Ask HN: How do you deal with alienation? - <AUTHOR> How do you deal with social alienation? Over the past couple of years of high school, I've slowly lost contact with all of my friends. Whenever I do speak with them, I constantly think about the differences between me and them, and why I'm not friends with them anymore. Despite that, I'm so alone now that I desperately want to have a peer group to be with again. The problem is that the only people I consider to be good friends all have different interests, and all belong to different social groups. I have no social group of my own and go back and forth between their friend circles. It seems that their respective friend circles are very close knit.I always feel like the odd one out of whatever group I'm with at the time.
I don't think I could consider my close friends a social group of it's own, as they are all from different groups and aren't friends with each other.
Am I setting my standards for friends too high? I don't think I am, because I just want a friend that I can talk to on a wide variety of subjects, not just the few we have in common. I can't do that with anyone I know. I feel like when I talk to my "friends", I either have to talk all about computers, or all about music, or whatever that they're interested in, but never a mixture of everything. The peer groups I see are all so specialized and serve niche interests; none of them are generally interested in everything.
I feel even worse about this, because I think that because I am feeling like this, that it makes me a walking adolescent stereotype. I feel like just another Holden, which probably makes the entire situation worse. I'm being self-conscious about myself being self-conscious, so that probably doesn't help.
I feel like I can recognize the flaws in how I handle friendships, but I have no idea of how to solve them.
The only thing that feels like a solution is waiting until I am out of high school to find new people. Everyone has told me to wait until college, and then I will find new people, but everyone I know in college generally sticks with the same friend group that they had in high school (hence why I would know), so I don't have much hope in that.
How do you go about meeting new interesting people? How do you stop yourself from over-analyzing your current friendships? I never post here on HN, but I love reading the articles and discussions, and you seem like a wise and interesting bunch of people. Please give me your advice. Whenever I try to talk to people in person about this, they just tell me that they don't know what to say, and I can't stand talking to psychologists because they seem to just regurgitate what you want to hear repeatedly.
Where are the truly interesting people in life? <comment><USER4> Don't try to meet people like you. Instead, become interested in lots of different types of people, how they live, who they are, etc. And don't just become interested, but actually make an attempt to blend into their cultures, social groups, etc. This is what is known as "social hacking." Successfully doing this will allow you to incorporate lots of different points of view in your work and life, which will give you a richer experience. Sticking to people who are all "good" at one thing inevitably leads to dysfunctionality and irrelevance.

Oh, and don't try to look for smart people. Half of those people we label as "smart" are actually complete idiots. Just because society currently describes people who can type mathematically-intensive instructions to a machine as "smart" does not mean that they are any more intelligent than the person who has dedicated their time to understanding social nuance and child-rearing, or whatever. A lot of "dumb", "average" people are a lot smarter than you at many things; cooking, talking to girls, changing a flat tire, whatever... Learn to enjoy this.

And finally, whatever you do, do NOT attempt to surround yourself with people who consider themselves "interesting." That's the absolute WORST. There's nothing worse than a group of people who sit around and congratulate themselves for being so cool and important - which is exactly why so many people in positions of power, feeling that they have "arrived" and can thus finally mingle with people worthy of their mystical talents, are so utterly impotent at accomplishing anything of significance. But hey, if you really want to smoke pot with Bono on his yacht and pretend you're saving the world, go for it. (That's not a joke, by the way. He really does that.)

<comment><USER5> > Don't try to meet people like you. Instead, become interested in lots of > different types of people

[http://www.cnn.com/2008/LIVING/wayoflife/07/28/mf.mrrogers.n...](http://www.cnn.com/2008/LIVING/wayoflife/07/28/mf.mrrogers.neighbor/index.html)

Mr. Rogers inspires me. Seriously. Check out #6.

<comment><USER6> Excellent point. Most interesting people are inherently curious about everything.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I was thinking of posting a question very similar to this one, though the details of my situation are pretty different.

See, I've been alone for most of my life. Alone in the sense that I've only ever had two or three real friends, and I often go for weeks without having a conversation with another person.

As a kid I was fine with this. I was the guy who always sat by himself during lunch and recess, and nobody bothered me and I felt fine. I stayed the same until my senior year of high school, when I was struck by a burning need to make friends, meet girls and stop being alone all the damn time. I made some friends that year, but we were high school seniors, so we all moved off to college and I never heard from them again.

Now I'm in my third year of college, I have no friends and I can't believe how hard it is to meet people. Though I guess the problem isn't _meeting_ people specifically, but getting the acquaintances I make to turn into friendships. I just don't seem to really click with anyone.

"You should join an organization for something you're into!" Well, I've looked but 90% of the organizations I see are racial, religious or political, and the rest just don't interest me. If I could find, say, an OCaml or Lisp programmers group, or an early music society, I'd be thrilled, but of course there isn't one. Maybe I'm just a narrow person, I don't know.

Hmm... I'm not sure now why I'm posting this, but I typed it so what the hell. _submit_

<comment><USER8> You're being narrow. Of course we all want people like us to talk with, but thats not the rigth attitude. Just talk with someone, try to find whats interesting about them, place yourself in his/her shoes and try to see what makes them tickle and then talk about it, youll find that you can almost always learn something.

<comment><USER9> Sure, you can learn something, but will that something be worth the effort? That's the $64k question here, and I believe the answer for most people is "no."

Being alone sucks, but before you kill the pain with the companionship of idiots, you should ask if the cure is worse than the disease. Looking back, I regret time spent on idiots a lot more than time spent alone. YMMV, of course.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> "Where are the truly interesting people in life?"

everywhere. My network of friends includes less than 10% that work in IT. Most are not geeks but are ok with the fact that I am as I accept and don't really define what they are. I just enjoy their company.

I had a friend that worked on the documentary series where they interviewed a group of people each year for, well, I forget how long, but a long time. I can't remember the series at the moment. The obvious question I had was "How did you pick the group of people to interview for such a long project? You need to make sure you pick potentially interesting people, right?"

My friend told me that my intuition was not correct. It turns out it didn't matter, everyone is interesting.

</comment><comment><USER11> If I could send my teen self some advice, it would be to _relax_ and simply persue the topics that interest me. All else will fall into place.

Hope this helps :)

<comment><USER12> Oh yeah, if only I had known... ;-)

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> You may want to reexamine potentially self-limiting assumptions:

 _I always feel like the odd one out_ \-- you may be partially imagining this 'odd man out' status; also, others you see as 'close knit' may feel just as tenuously connected as you do.

 _my close friends [are not] a social group... they are all from different groups and aren't friends with each other_ \-- have they met? what if you made them a group around you?

 _I can't [talk on a wide variety of subjects] with anyone I know_ \-- are you sure? what happens if you try? maybe they are so nervous about going off- script they're sticking to safe topics, too, and would welcome a change.

 _The peer groups I see are all so specialized... none of them are generally interested in everything_ \-- are you sampling all peer groups? do you see them in all their expressions? is there a chance you've defined 'peer group' as 'sharing narrow common interests', and thus it's impossible for you to see other kinds of peer groups, even right in front of you?

 _I can recognize the flaws in how I handle friendships_ \-- what if you're misdiagnosing the issues?

 _I don't have much hope in [waiting until college]_ \-- consider the possibility 'everyone' else is right in ther advice, and those people who don't find close friends in the contrived HS environment do find them in college and other non-HS activities.

'The map is not the territory'; your analysis may have prematurely converged on counterproductive (but self-reinforcing) conclusions.

Stepping away from your exact words: you seem to think of friend groups almost like formal clubs, that preexist, with clear memberships and standards, that have to invite new people in.

Try instead the assumption that they are _all_ ad hoc, popping in and out of existence, with ever-changing memberships, and open to anyone who shows up. You belong the moment you decide you belong, and others will assume you're 'in' unless you take explicit steps to opt out.

</comment><comment><USER14> _I either have to talk all about computers, or all about music, or whatever that they're interested in, but never a mixture of everything. The peer groups I see are all so specialized and serve niche interests; none of them are generally interested in everything._

Think on that statement for a little while, and maybe you'll see the source of your trouble. This is kind of a growing up phenomenon. You aren't unique in this regard.

You seem to expect your friends to be a perfect clone of you, with the same interests (you have a few things that you're interested in; you are not a "mixture of all things"). The older you get, the more you'll realize that sharing one or two interests with someone is enough, as long as you enjoy each others company. You may find a few "soul mate" type friends in college, who like the same bands you like, who enjoy the same activities, are nerdy, etc. If you go to a school that specializes in nerdy subjects it's actually very likely, whereas if you go to the local party school, it is very unlikely. So, yes, it may get a lot better in college--but then when college is over, you'll still have to be able to build relationships without that forced captivity thing, so you might as well develop the skill now.

The best way I know is to get involved in something you like. If it's music, start a band. If it's nerdy stuff, start a group that builds crazy nerdy crap and call it art. If it's theatre, join a local company or take classes. If it's a sport, join a league. If it's drinking heavily, start tailgating at football games.

I'm deeply introverted and a loner (and mostly I like it that way), but whenever I've felt the need to expand my social circle I've usually started a band, and right away my circle of friends expands dramatically. I happen to love talking about, listening to, and performing, music...so this works out. If you find that people who only talk about one thing are tedious, this can be a problem...so I guess you'll need to figure out something that you don't mind _only_ talking about for a few hours each week, so that you can do it regularly enough to experience a bond with folks.

