Death of a Troll - <AUTHOR> http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jan/28/death-of-a-troll <comment><USER2> Haha I'm the owner of the site. Surprised it made it to hacker news. There's a whole world out there with countless stories unravelling that the naked eye can't see. I'm very happy to have had a special glimpse into one of these worlds.

<comment><USER3> If you've got the time, I'd like to get some reflective thought from you: Based on your glimpse, what did you learn about people, online communities, or morals and ethics that you believed or didn't consider before?

<comment><USER2> I wish I had something eloquent to say here. But what I've realized that the online world is not any lesser or greater than the real one, it's just a completely different one with it's own social dynamics. People impart virual actions on each other with real consequences.

Otherwise I don't think I have special insight into people's morals and ethics. People remain complicated. You just get a better chance to see them in a different light when you expose them to a different medium.

Can't wait to see how people will behave in VR worlds, if it were to take off ;)

<comment><USER4> Thank you for being honest in your answer. Often such questions feel to me like - so how does the wine taste, or the beer - it's fuckin' hard for me to describe - it usually goes - well bad, or good...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> On the forums that I have run, I have seen 2 deaths faked.

The most recent was in December 2014 where a person claiming to be the partner of the guy who had allegedly died was then asking for contributions to help cover a funeral.

At the time it sowed a fair degree of mistrust, and the only way the community was able to move on was to pull together in secret to prove conclusively whether or not the person had died. What this meant is that about 50 people spent a chunk of time checking morgues, hospitals, location hints, police reports and other details until not only did we have an overwhelming amount of evidence it was faked, but could actually prove he was alive and well.

But then what? What do you do with someone who has done that?

The only answer that was palatable to us is that the person should be permanently excluded from the community.

It's taken the real death of another person to remind us that not everyone is like that and to restore a lot of the trust and faith in each other.

The damage a fake death does to a community is significantly more than the damage the person who faked it does to themselves. And you can be sure that the person who does it will lose a lot of friends forever and find it hard to find a place in which someone doesn't know someone that knows.

The world isn't a big enough place for someone to get away with this now, it's all interconnected.

<comment><USER6> _But then what? What do you do with someone who has done that?_

Report him to his local police? Collecting money on that basis is criminal fraud in lots of localities.

Otherwise, ugh, yeah, not much you can do besides serious shunning.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> A bit pedantic...but I couldn't help but think, WTF is going on with the Epic Mafia's website? The article describes the troll as effortlessly hacking the site, including locking mods out of their own forum, and sending them emails with links that unban friends upon clicking. The smallest site operator can throw up a phpBB board without such issues...It sounds like Epic Mafia is running on a custom written app that is full of SQL injection vulnerabilities. I hope they've gotten them fixed up before trolls external to the community prey on them.

This is not to say that the troll is just some script kiddie. It sounds like he has some serious social engineering chops, besides programming experience. I'm guessing this is the fake newspaper website he made to post his own obit? [http://www.sctribune.com](http://www.sctribune.com)

<comment><USER8> If you visit one of their fora (eg. [https://epicmafia.com/forum/36](https://epicmafia.com/forum/36)) and open your browser's console, the message displayed indicates the kinds of troubles it sounds like those poor moderators have had to deal with (specifically addressing the "social engineering" part of your comment, I think).

From a quick look at the source, it seems like the forum pages have the same fairly minimal markup as the rest of the site, which is slightly indicative of its being a custom forum app rather than something battle-tested (but I could be completely wrong, of course).

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> Mafia/werewolf is one of those games that tends to get out of hand (Diplomacy is the other big one, at least for me). I played a few games online, but realised it was bad for me - whichever side I was, I thought about nothing else while the game was running. When I was hospitalized my thoughts weren't on my physical problem but on how I'd be letting my team down. Games are fun because they're games, they're supposed to remain circumscribed - when a game starts to take over your life, it's time to stop.

<comment><USER10> Diplomacy is the only game where I've deliberately toyed with an opponents mental state in order to win. I knew that a key backstab combined with some carefully worded global press would cause the player leading the opposing alliance to have a meltdown. I did it anyway. Best German victory game I've ever had.

It worked so well that he got despondent and stopped talking to anyone in the game. Within two phases my global victory was assured.

Diplomacy is the most absolutely fascinating game, but I have mellowed out some and stopped playing - some newer games also have great strategy without the time commitment and mentally/emotionally taxing gameplay.

<comment><USER11> Diplomacy was banned at my house because it _always_ caused tears and angry outbursts, often within moments of the first set of orders being revealed, always before the third set, and I can't even remember a game going further than five moves.

The lesson I learned from this game: Don't play it with people you like.

<comment><USER12> Colonial Diplomacy was a pretty good variant that had a much different vibe to it. Less anger and less negotiation. If Diplomacy is a careful rock climb, Colonial is the 100 yard dash.

My only hate when playing Diplomacy is running into people who are OK with group victories. Those people suck the fun out of the room and cause the most problems.

<comment><USER10> Given the time involved in playing out a live game I'm okay with 2-player victories.

Very frequently when everyone is off the board save 2 people it can be boring to play for 2 hours to figure out who the victor is.

<comment><USER12> I'm fine with it as a time saver, but I've run into one two many people who actually play for joint wins.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I think one of my problems with all of this is that many communities allow people with unchecked mental illnesses to continue to manipulate and harass everyone around them.

I ran a meetup group with a few other co-organizers and it's amazing the amount of abuse people will take.

We had members that would come into the group, harass the rest of the members and continue with inappropriate behavior during our meetups.

We had one guy that would come in and basically corner any girl in the group and ask them out. During the meetup he looked like he wanted to hurt someone (he had angry looks on his face all the time), and wouldn't really talk to anyone or get to know the members.

After confronting the member, it continued. Since I was running the group with other people, I told them we needed to kick this guy out of the group. They outright refused. They felt that we shouldn't be exclusionary and that this would be 'mean'.

This guy eventually left when he was trying to get into an ivy league school and he sent us a blank entrance form and wanted us to fill it out for him. He sent us all angry emails and never came back.

I left the group shortly after this because I couldn't be part of a group that didn't protect its members.

More communities need to kick people out for inappropriate and harmful behavior.

<comment><USER14> I've heard that this is somewhat common in nerdy communities, or at least common enough that someone felt moved to write about "geek social fallacies": [http://www.plausiblydeniable.com/opinion/gsf.html](http://www.plausiblydeniable.com/opinion/gsf.html)

<comment><USER15> It's not really common in nerdy communities as such, just mostly those somewhere between the mainstream and the incredibly niche. There's an interesting TV Tropes write up on that here:

[http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheLawOfFanJackas...](http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TheLawOfFanJackassery)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> "In real life, ..."

"His real life and his virtual life were completely separate."

I think we need to stop validating the delusion that the activities one engages in online are somehow _not_ part of "real life".

<comment><USER17> This is certainly correct vis-à-vis the _real_ implications, but usually not the behavioral tendencies. In a way most "virtual lives" seem more similar to the real life of actors and public figures, i.e. persona-oriented.

<comment><USER18> Its certainly more experimental. Thats what you lose when privacy goes away.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> I've moderated forums before. Small ones, nothing like the scale of Epic Mafia, but there was still drama, there were real friendships, and there were trolls.

Fuck this guy.

Even in "death", trying to do something he thought might be helpful, he ended up hurting a lot of people. I have no sympathy for him.

The article mentioned that he talked about getting into therapy, but I had a hard time understanding whether the depression was something he actually battled with, or if it was just part of his persona; regardless, I hope he gets into therapy and _knocks this kind of shit the fuck off_ , lest he die friendless and alone. I don't hope for this so that he can live a full and happy life; I hope for this so nobody else gets harassed and doxxed.

<comment><USER20> Aww, come on. That idea that therapy is not going to help anything and ridiculing the therapist is absolute bog standard behavior of depressed persons - I'd go as far as saying it is part of being depressed.

<comment><USER19> Sure, but Eris lied about _anything and everything_. Pretending to be depressed and suicidal is probably the easiest way to get sympathy, which is cruel not only because you're an asshole for lying about being depressed, but also because it casts doubt on people who are actually suffering from depression as well.

I wonder how much of what Eris told the author was verified. Is he actually going to church? Does he actually have a Pennsylvania girlfriend?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> > _His real life and his virtual life were completely separate._

Whoa, whoa, whoa - that's maybe something a person like Eris would say, as some kind of defense, but even after faking suicide, getting a fresh start, and going back? No, they're not separate. That's an addiction[1].

This whole story reads like a functioning heroin addict who finally can't hold it all together anymore. I completely understand there's a great deal of trauma and history to acknowledge - depression and physiological issues are not minor things to be brushed aside in discussion. Context does matter.

All that noted, what a selfish way to go through life. What a perfect example of lessons to teach young people about interactions online, in that shared community values (morals? ethics?) aren't baked into the online experience - in fact, quite the opposite. The freedom can be abused, and having some personal buffer zones is important, otherwise a person will end up lying to themselves and others like Eris, saying that they have a real life, which is just one of the many lies they will tell to make themselves feel better.

