"The Shining" is perfect quarantine viewing - <AUTHOR> https://www.economist.com/books-and-arts/2020/04/25/the-shining-is-perfect-quarantine-viewing <comment><USER2> If you do (re-)visit this film, I highly recommend the "International Cut" that was shows and released on video everywhere _except_ the US. It's the director's preferred version. It's more than 20 minutes shorter(!) making for a much tighter movie, and removes some bits that didn't move the plot or looked weirdly dated (spooky Skeletons towards the end, for example)

<comment><USER3> FWIW: _" When released theatrically in the United States, the film ran approx. 146 minutes. However, as explained above, three weeks into its release, Kubrick cut the 2 minute coda from the end of the film, reducing its length to 144 minutes. After meeting with poor reviews and erratic box office, Kubrick decided to further edit the film for its theatrical release outside the US. He cut approximately 31 minutes of footage, reducing the length to 113 minutes. The 144 minute 'US version' is often erroneously called the director's cut when in fact director Kubrick regards both the 119 minute version and the 144 minute version as director's cuts."_

[https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0081505/alternateversions](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0081505/alternateversions)

<comment><USER2> I don't know if it's some weird quirk of copyright, but I really wish they'd just release both versions on video everywhere. AFAICT, there isn't a 4K HDR re-release of the International Cut, which is a shame.

<comment><USER4> At least it's within the realm of possible fan recreation if the international cut is strictly shorter than the 4K release we have.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Agreed, then watch Room 237, probably my favourite conspiracy theory doc:

[https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2085910/](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2085910/)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_237](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_237)

</comment><comment><USER6> We watched "The Shining" last week, oddly enough.

And yes it has something to say about "Cabin fever"

It seems likely to be an influence on a lot of David Lynch's work - in terms of a sense of oddness that's hard to define the cause of, and malign supernatural elements presented without much explanation, but which "make sense" in "logic of dreams" kind of way.

I did see The Shining years ago, but have seen a lot of David Lynch's work since then, so it's only now that I make the connection.

<comment><USER7> You got it backwards. Kubrick actually screened Lynch's Eraserhead to the cast and crew of the Shining to help them prepare for what he wanted to accomplish

<comment><USER8> Yes! In fact, one at least one occasion, Kubrick proclaimed that Eraserhead was his favorite movie of all time. It blows my mind that Lynch made Eraserhead while he was still in school - imagine having your student film receive that sort of acclaim from the arguably the most respected director in the world.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> If you want to feel more optimistic, _The Martian_ seems apt.

<comment><USER10> If not, try Moon, from 2009

<comment><USER11> I somehow missed Moon all these years. I literally just discovered and watched it last night. I don't know how it stayed so off my radar, since it's right up my alley. I'm glad that I was 100% unspoiled. tldr: +1.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Watching The Shining at midwinter is a tradition among South Pole Winterovers - for roughly 9 months there are no flights in or out.

<comment><USER13> I thought watching the "The Thing" was mandatory initiation for polar expeditions.

<comment><USER12> "South pole winterover" is a much more specific thing than "polar expeditions", but yes as the sibling suggests, the tradition at S Pole is to watch The Thing after the last flight of summer leaves.

My year also tried to institute a "Con Air" viewing before the first flight, mainly as a poke at the previous crew, but I'm not sure that stuck.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I recently learned it's Stephen King's least favorite adaptation of any of his stories:

[http://screenprism.com/insights/article/why-does-stephen- kin...](http://screenprism.com/insights/article/why-does-stephen-king-dislike- stanley-kubricks-the-shining)

<comment><USER15> That's interesting. Years ago, I recall King stating that _The Shining_ was the best movie adaptation of any of his stories. I wonder what changed, or maybe I'm misremembering?

Regardless, it's my favorite King movie (though I haven't yet seen "It").

<comment><USER16> I don't think I've ever seen anything stating that. He much preferred the later tv adaptation.

A big part of this is that he felt Jack Nicholson was just playing a crazy character. But the character in the book was a father first. And you could feel that. Not to mention this book had a lot to do with King himself and how he was lost in drugs and alcohol. There was a lot of internal and external struggle for him in the book that King felt was mostly ignored. This meant that by the end, the viewer had very little sympathy for him.

Personally, I love the movie and I love the book. But I completely understand King's criticism.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Some more movies in no particular order if you want to explore more of psychological horror:

Pandorum

The Lighthouse

eXistenZ

Videodrome

Hellraiser (I'm a fan of the series, some are better than others)

Blue Velvet

Mulholland Drive

The Thing

American Psycho

The Fly

Invasion of the Bodysnatchers (1978 version with Leonard Nimoy)

<comment><USER18> Ex Machina and Solaris would probably be at home on this list too.

The Lighthouse is fantastic.

<comment><USER19> Not strictly a quarantine movie but Take Shelter (2011) is a good watch. Deals with certain themes going on now.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> "The Masque of the Red Death" for a weird 1960's horror take on quarantine. Vincent Price. Adapted (substantially) from the Edgar Alan Poe story which is itself perfect reading for the occasion.

</comment><comment><USER21> I don't want to say too much, but after you've watched "The Shining" you might also appreciate one part of "Ready, Player One"

<comment><USER22> conversely, the weakness of the hommage just made me dislike 'Ready, Player One' even more.

<comment><USER18> Ready Player One misinterprets The Shining as a horror flick and not as psychological horror. Delbert Grady disapproves.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Talking about "The Shining": Doctor Sleep is one of the best "scary" movies I've seen in the last years.

The submersion was amazing.

<comment><USER24> Both me and my significant other found absolutely nothing about it scary, and were very underwhelmed by it all (it had a lot of cool shots and such though).

Different strokes for different folks.

It's been a while but I do remember enjoying Oculus[1] and The Blackcoat's Daughter[2]. My gf got so scared watching Session 9[3] that we had to sit there with the lights on for a while afterwards, though I haven't seen it in over a decade so maybe my memories of it are a bit rose-tinted.

[1]: [https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2388715/](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2388715/)

[2]: [https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3286052/](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt3286052/)

[3]: [https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0261983/](https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0261983/)

<comment><USER25> The Blackcoat's Daughter deserves wider recognition. Very good.

<comment><USER26> I turned it off after 40 minutes. I appreciate movies that use slower-pacing to build tension (No Country for Old Men comes to mind) but _every_ scene in The Blackcoat's Daughter is glacial to the point of being parody while still not accomplishing much in the way of characterization or plot development.

Maybe one day I'll revisit it, because I see it recommended all the time.

<comment><USER24> I fully acknowledge that it's not a film for everyone. I loved the movie but my gf couldn't watch it for similar reasons you specify.

But if you do find yourself alone one dark night, and in the mood for something slow and brooding, I would suggest you give it another try.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Or some of the short indy films that are freely available these days. The Omeleto channel on Youtube has dozens of shorts that are quite well done, a few in the horror/sci-fi category but many more in the psycho-drama topic.

There's also Dust and CGIBros. for mainly sci-fi/fantasy/horror. Alter specializes in horror, and there are several others that I haven't checked out yet (Mr. Nightmare is a large one).

For people working from home, as I've done for years, it's nice to take a short break at lunchtime or after work and catch a 15 minute movie. My eyes are bleary after eight hours, so a short film is ideal.

Later in the evening, we'll jump on Amazon Prime or Netflix and watch something family friendly (though I recently discovered that my 15-year-old kid was watching an anime that had about the most graphic violence I've ever seen).

</comment><comment><USER27> Is the Economist trying to get us to kill our wives and children?

<comment><USER28> No, just trying to get us to click and give them ad money.

<comment><USER29> We are feeding parasites, and they've been evolving.

Is there real value to the article? I mean, really, more than the "oh well value is relative" thing... Wonder how it would be if Newton would have preferred to watch a movie (or an equivalent at the time) instead of taking a stroll thinking of his theories and finding inspiration in a falling apple (the equivalent at the time).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> What mental illness he had? Schizophrenia, did voices told him to kill people? Wouldn't he died of other diseases? What else Bipolar mania and depression sounds reasonable combined with psychopathy I could see this happening.

</comment><comment><USER31> I happened to start reading it a few weeks ago. The book is even better than the movie, and the movie is one of my favorite horror films of all time.

</comment><comment><USER32> Speaking of perfect quarantine movies, might I recommend John Carpenter's "The Thing"?

</comment><comment><USER33> Ingmar Bergman's Seventh Seal.

Parallels to the time of the black plague.

</comment><comment><USER34> Also The Lighthouse.

</comment><comment><USER35> No it's not, Mrs. Torrence.

</comment><comment><USER36> I tried watching this classic because I ski Timberline sometimes but it's just a godawful movie all the way through.</comment>


Why We Don't Like Our Underground House - <AUTHOR> https://dengarden.com/misc/The-Pitfalls-of-an-Underground-House <comment><USER2> If I ever build a house, I'm going to get oversized crawlspaces, cable ducts... Anything I can find to make maintenance easier. Maintenance on houses is the hardest thing we don't talk about. I wonder if we might be better served with Japan's culture of rebuilding constantly, because maintenance is a chore and painful.

I also wish houses came with an owners manual and regular check-up tooling - I'd love to have a better idea of what I'm dealing with and something to reference about what I've forgotten.

