Zoom towns and the new housing market for the two Americas - <AUTHOR> https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2020/09/08/909680016/zoom-towns-and-the-new-housing-market-for-the-2-americas <comment><USER2> The disassociation of how you make your living and where you live will have interesting long-term social consequences.

Until recently, most people have had to live where they made their living. Farmers lived on farms. Workers lived near mines, mills, factories and offices in which they worked. Even rich people lived in the cities where their businesses and investments were located, at least until the late 1800s when rail commuting to nearby suburbs allowed them to live in more pleasant surroundings. Even so, the wealthy continued to identify with their cities, participated in civic life, indulged in philanthropy, and were reasonably concerned about their city's quality of life.

In the 1960s, jet travel became cheap and frequent for the wealthy. The really rich became detached from the cities and moved to enclaves of wealth in Newport, Carmel, Palm Springs, Palm Beach, etc. from which they could reach cities occasionally, but from which they could safely ignore urban problems. The urban cores declined, in part, because the wealthy no longer cared.

Information technology enables a whole new slice of the population to detach where they live from where they make their living. Their political and social interests will shift to where they live, and they will abandon where they make their living.

<comment><USER3> For almost all of human history, people have "worked from home". The workplace as a distinct separate space from the home is only about a couple of centuries old.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> This will all depend what % of employers stay with their current remote structure. It'll be somewhere between 1% of 80/90%.

The point is that we're making long-term decisions based on short-term problems. Specifically this week JP Morgan asked its traders to return to the office.

You can counter this with examples like Facebook opening an office in Austin some years ago because that's where the talent had moved. Similar in Boulder.

There will certainly be some % of employers who keep remote-first. And another scenario where they are forced to or the employees decide they love their lifestyle (which is likely). In the latter employers are either forced to adopt it or or the employees just leave or in some concentrations big companies start building offices in a distributed way.

We're severely limiting our job choices if we stay remote but most employers don't.

Before when we go off and buy houses or sign long-term leases we should really just wait this out until the Spring or whenever the virus is neutralized.

<comment><USER5> exactly this. i'm pretty surprised at the number of people buying homes in far out locations, like this "new normal" is going to be the "new normal" ongoing. I don't buy it (yet). There are a few companies that have bought in, and if you work there then at least you're set for a bit. But people only stay at a tech job for a few years typically - what happens when you want to switch companies?

<comment><USER6> It's certainly possible that people have taken a liking to remote work and decided it's the right move for themselves. Whether in 5 years remote work is much more prevalent than it was in Feb 2020 or about the same doesn't necessarily affect your own individual decision making.

<comment><USER7> If you're used to receiving BigCo pay and bought a mansion in a remote vacation hotspot, you could be in for a rude awakening if you find other remote jobs pay half as much and your employer knows that and stops giving you refreshes.

<comment><USER8> This.

The FAANG crowd is used to pulling down $100k-$150k. Developer jobs that are advertised as remote from day one tend to be closer to $50k-$70k.

(These numbers are based on a combination of rumors and job board postings, so no, I don't have a source to cite.)

<comment><USER9> Erm, in my experience (20 years, good but not a superstar) the numbers are 2x that. My last BigCo offer was $300k total comp and jobs with smaller companies (all remote) were around $120-150k. One startup offered me $190k to work remote (but I would have been the only remote worker).

That said, I agree that your average non-FAANG job pays about half of FAANG. Although this is true regardless of remote-ness.

<comment><USER10> You are getting those offers because of your 20 years of experience, not because remote work is inherently lucrative. Most people with 10 or fewer years of experience are used to seeing remote-only offers of less than $100k.

<comment><USER11> I have less than 20 years experience (less than 10 even) and I have gotten/seen a bunch of offers/jobs/etc with remote-only or remote-first over 100k

<comment><USER10> Do you believe your experience is common, or that you are an outlier?

<comment><USER11> It's less me, and more the experience of myself, my close friends and professional colleagues. But as with everything, I would assume it's a mix of both.

<comment><USER10> Can you speak more about these experiences? Are these colleagues from average or elite schools? FAANG type backgrounds or typical corp resumes?

