American Students Know Almost Nothing About Their College Loans - <AUTHOR> http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-02-02/american-students-know-almost-nothing-about-their-college-loans <comment><USER2> It would have been nice to have been told up front: "Rent will be this much higher (for a building with worse quality due to mass production), which you'll _have_ to pay to get access to the city where the jobs are. Wages will be stagnant by this much, and god save you if you have some kind of health crisis and don't navigate the healthcare system just so."

Anyone saying these kids or their parents should've known better need to get real. Most of the middle and lower class was hustled. Of course, they and those with even fewer protections abroad are still needed to get shit done. That is, only until those jobs can be replaced with automation so profits can be even higher at the top. Humans are so fragile, costly, lazy, biased / inaccurate, and replaceable.

What then? People keep saying that things have never been better, though, so I guess there's that. Meanwhile (anecdote incoming), _most_ of childhood friends are barely scraping by while living with their parents, clinically depressed & flirting with homelessness, or dead. The successful ones are few and far between, and they're typically those that were born with more "intelligence". And by successful, I mean achieving some kind of success that somewhat matches their parent's standard of living.

<comment><USER3> Having been through this once and now doing it a second time as a parent the information is available. It is not hidden. The undereducated parents are the ones that need help. But I see well educated parents not pay attention.

My comments apply to the traditional not for profit schools. The for profit ones are probably as you say.

<comment><USER4> I'm one of those people with "uneducated parents" and it's true they do not know the least about it. My father actually told every single one of his kids not to go to college.

4/5 did (a couple have grad degress) and only 1 of those has been able to make good on their investment (my sister who is a nurse). I love learning and I'm glad I am educated, but I would not do this all again. Americans pride ourselves on being a classless society, but the reality is I was born to blue collar workers and I was meant to be a blue collar worker. The extreme attempt at being a white collar worker has failed most in my family. All we did was get was huge debts that have crippled every one of us through our 20's and 30's.

And then we're told to get on our hands and knees and thank our bosses for the opportunity to never be challenged or build a career. I would rather slit my throat than continue to be lied to about all these "opportunities" I apparently have. I've made plans to do just that if I am going to be forced into another bullshit job where I get to make the world worse all for the "opportunity" to not be challenged or pay off my student loans. It sucks, but I see more virtue in going off and dying.

<comment><USER5> You sound like you are in a very dark place. It's true student debt is bullshit but your life is so much more important. Screw it. Leave the country before you consider dying. So many people in your boat so hopefully things will change. I am sorry you are going through this...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> So I was one of these kids for the better part of college. The issue is that you dont care because you don't have options. You're already in college and stressing out about oweing $100k isn't productive. You look at your loans once you're done with school and need to pay them back.

<comment><USER3> We are getting ready to send our youngest off to college next fall. The three of us (wife, myself, kid) talk about it, work the math and calculate repayment amounts and length in years together. It is the only way to do this. My daughter wants to understand the finances and we want her to. She also will have to agree in advance when it is time for the final selection of school and loans that the balance is doable. Much coaching along the way. I have an Engineering and Chemistry Degree and wife is an accountant.

The good news is she will be majoring in Mechanical Engineering with a concentration in CS and EE. Still we want student loan amounts to be reasonable.

Met a young person recently that got a sociology degree and had >$100K US in loans. She is making like $30,000. This is totally absurd.

<comment><USER7> Housing is killer. On-campus was over $600/mo, higher than median apartment rent, and they shared with 3 other students. There's no reason student housing should be half or more the expense of attendance over the same period.

<comment><USER8> > Housing is killer. On-campus was over $600/mo, higher than median apartment > rent, and they shared with 3 other students.

That's insane. The whole point of on-campus housing is to provide very cheap but spartan accommodations. If nearby apartments are cheaper, there's no point to it.

<comment><USER9> This has long ceased to be true at many American universities. The dorms command a premium because they're on-campus (short walk to class and dining halls, many of which are right in the dorms) and they foster an integrated social environment that you can't fully appreciate when living off-campus typically.

Dorms are also becoming increasingly luxurious in some cases. In my old college suite, we had maids come by every morning to take out our trash and recycling and every weekend they'd thoroughly clean the entire bathroom, shower, sinks, and toilet. Just to be clear, these were private bathrooms in individual suites that they'd clean, not just the shared communal bathrooms.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> I am from Europe, where higher education is inexpensive, and have very little understanding on the implication of such loans in someone's life.

But now this thought occurred to me: how can a 20-something person go out and start a company (as I often read on stories here on HN), leaving on zero or little income for a while (until you find investors, I guess), when I'd expect people to need a steady income to at least go even with the monthly loan payments?

<comment><USER11> > how can a 20-something person go out and start a company

Short answer: they never had personal financial hardship to begin with.

There's always exceptions, but the most frequent trait among young startup founders is that they have a great financial situation with their family and can always fall back on that if they fail.

<comment><USER12> This is the rub that I never understand with right-wing politicians who prize the free market, but then enable things that actively hamper it: tying health care to having a job, tying startups to people who could somehow afford college or just didn't go.

If you want to enable the free market, you have to remove the barriers.

<comment><USER13> > tying health care to having a job

Since when is that a right-wing thing? Employer-provided healthcare started as a result of (left-wing) price controls. And Obama and a Democratic congress purposely avoided that issue when they "reformed" healthcare.

<comment><USER14> Now hold the phone. Obama and a Democratic congress avoided that issue because it would have had ZERO traction with some huge campaign donors. That's still a mark against the administration, but it's also the reality of a government ruled first and foremost by capitalist lobbies and greed.

Second, left-wing price controls did not start the current healthcare model, empty hospitals beds, profit-based medicine, the great depression and WWII created employer-based healthcare [0].

[http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1140451...](http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=114045132)

<comment><USER13> > Obama and a Democratic congress avoided that issue because it would have had > ZERO traction with some huge campaign donors.

You described special interests, not right-wing capitalists. Special interests including people who would be confused then upset about losing their employer- provided healthcare.

> left-wing price controls did not start the current healthcare model

Sure it did, at least as the employer involvement is concerned. FDR froze wages, so employers provided other benefits, like company cars and free healthcare.

I'm not saying there's a clean way to get there (keeping employers and healthcare separate) from here (the current mess). But it's _not_ a right-wing conspiracy or something.

<comment><USER14> No, but nor was it a left-wing conspiracy either. People in the US like to throw mud at each other about whose to blame for this shitty situation, but we're all in this together.

Also, I fail to see the difference between special interests and capitalists. They may not be right-wing capitalists, but the folks who run Blue Cross, Anthem and Harvard Pilgrim sure as hell didn't want a public option anywhere close to the finished ADA legislation, and they paid big money to make sure that happened.

But either way, something has to give, because health insurance and for-profit corporations are an oxymoron. When you're for-profit and offer insurance, that makes your primary operating procedure to charge as much as you can for the least amount of service.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I hate myself for not knowing anything about them but it wasn't until I was out of college that it even dawned on me I would have to pay for them at all. I honestly thought my parents had that handled and the true cost of college was never made apparent to me. I take full responsibility for this but I really wish this had been made more clear to me. Not just this but also finances, loans, CC's, taxes, etc in general. The extent of the advice I was given from my parents was "Don't spend money you don't have" (subtext being: unless it's for student loans). Past that I didn't even understand how taxes really worked (Again, I take FULL responsibility) and racked up about $15K in taxes while working as a contractor. I had been working since I was 14 but part of that time I was working for my family and the other I was W2'd so I was paying taxes as I went.

</comment><comment><USER16> A lot of people seem to assume you get handed a 18 point font piece of paper that says, "You agree to borrow $70,000 for a student loan." Mine was hundreds of pages of legalese and I didn't even know what the total of my 11 loans were until I graduated and consolidated.

<comment><USER17> Your impression of the documents you were asked to sign does not comport with my recollection of the contracts I was presented with. As federal loans are a fairly standardized product, you can trivially find their contracts online.

Here's one of the examples for Sallie Mae:

[http://www.studentlendinganalytics.com/images/Sallie_Mae_Pro...](http://www.studentlendinganalytics.com/images/Sallie_Mae_Prom_Note_0409.pdf)

This document, in style and length, comports with my recollection of what I signed ~15 years ago.

8 pages; approximately the length of an apartment lease. The language should not tax the reading comprehension abilities of a college student.

Representative sample:

Interest on this note will accrue at the Variable Rate (as defined below), beginning on the first Disbursement Date, on the principal balance advanced and on the Capitalized Interest, Fees, and Other Amounts, until the principal balance and all interest are paid in full. The Variable Rate will be used to calculate interest during the entire term of this Note, and following the maturity of, or any default under, this Note; there is no initially discounted, premium, or other rate that will be used to calculate interest under this Note.

<comment><USER18> Better question:

Why are Federally subsidized educational loans at 8% interest, whilst the Big Banks get their money at 0%, or thereabouts?

One invests in the future, while the other breaks it. You can probably guess which does which.

<comment><USER19> Because college students are a much higher risk. You can argue that 8% is too high, but you can't argue that college students are more likely to pay back loans than big banks.