[1] Speaking from experience in online gaming community multiplayer Half-Life, which was a significant social outlet in conjuntion with the GamersX and eventual stand-alone [R]age Board for Elites. A lot of this story is familiar, both good and bad memories. RIP Neo Babson Maximus.

<comment><USER21> Some people just like it. It's not an addiction, there's no "reason", it's just fun to be a dick online. Why does nobody ever think of this? There always has to be some sort of grand underlying psychological reason.

You're reaching much too deep into it, even comparing it to Heroine addiction. Just, wow.

<comment><USER13> "it's just fun to be a dick online."

Because someone who would go to those lengths to just 'be a dick online' has an underlying psychological problem. They get off on it, and it's not something a healthy society should want to continue.

<comment><USER22> I would contend that:

(a) everyone universally fantasizes about nonconformity at one time or another (go ahead, disagree),

(b) almost everyone has too much of a stake in their life to actually follow through on it, so they bottle it up,

(c) a number of hobbies exist to "blow off [that] steam" or otherwise find catharsis, but not everyone finds these,

(d) those who troll like this have found their hobby that works for them and are actually more psychologically healthy than those who have not.

Just a theory. I've known some trolls who are easily among the smartest, sanest people in the world, and who are totally normal in all other aspects of their lives. Some are dear friends. This activity has been described in these terms by more than one of them. Countercultural behavior is practically a rhythm throughout history, and trolling is the Internet's counterculture, which can be mean because of anonymity. Some people go too far with it, yes. Some people go too far with anything, though.

My point is be careful ascribing psychological illness to something you do not understand. _That_ is crazy. Trolls don't care what you think. If you and many others respond by calling them crazy, what are you really saying? Think about it. Appealing to a good and decent society that ought to do something about this menace is pretty strange, too.

I have trolled before. I'm not good at it, but I have. I can vouch for the positive feeling it produces and I've come to terms with what that means about me and my self. This is the thesis of numerous psychological works as well as, say, _Fight Club_ (it's uncanny how well that story fits the big points I hit on, including taking it too far and plurality of self, and I don't think anyone disagrees that Palahniuk was onto something).

<comment><USER3> > _Trolls don 't care what you think._

False. Trolls derive joy from the grief of others that they have inflicted. That's what trolling is. See also: Sadism

Being a 'Contrarian' is different than trolling, but that takes some mental work to see how it can be constructive rather than simply a knee-jerk habit to elicit a negative response.

<comment><USER22> I meant they don't care about your opinion of them personally; otherwise, you are mostly correct.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> I am mentally ill and have to stay away from some forums. They are not moderated and when someone finds out I am mentally ill they call me names and troll me. I would try to report the abuse and nothing is done. I would try and troll back. It is very unhealthy and these sort of environments just socially conduction people into becoming trolls.

Hacker News is different were the users mod posts and comments and flag them for administrators that do a good job at moderating. I don't have the same problems here that I have on other sites.

If someone is being a troll a dick or a jerk, moderate their comments and posts, and let them know why you are moderating them. Ban then if you have to.

</comment><comment><USER24> It felt a bit surreal reading that, and reading the comments here. I know that many of us seem to spend more and more of our time seeking validation online (a state of mind I already struggle to understand), but this is a lot darker than I'd imagined.

<comment><USER3> Speaking of dark, I see this story as somewhere in the middle.

Here's the dynamic: There's the 'feel good' stuff of raising money for good causes or getting people to send letters to a sick child - all of which takes online validation to spread - and then there's the 'dark side' where those who are vulnerable and seeking validation online can be exploited and driven to suicide. A Mother-bullying-neighbor-girl case comes to mind, and I don't think it'll be the last.

It's not a new phenomenon to be seeking attention - that's pretty much hard- wired in some people's composition - but the online dynamic (+ influences by Kardashian-esque mentalities of fame uber alles) has added a new wrinkle to figuring out how to deal with such compulsions.

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> This was a lot more interesting and than I thought it would be. I never thought I'd see such a romantic story about a forum troll... Seems like most people involved are now in a better place than before. Good for them.

</comment><comment> at-fates-hands EM doesn't really sound like a place for unhealthy, depressed people. Yet most of the characters in the article all seem to have psychological issues themselves, including the main character, Eris.

</comment><comment><USER26> I feel like I just watched a whole movie

<comment><USER27> Better than a movie. Its not a remake, reboot, sequel, or formula. A startup should be able to disrupt Hollywood. There are stories out there.

The author needs an editor, and an agent.

<comment><USER3> Yeah but in my version of the story Eris dies at the end.

<comment><USER27> Too predictable, too morality fable. Better off with the truth.

<comment><USER3> Nope, audiences expect a certain level of payoff and just when it seems like he's in the clear, like things have turned around and they can maybe sympathise with him, BAM.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I've seen quite a few cases like this online, where people on various forums have faked their own death. Sometimes it's for attention (someone literally faked that they were dying of cancer to get people to make Youtube videos of a game they were working on), sometimes it's just wanting to leave the community (someone else faked their death in a car accident to stop working on a project that others were pressuring them about).

Either way, the linked article was an interesting read. Least partly cause it felt like watching a documentary with the wildlife or civilisation replaced by forum/online game goers.

</comment><comment><USER28> Really interesting, but a lot of grammar errors and runwithfire gets doxxed by the author within the article. Don't papers have editors anymore?

<comment><USER29> You might want to do a search for the term 'The Grauniad'.

<comment><USER28> Ha, that's pretty awesome. Still going strong.

My main issue with the article is that despite only using pseudonyms, the author easily revealed the real life name of one of the individuals by quoting her Twitter account.

Maybe the author doesn't understand technology, but this shouldn't have slipped by editing. Which really leads me to believe there was none.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> pero non vero pero bene trovare

EDIT : Ho! The comments seems to say the guy really existed.

Btw; should I tell the author that Eris means the goddess of discordia (misunderstanding that becomes conflict) and not of chaos. Which make the choice of the pseudonym even more interesting ... for a troll. I would have chosen Hermes (god of the pranks, liers, merchants, ambassadors, thieves, crossroads, boxing, and messengers).

And that is brother Ares is the god of war // dreadful conflicts (he is re- used as the leader of the knights of the apocalypse in the bible).

So bad St John never took the time to be versed enough in greek mythology to know that the goddess of intelligence always win vs Ares/Ires.

I sometimes think the christians/jews/muslims lacks something compared to the greek civilisation when it comes to dealing with our fears.

</comment><comment><USER31> The article was well-written and gave me the feeling that I traipsed all over the various subjects' lives. As someone who has done his fair share of what I feel to be innocuous trolling, I'm glad I've grown up.

</comment><comment><USER32> I can appreciate the skill involved in faking his suicide. Kind of a dick move, though. I've had someone threaten to kill himself before; that one was a bit more selfish, as he was pretty clearly trying to guilt me into staying in a relationship with him, but I digress.

I don't know what to feel about this story.

</comment><comment><USER33> I have to say this article was quite well-written. I couldn't stop reading, even though I really wanted to.

</comment><comment><USER34> That stuff happens in every community, but it's particularly present in communities with high occurrences of mental health problems. That's why you don't trust unconfirmed information. I cannot take it seriously anymore when people 'die'.

</comment><comment><USER4> The Boy Who Cried Suicide?

</comment><comment><USER35> So did he actually die or not? The article was somewhat unclear.

<comment><USER36> The article was entirely clear - he did not die, he faked his own suicide.

<comment><USER35> I'm on my phone so it wasn't easy for me to see that.</comment></comment></comment>


Don't Trust Google (2002) - <AUTHOR> https://idlewords.com/2002/12/don_t_trust_google.htm <comment><USER2> This blog was written 4 years after Jeff Bezos invested in Google.

Yeah no shit. Don't trust Hacker News either.</comment>


APT for Google Guava functions - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/t2v/guavapt

<comment><USER2> This seems cool.</comment>


Show HN: Codecast – Teach and Learn HTML and CSS in the Browser - <AUTHOR> http://codecast.me/ <comment><USER2> This is pretty cool. Kind of like jsfiddle but simpler, for people who are just getting started with programming.</comment>


2016 Algolia community gift: Yarn package search - <AUTHOR> https://discourse.algolia.com/t/2016-algolia-community-gift-yarn-package-search/319 <comment><USER2> Slick.

Random idea: what about instead of the "search by algolia" text, you replace the magnifying glass icon inside the search bar with an algolia-themed magnifying glass. For example you take the 'o' of algolia that looks like a clock and add the handlebar in the bottom right. And that's your new magnifying glass icon. And make this new icon the default integration.

This way, people would come to associate the fast-search with that logo, without having a "by algolia" text cluttering the UI.

</comment><comment><USER3> I like the results, it shows much more info than npmjs.com, but it also shows some shortcuts to GitHub etc. I often click on the GitHub link on the package page to check the bugs section to see if it is still active.</comment>


Ask HN: Is Getting Things Done still a book that HN recommends? - <AUTHOR> I have some spare time to learn to improve and structure my time better.<p>I remember seeing lots of recommendations for GTG couple of yrs ago but not so much now. <comment><USER2> I wouldn't recommend it. I've followed it for years. The Eisenhower Matrix is flawed for the same reason.