 _Where are the truly interesting people in life?_

I don't know. What do you mean by "truly interesting"? Are _you_ truly interesting? Does everyone in your life have to be _truly_ interesting for you to want them as friends? I'm empathetic to your position on this, as I kinda suck at having and keeping friendships alive, too, and it's partly because I find most people tedious after an hour or two of their company. But, I'm old enough to realize that no one is perfect, including me. Some of the most interesting people I've ever met (including a handful of famously interesting folks) are _still_ not people I would want to spend several hours a day with.

There's also something I've learned only in the past couple of years: When a conversation falls flat, it's always as much my fault as it is the person I'm talking to. As dumb or slow or weird or bland as the person I'm talking to may be, there is almost certainly _something_ I can do to make it more interesting for both of us. Maybe it's just telling a joke, and being funny (because being entertaining is as much fun for the entertainer as the entertainee). Maybe it's introducing the person to someone else, and making the pair into a trio or more. pg is hilariously and famously good/bad at this (anyone who's spent more than an hour or two with him has heard the words, " _This_ is the guy you need to talk to!").

 _How do you stop yourself from over-analyzing your current friendships?_

Do something else. If you find yourself thinking too hard about something dumb, like, "Are my friends smart/interesting enough?" Call them up and go do something that you enjoy with them. That'll answer the question, because they've just shown that they're smart/interesting enough to do whatever it is you enjoy, and it'll take your mind off of the wacky self-analysis. Of course, if they all bail on the idea and don't want to leave the house or something, then it answers the question as well...in the other direction. Find more interesting friends who like to do stuff. Doing stuff is actually a really good cure for a lot of mental blocks. I recommend it. It doesn't even matter what stuff. Ride bikes, go bowling, serve soup at the local homeless shelter, build big art, put on silly clothes and golf, etc.

<comment><AUTHOR> Oh wow. I never expected this many replies... But anyways, thank you for the advice. I guess I am expecting people to be like me, which I realize is a bit ridiculous, now that you point it out. I think I've been doing a little bit of what you said about trying to find people... I took up an internship at a public radio station because I thought the people there would be interesting, and the people there are great, but the age difference between me and everyone can be a bit awkward at times. I guess I need to repeat that kind of scenario where I put myself out there to meet new people.

You're absolutely right about doing stuff as a good cure for mental blocks. I got a road bike and started going for daily rides, and that helped a bit.

<comment><USER14> _I took up an internship at a public radio station because I thought the people there would be interesting, and the people there are great, but the age difference between me and everyone can be a bit awkward at times._

Excellent! Don't dismiss the old-timers. Some of the most interesting people I've ever known have been a lot older than me. In fact, actually, most of the truly interesting folks I've know have been older than me--they've just had more time to acquire crazy and funny stories. I took a job at an independent television station when I was in college, and that was a great experience (it got acquired by the WB, now CW, while I was there, and the character of the station changed and most of the old-timers left). Several of the folks I worked with had been involved in _building_ the tower and broadcast station back in the sixties. Those old guys (and one gal) had some fantastic stories about the birth and growth (and changing mores, like the fact that smoking pot in master control on the night shift was accepted practice in the 70's) of the station, and had a lot of interesting insight into technology and changes; they'd seen the station go from film to analog video of multiple types to digital video, along with the introduction of satellites and other wonders of modern technology.

Work past the awkward, be friendly and interested in their stories (fake it till you make it), and you'll probably learn something about making friends with folks who _aren't_ exactly like you. Older folks are also more likely to be able and willing to make up for your lack of social graces. Generally, the older you get, the less clique-oriented you become...you might get more set in your ways in a lot of regards, but older folks tend to be happier to talk to new and different people, especially if the new people are truly interested in what they have to say.

Another interesting old-timer story: A friend of mine worked with a lady who was maybe 10-15 years older than her. They became friends, because they were both vegetarian, and had a few other things in common. Turns out the lady was Jimmy Dale Gilmore's (probably best known as Smokey from The Big Lebowski outside of Texas, but he's a famous Grammy-wielding country musician) wife. You want interesting stories? Ask an old music star. Point is, you never know who you're going to find when you actually get to know someone.

Anyway, the old-timers aren't generally going to be your best friends, of course. But, socializing merely for the sake of socializing is good for you.

<comment><USER15> Old-timers (the cool ones) also don't have stupid social hangups, so they really know how to have fun.

Plus, when it comes time to network for your start-up, old-timers tend to have a lot more connections and resources too.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Wow, this sounds soo familiar. I remember having similar thoughts when I was in high school. I'll try to give some useful advice.

 _I have no social group of my own and go back and forth between their friend circles._

I'd ignore social groups entirely. Seriously, just forget any of these artificial groups of friends. I know that's not actually possible but in general don't worry about it. When I look back at the stratification of my high school social order it seems like it was straight out of "lord of the flies". Interact with the people who are doing interesting things. People who you find interesting or enjoy spending time with. Don't join any friend groups, that's an entirely isolating situation. Right now you can freely "group" with whoever you want.

 _Everyone has told me to wait until college, and then I will find new people, but everyone I know in college generally sticks with the same friend group that they had in high school (hence why I would know), so I don't have much hope in that._

Don't go to college where everyone else is going to college. Get away from all this. I did, and it was one of the best decisions I made when I was a teenager. Everyone in high school will likely think you are crazy for not going to the usual schools, but who cares.

I think the single best thing you can do is just get out and... do things. This is surprisingly simple but will really make a difference. I think it's been echoed here already by a number of other people. Pickup a new sport, go see a movie, go to clubs, take classes at the community college, go on a road trip (gas is affordable again!), see a concert you would otherwise not see, play cards, go to a house party, study with people you usually wouldn't study with, volunteer somewhere, go to a museum, get an unusual part-time job, do something that no one else is doing. Go buy a copy of Make magazine and pick a project (<http://www.makezine.com/>). Before you know it, you'll be the interesting person that other people will want to spend time with.

And of course read PG's take on high school and nerds: <http://www.paulgraham.com/nerds.html> Somehow this hasn't been linked to in the post. I know it represents my high school experiences very well and he gives great advice.

<comment><USER16> Good call on Make Magazine! I suggest that daniel_ start a project that he will probably need help with, and meet new people through the project. Tons of fun to be had from that magazine, I wish I had time to pursue all the DIY projects I could, oh well.

</comment></comment><comment><USER17> Interesting people are everywhere and nowhere. You find them one by one.

Feeling alienated sucks but you might find that not belonging to just one group is one of your strengths. It can give you a unique perspective because you have a wider range of experiences. It can also increase your tolerance for change and uncertainty. People that stay in groups tend to want things to stay the same and you don't meet interesting people in Berlin or Beijing by staying the same.

And you may want to reconsider your thoughts about psychologists. They are a great resource for figuring out how you feel because they're trained listeners and neutral to your situation. Sometimes you need to try out a couple before you find one that you find helpful.

<comment><USER18> Interesting people are everywhere. You find them by BEING one. And by listening to everything.

<comment><USER17> My point is that it's not a determinate process.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> I'm 17 and I have a bunch of good friends, and guess what? None of them share my main interests.

I'm geeky, I love my mac, I love podcasts, etc. My friends aren't crazy about computers really. A person I consider my best friend is really into cars, mechanics, etc. I'm really into SEO/marketing/startups.

The reason we get along is because we don't have a lot of the same interests. I get along with him because he's a good person, fun to hang out with and compliments me (as cheesy and fruity as this all sounds).

Stop looking for that person who is your clone. I have geeky friends that I meet with at local events, coffee shops, etc - but none of these people are my day to day good friends.

You also need some good online friends. Some may not agree, but I think having friends online is great. I have about 3 really good friends online who compliment me and who I talk to almost daily about.. whatever. I've known some of them for over 3yrs online. Some I have met in person, some I haven't. You obviously don't want to spend all day online but having a few of these friends and people to talk to is always good in my mind.

<comment><USER20> Not to be a pedant, but this post really doesn't read right when you keep using the word 'compliment' when you mean 'complement.' It makes you sound self-obsessed.

That said, online friends are definitely not a substitute for real life ones, but it's not a bad way to build a group of people you can use as an always available sounding board for the random crap that pops into your head.

For the OP, the thing about people is that talking about the one thing you have in common is _easy_. No one really only has a single interest, but you have to actually spend quite a bit of time with people to get them to open up and start sharing more about themselves. You'd be surprised by the kinds of people you'll find yourself having things in common with if you have the chance to get to know them.

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> _Where are the truly interesting people in life?_

If you haven't already - Travel, move overseas, etc - the world is a big place.

Sounds trite, but broad horizons help.

<comment><USER22> I'll second this, and add:

1.Traveling alone will help you to meet new people.

2.Do this with the objective of evolving your view of how humans work, not making specific life-long friends (though of course, that is possible).

3.Hitch-hiking is even better for meeting people and learning about people. In a way, a discussion with a lone driver in their own car is much like an accelerated version of making a friend. Hitch hiking is tough in the US, but easier elsewhere.

4\. Keep looking for people who are similar to yourself. At my high school <10% of people were similar to me. At my college >50% of people were similar to me. It was like night and day. It may not be college for you, but it's somewhere.

