Introducing Oculus Go, Plus Santa Cruz Updates - <AUTHOR> https://www.oculus.com/blog/pioneering-the-frontier-of-vr-introducing-oculus-go-plus-santa-cruz-updates/ <comment><USER2> Does anybody know if VR headsets will eventually replace monitors? Would be great for ergonomics. Much more portable, you don't have to sit but can lie on a couch, have a lot of screen estate even in tight spaces such as on a plane etc. That with a keyboard is my dream setup.

<comment><USER3> In the keynote, one of the developers said that they've done exactly this for some of the dev team. Specifically, they are using Visual Studio, in VR, as their primary development environment.

Could be hyperbole for marketing purposes, but even if so, I think we'll get there soon enough. They explicitly said that replacing monitors is one of their [long term] goals for VR.

<comment><USER4> Maybe if the headsets became "ultra-comfortable", but these are nowhere near that. I have some much better than average headphones, that are near top of the line for comfort. They still are too much after a few hours.

<comment><USER5> Are your headphones too heavy or do they put too much pressure around your ears? I can work through whole day with my M50x. However it took some getting use to them and stretching the overhead metal.

<comment><USER6> If you get some of the nicer pads for them off amazon, they're even better. Other than the music in my ears, I Honestly forget I have them on.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Can someone explain to me how they can make a device worth buying for $200? That seems incredibly cheap since the cost of decent VR systems are ~$500+ and that's _without_ a machine to provide processing/GPU.

<comment><USER8> It has no positional tracking so that already puts it within the "google cardboard" region of user experience quality (compared with the premium headsets)

<comment><USER9> I know it has no positional tracking but Apple's ARKit and Google's ARCore seem to make it clear you can do positional tracking with only a camera on the device, no external sensors.

Has anyone announced any VR that uses the AR tech for positional tracking?

<comment><USER10> The accuracy of ARKit-style tracking is low. It's mostly good enough for the use case where you hold a 5" window in your hand to peek into the AR world... But if you strapped it to your face, the latency and positional fluctuation would give you motion sickness very soon.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> "Today, we showed the next phase of Santa Cruz development, delivering hand presence with two positionally tracked controllers. This is an important, industry-first milestone that brings the magic and incredible design expertise of Touch into a completely standalone experience."

How is this different than the vive controller?

<comment><USER12> This is a stand-alone headset I believe - it doesn't need a seperate computer to run

<comment><USER13> It does require a separate graphics card, though requiring separate PC or console.

There need to be a place to dissipate that 200W+ of power current GTX cards are using, and this is not possible to fit it in kind of binoculars.

Thats marketing gimmick Oculus is doing: it does not require phone (as daydream does) but it does require graphics powerhouse to generate all the virtual reality (unless you don't want the world to be as in current AAA games which DO REQUIRE GTX kind of power).

<comment><USER14> No it's fully standalone probably using mobile graphics hardware which as noted by the Daydream etc. is already fine. It won't have the fidelity of the tethered versions but not being attached to anything is a tremendous win in terms of making the technology usable by anyone.

<comment><USER13> I don't agree.

Because this (not requiring PC to show VR) either means:

1) Oculus is standalone (not requiring nvidias/amd 200W+ 200USD powershouses) with comparable quality/features to what other (with PC) sets are doing currently

OR

2) it is not standalone UNLESS you have much (and here I mean much!) worse quality

ad1: this would mean that Oculus did a great breakthrough (rendering price of nvidia stock overvalued tenfold - which we don't see) while also solving heat dissipation issue (look at your typical GTX card and cooling they require and POWER they require).

ad2: currently, AAA games do require powerhouse in graphics department, and they still have a lot space to improve (from visual perspective). For VR you need 90fps lowlatency dual(sic!) rendered graphics - this brings you either subpar quality (A LOT OF SUBPAR) - hence I concluded this "no pc required) marketing gimmick of Oculus. Yep, it may work, but not at the level (not even close) to other solutions.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Curious why a user would opt for this over a Google daydream given that it's near certain they already have a mobile device. Granted for iPhone users or mid/low end Android users with lower resolution screens it would be more cost effective than buying a mobile device with a good qhd screen.

<comment><USER16> Possibilities: * User has an iPhone * User has a lower-end phone that can't run this * User has a different phone OS (Windows Phone, Sailfish OS, etc) * User's phone doesn't have long enough battery life while running 3d apps

<comment><USER17> Mine would be "user doesn't trust Google"

I don't trust they'll support it, develop it, focus on it, iterate on it, etc

and that's without getting into trusting their ecosystem and privacy issues.

I trust google less than I trust almost any other large tech company.

<comment><USER18> "user doesn't trust Google but trusts Facebook" is a very slim slice of the population

<comment><USER17> As I said - that's without getting into the Privacy angles.

Facebook hasn't burned their trust in their support of their new products like Google has. In fact, if anything, they have a better track record for that (granted, via acquisition, but still).

I know _many_ non-technical types that refuse to adopt Google's new products because they don't trust them to stick around. Outside of their core Google Docs suite they have a real perception problem.

The fiasco that was Google Glass hurt them too. Android support is... weak at best (and yes, that's not all Google's fault but they own the brand so they own the backlash).

They just aren't a company you can trust in their products.

<comment><USER19> Facebook killed Parse, so it's not all roses

<comment><USER17> True, didn't mean to imply that, but to be fair: Parse was much much less known as a product than glass/reader/wave/igoogle/buzz/talk/zeitgeist/answers... etc

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> So I think that VR headsets (the real ones) do need to come down in price before they (and VR in general) can become mainstream, even though the technology is still quite not there yet, which means it will be hard to make such devices cheap while also upgrading their technology (or at least slow/er).

However, this isn't really what Oculus is doing here. This isn't a "cheaper version of Oculus Rift". This is an _expensive version_ of Gear VR/any Android Daydream headset.

It has some extra sensors and whatnot, but other than that, it should play the same content. So how are most people going to understand the difference between a $60-$100 Daydream headset and a $200 Oculus Go?

At least the $600 headsets actually offer you a different kind of experience (realistic 3D games, etc), even though their price means they'll be relegated to an early adopter market for a few more years.

<comment><USER21> I don't even get who buys these cheaper VR headsets. I'm an early-adopter type and I can't see the purpose of Galaxy VR, Google Daydream or this new Occulus Go. I guess they are just like a $100+ novelty? At least the Vive (and to a lesser extent the Rift) are gaming hardware that can be put to use if you have a high-end tower, but the resolution and frame rates good VR requires need state of the art hardware to run any (albeit subjectively) interesting titles at this point in time. It seems to me like they are taking a product that isn't there yet and pushing it to market hoping to dupe consumers into spending money on a half-baked idea. Kinda like the push towards "tablet computers" in the early 2000's.

<comment><USER3> I get the same feeling when I see these products. I think they are targeted at the (surprisingly large!) segment of the population for whom their phone is their _only_ computing device.

In the bubble that is HN, they make little sense, but I assume these companies must have done some kind of market research that indicates that these products actually drive demand in a consumer group that has basically zero overlap with ours.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Love it! Sure there will be gripes about the capabilities and the specs, but a standalone headset that doesn't require a PC or phone is pretty much the ideal form factor for VR.

<comment><USER23> In many ways, the standalone headset is potentially much better for VR/AR. At least with regards to reacting to the user's movements. If the processing and display is close to your face, that cuts down some of the latency.

Now, yes, I know that at the speed of light (or more properly the speed of electrical signals) having a PC 3m away is only about 10ns, which is not going to be noticeable.

But there will need to be translation on each end to send a signal that far away, such as conversion to / from HDMI. If the embedded processor in the headset is directly connected to the LCD, that type of conversion eliminated. Ditto for cameras and other sensors needed for position tracking.

To reduce latency, developers are counting microseconds these days. Crazy.

<comment><USER24> What your describing is a non issue.

If you do something 10,000 time every frame that takes 10ns it's still only 0.0001 seconds and no you don't need to make that trip 10,000 times sequentially.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> Did they improve the resolution at all? As far as I remember, I was still able to see pixels and that spoils the immersion for me.

<comment> GuB-42 If anything, it will be worse.

The point of Oculus Go and Santa Cruz is to be untethered, and, if possible, cheaper than the Rift.

While it is undoubtedly a worthy goal, as anyone who tried a VR headset can tell you, it also means that you are letting go of the hundreds of watts computing power that a compatible PC represents. And without that power, it will be much more difficult to get the required latency, framerate and resolution.

EDIT : The Oculus Go is actually a little better than the rift : 2560x1440 vs 2160x1200, same FOV and supposedly better optics, so in term of not seeing the pixels, that should be better. The tradeoff is probably less details, maybe with upscaling.

<comment><USER25> That sucks. I wish they focused on best immersion quality first and optimize next.

<comment><USER26> It sounds like they claim making it untethered makes a big improvement to immersion.

<comment><USER25> I tried hololens, while I know it's AR not VR, the graphics sucked and it made the immersion much much worse than being on cable would.

They should first achieve something that hooks people in ways not done before even if it requires a 1080ti in sli + cable. Lowering the specs and/or quality of the final image is the wrong way to do it.

<comment><USER27> The market says otherwise.

In order from lowest to highest cost VR: GearVR, PSVR, Rift, Vive

In order from highest to lowest market share: GearVR, PSVR, Vive, Rift

Note that when Oculus lowered the Rift's price, sales dramatically increased. It is very clear that cost remains one of the primary barriers to VR adoption.