<comment><USER20> Students aren't allowed to declare bankruptcy on their loans now, and if they stop paying their wages will be garnished. I think we those types of conditions the interest rate could be lowered a bit.

<comment><USER21> The bankruptcy prohibition is why you even see loans in the single digits.

You have a typical 18 year old with zero credit history and zero real income. You have a loan that may take many years to repay, but unlike a mortgage there is no house to repossess if the loan goes bad. You can't repo a degree.

A good exercise is to imagine that you're a lender writing checks with your own money. Would you even make loans to somebody majoring outside of STEM? What interest would you charge especially given other options for investing your capital? How would you have to adjust your interest rates if students were allowed to declare bankruptcy to discharge their debt to you?

<comment><USER22> > The bankruptcy prohibition is why you even see loans in the single digits.

No, the reason you see loans in the single digits is because the government is both the sole lender (since the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010) and sets the rates by law.

What private lenders would accept was only relevant when there were private lenders.

<comment><USER23> There are numerous private lenders that offer student loans. A google search will easily lead you to dozens of them.

<comment><USER22> > There are numerous private lenders that offer student loans.

Not federally subsidized ones; the program under which such loans were offered through private lenders in addition to directly by the government was discontinued several years ago (as noted in the grandparent comment.) The upthread comment was about interest rates on _federally subsidized_ loans.

<comment><USER23> OK yes. That's correct. I think perhaps it's easy to read your comment and think that there aren't private lenders at all anymore. I just wanted to point out that this is not the case.

You're correct that private student loan lending is no longer subsidized and hence the rates tend to be higher.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> The real absurdity here is that we can have a discussion about student loans and not discuss the fact that non-STEM degrees offer, in nearly all cases, a poor ROI.

This completely boggles my mind. It's insanity.

<comment><USER25> It seems like the general advice for many years has been to just get _any_ college degree. If you have a college degree you are supposed to be able to get a good job. I think the main problem with that advice is that it was good advice when a college degree was relatively rare. These days, everyone is expected to get a college degree so the degree itself becomes worthless. Instead students should focus on acquiring some kind of skill in their post- secondary education. For example, a history degree doesn't actually give you any useful skills while a computer science degree gives you skill in writing software which is a high-demand job right now. Actually, many students who get a college degree would be better off going to a vocational school to learn welding or some other skill. They'd probably actually earn _more_ money than whatever job they can get with a generic 4-year degree.

<comment><USER24> I got that advice all my life and it never made sense to me.

You have to demonstrate value to employers; to anyone with whome you desire to exchange goods or services for money.

Simply having a college degree is a very weak signal for value.

<comment><USER26> I believe blktiger's point is that it _was_ a good signal for value but is no longer.

I'll guess that most of the people who gave you that advice probably learned it some 30-40 years ago, when it was more applicable.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> Though I can't recommend it, there would actually be better outcomes if we banned loans for college. Flooding the higher education market with cash has made it less affordable not more. Having people be responsible for the cost up front would make them better shoppers and the colleges more lean. Prices would come back down to reasonable levels.

<comment><USER28> The downside, of course, is that people who are from poor families never get to attend college. This perpetuates poverty in certain families/neighborhoods/regions and discourages diversity of opinion in universities and the workplace.

<comment><USER27> Actually (counter-intuitively) college would be _more_ affordable for middle class and the poor in a situation where there are no loans. Consider, there are only a tiny amount of rich people and there are many, many colleges. If there were no loans, colleges would have to make themselves affordable enough to get any enrollment. A large portion of tuition increases have come from bloated administration and useless degree programs. Those would disappear if people weren't given gobs of money in loans.

<comment><USER28> Sure the price will come way down, but it will still be out of reach for the people who are most likely to perpetuate poverty in their families. Surely the price would not drop below the annual difference in median incomes between those with and without degrees. If I'm going to make an extra $5k a year just for having the degree, I can get my family to cover it. Poor people can't really afford that. In fact, I'd wager there is no price at which it is viable to run a university that doesn't make it unattainable for people with parents living paycheck-to-paycheck.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> Dave Ramsey has a dim opinion of college loans that should be broadcast further than it currently reaches.

Many, if not most, college students and parents therof seem ignorant of Ramsey's sensible recommendations. As "Lie #4 about college loans" Ramsey declares: "I can't afford to go to college without a student loan."

from "9 Biggest Lies About College and Student Loans":

[https://www.daveramsey.com/blog/9-lies-college-student- loans](https://www.daveramsey.com/blog/9-lies-college-student-loans)

<comment><USER28> Some of this is silly.

Lie 1 is wrong. The uber rich (Gates and Ellison) are not a prescription for how to aim your life as a young person. Also, in the 2008 recession, people without 4-year degrees were hurt far worse and recovered slower than those with degrees.

Lie 2 is reasonable, except in particular majors. My wife was a historic preservation major in undergrad (I think there's less than a dozen in the country, and one happened to be in-state but she would have gone out of state if necessary) and her graduate program was out-of-state for Museum Studies. There are only a handful of these programs in the country, so being out-of- state was not a choice.

3 is also incorrect in my experience. While the employers may not care a lot what's on your diploma, they also don't recruit evenly across universities. Wasn't everyone complaining a while ago that Google was basically where people went after graduating from Stanford?

4\. When I was looking at school, the scholarships on those "find scholarships for you" sites were all under $1000. While that's not insignificant, you can't count on getting every one you apply for, and it's not reliable for paying for more than books. Community colleges and living with parents are underutilized, but you eventually have to attend at least 2 years in a 4-year institution if you want the 4-year degree.

5\. I wish this had been drilled into me

6\. Reasonable, but I don't think it is widely talked about

7\. This is complicated. I was in school during the 2008 recession, so there was really no way to know before going in what was going to happen after graduation. Students _do_ need to know it isn't necessarily a given, and this was a big pitfall for me. Unfortunately, our parents' generation didn't know about this because it is different from their experience with college.

8\. I've never heard anyone say this, but attendance levels are up in bad years

9\. Nobody thinks they're going to need bankruptcy when they start their college education; they're still young and bushy-tailed.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> _Fifty-nine percent of the students surveyed said the total outstanding student debt was in the "millions."_

The most worrying part to me. 59% can't estimate things like this within ~two orders of magnitude?

<comment><USER31> It is definitely worrying, though perhaps not surprising.

Many people who aren't accustomed to dealing with {figures, values, numbers} won't put much time into doing a back of the envelope calculation, and perhaps didn't put much thought into it. My best guess is that for these folks, "millions" or "billions" simply means "a lot, a really big number that I don't know/can't estimate right now".

I don't know how that particular question was phrased, and whether or not you were allowed to answer with "I don't know", or whether that option was presented as one you could answer with.

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> Speaking as a student who graduated not too long ago, here's the reality for those who are saying "we should know better":

1) We aren't required to know shit. Pretty much anyone can get a loan for any amount, depending on what school they're going to. I for one borrowed about $26,000 to go to a local technical college, and that included about 2 semesters of classes in a major I ended up dropping. I was never once questioned about how much was borrowed, or asked to demonstrate any knowledge, just sign on this line and you get free money. How many 19 year olds wouldn't jump at that? I'm not saying that's right, I'm pointing out the fact that if I were going to a bank to buy a house or a car, they would demand a LOT more (proof of income, talk me through the terms, interest, etc.) than a school does.

2) It's basically required. At this point a high school diploma isn't getting you shit if you aren't some startup funded golden child. Someone going out into the market for white collar work pretty much MUST have at least a 2 year degree, and most businesses prefer 4 year degrees. It seems wrong to me that we're billing people for what is more or less an essential part of their resume if they want to do something other than trade skills and that sort of thing, and doubling down on that, it seems insane than the debt incurred is not dischargeable in bankruptcy and can be payed back via seizure of tax refunds and other assets.

3) Entrance counseling is a joke. Yeah I know how loans work, I get this money now, I pay it back later. That does not cover nearly enough, and not to mention you can breeze through it in about a half an hour and fail the tests as many times as you want, as long as you check all the right boxes you can get past it, get your loan and never think about any of that shit again.

I'm not in trouble personally, I make my payments and I'm up to date. It just drives me crazy when boomers are out there saying "we started out with nothing" and my reply to that is "I started 25k in the hole, I would've LOVED to have started with nothing."

</comment><comment><USER33> As a few others have expressed similar, I can attest to the sentiments in the article.

I may be one of the more informed with my loans, and this is my understanding of the matter.

My freshmen year I incurred ~$26,000 in commercial loans, with $4500 in federal.

This year I got a residency reassignment and now have only $5500 in federal loans to pay for the whole year.

So I may now the approximate amounts of my loans, and I just summed them and found out I'm about $36,000 in debt. Truthfully that's the first time I've ever seen that figure, and damn it's scary because I have absolutely zero knowledge of how I'm expected to repay that. What are my interest rates, how long do I have to repay, how many months after I graduate am I expected to start paying that down?

The issue is that due to the inflation in college costs this is the only way many of us can afford college, and I'd have to say I'm lucky because I am supported for my living costs by my parents. Otherwise I would be in significantly more debt.