</comment></comment><comment><USER23> I think the type of friend you want is rare. But there is hope-- these people want to find you as much as you want to find them! Do what it takes to meet and get to know as many people as possible. I don't mean to befriend them all by any means but get to know them, try to understand them etc. Develop an interest in people and in relating to people IN GENERAL. Do not have expectations of amazing connections. Be in the moment. By that I mean you should be putting your full-self into the interaction. And you should be spontaneous and follow the intuitive flow of the situation rather than fixating on preconceived ideas you may have. Just like when you're debugging code. All focus on that person. What they are saying, how they are saying it, etc. Talk and respond. Monitor their feelings and adjust what you're saying and how you're saying it to make things go smoothly and interestingly for all. Monitor your feelings. Is this person making you feel slow, annoyed, sad? Or are they making you feel excited, "CAN!", surprised, etc? Take that information into account when "valuing" people. Someone who has different interests but makes you feel excited and enthusiastic is of much greater value than a carbon copy of yourself. Esp. if you're doing the same thing for them by a different magic mechanism. It's yin-yang. Lookout for that more than anything else. Good luck! And don't worry about feeling like a Holden. Holden's a good guy just a little immature. And being the catcher in the rye is a mighty good plan and one way to realize just what I'm suggesting. Not for everyone of course but helping the good and innocent can yield great satisfaction.

</comment><comment><USER24> I think you are giving too much importance to the kind of subjects you discuss with friends. The important thing is that you get along well, not what you are talking about.

Part of what you say sounds like the trouble of growing up. There is an age when what interests you automatically interests your friends. When I was a kid, other kids I met were usually open enough to get interested in whatever I was interested in, and we could easily have shared passions. These interests were also more shallow and less complicated than those I developed later. I am 39 now, and at my age everybody seems so specialized that they rarely pick up new interests. This is compensated by the lesser importance interests take in a friendship. I met some of my best friends because they make comics, like me. When I see them nowadays, we almost never speak about comics. I have practically no common interests with my wife, but we get along fine.

Maybe you have not found a psychologist that fits you, but a good one could be helpful. Their job is not to tell you what you want to hear, but often they will repeat what you say to make sure they understand you correctly. I went to see a psychologist once when I had a depression. I think what helped me most was to have a relation to someone I could trust. Feeling less lonely could be enough to get rid of some of the problems you mention, like thinking too much about the differences between you and your friends. Building a relationship is something a psychologist should really be good at, and seeing how he does it with you can help you with others.

</comment><comment><USER25> It's all in the deeper layers of your brain.

Look at all the "popular" people you know - individuals with lots of friends, a pretty busy social life, etc. What makes them like that? Easy: when they interact with people, the things that light up in their brains are all sorts of pleasure centers and reward sites and parts of the brain that generate positive emotions, and stuff like that. I don't know the proper names for those things, but you get the gist, I'm sure.

Even when just thinking about social interactions, before they even get up and go out and do it, the simple thought of interacting with people generates the same reaction in their brains. So they are motivated to start doing it, rather than sitting passive.

How about those with few (or no) real friends? When interacting with people, there's no such reaction in their brains. No reward sites, no positive emotions, nothing. Or, even worse, negative emotions are generated. And yes, that may happen even as that person feels "alone" - those are different processes, not mutually incompatible.

The solution? This is one of those rare instances when self-help books and New Age literature and stuff like that actually works. "Change starts with yourself", "positive thinking", heck even "love thy neighbor". All those stereotypes, in such a situation they do apply pretty well.

</comment><comment><USER26> Good friends are hard to come by and therefore finding a whole group of them at once is pretty improbable. On the other hand, there's something interesting and something worthy in each and every person if you only drop your expectations and demands first.

Secondly, friends are also like women: you'll find a good one when you've really reached a point of frustration where you find yourself swearing that "This is enough of suffering for me! I do NOT need a friend/girlfriend to be happy and to feel fulfilled. If I have to, I'll go by myself just fine, thank you!" OTOH, nobody wants to befriend someone who really wants a friend, maybe just any friend. You can't seek for friendship, it will seek for you.

Third, you should make up your mind about what you want. What do you want from your friends should you become blessed with one? What do you want to talk about with them? What do you want to do with them? Unless you know what you want, you'll just keep bumping into friends or "friends" who want to do their stuff. Nobody is going to come and probe you for subjects that you might want to talk about, everyone just settles for some topic they know you know too. Also, being occasionally brave enough to talk about what YOU want to talk about is a great device to weed out people who can't or won't align with your interests. For example, if you want to talk about life, start doing that and you'll soon find out who will bounce back and who simply can't handle it.

Generally, whatever it is that isn't working will just keep happening again and again until you find a way to change yourself, causing different and possibly more desirable things to keep happening.

<comment><USER24> > "This is enough of suffering for me! I do NOT need a friend/girlfriend to be > happy and to feel fulfilled. If I have to, I'll go by myself just fine, > thank you!"

This might be realistic in the case of a girlfriend, but is hard to believe in the case of friends. You can't just decide that loneliness doesn't hurt you anymore, can you?

Or if you can, it would be very interesting to know more. There is a lot of research that points the other way.

<comment><USER27> Not being around people does not equate to loneliness.

There are some good books on the subject. Solitude: A Return to the Self by Anthony Storr was one of the first I read and had a strong focus on psychology. For a more opinionated text, Party of One: The Loners' Manifesto by Anneli Rufus was good at building confidence in living this way.

<comment><USER24> I just put the first one my reading list.

Judging by what I see on amazon.com, Storr analyzes the life of some famous people that apparently managed to be happy through work despite 'inferior relationships'.

The one I've read is 'Loneliness: Human Nature and the Need for Social Connection' by John T. Cacioppo and William Patrick. It quotes a lot of studies that statistically link feeling disconnected with all sorts of things you want to avoid, including health problems.

Of course, instead of having friends, you can try to avoid loneliness by getting rid of your social needs, in a kind of ascetism. I never managed to do that. On the other hand I read that Alexander Selkirk, the stranded sailor who inspired Robinson Crusoe, suffered terribly from loneliness the first one and a half years, but then got over it completely. Later, back in Scotland, he even regretted his time on the island. I was wondering if this story was true, and if there were other examples.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> Firstly, don't feel bad because you feel this way. It is pretty typical for a bright kid to feel this way, often. The thing that is getting you down is the over-analysis and introspection not the relationships.

Relationships with people are hugely rewarding and enjoyable but you can't depend on them for happiness (or anything). See people as the oases in your life. Depend on yourself for what you need and enjoy people as you find them.

Over analysis and introspection are just a habit of mind. They are not always productive but have their place, especially at certain times (just broken up, just done something shocking, had a profound experience, failed in some way) but prolonged bouts can be destructive.

All the advice so far seems to point to finding something else to occupy your mind. Do that and you will find people with different interests a welcome distraction. Of course whatever you find to occupy your time other will do too, so there is your social circle.

It seems trite but you need to do stuff. I don't want to make you feel worse but if you spend all your time self absorbed then people will never have the same interests as you and yo won't be that interesting so won't meet life's 'truly interesting' people ( people like me ;) )

What do you like to do?

</comment><comment><USER29> I'm a senior in high school, experienced similar feelings a couple of years ago. SwellJoe says "you seem to expect your friends to be a perfect clone of you", which, at least, is what I felt.

Even though you might not find people with the exact same interests as you, if you look hard you will find that interesting people have similar qualities, regardless of their specific interests. Seek out people who are good at what they do, and avoid people who aren't. Academics are a good start—befriend your local valedictorian. Find people in any activity—math, science, music, newspaper—and if they're winning any competitions,

As for over-analyzing relationships goes, that shouldn't really be a problem so long as it doesn't stop you from actually executing them. The key to a friendship is to be useful to the other person. Always pay more attention to them than you do to yourself. Figure out things they like/need but don't have, and buy gifts for them.

Keep in mind that the social landscape can change drastically in a very short time. Don't assume that a year from now nothing will have changed. It's your job to make sure the change comes out in your favor.

<comment><USER30> _The key to a friendship is to be useful to the other person. Always pay more attention to them than you do to yourself. Figure out things they like/need but don't have, and buy gifts for them._

So have you actually met any people yet? This sounds like you're just trying to kiss someone's ass. That's not how real friendships are forged.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> Unfortunately you can hardly have it both ways. Most people only have one primary interest in their lives, and form groups around it. You don't seem to be like that, which makes you an exception. Of course there are other exceptions like you, but they are by definition hard to come by. So either you get really into one group, or a little bit into many of them, your choice.

</comment><comment><USER32> I agree with the idea about going to a college that is different than most of your high school classmates are going too. I did that too, and not knowing anybody forced me to meet a lot of people. Besides, I personally didn't want to spend the next four years of college hanging out with the same people I hung out with in high school.

Sure, the college you choose will be the standard destination for some group of people, and so they will be coming to college knowing a lot of their classmates. But people usually come to college with the goal of meeting a lot of new classmates, and as long as you make an effort to meet new people and get involved, you should be successful.

I remember coming to college not knowing anyone, and somewhat stressed out that I might not make a lot of friends. This might have made me come across as a little desperate. So, don't worry about making close friendships when you just meet someone new. Just get to know a little bit about them and what they find interesting. And when you get invited to something, or are doing an activity, invite people who you know might be interested. And then, after a while you will have made a lot good friends. Personally my social life now is a lot better than it ever was in high school, or even my first quarter of college.