Oculus is approaching the market with a tiered strategy of low (Go), medium (Santa Cruz), and high (Rift) models at price points that maintain an addressable market large enough to create a viable software ecosystem.

Based on their sales figures and market research, they believe high price and insufficient content are the top two barriers to VR adoption. This is why they fund 3rd parties to develop quality content (since the market isn't large enough to recoup the development investment), and why they released Go.

An HMD requiring $1400 in graphics hardware alone (2x1080ti) might make a good prototype - a "concept car" or "super car" if you will - but not a good commercial product. Few would buy it, and it would be very hard to leverage its power to the fullest.

<comment><USER25> Of course market is susceptible to pricing. Of course $1400 is too much for wide adoption. More people buy vr at lower adoption and spec because they are curious. Worldwide sales have been reported to be very underwhelming, regardless of the price point. There is no killer use and feature for it, that's why. When there are features (immersion) the apps will come even if they make the first one themselves.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> This is a bit OT, but: I live in Seattle and I would love to experience a top- end VR headset; tethered is fine. Are there stores that specialize in this? Where would/should I go?

<comment><USER29> There's a VR Arcade called "Portal" in Ballard that has padded rooms with Vive headsets hanging from the ceiling.

<comment><USER30> In my neighborhood, and I keep meaning to stop in. I just keep walking by because I am unsure what they are selling.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> The original Rift required a gaming rig to run. I'm curious what kind of tradeoffs have to be made to launch this.

Personally, I'm not very interested in a VR headset being anything more than a display. This makes me feel like it is a Smart TV, which is not something I want. We'll see how I feel in the future.

<comment><USER32> Eventually this will likely serve both.

This is nothing more than say Samsung Gear VR but without a removable mobile phone

That said being able to use this anywhere as a personal display device as well as not being limited by the pretty heavy umbilical cord setup is the way to go.

If you are going to put wireless hardware in the headset it's not like a mobile media player and a light application platform will detract from its value.

As an early VR adopter I can say that both my headsets ended up on the shelf after a few weeks.

It's just too exhausting to play traditional games and with non-VR exclusive titles it's actually a bit disadvantage in competitive play.

Mouse look and keybind reverse look beat a VR headset in sims and the UI for any titles but EVE Valkyrie is still better on a flat display.

Humans are not owls we can't turn our necks at lighting speed and there is a reason why even 200M dollar jets have mirrors and now 360 camera coverage.

Games like Elite aren't designed like an F35 they are designed around mouse look and being able to switching between 3rd and 1st person views quickly. Until some one will design a VR game with 21st century smart helmet augmented reality style interface in the game it won't work well and even then mouse look would still likely be faster.

However the killer app for me was actually the home cinema app as well as some of the creative sandboxes. These don't need my 1080ti setup and I don't really want to be tethered to my tower.

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> I bought into Oculus with the DK2, but fell off once they discontinued support for Mac and Linux. It's a shame, really.

</comment><comment><USER34> Is it just me, or does this image of three people laughing with one of them wearing a VR headset seem a bit bizzar?

[https://scontent- sjc2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.2365-6/22044141_1...](https://scontent- sjc2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.2365-6/22044141_1788230948138287_3202612921985138688_n.jpg?oh=ae5250c43e08d6f1e357c789c1af0f0d&oe=5A73F659)

We've already all but killed social interaction with smart phone addiction.

I can't think how many times I've seen a group of friends at a Starbucks not talking to each other and all looking at their devices.

But, at least, their actual faces are not covered by a huge mask with no way to look into each others eyes.

This picture makes me wonder about where this is all headed. For example, will there be a day when a group of friends are sitting around a table in Starbucks without the possibility of eye contact?

Edit: I'm not against VR I am just musing about what this ultimately means for all of us.

<comment><USER35> " We've already all but killed social interaction with smart phone addiction. "

(Rolleyes). Yeah, uh-huh. We can all agree phones sometimes intrude in ways we wouldn't like but if you think they've "killed all social interaction" you need to find some new friends.

VR is certainly a different matter but humans fundamentally crave social interaction. VR won't change that. AI, eventually, on the other hand...

<comment><USER34> (rolls eyes back)

[https://mobile.twitter.com/jamiesmart/status/918127285387059...](https://mobile.twitter.com/jamiesmart/status/918127285387059201/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2F)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> It's great they are getting something out the door today at a lower price with lower barrier to entry and less complexity.

That said this doesn't seem to support tracked controllers and it's not clear if it would ever support tracked controllers. It's VR, but VR without tracked controllers is almost a different category.

Still when you look at what it replaces (GearVR) it's a huge step forward. You no longer need to tie up an expensive phone that's going to overheat and have no battery left. You get lenses and a display designed for VR and positional tracking where previously there was only rotation.

It's also interesting that they are messaging nothing about a next generation headset you can tether to a powerful computer or console. That's where my interest lies. I would be fine with even just a refresh of the Rift with a better display and lenses. I'm not even looking for a bump in resolution.

<comment><USER37> _> VR without tracked controllers is almost a different category_

This is an important and under-appreciated point. Presence is a combination of many factors, and "hand presence," as Oculus is calling it, is a huge one. I still remember the first time I tried a Vive: I was already familiar with VR from the DK2, but interacting in 3D space gave the whole experience a wholly unfamiliar, almost dream-like sensation.

At this price point, tracked controller support seems unlikely, but perhaps a future Bluetooth lighthouse could enable it. Honestly, I think that should be a priority: if it comes down to more detailed graphics versus tracked controllers, I'll take the controllers every time.

<comment><USER38> Have you two clicked the link to the article at all? The second part is a release of wireless, tracked (from the headset, no lighthouses) controllers.

<comment><USER37> You may not have read it closely enough. With the caveat that the article is somewhat confusing in how it juxtaposes the two, the first part is about the entry-level, coming-to-market standalone headset (Oculus Go), while the second part is about the high-end, still-a-prototype standalone headset (Santa Cruz). The controllers are for Santa Cruz, not Oculus Go.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> Anyone know what the hurdles are for broad VR adoption?

This announcement seems to be saying it's 1) untethered and 2) $200 price point. Those will probably increase the current market size but I just haven't seen anyone (anecdotally) clamoring for VR. Curious if anyone has a view on other bottlenecks.

<comment><USER40> A killer 'app'. Some experience that can only be delivered on VR that is totally compelling to mainstream consumers. That could drive the entire segment, I think.

I don't think its games. At least, it's not obvious how to turn existing kinds of games into VR experiences, and make them mind blowing. In my experience, VR games are not currently very good _games_ , and are relatively lacklustre as tourist experiences.

So what? I wish I knew. But I just don't think there is a compelling reason for most people, even most passionate gamers, at the moment. Which, as a fan, pains me to say.

<comment><USER41> Do you think mainstream acceptance is inevitable, or do you think it could end up being like 3d is today? By that, I mean 3d has some hardcore fans and many of us seek it out occasionally, but it isn't part of my typical day.

AR is more interesting, especially if it can get to contact lens size.

<comment><USER40> > Do you think mainstream acceptance is inevitable

No. But that's not to say I don't think it will happen. And if / when it does happen, it will appear to have been inevitable (things tend to feel that way in hindsight)!

> do you think it could end up being like 3d is today

3D is a good analogy. Like 3D, unless there are some unique and only VR experiences, it will be a nerdy way of consuming content that is adequate (or even higher fidelity) on regular kit.

Lowering the price / making the form factor more convenient, can't hurt. But I'm not convinced that what the problem is at the moment.

When we talked to non-VR consumers (it's been a couple of years, but intuitively I can't imagine much has changed), the response was more "why would I want to put that thing on my head?", rather than "does it have to have a wire?" Price was a big turnoff, admittedly, but I fear a drop in price alone will simply mean it ends up in the 'barely used gaming peripheral' cupboard with your light gun, your dance mat and your steering wheel.

I would be very surprised if its success comes purely from being a peripheral used by gamers.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> Are specs cited anywhere? (e.g. resolution, battery life)

</comment><comment><USER43> I feel like it was a missed opportunity not making this a mixed reality headset. VR is great for completely immersive experiences but otherwise becomes a nuisance. Problems I've had with VR:

1) Audiovisual Isolation. With immersive VR you are unable to interact with the real world and often unable to see or here what is going on around you. It always feels creepy to me to put on my VIVE and not be aware that someone has walked into my room or has been knocking on my door.

2) Very poor multitasking. VR experiences demand uninterrupted focus. I'm often not 100% immersed in whatever I'm doing at any given time. I will share my focus with other activities and other external events. I don't like having my focus locked onto a single activity for long spans of time. If I'm gaming, I'll probably alt-tab once in a while to send a chat message. If I'm watching a movie, I'll likewise pause or shift my focus if something demands it. There are very limited blocks of time where I'm willing and able to give a VR experience uninterrupted focus.

3) Inability to physically interact with real world objects. If you don't need to do that, that's fine. But what if you want to take a sip of your drink? Eat a snack? Have a smoke? When you have 0 spatial awareness, that is very difficult to do. Even putting down your controllers and switching to a keyboard is hard to do when you cant see where it is. You could just remove the headset every time you want to do this, but that's very cumbersome. This headset doesn't even have a fliptop so that makes it even more cumbersome.

All in all I'm not sure how much utility fully immersive HMDs have outside of some unique interactive experiences that are short enough to mitigate some of the above problems. Remember that "dumb" HMD displays (like this: [http://www.siliconmicrodisplay.com/uploads/9/0/4/6/9046759/_...](http://www.siliconmicrodisplay.com/uploads/9/0/4/6/9046759/__5010906_orig.png)) have been available since the 90s. They were also billed as the future of entertainment and TV/monitor killers, but adoption never picked up for the reasons above. People don't like giving up all their focus.