<comment><USER11> No, we're all pretty average people. Mediocre colleges with mediocre degrees and mediocre working histories.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I am really curious about this trend myself.

I live in a town - Bend, Oregon - that already had a lot of remote workers. It also has a housing affordability problem that is getting rapidly worse.

I'm also curious about the "non-zoom" towns and what the dynamics might look like there. Bend was already fairly well-known, but there are tons of former mining/logging/ranch towns throughout the west that have access to a lot of fun stuff to do in the outdoors, but are still relatively cheap because they aren't "on the radar".

I facilitate a local YIMBY group here in Bend, but it's an uphill battle. A town of 100K people can enact some good policies (and we have), but if even 1K people from the bay area decided to move here, that would massively change our housing market.

Perhaps moving onwards into the 'next hot spots' is what will keep happening? But that still leaves people in service jobs that can't be remote and don't earn as much as all the remote workers in a really bad spot. Who's going to teach their kids? Take care of them in the hospitals? Fight fires?

I wrote about it here: [https://journal.dedasys.com/2018/07/27/fight-or- flight-yimby...](https://journal.dedasys.com/2018/07/27/fight-or-flight- yimbys-and-the-exodus-to-smaller-towns/)

<comment><USER13> > A town of 100K people

I know it doesn't really mean anything, but it always just seems peculiar to me when people refer to places with tens or hundreds of thousands of residents as "towns"

I guess mainly because the general consensus is that a "town" is smaller than a "city".

The "town" I grew up in had about 3k residents. To us, the place a half hour away with the big box stores where we'd do our shopping was the "city". It had all of 30k people.

Then again, that was 10x the size of where we lived.

<comment><USER14> It all depends on what you're used to.

I was born in a City of 6 million people.

I then moved to a City of 2 million people. It feels small by comparison.

To me a "city" is a place with an opera house, multiple museums, multiple options for every type of good international cuisines, shops open in the evening, and a transit system beyond bus (tram, or metro/subway).

I lived for a couple of years in a place that was the capital of a European nation, but was only about 600,000 people, and had "only" 3 Ramen restaurants. It felt like a town to me, not a city.

So yeah, I basically feel like every place below 1MM is a town.

In a city, I should to be able to (though I never have, and never will) streak naked down the street during rush hour, and for it to be a non-event. The European capital I lived in that thinks it's a city once had a frontpage story in the daily newspaper with the headline "Man on <street name> gets on all fours and barks like a dog at passerbys". That's not a city to me.

3k residents I would call a village.

<comment><USER15> It's interesting how different everyone's perspective is on this — it hadn't crossed my mind before.

My parents grew up in a town of one thousand people. There was a small bakery in the town and we had a leg up on all the other towns because we __had a post office __. If I ever misbehaved and did something I wasn't supposed to, my parents knew before I even made it home because all of the residents knew each other and could call my parents to tell on me.

Anything smaller than that was a village.

Later, I moved to a city of about 300,000 people. There were multiple big box stores and, as you said, shops and restaurants open late into the night. That city was surrounded by suburbia. That was a big city in my eyes.

Now, I live in a city of about 50,000 people and I guess that's what a normal city looks like in my eyes. It has a few restaurants, a few somewhat culturally distinct areas, and a college and university.

When I visited New York City, I would have characterized it as a metropolis, not just another city.

Going back, I think the defining characteristic for a city is that it's large enough not to keep everything in your head. You don't know everyone or everything in the city anymore, so you're forced to make subdivisions. It's not "the bakery next to the Jones's up the street" but instead it's downtown/uptown/Westside/Eastside.

<comment><USER14> That makes sense too!

I think by most people's definitions yours is closer to the standard. My wife did not grow up in the 6MM city like I did but towns of 70,000, 500,000, and 3,000 respectively, and she thinks my "It's not a city unless it's over 1MM people" take is the highpoint of douchey elitist snobbery.