I also had the problem of over-analyzing my friendships a little too much. I just realized that I couldn't expect to have the same level of friendship with everyone I meet. So what has helped me is spending time with more people. Sure, I'm better friends with some people than others. But knowing a lot of people helps when my better friends are all busy with other people or activities on the weekends, since I know that I'll be able to spend time with somebody I like. And once I realize that I don't really need a specific friendship to be around interesting people, or too spend time with people I like, then I mostly stop over-analyzing that relationship.

</comment><comment><USER33> The place where you'll truly find interesting people is the place that places emphasis on talent and skill above everything else. In high school I had the same problem you do; in college I'm finding it even harder, as we haven't had long to sort out into groups, versus the 12 years we had in grade school.

I've been three places where I've felt real kinship with the people around me, to varying degrees. I find it when I go to work out; there's a focus amongst everybody in doing something pure and on self-improvement. That's the least I've felt it. I find it among theater people - the real obsessives. Theater is such an odd thing that the people who are drawn to it are very focused on doing as good a job as they can, they're confident enough to have a good time doing so, and they understand how hard it is, so that they welcome most anybody who wants to learn. It was most focused at a summer program I spent a month at, that selected high school students based entirely on talent rather than GPA and resume, and made itself entirely free of charge. I was one of the writers in the program, and everybody in every field was absolutely incredible. Once you get to that sort of group, everybody's interesting and unique and loves everybody else to some degree.

So that's the tried-and-true method: find the places that are pockets of talent. Those places attract more talent and become really focused. If you can't immediately get there, the method I've found works is to just act like yourself. Don't avoid parts of your personality just because other people find them off-putting. That's uncomfortable. Instead, try and focus on doing what you want to do, and find the sorts of people that gravitate towards you based on who you are. I found, actually, that in my senior year of high school the people doing that all found each other, and while that group broke apart again, we had a few really wonderful months where we were all with people we'd never known really well before, where we liked each other not just for intellect but for personal honesty.

That's not as easy a route, depending on what kind of person you are. I'm very sharp-tongued, for instance, and I'm not very interested in most people. That in itself offends some people, or at least makes them indifferent. But the result is that when you _are_ with people, you really value them. I really connected with my roommate - he got me into lifting weights, actually - and a few people on my floor. Some musician/gamer/coder/work-out types. Nobody who's exactly my personality type, but a lot of people who really tolerate each other for who we are. And that's better than pretending friendships and having none.

Despite that, I've got phases. I have some periods where I feel outright hateful hostility towards the people who aren't like me. I usually just keep that inside me, and focus the angst that I've got on working. The first major period of it I wrote a book. After that I wrote a few bursts of poetry and designed a web site. I'm half in the middle of one now and it's really keeping me focused on my work. It helps to focus it outwards at something (though, as a warning, I tried to get rid of it by drinking once and as a result half my floor wouldn't speak to me for months).

I overanalyze friendships to death, to answer your last question. I overanalyze everything. I think that's a good thing. It implies that you're seeking for something meaningful and lasting. If something's not working, then it doesn't hurt to try and change it. Just don't get off to too drastic a start, or you'll burn bridges that you regret burning later.

Hope that helps you! :-)

<comment><USER34> If 80% of people are talentless or skillless (wow, a naturally-ocurring triple-L), what should those people do?

<comment><USER33> See, maybe this is bias, but I don't think it's possible to be talentless or skill-less (hyphen, maybe?) entirely. The people I know who're talented are the people who ask questions. The people who're skilled are the people who learn how to do something. And I've never met people who can't do either. Only people who refuse to.

The people who I think are most talented - the people I try to emulate - <USER2> the people who never stop asking questions. The more you ask, the more comprehensive view you have of the thing, and the more you've got to master. There's nothing particularly hard to it.

The people who don't ask questions, but accept things as they are, are the people who comfortably fit into a niche. I think most people do this: they get to a certain level, then stop, and they settle in with people who've settled there. The people who are skill-less settle in with people who have that mindset. So they end up with some sort of a satisfaction.

The people who impress me the most, in every single field, are the ones who are never satisfied entirely. The ones who constantly move forward. It leads to a mindset like the one in the OP: you feel dissatisfied with the people around you, the people who settle in. And while the whole idea is that you never _do_ settle in with a group when you're like that, you do acknowledge the people who are similar to you, and you develop bonds like that. Those are my closest friends: the people who, to some degree or other, never stop pushing themselves forward. It's because they always change: they always stay interesting. And while all of those close friends belong to entirely separate groups, while most of them have never met each other in person, they're still a very definitive group in my mind. And I'd like to think that I belong to that same group in their minds.

<comment><USER35> I like the lack of the "talent" meme in asian culture. hard work is correctly identified as the reason for superior performance.

<comment><USER33> _Part_ of the reason.

The part of that culture that I dislike is that there's _no_ emphasis on figuring out what's most worth figuring out. There has to be a period of figuring out what's worth your time before you dedicate your time. It's present in American culture, though not as prominently as it ought to be, but from what I've seen of asian culture it's not there at all. It's why the few big Japanese successes that fascinate me - though I don't know very many people, I'll admit - are ones that are openly West-influenced. Shigeru Miyamoto and Nobuo Uemats, for instance: the one is more influenced by The Beatles than anything else, and the other originally tried writing songs like Elton John.

<comment><USER35> when you have a billion people you can afford to brute force capitalism.

<comment><USER36> Superior performance can be had by applying the right algorithm. Also, applying the wrong algorithm may not get you where you want no matter how many cycles you put in. Brute force is always a terrible way of doing things unless there literally is no better way (I'm looking at you NP-Hard).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> _Where are the truly interesting people in life?_ \- they are here, among other places.

Normal people just want to live a normal life, have their statistically approved 2.1 kids, have sex every wednesday and friday and live their life like everyone else. That is why they are called normal.

And then there's this peculiar breed of man that doesn't seem to be satisfied with the acceptance of every rule and to do as he's told but want to question assumptions and discover new things. He is rare, and thus normally has problems finding peers that have the same curiosity towards life as him.

I think you're one of those people. Don't feel bad about that, they are the ones that change the world.

</comment><comment><USER38> It's not really about friends,it's about growing up. Self reliance and such. The older one gets, the less anyone has in common with anyone else. In a couple of seconds you'll be contemplating retirement and barely remember this question at all.

You are learning how to deal with the real world, the world you must navigate to find happiness. Sooner than later you'll fall in love and then even this goes out the window. You think you're confused now? Just wait.

Just be thankful you have a place like this, where people want to answer with contemplated gems and not something something...

</comment><comment><USER39> I really don't give a shit about alienation. I try to talk about anything and analyze the person I talk to using philosophical techniques. (philosophy is good for good conversation).

<comment><USER8> One of my best friends is a painter, so I made a good mental exercise of trying to frame my interests in something more broad so I can discuss them with him. e.g. I talk about people creating things from my programming experience and my friend from his experiences as an artist.

</comment></comment><comment><USER40> _"I feel like when I talk to my "friends", I either have to talk all about computers, or all about music, or whatever that they're interested in, but never a mixture of everything."_

Have you actually tried talking about other topics? It sounds like you're making assumptions about what your friends are interested in, but haven't actually tested your hypothesis.

I don't think I've met anyone who isn't keen to learn something new or teach me about one of their interests.

</comment><comment><USER41> Ah yes, ask a bunch of people who aren't qualified to give psychological advice a psychological question. This is the same as asking legal questions here.

Go get help. You don't sound suicidal or anything (though if you are, run to the nearest psychiatrist) but you do sound like you've got something other than teenage angst (in my highly unqualified opinion) so you should at least run your problem by a psychologist. What could it hurt?

<comment><USER41> I can see why this was downvoted. Advising someone to seek psychological advice from a psychologist, rather than a forum of programmers, was clearly wrong. A bunch of programmers who aren't qualified to give psychological advice doing so is clearly more valuable.

</comment></comment><comment><USER42> It's commendable that you post this in the open. That takes a lot of guts. You aren't alone, in fact like you mentioned... this is why Catcher In the Rye is so popular, so identifiable.

1\. Take others advice with a grain of salt. 2. Dig down and get tough otherwise this beat you up. 3. Standards are worth having.

Not the best advice, but in reality you'll ultimately do whatever you decide and not what we tell you. Good luck.

</comment><comment><USER43> Just stop alienating yourself.

Stop coming up with reasons to dislike your friends. Stop waiting for something to magically change in your life (college won't be _that_ different.

And definitely stop framing the problem as _other people_ alienating _you_. Even if it were true, that's not a problem you can do much about.

Spend time with people you like, and try to let people surprise you.

</comment><comment><USER44> This appears to be a popular thread, and I don't have time to read all the comments, but let me throw in this quick recommendation: How to Win Friends and Influence People, by Dale Carnegie. Try putting the basic techniques into practice along with developing _your_ skill for finding others interesting.

</comment><comment><USER45> Believe it or not you seem to be a social butterfly. The best "socialistas" have several friends in every field of life. This is great as it allows you to not get bored and each niche will feed you with more information. Stick to this plan. Expand it. Materialize it.

</comment><comment><USER46> i went to an out-of-state college in a big city nobody else from my high school was going to. it worked well for a reset (not that i had particularly intended to accomplish that).

and all the interesting people are in startups ;)

</comment><comment><USER3> When I was in this situation, I somewhat wanted advice, but really I wanted someone to just take the time to talk to me.