That's why mixed reality headsets are more promising to me. If you can insert virtual windows/objects into real world spaces, you can introduce immersion without necessarily sacrificing awareness. Let people jump in and out of virtual reality without having it be an all or nothing compromise.

</comment><comment><USER44> _> awesome for watching movies or concerts, playing games, or just hanging out with your friends in VR._

I have real life for movies, concerts, and hanging out with friends, so that leaves games.

What's the content offering like for VR these days? Are there any games that are more than a tech demo that lasts for a few hours? Something like a Skyrim or a Civ, that I will want to return to week after week?

<comment><USER45> Flight sims. Elite dangerous.

I think motion sickness might be a problem for some people though.

</comment></comment><comment><USER46> I don't see any earphones in the photos, how does it work for matching 3D audio? Does it have a headphone jack?

EDIT: Oh it says it right there in the article! That was a redundant comment... Reason I cared about is that last time I tried VR, the audio came from stationary speakers and it was a very weird experience to have the direction of the audio not match what I saw :)

<comment><USER47> "If you need it, there's also a 3.5mm headphone jack for private listening."

</comment></comment><comment><USER48> I'm going to take a guess and say that this is running a forked version of Android. Oculus has a Gear VR store [1] and it only makes sense to leverage the existing software catalog than start from scratch.

[1][https://www.oculus.com/experiences/gear- vr/](https://www.oculus.com/experiences/gear-vr/)

</comment><comment><USER49> As expected, looks like it'll be much closer to Gear VR than the Rift. It does not have positional tracking.

</comment><comment><USER50> I was hoping to buy the current Oculus, but I never got around to it since I for one need to plan out a bit more when it comes to that price. At a $200 price point though, I can pick one up without having to think about it twice. I'm getting one when it comes out.

</comment><comment><USER51> Interesting news! Will be looking forward to the specs and actual demo experiences.

Also, I wish they were lighter on the word "magic"...

</comment><comment><USER18> Honestly I just want a Rift priced at $300 without the touch controllers (today, with touch controllers it's $400).

<comment><USER52> I got mine during the summer sale before they offered the all-in-one box. I got my HMD before I got my Touch controllers. Not having Touch was a huge limitation on the kinds of games I could use, and made the experience feel like a neato tech demo and not anything of substance.

You definitely don't want a Rift without Touch.

</comment></comment><comment><USER53> It's a little light on specs, but the price point is amazing for getting the broader community excited about VR.

<comment><USER54> This makes VR way way way more attractive to me - accessible and affordable. If VR will break through this seems like the product to do it.

The trouble with VR so far isn't VR itself, because Vr is actually pretty cool, but the trouble is that it's a giant pain to get into, both cost and set up and so on, it's not currently reasonable to buy vr . This product seems like it could change that. Seems like a big deal to me.

</comment></comment><comment><USER55> What are the hardware stats on this Oculus Go? I can't imagine for $200 it's very impressive...

</comment><comment><USER56> VR would be nice for shut-ins (infirm, imprisoned, remote, etc) to vector somewhere else.

</comment><comment><USER57> Im curious to know if the Oculus Go will work with the touch controllers.

</comment><comment><USER58> Positional tracking?

</comment><comment><USER59> This looks cool

</comment><comment><USER60> Sorry, but I'm really turned off of the Oculus Rift because of Palmer Luckey and Facebook. Gives me the creeps.

<comment><USER61> I don't think Palmer is part of Oculus any longer; I could have sworn he left earlier this year, or maybe last?

Facebook is still there, though.

Despite my being an early backer of the original Rift KS (I have the DK1 and the FB branded CV1 - both unused), I over Oculus' offerings, ever since they dropped Linux support. It was one of the main reasons I supported the KS to begin with, but then when it got big, they just decided our market segment wasn't worth supporting.

I will never, ever understand why hardware companies have such problems with this - I have yet to hear a truly convincing argument why hardware API specs can't be released to the community in order to allow them to create drivers - instead, the community has to go thru an arduous round after round of reverse- engineering the protocols and API just to get (at best) 2nd-tier support of the device (usually with buggy and/or missing results). It's been a huge pain with graphics cards, and now its continuing with VR headsets.

Also - why isn't anybody supporting or mentioning OSVR? There's another player in the headset market nobody ever mentions - Razer - who seems to be the only one who does support OSVR, yet their product is given virtually no coverage anywhere.

I don't know why that is, either.

<comment><USER62> Razer doesn't get mentioned because their product is not very good. OSVR is their proprietary API, and its an "open" standard in the same way OpenVR is. OpenXR, the Khronos standard for VR/AR/MR devices will be the industry standard API equivalent to OpenGL, but even OpenVR (Vive/SteamVR api) is a better option than OSVR currently.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER63> "Oculus, creating a 'rift' between humans at an affordable price."

</comment><comment><USER64> This doesn't say shit about shit. What kind of media will I be able to interact in with Oculus? To me the value add to purchasing one of these is to be able to see those cool 360 degree videos on Youtube, maybe game, and I don't know what else so educate me! Reads like an "announcing the announcement" more than anything.

<comment><USER65> My guess is that it is going to be an all-in-one of what is currently GearVR. Can't remember the name of the app, but there's a Video application where you can watch 360 videos (there are also apps that have 360 videos from Disney and the like) and 2D videos in a virtual theater (the theater is a skin though, so can watch in other locations as well). I've also watched the Youtube 360 videos you mention I believe within an app on the device, or maybe it was via browser. Sorry, been a while since I used the thing (neat device, but not enough to maintain interest).

Personal experience: the video always looked grainy on my S7 Edge + GearVR headset. I'm kind of waiting for the next iteration of headsets of which I kind of think we're there with Samsung's Oddyssey or whatever (though really wanted LG to release that flip-visor headset they demoed as that'd be great for shifting between VR and real world without constantly taking off and putting on).</comment></comment>


Barack Obama talks to The Economist: An interview with the president - <AUTHOR> http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2014/08/barack-obama-talks-economist

<comment><USER2> I really respect Obama but every time I hear him speak I'm amazed at how stilted his turn of phrase is.

I understand that this is probably due to him really focusing on ensuring that everything that leaves his mouth is what he means to say.</comment>


1Password Travel Mode: Protect your data when crossing borders - <AUTHOR> https://blog.agilebits.com/2017/05/18/introducing-travel-mode-protect-your-data-when-crossing-borders/ <comment><USER3> "May I search your laptop?" "Certainly." "But... this is practically empty." "Yes sir. I FedEx'd my SSD to the destination."

I have a small SSD in the primary disk in my T420s, it has just enough to get me through the flight. I keep the primary in the UltraBay with a simple adapter, takes one reboot and no tools to put it back in place. Done. Happy searching! I can't log into anything even if I wanted to because I physically do not have my password store [https://www.passwordstore.org/](https://www.passwordstore.org/) with me. ([https://github.com/chx/ykgodot](https://github.com/chx/ykgodot) I wrote this trivial script to automate yubikey neo with pass)

Alternative: encode the entire primary disk [https://github.com/cornelinux/yubikey- luks](https://github.com/cornelinux/yubikey-luks) and FedEx the yubikey. Yanking the disk is better, though.

<comment><USER4> It's a practical approach, and my comment here isn't necessarily aimed at you, chx (since I don't know your citizenship status), but I would add this entreaty to American citizens like me:

If you ever get asked that question at the US border, please don't acquiesce to that request. They have the right to ask, and they even have the power to search it regardless of your permission, but despite an alarming drift towards a total surveillance, they have _not_ established the right to force you to unlock/decrypt anything.

I'm flying into SFO tomorrow, and I am taking similar precautions as chx so that my laptop doesn't contain any meaningful data[1].

However, if asked to unlock my laptop, I plan to say "No, of course I cannot do that; it violates the most basic security practices and I could and should be fired if I exposed sensitive company data in that manner." And then just sticking with it. It will be inconvenient, especially if they seize my laptop and detain me, but as citizens it is up to us to resist the normalization of behaviors that push the nation further towards the precipice of idiotism.

[1]: As an American citizen, I have routinely done this when traveling to authoritarian nations like China; it's hard to express how outraged I am that my own country has degenerated to the point where sound security practices now require these kinds of procedures when traveling to the USA.

<comment><USER5> Is the goal to resist normalization of the behavior or is to get through the security theater?

<comment><USER6> Both, but for non-Americans, getting through the security theater is not guaranteed, so they have to focus on that. For Americans, their rights are clearer and they are guaranteed to get through the security theater, so they can afford to fight the normalization of this.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> If you are refusing to enter the password, access to the device, or to disable travel mode, then good luck to you. IANAL, but the border agent doesn't care if the data is technically in the cloud, rather than on the device, because it restores when you unlock it.

In addition to removing the data from the device, cheers, don't you also need to be able to honestly say you can not provide access to it?

Ways to honestly answer, "not possible", and mean it:

\- schedule a time period where no password is accepted. \- enable whitelist/blacklist zones via geolocation. \- set a new password that you give to a trusted friend/coworker/spouse that you must contact to retrieve.

Some combination of the above for ease-of-use, and ploys like emailing yourself the new password after a period of time for redundancy/safety.

<comment><USER8> If you read the article, there is no "tell" that 1Password is in Travel Mode. The only impact is that most of your passwords are missing from the password vault, but the agent would have no way of knowing what's missing. It's not like it pops up a big "Travel Mode" banner.

