn't have this constant source of interruption and expense hanging around my neck.

My advice for anyone who really wants to buy a house... I would suggest trying to make sure it's the last house you'll ever need.

<comment><USER4> Not to rub it in, but something many people also don't consider when looking at condos is that there are generally speaking condo fees associated which can easily run $300-$800 for a run of the mill condo depending on amenities. There's also a dirty little secret that really doesn't get a lot of air time, many of the condos have what are essentially builder / developer royalties that go to the developer in perpetuity. So, on top of dropping 5 digits on closing and paying thousands in property taxes, you get to pay monthly fees and part of those go to the developer that built the complex with lowest bidder and shoddy illegal immigrant labor.

<comment><USER5> $800? A _month_?

<comment><USER6> Here is an overview of what is involved in condo fees: [https://thebaverstockteam.wordpress.com/yesterdays- news/ever...](https://thebaverstockteam.wordpress.com/yesterdays- news/everything-you-need-to-know-about-condo-fees/)

Here is a reddit discussion from 2 years ago: [https://www.reddit.com/r/Frugal/comments/1ektio/my_hoa_dues_...](https://www.reddit.com/r/Frugal/comments/1ektio/my_hoa_dues_are_ridiculous_what_options_do_i_have/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> People should really do their homework. Find an online interest calculator and see how much interest you pay over the life of a 30 year loan. Even at these historically low rates it's about double the sticker price. Also look at the amortization schedule.

Unless your house appreciates considerably ever year, you will pretty much always sell at a loss when you factor in the interest paid over your time as owner. This is not even including incidental expenses like appliance repair or extra warranties hi might purchase to "protect" you from said incidental costs.

In short, from a financial standpoint the math on buying a house with a mortgage never works out in your favor. It's not even close. I am looking at this from a purely mathematical standpoint. I do undere that there are qualitative reasons that owning beats renting; however, I'm sick of hearing people try to make the case that a home is an investment, which is true only if you ignore the interest paid.

EDIT: if you did sell early in in the loan you could treat the money lost to interest as an implicit rent. This makes me laugh because you could've just rented in the first place and had the benefit of mobility and avoided the headache of putting a house on the market.

<comment><USER8> > Find an online interest calculator and see how much interest you pay over > the life of a 30 year loan.

Then go to a cost of living calculator to see how much the inflation trend of 30 years minimizes that. The dollars you pay at the start of your loan have much more value than the dollars at the end; it tends to take quite a bit out of the "sticker shock" of just looking at the "total interest paid" column of an amortization schedule.

<comment><USER7> Yeah but the interest is not paid upfront. You don't get the benefit of time value money. Interest laid in year 25 is paid in year 25 dollars. It makes the loss calculation more complex but it does not change the fact that you still paid double for the property (at least) and will,barring a housing bubble, will never come close to recouping that money.

<comment><USER9> But the COST of the interest is in year 0 dollars. I may be buying Cokes in 2015 dollars, but if the price is set in 1900 dollars I'm getting a shitload more Cokes.

<comment><USER7> I get what you're saying. If everything arou.d me has gotten more expensive and assuming my wages keep up with inflation, the interest cost is cheaper in later years relative to the earlier years. Makes sense but hasn't wage and inflation growth diverged in the last couple of decades making that assumption a questionable one?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> IMO, the biggest thing in being happy with renting vs buying isn't the monetary factor, but in how ready someone is with owning.

Owning comes with a lot of advantages: home renovations, settling in and making something your own, building property value over time, a stable monthly mortgage payment, that pride that comes from saying you own something.

But it has a lot of other factors to: being responsible for repairs, landscaping, property taxes, less flexibility if you need to relocate.

The "renting is throwing your money away" line is prevalent, but is also a gross simplification of the rent vs buy decision.

<comment><USER11> So if one doesn't care about home renovations, building property value over time, that pride that comes from saying you own (but mortgage == owning something fully in x0 years?) something, and wont mind moving if prices change, then it seems like one should stick to renting?

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> I suspect that renters magnify the difficulty of getting a property, which psychologically prevents them from seizing the opportunity. You need less money down than you think. The income is the important thing.

<comment><USER13> Sort of.

Yes, you can get away with a 3% down payment with an FHA loan. But 3% is still $6K on a $200K property, even more if you're trying for a $250K or $300K property. That doesn't include closing costs, nor an emergency fund you need for homeowner expenses that traditionally come up.

Sure, you can afford the house at closing. Are you financially well off enough to afford it for the next 15/30 years (depending on loan term) so as to not lose your equity?

Probably not, and that's not going to get fixed until incomes start rising.

<comment><USER14> Not to mention the less you put down the more you're going to pay in interest over the long haul.

<comment><USER12> Of course that is true, but mortgages have options to make regular balloon payments and such. You can "catch the train now" and beat that problem down later. If you're young and starting out in a good field, you can expect your income to rise.

How much you're going to pay and how long it will take is just a projection based on the current numbers: interest rate, remaining principal and payment size. The projection isn't reality.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> One has to stay in a house 5 years to break even on buying it. I am not sure the current employment landscape is conducive to that sort of commitment.

<comment><USER16> That's not true. The amount of time you need to stay in a house vs. renting is variable base on a number of factors. Among them are the cost of the house you would buy compared to the cost of rent among other considerations. Google "Rent vs. Buy" and you will find a number of comparison calculators. The one from the NYT is particularly good and tells you how long you need to stay in a particular house to make it better than renting financially speaking.

[http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/upshot/buy-rent- calc...](http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/upshot/buy-rent- calculator.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Majority of Germans also not saving for down payment. Only America is deranged about home ownership.

<comment><USER18> Not only America - Germany and France are the exceptions, not America.</comment></comment>


Tell HN: Official "Clone" Thread. - <AUTHOR>

This is a thread to call out the all too similar websites/web apps.<p>Add your own look-a-likes. <comment><AUTHOR> <http://www.geticeberg.com/>

<http://www.icebrrg.com/public/howto.aspx>

<http://www.readwhale.com/>

Coincidences in name, color scheme, graphics and even _functionality_.</comment>