If you feel that way, I'm free to talk - send me an email or aim me - <USER3> (at) gmail or Spyckie on aim.

</comment><comment><USER47> social life at that age is ebb & flow, man. just find your similarities and try not to exacerbate the differences. youre in a hyper-sensitive stage of development and anyone you can find to lean on for growth is going to be an invaluable resource. hell is (mostly) not other people, hell is over- analyzation.

college, hopefully, will blow your mind. it may not be everything you want it to be, and may not even be right for you, but it will take a _great_ personal undertaking on your part to _not_ meet some excellent people.

</comment><comment><USER48> Consider joining local chapter of <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toastmasters_International>

</comment><comment><USER49> _I feel like just another Holden, which probably makes the entire situation worse._

Holden? I've wiki'd it to no avail. Can someone enlighten me?

<comment><USER50> _Holden?_

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

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> Work hard and get into a good college.

</comment><comment><USER51> Here is a concept.

Your friends don't need to share the same interests as you and you can still be friends.

</comment><comment><USER52> There is an old saying: "bored people are themselves, boring"

<comment><USER53> srsly.

my Spanish teacher a few years ago told me that the word in Spanish is the same in either case: aburrido. the downside is that most English speakers will assume you mean "a burrito." the upside is that it makes a lot of sense to combine these two words into one thing.

</comment></comment><comment><USER54> > Where are the truly interesting people in life?

www.curi.us

</comment><comment><USER55> This is coming in a whiles after your post, but hopefully I can still put in some input.

I am a freshman in college with my first semester finished. In high school, I had about 3 good friends I enjoyed hanging out with. Besides them, I rarely had any social interaction. I was rarely (maybe once or twice?) invited to anything by anyone other than those 3 friends. The end of my senior year especially was depressing. I got to see everyone else, including my good friends, get invited to a good number of graduation parties while I stayed home. Weekend nights on the computer (like this one now) were common.

Enough about myself, but hopefully that gives you an idea of where I'm coming from. This advice is from very recent experience. I understand what you mean by having people you only have a specific interest with. While others say this is normal, I don't think they git it. If every time you're with them, the conversation turns to just computers or whatever, it's not real friendship. One piece of advice is that you could try doing something or going somewhere with people, so it's not all about a conversation. I also know that living in certain towns (like my hometown) finding something to do can be near impossible.

Now, for making new friends. Honestly, this is hard in high school, but not impossible. Friendships ebb and flow, and all of my friendships have seen different levels. Joining clubs is one good strategy. You could even try starting a club with someone else. For example, if you know someone who enjoys programming and you do too, you could both start a programming club. Why when I just said that _only_ talking about computers is not frienship? Because having a club means you have to interact with people and it can bring in situations for meeting other people. Often, just having a good time with someone is a good sign.

Now, for the advice that is probably most important, what will happen at college. I'm a geek, and I chose NYU, a college that I'm pretty sure is not very geeky at all. I did this on purpose, because I wanted a clean slate and an environment that actively pushed me to become more social. Here's some tips:

\- You _have_ to do whatever you can to meet random people in the beginning. Sit with people at lunch, talk to people before class, join clubs, go out with floormates. I didn't do this at all, and now I regret that my only friends are from my floor. You just have to take advantage of this critical period when socializing is extremely open.

\- I was extremely depressed during my first few days at college. Many others seemed to have something amazing about them, playing an instrument, photography, acting, etc. Everyone else also seemed much more sociable while I stayed quiet most of the time. I often thought whether I made the right college choice. But after those few days, I suddenly fit in well enough. I was still very much the same person, but after all the stuff about "whoa! you play guitar!" or "dude, you've got so many movies", personalities became more dominant. I wasn't an asshole, and I could be funny on occasion, and I danced like an idiot, but a funny idiot. So the moral of this is, do something in high school that you can show off to other people so those first few college days won't be as painful. Otherwise, just be a nice guy and if you come up with something funny, clever, or interesting, say it!

\- After a few weeks of college, you will notice that everyone seems to have an individual label. I don't mean prep, jock, goth, or things like that. More like, everyone has a few personality traits that make them who they are. Somebody might be the big, outgoing guy, or the californian Asian dude, or the quiet we-need-to-get-this-guy-a-date nerd (guess who I am). Whatever happens, don't be the awkward guy. This will mean being natural and casual. If you don't think you can hold a one-on-one conversation with a girl, even if she's just a floormate, then frankly, don't. Large groups are your safest bet.

To return to your high school troubles, here's one last piece of advice. Even though the guy who might be good at acting or talking to girls has his own kind of smartness, make sure that both you and other people respect you. Don't mix with people who disparage science if you're into science. Find people who are willing to be intellectual.

I'm afraid that much of the above was too long, off-topic, or just weird. I'm pretty much writing this as stream-of-consciousness. Just remember: Be yourself. You can change yourself. You have to like what you change into.

</comment><comment><USER48> Have you tried Facebook?

</comment><comment><USER56> _I have no social group of my own and go back and forth between their friend circles._

That's a sign that you're an interesting person. It's painful, though.

 _I feel like when I talk to my "friends", I either have to talk all about computers, or all about music, or whatever that they're interested in, but never a mixture of everything._

You need to swallow your pride and learn how to make small talk. It's frustrating for intense people like us, not because we're too smart or to good for small talk, but because we frankly don't care about things like sports teams or the weather (or if we do, we care too much and can recite sports/weather statistics and bore people to death). However, it's a skill you'll need to learn, and you might as well do it now.

 _Everyone has told me to wait until college, and then I will find new people, but everyone I know in college generally sticks with the same friend group that they had in high school (hence why I would know), so I don't have much hope in that._

College is less cliqueish than high school, but still much more cliqueish than the real world.

Most people have "cliques" (which usually emerge from what floors people are on in freshman year) because they are insecure and need a set of people whom, even if they are not close to any of them individually, they recognize as "friends". They rely on their base social group (most of whom are not very close friends) more than on individual friends, and meet dates and new people through this group.

The high school cliques break up a bit in college, unless a large number of students from your high school go to the same school.

 _Where are the truly interesting people in life?_

All over the place, literally and figuratively. Quality people are both rare and common; there are few of them, but they can be found everywhere. Most of my friends in college were international students, but I've met interesting and smart people literally everywhere, of all nationalities, races, and social classes.

<comment><USER57> I think you've summed up the dynamics of university relationships better then anyone else I'd known. Speaking as someone who missed out on a big part of first year dorm life, this is exactly what I've seen happen

</comment></comment><comment><USER53> what in the hell does this have to do with hacker news? why are you asking programmers for advice on making friends? I think you're missing some key information about programmers here.

anyway, if your friends annoy you, spend less time with them, and go to places you haven't been before, pursuing whatever interests you have, and see if you meet people.

personally I deal with alienation by telling everyone I know to go to hell and seeing who sticks around anyway. I'm not actually qualified to give anybody advice on this topic, but I'm just reiterating my initial point now.

might as well reiterate my second point. I have the opposite problem: making too many new friends and not having the time to follow through on the friendship. this comes about because I have a lot of interests that I pursue really intensely. if you pursue a lot of interests, you'll meet people. so do that, but without being too intense about it to make any space for new friendships to develop, and you're good.

</comment><comment><USER58> This is a link to a therapist I use all of the time. She is awesome:

<http://www-ai.ijs.si/eliza/eliza.html>

<comment><USER59> I prefered her evil twin, Azile.

I can't find a web version, here's the really old school app (Mac OS classic) <http://www.tex-edit.com/index.html#Azile>

</comment></comment><comment><USER60> Do you have any true friends who are just plain old normal, and not exceptional in any way? If you don't then you are lacking something fundamental - it's you who is flawed, not them.</comment>


HTA -- HTML Application - <AUTHOR> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTML_Application

<comment><USER2> I was always surprised how no one knew about these, they can do so much!</comment>


New Site Recovers Files Locked by Cryptolocker Ransomware - <AUTHOR> http://krebsonsecurity.com/2014/08/new-site-recovers-files-locked-by-cryptolocker-ransomware/

<comment><USER2> > _The free decryption service was made possible because Fox-IT was somehow > able to recover the private keys..._

Part of me is _so_ hoping that they extracted those keys from the crooks using rubber-hose cryptanalysis. There are many types of Internet scams, some more evil than others, but this is one of the nastiest I ever heard of.

<comment><USER3> They got a database copy:

BBC article: [http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-28661463](http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-28661463)

Fox-IT CEO: [https://twitter.com/cryptoron/status/496945787700805632](https://twitter.com/cryptoron/status/496945787700805632)

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I know they are doing this as a community service... because, I assume they feel it is their honor and duty to do so... but why the hell do these guys NOT have at least a donate link/button on their site!!!!! This is crazy. I know they are going to get awesome press which would have normally cost thousands but it never hurts to throw up a link and see how much your appreciated.

<comment><USER5> Does anyone have any conversion stats for those donate buttons?

I don't think many people actually use them, especially if the traffic is mainly curious readers sent there by mainstream press.

<comment><USER6> I've had sites with a fair amount of traffic, never received a donation, not ever, not even once. Much more effective to sell a sticker than to place a donate button. A friend of mine recently avoided my advice and replaced his twitter feed with a donate button, he said it was a horribly stupid mistake.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Relevant [http://blog.cassidiancybersecurity.com/post/2014/02/Bitcrypt...](http://blog.cassidiancybersecurity.com/post/2014/02/Bitcrypt- broken)

<comment><USER8> But it sounds like in the Cryptolocker case that the encryption was pretty good, they just (thankfully) weren't erasing the decrypt keys as promised.