The problem is that, unlike in 2001, there are now an infinite number of important things to do (e.g. learn a new framework, respond to boss's emails, unclog the toilet). All of these have bad consequences if you fail to do them, so they end up on the list.

To quote Paul Graham: "You're "getting things done." Just the wrong things."

Some better options might be the following options:

Marc Andreessen: [https://pmarchive.com/guide_to_personal_productivity.html](https://pmarchive.com/guide_to_personal_productivity.html)

(Make _only_ two lists - one for today, one for later)

Paul Graham: [http://www.paulgraham.com/procrastination.html](http://www.paulgraham.com/procrastination.html)

(Procrastinate on small things to work on big things)

<comment><USER3> There _are_ an infinite number of _things_, but which ones are important it's up to you.

I will be advocating GTD. It doesn't only give you the framework. Once you're done with the basics, it also allows you to make clearer decisions. A nice quote (self-translated, I wasn't reading in English): When the boat sinks, you don't think about its course.

"Essentialism" is another classic in the subject, more disciplined in rejecting unnecessary stuff, complementary to GTD in terms of your concerns.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> _How the Mighty Fall_ [1] is the book by Jim Collins that I'll never forget.

The lessons within remain top of mind as a key mental check that has stuck with me over the years. The book begins with a study on hubris and how your blindspots are like a cancer of mind that remain undetected while working to kill you long before their effects are known.

See Jim Collins' 2009 interview w/ Charlie Rose to get the gist and understand the context for how the book came to be: [https://charlierose.com/videos/22502](https://charlierose.com/videos/22502) [video]

[1] [https://www.jimcollins.com/books/how-the-mighty- fall.html](https://www.jimcollins.com/books/how-the-mighty-fall.html)

 _How The Mighty Fall: And Why Some Companies Never Give In_ , by Jim Collins [https://www.amazon.com/How-Mighty-Fall-Companies- Never/dp/09...](https://www.amazon.com/How-Mighty-Fall-Companies- Never/dp/0977326411)

</comment><comment><USER5> I would recommend it, but I have some remarks.

There are 2 things I've learned from the book that I still use daily/weekly: 1\. Capture everything, it keeps your head empty so you can focus on the task at hand. If something comes to mind I drop it in my Todoist Inbox to review later. 2\. Weekly review: no matter how good the method is you use, as long as you don't regularly clean it and keep it up to date, you won't use it for very long. It also makes sure you can trust your system.

The GTD system has a downside I think: you could end up implementing it perfectly and never forgetting anything and getting shit done. But the question remains if you are getting the important stuff done or just all of the small tasks in life? Just as one of the previous comments also suggests.

</comment><comment><USER6> It's my #1 favorite book.

I don't think you need to read the entire book. Watching David Allen's talks (Google, TED) and reading the GTD cliff's notes should give you a good idea of what the methodology is all about.

I only mastered the first step of the methodology, that is to capture everything that comes to your mind. I think it's the most important one.

</comment><comment><USER7> I'm reading it right now and enjoying it. Overall the way I view these books is if I get something from them that is worth more to me than the $15 or so they cost it is of value, I don't have to agree with or implement everything in them whole hog.

</comment><comment><USER8> I recommend it. I don't recommend following its system to the letter. But it teaches some techniques that are useful for making sure you're focusing on the right things and for making sure important things don't fall through the cracks.

</comment><comment><USER9> I think the 2001 version of the book is fantastic.

Even if you do not follow the whole system, you still come away with some gems.

</comment><comment><USER10> GTD is out Pomodoros might be in again.

</comment><comment><USER11> You mean the book by Jim Collins?

[https://www.jimcollins.com/books.html#good-to- great](https://www.jimcollins.com/books.html#good-to-great)

</comment><comment><USER12> What book is GTG?

<comment><AUTHOR> sorry GTD

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> GTG? or GTD?

<comment><AUTHOR> ah..crap. I messed up. Its GTD.

<comment><USER14> ... what is GTD

<comment><USER15> [https://gettingthingsdone.com/](https://gettingthingsdone.com/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> what is GTG?</comment>


They're Not For You - <AUTHOR> https://twitter.com/georgebonnr/status/376070748814585856

<comment><AUTHOR> (p.s. in case somehow it's not clear, this is in reference to this: [http://marissamayr.tumblr.com/post/60336044815/geeking- out-o...](http://marissamayr.tumblr.com/post/60336044815/geeking-out-on-the- logo))</comment>


Vancouver plans to tax empty properties 1% of their assessed value - <AUTHOR> http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-11-09/vancouver-wields-c-10-000-a-day-fine-in-crackdown-on-empty-homes <comment><USER2> Intelectual Property (especially patents and copyrights) should also be taxed at 1% of their assessed/declared value. And a single infringer should never be liable for more than the assessed value.

Not because patents are empty, but because this would create the incentive for patent owners to assess a real value to them, and not "bajillion dollars", which they do now.

<comment><USER3> This really seems like a great idea!

Anyone see any reason why it shouldn't be?

<comment><USER4> Patents and trademarks maybe, but copyright? You have copyright on basically anything you create. Should I pay taxes on everything I put on github? On essays I write? What if I'm a famous artist? If I make some artwork to go in my living room, should I really pay 1% of the assessed value of that every year? If I write a book, is it not enough to pay taxes on the income I get by selling my book? Should I really have to pay taxes on it to keep it out of the public domain?

<comment><USER5> Who said anything about copywright?

<comment><USER6> > Intelectual Property (especially patents and copyrights)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Shameless plug, for my just-released "fake home occupancy as a service", where my family and I charge you only 0.5% of the property value to satisfy the government's occupancy requirements. Contact info in my profile.

<comment><USER8> So you have someone pick up mail and make it look lived-in, but why would someone not just rent it out then?

Why pay for your service (assuming it's not tongue-in-cheek) when you can pay for a property manager (lets be generous and say 10%) and also get rental income to offset the investment?

Ultimately, that's why the city is doing this; Whether the property is rented or owner-occupied, there will be a consumer who is adding to the economy.

UK/London really has a problem with non-occupance - they should definitely follow suit.

<comment><USER9> Most investor owners really don't care for the yield. They want to hold for capital appreciation. And rentals are annoying, dealing with tennants. Stuff breaks.

Would you care if you purchased a $1m home cash to flip it in a few years for $1.4m?

<comment><USER10> That's the definition of a bubble - asset detached from fundamental value.

<comment><USER9> That's how a lot of investors make money:

1\. Pick a hot up and coming city.

2\. Buy 5 properties at $1m each.

3\. Sell in 2-4 years for double the value, preferably paying no tax on the capital gain at all if you (somehow) can.

Rinse and repeat. It's what happened in London in 2008-2014, etc.

You just, as an investor, need to be aware it's a bubble.

<comment><USER11> _Rinse and repeat. It 's what happened in London in 2008-2014, etc._

Yeah, that worked really well for me in 2004 – 2009.

<comment><USER9> Property is one of those things where people are irrational about purchasing, which is good if you want to make money. Some people don't even care about the price -- they want to buy in 201X, and buy a property they shall.

If you believe property to be (significantly) overvalued, then you should rent instead of buy. If you're at the end of a "boom", then it's not unreasonable to wait it out and see how prices progress. Low interest rates also tend to push residential prices higher, because people can pay off more principal monthly vs less if rates are higher. When buying property it's almost always better to buy when rates are high and refinance later than to buy when rates are low.

Buying high and selling low is also definitely a thing. That doesn't necessarily mean you can't find a good deal somewhere (you can), but it'll be much harder.

Tldr: Unlike what most people believe, property is not a "sure thing" investment.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> A fair approach is the Swiss one. Every property is taxed as if it is rented out at market rates, no matter whether it is rented, owner-occupied, or vacant. On the other hand there are (almost) no taxes on the value of the property. This removes most distortions in the rental market.

<comment><USER13> That's a beautiful solution. Why is it so hard to get intelligent legislation like this passed in the USA?

<comment><USER14> Switzerland has much more of a sense of unity than the US, which is perpetually at war with itself.

It's also surprisingly egalitarian, or at least against _conspicuous_ inequality; you can accumulate a fortune in a Swiss bank, but you can't build a mansion that annoys your neighbors.

<comment><USER15> Switzerland also has less population than New Jersey and it's less than twice as large.

<comment><USER16> Being in a smaller country seems great sometimes.

<comment><USER17> The original vision for the US had relatively powerful small states and a relatively less powerful federal government. There are a lot of reasons to think this is still a pretty good idea.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> In DC vacant homes are taxed at 5% assessed value and "blighted" homes at 10%. It's the city's main weapon against vacant properties. People complain that enforcement is uneven or that sneaky developers find loopholes, but it seems like a good program overall.

<comment><USER19> Wow, that's an incredibly high tax! I bet it works pretty well, I'd want to offload that property damned fast if I couldn't rent it.

<comment><USER18> I wonder how many people end up actually paying it, but at the very least it's got to make it inconvenient and risky to own vacant property.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> I wonder how they picked the magic number of $10,000. (Edit: as mentioned below, the figure is actually 1% assessment.)

Vancouver real estate prices jumped 20% in 2015 -- a $200k gain on a $1M house. If pricing trends continue along that trajectory then Vancouver real estate still looks like a great investment even if you just eat the entire tax.