<comment><USER9> Customs read these articles just like us. What if they ask you if travel mode is turned on? Will you lie?

<comment><USER10> I was thinking this (and no I wouldn't lie to customs), but the second half of the article details how to let a remote administrator enforce these policies, ie blame your employer for wanting to secure their data from unauthorised access.

Of course the real answer is to avoid the business hostile USA (or at least the border)

<comment> michel-slm The definition of "border" is surprisingly vast too -- if you're within 100 miles of any "external boundary". Two thirds (!) of Americans live within this "border" area.

[https://www.aclu.org/other/constitution-100-mile-border- zone](https://www.aclu.org/other/constitution-100-mile-border-zone)

<comment><USER8> This is a bit of an exaggeration, which has frequently been de-bunked. In brief, if you didn't recently cross a border, then immigration officials have no special powers within this zone.

There is, however, a "functional equivalent" of the border in every international airport that grants ICE these powers over arriving citizens (which makes sense).

[https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/does-a-constitution- free...](https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/does-a-constitution-free-zone- really-exist-in-america)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Counter: the border agent asks "are you hiding any information from us?". answer yes, and they get you to disable travel mode. answer no, and you just committed a felony.

<comment><USER12> As a general comment to so many of the follow-ups to this post:

You _really, really_ don't want to get into a rules-lawyering match with _Federal fucking prosecutors_ over whether "clever technological solution" counts as "hiding" something or not. They have _all of the guns_ in this situation, and you have a demonstrably inaccurate understanding of the relevant statute.

You WILL lose.

<comment><USER13> If the question is "are you hiding any information" then the obvious (and true) answer is no. If the question is "did you use travel mode for 1password" then that's a very different question. Unless you can point out a statute that requires you to travel with certain information on your device it's hard for me to see the problem.

Your position seems to be that if you were carrying your checkbook (as an American) and then decided against it because you were worried someone might get your bank account number then you somehow risk getting into a debate over technicalities with a border agent. I would strongly recommend not getting into that debate as well by not bringing it up.

<comment><USER14> I don't think searches of accounts are in any way excusable either, but for the purpose of rules-lawyering:

You have deliberately chosen to make certain information not available during the search period and are planning to make it available again once the search is over. I can absolutely see how that counts as "hiding".

<comment><USER15> Therefore, if you had a device to withdraw money remotely that required entering your pin, and if the security agent asked you for your pin, would you provide it?

What if my laptop had similar capabilities?

<comment><USER16> The bank PIN isn't really comparable as government agents can access bank info (in UK at least); the only purpose of the PIN is money withdrawal - <USER2> there is no situation where a border agent would be legally asking for that PIN?

If it's going to bother you why not just use a dumb device and a VPN to access your sensitive data?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I'm struggling to understand all the comments here, but it feels like I'm living in an alternate universe. All of these questions like "but do the customs agents search for hidden partitions", etc...

Who is it that is running into all these scenarios with border control? I've gone on international flights, including to the us, dozens of times, and have seen around me thousands upon thousands of travelers, and I've _never_ seen anyone asked to open their laptop, no to mention being grilled on hidden partitions.

Not that I'm doubting this _ever_ happens. But from these comments, someone would get the feeling that this is _routine_ , rather than a 1-in-an-X occurence for a probably very high X.

<comment><USER18> According to a CBP press release from April, "in the first six months of FY17, CBP searched the electronic devices of 14,993 arriving international travelers, affecting 0.008 percent of the approximately 189.6 million travelers arriving to the United States."

The release goes on to show that this is nearly twice as frequent as the equivalent period last year.

<comment><USER19> The press release in question:

[https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/national-media-release/cbp- rele...](https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/national-media-release/cbp-releases- statistics-electronic-device-searches-0)

<comment><USER18> Thanks very much, I had been e-mailed a copy and didn't have the link handy.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> The implementation looks sound, and it's easy to use. Props to Agile Bits for making this feature a priority.

So this is great! -- I think. My only concern is that if the authorities are already suspicious of you, and find no password vaults (or practically nothing in your password vault), they may just detain you until you reveal what you haven't disclosed to them.

There's clearly a technical solution to the problem of protecting data across borders but they do not work so well under duress. Is there any technical way to convince an adversary you are not hiding anything else or did not delete something?

<comment><USER21> Social engineering. Confidence. At some point technology needs to be abandoned and you need to be a human being during those scenarios.

Or simply don't have anything to hide. If you have a guilty conscience that is going to manifest itself in your body language and mannerisms.

<comment><USER22> > Or simply don't have anything to hide. If you have a guilty conscience that > is going to manifest itself in your body language and mannerisms.

What if I am an anxious guy?

What if I carry some business secrets?

What if I don't want some TSA agent look at my SO pics I have on my devices/social media?

<comment><USER21> Being anxious is something you can work on. Business secrets are perfectly legal to carry across a border. Not wanting the TSA to look at your shit is something I can understand.

I'd basically tell them to fuck off (in a more diplomatic sense) until it reached the point of being either blocked entirely from traveling or detainment. At that point you gotta ask yourself if the juice is worth the squeeze and turn back or play their game.

Also this is more than just an issue with the Trump administration and the TSA... I don't travel to Canada any longer due to the treatment I have received at the border there.

<comment><USER23> Just out of curiosity, how's the treatment at the border in Canada?

<comment><USER24> 10 years ago I was working in Canada; couple of friends and I (Australian, British and Québécois) decided to go and ski in Montana for a few days. We had a few beers on the way down and stopped just before customs to drop off open cans before we crossed the border. Being 11pm, we were the only people at the crossing. As we circled round they decided something wasn't right (probably justified although not in their jurisdiction) - 4 hours later we were allowed into the US having been fingerprinted and our car searched on a ramp for what I assume was explosives or drugs. 3 days later we returned to the border travelling the other direction - the CBSA officer looked at the cover of all three different nations' passports before saying "I'm sure there's a visa in there somewhere, have a nice day."

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> This is a nice feature, but ultimately if you are concerned with border agents requiring a phone search then you should just backup and install a fresh OS before traveling, then restore when you get back. Log into the minimal number of apps after you've entered the destination country, and optionally delete/logout of said apps prior to return travel if the return border crossing is also a concern. Admittedly if you use a password manager you might need still want to make use of a feature such as the one in this article, or install the password manager app after entering the country, or just write down the passwords that you will need and hide them somewhere unfindable with your stuff.

On iOS about the only thing you would lose is your message history during the trip. It might be an annoyance if you wanted to play games that had non-cloud- based saved player state, but I can't think of too many other issues with doing this.

<comment><USER26> Can't they order you to sign into iCloud or equivalent and then just sync whatever they want, photos, texts, emails, apps (and then order you to sign into those apps like Facebook, Whatsapp, Gmail)? Bottom line is they can get you _AND_ everything you have access to. And it you try to circumvent it by i.e. temporarily encrypting everything for 24hr boom you just committed a felony. This is my understanding at least.

<comment><USER27> IANAL and I don't have an answer to this, but I would be deeply alarmed if this were the case. I can understand them making the case that anything on your personal is searchable (though I disagree that this should be allowed).

By asking you to sign in and sync, they're not just requesting access to information on your person -- that's an enormous expansion of their search powers.

<comment><USER28> I mean, aren't they forcing you to give Facebook passwords now?

[https://www.cnet.com/news/us-border-agents-facebook- twitter-...](https://www.cnet.com/news/us-border-agents-facebook-twitter- password/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> This feature really should ask you to commit to your duration of travel beforehand. It's no use if you can be compelled to readd the data.

<comment><USER30> That doesn't solve the problem, because you could be detained until the data is accessible again.

<comment><USER31> No you can't be detained indefinitely (unless they have evidence to charge you with a crime). You could have your devices confiscated, and as a non-citizen, you could be denied entry.

<comment><USER30> I believe you can be detained indefinitely, and without probable cause, by border agents.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> I'm a little sad that this would require me to use the 1Password cloud- service. I would never want my 1Password vault to be on any server outside of my control. While I completely trust agilebit's intentions, I feel that their cloud service adds a very major attack surface. Someone like the NSA would certainly be able to obtain copies of the encrypted vaults, which means that _everyone 's_ vaults are just one bug/backdoor in the cryptographic stack (remember Debian RNG bug?) away from being exposed.

Hence, I only use WiFi sync for 1Password. It would be nice if 1Password added a sync option through my own WebDAV server. I'd then be happy to pay for a 1Password cloud account just for the TravelMode feature, as long as the vault data itself wasn't stored anywhere outside of my control. Having my own server would mean the the NSA (or whoever) would have to do a targeted attack on me personally, which is a whole different ballgame from everybody's encrypted vaults sitting on agilebit's servers.

In the meantime, if I had to cross the US border (as a non-citizien!), I would probably delete the whole 1Password app from my phone before crossing, and then restore the entire phone from backup afterwards.

</comment><comment><USER32> I think this is an incredibly worrisome move on 1Password's part. Coming from the right motives, but ultimately it'll end up being used against us.

Look at it from the perspective of the government. By bringing information from elsewhere into the US, you're importing it. It just so happens that the import security is tight in airports. So you use 1Password to delay importing this data until you can reach it through an alternative import method which is much harder to regulate - the Internet.

What's going to happen is that they'll spend much more effort on tightening up the "import security" from the Internet. Things like SSL/TLS MITMing and deep packet inspection will be used to enforce compliance.