I think that "keep everything in your head" is a reasonable cutting off point. Despite me scoffing at that "only 3 ramen restaurants" city I lived in, it's not like i know and have been to every restaurant in the place. A town you probably would be able to go to each one if you wanted to after a year.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> > Many Americans — especially 30-somethings who remain employed — are ditching > their tiny rental apartments in hip districts of expensive cities and moving > to buy houses in more affordable cities or the burbs...

I suppose I fall into this category but even houses in the burbs seem more expensive than they should be. I'm specifically looking at up and coming towns, not any random burb but buying a house that's literally 2-3X what it sold for 3-5 years ago is hard to justify. I really want to finally purchase something but I'm worried the market will fall out from under itself in a year or two after COVID financial aftermath settles down and I end up way underwater.

EDIT: typo

<comment><USER17> I was thinking that the high-end vacation towns of the affluent would be a pretty good investment bet, because even when remote work isn't popular there still is high end demand for vacationers. Think places like Jackson Hole, Aspen, Maui, Nantucket, Newport RI, Hilton Head, Scottsdale, etc... could see places like that retaining their value no matter what happens.

<comment><USER7> Some of those places you listed crashed hard after 2008 and others didn't. I think there are trends in vacation destinations that can cause speculation. Also, many of the the buyers are leveraging wealth from equities that is more variable than the salaries the average homeowner uses. If there's a prolonged stock market drop during a recession, many may be forced to liquidate when buyers are fewer and poorer (you'd prefer not to sell anything in a downturn, but the vacation home might be the first to go). I saw people take huge losses on vacation properties after 2008.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> Right now, being a landlord in SF is looking pretty grim given that tech workers who used to rent are fleeing in droves and those that are not are negotiating their rents. I wonder whether this trend will reverse in the next 1-3 years or this is the new permanent dynamic of the SF rental market.

<comment><USER19> The midatlantic region is filled with cities that are carcasses of an industrial era that doesn't exist anymore.

It's not "doom and gloom" to say that when there are examples of it happening before.

San Francisco's tax base is leaving. What do you think is going to happen?

Rent wise, San Francisco will just be Anytown, USA with a little bit of scarcity due to plethora of rent control and old tenants with grandfathered in low property tax due to state law.

City better balance its budget.

<comment><USER20> I moved to SF in 2009 and there were very few tech companies in town and it was in the middle of recession. Even then good places had a bidding war. If you read this Bay Area housing market report[1], you will see that it still showing strength in SFH market. My guess is SF will continue to do fine

[1] [https://www.bayareamarketreports.com/trend/san-francisco- hom...](https://www.bayareamarketreports.com/trend/san-francisco-home-prices- market-trends-news)

<comment><USER19> I can't believe you are still trusting real estate agents and mortgage underwriters when half of the market signals are completely missing.....

yes, _to them_ it seems like a lot of business

evictions and foreclosures have barely started in San Francisco and will be completely backlogged

nationwide: a few hundred thousand people playing around with low interests rates, millions of people pending default

like I said, scarcity and views will continue to help San Francisco prices as it has for the last 170 years, but it can also become like those midatlantic satires of civilization.

<comment><USER20> I don't know what are data sources to look for real estate demand other than real estate transactions. Anyways, that's not the broader point I am making. The broader point I am making is that it was a thriving City with or without tech and continue to be one. The Golden Gate bridge, GG park, the ocean, the bay, the museums, the charming hills, and train cars is not going to vanish when all tech workers leave. I fell in love with SF even before I started working in SF.

<comment><USER21> I actually think rent going down in sf will open up a lot of opportunities that wasn't possible due to cost.

So much culture left sf to Oakland due to cost. As SF rent gets cheaper, I suspect we'll see art, food, and activism jobs come back.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I think a lot of people living in cities think there's only two options - living in an apartment downtown in a megacity, and living in a car-bound wasteland suburb.

But there's a third option - towns.

I know you have them in the US! I've been to a few of them. Walkable towns with coffee shops, restaurants, bars, culture, dating. You can even find a few in the Bay Area if you don't want to look too far.

Isn't the small town an icon of American living? Why are people so incredibly snobby about it?

<comment><USER23> What are some examples of Bay Area towns? It seems like everyone in my friend circle in tech lives in San Francisco and puts up (or used to) with the long commute.