The goodness of the decryptCryptolocker crew will probably make me laugh whenever I hear some other not-half-as-good organization claim "we're the good guys".

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> This is interesting because it's one of those cases where _insecurity_ can turn out to be a good thing - had those cybercriminals been more careful with their systems and made them more secure, this may have never been possible; but then again, the malware might not have been able to do this in the first place if the users' systems were more secure. How that could be accomplished is also worth considering - there is a school of thought that suggests taking control away from the users and disallowing them from doing anything that some entity (corporate or government) does not approve of on the assumption that users will always make mistakes (e.g. Trusted Computing), but this also means loss of freedom - as the saying goes, "freedom is not worth having if it does not include the freedom to make mistakes."

However, if on the other hand we allow the users freedom, and thus assume that mistakes (such as being infected with malware like this) will happen, then it makes sense that a means of recovery should be available, which is not something that "perfect" security allows. To use an analogy, people who have lost their keys or had them stolen should still be able to gain access to their house. In the physical world, perfect security is nearly impossible, but with digital data, it's not. Locking an item in a safe means it can still be retrieved if the key is lost by, in the worst possible circumstance, cutting open the safe, no matter how physically strong it is. Encrypting data with a long-enough key and sufficiently strong algorithm means it's truly practically _destroyed_ without the key. I think this point - that encryption can be really, really, _really_ unrecoverably strong - needs to be made more aware as we continue to use more of it.

It would be particularly ironic if this recovery was made possible through exploiting the malware servers with something like Heartbleed...

<comment><USER10> > _it 's one of those cases where insecurity can turn out to be a good thing_

Well, it's usually a good thing when the bad guys make a mistake, isn't it? "Oh, I wanted to blow up this building, but I set my timer to the wrong time zone." Oops, now the police has an extra hour to evacuate the building and dismantle your bomb.

What matters is: Good for whom? Obviously, insecure tools are not good for the person who relies on it for mission-critical tasks. But what is good for that particular person and that particular task might not be good for other people and other tasks.

Since "good" is relative, "perfect security" is also relative. Perfect security for whom? And what do we mean by "security", anyway? Let's say we think of security as the ability of a system to resist interference from anybody other than its legitimate user(s). But then the question becomes, who are the legitimate users?

If Apple is the sole legitimate user of a device, it makes sense for that device to resist your attempts to interfere with its Apple-approved functions. That's perfect security for Apple, perfect security for Steve Jobs's posthumous ego.

If you are the sole legitimate user, on the other hand, the device should resist Apple's attempts to tell you what you can or can't do with it. That's perfect security for you, but it comes at the expense of perfect security from the point of view of Apple designers.

As for CryptoLocker, the whole purpose of that program is grossly immoral, so does it even have a legitimate user?

Unfortunately, it is becoming increasingly clear that perfect security for one party does not always align with perfect security for some other party.

<comment><USER11> You're listing the clear, black-and-white cases.

The interesting case is: if I am the sole legitimate user of the device, should my device resist my attempts to run cat_pictures_infected_with_cryptolocker.jpg.exe?

<comment><USER10> > _if I am the sole legitimate user of the device..._

On the flip side, if your device resists your attempts to run cat_pictures_infected_with_cryptolocker.jpg.exe, it is clear that somebody else has some degree of control over the behavior of your device, and this somebody does not consider you to be the sole legitimate controller of your device.

Who is this somebody, and what right does he/she/they have to retain partial control of your property? That sounds like a more interesting question to me. Because unless you're like RMS and only use free software on open-source hardware, you're never the sole legitimate controller of any device these days.

<comment><USER12> How about if said somebody is a less tired, more sober, more attentive and less stressed me?

<comment><USER10> If you wrote a program to restrain your own careless self, or installed someone else's program with the expectation that it will restrain you, then I suppose everything's kosher. We're all consenting adults, right?

Things get more complicated when a stranger decides to tell you what you can or can't do, without your consent, against your expectations, and sometimes even in spite of your loud complaints.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Relevant: Neil Stephenson's Reamde takes the principle of Ransomware and plays it out to a fun conclusion. This site would have come in handy. Highly recommended [http://www.audible.com/pd/Sci-Fi-Fantasy/Reamde- Audiobook/B0...](http://www.audible.com/pd/Sci-Fi-Fantasy/Reamde- Audiobook/B005PMU12U?bp_ua=y)

</comment><comment><USER14> Key from one of the comments "It's not too late if you still have the encrypted files, as I suspect many people do, hoping that someday a program like this would come along."

That is awesome. I'm sure a large percentage of people with irreplaceable files hung onto them, hope these guys get the exposure they deserve for the site.

#1 on HN is a good start.

<comment><USER15> +1. One lady in my office (running 1/4 Windows PCs) opened something from "Intuit" concerning a bill and got most of her documents locked down... and some of the shared files on the company's main NFS drive before I unplugged the box's ethernet cord. Oops.

She kept her files hanging around, just in case someone broke the encryption later on. A smart move from someone foolish enough to open a ".pdf.exe" file from an email reeking of fraud.

</comment></comment><comment><USER16> I just hope as many people as possible who were affected by this lockdown and who have not paid ransom yet would know about this. As per the Krebs' article only 1.3% paid ransom so it's not too late.

</comment><comment><USER17> Has anyone here looked at the software? It requires you to manually run a command from the command prompt for every file. Decryptolocker.exe --key "<key>" <Lockedfile>

If I have thousands of files, that will take forever, anyway to batch decrypt?

<comment><USER18> The faq mentions an "-r" parameter :)

<comment><USER17> Perfect, I have the recursive part working, but I can't get the key pasted in the command prompt.

Decryptolocker.exe --key "<key>" <Lockedfile>

Everytime I paste the key in, the command prompt executes each line. Any ideas how to preserve the line breaks?

<comment><USER18> Put the command in a .bat file with notepad and run that in the cmd window?

<comment><USER17> Nevermind, I put everything on one line and it fixed it. Thanks!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> Of course, the conspiracy theorist might say that it's a bit _too_ convenient to suppose the hitherto extremely clever criminals helpfully and stupidly copied their private keys across to computers controlled by 'the feds'. A bit like those supposedly 'random' police stopping of vehicles which turn out to be full of drugs or explosives.

Maybe public/private key pairs aren't as secure as we've been lead to believe.

<comment><USER20> Or maybe they got their hands on the keys some other way they're not willing to disclose.

<comment><USER21> It is likely that they were able to compromise the bad guys' systems and steal the private keys, which in itself is against the law.

<comment><USER22> Technically yes, but in practice only if the bad guys file charges and/or assist the authorities with evidence, ie their machines.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


Opioid Addiction by the Numbers: An Analysis of 290MM Prescriptions (2013-2016) - <AUTHOR> https://www.omnisci.com/blog/fight-against-the-opioid-crisis/ <comment><AUTHOR> For those of you who want to skip the article and just play with the data, you can view our live GPU-accelerated demo here:

[https://opioid-demo.omnisci.com](https://opioid-demo.omnisci.com)</comment>


Fascism and the Historical Irony of Facebook's "Fake News" Problem - <AUTHOR> https://medium.com/initialized-capital/fascism-and-the-historical-irony-of-facebooks-fake-news-problem-d744b05045fd#.b926mqmgb <comment><USER2> Except Trump is not the Hitler figure, he's the American figure. The Nazis of today are inspired not by trump, but by the democrat created phantoms of who they say trump is, this article included.

If no one ever called trump racist, we wouldn't have inspired alt right groups. They are the irony of the left's failed smears.

Another thing Hitler did was turn children against their parents. The Nazi youth put society above family. You see more democrats disowning children for voting trump than the other way around. Bernie is a socialist. Trump has a big beautiful family.

<comment><USER3> Bernie is a social democrat.

I swear the word 'socialism' has lost all meaning through repeated misuse.

<comment><USER4> He says "democratic socialist". I would take your reversal of the phrase to be related to the democratic party, though perhaps I'm reading too much into it?

Even then he's called himself a socialist without any qualifiers before:

"When I ran for the Senate the first time, I ran against the wealthiest guy in the state of Vermont. He spent a lot on advertising — very ugly stuff. He kept attacking me as a liberal. He didn't use the word 'socialist' at all, because everybody in the state knows that I am that."

politifact has some nice analysis on it: [http://www.politifact.com/truth-o- meter/article/2015/aug/26/...](http://www.politifact.com/truth-o- meter/article/2015/aug/26/bernie-sanders-socialist-or-democratic-socialist/)

<comment><USER3> I've kind of proven my own point there haven't I, by not even remembering correctly how Bernie described himself!

<comment><USER4> I always took his qualifier as distancing from himself from the dictatorships that usually implement socialism. Most Americans think the economic and political system are the same thing. History has shown that to be somewhat true in practice, though logically they are not tied together.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Hah, and to add to the irony, the servers that host all of this stuff run an OS designed by a bunch of hippies.

</comment><comment><USER6> __* This makes engineers reluctant, but necessary, brokers of public discourse. __ __

" Turner: I don't envy engineers or executives at tech firms. They've been put in the position of being legislators for our public debates. America's architecture for such debates — Congress, the courts, the executive branch, and to some degree, the press — was built in the 18th century. But the conditions of public discourse have changed, and the speed at which those conditions are changing has accelerated too."