Don't get me wrong. The ability to be able to do this is incredibly important. If they had marketed this as anything other than a travel mode specifically, and let users work it out themselves, it'd probably be better. But as it is, they've created something which is basically publicly stating that it exists to break import security, and as a result it's going to get a lot of attention from the wrong people. I worry that the existence of this mode this is going to be used by the government as an excuse to have a "Great Firewall of America".

<comment><USER33> The difference is: with physical access, "they" are in control (during import). Importing over the internet, the user is in control (by using proper encryption).

If they beat encryption, everything is over anyway.

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> Isn't the counter simple; they ask for your logins to the 1Password vault? I guess this just adds an extra layer of obfuscation.

The most secure way I can think of is to either encrypt your drive (or wipe for travel and online restore once arriving) and physically mail the new password (or hand over to a trusted friend/store location) to the destination. Then there is no way of restoring at the airport.

Of course, then they can just detain you indefinitely for not revealing the password you don't know...

<comment><USER35> ,,even if you're asked to unlock 1Password by someone at the border, there's no way for them to tell that Travel Mode is even enabled.''

It looks similar to hidden partition in TrueCrypt

<comment><USER36> Any subscription-based 1Password can be accessed from the web. Couldn't they just demand those credentials?

<comment><USER37> Only if you know them. I don't know about you, but I don't have my long random account key memorized (only my master password). You can't log into the website without that account key.

Of course, you do need to be able to log in to turn travel mode back on, so if I were to use this I'd probably do something like set up a service to securely send me my account key after I'm expected to have finished crossing the border, or maybe just store it on a remote server that I have access to under the expectation that the TSA can't demand that I SSH into a remote server (especially one they don't even know about). Though if I'm traveling alone (instead of with my wife) I'd probably just call her and ask her to turn travel mode off for me.

<comment><USER38> That's a great solution if you're a US citizen and want to enjoy showing off to a border guard before being guaranteed entry, but for migrants (who are most affected by this), this kind of 'gotcha' logic would likely be considered insubordinate grandstanding, and get them denied entry.

<comment><USER37> > _this kind of 'gotcha' logic would likely be considered insubordinate > grandstanding_

I'm not sure what you mean. I don't think it's unreasonable for anyone, migrants included, to tell CBP "I don't feel safe traveling with sensitive data, so I don't have any of that data on my computer". What's the 'gotcha' here? CBP isn't the only reason to want to have Travel Mode, there's also the increased risk of having your laptop stolen or misplaced.

<comment><USER38> In your original post, I took

> _Only if you know them. ... You can 't log into the website without that > account key._

To mean that you'd openly have access to information in front of the guard, and then let them know that you can't access it at this time because of your elaborate scheme (e.g. tell them that it exists, but that they can't have it).

That's quite different to just not travelling with the data (or evidence of it existing) at all.

> _CBP isn 't the only reason to want to have Travel Mode_

No, but it's the only 'reason' that's likely to use serious, life-altering coercion to make you to disable it, if they detect that it exists. It may be better to have no data that suggests capabilities, than openly posses partially disabled capabilities.

There's no way for a border agent to tell if you're refusing to disable travel mode because you won't or you can't (and little reason for them to care).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> It's a clever idea, but how long before border authorities simply order travelers to log on to 1Password and turn off travel mode, or be denied entry? I'm guessing not very.

<comment><USER40> :-/

What we really need is plausible deniability - if they don't know you use 1password, they don't know to ask for it.

<comment><USER41> Is plausible deniability the right term here? Usually that's about the ability to deny having known about or authorised something after it's already been discovered.

I'm not really sure how you'd refer to the concept "they don't know I have it, so they don't know to ask". Security through ignorance?

<comment><USER40> I guess it's a type of steganography then.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> Is travelling with confidential data really necessary? Wouldn't it make more sense for me to have a 'empty' notebook and store my data out of harm's way (but accessible via a VPN).

<comment><USER38> I've come to the conclusion that this is the only reasonable technical solution.

Don't travel with sensitive data, and openly explain that you don't do so.

The frustrating part is the UX, and the fuss when you land.

I've found that this works:

\- Burner android (burner account explicitly for travel) for music, podcasts, light browsing, etc.

\- Cheap ThinkPad for headscratching / hacking (work over SSH, keys on a Yubikey, IP in your head. YubiKey as second factor for password manager as browser extension (uninstall before the border))

<comment><USER43> Any recommendations for a "burner android" phone?

<comment><USER38> I'd just go to your local phone repair kiosk and see what they have lying around for cheap.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> Wouldn't an alternative "destroy everything" password be a good idea also ?

Would work like this : When forced to enter / give the password to your vault, you enter/give this one, and everything the vault contains is wiped out before the vault is unlocked.

<comment><USER45> Once again we drum up technical "solutions" to what ultimately is a policy issue.

A better idea is to change our laws so that our constitutional rights are respected. If that's not possible then the next solution is to change our elected officials.

<comment><USER46> > change our elected officials

In America, who you vote in has very little effect on public policy, and by very little I mean a near zero/statically insignificant amount (unless you're part of the top 10% of income earners):

[http://fightthefuture.org/videos/does-voting-make-a- differen...](http://fightthefuture.org/videos/does-voting-make-a-difference/)

<comment><USER47> Eeyore / South Park style cyncism actively forments apathy. Self-fulfiling prophesy.

Counterpoint: My friends and associates do amazing things. Marriage equality, marijuana legalization, DREAM Act, etc, etc. I (a yeoman) also do what I can.

Maybe think of politics, society, culture like thermodynamics:

Organization requires continuous effort, to mitigate entropy.

<comment><USER46> Keep in mind Marriage Equality in America came via the supreme court, not legislation (unlike New Zealand, Canada, et. al.)

I'm not saying people shouldn't be active. Groups like The Anti-Corruption Act ([https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhe286ky-9A](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhe286ky-9A)) are doing a lot, not to mention the group that pushed Maine's ranked voting amendment.

But the vote itself is not very useful. There are other forms of activism that are more worthwhile; those that seek to slowly and fundamentally change the system. Focusing on the left right paradigm will ultimately lead people to being angry at two parties that are essentially the same.

<comment><USER48> > Keep in mind Marriage Equality in America came via the supreme court, not > legislation […] But the vote itself is not very useful.

Liberal supreme court judges do not materialize out of thin air, do they?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER49> One thing that I have always thought about is why Emails doesn't have disposable passwords. For example, you make 1 new password that you can use just one time.

That way if you need to use unsafe PC from a hostel, you can log in with that password.

<comment><USER50> Or why we have passwords at all. Sites like Medium have moved to a passwordless model, where you're sent a login link to access your account rather than forcing you to remember or retrieve a password.

[https://blog.medium.com/signing-in-to-medium-by-email- aacc21...](https://blog.medium.com/signing-in-to-medium-by-email-aacc21134fcd)

<comment><USER51> Where would you send a link to log into your email?

<comment><USER52> I was thinking it would be super cool if you could use something like [https://krypt.co/](https://krypt.co/) and use public key private key.

Sure, you would need that ssh daemon running on the computer, but I bet it could it could be retrofitted to use qr codes or something.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER53> TL;DR: Just avoid traveling to the USA.

P.S. I love the USA, don't get me wrong. I hope some day the madness on the borders gets less paranoid.

<comment><USER54> And the UK. And New Zealand. And I believe Canada. And...

<comment><USER55> And definately Australia and China.

<comment><USER56> Which makes Ireland the only English-speaking country where you don't expect stuff like this to happen?

<comment><USER55> I don't understand why the language would matter? In Sweden we don't have this control and we speak better english than many americans.

<comment><USER54> No, you don't.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER57> I use Linux. I'm convinced that if I put a small Windows partition up (or another Linux install) and make grub boot into it automatically (with little delay) no one would ever notice. Does any one know if they check for multiple partitions at all?

And Android can have multiple users, can you set up a new user and boot into that one automatically?

<comment><USER58> well, with some experience, border guards will learn to spot a non-ntfs partition, that windows dutyfully reports as unformated/blablah space, so that will eventually be caught, dont rely on this to actually protect you, its more of a sleigh of hand that may be easily spotted by the right guard.

<comment><USER59> Time to write one's own filesystem driver, that either hides this info or shows the disk as fully partitioned but empty NTFS partition, and when something tries to write onto it, throws a failure (so you can have e.g. 10 MB at the very front of the partition free, and the rest looks empty, but actually contains your Linux system)

Another hack would be one's own BIOS, that lies to Windows saying "This disk is 100 GB", but given the correct unlock signal, will admit to the OS "this disk is 500 GB big".

<comment><USER60> What about dumping the partition table before simply removing the partition that matters? Just restore the partition table later. You could even grow the remaining partition without growing the actual filesystem, and hack something so that the FS layer reports the whole size. Or have both GPT and MBR that differ, offering two different views of the disk. If you're using lvm or btrfs you could also make a snapshot before removing all data then revert to the snapshot, and/or apply clever subvolume tricks like btrfs-convert does to keep the ext filesystem around [0].

[0]: [https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Conversion_from_Ext3](https://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Conversion_from_Ext3)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER61> Mandatory "No Linux client" comment :|

Does anyone have any insight if this is a pure business decision or there's something holding them back technically?

<comment><USER62> They can't even ship version of their Windows client with the ability to create/edit/delete local vaults.

I think they are focusing on money before all else. They do still make a good product, but the direction they are moving towards eliminates their support for many threat levels that they had previously.