<comment><USER34> > What are my interest rates, how long do I have to repay, how many months > after I graduate am I expected to start paying that down?

All that will be in the contracts you signed. It'd probably be worthwhile to see if you can audit or sit-in on a contracts class with the business college, as the info will be very useful in your future, like when you buy a car or a house.

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> Worth noting that the Brookings study says:

"We do find that students with higher expected contributions are more likely to be unaware that they have federal debt (or any debt). This may be because these students' parents made the decision for them to take out loans, perhaps with the informal understanding that the parents would later pay it back (note that students can usually obtain loans on more favorable terms than their parents). In some cases, the lack of knowledge about cost and debt may stem from parents proactively managing their children's decisions about education."

And that the first study was an informal survey conducted by LendEDU, a company that recommends and reviews student loan refinance companies.

That said, I think confusion and misinformation about loans likely does have a large contribution to the US student loan debt. It is unclear how statistically founded the contribution is.

</comment><comment><USER36> I was lucky enough to not have to take out loans, but we did finance my wife's law school education predominantly with loans.

The thing I never understood was the interest rate. It seemed like we were locked into a 6.5% rate no matter what, but others were getting loans at nearly half that rate. I'm not sure if this was based on need (seems like a dumb way to set interest rates), when we first started taking the loans, or what.

Once you graduate, you're able to refinance into a private loan, which will get you a lower rate, but you seem pretty stuck while in school and unsubsidized loans accrue interest while you're in school. Our loans will be paid off in a few short months, but we have been scrimping by the past two years in order to put as much money as possible towards the loans. I'd guess most people don't graduate as undergrads to this type of scenario. With law school, you're hopefully graduating into a nice paying position and are in a better financial place to pay off the loans. I do find it a bit ridiculous that during a period when you could finance a house at 3%, a car at 2%, and could only get 0.5% or 1% on a savings account that the government was collected 6.5% of student loans. Yet, they did, and lots of students are going to be stuck paying multiples of their actual education cost as they pay interest on those loans for 30 years.

There is a government program where if you work in the public sector for 10 years, they will forgive your law school loans. I did the math on this and it ended up costing less money to just pay off the loans as quickly as possible rather than pay 10 years worth of interest on them, while being indentured to a single public-service job that likely pays less than the private sector anyway.

<comment><USER37> > I do find it a bit ridiculous that during a period when you could finance a > house at 3%, a car at 2%, and could only get 0.5% or 1% on a savings account > that the government was collected 6.5% of student loans.

You can't repossess an education... yet.

<comment><USER36> You can't erase student loan debt with bankruptcy either, so its not something you can really walk away from like a car or house.

<comment><USER22> > You can't erase student loan debt with bankruptcy

You _can_ , though its harder than many other categories of debt. That you _can 't_ is a popular myth which makes the problem worse, since it discourages people from looking into the possibility of doing so.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> The way I had to take out loans when I went to college, I knew how much more in debt I was getting every semester and the total debt. I had gone to a public university in the US. Since I had scholarships, I had to take out "only" $1000-$2000 in loans per semester. Every semester when disbursement time came around, the university financial office would send me an email informing me of all the money that was coming in from scholarships and loans, how much of it would be applied to tuition, and the amount of the rest that would be deposited into my account. If I recall correctly, I think they even made me see the balance before the money would be disbursed. In this way, I knew what my loan balance was when I graduated, and instead of panicking about it, paid it off gradually over several years.

</comment><comment><USER39> Looks like Entrance Counseling [0] isn't working.

[0] [https://studentloans.gov/myDirectLoan/whatYouNeed.action?pag...](https://studentloans.gov/myDirectLoan/whatYouNeed.action?page=counseling)

<comment><USER28> There are lots of reasons for this, in my experience. Firstly, entrance counselling is provided right at the beginning. That is when students are at peak optimism, and most unaware of the realities of living on their own, much less understanding their debt obligations. Secondly, I think students have already made the decision by the time it gets to entrance counselling. This should happen before or during the acceptance process, when kids are making the decisions about which school to attend (and how much it will cost them immediately and in the future). Thirdly, the online system I was in lacked specific examples and calculators to make the thing seem real. If they had given me a sliding bar to play with and see what my monthly payments would be, it might have made a big difference. Maybe not, though, because I didn't really know what to expect to pay in rent or mortgage either.

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> "The survey, conducted in January by Lendedu, a company that provides information about loan refinancing options..."

Let's not forget that the company running the survey has skin in the game. It's not at all clear exactly how they categorized different answers. I have student loans. I can tell you a ballpark number for how much I currently owe, but I couldn't tell you precicely down to the cent off the top of my head (they get auto-payed every month and I don't really think about it). If I were a student would I be categorized by this survey as not knowing how much I owe?

</comment><comment><USER41> I didn't know anything about my loans, and only had a ballpark knowledge of the cost of college. And it was fine--I paid off my loans after graduation relatively quickly and with little fuss.

Of course this was because I went to college 24 years ago (dear god I'm getting old). College was far more affordable, and the loan conditions were more humane.

The landscape has changed dramatically. At least part of the problem is parents in my age group not realizing that their children's loans are far more onerous than their own loans were, and failing to give them adequate scrutiny.

</comment><comment><USER42> You can say that students should know to read paperwork by the time they're entering college and that's fine, but the problem is that (for most) their only avenue towards high earnings is a degree and the only avenue to a degree are loans. Combine that with someone around age 18 who has never had significant income doesn't realize just how big those numbers are and how they'll impact them in the future. We badly need to reign in public college costs and offer student loans at lower rates.

</comment><comment><USER43> Not their fault! "Education System" \- They don't know how mortgage or taxes work but hey atleast they know about the cells inside a fucking leaf!

<comment><USER44> If you're old enough to go to college you should know you should read papers before you sign them. Not an excuse, even if public schools didn't teach how compound interest worked, which they do.

<comment> FLUX-YOU There should be counselors for this sort of thing too. However, I can't fault an 18-20 year old for not really having any sense of scale about how much >$50k is, even if they understand the paperwork clearly. They likely haven't slogged through years of work in a job they hate just to make ends meet. Any experience up to that point is likely with little bills and a low paying job. Even if these loans were made interest free, the principal getting that high in the first place is the larger issue. This is when the decision gets to the parents, and the drum beat for as long as I've been alive has been "go to college to get a good job!", conveniently ignoring the trade schools and other opportunities.

It seems difficult to teach the hard lessons and experience of personal finance without them actually being hard lessons. Unless something else is driving everyone to accept student loans.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> My wife was subject to very confusing papers that resulted in a federal loan many years ago. To her (she is dyslexic), it appeared to be a scholarship or a grant.

        1. She has no degree, yet owes money.
        2. Cannot get a better job to pay off said loan.
        3. Cannot get official transcript for classes she **has** paid for, because school blocks it.

Ok, so it's a perfect storm that she can never get out of, due to predatory interest (yes ~8% on a federal loan when banks get 0% IS predatory) and 'fines and fees' that exponentially compound.

Worse yet, taxes and wages are garnished. Yet any calls to find how they are taken from the bill falls on deaf ears. Tax return payments alone have at least counted up to $15k... yet Navient cannot answer for it. Nor can anyone else.

So, how do you dig out of this situation? Well, she won't take the solution I recommend: Lie about a degree. But we're looking at this haunting our retirement. But one thing is for sure: we are in it together.

I know this isn't some sort of isolated situation. I can see variants of this being played out time and again; I can only wonder how the fallout of this will affect the people.

<comment><USER45> Out of curiosity, have you talked to a lawyer, particularly one who does ADA work? I'm not a fan of how some of them operate, but it might be a good talk in your situation.

<comment><USER18> No, we haven't. She hasn't been in a good enough financial position to properly address it, with legal retainer fees and all. She's also undiagnosed with dyslexia, but we're working on that diagnosis (thanks to the PPACA for our insurance).

I wasn't sure what kind of representation was needed, but you recommend an attorney with ADA experience?

<comment><USER45> IANAL, but it would be logical, or go see a lawyer of decent reputation that does free consultations. That would point you in the right direction. Your case really sounds like you need to talk to an actual lawyer and not try to deal with it yourself.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER46> Perhaps the amount of money you're allowed to borrow should be proportional to one's age (starting at 18). The fact that a 17 year old can sign a promissory note for many thousands of dollars just doesn't make sense to me (ignoring the fact that 17 year olds can't sign most other kinds of contracts).

Some of us were extremely knowledgable about the world at that age, but most of us had no idea how anything worked. We had no experience, and our parents didn't do us the service of teaching us. For many of us our maturity level wasn't enough that we _could_ be taught what we were doing. At that age our biology makes us reckless.

So why should it good for society to allow this? Putting aside the ideas of free/subsidized tuition (not because they don't deserve consideration), perhaps this is too young an age for people to be choosing their life's vocation, much less signing away their financial future. More and more I think we should focus on getting young people out into the world into a variety of jobs and apprenticeships and internships and community service.

</comment><comment><USER45> In Fall of 1988, I was handed a sheet with my first loan that said how many $ per month the loan payments would be starting 6 months after I graduated and lasting for 10 (15?) years. I take it that's unusual and new students don't get that information?