<comment><USER24> Quite a few of the towns in the South Bay have walkable cores: Mountain View, Palo Alto, San Mateo...

You also have smaller cities all over the country.

Now, you get into truly small towns in places like New England and there really isn't a lot in the town center and it's unlikely you'll be living walking distance from it.

<comment><USER25> No way, man. You have to pay like $1.5 mil for a home in Palo Alto and Mountain View. You do all that and you get a glorified suburb. No way. The city is like 400x as city life for like 1.1x the price.

<comment><USER26> I would be shocked if one could find a liveable single family home in Palo Alto or Mountain View for $1.5M.

Last I looked empty lots went for that much.

<comment><USER27> By home, do you mean house? Sub-million dollar homes show up all the time in Mountain View, even before Covid. Thinking anything less than a house is unlivable for a family is not the norm in most other parts of the world.

<comment><USER26> I assumed you meant "single family home", but yes, you can find sub-$1M apartments.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> You're also living in a prime wildfire area in Truckee. There's too much fuel in the Sierras as it is, it'll burn sooner or later.

<comment><USER29> The picture of a house they show nestled in the trees is incredibly dangerous, incredibly resource intrnsive, and just ecologically unsound.

We need to be building massive amounts of housing in city centers to let as many people live in them that would like to. Instead we lock down any new construction in cities, which requires the least amount of infrastructure and environmental damage, and instead let pretty much anybody build in ecologically disastrous ways.

California is ruled at the local level, where decisions like this are made, by an older generation of conservatives that have convinced themselves that their personal pastoral aesthetic preferences of cars and suburbs and low density sprawl that consumes vast amounts of wilderness is somehow conservationist. It's a massive problem!

<comment><USER30> > We need to be building massive amounts of housing in city centers to let as > many people live in them that would like to.

All else being equal, Americans will choose to live in a detached house on a 1/2 acre lot with an SUV or pickup in the driveway.

<comment><USER29> This is simply untrue. Some people will, but this sort of "everybody who doesn't want what I want is lying to themselves" is elitism that destroys people's chances to live th way they prefer.

The higher cost of living in cities is pretty strong evidence that city living is under supplied compared to suburban living.

<comment><USER31> You can argue back and forth whether people in flyover country hate the idea of living in dense housing or not. But if you peruse city and county planning documents you find that most places it's completely illegal to build greenfield projects with urban density. Instead of being able to build 25-35 units an acre you're allowed 3-4. And no mixed use allowed.

Seems to me the answer is people don't get a choice a most places. Would people outside of old dense cities want to live in a walkable mixed use development? We have no idea because those have been banned since before WWII.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> I wonder how sustainable this is. Part of this is obviously going to remain but I can see a big swing in the other direction saying employees and groups need to be together to generate the feeling of a team and that remote work doesn't give you that.

<comment><USER33> That's likely true. But it's probably cheaper to fly the entire company and their families to a ski resort every quarter, then it is to pay for Bay Area cost-of-living and office space.

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> We're "fantasizing" about relocating from Silicon Valley for our USA home (we spend about 5 months/year overseas) but we've always thought it would be foolish to stay in California because of the tax situation. If you could live anywhere, a more tax friendly / less income-hostile state would be a good idea. (However, if your employer is in CA, good luck not having California try to collect anyway. They even are proposing a "wealth tax" that would apply retroactively to people who left in the past 10 years!)

</comment><comment><USER35> I live in western Wyoming and the market (which was already pretty bad) has been flooded by people trying to just get away from the city.

Winter will certainly spit the "softer" folks out, but it will be interesting to see what sticks.

To the point about making less for remote work... You don't need 200k to have a very high QOL in most these places (assuming you value an outdoor lifestyle).

I would personally take a 50% pay cut before I'd consider moving to the city for a 50% raise.

</comment><comment><USER36> "Still over 7% of active mortgages are in forbearance,"

This seems incredibly concerning, and could suggest an especially hard market in the coming months/year.