Now you have to have a cloud account and you have to store your stuff there because their supposed "cross-platform" client cannot work on their own vault format on Windows.

They might respond saying the version 4 of the windows client supports working with these vaults, but version 4 does not support OTPs so if you want to use the modern features without relying on their cloud storage...they don't care.

If you go to their forums and read the response from the community about windows not supporting creating or editing of local vaults you will see they are by and large dismissive. So I think it's really about money and resources.

</comment></comment><comment><USER63> Excellent effort. I do wonder though, what is to prevent authorities from forcing you to just turn off travel mode? Is there a timer that you set? Deadman's switch? Geolocating? (The last 2 are not good solutions, but you get the idea)

Edit: I missed this bit below:

> even if you're asked to unlock 1Password by someone at the border, there's > no way for them to tell that Travel Mode is even enabled.

However, it won't take very long for authorities to wise up, know that 1password has a travel mode, and tell you to turn off Travel Mode, eh? Or am I missing something?

<comment><USER64> My instinct is that if you have anything stored on your device, you're at risk crossing borders. So in my case, I would likely remove both the Dropbox app and KeePass, and then reinstall them on arrival. I suppose that would leave detectable traces, which could argue for using a burner phone, and then installing those two on arrival on it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER65> Although it's a great option, what's to stop them for asking for your 1Password account credentials?

I believe they already ask for your social media accounts, don't they? That is ridiculous in itself. Why not ask for my bank logins while you're at it?

<comment><USER66> > _Why not ask for my bank logins while you 're at it?_

One step at a time.

</comment></comment><comment><USER67> It is very sad that it had to come that far

</comment><comment><USER68> Could we have something like time-delay passwords? Like the time-delayed vaults they (allegedly) have in banks?

Then you could say: "Even if I agreed to give you my password, you wouldn't be able to unlock my device with it for another 24 hours".

<comment><USER69> That's just _begging_ them to detain you for a day.

Time delays only work for the entity in power. The bank has your money, you'll just have to wait to get it. But the border people have power, not you; they can make you wait if they want.

<comment><USER68> I understand that even in the USA, to detain someone for 24 hours you need something like a warrant or some kind of special permission from the judiciary. I mean, if it's got to the point where the border force (?) can just detain you on a whim, I have a much better way to keep my data safe: by not flying to the USA.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER70> Or: just delete the app before you get to customs and redownload after you pass customs. Simple, elegant, and fool proof.

<comment><USER12> If CBP knows you're a 1P user (which they hypothetically could since the NSA has read 1P's emails to you, a foreign user of that service), but you don't have the app installed when you attempt to enter, what makes you think they'll respond differently than they _currently do_ to people whom they know have Facebook accounts, but delete the app from their device before attempting to enter the country, rather than allow the immigrations agent access to their feed?

<comment><USER71> "I forgot my password"

<comment><USER12> That will get you a cell in the UK, true or not.

In the US, it will probably get you denied entry, possibly permanently, for "lying to a customs officer" (if a non-citizen), or the device possibly being confiscated if you're a citizen, (and a note in a file somewhere that says you've probably lied to a federal agent — particularly if they happen to catch any security camera footage of you stupidly using your device shortly after exiting the international arrivals area).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER72> They can only legally view the data you bring into the country on physical media in your possession as you pass through customs.

Though it's not difficult to remove the app/vault and then reinstate it after customs...

</comment><comment><USER73> I have some ideas I think will improve our security in this direction. Apple seeks to make it technically impossible to extract iPhone data and I've been wondering how we can do the same with using someone's credentials to enter the systems we build.

One idea is to allow users to define how many concurrent sessions they can have so they can manage those slots and require something sign out before their credentials can sign in again.

The other is to allow users to configure a schedule when their credentials work so you can block most of the world and probably most of most days too.

</comment><comment><USER74> In a true democracy this would be a pointless feature.

<comment><USER75> Why? What prevents a "true democracy" from enacting strict border controls?

<comment><USER74> A democracy is not just a system of governance. The fact that a law was voted by congress means it is a republic, or a parliamentary monarchy.

To be considered a democracy a country needs to provide its citizens more than the ability to elect a legislative body. There needs to be some basic freedoms and guarantees as well, like strong protections against unlawful detentions (habeas corpus) and unlawful seizures.

Border control agents are provided exceptions to the normal rules. They can check your luggage for weapons or illicit goods without any probably cause. The logic behind these exceptions is that it has a deterrence effect on criminals that would like to bring in illegal goods.

But going through your digital information makes no sense in that regard. If you were "up to no good" you would be able to send that information digitally without stepping foot in the country. Going through someone's private information is not about ensuring the safety of the country. It is an invasion of privacy and an intimidation tactic. The deterrence effect is not against criminals. The government uses this power to intimate people they do not like. For instance Loira Poitras and Glenn Greenwald are routinely subjected to this, for political reasons. Many muslims are subjected to this, simply because they are muslims.

These are the tactics of non democratic regimes. It is sad to see them becoming more and more widespread in the US.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER76> If you travel for work, wouldn't it be better to just let your employer hold the password? When border security asks for data you truly cannot provide it.

I think the only way to get around this shit is to have another person hold at least part of the key. Border security can't force you to lie to your employer on the phone, so they're not getting access.

</comment><comment><USER77> Crazy question: is it more effective to have your laptop couriered to you after you've arrived and cleared customs?

<comment> brown9-2 Your laptop has to clear customs too, and it won't be in your possession with this plan.

<comment><USER78> If the laptop is not in your possession when it has to clear customs wouldn't this mean they cannot ask you for the password and such, then this would limit what they could do? Though they could still seize it, but at least without the knowledge of passwords and social media.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER79> I'm kind of wondering how this all works in general when getting to the US.

Considering my usual work contracts, complying with letting border control look into my fully encrypted work laptop would actually be a breach of my work contract.

How do you guys handle this?

<comment><USER80> Refuse to go to the US unless provided with a safe / separate laptop that contains nothing that would cause a breach.

I'd make it your employer's responsibility. If you have to go to the US on business, it's your employer's responsibility to help. Or to not send you to the US.

</comment></comment><comment><USER81> I don't understand. Is this really a thing? I'm from the UK and never heard such a thing. Is this common in US? What are they looking for? Do they just pick someone randomly, login to the laptop and check emails and stuff?

<comment><USER82> As I understand it, they generally don't just aimlessly scroll through your email/facebook in front of you, then give your device back (although they can, if they feel like it) - they get you to surrender your credentials, then save these in their database; the contents of the accounts will then be downloaded automatically.

Same for devices - they have you unlock the device, then take it away, plug it into a PC/whatever, which sucks down a complete image of the device. Then they give it back, if they feel like it.

Obviously, if they do this with your email & facebook, they're also sucking in all your connections - your social graph: everyone you've ever emailed or has emailed you, everyone you're connected to on facebook.

<comment><USER81> Thanks for the details? Is it a common procedure? Are they doing that to everyone coming to US?

<comment><USER82> I think the answers to those are probably: No one really knows, and No, not yet - although they do now (optionally) ask for your facebook/twitter usernames when applying for an ETSA.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER83> I thought the trick was to back up the phone on one side of the border, factory reset / wipe, restore the phone on the other side of the border.

Obviously that doesn't work for laptops - but for a phone it is in the realm of possible.

</comment><comment><USER84> Would it be equivalent if my (for example with LastPass) vault required a 2FA token to access, and I simply left the 2FA token at my house? I would in that case similarly be incapable of complying.

</comment><comment><USER85> I don't get how this would prevent border agents from asking to unlock / turn off travel mode.

Why not make this feature tied to a geo-location? Like the hotel or the conference centre I will be attending.

<comment><USER86> AFAIK you can only deactivate the travel mode on the web profile. Of course it would be much more effective when you use it in the team mode. So that someone else has to deactivate the mode for you.

</comment></comment><comment><USER87> One other way: change your password to a temporary one, give it to a trusted friend who changes it. You don't know the password, you can tell the truth to the border agent.

Once you're out of their hands, ask for it back and change it again.

Even if the friend is in the US, they cannot compell her/him to release it easily, US laws apply.

There must be a way to also encrypt the new temporary password with 2 keys so that the trusted friend cannot access your encryped content without your own key.

<comment><USER88> I don't see how any of these solutions help. At the US border agents routinely ask you to log into your email account and search your emails. If you refuse to comply it is much more likely they will not let you into the country.

So they don't just search your laptop they try and search online accounts also.

</comment></comment><comment><USER89> Its great that they have at least thought about this and developed something, but this just sidesteps the issue.

Only dissidents in despotic regimes need to resort to these kind of workarounds for lack of other options. Why should citizens of a democratic country have to workaround anything?

The solution to privacy, surveillance and overreach issues in democratic countries has to be political, and not technical.

</comment><comment><USER90> I am a U.S. citizen and I flew last year from America > Qatar > India and from India > Qatar > America on a business trip. I was carrying two laptops. Neither laptop was searched, but they were put in separate trays under the x-rays to make sure they didn't contain physical explosives or hinder the x-raying of the food and clothes in my backpack.

</comment><comment><USER91> Tangentially relevant, I made a pam authentication module for Linux a while ago, that addresses this issue. It allows for the creation of duress passwords. Here is the repository: [https://github.com/rafket/pam_duress](https://github.com/rafket/pam_duress)

<comment><USER78> That is neat! I would think using it at a border crossing would constitute hiding something...right?

</comment></comment><comment><USER92> The right solution to this problem is, when traveling, always answer "no" to "may I search your laptop?"