<comment><USER28> I heard a news story last fall that said they're doing this at Indiana University, but I went to a different university starting in 2006 and didn't receive anything like that. The story made it seem like a novel and nearly genius approach to making students aware of what they're getting into. It's interesting that it was around in '88, then disappeared, then the economy crashed, and it's coming back.

<comment><USER45> Well, Bank of North Dakota is actually pretty good at what they do, so maybe it was just them.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER47> Make public higher education Nationalized like every other 1st world country and the problem would be moot.

</comment><comment><USER48> In my mid 30's and that's the common theme in my very highly educated city. The average home has been re-pumped up to over $500K, high property taxes, etc.

Unless you're in the top 10% of wage earners, you'll need two incomes. Day care costs would eat a lot of the second income anyway. The college loans still exist as many here have masters and PHDs. Singles at 35+ live with roommates as if they were in their early 20's.

Wonder why Donald Trump has risen so high so fast?

Lots of hispanic women with 2 or 3 little kids in tow, another on the way. Guess who gets to pay for them?

<comment><USER49> What do you mean by your comment about hispanic women?

<comment><USER50> Lower classes like to imagine a large amount of public spending goes towards welfare for "foreigners and their anchor babies".

<comment><USER48> SJWs like to imagine that massive immigration of non-educated foreigners creates jobs and raises wages cause they believed the studies pumped out by the Heritage Foundation and Chamber of Commerce.

Anyone who points out the actual economics of this, in a society where there are MORE people now than available jobs, is labeled xenophobic, racist, and now, it appears, 'low class'.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER51> 'STUDENTS' \- this word is the problem. Students are those studying to become engineers/surgeons[producers] and those studying sociology/gender_studies[parasites].

That's why so many people in humanities departments are liberals/communists. How else is a sociology student going to get a smartphone? They have to tax producers, take their money by getting a fake job in some non- profit/government agency/college and receive a salary there[taken from tax dollars].

The word 'student' makes it seem like we're all in this together, but we aren't. Parasites are eating us alive.

<comment><USER48> I agree with the sentiment 100%, however there is reasonably only so many producers our society needs. We could give the non-producers a basic income. If it's disparate, you end up with class warfare. If there is not a large disparity, the producers stop producing since they can get the same outcome by sitting on their ass. Not sure what the solution is.

<comment><USER51> There is a solution and it's very simple:

\- Kill the parasites.

Producers are taxed at nearly 50% rate[income + sales tax + property + wage + others] on what they make. If we kill off the parasites, then we would have to work almost 50% less to have the same standard of living as we have now. Imagine: 20 hours/week. You could work 2-3 days and then enjoy the rest. Or 1 person could work and the other one would stay at home and take care of their children.

It makes sense to reward people you love and who are productive. But, these are parasites and the correct course of action is to, not reward them with cash and goods we producers make, but to kill them and enjoy our lives.

Don't you agree?

<comment><USER52> We've banned this account for repeatedly breaking the site guidelines.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER53> Instead of pushing students to loans, why not show them the value of hard work thru college? People make out like it's an impossibility, but it isn't. It isn't fun, and you might not get the 4.0 average you'd want, but it is possible because I've done it. I didn't have a fancy car or a great high paying job. I also didn't go to a well known college, but rather just a smaller college locally.

What we really should be doing is showing students that WHERE they go to college very often doesn't matter at all after graduation, because so much is learned on the job. What matters is the core concepts are given that lays a great foundation for their "real" jobs later.

<comment><USER54> "I did it in this specific area, so anybody who can't in the entire country is just lazy" seems to be what you're implying here, and that's an incredibly unhelpful position when dealing with tuition that in many places has inflated well beyond what an entry-level work can hope to cover while also dealing with room and board.

<comment><USER53> No, I'm not. I'm saying a part of maturity is paying and cash flowing things.

It might take a lot longer, and it might be a lot harder and a few less dinners with friends, but it is very possible to cash flow college.

It's a different mindset. What most people think today is you should always have a loan for something -- car, house, college, a little consumer debt... but it's incredibly freeing when you don't have any of that stuff. I wasn't given anything, but I've learned that hard work and no debt can make life so much greater.</comment></comment></comment>


Extract and structure unformatted data without prior system training - <AUTHOR> http://convextra.com

<comment><USER2> Really nice idea, I usually have to resort to some Javascript hackery to do this kind of thing (or BeautifulSoup). One click is awesome.

A simple spoken script over the tutorial video by a voice actor would add _significant_ credibility. There are a bunch of sites where voice over professionals will do a really good <60second clip for $100-200. Well worth it!

</comment><comment><USER3> Nice!

For those who want a wide ranging overview of web scraping in Python:

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52wxGESwQSA>

</comment><comment><USER4> This reminds me of Needlebase from ITA before they got swallowed by Google. Needlbase had a bit less magic and a bit more data modelling, judging by that little demo.

Video tour: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58Gzlq4zSDk>

</comment><comment><USER5> This is really great - had I known about it a week ago I would have used it for a small project. (I ended up scripting it out with httrack). Definitely bookmarked for future use!

</comment><comment><USER6> I see it useful for monitoring competitors. It would be great to have a kind of charting feature to visualize data à la webnumbr

</comment><comment><USER7> Very nice idea. Can you give more detail about what kind of machine learning you employed?</comment>


Bethesda blocks resale of used game - <AUTHOR> https://www.polygon.com/2018/8/11/17661254/bethesda-sell-used-games-amazon-block <comment><USER2> Vorys is corrupt. I've received threatening letters from them as well, that came to my physical address despite it not being listed anywhere on my Amazon store. It also contained false assertions (I'd bought the goods in question from an authorized distributor that confirmed to me that the letter was simply lying).

I know multiple other sellers that also had this issue. It is my belief that Vorys is illegally paying Amazon insiders to get contact information for sellers, as there is no legitimate path to get that information that does not involve a subpoena to Amazon, which would involve an active lawsuit. Unfortunately, this is hard to prove.

<comment><USER2> In general, companies can be extremely abusive if they don't want their stuff being sold online. I know multiple people who have bought directly from companies, and later had the company claim to Amazon that they were infringing IP. The listing goes down, sometimes the entire account as well, till you send in invoices and convince Amazon to accept them and reinstate the listing, which takes time.

<comment><USER3> I wonder if this is more of a Bethesda initiative or a law firm initiative. Is Bethesda aware that bad PR these days can cripple your launches? Are they really risking an increase in "revenge piracy" or loss of sales just for a marginal reduction in "losses" from these Amazon sellers?

People who buy used games don't want to pay the new price, and they won't. One way or another they'll get it for the discounted price. It's best if you don't alienate your customers for something that will bring no palpable benefit.

<comment><USER4> "People who buy used games don't want to pay the new price, and they won't"

They will once physical disks are abolished for digital stores. They have been pushing this for years and PC gaming is already there. No more used games.

<comment><USER3> I wonder if people will just create a different account for every game and just sell the account :D.

And I don't see PC games being any different than console ones. Most games still have physical copies that can be resold, or am I missing what you meant? Physical copies still have plenty of life in them with games ballooning to triple digit GBs and most of the world being stuck on slow internet.

<comment><USER5> Many PC physical games have been Steam keys in a box for a long time. Sometimes they come with a disk with the Steam installer for the release version but it has DRM to prevent running it without activation on a specific account, so it only really saves on download time for a couple of months until patches are as large as just downloading the game anew.

In recent years, there's a been few more cases of Origin/uplay/etc. keys in the box instead, but the same limitation applies.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> This is an interesting legal move: using a warranty to claim that a resold good is 'materially different' from an original, and therefore is not subject to first sale doctrine. If it held up in court, it seems extremely dangerous for consumer rights.

<comment><USER7> How is that different from selling a used car that's no longer under warranty? If this ever gets litigated, is a court likely to make a decision that undermines the U.S. used car market? Or is the company hoping that it can intimidate sellers into backing down without ever having to go to court?

I suppose that it would be stupid for car manufacturers to attempt to put restrictions on resale, since that would significantly reduce the value of a car. But the same thing could happen to games: if someone knows that they can't resell a game if they get tired of playing it, they'd be somewhat less likely to buy it in the first place (or not be willing to spend as much for it).

<comment><USER8> The arguments only apply to the sale of copyrighted material, not general goods.

<comment><USER2> Warranty is used to get around first sale rights for trademarks, not copyrights. The argument is the trademark can no longer be used if the goods are "materially different", such as by not having a warranty.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> > _Bethesda recently sent out a notice to at least one seller on Amazon's > Marketplace who was trying to sell a sealed copy of The Evil Within 2, > demanding that they remove their listing._

This could be an attempt by Bethesda to rein-in what they see as "counterfeit" products, since Amazon is largely unwilling to police their own Marketplace. Though the article states "Bethesda is a notoriously litigious company", and have a heavy-handed history.