I don't think our craft has quite figured what to do about this.

</comment><comment><USER7> The problem with the comparison is that the left also has blood on its hands. The self righteous zealotry of the progressive movement is as comparable to China's cultural revolution, as Trump's populist appeal to Whites is to fascism. That is, there are real parallels and real concerns on both sides. We can't just act like the only danger comes from the political right.

Here's a nice piece of fake news I saw circulating among my progressive friends on facebook: [http://www.snopes.com/2016/11/22/controversial-cnn- chyron/](http://www.snopes.com/2016/11/22/controversial-cnn-chyron/)</comment>


Getting smarter about bandwidth - <AUTHOR> http://news.latakoo.com/2012/03/01/getting-smarter-about-bandwidth/

<comment><USER2> Articles about bandwidth should try to get the distinction between gigabytes (GB) and gigabits (Gb) correct; otherwise, figures will be off by almost an order of magnitude.</comment>


Amazon temporarily gags Spore critics, deletes and restores all customer reviews - <AUTHOR> http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080912-amazon-gags-spore-critics-deletes-all-customer-reviews.html <comment><USER2> This really is fun: I installed SPORE on my Mac and there is no copy protection whatsoever. I don't even have to keep the disk in the drive to play it.

<comment><USER3> Is that because it's on the Mac? Or did you get a special copy or something?

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> When will these distribution idiots (RIAA, game companies, et al.) realize that DRM just plain doesn't work? There's no way to stop piracy of digital content, so just work with that limitation, instead of fighting an impossible battle that only punishes legitimate customers.

<comment><USER5> I can't find the quote, but I believe it was Neils Bohr, who when asked how supporters of quantum physics overcame the resistance by classical physicists, said "we didn't, we just waited for them to die." I believe the same principle applies here.

<comment><AUTHOR> Same was said about AI researchers like Minsky ;).

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> With RSA encryption in the CPU, you can definitely enforce DRM. Just decrypt the game's code on the fly in a DRM-enabled CPU. The only way to break the code is to get the RSA key, or spend year(s) hacking the key.

I believe the Xbox works this way.

<comment><USER4> Only one person has to hack the key. Then he/she can distribute either the key or the decrypted content to everyone else. This is exactly why DRM will never work.

<comment><USER7> Have you noticed that XBox 360 is not cracked (short of one batch that had leaky DVD drives)?

It's not a problem to create a real pain in the ass for the pirates. The problem is to avoid creating real pain in the ass for normal users and your own developers at the same time.</comment></comment></comment>


Corel Linux review (2000) - <AUTHOR> http://www.geek.com/hwswrev/software/clinux112/clinux.htm <comment><USER2> Wow this takes me back, we poor UK modem users used to order linux cds from sktechy Micromart adverts, or fork out 40 quid to suppliers like software warehouse (now defunct) when Red Hat Linux was just RHL and came in a box too (no enterprise, fedora not yet born). Never used this particular distro though, $80 for the deluxe edition, one can buy a whole computer pre-loaded with Linux/Android even Win10 (in some scenarios) for less than that price nowadays. Makes me feel lucky</comment>


iPhone 6 Plus review - <AUTHOR> http://www.theverge.com/2014/9/16/6155009/apple-iphone-6-plus-review

<comment><USER2> "The iPhone has long had a better camera than just about any Android phone, and it's always had a better ecosystem of editing and sharing apps than any other platform."

I'm in neither camp, but after reading this I can't really take this review that seriously...

<comment><USER3> Why not? I'm not in a phone 'camp' either, but I have had both the flagship phones (currently (until Friday anyway), iPhone 5s and Nexus 5) for a long time, and the statement seems very accurate.

The camera and app ecosystem are, and have always been, better on the iOS end. OTOH, Android does manual data entry and voice dictation much much better.

They have different strengths and weaknesses.

<comment><USER4> Nexus 5 is hardly a flagship phone and it probably has one of the worst cameras in its price range.

<comment><USER5> Can't agree more! I'm so disappointed by Nexus 5, bad camera, bad display, worst ever speakerphone, terrible battery life (even with Android L, which is supposedly more energy efficient), and so on, but at this price, how can one complain?!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Since iPhone 4, iPhone design seems going downhill. With the same display size, iPhone 6+ is much bigger and heavier than LG G3. Its quality is so much better than others, especially on camera and battery life.

<comment><USER7> Here's a size comparison I posted in another thread, but still relevant:

[http://www.phonearena.com/phones/size#/phones/size/LG-G3,App...](http://www.phonearena.com/phones/size#/phones/size/LG-G3,Apple- iPhone-6-Plus/phones/8347,8908)

Having now used my LG G3 for only a couple of days, I can't imagine using a phone much larger than this.

Dear LG: Please make a slightly smaller version of the G3 with a lower resolution display (for battery life and app compatibility) and you have the perfect android phone.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Am I the only one finding iPhone 6 to be the ugliest model so far? Just compare it to Moto 360, for example.

<comment><USER8> The Moto 360 is a watch.

Why are you comparing it to a phone?

<comment><USER5> Duh! I meant to say "Moto X", sorry!</comment></comment></comment>


A voice of reason speaks of the tragedies in Japan. - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12785274

<comment><USER2> In light of all the news on the Japanese nuclear power plants, I found this (below) radiation dose chart (from xcd) helpful. It does not seem like there's too much to be concerned about regarding radiation. They unfortunately have bigger issues to deal with.

<http://xkcd.com/radiation/>

<comment><USER3> <http://www.peakoilblues.org/blog/?p=2630>

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I think the reason people are focusing on the nuclear threat is that it is still in the future, whereas the tsunami is done and is no longer threatening. Sure, the carnage left in its wake is still there, but you don't need to fear it.

<comment><USER5> People in the US don't need to fear either event, and yet they covered the nuke crisis almost to the exclusion of the tsunami. Is the point the article makes.

<comment><USER6> I don't get that from the article at all. The article mostly seems apologism for nuclear power, and neatly sidesteps how such a disaster can make large areas uninhabitable. When you're the size of Russia, losing an area like Chernobyl is barely a scratch. When you're the size of Japan, with people squished in everywhere, there is no space to lose.

<comment><USER5> You might try the lede:

 _The apocalyptic visions of destruction brought by the Japanese earthquake and subsequent tsunami have been largely replaced in the media this week by reports of the struggle to control radiation from the stricken Fukushima nuclear plant._

Japan hasn't lost any area. Unlike Chernobyl's reactors, which were still fissioning at the time of the disaster, Japan's were not stuffed full of burning graphite.

<comment><USER7> It may not be obvious from media reports, but Daiichi's 1, 2, and 3 reactors were in full operation when hit by the earthquake, and all three successfully executed emergency shutdowns within a matter of seconds. This was the single most important thing to happen, since It reduced the heat generation virtually immediately, without which it it is highly likely that at least one would have lost containment prior to emergency measures of the last few days working. The lack of graphite may have made that survivable for Japan, but the plant itself would have been virtually impossible to recover, and continuing failures would have been very, very bad for neighboring communities. (They'll probably all get to go back a few weeks after the plant is secured.)

Some minutes _after_ the earthquake, the tsunami physically hit Daiichi and Daini. (You haven't heard of Daini in about a week because we've reestablished control there.) It wiped out their diesel generators and external power lines, because both had tolerances in the five to six meter range for tsunamis and the actual wVe was nine to ten.

Things, incredibly, still didn't go to pot immediately. They worked on battery backup for a few hours, but couldn't get an emergency plan in operation in time without power. That's when things started to get bad, principally with overheating from waste heat causing radioactive steam/hydrogen explosions, which were the first cause of radioactivity spikes and have complicated all the disaster response since. (Though, perversely, the fact that Daiichi 3 had a steam/hydrogen explosion blow the roof off made the spent fuel pool accessible to water delivered without entering the building, without which getting a hose inside would have been a one-way trip.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> > It has been estimated that 17 million were exposed to significant radiation > after Chernobyl and nearly 2,000 people have since developed thyroid cancer > having consumed contaminated food and milk as children.

Citation needed for this one, other than one coming from an industry-lobbyist like IAEA.

<comment><USER8> Me replying to me own comment, and because I've just seen that he's posted an Update linking to an UN study, here's a link to a book written on the effects of Chernobyl which presents a much bigger number:

[http://books.google.com/books?id=g34tNlYOB3AC&lpg=PA186&...](http://books.google.com/books?id=g34tNlYOB3AC&lpg=PA186&ots=O15TiPU2a8&dq=romania%20cancer%20rates%20chernobyl&pg=PA185#v=onepage&q&f=false)

I can tell you that in the case of my country, Romania, the numbers are probably even higher because of a lot of mis-reporting (voluntary or not), or just plain stupidity from the doctors when it came to diagnosing (just fyi, we had close to 7,000 kids "accidentally" infected with HIV at at the end of the '80s).