<comment><USER3> Put some sort of access, such as an unfinished closet, behind every place where plumbing is installed in the wall. Get access to the shower valve without ripping out your tile. Get access to the back of your dishwasher, along with the water/sewage connections and a 20-Amp 3-prong socket. Get room next to your toilet, ensuring that you can get down there to mess with bolts and valves. Make sure your attic is at least a foot tall around all the edges, letting you drill straight outward to install things like lights and cameras and overhead utility connections.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> If I may, in a nutshell a badly built house is bad.

To this you add ineffective, amateurish or no repairs and maintenance and you have the perfect disaster.

It is perfectly possible to build a long lasting, maintainable, underground house, but you won't have it "cheap", expect the costs to be between 150% and 180% (if not more) of the "normal" costs for a comparable sized house built with whatever building technique is common in your area (bricks/concrete/etc.).

Mould is almost unavoidable in _any_ (not only underground) houses with a high level of energy efficiency (in Europe those that would be classified B or A and higher, even if in my experience issues start happening at the D or C class) unless a proper (and properly calculated and maintained) mechanical ventilation system is installed.

Though you may save over the years something in heating/cooling costs, it is simply (usually) not worth it.

<comment><USER5> _" Mould is almost unavoidable in any (not only underground) houses with a high level of energy efficiency (in Europe those that would be classified B or A and higher, even if in my experience issues start happening at the D or C class) unless a proper (and properly calculated and maintained) mechanical ventilation system is installed."_

Don't all modern houses have a decent mechanical ventilation system? In my experience, mold is mostly an issue for older houses, which tend to have lower energy efficiency. Bad insulation does nothing to prevent mold, and if your insulation is so bad that you don't need mechanical ventilation to prevent mold, it means the wind is blowing through your house.

So just get your energy efficiency as high as possible and use proper ventilation.

<comment><USER4> >Don't all modern houses have a decent mechanical ventilation system?

No, a large number of houses (at least here EU\Italy) is not "re-built" they are (badly) adapted with increased insulation (and usually with polystirene or styrofoam "coats" \- please read as waterproof insulation) and - often this is the key issue - new windows that are air tight without retrofitting "proper" mechanical ventilation systems.

And it is not uncommon to find newly built (in the last - say - 8-10 years) houses that are in energy classes C, B or A that still miss such a system or having it not providing enough air changes.

Hence I earlier said:

>unless a proper (and properly calculated and maintained) mechanical ventilation system is installed

As a matter of fact mould is usually not an issue for older houses, exactly because the walls are not completely waterproof and because of the leaks from windows and doors (that even without having wind blowing through do allow some ventilation), there may still be localized mould where thermal bridges are, but is usually a minor issue that can be solved.

Recently (again last few years) some "new generation" of "local" (as opposed to centralized) ventilation systems (basically a fan with a heat exchangers that fits in a pipe 100-160 mm for which you bore a hole in the outer walls) are becoming a needed retro-retrofit to these houses but they tend to be a little noisy (so you need timer controlled ones for bedrooms).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Most of the problems mentioned could easily apply to any given basement.

It really does sound like a poorly built house. I'm not an expert by any means, but flooding, seepage, pests, cracks, and mold are all extremely common basement problems. Of course, their impact on your quality of life is magnified when your whole house is effectively a basement, but it's still normal stuff.

</comment><comment><USER7> "Who would have thought to buy flood insurance four a house high upon a hillside?"

Anyone buying a underground house, I would guess.

"When we first moved in, we ran the electric system for two weeks, nearly froze off our tail feathers, and paid double what we had been paying for natural gas heat in our previous home of 1,000 sq. ft."

Gadzooks a 2,500 sq. ft home with 14 foot domed ceilings cost double to heat then a 1,000 sq. ft home... The horror!

</comment><comment><USER8> If you're going underground hire an engineer and/or architect to save you some of the long term pain.

</comment><comment><USER9> I've never lived in a house or worked in a building that did not have water problems.

And I've lived in $1m+ houses and $100m+ work buildings.

There's no way you'd get me in an underground house. Except maybe in Coober Pedy.

</comment><comment><USER10> This is a good source of inspiration for a life of a hobbit fan fiction.

</comment><comment><USER11> I think that primarily, as others have said, we need sunlight. However, one can introduce sunlight into an underground structure with various skylights, including those that use mirrors to bring the light just about anywhere underground.

It's mostly the excavation, drainage, and more robust structural requirements that increase the cost of construction of an underground house to a point where it outweighs the benefits of such a house. One would want to locate any underground structure on a site that is well above the water table, and well above a flood zone - so again, the cost of locating such a plot of land increases the difficulty and expense of building such a home.

However, I think that there are advantages to residences that are - half- buried. In other words, built into a hill on a slope. The advantages to such a house would be significant if it were sited correctly with a well-engineered drainage system. For example, in the Northern hemisphere the energy savings of a house on a slope with a glass curtain wall facing south would significantly reduce heating and cooling requirements regardless of latitude. Temperatures within the structure would be pretty constant year round. In winter, when the sun recedes to the south and stays lower to the horizon, sun would shine in, and warm, the house for a major portion of the day. In the summer as the sun rises more to the East and is higher in the sky, the earth surrounding the house except for its south-facing wall would insulate the house from radiant heat, and the cooler temperature of the earth would also keep the house from warming up much.

Our summer house in New Jersey faces South, and that long side of the house is windows the entire length of the house, and about half of the surface area of that wall. In winter, on a sunny and below freezing day, the temperature inside that long room can get as high as 80 degrees F (27 C). Midday the furnace doesn't come on at all (unless it's a very windy day). The basement is at ground level on the south side, completely underground on the north side. The basement maintains a pretty steady temperature year-round. Had this house been built in the past 20 years rather than 60+ year ago it would have had solar panels running fans to use the basement coolness to air condition the house on the (relatively few) hot days in summer, and distribute the excess heat in winter throughout the house. As it is, it's an extremely energy- efficient structure.</comment>


Ask YC: How to web scrape 100s of sites/forms? - <AUTHOR>

hi...
a potential research app requires the scraping of a few hundred websites/forms and diving into the child links to obtain the linked/parent structure ie. company->dept->title->name.
in this case, this would involve going 4 levels deep, and getting the required information.
so, does anyone know of a method/app/company that can be used to accomplish this. orm am i going to have to figure out how to get a number of cheap guys to write a bunch of python scripts!!
thanks <comment><USER2> _...cheap guys to write a bunch of python scripts_

You know what will be 'cheap'. Writing it yourself.

</comment><comment><USER3> Libraries like mechanize and hpricot are shrinking the curve for scraping tasks. That's not to say it is easy, but it should not take a bunch of people working on it. One good developer with proper experience would be ample in my opinion.

</comment><comment><USER4> Or get one expensive guy to write you a script that

writes the scripts to scrape the sites by scraping the sites to read the structure to write the scripts to scrape the sites.

</comment><comment><USER5> Check out the search.wikia.org project. They make their crawler (and crawl data) available. Maybe you can get away with using theirs. That would _really_ be cheap!

</comment><comment><USER6> I am unable to think of an application for this technology other than spamming. Care to provide more details before we shoot ourselves in the face by helping you?</comment>


Ask HN: Are there any systematic and scientific ways to develop a habit? - <AUTHOR> I want to develop many daily habits, such as running, reading, or exercise every day, but all difficult to stick to, I know someone, such as zurkburg, who can insist on what they want to do, so I wonder is there any systemic way i can develop a habit? <comment><USER2> 1\. Build a routine. Set a specific, repeating time when you will do the thing in your calendar. Keep that slot clear, ALWAYS. Never let something interrupt this task.

2\. Learn to say no. If someone wants you to do something else during this time slot, say no, and tell them why.

3\. Never break the routine. Breaking it once makes it MUCH easier to break the next scheduled time. If you do break it, feel bad about it and get back on the horse IMMEDIATELY.

4\. Use the power of accountability to reinforce the routine. If you can find someone who will hold you accountable, do it. Someone who does the routine with you, or a coach who will call you out if you make excuses.

5\. One thing at a time. Don't build some huge routine of 15 tasks at once. Ease into it one task at a time.

6\. Don't overload yourself. Leave time in your schedule for play. If it gets to be too much, decide CONSCIOUSLY which one you will drop permanently (and not right before the schedule to do it).

Edit: I'll also say this: Overcoming adversity builds discipline. A tough life that forces you to fight for what you want builds this naturally. An easy, carefree life doesn't make you tough. Seek out tough things to toughen yourself up.

<comment><USER3> As someone who got into a regular exercise habit a year ago that has progressively gotten more intense, I disagree with a few of your points.

Actually, I guess it's mostly the first 3:

> 1\. Build a routine. Set a specific, repeating time when you will do the > thing in your calendar. Keep that slot clear, ALWAYS. Never let something > interrupt this task.

> 2\. Learn to say no. If someone wants you to do something else during this > time slot, say no, and tell them why.

> 3\. Never break the routine. Breaking it once makes it MUCH easier to break > the next scheduled time. If you do break it, feel bad about it and get back > on the horse IMMEDIATELY.

It's this "do it now or feel guilty" stuff that keeps most people procrastinating or avoiding doing the task. I remember initially I would have it set in my mind that I needed to go to the gym at 10 a.m. the next day. If I woke up a bit late or was wasting time on reddit and 10 a.m. looked unrealistic, I started feeling really guilty. "Oh no, if I don't go now, I'll never go!" It put a lot of stupid, unnecessary pressure on the situation. And it didn't really have the desired effect -- I'd usually not go, since I had already blown it by missing my 10 a.m. deadline, after all!

Now, I might wake up and plan on going at 10, but I know that I 1) absolutely do plan on going and 2) can go at 11, or 12, or 1, or 2, etc. There's no need to make the task worse by associating a lot of negative pressure and guilt with it.