<comment><USER10> They could actually be charged with perjury if they are using the DMCA to take down listings that they have no proof are counterfeit and turn out not to be. Though I am not sure if DMCA applies in this case.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Wow, this seems to be taking a piss all over the first sale doctrine if this article is not somehow playing fast and loose with the facts. Seems like an open and shut case for somebody like the EFF to take on, with some great press for themselves in the process. Feels like there has to be some piece of the story missing here.

<comment><USER12> From the article:

 _Bethesda's letter claims that Hupp's sale is not protected by the First Sale Doctrine, because he is not selling the game in its original form, which would include a warranty. The letter says this lack of warranty renders the game "materially different from genuine products" that are sold through official channels._

IANAL, but it seems to me that if this argument goes through, it would render first sale doctrine useless, as you could tack on a warranty to just about any old product.

<comment><USER13> Warranties for software are notoriously narrowly scoped. Not warranted for any particular use or fitness for any purpose, etc. About all they _will_ warrant is that the media itself works and offer to replace it if it doesn't.

So just warrant that what you are selling is what it claims to be and offer a refund or replacement if it isn't. That seems to be materially the same as what the original seller provides.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> If this expansion gets to and is upheld by the courts, it makes me wonder about DVDs and Blu-rays people sell with either now expired or previously used digital codes and whether this would be subject to the same "material difference."

<comment><USER15> Nothing to do with them then, it's not their product you're reselling as it's "materially different" \- oh right, so for copyright purposes it's an exact copy, but for any natural rights the consumer should have it's a different product.

This sort of evil should be stamped on hard by government.

<comment><USER16> You mean the same government that is currently controlled by corporations and doing everything it can to maximize corporate profits? Yeah, good luck with that.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Did they notify consumers that they were bundling a warranty, sounds like all the purchasers should be due a partial refund and any people with damaged discs should get replacements, under their warranty.

<comment><USER17> [https://help.bethesda.net/app/answers/list/search/1/kw/warra...](https://help.bethesda.net/app/answers/list/search/1/kw/warranty/dym/1/p/886)

There's no mention of a warranty on the Evil Within 2 support page

[https://bethesda.net/en/search?q=warranty](https://bethesda.net/en/search?q=warranty)

And no mention of a warranty on their main website either.

The amazon store page says that for warranty information, you can contact the seller (which would be amazon, and presumably amazon's warranty) or that more information may be available on the manufacturer's website (and the above links demonstrate that it isn't).

So yeah, my question is "Does anybody know about the warranty, and if not, how is a warranty that you don't know about materially different from not having one?"

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> After their apparent pivot to becoming an MMO company, I don't expect many more good games out of Bethesda anyway.

<comment><USER19> I suppose they're only the publisher, so maybe this doesn't count, but Doom 2016 is hands down the best fps I've played in a long time.

<comment><USER20> Same, I just picked it up in the Steam sale, and it's what I wanted out of Doom 3 fourteen years ago. I feel conflicted that I just gave $10 to Bethesda while they are pulling this stunt, but it's a great game nonetheless.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER21> Was gifted Fallout 4, and what was in the case was one DVD.

Upon install, that required a Steam account, it would pull down 2x or more that of the content of the DVD to make the game playable.

And then i had to go mod hunting basically on day one, because they had implemented a non-optional head bopping on the first person camera...

</comment><comment><USER22> Can Blu-Rays be manufactured to make each disc unique, with an embedded code that is used to link a license of the game to an account?

Then the publisher could simply decide to disallow games from being activated on another account.

Or, bundle a CDKey inside the case, but I think this exposes significant fraud risk if a rogue employee cracks open hundreds of cases from a shipment, sells the keys online, then reseals them.

<comment><USER23> I believe this was how the XBox One was originally going to work, but the outcry was so loud that Microsoft had to backtrack before the console was launched.

A particular criticism was that you would not be able to play any games without internet access, which would have made it useless for many people, including for example some military personnel deployed overseas.

<comment><USER22> Its just a matter of time before that happens. How many gamers who aren't on a plane, in a train or in a base in Fallujah don't have constant broadband access?

I think those instances are being reduced yearly all around the world.

The next generation of consoles will have a low-end version that hosts some of the calculations locally, such as input and collision detection, but all of the detailed rendering etc. on the cloud. All games will be inherently 'online only', distribution of optical disks will become pointless and everything will be linked to an account - no resale.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Software is licensed, not sold. Generally speaking if the license indicates it's nontransferable (which it almost always does), the software is not subject to first-sale doctrine and is illegal to sell.

<comment><USER25> Not unless the copyright holder can produce documents proving it was a licensing and not a sale:

[https://www.finnegan.com/en/insights/copyright- infringement-...](https://www.finnegan.com/en/insights/copyright-infringement- case-is-blocked-by-first-sale-defense.html)

If I just buy a copy of a game from a physical store and I don't sign a licensing agreement, it's hard to see how that would pass the test here- he never even opened the jewel case.</comment></comment>


Price goes up $3/day - <AUTHOR> https://gumroad.com/l/kxkNL

Grab it while you can! <comment><USER2> Page not found ...</comment>


Ask HN: Can Google AdWords help local pizza? - <AUTHOR>

Search pay per click has become a dominant ad platform for advertisers. Google. yahoo and MSN are trying to attract local advertisers by offering geo and demographic targeting. Still a look at their advertisers suggest that local barbers, plumbers and pizza parlors are still not advertising on search engines.
Yellowpages and local newspapers are still the preferred channel for these geographic businesses. The question is what role will internet play in local advertising and in what format?
I hope this hacker site can answer this question.
regards
Kundi <comment><USER2> well, yodle and reachlocal, amongst others, are trying to answer that question

In general, though, it's hard to do well. Problems include the fact that many people don't turn to google first thing for pizza, that google still doesn't do a good job looking up businesses by name, that even with geo-targeting food delivery is hyper local and very competitive, that even yelp and seamlessweb have interesting penetration in only a tiny handful of cities, etc. Frankly, I don't really think the internet is the wave of the future for a lot of restaurants -- I'll find out about them from word of mouth or from walking around my neighborhood. Plus, adwords is expensive, and irrational competitors can drive keyword prices sky high.

<comment><AUTHOR> The issues you point out are real and no one so far has answered them conveniently. What do you think will be the parameters for success if someone comes up with a local advertising or promotion platform. What will be the driver for local businesses to generate leads or traffic.

Kundi</comment></comment>


Ask HN: How do I get motivated again - <AUTHOR>

I am currently working as a contractor in vertical advertising, sports betting specifically. Initially, the job was exciting, but now its gotten to a boring point, and on top of that I am the only developer, hence there is zero time to chill-out. Occasionally, I get to respond to support issues on my days off.
My client is a start up with little to no organisation, they want me in the office, and want me to get things done by verbally asking me, constantly changing their minds and, and most times I'd have to switch context constantly.
While the pay is relatively aright, and I have bills to pay, I have lost all motivation to keep on working. I stare at the computer but can't think. I really want to get my motivation back, but don't know how.
Can you share your experiences on how to keep on how to rapidly re-boot? <comment><USER2> Sounds like the advise is obvious: Change jobs! "Vertical advertising for sports betting" sounds like the definition of useless to society. The management issues don't make things better. No pay is worth working at a job like that.

That being said, if changing jobs is not an option in the near future, here are some tips:

1\. Take pride in what you do. Try to write the most beautiful code. Learn new technologies. Make Easter eggs.

2\. Remove friction and sources of frustration. For example if you write tests, you don't have that felling that you might have broken something after you made a change.

3\. Communicate. Explain people how you fell. Probably, people don't realize they are disturbing your concentration. Maybe they can send an email or make an appointment.

4\. Plan a vacation.

5\. Accept things the way they are. If some days you are not as productive that's okay and ultimately not your fault.

6\. See the positive.

<comment><USER3> >> "Vertical advertising for sports betting" sounds like the definition of useless to society.

I work in the same 'industry' and equally dislike it as a whole and also completely lost my motivation.

>> No pay is worth working at a job like that.

Not when you have a family to raise or bills to pay, the thing with this betting industry is that it pays as said relatively to very good. There is also an overload of jobs, and if you are anywhere smart and in this stuff for a bit you can get a pretty good salary. I made a salary jump of about 80% in 3 years working in this industry.

What I hate the most about this industry is that there are some very talented people working in here, which could do much better things then programming systems to make people loose more money then they already do. Makes me sad.

What I do? I am working on some side projects, and just 'grind it out' during the office hours and do what I have to do, time goes by faster. Hoping to get one of my projects off in the next months/years and leave this industry behind for once and all.

Where are you based?

<comment><AUTHOR> On side projects, the problem is, I have always been passionate about whatever I am work on and have no energy left for side projects. I guess I should just 'grind things out' as you mentioned, and perhaps focus energy on things I care most about, but won't this hamper on productivity?

I am based in London.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> Man, I've been in your exact position before. It sucks. That's just an understatement. I hated it. When all you're holding on to is the comfort of money then I'd say it's over. My suggestion is to be open and honest with your client. Maybe they know you feel that way too. Since you're the only developer they know they need you. But I think if you both enter a conversation on how to improve the situation, you'll both be happier in the long term.