</comment><comment><USER37> Ah, Truckee. Really, NPR should've lumped Western Nevada into the article as well. I left Nevada in the mid 2010's, but housing prices were well above their Recession lows. Now I look at houses in that area on Trulia, and the prices just seem to go forever upwards. Scenic mountain views + no income tax on the Nevada side + remote work + Tesla moving in = housing boom.

</comment><comment><USER38> I think the concept of a "Zoom town" is important vs a "Zoom hamlet." It's a lot easier to work with a remote 50 person engineering team than 50 remote engineers, because you can just interface with the head of the group and his/her direct reports. So I think long term 2nd tier cities will get engineering hubs but the fully remote concept will remain niche.

</comment><comment><USER39> Talking about house prices, saying something about less supply, but not fully comparing the volume of sales is IMO very misleading.

</comment><comment><USER40> Curious what will happen to prices in these zoom towns once people return to office work? Wouldn't it be more prudent to shop around in areas where we know people will return in a year or two?

<comment><USER41> Probably depends whether or not there is a ski resort nearby to sustain property values. reasonably convenient lots to the resort would eventually all be infilled, at which point prices would surge exponentially. Otherwise it's an overpriced mountain lodge, and mountain lodge supply increases exponentially.

</comment></comment><comment><USER42> So a pandemic hits and everyone screaming NIMBY is suddenly moving out?

</comment><comment><USER43> Can we stop referring to anything video conference related as "zoom"?

</comment><comment><USER44> Can we please call these bed-Zoom communities? ;)

</comment><comment><USER45> "Many Americans — especially 30-somethings who remain employed — are ditching their tiny rental apartments in hip districts of expensive cities and moving to buy houses in more affordable cities or the burbs for a life of shopping at Home Depot and spending their Friday nights eating mozzarella sticks at Applebee's."

oof, that's a savage take for NPR.

<comment><USER28> Who cares about NPR elitism. Why shame people for doing what they want.

Hell, the Buffalo Wild Wings in Daly City has a more diverse crowd than any bar or restaurant in SF.

<comment><USER46> Honestly, BWW had the best tap lineup in my area for a long time, which has no shortage of trendy bars.

<comment><USER47> The first time I walked into a BWW (maybe 10 or 15 years ago) my eyes opened wide when I saw all the taps.

My excitement wore off when I realized that it was literally all budweiser products and most of them had the exact same thing.

<comment><USER46> Ah yea. Good beers took a while to come to my area (maybe 5-10 years ago). I'm guessing other parts of the country might have been a little different, especially as Big Beer tried to catch the craft wave and smaller breweries didn't have any distribution yet. Maybe it's different now in most areas (hopefully)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER48> in case it is not obvious, the housing market, and real estate in general is the front line of a very real class war. it is very effectively bifurcating the population, as this article describes. i find this really upsetting and immoral, but im sure other people will interpret the same thing differently.</comment>


The Political Path to GPS: How war and peace forged the universal map - <AUTHOR> https://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/the-political-path-to-gps <comment><USER2> I'd expected to see a mention of Korean Boeing that was shot down by Soviets, which prompted Reagan to make GPS available for civilians. As in [0]

"President Reagan announced on September 16, 1983, that the Global Positioning System (GPS) would be made available for civilian use, free of charge, once completed in order to avert similar navigational errors in the future."

[0] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Air_Lines_Flight_007](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Air_Lines_Flight_007)

<comment><USER3> That's a nice example for a reasonable reaction from politics. Good to know!

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> I don't know how you can mention the history of GPS, politics, and not include this:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Air_Lines_Flight_007](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Air_Lines_Flight_007)

It was one of the biggest reasons why the military-only GPS system eventually became available for civilian use.

</comment><comment><USER5> Shouldn't it be called "Global" map? Not Universal?

</comment><comment><USER6> Just imagine if GPS was developed today. There would be widespread blaming of programmers involved because "they are writing software for targeting missiles used to kill people".

<comment><USER7> I'm not sure if those are supposed to be scare quotes or just the regular kind, but just in case: that was exactly the original purpose of it, and not just kill people, but kill hundreds of millions of them. I imagine the only reason it didn't get protests is because it was relatively obscure.