> One thing at a time. [...] Leave time in your schedule for play.

Totally. Especially if it's an area where the amount of information out there can be overwhelming (a la fitness / weightlifting). I started out going with a few exercises I enjoyed in mind and simply did them until I felt tired. I didn't worry about making a program, writing down my workouts, obsessing about nutrition, or obsessing about how many days or which days I did what.

Over time, things started getting easier and I began incorporating more of this stuff as I started feeling comfortable. But the initial phase where I made the habit something I actually enjoyed was crucial. Even now, when I occasionally find myself feeling like I've slipped too much back into treating it like a job, I take a day to not keep track of anything and try some new exercises that I think might feel good.

Edit: Also super useful:

> If you can find someone who will hold you accountable, do it. Someone who > does the routine with you, or a coach who will call you out if you make > excuses.

For me it was my roommate. I'd go with him the first couple of months. After a while I felt comfortable enough to go by myself and do my own thing, but that initial time where I would use the slight social pressure of him going and asking me if I wanted to go to keep myself in check.

<comment><USER4> > It's this "do it now or feel guilty" stuff that keeps most people > procrastinating or avoiding doing the task

Couldn't agree more with this.

I've tried many times to build habits into my routine, only to abandon them and feel bad about it because I couldn't maintain them for a few days.

No more. Now I have them in my list, I keep them consciously present, but I won't punish myself if I don't get them done one day. Allow some leeway. If you really want it, build it paciently into your routine and if it doesn't feel right, try another way.

One example: I've been trying to stick to a healthy diet to lose some weight. I don't enjoy cooking, and much less enjoy preparing or eating salads. Tried lots of apps, lots of ways of grocery shopping, and hated it all the way. Now I switched to calorie counting and drinking lots of water. Walking away from the desk to fill a bottle 3 or 4 times a day feels like I'm moving forward without any hassle, and I just try to eat slowly when I sit down for lunch or dinner. Water diminishes my appetite and cravings for eating out of just feeling anxiety. And if I feel like chomping down on a pizza with beer, it's ok, no big deal.

Just take it easy. Hakuna matata.

<comment><USER3> > Now I switched to calorie counting and drinking lots of water.

Nice! Calorie counting was _huge_ for me. I started using an app for tracking it, and suddenly the weight just started coming off. The quantification and gamification aspect was hugely addicting for me. For the first time I actually felt in control over my body.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Have a read, great book on the topic: [https://www.amazon.com/Power-Habit- What-Life-Business/dp/081...](https://www.amazon.com/Power-Habit-What-Life- Business/dp/081298160X)

Systematic, definitely. Scientific? Not really sure, but I find it extremely effective. If I could boil it down to "what works" for me, it'd be:

\- Pick a task or thing that you want to accomplish. Let's say running (mine is running/lifting).

\- Pick a "cue," or something that signals when you perform said task. The more apparent the cue the better. Mine is waking up. Working out is the first thing I do.

\- Follow this routine religiously for about 21 days. That's the magic number according to people who are into this kind of thing, and I agree. At this point you kind of forget what your old habit was when you woke up, and you naturally go to perform your new task.

And lastly, there will be some days when you don't want to perform the task. Do it anyway. A streak of not performing that task is really just the (re)formation of a _bad_ habit.

<comment><USER6> I second "The Power of Habit", Duhigg is the kind of writer you're looking for - aggregating scientific sources and multiple studies, but presenting them in very easy-to-consume popular-science format.

Worth noting that the 21 day recommendation is "average", the actual "stick time" has a huge variation between a few days spent on "brush my teeth as soon as I wake up" habit to (likely) months that it would take to pick up the "run 5 miles before breakfast" habit.

<comment><USER7> Running five miles before breakfast is more than just a habit; it is also a skill. Many people simply can't run 5 miles right now, they need to first train up to acquire the ability to do it.

<comment><USER8> I agree with you, but I think the parent was saying that even controlling for one's ability to successfully do a thing, some things (i.e. those that are more strenuous or otherwise require more commitment) take longer to solidify as habits, which makes sense if we think of habit-forming as environmental adaptation. One doesn't adapt to massive environmental changes after just a couple of weeks.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I was the same and now, after reading a lot about these things, I believe I am able to actually develop habits I want. What worked for me:

\- I stopped trying to develop all the habits at once and sticked to a single habit. Preferably the easiest one.

\- I discovered I get used to doing something by repeating it a lot. For e.g. at the beginning, I was targeting doing yoga once a week because I was thinking that the more often I target, the more difficult it would be and I would fail. It did not work out because doing something once a week did not turn into a habit. Instead, I switched to doing 3 minutes of yoga, but every single day. And I did not target increasing it at all. After a period, I was automatically increasing it without noticing it.

\- I cannot develop habits when my life is busy and unstable. For e.g. if I am not coming home at the same hour everyday, and targeting to read at the same time but missing it because I was not at home at that hour, it did not turn in to a habit. When I could do it at the same time everyday for a period, then it started to stick.

\- I started giving a habit at least 3 months to develop. I reserve the next three months for a single habit, if I can do it, say 60 times in 90 days, I tend to stick to it after that period and am now able to add a new one, because the feeling of "I am now trying to develop a habit" disappears for the old one.

\- Also I discovered that once I make something a habit, I can decrease the frequency and still able to stick with it. E.g. I developed a habit of running 3-4 times a week, now I want to do it once a week and I can easily stick to it.

</comment><comment><USER10> Couple of life-hacks to help you along:

\- Pay for things. I'm been paying $400/month for fitness classes and rest assured I never missed one. Haven't even been late.

\- Develop a single meta-habit: check your checklist. I have a morning checklist of things that I need to check off before I feel my morning is complete and my day is off to a good start. I don't forget my vitamins anymore.

\- Talk things through with someone who listens. As you're talking out loud you will get a better perspective and ideas on how to make new habits stick will pop out of nowhere.

<comment> semi-extrinsic > Pay for things

Counterpoint: lots of people hold $50-$100/month gym memberships but never go to the gym. In fact, this is the most important part of the business model of most gyms.

<comment><USER10> In my case the program will end. So I'm paying $400 and if I slack off I will have to start over and that's _another_ $400.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I don't know of any "how to" type material, but the scientific topic here is operant conditioning. The basic idea is that you reward behaviors that are desired and/or punish behaviors that aren't desired. There's an interesting dichotomy, though: the fastest way to _learn_ a behavior is to have a reinforcement (a reward or foregoing something unpleasant) that is consistently provided with/after the behavior and not at other times. However, the most effective way to _maintain_ a behavior is for the reward to be provided at a random ratio to the behavior (but still only in conjunction with the desired behavior) [1].

A lot of people want to believe that humans are somehow "above" operant conditioning, but there's a _lot_ of evidence that we aren't.

Language nitpick: the word you want is _systematic_ [2].

[1] [http://open.lib.umn.edu/intropsyc/chapter/7-2-changing- behav...](http://open.lib.umn.edu/intropsyc/chapter/7-2-changing-behavior- through-reinforcement-and-punishment-operant-conditioning/#stangor- ch07_s02_s02_f01)

[2] [http://www.public.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/systemic.html](http://www.public.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/systemic.html)

</comment><comment><USER12> I wanted a particular job; I wanted to get it and succeed at it once I had it. I wanted it more than any job I'd ever wanted. The commute was 44 miles, work started at 7 AM. I quickly realized I could eat breakfast, read the paper at home, then fight rush hour traffic, or reverse that and avoid rush hour. I searched and found a nice deli/diner 1.1 miles from work. That meant getting up at 4:30 AM, which meant going to bed at 8:30 PM. My (now ex) girlfriend picked a pointless fight with me at 8:20 twice the first week. But at 8:30 I went to bed.

All of this might sound crazy, but I wanted it badly, made it paramount, so all the rest flowed from that. If you really want your life to be different, decide what you want and accept the decisions that flow from the goal. People will get in your way, including yourself. I've had the weirdest effects myself of suddenly unable to focus on getting out the door, forgetting where my keys or such are, etc. But keep at it. Make the goal paramount, break through whatever bizzareness appears, and you'll have what you want.

<comment><USER13> I think the lesson here is: be prepared to make sacrifices for the thing you really want.

Not sure if there's advice or a definitive way to develop a habit here, but it's helpful nonetheless.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> The biggest challenges I found are distractions. It's easy to get going with running, reading or exercise but as long as TV is there, Netflix or the Internet, we are easily tempted to follow the easy path.

Once you get distracted by something, it's very easy to continue to be distracted. I'm thinking of binge-watching Netflix, or checking out the reddit front-page etc. After, we forget what is the work and what are the todos. Even if we have to go back to a productive state, then we are not in the zone, and it is still very easy to go back in distraction mode.

Based on all this, what worked for me was being productive right from the beginning. Waking up, I do something productive, often creative writing. When I begin to work, I do not check news or email. I start with a to-dos that are quick to do. You do a streak and then continue on the bigger todos. News, emails, blogs, social media are much later in the day, if at all.

In this framework, if I want to develop a new habit, I would wake up early and put 30mn of time into it. I won't open up my phone or have any social interaction before finishing it.

</comment><comment><USER15> BJ Fog is a Stanford researcher who is studying exactly that. Check out his "tiny habits" program, which is a one week course in which you will learn 3 new tiny habits. It is free and enlightening: tinyhabits.com

<comment><USER16> I highly recommend this as well. It involves all the principles discussed in this thread, but makes you actually do them rather than just reading about it

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Get a dog. Our dog needs to go out first thing in the morning. It sounds silly, but she succeeded in injecting an element of schedule into my days that I hadn't had before. I feel like I've found it easier to develop other daily habits as a result.