Still, I'm impressed by how quickly Vancouver is moving forward with these measures (going into effect Jan 1st!). They're sorely needed, and it's great that they don't have to sit in limbo for years before being enacted.

<comment><USER21> >I wonder how they picked the magic number of $10,000.

As per the article: They didn't, it's 1% of the property value. The title is misleading.

<comment><USER20> Thanks, I missed that. It's strangely written because it re-iterates the $10,000 figure in the first paragraph of the article, but then notes 1% in the second.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> While I think it is a step in the good direction, I am skeptical as to how successful this measure will be.

The problem at stake is that Chinese buyers are not buying property in Vancouver for speculative investment purposes only.

They see these properties as safe stores of value in order to diversify their risk profile in case the situation in Mainland China or their own financial situation goes down the gutter,

and / or to support their future potential effort to gain Canadian residency / citizenship for themselves or their kids,

and / or to vacation outside of mainland china once in a while.

Sure, this tax will hurt some of them, but the number of Mainland Chinese people with the means to write off such an amount as the cost of security is massive.

Source: lived in Mainland China for a few years, worked for this specific demographic.

<comment><USER23> If they're not just in it for short-term speculation, then they can rent the house out and hire someone to manage it. Make some more profit while contributing to the Vancouver economy and rental market.

<comment><USER22> This would go against the ideas of being able to go to Vancouver on a whim, and finding things as they were left, or being able to jump on a plane in case of Mainland China Meltdown and directly move into their house/flat. Those apartments are not meant to be rented, they are safe places.

Contributing to the Vancouver economy and rental market? This demographic could not care less, this does not factor in their decisions.

(I have only empirical evidence of this mindset, but I would be willing to expand on what I base my reasoning on.)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> They are going to try and tie in AirBnB regulation with this as well (sort of). Since places wouldn't be considered occupied when you have 20 of them renting them out as full time AirBNBs.

To get around it you will need a business license for each unit, which is also taxed. Business license #'s must be displayed on the temporary rentals website under the listing. Business licenses can only be obtained with permission from your strata. They think they can free up another 2000+ rentals this way as well.

AirBNB is running an insane ad campaign here that mostly pisses off every Vancouverite I know in my echo chamber of EVERYONE UNDER 35.

I work at one of the big Universities here. It is crazy biking in the summer through affluent ghost neighborhoods. Lots of the older big houses that were tore down were rentals to like 6-8 students at a time, or had basement suites. Now they are empty boxy white McMansions.

</comment><comment><USER25> Many people complaining that "1% is nothing to Chinese millionaires" are missing the point. These people didn't get rich by throwing their money away. Yes, they can easily afford an extra $10k or $20k or even more a year, but this combined with the recent 15% tax makes Vancouver a lot less attractive. After that last tax, foreign investors are already getting spooked and starting to flood Toronto's housing market instead - this too will have an effect. It's a great start, and I hope to see it in Toronto and other cities as well.

<comment><USER26> This is a good observation, and supported by even a casual glance at international macro over the past 35 years. "Hot money" flows very quickly in countries with deregulated captial markets.

</comment></comment><comment><USER27> Wouldn't be sad if that was implemented in NZ - same problems here of ridiculous price rises = land banking. Seeing empty (million dollar +) houses around you is surreal and totally against community spirit we're so widely known for. Good move Vancouver !

<comment><USER28> I really really really hope that Winston Peters polls well with this as a policy so John Key will appropriate it.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> I grew up in Vancouver and I think this law is necessary (maybe). The big question here is...how do they tell if the house is unoccupied or if the owner is on an extended vacation? Can it really be enforced?

<comment><USER29> Well with a gov't power monopoly, they can do things like check power and water utility usage. You can also look at tax return address records for the BC income tax part. Driver license / BCID / immigration records are another. You can also do a 'prove you have a resident in X months or be assessed fines' like many HOAs and mortgage agreements do for various things.

Policies over large numbers aren't about %100 enforcement, a general behavior modification is considered a success usually.

<comment><USER9> They do this in Monaco as well. I read in an article a while back that some nonresidents have automated timers to turn on/off the lights, turn on the heating, water, etc.

<comment><USER30> I was going to say this. These rules will drive investment in home automation. I'm also willing to bet that a large portion of the revenue generated from this scheme will be spent on the manpower necessary to enforce it.

That being said I'm happy to be proven wrong, but can we expect any sort of data to support a hypothesis? I'm not sure as I'm unfamiliar with Canada's policies on access to public data.

<comment><USER9> > I'm also willing to bet that a large portion of the revenue generated from > this scheme will be spent on the manpower necessary to enforce it.

Yep. You can see that with wealth taxes. Most countries that have wealth taxes (e.g. France) make close to nothing from them, because it's inefficient to verify and collect all the data to properly levy the tax, and you need a lot of civil servants for that.

<comment><USER31> The goal in this case isn't to make money but to have more apartments/houses for rent (and hopefully lower the prices too)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> So they will find someone to show up every week or two and turn on lights on, add some furniture, moving things around etc. I feel like the city of Vancouver is going to always lose the free market game of cat and mouse.

<comment><USER33> No, I'm pretty sure you have to either declare it as a principal residence or you have to rent it out for at least 6 months a year with leases of at least 30 days. Enforcement isn't based on whether the lights are on or not.

And I'd assume that if you're declaring it as your principal residence but you're registered elsewhere for little things like voting it may trigger investigation that could get Very Expensive if you are determined to be lying.

<comment><USER34> "No, I'm pretty sure you have to either declare it as a principal residence or you have to rent it out for at least 6 months a year with leases of at least 30 days. "

I don't understand - what if it's neither ?

What if you are a plain old canadian who has a home in Vancouver and (for instance) a home in Golden ?

It's not at all unreasonable to have a home that:

a) is not your primary residence

b) you live in for 2-3 months of the year

c) you have no intention of renting out because you go there regularly or sporadically

What does one do in that circumstance ?

<comment><USER35> Pay the tax. Owning a home in a crowded city, not living in it the vast majority of the time, and refusing to rent it out to people who desperately want to live there imposes a negative externality on the city, which you need to pay for.

<comment><USER34> "Owning a home in a crowded city, not living in it the vast majority of the time, and refusing to rent it out to people who desperately want to live there imposes a negative externality on the city"

It is _proposed_ that doing so imposes a negative externality.

That proposal is not without counterpoints, however.

Specifically: that the owners of those homes not only pay their _full property taxes already_ , but they impose fewer costs on the infrastructure of the city while not being present. They don't drive on the roads or walk on the trails or use the public restrooms, etc.

Look, I proposed a hypothetical situation[1] that has nothing at all to do with Chinese speculators buying up housing assets in a safe haven market. I proposed an unintended consequence on an otherwise innocent, well meaning actor. It's very interesting to note that the response is, basically, "too bad for them".

[1] I don't live in Canada.

<comment><USER36> I'm suspicious of statement [1] given that you know where Golden is and why people would want to live there. ;)

I think you're right there is probably isn't a loonie cost to the city that can be recouped with this vacancy tax. But I also think your counter-point is moot. Vancouver isn't trying to keep revenues up, it's trying to encourage a certain behaviour, namely more housing and rentals on the market.

While I do think this vacancy tax is a good idea that could help out affordability in Vancouver, I agree with you that it's far from the best that Vancouver could do and is really only addressing the symptoms rather than the cause.

<comment><USER34> "I'm suspicious of statement [1] given that you know where Golden is and why people would want to live there. ;)"

I'm a skier :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> I expect to see a thriving "rental" market. How is a poor home owner expected to know that the person they rented their house to wasn't actually living there?

<comment><USER38> Can you clarify this? Are you saying that homeowners will create fake "rental" contracts with straw man renters, and then when fined, provide the rental contract as evidence that they tried to comply? My guess is that the city will simply take the position that the onus is on the homeowner to ensure the renter is actually there, which is the correct approach if the concern is that homeowners would create straw man renters.

<comment><USER37> Yes, I'm talking about straw man renters. Considering that the non-compliance penalty would likely end up being _several times the value of the property_ (1% per day, and you can bet that it will take more than a few months before self-declarations are challenged), I suspect that this bylaw would get thrown out or heavily rewritten by the courts.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> When I was living there in 2014, I made a guess that 1/3 of Coal Harbor appartments were unoccupied or unsold by counting dark windows.

My guesstimates were not far from what the city hall counted in 2015.

B.T.W. I'm no longer living in Vancouver

<comment><USER40> Ya if you stand at Georgia and Denman on a clear evening, say 9 PM, 3/4 of the West End will have lights on, and 1/4 of Coal Harbour will. It's a ghost town.

</comment></comment><comment><USER41> Is a flat rate fine a good idea in this case?

I imagine an investor keeping his or her $30M mansion just as a hedge against RMB depreciation and keeping it empty will think nothing of the $10,000 fine.

<comment><USER40> it's 1% of the previous year's assessed value. $10,000 was an example

[http://vancouver.ca/news-calendar/vancouver-introduces- empty...](http://vancouver.ca/news-calendar/vancouver-introduces-empty-homes- tax-framework-as-rental-housing-crisis-persists.aspx)

</comment></comment><comment><USER42> Why don't they just build more? Flood the market with supply and see how the price goes.