The best thing that has worked for me when I'm just spinning my wheels is to travel. Enjoy life and appreciate what it has to offer. Changing up your routine will allow your mind to do that. Think hard about what you want to do and live your life now. It's short.

</comment><comment><USER5> Unfortunately there is no recipe for rapidly re-booting yourself, your motivation or anything about you.

There are some red flags here. The request of your presence in the office, not having a roadmap, missing features / bugs list, etc. What I'd do is to get rid of them asap.

But.. There is zero time to chill-out? There is always time and it is flowing. At this point, it doesn't matter if you sit in front of your computer for 12 hours; it's what you've done on your time. Stop. Take 2-3 days off and tell them to organise in the meanwhile. Tell them about how they are consuming you and when you get back at working you want to do things better.

Go out to the nature on your off time. Go to a swimming pool or swim in the sea if you can, ride bicycle, run, read something you've enjoyed in your childhood. Take the computer out of your sight. Spend time with your family, the ones those make you just happy. The idea here is remembering how it's to be happy and productive. Also some thoughts will occur such as are you doing everything as you should? are you alright with the outcome of the work you've completed so far? etc.

Good luck with it and hope you can overcome this.

<comment><USER6> Well actually there is a recipe for getting your motivation back, and TheSmoke has pointed the way.

[1] Take a week-long break from work and do something enjoyable. If you can't take a break, go to step [2]. [2] In the long-term you need to either fix your attitude to your job, or change your job. If it's a contract job, see if you can last until the end of the contract, then take something else.

I suspect you will need to ditch the job. If you do that, make sure you try to take a break before starting the next time, to give yourself time to reboot your motivation.

If you're starting to experience any kind of serious depression or burnout, you really need to quit the job pretty soon before it gets out of hand (I've been there).

Just remember there are always other opportunities out there - you are never as trapped as you think you are.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> This sounds like depression/apathy/burnout. If it is just work related, remind yourself that is completely within your power to fix.

Two suggestions:

1) Make sure your human interactions are actually positive. If your clients keep pointing you in different directions and making you context switch, fix that. Spend an hour thinking about how that interaction could be better, and some steps towards making that happen. I've had success with writing down requests on a shared whiteboard, and making sure the people asking understand what you would have to de-prioritize to work on the new shiny thing they are asking.

2) If the job was initially exciting, it can probably be exciting again. You should take a break, or find something not-work-related to spend our time doing (e.g. a hobby).

</comment><comment><USER8> I've worked with entrepreneurs like this and they would change their mind on features and functionality week to week. Entrepreneurs are constantly testing new ideas and features to understand what will work.

I compared it to walking a dog. The dog runs around side to side front to back sniffing everything but at the end of the day, the dog is still tied to you and you to it.

If possible get more involved in the actual business and start to build in flexibility and anticipate future enhancements based on the business goals.

If you don't get a say in the business and have no path to equity, leave.

</comment><comment><USER9> Take some time off - maybe just a week (if you cannot get more). When you get back if you still feel the same about work, it means that its time to move on - maybe to a different job or maybe a different industry.

It's hard to do especially if you have bills to pay. But you are going to have to take that step and make an effort to move on. Work becomes very difficult once you start resenting it.

</comment><comment><USER10> It sounds like you need to step up and put some structure around this project you're working on.

Pull out requirements, prioritise, make weekly iterations, and put yourself somewhere where they can't come and interrupt constantly.

Most importantly, change something. If you always do what you've always done...

Good luck!

<comment><AUTHOR> >> Most importantly, change something. If you always do what you've always done...

I have a feeling this should reset a button somewhere :) Thanks.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Damn! This sounds just like my situation! It is fairly chaotic here, no specifications or documentation for work I must do, and no one understands what I do. So I use this to my advantage by learning new skills. Because no one asks me what tools I use (they all think I use C#, I think), I find tools that interest me and learn them by using them in my work. So far I have learned R and Pandas for data, although I am lucky to get a 10M file to use. I have built a desktop app with Ada. I am trying to created LaTeX files from a script. I want to improve my Racket/F#/GIMP/Scribus/Inkscape/Blender/Node.js skills and knowledge, but cannot yet come up with appropriate tasks. But I keep looking! So basically I keep motivated by learning new stuff all the time at their expense.

<comment><AUTHOR> The difference with me is that my client has a rough knowledge of the tools I use, and even make false assumptions about implementation detail.

Sometimes I get pseudo-code as spec requirements, or get told 'solutions' instead of elaborating on the problems at hand. So, I don't get the chance to learn any new stuff besides what's in the pot.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> You have two options; say what you like and what don't, get to know yourself, what you really want, talk about it. Say you are a real engineer not a code monkey. You want to build something great, not fool around. Tell them they're wasting just time by not being organised.

The second option is to still find what you really really want and find it, and quit.

Being in resistance is just wasting time sorry :-) Good luck!

</comment><comment><USER13> I run a website which aims to motivate/inspire people daily by showing simple inspiring quotes and videos each day. If you're after that type of reboot - something that will just give you a brief lift, then check it out. I won't post it's name as i don't want to spam - you can see it in my profile. Thanks

</comment><comment><USER14> It's definitely a challenge to work with founders who are what seems to be trying to figure things out as they go, which results into creative chaos at best or disorganized, aimless destruction at worst. Before concluding that this gig isn't for you, at the very least, make sure you maintain your own standards of quality and responsibility to do the best you can do. Try to be flexible and work with them. Sell them on your ideas as best as you can when you disagree with their always changing ones. But if they disagree, I strongly advise to be flexible and don't let the chaos shake you from your own high standards of professionalism to do the best you can. I'm old school, but I feel you still owe that much to them since this is a contract you agreed to take on. Who knows? If you show you're working hard, your client will begin to trust you more and more when you have a different opinion than theirs. Either way, if things don't improve, you can walk at the end of the contract, but with the integrity that you did your best.

</comment><comment><USER15> Besides what everyone else has already mentioned, I find great computer science presentations and story/interview based computer science-ish books to be great motivators.

Book examples: In the Plex, Masters of Doom, Steve Jobs, Founders at Work, Coders at Work

</comment><comment><USER16> Been there, done that! I eventually got so frustrated, that i just stood up from my desk and quit the job. Its been 3 months now and loving it.</comment>


Former Employees of Google Prepare Rival Search Engine - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/28/technology/28cool.html?ref=business

<comment><USER2> I'm not sure I'd call it a rival yet... very disappointing results. <http://www.cederman.com/?p=97></comment>


The house always wins: Monte Carlo Simulation - <AUTHOR> https://towardsdatascience.com/the-house-always-wins-monte-carlo-simulation-eb82787da2a3 <comment><USER2> Yes the house always wins on average, in the long term, especially on American wheel Roulette.

However, a few points of clarificaton.

European wheel poker, when offered to extremely highrollers in Monaco typically, offer "en prison", which effectively eliminates the existence of green 0 if the play has the funds to cover a second bet.

When playing roulette, the quickest and most efficient way to play is to simply bet everything you are willing to lose on black or red. The odds are nearly headsup and nobody has time nor luck to play 100 hands.

If you really must sit at the table for as long as you can (perhaps for comp eligibilityy), then use martingale betting system and avoid tables with low max bets.

This way, if you lose 7 hands in a row and with the 8th, it looks like this:

Lose 2 Lose 4 Lose 8 Lose 16 Lose 32 Lose 64 Lose 128 Win 256</comment>


Hubble returns to 'old friends' for 25th anniversary - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-30699647

<comment><USER2> Anyone find the links to the full images?

<comment><USER3> The Andromeda image can be found here: [http://www.spacetelescope.org/images/heic1502a/](http://www.spacetelescope.org/images/heic1502a/)

The Pillars of Creation image can be found here: [http://www.spacetelescope.org/images/heic1501a/](http://www.spacetelescope.org/images/heic1501a/)

Be aware, though, that spacetelescope.org seems to be under heavy load, as it's been very slow for the past few days.

Edit: The original of the Andromeda image is a ~4.3 GB PSB (high-resolution Photoshop format) image. The website has provided a magnet link for that file in a torrent.</comment></comment>


Eternity Wall: the public registry underneath Bitcoin - <AUTHOR> http://eternitywall.it/ <comment><USER2> Messages lasting forever!</comment>


Avout: Distributed State in Clojure - <AUTHOR> http://avout.io/ <comment><USER2> The library is fundamentally flawed, as the first bug report shows: [https://github.com/liebke/avout/issues/1](https://github.com/liebke/avout/issues/1)

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> I came across this after watching Rich Hickey's The Language of The System [1], and it has really changed the way I look at distributed persistent storage.

Any thoughts?

[1] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROor6_NGIWU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROor6_NGIWU)

</comment><comment><USER3> Discussed in 2011: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3291153](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3291153).</comment>


Java in 2018 - The State of Developer Ecosystem by JetBrains - <AUTHOR> https://www.jetbrains.com/research/devecosystem-2018/java/ <comment><USER2> Interesting how the most used frameworks and technologies are also the most hated on on hackernews (Spring Boot, java)

<comment><USER3> You don't get to be the most hated without also being well-used, unless you're particularly skilled at it.</comment></comment>


Ask HN: How can Google Fit tell if I am cycling? - <AUTHOR>

It did miss a couple cycling sessions but it is mostly accurate. Does it combine the data from GPS and the accelerometer? Are these always on? <comment><USER2> I did a project along these times some time back, training a Hidden Markov Model on accelerometer + gyroscope data sampled every 100ms gave basically 100% classification accuracy. Can share the code with you if you are interested.