<comment><USER18> I can second that. On one hand you have a little less of the free time, but on the other hand you learn to stick to a routine. Which is a useful skill for habit formation. And you can couple the walks with something else, like running or listening to audio books.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> There is an excellent app for android called 'Loop - Habit Tracker' ([https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.isoron.uha...](https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.isoron.uhabits&hl=en)) which has a really great interface for keeping track of habits. It's very well designed. The interface is simple and snappy. Best app I've found anywhere for keeping track of even small daily habits (like flossing). It takes about 3 seconds to check off a habit, it can remind you every day, and you can consult graphs to see how you've been doing. It's also free and has no ads.

I didn't make this project. But it's great. I've picked up quite a few habits using it.

<comment><USER20> I really admire people who make stuff like this. It's completely ad free and open source too.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> Also about the pain vs. pleasure response.

Ultimately, we as humans, are always trying to either obtain more pleasure or avoid some level of pain. This is true for every task and decision we make in life.

If we take the task of going to the gym for instance, some people associate going to the gym with "pain". I.e. I don't want to run because I"m tired. Whereas others associate going to the gym with "I want to feel good and have more energy".

The trick is being able to combine the power of habit (cue) with pain and pleasure.

All of this can be read in Awaken the Giant Within by T. Robbins. Oldie but a goodie classic on this stuff.

</comment><comment><USER22> Quickly trying to bootstrap my knowledge of the field I have a few things for you.

First of all as such the examples you have given aren't quite habits. A habit is generally defined in the research as a sort of automatic response to contextual cues. So running just "every day" can never be habitual, however running as a specific part of your morning routine can become habitual.

Secondly the cue is the essential part in making the habitual behaviour override your conscious intentions. It is however both necessary and sufficient, so you don't necessarily need to worry too much about rewards or accountability to make things stick. Just developing the association between cue and behaviour is enough.

And that is basically all we know for certain so far. At least as far as I can learn skimming the first related literature review that popped up ([http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17437199.2013.87...](http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17437199.2013.876238?)) and some of the associated papers.

If you are not the kind of person who can through willpower alone get yourself to set up the cue and do the action it may benefit you to get help from someone who is better at that kind of thing until the habit is automatic.

</comment><comment><USER23> I think you need a complete change in mindset, because you're just setting yourself up for failure.

You shouldn't need to develop a habit like reading or exercise. If you don't truly want to do these things then you'll stick to your systematic habit for a few days and it'll fizzle out, then it's back to the drawing board.

I've been walking/jogging a few miles a day for the last 5 years or so. Now it's part of my life because I straight up enjoy it. I also quit smoking cigarettes cold turkey after smoking a pack a day for a long time.

Both were honestly really easy to do because deep down I wanted to do them. I woke up one day and the room was spinning which is something I never encountered before. It scared the shit out of me, so I immediately changed my life style.

You should be asking yourself why you want to read and exercise more. Is it because of a long term goal? Good, write that goal down and stick to doing things that point you towards it. That's all there is to it.

If you find that too difficult, then your goal is not really something you care about, so think harder. Keep repeating that until you find what you really want.

<comment><USER24> > If you find that too difficult, then your goal is not really something you > care about, so think harder.

From personal experience, agreed that you shouldn't have to _make_ yourself, and instead realizing that you _want_ it.

Disagreed with 'think harder', though. When mind is foggy, thinking harder doesn't seem to help; and when mind is clear, things tend to be obvious without thinking.

When you woke up to a spinning room, you probably didn't have to think too hard about goals or whether you'd want to experience that again. It was a moment of clarity. However, when everything is going _mostly_ well and there are no incoming existential warnings—just normal ups and downs of life—such moments can be elusive to some of us.

I'd say regularly practicing different ways of inducing bouts of mindfulness (how? I wish I knew) might be the only habit worth development per se.

<comment><USER23> Right, when the room was spinning, I didn't think "I better read a Tim Ferris book!" or "what type of application should I use to schedule my time to monitor habits".

It was more like sitting down and having a conversation with myself that went something like this:

"You're not in that bad shape, but something is messed up. Cigarettes are terrible and while you're not overweight, you're inactive and that needs to change or you're going to die".

Then I basically evaluated my life up until that point and made sweeping changes based on a bunch of goals that I wrote out.

The really funny thing is, death wasn't enough to keep me motivated with walking. Not because I hated it that much, but it was really easy to get trolled by my own brain with thoughts such as "you just walked 4 miles in 4 days after sitting at a computer desk for years... you're fine man".

Now I have long term goals and walking meshes well with my life style. I've grown to like it because of what it allows me to do, not because of the mechanical motion of walking.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER25> On Reddit there are several groups that try to do this. It's called the X-Effect. It works by creating a habit by doing a small task daily. One of the most important things is to start small.

You have to start so small that is seems stupid, but as it's all about positive reinforcement, you better start small (five minute tasks like clean your desk) and succeed, than a little bigger and fail. You may think that you could do 30 minutes and do more, but the goal here is to do this each and every day. If you do more one day, that's great. But this is the minimum. You have to set yourself to do this every day for five minutes.

You repeat this for 50 days, and the idea is that by then you have created a habit. Then you can start a new goal.

It sounds stupid, but it's not. It's really easy to let this go for one day, and think tomorrow I'll do 15 minutes to compensate. Or maybe you had a good day yesterday, and you worked 30 minutes on your goal. This is not a good idea. It's a trigger to let go, and stop the routine. Soon you're doing this 5 minute task only every other day, and then suddenly you stop alltogether.

And of course I take a stupid example here. You may choose another task that takes more time, and maybe you don't set a time limit, but something like walk the dog three times a day, or read one chapter of a book each day.

[https://www.reddit.com/r/getdisciplined/comments/1x99m6/im_a...](https://www.reddit.com/r/getdisciplined/comments/1x99m6/im_a_piece_of_shit_no_more_games_no_more_lies_no/cf9dz72/)

[https://www.reddit.com/r/theXeffect/](https://www.reddit.com/r/theXeffect/)

</comment><comment><USER26> BJ Fogg has a few insights regarding good habit retention: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g56aKi-z05w](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g56aKi-z05w)

Basically if you look at it as a process, making sure not to overwhelm yourself before the habit becomes second nature, you have a better chance of succeeding at it.

</comment><comment><USER27> BJ Fogg's tiny habits is a good way. You might know him as author of the book "persuasive technologies". But his habit tools are well studied and tested (according to him ;) [http://tinyhabits.com/](http://tinyhabits.com/)

</comment><comment><USER28> See Tim Ferriss and his various podcasts/books. This is basically what he's spent 10-15 years studying, does a good job distilling information into the most impactful and substantive bits.

A good starting point: this podcast with Naval Ravikant [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-7J-Gwc9pVg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-7J-Gwc9pVg)

Naval is a deep thinker, talks about happiness, habits, learnings, etc.

Then, check out Derek Sivers (also w/ Tim) [http://fourhourworkweek.com/2016/11/21/tools-of-titans- derek...](http://fourhourworkweek.com/2016/11/21/tools-of-titans-derek-sivers- distilled/)

</comment><comment><USER29> After trying to build a healthy habit app for several years, we have found that the most effective way to do it is to turn what you're trying to do into a game. It doesn't need to use technology - you could just be doing it on a piece of paper.

There's an important psychological reason behind this. When we usually try to build a habit(or 'change a behavior'), we're going against our default nature. If that weren't the case, you'd already have acquired that habit.

Now going against your nature takes willpower. And research has established [1] that we have a limited amount (budget) of willpower everyday. Expend the budget on one thing, and you have no more of it for another. In experiments, people are more easily tempted by an unhealthy snack after a hard day, because they've already used up their willpower for the day. Bottomline: willpower based behavior change is very hard to sustain.

Also, we usually interpret our failings to keep up with our behavior change effort as guilt and failure, rather than the budget of willpower drying up, which is what it actually is. That starts a negative connotation with the very thing that was supposed to bring a positive change to our lives.

I don't want to sound promotional, but we're seeing incredible change in people's walking behavior by turning it into a fun engaging game/app [2]. It just seems to work where an 'endless willpower' driven approach fails.

The interesting insight into this process is that the healthy habit needs to be a side effect of this game. It cannot be the main focus of the game. In other words, there must be a strong gaming core loop that's just fun and sticky by itself, and which is what people think of when they think of the game. The core loop is basically going to be fed by (among other things) elements of your healthy habit.

[1] [http://www.webmd.com/diet/features/willpower- facts](http://www.webmd.com/diet/features/willpower-facts)

[2] [http://battlesteps.com](http://battlesteps.com)

<comment><USER30> The willpower research has been debunked, example: [http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/cover_story...](http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/cover_story/2016/03/ego_depletion_an_influential_theory_in_psychology_may_have_just_been_debunked.html)

The game advice seems legit though.

<comment><USER29> Thanks.

"Challenged" (not debunked) would more precisely describe what the linked article says. I'm not saying the claims were set in stone, but even intuitively, it seems to make sense that people might be tempted to 'throw in the towel' after a hard day.

As for me, I've found I'm usually actively seeking out a guilty pleasure after a hard day. A cookie (or a beer) looks pretty appealing at that point.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> The book "Superhuman by habit" is the best book I've read on the subject. It's well researched and comes with lots of practical advice for developing habits, not just the research and theory.