<comment><USER43> A fair question, but it assumes that they aren't already doing this. There is already a great deal of new supply creation and there has been for decades. Vancouver has nimby tendencies just like any other city, but it's not SF. There is lots of new condo construction.

The problem with a supply only solution is that supply takes time to create, and there are limits to the rate of supply creation (ie. how many trades are available). Even if city government really made a push to increase the pace of supply, they only be able to move the needle slightly, and it'll take years for that supply to appear. If the speculative demand is overwhelming it might not have a noticeable affect. I would say this has been the case for the last several years where Vancouver housing starts climbed to the highest it has ever been and yet prices climbed ever higher.

If you want to solve the problem quickly, you need to not only increase supply, but also have a look at curbing speculative demand.

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> I understand some cities have exuberant property values, for various reasons. Is it that great of a city? I've never been, but what makes Vancouver special to see such high value increases?

<comment><USER44> Canada's housing bubble hasn't yet popped, and prices are high in many places.

Vancouver itself is attractive to investors because it has a very mild climate, is close to Seattle and the rest of the U.S. West Coast is a short flight, and it's much closer to Asia than the rest of Canada is.

It's also a very beautiful place with lots of amenities for those living there rather than overseas investors or occasional business travelers.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> I want to clarify that the $10,000 is not a fixed value. It is simply the 1% assessed value of the house. However, most houses in Vancouver are greater than 1 million.

</comment><comment><USER45> This _is_ an incentive to demolish a home in order to drive the assessment down (and keep ownership of the valuable land). Right?

</comment><comment><USER46> >Lie about it? That'll be C$10,000 a day in fines.

Ouch!

I think you should have to live in your home at least six months of the year (sounds weird!) that would also appease snowbirds.

If the owner can't be there for six months of the year then require the owner to rent or lease it.

<comment><USER47> Interestingly, something similar is already enforced for Alaskan oil tax credits: you have to live in Alaska at least six months of the year to receive them. One could probably look to their enforcement system.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> I'm really surprised that this was implemented into law. I remember suggesting it on twitter without hearing anyone say it before a couple of years ago. But I'm guessing what happened is other places might have similar laws.

</comment><comment><USER48> Is their an exception if you're trying to sell your house?

<comment><USER49> I would hope not. The whole idea is to lower prices, what better way to lower prices than to tax you for holding out for more money?

</comment></comment><comment><USER50> They really need to crack down on black money flooding into the Canadian economy. This seems like a quick way to assuage the criticism without addressing the core issue.

<comment><USER49> One way to crack down is making it less attractive to bring in such money which this seems precisely tailored to do.

</comment></comment><comment><USER51> In the rural US, it's reasonably common to bulldoze unused agricultural buildings like silos and barns (and old houses on the property) to reduce the property value and thus property taxes.

It's also somewhat common to fine owners of unused urban houses because they attract "transients" and cause other assorted problems.

</comment><comment><USER39> Another thing about Vancouver is the staggering amount of brand new real estate being unsold for years.

Every developer thinks that one day there will be a naive Chindonesian/Eastern European nouveau riche that will buy it no matter the cost. And yes, such people were coming in great numbers

</comment><comment><USER52> Read something recent about vacant properties in Amsterdam:

[http://nltimes.nl/2016/09/29/amsterdam-fine-vacant- buildings...](http://nltimes.nl/2016/09/29/amsterdam-fine-vacant-buildings/)

</comment><comment><USER53> Wow. Should be interesting to see what happens in the next recession. My guess is that property values will get hammered down, and the city will lose much more than 1%. Not to mention the money people will lose selling property in exacerbated conditions.

</comment><comment><USER54> I'd be worried about unintended side effects here. A lot of places might get rented out to the poor to avoid a fine, but the rental arrangements might be shorter term and force the poor to move more frequently.

<comment><USER55> Why would that be the case? These places are currently not being rented at all. Why would people favour short-term arrangements? I own 2 apartments and rent one of them (mostly to students). I look for tenants who can stay for longer periods so I don't have to spend a lot of my time finding new people.

<comment><USER54> We don't know why they're empty. A lot could very well be "I'll lower the rent until I can find someone to pay more".

<comment><USER56> "I'll lower the rent until I can find someone to pay more" is the very definition of free market; a free market in which rent rates stabilize downwards, as socially desirable.

Attempting to rent the house for a shorter time is simply going to restrict the target market to transient residents who plan to move away shortly (e.g. students), which is rather orthogonal to being rich or poor.

Owners need to seek a balance between not renting at all, or renting very cheaply, and accepting longer-term contracts; it's never a unilateral decision.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER57> I wonder if the tax will apply to unused office space too

</comment><comment><USER58> Anyone know how hard of a "token effort" you have to make to get a home classified as "used"?

<comment><USER59> Show them a rental contract to someone for at least six months of each year. If they're fake, hope none of your neighbours dislike you.

</comment></comment><comment><USER60> Is this supposed to sound like a lot? My house is taxed at about 1% annually and that seems normalish.

<comment><USER61> This is in addition to standard property taxes.

<comment><USER60> That would bump mine up to about 2% total, which still doesn't look particularly unusual.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER62> Does anyone know how empty properties are handled in U.S? Do you still end up paying property taxes?

<comment><USER63> Generally speaking, a homeowner pays the full property taxes if the home is not the primary residence. (Some states offer to reduce the property taxes if the home is the primary residence; this is known as a homestead exemption.)

On top of the property taxes, the homeowner also pays insurance (home + hazard + flood) and the mortgage (principal + interest). If the home is part of an HOA, monthly fees to the HOA are also due. At all times the homeowner is responsible for the full upkeep of house. For example, tree trimming, fence repair, lawn maintenance, etc.

If troublemakers identify a house that remains empty most of the year, be prepared for them to move in secretly and indulge in nefarious activities (like setting up a marijuana grow operation in a state where that is illegal).

All in all, an empty property is a headache to maintain. A professional property manager helps, at which point you may as well rent the damn thing out.

</comment></comment><comment><USER64> I think it is the government to be blamed failed to give a proper direction of the hot money.

<comment><USER64> Namely the incompetence in other sectors.

</comment></comment><comment><USER65> Doubt a 1% tax is going to deflect any of the foreign funds parking, but it's a start.

</comment><comment><USER66> They should just legalize squatting.

<comment><USER67> That's definitely one of the more anarchistic approaches, especially if you combine it with adverse possession. The absentee owners will either have to worry about the squatters "stealing" their million-dollar houses or will have to hire locals as security guards. Either way there's some more money being recycled back into the local economy.

</comment></comment><comment><USER48> What about vacation homes though?

<comment><USER68> What about them? Mean value of a home in Vancouver is $1.4 million. ;)

How could speculative empty homes be distinguished?

</comment></comment><comment><USER69> Told ya

</comment><comment><USER70> This is great (although it's not enough) and more cities should do it. It's an effective use of public policy and a powerful statement and I'm thrilled to see it.

This is the good kind of nationalism, the kind where people band together to defeat the global elite and the upper class/0.1% instead of letting them divide-and-conquer us (Red States vs. Blue, white vs. black, immigrant vs. native, Boomers vs. Millennials).

I wish that our recent display of nationalism in the US had not been one of the disgusting kind.

<comment><USER71> Have you considered that these people payed for their house fair and square and that it's profoundly unfair to charge them just because you and others don't like what they chose to do with it?

<comment><USER72> I am on the same boat as these people that can't afford a home with these property prices. But, I don't blame other people for having more than me. The concept of private property is that anyone can do whatever they want with their property.

<comment><USER73> The fundamental flaw with this is, you don't exist in a vacuum. This all has effects on the city and on everyone else who lives in it. At a certain point, no, they can't do "whatever they want" because ultimately it does affect other people.

<comment><USER72> This "At a certain point" is, however, subjective. Who can say your "point" is right or wrong. Some people have more tolerance than others. Having a mob mentality of dictating what those limits are is dangerous in my opinion.

I would not oppose having a quantitative measure of how empty homes ultimately harm Vancouver's economy in the long term. I think that would be a much more constructive argument to implement measures to curb this trend.

<comment><USER74> > Who can say your "point" is right or wrong.

We've kind of decided on using a democratic process, which indeed is a form of mob rule.

As for the danger of this approach....so multi-millionaires have one less global city they can buy property in completely hassle free....I think they'll find a way to survive.

<comment><USER72> [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ochlocracy](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ochlocracy)

"Ochlocracy ("rule of the general populace") is democracy ("rule of the people") spoiled by demagoguery, "tyranny of the majority", and the rule of passion over reason, just as oligarchy ("rule of a few") is aristocracy ("rule of the best") spoiled by corruption, and tyranny is monarchy spoiled by lack of virtue. Ochlocracy is synonymous in meaning and usage to the modern, informal term "mobocracy", which arose in the 18th century as a colloquial neologism."

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER75> The title is misleading. The tax is apparently 1% of property value. $10,000 would be the tax on a $1M home.

<comment><USER76> A typical home in Vancouver BC is $1.4M[0], so if anything it's an understatement.