<comment><USER8> The military side of GPS was more intended for killing retail rather than wholesale. ICBMs and strategic bombers have always relied more on stellar and inertial navigation since they knew they couldn't rely on GPS in a WWIII scenario.

<comment><USER7> Nuclear weapons were a major use case. Ballistic missiles wouldn't use GPS in flight, but they need to know where they were launched from to a high degree of accuracy. That's easy for ICBMs in silos, but a major problem otherwise. GPS greatly improves the accuracy of SLBMs and mobile ICBMs (which we never actually fielded, but that was the idea).

<comment><USER8> Do you have a citation for that? SLBMs are launched submerged so I don't see how GPS would work.

<comment><USER6> At some point the rocket is out of water.

<comment><USER8> The missile accelerates so quickly that once you factor in the lag time for obtaining an accurate GPS fix without current ephemeris data it would be effectively useless.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Why are tech stocks suffering while others are going up? - <AUTHOR>

MSFT, GOOG, CSCO, YHOO, DELL, AAPL...All going down?
WMT, TGT, NKE, MS, LEH, CFC...All going up?
I'm not a seasoned investor in any sense, so does anyone have any insight as to why tech is suffering while everyone else is ok? <comment><USER2> Tech stocks are considered overvalued and unstable.

Yes even GOOG.

*Note - it's all about perception.</comment>


Ask HN: How do you motivate yourself? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> In general I stay motivated by reaching a base level of healthiness - physical, work, and social. The motivation comes naturally if I've met those needs.

I'm not a superhuman kettlebell-swinging crossfit soylent paleo junkie by any means, but I walk to work every day and bike a good amount using my city's bike-share. And I've started (over the course of 2 years, it's so tough!) to eat less-unhealthy food.

Being happy at work makes a big difference to my motivation, I'm able to channel some of that extra energy I get from feeling like I'm putting good effort in, into my side projects. I work 9-5 most days (as a programmer).

I find I'm more motivated when I keep in touch with people, and also when I work on projects that get me interacting with people who are excited about what I'm doing. For me at least, it's not as fun to work on a project if people I know don't think it's cool. That was a snippet from a Paul Graham essay I took to heart and I think it's true.

I also occasionally journal my thoughts down, which makes me feel calmer and more ready to approach a task.

<comment><USER3> Also: sleep. If you find yourself staying up late at night trying to focus and instead reading Wikipedia articles about the Hapsburgs, stop. Get yourself on a sleep schedule. Download RainyMood[1] and Freedom[2] if it helps you.

[1] [https://rainymood.com/](https://rainymood.com/) [2] [https://freedom.to](https://freedom.to)

<comment><USER4> A similar app I've used is SimplyRain [0].

[0]: [https://rain.simplynoise.com](https://rain.simplynoise.com)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I have actually written about this a lot as it is one of those topics that I am fascinated with. The trick is not to try and motivate yourself but to build systems and processes to get things done regardless.

For me, it boils down to 3 things. Pre-planning, habits and elimination. I have written about each separately on my blog [http://www.new2code.com/2016/06/deep- work/](http://www.new2code.com/2016/06/deep-work/)

I plan a lot of stuff on my Google Calendar. My whole days are planned in advance including free time. When I am learning a new language, I set aside time for study. If a friend asks me to hang out, I can just check to see if I have prior commitments. I also have the regular gym slot and after 2+ years, I am simply routine when it comes to exercising.

Next, learn how to build habits and routines. This saves a ton brain power. There is a great video on habit building

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AdKUJxjn-R8](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AdKUJxjn-R8)

Also, check out a book by Charles Duhigg called The Power of Habit.

Finally, cut out the news and as much information as possible. Not watching the news added a ton of happiness to my life. This also cuts out distractions. Check out something called the Low Information Diet which goes into more detail as well as a book called Deep Work by Cal Newport

I also wrote a guest post on the blog Simple Programmer that goes into more detail on the willpower.motivation side of things [https://simpleprogrammer.com/2016/09/07/limited- willpower/](https://simpleprogrammer.com/2016/09/07/limited-willpower/)

I hope that helps. Largely I don't believe in long-term motivation, it is more to do with becoming routine.