<comment><USER32> I'll second this recommendation. "Cliff Notes": [https://sivers.org/book/SuperhumanByHabit](https://sivers.org/book/SuperhumanByHabit)

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> If there were a short answer to this, we'd all be amazing. There are strategies for building good habits, such as adding a small amount to your daily load at a time (to avoid overextending your will power, and build it up slowly), and logging your actions in a journal everyday, which causes you to recognize your accomplishments and confirm your goals. Also, there are methods of setting very specific, measurable goals that can be achieved in relatively short spans (days and weeks, not months and years) so that you continue to push forward at a visible pace.

</comment><comment><USER34> I doubt there is any 100% reliable way, or any way that works for everyone (cause people are different), so it's partly a case of finding out what works for you.

A useful discovery for me was that emotion is a greater driving force that rationality. Rather than making a list of all the reasons that exercise will be good for you, spend time visualising exactly how wonderful you will feel (in as much detail as possible) when you are fit, and spend time visualising how bad you will feel if you don't get fit.

It might not work for you, but if it does it can be very powerful.

</comment><comment><USER35> Yes and it's explained in awesome book The Power of Habit by Charles Duhigg

You need a cue/craving -> response -> reward cycle

The reward should be slightly unpredictable to make the habit really addicting.

So best way to build (or deprogram) a habit: keep a log of how you feel before you do (or don't do) something you want to change. Become aware of your "cue" or craving. Begin to introduce a different response that comes with a reward.

For instance, if you don't feel great after leaving the gym you'll never make it an unconscious habit.

</comment><comment><USER36> Following up on katzgrau's recommendation for "The Power of Habit", I think it's important to stress that you should prioritize and choose the most important habit first and focus on that 100%. In the book, Charles Duhigg mentions "key habits" that, if changed, will lead you to change other habits as well.

I've been down the road of changing habits multiple times and I think the most important habit you can adopt is actually to continuously watch your progress, adjust your routines if necessary and, more generally, give you time to think about where you're moving with your life on a grand scheme of things.

Whenever I tried to get into a new habit, I found that the hardest thing was actually to come up with and take counter-measures if the routine wasn't sticking as expected. I would often try a new routine and if it failed to stick, I would automatically fall back into my old (bad) routine.

So my advice is this: Set aside time to reflect upon your routines (and your life in general). Make this your very first habit to get into. Personally, I've found that doing it once a week is by far not enough for me (and it's also a difficult habit to maintain), so I decided to do it once a day and, since I rarely find the time at night, I decided to get up a bit earlier in the morning and go for a 30min walk. This has the added benefit that you get a bit of exercise and lots of fresh air. I also use that time to decide on my most important task for the day that I will work on right after the walk.

</comment><comment><USER37> I've read the book The Power of Habit and found it enlightening, but the bits I'm having most trouble with are choosing rewards and getting started. The part about choosing rewards is, by far, the most difficult for me. Everybody keeps saying "make sure to reward yourself after doing the thing you want to make habitual" but nobody provides actual examples of rewards that work and are not harmful (no, I don't want to eat a cookie each time I do the habit).

<comment><USER38> From personal experience, _starting_ with a cookie (I used a piece of chocolate, because small individually wrapped units) is really the most effective way.

However, I always congratulated myself (outloud, by name) when giving myself the treat, and pretty soon, the congratulating myself was conditioned as a reward for the activity, letting me drop (most of) the usage of actual treats.

Just treat yourself like a particularly stubborn and clever dog/cat/animal you're trying to train -- if marketing has taught us anything, it's that cheap psychology tricks work.

<comment><USER37> How did you choose your initial rewards? Did you just start experimenting with things that popped in your mint or did you find a list of suggested rewards? I'm trying to limit my sugar intake otherwise I would've gladly used the sweet treat reward.

<comment><USER38> I just went for the first thing that popped in to my mind that is a primary reward -- something biology has conditioned me to want, and will activate reward pathways (quickly!) when ingested/experienced.

Honestly, you could probably just start with the secondary reward of congratulating yourself -- it's just important that you do it out loud and call yourself by name (eg, "John, you did a good job of running today"), so you _hear_ it happening, instead of it being part of your mental dialog.

Generally though, I find that speaking to myself is psychologically different than talking to myself internally, so YMMV if that's not true for you.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> What's worked for me for running (2x/week), pushups (2x/week), pullups (2x/week), stretching (daily), going to bed by a certain time (daily), and other things:

* focusing on consistency: if you do any tiny amount of the thing (even if it's just one pushup), that totally counts. once you have the habit, you can build intensity as you please.

* specific deadlines: (e.g. run Tues/Fri by 1pm), since then I don't have a series of "I'm in the middle of something, I'll do it in a bit"'s that are kind of unpleasant and attention-consuming.

* It's kind of stupid, but I wrote a little app where I can press a button after I've done a habit -- if I don't press the button before the deadline, it sends a text to my brother. I don't wanna bug him, so for me, this helps make the deadline more "real". If I'm super busy or really don't feel like it, it's totally fine if I just do a tiny bit of the habit and then press the button-- but that rarely happens.

It's kinda nice to have all this running on autopilot; it's been working well for about a year, and it doesn't take any sort of willpower at this point. I find it especially useful for keeping my routine after something that would normally disrupt it, like travel.

</comment><comment><USER40> I'm very sorry that I don't have citations handy [0]. But there are studies that explored affecting one's propensity to do what they rationally believe to be right. The common theme of these studies has been that feeling observed by others greatly improved it. The most memorable result has show that merely placing someone in front of a mirror improved it too (a testament to how salient the effect is)! My point being that if all else fails, it's worth trying to structure your social environment in a way that motivates you. It's easy to slack off when nobody's watching. It's easy to not deliver your side project on Friday if nobody's gonna care anyways!

[0] that's the playlist where I heard about it, I'm not sure if it's the right video, though. Sorry just don't have the time to dig through it. I greatly suggest everyone watching the whole playlist. The subject matter explores a lot of concepts tangential to procrastination from a philosophical angle. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reZA81S0zfI&list=PL3F6BC200B...](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reZA81S0zfI&list=PL3F6BC200B2930084&index=9)

</comment><comment><USER41> Yes! In addition to some of the awesome answers already posted here I wanted to mention how important the schedule of reinforcement is habit formation.

If you're building a product, optimizing when and how it rewards users can double your retention and engagement. I make a tool to help with this: [http://useDopamine.com](http://useDopamine.com)

</comment><comment><USER42> For reading there's this product: [https://www.amazon.com/Mark-My-Time- Digital-Bookmark-Neon-Bl...](https://www.amazon.com/Mark-My-Time-Digital- Bookmark-Neon-Blue/dp/0976142503/) . It's a bookmark that allows you to set any target reading time, and it displays a countdown... You can do the same with your phone eventually, and it might be unpractical to have one per book... I use playing cards as bookmarks. You can read before going to sleep, and make it a habit to read while catching some sleep...

Running/exercising... there are many apps such as Runkeeper and such that allow you to set weekly goals. Running might better in the morning.

Another one is to get a wall calendar in a visible place at home and mark the days where you have been active in whatever habit. If you see no marks it means you have dropped your habit. You can also use a calendar app and set reminders... but those are easy to ignore.

</comment><comment><USER43> Look into CBT in terms of efficacy.

A bit of a PSA... For anyone who relates to this very strongly, some people with extreme difficulty in forming positive habits have executive function disorders such as ADHD. This is a primary symptom and is often viewed as lack of willpower or laziness vs. a treatable condition. Forming habits under treatment is much more effective.

</comment><comment><USER44> Want to introduce an app / website I created for this - [http://www.keepresolve.com](http://www.keepresolve.com)

Based on my own experiments and also watching how other users are following through, I noticed few things: (1) If an user starts with huge list of habits to develop, more likely or not s/he would quit fast -- so starting slow is recommended (2) I think having long term goal followed by daily steps / habits is a good idea. (3) Sharing the goal with your friends / family helps a lot - so currently we are working on a functionality to share the goals with others (not strangers but 'friends'). (4) Also, when habits are set by someone like parents / teachers, they are followed up better than self imposed habits (ex doing daily music practice or homework as opposed to doing course work for free online courses)

</comment><comment><USER45> I was going to be a jerk and just say 'heroin' but then thinking about it, addictive properties does indicate one of the signatures of successful habits. The times that I have developed exercise habits is because I managed to get over the first week hump and then wanted the adrenaline rush that came with it.

One pertinent aspect of developing any sort of exercise habit is that the routine needs to vary enough - not just to help you grow - but also to keep giving you that adrenaline feedback. This is why a martial art of some sort is a good exercise routine, because of the variation that tends to naturally occur ( I prefer capoeira )

But I guess the most systematic and scientific way to develop a habit is operant conditioning [http://www.simplypsychology.org/operant- conditioning.html](http://www.simplypsychology.org/operant-conditioning.html)

</comment><comment><USER46> A book that I have found very useful for both developing new habits and breaking existing unproductive habits is "Self-Directed Behavior" by Watson & Tharp. It's based on scientific research, but the ideas are presented clearly and in a practically useful way. It's also about more than just the introduction or changing of habits - it also helps you analyze them, understand them, measure them, reinforce them, etc.

It appears to be sold as a college textbook so the latest edition is horrendously expensive, but this also means you can easily find used copies of older editions. Mine is at least 15 years old and still very useful.