</comment><comment><USER3> I'm having the opposite problem. I don't use a bicycle, but Google Fit thinks I do. I assume it's confusing my driving with biking, somehow.

</comment><comment><USER4> It's easyish to derive to good accuracy from the accelerometer signal alone (which I believe is always available).</comment>


Ask HN: How to find a room in SF to rent? - <AUTHOR>

So I've almost given up now. I've sent about 40 Craigslist messages in the past week and haven't had a single reply so far. There's something different about San Francisco.
I've tried using my Gmail, my university email, a nondescript account too. I've tried long descriptive messages and short punctual messages. I've tried thoroughly describing myself to sound legitimate or not at all. Not a single bite.
What am I looking for? Simple, a room to rent with some other young-ish (lets say less than 30 years old) people in San Francisco. My lease terms are totally flexible too, 6 months, 1 year, whatever. I was hoping for something in Hayes Valley or Mission but honestly, I don't even care anymore as long as its safe.
Is there a secret handshake involved? Is there a formulaic way to approach classified inquiries? Should I be calling everyone? I'm even open to giving someone a referral bonus at this point.
Advice would be awesome!
Context: just finished college, starting with a company in Palo Alto on the 12th, flying from Canada to SFO on Saturday and have no place to go. <comment><USER2> Might be easier to look after you arrive. Do you have any friends you can crash with? If not, try AirBnB for something short term. People renting out a room might consider a longer term rental if you're a good roomie. You'll also be able to start networking when you're here which can be a good way to find lodging.

</comment><comment><USER3> Hey kpeiris, congrats on starting a new job and life in the Bay Area! I think pbreit is right about needing to meet some of these potential room mates in person when you arrive. Until then though, you might need to shell out a few bucks for an AirBnB room (maybe a week) while you hunt for more permanent digs. My friend Joe has a room about 5 minutes from me here: <http://www.airbnb.com/rooms/show/154143> He's super chill and relaxed and it's right on the N-Judah line so it's easy to get around to the other parts of the city.

</comment><comment><USER4> I had the same problem except compounded by the fact that I have a dog! Basically, hammer the emails and phone calls and eventually you will find something (craigslist).

I moved here from LA so I was looking for a place without actually being here. I found a handfull of places that accepted dogs and were within my price range, flew up here for a weekend and ran all over the city like a madman. I finally found a place that worked.

You may have more luck looking for an apartment without a roomie, if you can afford that. Feel free to shoot me an email (address located in my profile) and I will help in any way I can.

Also, yes, SF is especially hard to find apartments.

</comment><comment><USER5> If you end up in the city, make sure you are very near the Caltrain, since it sounds like you are not planning to drive. Trying to commute to Palo Alto by connecting to the Caltrain from other public transit (MUNI etc) is a PITA.

</comment><comment><USER6> I think that someone here needs to start a HN housing list or something. I'm looking for a place myself out in NYC and CL is nothing but trouble; however, I have gotten 4 replies from some very helpful Nigerian folk offering to fedex me the keys to their places after I simply wire them 1st month + sec.

Seriously though, CL is filled with crap, it takes far too much work to find places and there is no way to judge any roommate compatibility before the open house (which quickly leads to renting the room if everything goes well).

</comment><comment><USER7> Rent in San Bruno or San Mateo, affordable, boring and close to public transport and the 101. Good enough until you find a good place in the city (It's been months and I'm still looking though...).

</comment><comment><USER8> Yep, the bay area is a special case! When I moved there way back in 2000, it was much the same. You are likely one of hundreds of respondents.

I finally wound up paying a guy 100 bucks a month to get access to rental listings _before_ they showed up on craigslist and the usual places. I was skeptical, but it worked. Being the first or second caller instead of the hundredth did the trick.

I haven't lived there in more than ten years, so my info might be out of date.

<comment><USER9> "You are likely one of hundreds of respondents."

If demand exceeds supply, why don't landlords raise their prices?

<comment><USER10> Demand only exceeds supply for good deals.

There is a dearth of cheap rooms and rentals. However, if you want to pay $2500 a month for a 1BR you will have no problem finding a place.

<comment><USER11> So slowly raise prices until you only get a few responses?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> For all the talk about SF being a great start-up culture, what's true everywhere is still true here: No one wants a roommate who can't make rent.

Damn near every place I went to with a photocopy of my job offer did I get offered a spot. Try getting something in paper from the company you're working for and bringing that to some open houses. I got much better responses from that tactic than bringing beer or nothing at all.

</comment><comment><USER13> I've worked with kpeiris on a project before, and he's a pretty awesome guy. Won't regret helping him!

</comment><comment> wh-uws What is your price range and are you using padmapper?

<comment><AUTHOR> I've been using padmapper with CL - is there any advantage vs using CL alone?

Anything under 2k a month is reasonable enough for me given the prices I've seen.

<comment> wh-uws Ok you've got the tools. I'm seeing lots of things in your price range there.

Whats your pitch?

The thing about Bay Area housing is for some reason everybody wants to be there. So you got to sound interesting and move fast.

When I interned out there last summer my pitch was

        Hi I'm {name},
        Found your listing on craigslist I'm here in the valley interning with {company} for the summer.I'm a {student/in your case recent grad} from {hometown} and I'm interested,
        would you be free for me to come visit after 5pm. You can reply to this email and/or
        give me a call at {phone number}

You want to give people the fastest way possible to get in contact with you and the soonest time possible you can go see the place.

The pitch is extremely important because renters want to know several things before they will be ok contacting you about moving in.

\- Who you are in the first place?

\- Are you legit?

\- Can you pay? and if its multiple months or times can you pay consistently

\- Will you cause trouble.

Also in terms of using straight up CL vs padmapper remember padmapper does everything it can to only list places with addresses in them and it has a slight update delay. If you want to whole picture make sure to check the CL site as well.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Maybe the Mother Nature is urging you to look closer to Palo Alto.

</comment><comment><USER15> Don't keep us Canadians out in the cold...although we are used to it... :P

</comment><comment><USER16> I've love to live with this guy, don't miss out.</comment>


Python, Unicode and UnicodeDecodeError - <AUTHOR> http://www.stereoplex.com/blog/python-unicode-and-unicodedecodeerror

<comment><USER2> Good technical summary. I would like to point out couple of things:

1) Most (if any?) Western Europeans does not use ASCII. (UK being an exception.)

2) There are no reason to use ASCII if your program handles any kind of textual input. Not even English can be properly represented by ACII, because it can contain foreign names, brands, loan-words etc. with non-ASCII characters. ASCII with its arbitrary 7-bit limit was invented in 1960 when computer resources were extremely limited. Always deploy Unicode, whether your application is English-only or not.</comment>


Picture-to-Identity linking through social network accounts [pdf] - <AUTHOR> http://pralab.diee.unica.it/sites/default/files/Satta_VISAPP2014_0.pdf

<comment><USER2> "Usage of Sensor Pattern Noise for Picture-to-Identity linking" is a more accurate title.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks. I just tried to put it in less than 80 characters. Your suggestion is more accurate, but I could not change it now.</comment></comment>


Supreme Court Rolls Back a Law Born of Enron - <AUTHOR> http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/25/business/25norris.html

<comment><USER2> I couldn't quite tell: was that a "news item" or an editorial?</comment>


My friend was a homeless grad student this past year - <AUTHOR> http://lupestan.wordpress.com/2014/06/09/homeless-living-in-graduate-school

<comment><USER2> I know this is a controversial point of view, but the recommendation I consistently give friends is: don't go to grad school unless you get a stipend and tuition waiver (that's how my PhD program was funded). If you can't get into a grad school program that offers you this, then perhaps you're not academically good enough for it. Work for a bit and re apply later.

If you're starting your career with debt in a field that can't even pay for the value you will add, how do you expect things to get any better?

Especially if you're American, you have two things going on for you: you speak English fluently, and American universities tend to be better recognized internationally (for example, my European undergrad was not recognized by American grad schools, and I had to spend a year in the UK to round off an "official" BSc.) Leverage that to go to grad school abroad: your profile will be desirable there.

<comment><USER3> > don't go to grad school unless you get a stipend and tuition waiver

That actually sounds like some of the _least_ controversial advice I've every heard about grad school, at least on the science-y side (maybe things are different in the humanities?). In fact, I think you'd be hard-pressed to find someone with a Ph.D. who didn't agree with that statement.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Brilliant; and an unfortunate reality for her. Not in the sense of sacrifice, but in why she had to make the sacrifice.