[0] [http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/canada/british- columbia/vancouve...](http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/canada/british- columbia/vancouver-real-estate-house-prices-1.3564528)

<comment><USER77> Wow. This is what happens when it's too easy to borrow money.

<comment><USER78> Possibly, but only easy to borrow money to buy homes...rather than build more homes, otherwise that'd drive prices down.

<comment><USER19> There's lots of development, but it takes time to see the effects of that. The recent spike in prices has been extremely fast, up by 20% in 2015. Also, the city has to approve any increases in density, which doesn't happen overnight. Faster than silicon valley, though.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER79> So I could get paid to escape Trump for 4 years? This is looking pretty awesome

<comment><USER77> Would you want a bunch of conservative Canadians flocking to America every time they get an elected official they don't like? Why do you think Canada wants you?

</comment></comment><comment><USER80> "I manufacture T-shirts. Hand made T-shirts which are not spectacular, but kind of unique. I have been selling them for a long time, but in the past few years, people from other places are buying all my T-shirts, more than the ones I can make. I increased prices because of it, but I still sell all the T-shirts I have. Maybe i can make more T-shirts, but right now this is the amount I can make. Maybe, i should tell Bob to go check if my customers are using the T-shirt, and if they are not using it, well, they must pay Bob or Bob will take the T-shirt away. "

<comment><USER19> We're talking about regulating the use of a limited-supply common good: the land in a city. The residents of that city have the authority to regulate the use of that land to ensure that it is providing the desired benefits, in this case housing. They mechanism by which the residents can regulate land use is taxation imposed by an elected municipal government.

More broadly: the only sense in which one can "own" property is within the framework that society has created. If there was no society or government, your land title would mean nothing and anyone with more physical power than you would take your home as soon as they so desired. Fortunately, we live within a civilized society which enables ownership in a sense other than immediate possession. However, that framework of ownership has a caveat that allow property to be reclaimed if the public good demands it (cf. eminent domain). The framework _could_ have been built without that escape hatch, but that would have caused its own problems.

This example isn't specifically eminent domain, but the same principle is at play: regulation of common goods by a collective. Any introductory class in game theory will provide half a dozen examples of why this is necessary.

<comment><USER80> There are many points where I disagree, and I wrote several but prefer to keep it short.

This is a tax to gather funds, and the housing situation is a collateral.

This tax revenue is not going to be used towards any cause, let alone efficiently, to reduce the housing problem.

If this tax is levied, and then economists see that it is ineffectual to housing, or even makes it worse, but the tax does produce revenue, it will not be reversed.

If the housing situation improves in the future either because of this tax, or because of market conditions (like more dwelling units being built, or change in global trends of property) this tax will not be removed.

This extra tax revenue does not come with a reduction of taxes in other areas.(it is not a shift of the tax burden, its an increase).

A short list to at least question the intentions and effects of such policy:

1) There is an ill-shaped enemy that must pay (Rich foreigners) 2) It uses a justification that applies to many other use cases but its only applied here (we can decide to tax you on what you do with your property, and the only one we do right now is to you X group, because you do Y.) 3) It doesnt represent an understanding or a solution to the underlying problem.

<comment><USER80> EDIT: Like seriously, why would an investor buy property and not rent it out at all? Just lose money?

<comment><USER36> Maybe it's a larger home (say 5 bedrooms) and it's not near a university or college so students wouldn't want to live there, and the market for huge rentals like that isn't very good. Or maybe the market rent for the type of house is lower than the expected price appreciation /and/ you can sell it for me if it hasn't been lived in, so it's worthwhile to sit & flip rather than rent it out.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER81> Instead of maintaining a facade that people still have a right to property they might as well announce that government owns everything, you know just like communist countries.

<comment><USER82> What is property without laws and enforcement to protect it?

</comment></comment><comment><USER83> How can you be said to own anything if you are forced, basically 'extorted' by government, into occupying your own house or not? I guess it is whether you believe in property rights. If you inspect your property to see squatters or others haven't criminally occupied it, and you maintain it so that it does not cause any harm or damage to your neighbors homes, why this? More pressure to not own/maintain and just rent or leave the community. How can a neighborhood that's basically empty fetch any high rents for the units that are not empty and for rent?

<comment><USER55> Just out of curiosity are you Canadian, from the US, or other? I ask because there is a cultural difference between what people in the US and Canada expect from their government.

The essence of the problem is the low occupancy rate and rapid inflation of housing prices in Vancouver, fueled largely by foreign nationals buying Vancouver property as an investment rather than actually living there. This prices Canadians out of the market.

Generally the Canadian attitude to government focuses on asking it to solve these kinds of problems in an "interventionist/activist" model: intervene in the market to affect change.

In the US, I found people generally prefer the government to focus on "freedom-to": erring on the side of providing people with too much liberty to do as they please, rather than too little.

I think this is just a cultural difference and not so easy for Americans to understand. I hope this comment was helpful in conveying the Canadian perspective.

<comment><USER83> I am American, and thank you for your viewpoint. Does a 'Canadian attitude to government' translate into enforceable legislature? Even in the US, it's a mix of attitudes, but one consistent law needs to prevail.

I have lived overseas for 8 years, and in Montreal for a year. As a libertarian I do believe you should be free to do things, unless those things impinge on somebody else's freedoms.

Being priced out by foreign investment does not seem to be a reason to have government intervention. Empty houses en masse should lead to big drops in property values after the initial buying spree spike.

Keeping your home up to code and paying taxes is one thing, but enforcing occupancy is another. How about if you travel 6 months out of the year for work? Why should you be penalized/fined for not staying home?

What is the period of occupancy - 4 days a week; 1 week per month; 2 months per year? Who decides, and how to gauge it?

I always think of the following ab adsurdum-like argument: Most crimes occur at night. Government is responsible for everyone's safety. Curfew is mandated for your own good from sundown to sunrise. Just a thought.

<comment><USER29> There are many places in the world that have close to none in property taxes. You just a flat rate city services / council tax. Property tax was partially created to incentivize the usage of unused land to reduce the externality of it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER84> It's hardly clear how this will help much. Vancouver has a population of about 600k people. According to the article, 10k houses are empty. This will, at best, increase the housing supply by 1.6%.

Meanwhile, Vancouver is extremely low density - 13k people/square mile, about 1/3 that of high-rise megacities like...Brooklyn.

Great work guys! Scapegoating a few rich Chinese people with second homes while ignoring the massive self-inflicted harm that locals do.

<comment><USER85> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vancouverism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vancouverism)

<comment><USER86> Vancouverism-as-high-density only applies to the small downtown area, and tiny slices of land near transit stations. Nearly all the city's area is single- family homes on tenth-acre lots.</comment></comment></comment>


Harvard Study: Your Open-Plan Office Is Making Your Team Less Collaborative - <AUTHOR> https://www.inc.com/jessica-stillman/new-harvard-study-you-open-plan-office-is-making-your-team-less-collaborative.html <comment><USER2> oh God, open office bashing is the new javascript frameworks bashing.

Every other day there is an article about it.

why don't people get over it?</comment>


Do not share your private key - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/search?q=BEGIN+RSA+PRIVATE+KEY&ref=searchresults&type=Code

<comment><USER2> The link points to pages and pages of empty keys or obvious test keys, and this:

[https://github.com/johndouthat/mydotfiles/blob/81b657398c71c...](https://github.com/johndouthat/mydotfiles/blob/81b657398c71c33c6b7459c5aa8c2f070adadca9/.ssh/id_rsa)

A more useful link to have posted would have been eg: [https://github.com/bobgilmore/githooks/blob/master/pre- commi...](https://github.com/bobgilmore/githooks/blob/master/pre-commit)

... a pre-commit hook that prevents commits of private keys (among other things)

</comment><comment><USER3> There doesn't seem to be any valid private key.

<comment><AUTHOR> Check at the pages 11 and more</comment></comment>


We hacked 28,000 unsecured printers to raise awareness of printer security issue - Pick-A-Hill2019 https://cybernews.com/security/we-hacked-28000-unsecured-printers-to-raise-awareness-of-printer-security-issues/ <comment><AUTHOR> Yeah that's an ad stunt for their blog. Nothing interesting really. Probably shodan and a little python script. Yes, IoT has a security problem but you shouldn't be going around using people's ink to make an already made point.

<comment><USER2> As a hacking endeavour it is lame, yes. As a social one, I think it's better than many other I had seen in a long time.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> After going to the effort of "hacking" 28,000 printers I was expecting them to provide more details and analysis. As it stands, it's a bit of a "look at me" script kiddie stunt

<comment><USER4> Seen people doing this exact thing for many years, the only difference each time is the content printed.

<comment><USER5> Printer gerbil hungry, please load new cartridge of nuts.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> If you're interested in detecting these types of attacks, I wrote a printer honeypot during my Masters program.

[https://github.com/sa7mon/miniprint](https://github.com/sa7mon/miniprint)

<comment><USER7> I'm curious: if by chance you had some instance online, was it hit by the article's "attack"?

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> They covered all the world. But there's no word about translations? Sending documents to random people in English is kinda pointless (if not self- serving)... and may spook some people.

I was kind of expecting they were selecting on device location to make sure the recipient can understand the message.