[https://www.amazon.com/Self-Directed-Behavior-Self- Modificat...](https://www.amazon.com/Self-Directed-Behavior-Self-Modification- Personal-Adjustment/dp/1285077091)

</comment><comment><USER47> Don't break the chain - [http://dontbreakthechain.com](http://dontbreakthechain.com)

In the same vein, I made an app called 100% for doing something similar: [https://www.imralsoftware.com/100](https://www.imralsoftware.com/100)

</comment><comment><USER48> [https://www.reddit.com/r/getdisciplined/comments/1x99m6/im_a...](https://www.reddit.com/r/getdisciplined/comments/1x99m6/im_a_piece_of_shit_no_more_games_no_more_lies_no/cf9dz72/)

tl;dr; Draw Xs and don't break the chain

</comment><comment><USER49> I don't know if there is a scientific way, but I can say what works for me. To start, I essentially resign myself to doing whatever habit I want to build, making it in my mind so I have no choice so there's no getting out of it. Then I just do it, rain or shine, no matter what, which can be super difficult. After a while, it becomes easier.

One example is running. I just told myself that I needed to run for one hour every weekday at 6am. Extremely difficult as I normally sleep in until 7, but I just told myself I have no choice. So I started getting out of bed at 6 and running until 7. After a couple weeks it got easier, after a month I did it without much thought. After about two months, I feel weird if I don't do it and miss it.

I am also interested in whether there's more to building a habit than this.

</comment><comment><USER50> There is a whole industry focused on portraying developing habits as being complicated.

It's not.

Just take things one day at a time and make sure you have your habits scheduled in the times where you are least liable to get interrupted. I prefer early mornings.

Then just do what you've committed to do. There is no magic trick.

</comment><comment><USER51> They touch on this in the "Learning how to learn" online course. One of the point is to learn to recognise patterns:

[https://www.coursera.org/learn/learning-how-to- learn](https://www.coursera.org/learn/learning-how-to-learn)

</comment><comment><USER52> To develop a habit, you simply need to repeat the specific action, by forcing yourself (apply discipline).

If you do that, your brain will benefit from its (life-long!) property of plasticity and will create new neural connections (with each repetition) which favor the action you're about to execute:

First, you're about to create a new path (like through a thick a forest), which is a bit harder, but then you use that path again and again, and the path will become a street and then a highway (which is increasingly easier to use). In the end, you can execute your action without any effort because your neurological pathways are now really solid and the electrical signals travel much easier.

<comment><USER53> >discipline

I think, the word is used inflationary, but maybe I just don't understand because I lack disciplin. I suppose disciplina ("instruction") implies some form of encouragement.

</comment></comment><comment><USER54> _" I want to develop many daily habits, such as running, reading, or exercise every day"_

Done that. Do the hardest thing first.

The simple hack I've found useful is to repeat the activity ^no matter^ how you feel. I found the biggest point of failure is ^just before^ you start and if you get over that hump of avoidance you'll succeed.

You have to repeat this every day. Every day you start is another point of failure. ~ [http://seldomlogical.com/2009/OCT/29/do-the-hardest-thing- fi...](http://seldomlogical.com/2009/OCT/29/do-the-hardest-thing-first/) (on 2770/3000km for this year, 10km at a time.)

</comment><comment><USER55> Piggyback on your dopaminergic system. Start by rewarding yourself with something you already enjoy every time you display the habit you want to acquire, and in the fullness of time your brain will react to the new activity without the need for the separate reward.

This is more or less how smoking functions, modulo some neurochemical details - the idea is to effectively addict yourself to the new behaviour.

<comment><USER56> Bear in mind this still needs some discipline. Your brain will try really hard to make you go "I control the reward thus I don't need to do the work".

For the those with a flabby self-discipline muscle, start small. You won't feel like short circuiting to the reward as much if you make the goal about building a small habit and extending your self-control.

</comment></comment><comment> rm_-rf_slash Not sure if this helps, but in order to _break_ a (bad) habit, I have found the single best method to be a trip to the ER.

I had a nasty case of dehydration from a combination of beer and Mexican food that resulted in the worst pain I have ever experienced in my life. It really got me to reevaluate my perspective on alcohol. I stopped drinking immediately and haven't looked back.

</comment><comment><USER57> If, your habit involves your computer. I use SlimerJS to automatically remind me to fill in a time sheet I use at work. After a month or so this resulted in me remembering before it popped up to remind me. Sort of habit forming. I think what was key was that it popped up with an actual window that I could perform an action on, plus the visual aspect.

</comment><comment><USER58> You can check out [http://www.spring.org.uk/making-habits-breaking- habits](http://www.spring.org.uk/making-habits-breaking-habits) A good book on habits. The book covers on habits are formed, how they can affect you and how you can change them.

</comment><comment><USER59> Seinfeld has his 'don't break the chain' method, worth a look:

[http://lifehacker.com/281626/jerry-seinfelds-productivity- se...](http://lifehacker.com/281626/jerry-seinfelds-productivity-secret)

<comment><USER60> [https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/1ujvrg/jerry_seinfeld...](https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/1ujvrg/jerry_seinfeld_here_i_will_give_you_an_answer/ceitfxh/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER61> I've been focusing on building new habits for the past couple of years and have written about it a lot. Here are some of the things that have made the biggest difference for me:

\- Start small. Focus on making the behaviour automatic (the definition of a habit) in its smallest form. It's easier to increase the time and effort spent once doing the behaviour is automatic. \- Schedule the habit. My habits almost always fail if I don't figure out in advance when and where I'll do them. \- Stack your habits. Using an existing habit (it can be something you didn't build on purpose like brushing your teeth, putting on your pyjamas, putting on your shoes before leaving the house, etc.) as a trigger to remind you to do another habit. This makes it easier to remember and build into a routine you already have. \- Make it easy to do the habit and hard not to. If you need equipment, get it ready before you'll need it. Set up your environment to encourage you to do the habit. Keep things out of sight if they encourage you not to do the habit. Context makes a big difference in the early stages. \- Build one habit at a time. Only when a habit is truly habitual (you do it without thinking) start focusing on a new one. I've failed at building habits every time I've tried to do more than one new habit at a time.

I've written a lot about habits. I'll link to some articles below that might be helpful. Many of them expand on the suggestions I mentioned above.

I also wrote a four-week email course and a book to help people build habits—specifically habits that will help you be more productive by saving you time and helping you work more efficiently. But the course can be applied to any kind of habits. You can find the course and book here: [http://habits.bellebethcooper.com/](http://habits.bellebethcooper.com/)

[http://blog.bellebethcooper.com/pushups.html](http://blog.bellebethcooper.com/pushups.html) [http://blog.bellebethcooper.com/french- habit.html](http://blog.bellebethcooper.com/french-habit.html) [https://open.buffer.com/building-habits/](https://open.buffer.com/building- habits/) [https://exist.io/blog/simple-habit- process/](https://exist.io/blog/simple-habit-process/) [https://exist.io/blog/keeping-up-habits/](https://exist.io/blog/keeping-up- habits/)

</comment><comment><USER62> How do you design a fast car? You avoid designing a slow one.

Make room for good habits by stopping bad ones.

I wouldn't take outliers as examples unless you are also such an outlier. At which point any advice based on averages is moot.

<comment><USER63> I'm not sure why someone downvoted you but I read a book, on psychology I think, and the author argued that one mistake people make is trying to stop a bad habit by shear force of will. Just applying "don't do X" never works. You have to consciously and intentionally _replace_ bad habits with good ones (e.g. "don't do X, do Y instead") or the mind will just fall back into its old programming. With repetition it soon becomes "do Y" and X is gone.

</comment></comment><comment><USER64> as a react practice protect I made habity.io (open source at my github, sry phone) I am currently rewriting a new version of it with some machine learning scheduling stuff e.g. predict what is the most efficient time of day to do stuff based on previous days..(neural net practice idea of mine)

<comment><USER64> disclaimer: it was coded in many spare minutes so code is not well structured

</comment></comment><comment><USER65> There is an excellent book "the power of habit" that delves into this very topic. Its a quick read.

</comment><comment><USER66> Did you tried «Fabulous» app ? It's using a scientific method, besides being very successful app.

</comment><comment><USER66> Did you tried «Fabulous» app ? It's using a scientific method, besides being very successful app.

-Hatem

</comment><comment><USER67> Drill sergeants. Much of military training is about habit implantation.

</comment><comment><USER68> Meditate for greater self awareness.

Learn about the trigger-action-reward cycle.

</comment><comment><USER69> M O T I V A T I O N

You'll do whatever if the right buttons are pushed.

</comment><comment><USER70> probably BA and CBT are the most studied and scientifically proven ways to develop new habits and rid yourself of self-damaging habits.

</comment><comment><USER71> no there isn't. All the pop 'habit methods' methods like repeating same thing to death over and over 'to form a habit' are bogus.

we need motivation, not habit. There are no shortcuts or hacks for motivation, we have to put in the effort to understand our own brain and what drives it to do things.

<comment><USER34> Do you have any evidence that all habit methods are bogus? It's quite a big claim to make, so would imagine you'd have something strong to back it up.

Also, do you have any evidence that there are "no shortcuts or hacks for motivation"? I'd be quite surprised if that were true, because motivational speakers seem to be get people motivated in a very short space of time, so I would expect there to be some shortcuts.

<comment><USER71> >do you have any evidence that there are "no shortcuts or hacks for motivation"?

Is there any evidence to the contrary that motivation speakers have any long term impact. Burden of proof is on that side.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER72> having an indoor bicycle ready next to my chair help me a lot to build the habit.