It sucks, and it many mean a lot of hassle ranging from confiscated equipment to being held at the border to being refused entry, but this is just one of the new risks of travel. Border security only gets away with this because people say yes.

Companies need to make clear to their employees (and the public) that sharing passwords is a terminable policy violation. You should be able to say, honestly and credibly, "I won't unlock my laptop because I don't want to get fired."

<comment><USER12> Do you _honestly_ think customs agents _care_ whether you'll get fired or not? US immigrations will permanently sever families that have been together for years or even decades with utter disregard for the emotional trauma they're inflicting.

Your job matters exactly fuck-all to a CPB agent.

<comment><USER93> It completely depends if you are white or not. If you are white, and speak politely, the agent will care deeply about your concerns, including potential firing as an example. If you are not white, and especially if you appear black, Latino or Arab, then your comment will definitely hold true.

<comment><USER94> Recently delayed by the TSA to the point of missing my turn to board. Was subjected to additional searching. Upon finding nothing, I discovered the extra searching was what they do when you fail the hand swab test. I had not had the test administered. So they administered the test. I passed. They then searched my things again and I was questioned regarding the quantity of business cards I was carrying.

Oh also I'm white.

<comment><USER18> TSA is not the same agency as CBP. They don't receive the same training, encounter travelers in the same situations, enforce the same laws, or execute the same authority.

<comment><USER94> I've had similar experiences with CBP too. It's still a pretty silly unqualified comment. They tend to be on power trips any chance they get, brown or black or white.

<comment><USER18> I didn't mean to comment on the use of racial profiling; I've just noticed that there's a lot of confusion about the difference between TSA and CBP.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER95> When the features start rolling out, the market entrenches the status quo. Props to 1Password though; this is a symptom and they are not the cause.

I guess the reasonable next step, when all the outrage has fizzled, is pre- screening. Pay for the government to have all of your passwords all the time, and save yourself the hassle.

<comment><USER65> _> I guess the reasonable next step, when all the outrage has fizzled, is pre- screening. Pay for the government to have all of your passwords all the time, and save yourself the hassle._

Lol, on what planet is that the "reasonable next step"?? Do they want to see my dick pics and login to my bank accounts as well? My poetry or whatever rambling I may write? Am I not entitled to any privacy at all?

The actual reasonable next step is not to go to, or deal with, the US at all.

<comment><USER96> I assume that was meant as "it's reasonable to expect this as the next step".

<comment><USER65> Ah, ok. I get it now. I read it incorrectly.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER97> I've had this idea for so many years now: your gmail account has - let's call it - a master password and a throwaway password. Say you need to print something from a public PC, you just use that password that works only once, even if somebody key-logs it, you're safe.

<comment><USER57> 2FA is basically an ever changing 2nd password used 1 time. I use it everywhere it is supported. More info: [https://www.google.com/landing/2step/](https://www.google.com/landing/2step/)

<comment><USER98> Additionally Google will give you a set of (longer) `recovery codes' that can be used as one-time second factor passcodes.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER99> Bin Laden has obviously succeeded removing freedom that american citizens were enjoying not so long ago.

</comment><comment><USER100> A travel mode like this for Dropbox would be even more useful. Being able to mark certain directories as confidential so they can easily be removed and re- synced would be much better than deleting and re-installing the entire app.

</comment><comment><USER101> because... seriously:

> the border agent asks "are you hiding any information from us?"

Answer yes, always, because: I have client data I'm most certainly hiding from you on my computer because they'd in general be worried if it i didn't, also I have passcodes to friends mail servers I manager for them I'm hiding from you, also I'm hiding from you all the emails I've sent to my parents, I'm also hiding from you all the pics of my gonads I sent to my lover. So yes, I'm hiding information from you. What country is this anyway? <asks the person arriving to the US from Germany>

</comment><comment><USER102> Shame it has to come to this

</comment><comment><USER103> I'm surprised this is even a thing. Do folks get asked for passwords at airports? What is the reason for this feature?

Hope this comment didn't come across as negative. I'm a big 1password fan.

</comment><comment><USER104> The video/onboard tried too cute to make the Travel mode = off a confusing ambiguity by making just gray. If you don't want to waste people's time make things explicit.

</comment><comment><USER105> It would be interesting if service providers like Google, Microsoft, Apple, and Facebook started taking governments to court for unauthorised access to their systems.

<comment><USER106> It's OK. The NSA already has access to their data. No biggie.

<comment><USER105> That is the other half isn't it. How can one trust that non-security experts can safely store your passwords in clear text on a networked system when no one else can do it safely

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER107> Do you really trust cloud password storage services?

</comment><comment><USER108> This might be troublesome in airports like Tel Aviv (personal experience). I'd rather encrypt and send my data through regular mail.

</comment><comment><USER109> I know many who buy an old laptop and ONLY use the Epic Privacy Browser or the TOR browser on it when traveling.

</comment><comment><USER110> LINUX SUPPORT PLEASE. Seriously, please.

</comment><comment><USER111> maybe instead of developing all these bend over backwards solutions to deny these data rapists from getting any pleasure out of it, maybe change the law to make them stop doing it in the first place... they are acting on the rules set in the system so change them.

</comment><comment><USER112> A more accurate reality: [https://xkcd.com/538/](https://xkcd.com/538/)

<comment><USER113> At, say, the US/Canadian border? No, not accurate nor realistic at all.

<comment><USER114> Then again, you don't even need a $5 attitude readjustment tool when you can just shrug and say "Whatever. You are detained until you cough up what we want." \- and are able to do just that...

<comment><USER115> They can't detain you indefinitely without articulating a good reason, even as a non-citizen. What they can do is deny you entry. For citizens, not even that.

<comment><USER116> * What they can do is deny you entry. For citizens, not even that.*

Job lost. Father died without you seeing him. Thousands of dollars gone in lost ticket, reservations. That's more than enough for 99% of people. The other 1% don't even try to enter USA

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER117> Arms race in post-Snowdown era.

I would never imagine world in 2017 to look like this.

"Black Mirror"

</comment><comment><USER118> I don't understand. Why would people not just change their passwords by someone they know, travel, plausibly deny kniwlege of the password, and call the relative to unlock once crossed the border?

<comment><USER82> Because they don't want to get detained, be denied entry, have to travel home at their own expense, and be refused/blacklisted entry in the future, probably?

If you're not a US citizen, there's no plausible deniability, due process or rights at the US Border; CBP agents can deny entry to whoever, for any reason at all - they have _very_ wide latitude and there is no appeal.

Legal details vary by country, but this is pretty much the case at all borders, afaik.

</comment></comment><comment><USER119> Detect CBP IP address?

> There are 0 passwords in your vault.

</comment><comment><USER47> I'm a very happy 1Password customer.

Repeating my #1 feature request here, dovetailing this thread, please forgive.

Problem: My logins keep breaking as websites evolve, change their forms, etc.

Suggestion: Online catalog of login config/scripts.

a) Pre-populate with "official" scripts for top 50 websites. Also serve as examples to show everyone how its done.

b) Permit users to submit new scripts.

c) Version these scripts. Use some kind of repo.

d) Keep track of success rate, a la bugmenot, retailmenot, etc. Anonymize feedback, of course.

</comment><comment><USER120> Upload an encrypted image of your OS (Linux in my case) SSD on your server. Install an older legit version of windows (which was likely provided to you when you bought your computer).

Add some nasty gay porn and you are all set for the border.

</comment><comment><USER28> I wish Android and iOS also had a more incognito/hidden "travel mode" than the current account profiles.

</comment><comment><USER121> I said I wanted to avoid terrorist attacks, not be near them.

<comment><USER122> We detached this subthread from [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14405388](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14405388) and marked it off-topic.</comment></comment>


$200 Laptops Break a Business Model - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/26/technology/26spend.html <comment><USER2> I find this a little misleading, because netbooks are very rarely someone's sole computer, and they seem to deliberately omit the growing sales of Macbooks and Macbook Pros (which aren't cheap) to make the story more convincing.

In fact, I'd say that this is a bit of a microsoft biased story in that the emphasis is "Microsoft can't compete on price" (which they can frame as "we don't want to compete on price") when in fact MS is losing at both the top end and the bottom end of the market.

<comment><USER3> I recently got a Lenovo s10 and I'm considering using it as my main development workstation (hooked up to decent monitor & keyboard, doing mostly Python stuff) after spending some time traveling with it: I absolutely love this tiny laptop and I could easily imagine people using it as their sole machine.

<comment><USER4> This is exactly what happened to me. I bought a cheap laptop to ensure my mojo worked in Vista. I made it a dual-boot with fedora to play with linux, and now it's my main rig.

I only really boot the xp machine so the rest of the household can reach a printer, when necessary.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> "It is spending a fifth of what it would be for traditional technology, said Jayshree Ullal, Arista's chief executive."

[Traditional technology being mostly the standard Microsoft stack, replaced by various online applications.]

At some point, CEOs of more conservative corporations are going to be presented with these numbers in a board meeting, and will have a very hard time defending the value they're getting for the money they're handing over to Microsoft. True, there's the "we would have to retrain our employees" argument, but young employees are already used to doing everything online and will be asking the same questions.

Add to that the downward pressure on margins from netbooks (no one is going to spend $200 for an OS on a $200 computer), and I do not see any upside for Microsoft in the near future.

<comment><USER6> _no one is going to spend $200 for an OS on a $200 computer_

You can easily pay $20,000 for software to run on a $200 computer. Whether that represents value for money or not depends on what you're trying to do.