<comment><USER9> > may spook some people

Right. I think the word "hacked" feels more aggressive and even scary than something like "This printer is vulnerable. We are security researchers but it could be real hackers. Here is how to secure it..."

It definitely draws attention, but in a very uncomfortable way.

It's even worse for people who do not speak English. As a Russian, I guess "hacker/hacked" is recognizable in a lot of non-English speaking societies, but other parts of the printed page are less so. So it definitely can unnecessarily spook some of those people until they find a way to understand the entire message.

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Is it generally illegal to send unsolicited ads over physical mail?

I mean, "hacking a printer" is surely illegal, so what if you sent a "Free Weekly Security Newsletter" with some news headlines and the footer saying "To unsubscribe, secure your printer" for couple weeks?

</comment><comment><USER11> So they wasted 140 000 A4 pages. Why not just let the poor printers be alone. I see no need to show off just becouse the printer owners forgot to look them.

<comment><USER12> It looks like the document printed was a single page doc.

<comment><USER11> Oh, read 5 step guide as 5 page guide. But anyway.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I hope the author ran this by their legal team first.

<comment> Pick-A-Hill2019 That was my exact initial reaction (which is why I posted it). Actually my initial reaction was 'WTF???' and so I made sure to read right to the end just in case I misunderstood and yep - they did in fact print off pdf files to random printers.

Thought the HN crowd would love diving in to the rights and wrongs of it. It reminded me of the 'old days' of fax spamming via uhmmm '2600' approved means and methods.

With that said - Would I rather read some pages printed off for 'some weird reason' (and got p*offed at the waste of paper etc) vs. inadvertantly becoming part of a possible future bot-net?

I mean - How do you alert the owner of a 'Write Only' (pun intended) device? And also hopefully at the same time kick up enough of 'Facebook/Twitter/XYZ' storm that Joe/Sue Q. Public notices?

That's a tough one.

<comment><USER14> Are you legally liable for botnet damage done to others if your unsecured printer is made to join that botnet by an unauthorized third party?

Does the answer change if you were notified of a misconfiguration that could allow this?

<comment><USER15> > Are you legally liable for botnet damage done to others if your unsecured > printer is made to join that botnet by an unauthorized third party?

Depending on jurisdiction, sometimes.

> Does the answer change if you were notified of a misconfiguration that could > allow this?

Depending on jurisdiction, often. Not quite always, as it may fall back on the manufacturer for not releasing a "reasonable" way to secure the machine without loss of function. But generally speaking, if you have been notified, you're on the hook.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> What I'm missing here is statistics on how many people actually followed the advice their botnet printers just spewed out. A simple check a week later to see how many printer owners managed to secure their devices would be nice.

Hacking printers just to promote your blog is kinda scummy. If you do it to help people secure their networks, then at least show how much you've managed to help by publishing the numbers. Anyone can use Shodan and submit a PDF with a script.

</comment><comment><USER17> Sometimes I leave my door open at night. Does that give you the right to walk into my house? Morons.

<comment><USER18> No, but some (not me) would argue that because you didn't try hard enough to stop it, it's your fault. In other words: victim blaming.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Hacking printers has been around for ages, people will never learn, no matter the consequences (sadly).

Phenoelit also have a few "fun" tools around to mess with printers: [http://www.phenoelit.org/hp/docu.html](http://www.phenoelit.org/hp/docu.html)

I can't recall when exactly this was (around the 2000s), i think there was a talk or paper by FX of Phenoelit who wrote a proxy for HP printers.

So you'd go Internet <-> Printer <-> internal Network - now, that should send a few shivers up peoples spines but apparently not.

</comment><comment><USER20> Does this mean roboprinting will be a thing soon? Will my printer start printing off ads for cruises and extended auto warranties?

</comment><comment><USER4> Nothing here beyond wardialing for fax machines and sending them spam for a firm. I'd call it hacking if it involved identifying forward-facing management ports on the same printers.

</comment><comment><USER21> Seems like kind of a jerk move.

"I went around and scratched the paint on 28,000 ICE cars to raise awareness on climate change issues"

</comment><comment><USER22> A similar thing happened when someone made did this promoting the YouTuber "PewDiePie"[1]

1\. - [https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2018/12/03/a-hac...](https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbrewster/2018/12/03/a-hacker- forced-50000-printers-to-spread-pewdiepie-propagandaand-the-problem-is-much- bigger-than-you-know/)</comment>


Building Remote Team of Russian Speaking Developers - <AUTHOR> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/building-remote-team-russian-speaking-developers-ilya-sidorov?trk=prof-post <comment><USER2> all true. moscow is really great, safe and clean</comment>


Seven People Have Been Entrusted With The Keys To The Internet - <AUTHOR> http://gizmodo.com/5597964/seven-people-have-been-entrusted-with-the-keys-to-the-internet

<comment><USER2> This has hollywood movie script written all over it! Scylla from Prison Break anyone?</comment>


Strime, feedback is sexy - <AUTHOR> https://www.strime.io <comment><AUTHOR> Making clear and precise feedback on a video is not obvious.

Strime is a simple tool designed to improve the management of corrections on video projects and facilitate discussions with your customers.

With Strime, you can upload any kind of video and invite your clients, partners or collaborators to comment. They will be able to write down their comments directly on the video. It's dead simple.

And it's completely free.

</comment><comment><USER2> Hope you'll enjoy our work!</comment>


Say Hello to Windows Azure, The World's Most Misunderstood Cloud - <AUTHOR> http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2012/04/microsoft-azure-java/ <comment><USER2> I've deployed some Node.js code on both Azure and Heroku, and I have to say the Heroku experience is in many ways superior:

* Both seem to do Node quite well, supporting both web instances and workers

* Deployment to Azure can take 30 minutes. On Heroku we average 30 seconds

* App setup on Heroku uses environment variables and the simple Procfile. On Azure you need to deal with poorly-documented XML files (most documentation deals with how to generate those with wizards in Visual Studio)

* Heroku's toolbelt works on Linux, Mac, and Windows. With Azure you have to use Visual Studio or Windows Powershell

* Azure provides some useful services like table storage and message queue. But Heroku has a much wider array of nicely-working add-ons to choose from, many of these things you could run on your own servers as well, like Redis or Postgres

* Last time I checked, Azure was quite expensive. This may have changed with their recent pricing cuts

* On the plus side, Azure lets you choose where to run your app geographically (USA, Europe, Asia?)

Compare:

[http://universalruntime.tumblr.com/post/14303346830/running-...](http://universalruntime.tumblr.com/post/14303346830/running- coffeescript-on-microsoft-azure)

<https://devcenter.heroku.com/articles/nodejs>

</comment><comment><USER3> Microsoft's problem is sycophants. There are enough people telling them how great their products are, that when those same products don't do well, Microsoft looks outwardly for the problem.

Windows Phone must be great, a lot of reviewers said so. Poor sales? Perception and marketing! (Forget lack of leadership, vision and innovation)

Azure is shunned? That's because people misunderstand it. Nothing to do with being slow out the gate, falling farther behind with each new AWS product, and not having any price advantage (in some cases, it's far worse).

Bing losing money? That's just not fair, our results are as good as google. (NO THEY ARE NOT).

These sycophants are both internal to the company and external.

The sooner Microsoft realizes that it's failing to succeed in new markets because it's average-at-best, the better for them. As long as they keep believing that their failing products are great and thus the failure is [largely] outside of their control, nothing will change.

<comment><USER4> >Windows Phone must be great, a lot of reviewers said so. Poor sales? Perception and marketing! (Forget lack of leadership, vision and innovation)

There is no reason for both of them to be problems.

You mean like how when you go looking for Windows Phone the salesman almost always pushes you hard towards other phones? There are too many instances of this to ignore.

Meanwhile, in multiple third party independent surveys, Windows Phone continues to do well:

[http://www.neowin.net/news/windows-phone-tops-in-user- satisf...](http://www.neowin.net/news/windows-phone-tops-in-user-satisfaction)

[http://socialtimes.com/windows-phone-bests-android-in- user-s...](http://socialtimes.com/windows-phone-bests-android-in-user- satisfaction-according-to-changewave_b70939)

[http://thenextweb.com/apple/2012/03/28/revealing-user- survey...](http://thenextweb.com/apple/2012/03/28/revealing-user-survey- proves-windows-phone-a-worthy-adversary-for-iphone-if-only-it-had-the-apps/)

For years we have heard the talk-ers proclaim how the .NET stack doesn't scale is too expensive for a startup. Meanwhile the do-ers built Stackoverflow and it has none of the scaling problems that sites built on other tools like Reddit have.

The perception problem is real and for you to totally ignore it shows your own biases.

<comment><USER3> Windows Phone isn't selling because it came out 4 years after the iPhone. It's an absolutely failure at the leadership level. They ridiculed the iPhone when it came out. What's the leadership going to say "We really dropped the ball on this one"? Ya right...blame anyone else.

I'm not arguing that Windows Phone isn't better (nor am I arguing that it is). I'm arguing that the reason it isn't selling is 100% internal to Microsoft and isn't merely a marketing and perception problem.