</comment><comment><USER73> Willpower is not about forcing yourself to do something, but to deliberately put yourself into a situation that forces you to do it.

For example: You want to run, but you are too lazy. Ask a friend to run with you at a certain time. Now you can't lazily back out, unless you want to call your friend again and mess with their schedule, as they were expecting to run with you.

As you become better at something, like running, it starts to become more fun and satisfying. You gain _momentum_. That allows you to adhere to your schedule much more easily, to the point where you miss it when you don't/can't do it.

</comment><comment><USER74> Uh, it's really sinple, though not easy.

1\. Do the same thing at the same time over and over again, intentionally. 2\. Watch yourself keep on doing it unintentionally.

Ok "same time" is the more complex part. Your trying to wire your brain to do something deterministically in response to some stimulum. It can be external, or internal (feedback).</comment>


Covid-19 Crude Fatality Rates, Media Freakouts, and Capacity Analyses - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/handwaving-freakoutery/covid-19-crude-fatality-rates-media-freakouts-and-capacity-analyses-8f50c58cfe00 <comment><USER2> This certainly explains how a time-buffer can smoothen the workload in hospitals. However, the article seems to completely miss the exponential growth in infections. Therefore don't think that the description is valid.

</comment><comment><USER3> I get my news from the "mainstream media" almost exclusively, and I am well aware of the the caveats around CFR. This is some bullshit Streamen the article starts with.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> This guy gets science and facts; explains clearly.</comment>


OpenBSD 5.9 released early - <AUTHOR> http://undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=20160329181346 <comment><USER2> It is likely they released early because they want additional testing time for the SMP diffs they are about to merge. With 6.0 we may be seeing both fully SMP routing and PF support. As of now, routing and PF are fully giantlocked in the kernel, and can only run on one core. This should greatly speed up routing and filtering performance.

</comment><comment><USER3> "The less(1) we're all familiar with has been completely rewritten. After importing a fork from illumos' Garrett D'Amore, OpenBSD continued to make improvements to the code. A safer and more modern tool was the end result, even if it's just for viewing text. Hopefully there will be less bugs now."

Impressive work.

<comment><USER4> And _less_ bugs. Beautiful pun there.

<comment><USER5> ...until you realize that the proper word would be "fewer" because bugs are countable.

<comment><USER6> ...or until you realise that the personal preferences of Robert Baker do not constitute what is "proper". It was a daft preference when expressed and it's no less a daft "rule" now.

<comment><USER7> I think you meant "fewer daft".

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> _> If running OpenBSD under Xen (such as on Amazon's cloud platform) sounds interesting to you, you'll be happy to know that 5.9 includes some pretty solid support for this._

Exciting! Does the default build include Xen PV drivers for networking and storage, or is a custom build needed? How about SMP support? OpenBSD would make an excellent firewall VM for Qubes, XenServer, etc.

<comment><USER9> Yesterday I discovered that OpenBSD runs well in EC2, but EBS attachments are silently ignored. :(

</comment></comment><comment><USER10> Good work to OpenBSD team. Especially on pledge. Widespread changes are risky and often fail. Just speaks even more about the quality of work they do.

<comment><USER11> Yeah, that caught my attention. I envy OpenBSD's ability to do "apply this to everything" projects like this one. Linux had seccomp for ages now, but there's still barely any application using it. I even wrote patches to add supports in some projects and they were just ignored. :(

<comment><USER12> You might want to check out firejail - [https://firejail.wordpress.com/](https://firejail.wordpress.com/) \- it supports seccomp as well.

<comment><USER11> It's a step in the right direction, but it misses one great feature of seccomp - you don't have to activate seccomp at startup.

What it means in practice is (for example) a daemon running under firejail must be able to open log for writing and open sockets. An application which uses seccomp natively can first do those things and then block all further open/socket syscalls.

<comment><USER13> Are you talking about pledge? Pledge works as you describe

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Don't forget to donate to the OpenBSD Foundation!

PayPal/Check/Bank Transfer: [http://www.openbsdfoundation.org/donations.html](http://www.openbsdfoundation.org/donations.html)

<comment><USER15> Is there a way to verify that OpenBSD controls that Bitcoin address?

<comment><USER14> They also have BitPay.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> _802.11n

Another big one for laptop users: initial support for N wireless has landed in both the iwm(4) and iwn(4) drivers._

Does that mean that 802.11n wasn't supported by OpenBSD until now? 802.11n was first available in (2010?) and is no longer the current version (802.11ac is).

<comment><USER17> Reversing firmware without documentation takes time. Especially when a single developer does it on their spare time as a hobby.

<comment><USER18> Does OpenBSD actually write open WiFi firmware?

<comment><USER19> No. But they still have to write drivers that will interact with those firmwares.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> The release notes mention good support for running on AWS. I would love to see more distributions embrace building AMIs, or at the least provide good documentation to get it running. Ubuntu probably has the best support by building AMIs for all the regions, it would be awesome to see some others do the same thing. I think this is probably an overlooked area that could provide more growth for the BSDs.

<comment><USER9> When 5.9 was still -current, [https://github.com/ajacoutot/aws- openbsd](https://github.com/ajacoutot/aws-openbsd) was a viable if clunky way of producing one's own AMIs. As you can see from the script, there's quite a bit of work that happens before a -current snapshot could be turned into a valid AMI.

I think this will become really useful when attached EBS volumes are properly detected by an OpenBSD system running in EC2. Right now EBS attachments are silently ignored. (Someone please correct me!)

<comment><USER21> As far as I'm aware there isnt any blkfront support in the recent changes, which would be needed for EBS.

Support for blkfront is not needed to get up and running with Xen though, so it makes sense to defer it until later and get the bootstrap going and then the devs can focus on the remaining pieces.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> After saving an old laptop at work from landing on the garbage pile, I took it home and, on a whim, decided to install OpenBSD on it.

I expected problems of some kind or another and was mentally prepared to install Debian instead, but I was pleasantly surprised that all of the hardware worked out of the box. Since it is old an fragile, and the battery lasts about five minutes, I don't do much with it but keep it around for good luck.

Guess I'll be upgrading this weekend. As luck will have it, I am also binge- watching Doctor Who currently, which fits in nicely with the cover art. ;-)

<comment><USER23> I am using OpenBSD as my primary workstation on a 2015 Carbon X1, and it works like a charm.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> OpenBSD has been my go to firewall since my firewall was a Sparcstation IPC. There have been some major changes along the way, but most of the time rebuilding the system takes less than an hour and is a matter of porting a few config files to a fresh copy of the OS. Even the major changes are usually trivial since the documentation is kept up-to-date and there are plenty of examples in the docs and on the mailing lists.

The last time I saw anyone test packet passing speeds against OpenBSD it was around the time of the pf/ipf split and rewrite and OpenBSD was the slowest of the lot. Although modern hardware can saturate a cable modem, the multithreading of their network stack is still a positive, as is the work to support modern wifi cards (N); hopefully AC will be next.

Also definitely looking forward to pledge since it further reduces attack surfaces on an already hardened OS.

<comment><USER25> There's a lot more work to do for 802.11n in future releases (e.g. MIMO support). So putting 802.11ac on the roadmap doesn't make much sense at this stage.

<comment><USER24> Fair enough - just wishful thinking, and as my friends in OpenBSD-land say "If you want it so bad, submit a patch."

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> The 5.9 release includes many pledge(2)'d programs in base, but some notable ports include decompressors like bzip2/unzip/p7zip/xz.. oh, and Chromium.

</comment><comment><USER27> I'm hoping for a portable version of OpenBSD's less(1) fork (now rewrite) ever since Theo mentioned it in his pledge(2) talk at Hackfest.

</comment><comment><USER28> Another great release from the OpenBSD team. Always looking forward to the great things Theo and team put out. Pleasantly surprised to see this release a month early.

OpenBSD has been my favorite OS since 2000. Such an easy-to-use OS for any number of things. I've used it for firewalls, Web servers, and a nice simple desktop with a custom FVWM config. Fast and simple.

</comment><comment><USER29> Can anyone explain pledge?

<comment><USER30> It tells the kernel which system calls and file paths your process intends to use. If it uses any others, because of malicious code injection or whatever, your process is killed immediately.

[http://man.openbsd.org/OpenBSD- current/man2/pledge.2](http://man.openbsd.org/OpenBSD-current/man2/pledge.2)

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> So it's now possible to have a -1 day exploit ?

<comment><USER32> In that vein, do note the errata page[1] has patches that need to be applied.

1) [http://www.openbsd.org/errata59.html](http://www.openbsd.org/errata59.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER33> Considering how much the OpenBSD team cares about secure programming and the time they invest rewriting unsafe kernel and userland code, why do they still use C when they could use a safe language like Rust?

<comment><USER28> C is a systems language from the ground up with decades of successful use and knowledge behind it. Rust is the new kid on the block with everything to prove. C is the best tool for the job. I think Theo de Raadt and his devs know exactly what they are doing. With only two holes in the default install in over a decade, why fix what isn't broken?

I'm one of these guys that still clings to old tech because it works. If C works, use it. Rust is too new, too unproven. C has proven its worth with billions of lines of code, something Rust will likely never achieve as a niche language.

<comment><USER10> "C is a systems language from the ground up"

It was actually an extension of BCPL, which wasn't designed: just what parts of a good language compiled on 1960's hardware. Proof below.