<comment><USER8> And also, a very interesting extract from Wikipedia's entry on one of the authors of the above book: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vassili_Nesterenko>

> Because of his activities, he lost his job and got problems with the State > Security Agency of Belarus, which threatened him with internment in a > psychiatric asylum. Later, however, the Belarusian government tried to > soften him proposing him to get back a job in a state institute, "at the > condition that he would not work on Chernobyl anymore." He escaped two > assassination attempts.[1]

> Nesterenko intervened immediately after news of the accident in the nuclear > power plant started to spread. As an expert on the subject and with his > experience as a fire fighter, he threw liquid nitrogen containers from a > helicopter on the burning reactor core. To do this he had to move into the > middle of radioactive smoke. Despite the heavy radioactive contamination of > the area, Nesterenko survived. However, of the four passengers of his > helicopter, three died from radioactive irradiation and contamination.[1]</comment></comment></comment>


An Inside Look at How we got TechCrunched - <AUTHOR> http://blog.newscred.com/?p=112

<comment><USER2> I don't understand the obsession people have about getting techcrunched.

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm not sure if you actually read the post, but I re-iterate how TC is not an indicator of long term success. If was fun, and it put it on the map. I just wanted to share the experience. Its not the endgame, but rather, just the beginning.</comment></comment>


How to Vectorize Data Standardization - <AUTHOR> https://www.jforbes.io/vectorized-data-standardization <comment><AUTHOR> Hey all. This post looks at standardizing a time-series for machine learning. The idea is that when you have a running sensor, you have to batch standardize your data to remove any variations in the collection process. A vectorized algorithm for efficiently performing this standardization is presented.

I'm afraid the post got a bit too "math-heavy", but I'll be around the comments to answer any questions.</comment>


Taking a Naked Selfie? Your Phone Should Step in to Protect You - <AUTHOR> http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/09/05/taking-a-naked-selfie-your-phone-should-step-in-to-protect-you

<comment><USER2> It's going to go into somebody's cloud whether you like it or not as soon as you send it to somebody else, unless the "private" flag is an end-to-end solution. If I send a private file or photo to someone, it should be encrypted with an ephemeral key which is not stored but sent to another device immediately, so that in rest it's not accessible. Then when the recipient receives the file, it is decrypted and placed immediately into their device's "private" space.

</comment><comment><USER3> I'm not opposed to the ideas presented here in an ideal world, but image recognition is far from perfect and if developers attempt to implement this (making their photo apps the equivalent of something other than a "common- carrier" of image bits) when it inevitably fails to detect a "nudie" it seems likely they will eventually be sued, especially if they implement an "underage" filter (which the article also suggests) that fails (which it of course inevitably will, and often).

I do think it is pretty bad that some platforms/apps default to sync-to-cloud in a way that the use of cloud storage may not be clear to the user. I still remember the uneasy feeling I got the first time I took a photo with Google+ and it asked me if I wanted to automatically upload all subsequent photos to the "cloud", and that's despite the fact that 1) I don't use my phone to take nudies anyway and 2) at least Google+ asked and didn't default to sync-to- cloud.

</comment><comment><USER4> I think the easiest way to do this is have a little lock icon when you're previewing the photo after you've taken it. Clicking on the icon makes it private (i.e. it doesn't go to the cloud and goes into a "private" password protected album only on your phone).

<comment><USER5> An alternative might be to have a different mode for the camera, private and public. Kind of like incognito mode on Chrome.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> This might actually be a great vehicle for promoting more secure technology. For many people this hits a lot closer to home than any of the arguments that were presented with the NSA revelations.

</comment><comment><USER7> The last thing I want when I'm taking a nude picture is for my camera to recognize _anything_.

I see you're taking a picture of your junk, would you like me to photoshop it bigger?</comment>


Generating Sequences of Primes in Conway's Game of Life (2009) - <AUTHOR> http://www.nathanieljohnston.com/2009/08/generating-sequences-of-primes-in-conways-game-of-life/

<comment><USER2> I presented Conway's Game of Life in a classroom this summer of 10-12 year olds. They had no issue understanding it, were fascinated by the very simplicity of the concept that has immeasurable applications.</comment>


Implementing Regular Expressions (2007) - <AUTHOR> https://swtch.com/~rsc/regexp/ <comment><USER2> I highly recommend Sipser's "Introduction to the Theory of Computation" if you want to learn more. Here's a link to the edition I had in college (around 2002): [http://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Theory-Computation- Michae...](http://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Theory-Computation-Michael- Sipser/dp/0534950973)

It's used at MIT ([http://math.mit.edu/~sipser/18404/](http://math.mit.edu/~sipser/18404/)), the U of MN (where I used it), and—I'm sure—most other schools.

You can buy the newest edition, but you'll spend an extra $150 for not much gain.

<comment><USER3> Off topic for this thread, but still of interest I think: when buying text books not for college (i.e., when exercise order and page numbering don't matter), I've saved hundreds over the last years buying international editions through e.g. Abebooks. Like, the book mentioned in the parent is 6$ (!) with free shipping (!!!) from India: [http://www.abebooks.com/servlet/SearchResults?an=sipser&sts=...](http://www.abebooks.com/servlet/SearchResults?an=sipser&sts=t) .

These are usually either used or new international/Indian editions. The quality is not as good as the 'real' versions (very thin paper, binding not very solid) but the savings are substantial. I bought a book a few weeks ago that I couldn't find for less than 120 euros here in Europe, and it cost me ~20 euros including shipping from India.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> A fantastic guide. I stole a lot of the ideas from it when I implemented regexes for my language.

[http://git.eigenstate.org/ori/mc.git/tree/libregex/](http://git.eigenstate.org/ori/mc.git/tree/libregex/)

</comment><comment><USER5> Can you implement submatch tracking with a DFA? There is this: [http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3287860/what-is-a- tagged-...](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3287860/what-is-a-tagged-dfa)

But when I looked, the code did not use it.</comment>


Show HN: CSS3 art book for babies - <AUTHOR> https://github.com/marvindanig/ABCD-Animal-Book <comment><USER2> Very cool! Well done! My only suggestion would be to replace the font used for the letters with something more generic. As it is now, some of the letters don't really look the way they usually do in popular fonts. I think the best examples of this are the "G", "Q", and "S". The "G" actually looks better in Firefox 44 than Chrome 48 (both on Mac OS X 10.10). I like the animations, though, and I like how the letters animate when you hover over them.

</comment><comment><USER3> The fonts might be very pretty but are they fit for purpose? The flashcards I can remember always seemed to use totally sensible fonts with not even the slightest whiff of hipster about them. There was no merging between letters or 'wedding invite' fonts. Clever this may be, but, for me, I would prefer fonts that were better suited to learning the English Language.

</comment><comment><USER4> Hey, great work! I'm interested in how you did that flip book effect and unfortunately the JavaScript code looks minified and is very hard to read. Did you use a library or did you hand-write it yourself?

<comment><USER5> Quick google finds: [http://www.turnjs.com/](http://www.turnjs.com/) (not what OP uses probably)

<comment><USER4> Yeah, I know that one. It's discontinued, though - I'm actually looking for a replacement for this exact library.

Been thinking about writing my own implementation but was hoping for an alternative when I saw this post.

<comment><USER5> If I were to write my own implementation, I don't even know how to start.

For doing stuff like this, what background knowledge do you need?

I assume it's just math, but as a junior dev do you know what should I learn to do things like this?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> As a new father, I really love this; thank you for your effort. My wife and I have been gathering lots of books to read to our baby and this will be an awesome addition!

</comment><comment><USER7> Nice, any reason you haven't launched it as an App and tried to make some money? :)

</comment><comment><USER8> Awesome! Very well-crafted and ultra consistent among all devices!

</comment><comment><USER9> This is awesome. Exactly what I need for my baby.. :D

</comment><comment><USER10> This is very sweet, and also quite appealing even if we ignore the technological feat. I'm sure many parents will love it, great work!

</comment><comment><USER11> Super cute!

I wonder if there is a more common animal with "I" then the iguana...

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks!

Not many; we chose Iguana over Impala because it's more fun for toddlers to speak out "Eee-goo-vaana" with a hand action.

:-)

<comment><USER12> Ibex or ibis perhaps.

I thought there were other more interesting choices, like Xerus and Urial. I really didn't mind the more esoteric animals, mixed with the common, as I thought it made a good learning experience.

I'd love my boy to point at a red squirrel and (incorrectly) shout Xerus! Xerus! Or (less likely) a mouflon calling it a urial, so I could patiently explain the difference.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> Niiiice. Very well done !! :)

</comment><comment><USER14> Are children that stupid?

</comment><comment><USER15> Well done, very cool!</comment>


List of NOSQL database - <AUTHOR> http://nosql-database.org/ Here I am providing link for list of NOSQL database. <comment><USER2> Gah! My eyes!

Seriously, I'm useless at web design, but whoever is responsible for this really needs to understand that scattering random <b> tags severely detracts from the readability of this site.

</comment><comment><USER3> Seeking nosql advice. I'd like a system that allowed for standing queries instead of synchronous queries.

With mongo, if you want to know if something has changed, you send in a query.

I'd like to have a client subscribed to the db. Essentially, it's saying, "Whenever you get a dictionary that matches this query, send it through to me." It would hold this subscription over a standing socket connection.

Does anyone know of a system like this?

<comment><USER4> CouchDB has a changes API that can send notifications to a client of what has changed - you can restrict this to changes you are interested in by using filter functions, which are a bit like views.

See: <http://guide.couchdb.org/editions/1/en/notifications.html>

[NB I can't really compare this to any other NoSQL db - I've only used CouchDB, although in the past I have built various document oriented data stored, something that I've now stopped doing!].</comment></comment>