I have no doubt she'll get that dream though... :)</comment>


Why Did I Serve 16 Years for Murder When I Didn't Kill Anyone? - <AUTHOR> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jKGy8TlGMDI <comment><USER2> TLDW: felony murder ([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felony_murder_rule](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felony_murder_rule))

A similar case was recently in the news as _"Police Shot Jacob Harris — Then Charged His Friends With Murder"_ : [https://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/phoenix-cops-shot- jacob...](https://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/phoenix-cops-shot-jacob-harris- charged-friends-with-murder-11319507)

</comment><comment><USER3> Civil Law, my guess.</comment>


Microsoft needs to stop trash-talking IE6 and just trash it - <AUTHOR> http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2010/05/microsoft-needs-to-stop-trash-talking-ie6-and-just-trash-it.ars

<comment><AUTHOR> Until recently, I consulted for a Fortune 500 which was still issuing IE6 on its desktops. The company just embarked on a huge project to update to IE6, and it faces all the issues mentioned in the article. It will be at least a year before IE6 can go away.

I don't blame MSFT for supporting IE6. While the article advocates rapid abandonment, the effect on corporate perceptions would be disastrous. Companies like the one I consulted for are terrified of being left stranded.

What would really help my former client would be for MSFT to provide IE6 bundled as an app that could exist along IE8. While not ideal, users could be told to use IE6 for certain corporate applications that were built and tested in the early 2000's against only IE. This would make the transition much easier. This would also benefit Microsoft as the Windows 7 roll-out likely depends on IE6 elimination.

<comment><USER2> I'm working on something sorta like that. Are you still in contact with that company?

I'm looking for IE6 apps to test with. :-)

[http://www.publicstatic.net/2010/05/have-an-ie6-only- applica...](http://www.publicstatic.net/2010/05/have-an-ie6-only-application/)

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> > [Microsoft] is 100 percent committed to the concept of stable, long-lived, > versioned Web browser platforms. This strategy makes no sense in the fast- > changing world of the Web.

What? HTML 5 isn't done yet, and HTML 4 hasn't changed for ten years. This sounds like more complaining from authors doing sloppy js-only work.

Sometimes incompatibility is a necessary evil, but that's not true on the web. I take pride in valid documents with progressive enhancement which I fully expect are usable in any browser that has ever existed.</comment>


Mark Zuckerberg Sued Native Hawaiians for Their Own Land [video] - <AUTHOR> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6_RyE6XZiw <comment><USER2> Haven't watched this specific video, but from what I've read previously he's suing so that the courts can determine who owns the land so he can fairly pay them. Many people own tiny slices of land that they don't have any practical use for (because of how Hawaiian land gets passed down through generations), and Mark owns the vast majority of the island, so he's trying to fairly compensate the remaining land owners.

Also, he apparently dropped the lawsuit after the uproar.

[https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/news/2017/01/27/zuckerbe...](https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/news/2017/01/27/zuckerberg- drops-kauai-land-suits-hawaii-quiet-title/97152332/)

<comment><USER3> I'd just note that, while I'm nowhere near an expert on the topic, a big part of the problem generally is a fundamental cultural disconnect. Native Hawaiians had a more communal ownership model that appears to strike mainland US culture as fundamentally illegitimate. It tends to manifest now when a billionaire is annoyed that there's no one seller to go to when they want their island. In the past, it was plantation owners.

This is of course nothing new; one argument for displacing mainland Native Americans was that they didn't grok the virtues of private ownership of land. (In reality, the rationalization never matters; in such things, might quite literally manufactures right.)

<comment><USER4> > _Native Hawaiians had a more communal ownership model that appears to strike > mainland US culture as fundamentally illegitimate_

You're projecting agreement where there isn't any. The State of Hawai'i could pass a law placing these lands into public trust. Hell, the current owners could get together and do that themselves. That isn't happening because some want to keep the land, some people want to sell, and some might want something else, but nobody is sure who can do what with what.

> _one argument for displacing mainland Native Americans was that they didn 't > grok the virtues of private ownership of land_

The courts, here, are trying to assign ownership to the natives. This is strengthening their claims to their land, not diminishing it.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> WHY do we have an economic system that allows an individual to own almost an entire Hawaiian island, by virtue of owning majority share of an advertising platform?? The employees certainly don't get an island of their own, nor the owners or workers at any vendor data centers, or the power plant workers, or the crew that laid fiber or built the routers and wifi access points that get FB onto your screen? This giant funnel that plows billions of dollara into the pockets of a tiny number of people, because they have the piece of paper that says "I own this" and everyone down the line was just ok with it.

We should not allow billionaires.

<comment><USER6> Remember to compare what you don't like about one system with what you wouldn't like about the other. Socialist societies aren't without centralized extreme power, and how you get and keep that power is arguably much worse.

You also don't need to be socialist to fix the inequality problems.

And simply, there are too many mathematical power laws in any society to prevent the few from having a lot. The intensity is what you need to change. It's difficult.

<comment><USER5> Totally agree and I shouldn't invoke socialism because that introduces a huge number of other issues which I'm not referring to. My target is the outrageous inequality of wealth and ownership.

<comment><USER6> The thing is, when you take away "ownership" in the capitalist sense, de facto ownership and wealth still exists, just with different names.

Societies that aren't hierarchical don't really exist on any but the tiniest scales excluding some situations where individual units are nearly self- sufficient.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Look while it might sound horrible of a billionaire to do so, the way the titles work is quite difficult.

You buy the land from someone, and then 6 months down the track a relative turns up and claims they own part of the land etc etc. So pre-empting this, it is better to sue first than be tied up in court cases with people turning up over the next 20 years.

<comment><USER8> >it is better to sue first than be tied up in court cases with people turning up over the next 20 years.

Better for who though?

<comment><USER4> > _Better for who though?_

Settling land ownership disputes early and clearly is in the common interest.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> I will state upfront that I think Zuckerberg is an asshole for doing this. But the reality is that there are a lot of problems with the way native land gets structured legally.

Customary land accounts for 97% of land in Papua New Guinea. This is basically tribal land. There are more than 800 languages spoken there and about 40% of residents still support themselves in a traditional subsistence tribal lifestyle. In some sense, it is a success in terms of protecting native traditions.

It also means only 3% of the land can be developed. You cannot get a mortgage if a bank cannot take possession of the land. This barrier to accessing funds is a huge obstacle to real estate development on most tribal lands in any country.

Papua New Guinea has terrible intractable poverty and some of the worst domestic violence in the world. The violence there is so bad it is comparable to violence typically only seen in war zones. Violence and poverty tend to fuel one another. People trapped in poverty commit violence because they are frustrated and angry. Violence both destroys resources and makes it unsafe and unwise to try to invest money in development.

Historically, agrarian cultures and more modern cultures tend to displace hunter gatherer societies. Hunter gatherer cultures support only very low population levels. It takes a lot of land to feed each individual under this model.

In order to return to a hunter gatherer model for the world, billions of people would need to die. Modern agriculture is what makes modern life and population levels at all feasible.

Holding the land as a group sounds like a nice ideal, but it has a really poor track record for actually fostering some kind of high quality of (modern) life.

I don't know what the answer is. I am some small part Cherokee. I have kind of a romantic attachment to the idea of preserving native culture and practices. But this particular real estate practice seems to do more harm than good.

I wish I had a brilliant answer for how to preserve native land and also foster development. But those two things seem to be diametrically opposed and fundamentally incompatible.

Someone who knows a good answer, pretty please step forward and tell me otherwise. I would love to learn that I am wrong.

</comment><comment><USER10> Hawai'i has a different history of land title than most of the United States. This Wikipedia article isn't great, but has the basics. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_M%C4%81hele](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_M%C4%81hele)

<comment><USER11> I'm always unsure how to view historic land ownership. It seems a very recent development that humanity has stopped stealing land from one another and it's been great.

But now that we're not doing it anymore, many compare historic actions to today's values and say they were wronged. In many sense they were wronged but there is not a person on earths who ancestors didn't have land stolen from them. It's only the land that was most recently stolen that causes issues.

Given the amount of time that has past and the complexities around the issue I just don't see any solution that could be considered fair. Someone has since purchased the stolen land and views them selves as the rightful owner but the person that should have inherited the land also has a claim to it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> Yeah its almost like we need a different word than "sue" which universally has negative connotations.

He named them in court to force a discovery process because _governance structure_ in Hawaii has no infrastructure to track titles. Hawaii's executive branch has no tool, and Hawaii's legislative branch isn't going to undermine its constituents, so Hawaii's judicial branch is all that there is.

He offered them money for the land when they were able to be identified.

He did it through an LLC and some people regretted it when they found out it was actually the "rich white man" instead of a fellow farmer like they assumed.

Now as for tact? It was calculated and poorly executed. Analogous to when a billionaire landlord tries to evict all the public housing tenants who are all disenfranchised minorities "because they are renters! the law is on my side!". Actions have consequences.</comment>


Show HN: A stock-picking helper for DIY investors - <AUTHOR> http://www.stockstrat.com <comment><AUTHOR> This is an app intended to help people sort through massive amounts of market data to make informed and independent investment decisions.

At this time, it can make stock-pick recommendations for your investment strategy. I'm planning to add a backtesting feature that tests real-world performance of your strategy.

Any feedback welcome. At this stage, I'd be willing to build in features just for you ;)</comment>