<comment><USER5> You're talking about public statements. Of course, any company ridicules competitors' strategies. Where are statments from Apple heaping praise on the Kinect?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> This piece reads like it was written by a Microsoft PR person, and not a investigative journalistic piece in Wired. After reading this[1] I can't help but be extremely critical of articles written this way. (or most magazine articles these days)

[1] <http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html>

</comment><comment><USER7> _"I can code in somewhere between 60 and 80 languages, and I can assure you there is nothing like C#."_

Um, really? I can just barely _name_ 35 languages, even including esoteric ones like Brainf*ck and Shakespeare.

<comment><USER8> That does seem a little hyperbolic. Shame, because the original statement is very valid- C#/.NET is looked down upon in Silicon Valley, but rarely for valid reasons. It's just not "cool".

<comment><USER3> People look down on it because:

1 - Most people want to run OSS...specifically Linux so they can leverage all the tools that run better on (or only run on) Linux. Like memcached, varnish, redis...Running .NET on Linux is silly.

2 - Want a dynamic language because it's more productive.

It isn't because it's "not cool". It's because general purpose languages are a dime a dozen, and there's no reason not to pick the best one possible. The only advantage .NET has is if you are doing work that integrates with other MS products.

<comment><USER9> What's silly about running .NET on Linux? If C# is a decent language on its own, and Mono is a decent way to run it (neither of which I'm completely sure of, but I _think_ that's the case) then it seems like it could be a fine choice.

<comment><USER10> > and Mono is a decent way to run it

I had consistently better performance running the same (CPU-bound, little IO) program on Windows Server than running it on Mono/Linux. I did that in 2005, so, YMMV.

Why would you pick C# over, say, Objective-C, Go or Java if you intend to run your software on Linux?

<comment><USER9> I imagine things have changed in seven years, although I won't say that Linux would win.

C# is definitely better than Java as a language. It's arguably better than Objective-C (whose main advantage is ease of talking to C APIs), and I have no idea about Go but I imagine there are probably decent reasons to prefer C# over it at least in some cases.

<comment><USER10> There is another point to be made: with the enormously rich language ecosystem that runs so well on the Linux platform, why limit oneself to the subset that runs well on Windows?

<comment><USER9> Sure. I'm just saying that _if_ C# is actually a better language than the alternatives (and it does seem pretty good, but I'm not _that_ familiar with it) and _if_ C# integrates with Linux as well as the rest, then it would be a decent, not-silly choice. I'm sure there are plenty of reasons why you'd choose something else instead though. But I don't think it's necessarily silly to choose C# on Linux purely on the merits of the language, nothing to do with Windows.

<comment><USER10> I don't think Linux integration is that good - Ubuntu just released a Mono- free OS release (you can install it, if you want, but it doesn't come installed by default) - and I wouldn't bet on it getting better.

I'm kind of curious about languages such as Vala and Go and how they compare to C# and Java.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> "People say, 'Oh, I'll have to teach you about Java sometime, so then you'll know the bright side.'"

Did this strike anyone else as something _nobody ever_ would say? I think it's pretty much consensus that C# is basically the next-generation of Java.

As for Rails, Python, etc. being the most common tools in SV, I tend to this it might be because they are free. The thing is (in my experience) MS dev tools are usually very good, and probably don't cost nearly as much as most people think they would. However, entrepreneurial folks are just more likely to start with something free, and then when the time comes to get more serious about their startup, it just makes sense to keep running with what you know.

<comment><USER12> _As for Rails, Python, etc. being the most common tools in SV, I tend to this it might be because they are free._

I don't want to go all Richard Stallman on you, but I think it might also be because they are Free. I mean, I've never bothered looking into MS dev tools because I assume they'll only run well on Windows, and they'll be designed for a server stack that will only run well on Windows, and then I'll be tied to getting my dev tools and server stack from one company on one OS, and it will be _Microsoft_.

It happens that I like developing on a Mac with a Python IDE right now, so I freely admit that I'm both biased and ignorant. But I do know, _know_ , that if a year or two down the line Apple gets too controlling, I can switch to Windows or Linux and keep using my same stack with tools that are just as good. And if Guido decides to become Tyrannical Dictator for Life and screw up Python, he'll have no real power to do that because the community can do exactly what they're doing without him. Are those things true about MS dev tools?

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> It's very very hard to take a company seriously that persistently have ridiculously lame bugs in their code and systems.

For example Windows Azure suffered outages in February because the programmers did not anticipate a leap year happening.

[http://www.forbes.com/sites/ciocentral/2012/02/29/microsoft-...](http://www.forbes.com/sites/ciocentral/2012/02/29/microsoft- windows-azure-cloud-service-suffers-big-outage/)

<comment><USER14> Jeezus, don't be so melodramatic and selective, everyone creates bugs.

Remember when android would lose text messages? Or Amazon's supposedly redundant system went down all at once?

Don't point a finger at MS for what wasn't even a complete outage.

And not taking the biggest and most successful software company in the world seriously makes you look like a complete fanboi tool.

<comment><USER13> McDonalds are the biggest and most successful restaurant in the world. But I doubt any chef would describe their food as being fantastic.

When I want to eat a really nice meal with friends or family, I rule out McDonalds. Does this make me a "fanboi tool"?

Microsoft have a pretty long history of date related bugs in their software and products stretching back years. They do not seem to understand how leap years work.

Windows 98: <http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/150947.stm> Zune: <http://bit-player.org/2009/the-zune-bug> Excel: "Excel 2000 incorrectly assumes that the year 1900 is a leap year" Exchange 2007: [http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/03/04/microsoft_admits_to_...](http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/03/04/microsoft_admits_to_exchange_leap_year_bug/)

etc etc

<comment><USER15> Yes, yes; this obviously makes Microsoft irrelevant _roll eyes_

Some of you need to be treated for Microsoft Derangement Syndrome.

<comment><USER13> It makes them as relevant as McDonalds is, when I'm considering where to go to get some good food.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> I got into Microsoft Bizspark and it came with Free azure hosting. So far so good. Coming from heroku with a Django app, It was a bit tough at the start but when you get the hang of everything, it does it's job.

<comment><USER17> is it better or just cheaper? (seriously, I'm interested in your opinion) did you switch for costs only or are there benefits to Azure as well?

<comment><USER16> I can't really compare it to Heroku. You have to compare it with EC2. First thing. They are planning to roll out Linux hosting but as of right now it's only windows and I have never used Windows EC2. With Azure you actually get a Windows machine in a datacenter that you choose. You can Remote desktop into it and control it, like you can control your local computer. Deployment is kinda tricky. But it's important to get Remote desktop working first so you can see what's happening in the system. It's not like heroku how you can do Heroku --logs. It's very important to remember that with Azure. You have to do everything. Heroku makes deploying, logging very simple for you. But at the same time you have less control. To sum up. There is a steep learning curve coming from heroku. But overall, I think it's was worth it.

This is what you get with Bizspark: <http://www.microsoft.com/bizspark/azure/>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> "In this echo chamber which is the [San Francisco] Bay Area, unless you follow what everyone else does, then there's an assumption that you don't know what you're doing,"

How true is this?

<comment><USER19> I am considering a move to SV and this quote left me w the same question. How about it guys?

My perception so far is - It is quite possibly true, and I have noticed a strong anti-MS bias. I like and use Ruby\Rails but I have developed in .NET, and Visual Studio, C# are quality tools. VB.net is totally maligned but quite good: very English syntax w/o managing all the damn brackets.

I switched to open source because I hope to have a lot of users, thus a lot of servers. My feeling is the MS space is excellent for B to B, or internal intranet stuff, where the tight integration w Windows et al is useful and the licensing costs are moderate because of the low volume of users.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> You can't deploy to Azure without windows.

Cloud9 ide allows you to deploy from their platform to Azure but it was a headache getting anything working.

<comment><USER21> Sure you can. The Azure website's control panel has a package upload dialog box. As long as it is a valid Azure package it doesn't matter where you upload from.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Does anyone here have actual experience to share on using Azure that has also used AWS? I'm building a node.js app and by default I'd use AWS but should I consider Azure?

<comment><USER2> Azure's Node.js experience feels a lot closer to a PaaS like Heroku than that of AWS. And for that experience, see my Azure-Heroku comparisons in this thread: <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3899159>

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> Appharbor is awesome for .NET (as an alternative to Azure).

The article does ring true that valley based consumer startups run on Python/Ruby more often.

(I am really not sure about the "enterprise" ones.)

</comment><comment><USER23> So, someone who loves C# loves Windows Azure. I'm not surprised and as noted by many other posters, this article hardly has a genuine ring to it. Nice try Microsoft.

</comment><comment><USER24> I like C# and a lot of my career has been .NET work, but I detest this sanctimonious attitude .NET devs cop sometimes, like they're being iconoclastic or rebellious for using the MS stack. Like everyone who doesn't do what they're doing is engaging in groupthink or trying to be "cool". Believe it or not, people actually have good reasons for not using MS software!</comment>


2012 Logo Trends - <AUTHOR> http://www.logolounge.com/article.asp?aid=llPo

<comment><USER2> Is it me or did a majority of the logos on this list look amateur at best? I used to remember looking forward to this trend report to see great solid work. I felt like half of these were gimmicky and very much underwhelming.</comment>