[http://pastebin.com/UAQaWuWG](http://pastebin.com/UAQaWuWG)

"with decades of successful use"

It actually had decades of failures with all sorts of bugs and hacks that safer, system languages dodged by design. Only the best coders got successful and secure use out of it. We praise OpenBSD quality for a reason: it's not easy.

"Rust is the new kid on the block with everything to prove. "

This is true. I have a rule against using anything new for security-critical coding if its in the TCB. Takes time to discover all the issues in things.

"With only two holes in the default install in over a decade"

Propaganda I've called out plenty. On the other systems, people finding bugs often weaponize them, declare a vulnerbaility, and add that to the count. OpenBSD treats bugs as just bugs then fixes them while assuming their mitigations stopped any attack attempts. It's easy to say you only had 2 vulnerabilities when you're not counting vulnerabilities. ;)

"C has proven its worth with billions of lines of code, something Rust will likely never achieve as a niche language."

It does have proven worth. After billions of lines, you can be sure you'll be fixing all sorts of things and doing breach notifications if you rely on it. Unless you pay extra money for top coders. Rust already beat it on app-level safety w/ effects of low-level interactions and compiler risk being next to assess or address. Ada and SPARK beat both for systematic safety with many empirical results from case studies and field use. Safe versions of C like Cyclone and Popcorn outdid C, too, in security but nobody invested more in them. TAL and CoqASM are even doing safety/security at assembler level.

And so we have a language proven worthless for quality or security the mainstay of quality or security focused UNIXen even with decades of alternatives empirically shown to be better. Sounds like a cultural thing to me. Drawback too.

Only advantages: lots of people know it and lots of existing code/tooling. Valid reasons to choose it for existing BSD code but allows it was inferior on other angles. And that rewrites to safer languages for it or new projects should be ongoing.

<comment><USER34> I am genuinely wondering, what is (or could you point me to) the alternative with the following properties:

\- Compiled, type-safe and available for armv6.

\- Simple semantics: Rust and Ada are complex (C++-ish) and it gets hard to limit the number of memory allocations/accesses as well as data copies going on.

\- Tooling and discoverability: Man pages and Emacs with a few modes that are easy to setup beats anything I've tried so far.

I understand that C has shortcomings when it comes to safety/security and even lacks features that would make programming certain things easier, but what do you suggest I use when I want to write a UNIX daemon that needs to transfer a boatload of data from disk over the network and vice-versa?

I personally like it, I find it to be clear and concise, a little tedious but at the price of giving me fine grained control over the data in memory: I just have to be careful with that.

<comment><USER35>
      > it gets hard to limit the number of memory allocations/accesses
      > as well as data copies going on.

I would be interested in hearing more about this, if you have the time.

<comment><USER34> In this video[0] on Rust, in this example I was unable to directly tell whether the Vec structure is being copied to the take() function. If ownership is being handed over, why is a copy being made? And if a copy really isn't being made, then why aren't the function signature and the calling site reflecting that?

I hope I am making any sense... Please tell me if I should try to rephrase, or if I am in need of clarification on the subject.

(BTW, this is also something I really dislike about C++, two function calls that look exactly the same, foo(x) and bar(x), could either be pass by value or pass by reference: you have to go dig up the function signatures to figure that out).

[0] [https://youtu.be/O5vzLKg7y-k?t=1110](https://youtu.be/O5vzLKg7y-k?t=1110)

<comment><USER35> Gotcha. I thought the video would have explained this, but since it didn't get through, let me try :)

      fn take(vec: Vec<i32>)

In Rust, the default way that things operate is to _move_. So when you call take(), we'd say that the vector moves into the function.

Moving is always a memcpy. There's no way to change this behavior, so you can always know that it's true. But with a Vec, there's a subtlety: the Vec itself is three words: a pointer to the heap, a length, and a capacity. So when I say that the Vec is memcpy'd, I mean literally those three things. It doesn't try to follow the pointer and copy the data that it points to.

Incidentally, that pointer is why we say that it moves: because two copies of the Vec structure itself would mean an aliased pointer to the heap, the compiler doesn't allow the use of the older binding after take() is called.

For simpler types, like integers:

        fn take(i: i32)

they implement a trait called Copy. This means that when you call take, the i32 is copied, in the same fashion that the Vec was copied. The only difference is that there's no problem with having these two copies, as an i32 is, well, just an i32. So the compiler won't prevent the use of the binding outside the function like it would with a non-Copy type.

References are like pointers, but with the extra static checking that Rust does.

        fn take(vec: &Vec<i32>)

References also implement Copy, and so when you pass a reference to a Vec to this function, the same thing happens as in the i32 case. The reference itself gets copied.

This is sort of a long-winded way of saying that Rust is "pass by value", not "pass by reference." Some people like to call this "pass reference by value", since while it's always pass by value, references are themselves values.

What if we _did_ want to make a full copy of the Vec, including its elements? For that, we have to use the .clone() method.

        let v = ... // some Vec<i32>
        let v1 = v.clone();

Now, v and v1 will be full, independent copies of the same thing. In other words, if you don't see .clone(), it will never be a deep copy.

        let v = ... // some Vec<i32>
        let v1 = v; // a move, always a shallow memcpy
        let v2 = v1.clone(); // a deep copy

You can always see, syntactically, when you're making a possibly expensive copy of something.

Does that help? I'm happy to elaborate further.

<comment><USER10> It was a great detailed explanation that also illustrates why I've held off on Round 2 of reviewing the docs. I mean, I read this...

"This is sort of a long-winded way of saying that Rust is "pass by value", not "pass by reference." Some people like to call this "pass reference by value", since while it's always pass by value, references are themselves values."

...and instantly have to focus hard to make sure I'm not slipping on the basic concepts. The wording of many Rust descriptions seems unnecessarily confusing to the point that I just googled value vs reference semantics to make sure my memory wasn't screwed up [more]. In a normal 3GL, pass by reference basically stores a pointer in a variable and passes that value somewhere. That value/reference can be used to modify original data outside its original function. Is that what Rust does? If so, it's just pass by reference "with (caveats/rules here)." End of story. Otherwise, I'll see if I can guess a wording that doesn't merge opposite concepts.

<comment><USER35> This concept isn't Rust specific, it's a general PLT thing. Rust is the same as C in this regard. Almost every language is pass by value these days. IIRC Fortran is pass by reference, an exception.

<comment><USER10> Then just say it's pass by reference instead of stuff I quoted. Counter anyone else doing the same in your usual, gentle style reminding how unnecessary confusion hurts adoption. Ill get back on helping find more of this stuff in the docs once im done moving.

Btw, I tried to get on your draft but link didnt work by time I got back to it. Was it merged into official docs or where so I read/review the right thing?

<comment><USER35> I still failed, it's pass by value :( just like C.

[http://github.com/rust-lang/book](http://github.com/rust-lang/book) is the repo, and has a link to the rendered version.

<comment><USER10> It's all good. You still take the feedback and try to improve things. That's what counts. :)

Thanks for the link. Ill look at it again in coming weeks.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Tether (USDT) Grappling with Allegations of Noble Bank Insolvency - <AUTHOR> https://cryptovest.com/news/tether-usdt-grappling-with-allegations-of-noble-bank-insolvency/ <comment><USER2> The article wrongly conflates Noble Group - an unrelated Hong Kong company, trading commodities, with Noble Bank - the actual Tether bank, having rumored problems.

The Hong Kong financial group - the one that is being bought by Deutsche Bank - has nothing to do with cryptocurrency. (That means liquidity problems of the Tether bank cannot be related to commodity trading.)

<comment><USER3> Yes. It's this Noble Bank.[1] "Noble Bank International is a full-reserve bank providing real-time post-trade services to OTC markets including FX and Digital Currencies."[1][2]

[1] [https://www.noblebankint.com/](https://www.noblebankint.com/) [2] [https://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.a...](https://www.bloomberg.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=309500253)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Have Tether ever even provided evidence they have dollar backing like they claim? I remember they hadn't in the pump last December and I stopped paying attention after that inevitable pop, so maybe they did at some point. Otherwise though, it seems pretty irrelevant whether the bank that doesn't have the money they claim it does has other unrelated money.

<comment><USER5> They've provided "evidence" but there are always plenty of holes, like not naming what banks they use. If anyone wants to indulge some morbid curiosity, the latest "not an audit" was [https://tether.to/wp- content/uploads/2018/06/FSS1JUN18-Accou...](https://tether.to/wp- content/uploads/2018/06/FSS1JUN18-Account-Snapshot-Statement- final-15JUN18.pdf)

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> This article is horrible and is just click-bait or trying to induce panic. The $5m volume on Kraken is peanuts to the size of tethers ($2800m). Not only that but looking at the chart, it only moved the price by 0.5% and the volume was not irregular.

<comment><USER7> Normal volume can move the price by 0.5% against the underlying?

<comment><USER6> You have to understand the asset being traded and the environment. Kraken fees are around 0.1-0.2%. So the Market maker is making 0.4-0.6% if there is demand on USDT after this "dip". That's relatively little profit given the low volume.

So the market maker must be pretty certain that USDT is fine. Otherwise he'll demand a premium to offset the risk of holding USDT.

If anything the argument the OP gave suggests that traders have full faith in USDT.</comment></comment></comment>


Fast proxy to expose a local server behind a NAT or firewall to the internet - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/fatedier/frp <comment><USER2> Why does the config file name end in .ini? Was this written by a Windows programmer? (Serious question.)

<comment><USER3> maybe they didn't want yaml? /shrug</comment></comment>