<comment><USER5> Microsoft has been successful largely because the cost of their product was hidden in the cost of the computers on which it is pre-installed. $200 total price point does not leave them much room to hide. Because consumers have been trained not to think of the operating system as a separate cost, but just part of the computer, I don't think you can convince them now that the operating system, by itself, is worth as much of the rest of the computer combined.

This is not quite as true for businesses, but even there the cost of site licenses for the Microsoft product stack needs to be questioned for employees whose needs are web browsing, email, and basic document editing. And, of course, the article shows that newer companies are coming to that conclusion already.

<comment><USER7> Vista Home costs dell ~40$.

<comment><USER5> 1\. Did Microsoft charge more than that before Dell started seriously supporting Linux on their computers? (Honest question, I don't know the answer.)

2\. $40 is a big cost to absorb when you are selling a $200 or $300 netbook.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> No sign-up version...

[http://www.iht.com/articles/2009/01/26/technology/26spend.ph...](http://www.iht.com/articles/2009/01/26/technology/26spend.php)

</comment><comment><USER9> Maybe some people are missing the point of the article: hardware is cheap, getting cheaper: Moore's Law in action.

Software only becomes expensive when it is based upon this intangible notion of "sales," a per-unit figure that becomes largely irrelevant when factoring in dollars spent on marketing and advertising, licensing fees and things of that sort.

OSS has the unique ability to put both categories in somewhat of a corner. Not really intentionally, either; simply by being honest.

</comment><comment><USER3> This is a great time to set up a business that helps small to medium businesses shave some of the IT costs; that's exactly what I am trying to do as a side-project. So not all is black and gloomy in this depression.

</comment><comment><USER10> Cheap alternatives that eat into revenue generated from their more expensive counterparts are not really business model busters. They just compete better using the same business model in this economy.

</comment><comment><USER11> I noticed the article started out by talking about Asus' EEE PC, but then went on to talk about how Acer is stealing Apple's market position. Is this a typo? I know Acer still exists, but I'm pretty sure Asus still sells the most netbooks.

</comment><comment><USER12> couple years ago netbook was luxury

asus makes luxury into commodity

the price of netbooks should drop (esp over last 2 yrs) but didn't, suggesting there's a lot of demands

</comment><comment><USER13> In parallel, economic downturn means more innovation as individuals and companies get very creative to meet the changing expectations from consumers. When resources are scarce, thinking becomes abundant. This is the same reason why poor and hungry startups are always more innovative then large and stable companies.</comment>


Question: If you're not already starting a company, what currently occupies your time? - <AUTHOR>

<comment><USER2> University. In my opinion, college is the best thing to do when you don't have something better to do, if you'll pardon the tautology. Universities put you in contact with lots of other smart people, with the resources and freedom to devote your effort to whatever serves your interests.

</comment><comment><USER3> Most of my time is being dedicated to working on my project. A beta launch is set for within the next 2-3 months.

I'm also at school in the meantime.

</comment><comment><USER4> College. I'm on the ltwt rowing team, so that can take up as many hours per day as I want.

I'm also working on a couple of books. I have a full mindmap for one, so it's just a matter of translating it into prose. I write slowly, but hopefully I'll have a first draft that will be somewhat readable by others by the end of summer.

</comment><comment><USER5> Bloody Robots. And they are not even bipedal dynamically self-balancing ones.

Estimated Time to Startup: 4 Months.

<comment><AUTHOR> Just out of curiosity - how did you get into making robots, and do you have any resources I can look at?

<comment><USER5> Thankfully I don't make them. I'm involved in the RoboCup project: www.robocup.org. But I'm in a 'league' where software is king and hardware is standard: the 4 Legged League. Here's the link: http://www.tzi.de/4legged/

But if you're into making robots, pretty much every other league in RoboCup (save simulation) does hardware: humanoids, coffee-can robots, rescue robots, etc.

So yeah, I program robotic dogs to play soccer. Pretty ridiculous concept, but it's darn cute.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Also, if you plan to start something in the future, what is your expected timeline?

</comment><comment><USER6> School... 2 Months 'til graduation... let me out!

</comment><comment><USER7> Working for the man.</comment>


Miscellaneous unsolicited (and possibly biased) career advice - <AUTHOR> https://erikbern.com/2019/09/12/misc-unsolicited-career-advice.html <comment><USER2> I came across Erik around the middle of my CS degree and since then his blog posts and talks have been major 'passive mentoring' for me.

I really admire what he's acheived so far in his career and I also really like the way he approaches software development. He's successfully straddled the Data Engineering <-> ML divide, something I've been trying to do myself.

His ideas about growth companies and personal human capital have also been influential. Part of the reason I turned down a Senior position paying more money to go in as a grad at a growing unicorn was his advice.

Also good to see him still reinforcing Stats as underrated. I just applied to go into a short graduate program in Maths & Stats because I'm not got enough at it to be an ML Engineer.</comment>


Scraping the Windows Phone Marketplace - <AUTHOR> http://taylor.fausak.me/2011/12/28/scraping-the-windows-phone-marketplace/

<comment><USER2> Microsoft should offer a free phone for anyone that owns a Windows powered computer and future owners to combat Android and iOS. [http://www.trendslate.com/2011/12/28/windows-should- include-...](http://www.trendslate.com/2011/12/28/windows-should-include- phone/)</comment>


Ask HN: Now that CO2 levels are down, can we see if CO2 causes global warming? - <AUTHOR> The Chinese virus caused an almost complete stop of all activities, at a level that would be impossible to achieve in a normal situation.
It's already been noticed that CO2 levels have decreased significantly.
Will we be able to observe temps and see if there is definitely a relation between CO2 and global warming, or will this not be possible?
I would think that this is a one-time opportunity. <comment><USER2> CO2 stays in the atmosphere for centuries ([https://www.researchgate.net/publication/38136820_Atmospheri...](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/38136820_Atmospheric_Lifetime_of_Fossil_Fuel_Carbon_Dioxide), [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_in_Earth%27s_at...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_in_Earth%27s_atmosphere#Anthropogenic_CO2_emissions)), so a temporary decrease or even a temporary stop will not make much of a dent.

I'm sure we will see papers on this, though, just as we saw them after 9/11.

Also "if CO2 causes global warming"? I thought that has been established; even the starkest deniers only debate whether human contributions to CO2 emissions make much of an impact.

</comment><comment><USER3> > It's already been noticed that CO2 levels have decreased significantly

I think CO emissions decreased not CO levels.. So we wont see decreassing temperatures right away..

<comment><AUTHOR> Is it known how long it takes for CO2 levels to decrease?

For instance, if we're supposed to reduce by 50% before 2030, after how many months or years would we notice a difference?</comment></comment>


Ask HN: A better way to pay bills? - <AUTHOR>

Hi all,
I pay my bills online, but it is still kinda obnoxious logging into a dozen accounts every month and making the payment. Is there a website that consolidates this? I did some googling, but I didn't find a great answer. This seems like such a good idea that I can't believe that nobody has made this yet.
Thanks <comment><USER2> I use Paytrust, but since Intuit bought it, they've let it go downhill. The problem from a business standpoint is that it's hard to compete against free.

It's also pretty hard right now to crack the market without a lot of capital, because there isn't standardized electronic bill presentment that works in a high enough percentage of cases. Therefore, you have to web-scrape. Paytrust bootstrapped this by having billers mail paper bills to them, which they would scan and manually enter the amount due. Since virtually everyone receives bills online now, the paper API isn't really viable.

If someone came up with a common format for bills which included some metadata like amount due, due date, name of biller, plus HTML or PDF for the actual bill, it would be very useful. Then there is the question of delivery. Most banks don't want to deliver the full bill by email -- they want you to log into their site. If there were a standardized API with the ability to authorize third parties, it would make things much easier.

The only real opportunity I see is for Intuit to bring Paytrust into Mint. There could be a lot of integration between the two, and the attention to detail that Mint has could make a world of difference to Paytrust. Right now (insanely) you can't even export your paytrust transactions to Quicken, because a number of years ago, Quicken stopped supporting the QIF format, and this is the only format that Paytrust exports.

</comment><comment><USER3> I do it via my bank account. For anything that has almost any 'size', it is available via that account. You should be able to consolidate most via the bill pay option your bank provides.

<comment><USER4> Ditto. Fidelity brokerage account + "mysmart cash" checking account.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Australia has BPAY which works great for me.

From my online banking site I have all of my utility bills appear automatically and I can add any other bills that are still snail-mailed to me. (I have about 20 merchants listed - everything from medical insurance to toll road operators). Payments can be scheduled or manual.

In the past 3 years I think the only "mundane" bill that I haven't been able to BPAY was perhaps a parking fine.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BPAY>

</comment><comment><USER6> I have most of my bills paid through each service provider's (gas, electric, phone/internet, cable) automatic bill pay. Rent is paid by check through my bank's bill pay feature each month. With this setup, basically the only bill I log in to pay each month is my credit card.

</comment><comment><USER7> <http://paytrust.com></comment>


Facebook pushes Facebook.com email address in Contact Info, hides alternatives - <AUTHOR> http://www.theverge.com/2012/6/25/3116299/facebook-email-default-address

<comment><USER2> Discussion: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4151433>

Here's some discussion and a link describing how to fix it: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4157589></comment>


Save 3 seconds of your life when naming things - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/carlos-wong/cerebro-codelf/blob/master/README_EN.md <comment><AUTHOR> Life is short, you need plugin.</comment>