<comment><USER6> Thanks, I watched the video. I totally agree about avoiding news and being low information. Unfollowing all my Facebook friends so I have no feed has been great. I was until recently ignoring a lot of news but due to boredom have allowed myself to get sucked back in.

<comment><USER5> I have a Chrome Plugin called News Feed Eradicator for Facebook. *

I find it is a terrific solution for preventing you from browsing Facebook. Now everytime, I got to Facebook out of habit, I end up leaving because my news feed does not exist and I don't get sucked in.

Works for me anyway.

* [https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/news-feed-eradicat...](https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/news-feed-eradicator-for/fjcldmjmjhkklehbacihaiopjklihlgg)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> "Discipline is remembering what you want" \- David Campbell, Founder of Saks Fifth Avenue. So if you want to motivate yourself, then remember what you want. Then if you find you are not doing what is necessary, it means that you have to confront the fact that you may not actually want what you are telling yourself you want.

<comment><USER4> Alternatively, it may mean confronting the fact that you've never really sat down to examine your values and find out what it is that you _truly want_ in the first place. :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER8> DHH once gave a talk at Startup School. Watching that talk invariably pumps me up and leaves me motivated for hours. (Specifically, it gets me motivated to work on personal projects that make money online.)

In general, reading about anyone's success is like a shot of motivation directly into my veins.

<comment><USER9> Is this talk available online?

<comment><USER10> [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CDXJ6bMkMY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CDXJ6bMkMY)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> The easiest for me is to just start doing something, even if it is a little thing. It may have been in the Power of Habit or another place. The person said if you wanted to get in the habit of flossing, just start with the front two teeth. Derek Sivers I think said something like do one pushup and what ends up happening is that you get to thinking, I am already down here why not do another one. This leads to a habit.

I approach this the same way when it comes to motivating myself to work on a side project. Another good approach I picked up is the 5 minute journal. You invariably end up reflecting on things you could have done better. This helps you to focus yourself and pay attention to where you are not getting the most out of life.

<comment><USER11> I've converted the 5 minute journal into 2 Google Forms one for AM & PM and have put links to those in a calendar invite for my notifications/alarms to wake up and go to sleep. Keeps me on point every day without being too cumbersome. PM me if you'd like access to the template so you don't have to recreate yourself.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> I race bikes and train like crazy.

I wrote about it before here: [https://medium.com/@kensodev/how-bike-racing- is-making-me-a-...](https://medium.com/@kensodev/how-bike-racing-is-making-me- a-better-engineer-cd2870bdaa87#.kledyyrt6)

Racing bikes (and training for it) creates so much structure in life. What you eat, how you sleep, when you recover. Even though I work most of the time from home, it gives a clear order to the day.

</comment><comment><USER13> Everything was handed to me in life. Not much but enough to get to middle class if I had just followed the rules and stuck with it. But I didn't. I failed out my physics/engineering program. I now work in a factory, and owe around 50K which I barely make 19K a year.

My life sucks. But I'm also young. I watch movies, sci Fi movies/shows which motivates me. I want that life. But then I try to program and I'm like "Holy crap. I'm so far away..."

I hate going to work I perform the same tasks over 6,000 in a day. Everyday is the same. I am wasting my life.

Motivation by fear isn't a good thing. Like the cliche, follow what you love.

Me I'm about trying to get out of my situation. Make money. I HAVE AN IDEA!!!

The problem is discipline. Sleep is a basic thing. Screw up your sleep pattern. You end up wasting time being awake and trying to fall asleep/not able to work.

Yeah discipline is the big thing. And true motivation from a desire/longing to do whatever it is with an internal driving force.

<comment><USER14> Argh. That must feel frustrating & demoralizing. Are you working full time at the factory? Are you working on a project on the side to help lift yourself out of the situation? How do you keep your spirits up? (If it were me, I think that situation would weigh down my self esteem - hanging out with friends would be very important to me to stay upbeat.)

I agree that motivation by fear isn't a good thing & doesn't work for everyone. The times I was most fearful, I found the fear & anxiety paralyzing and I wasn't productive at all.

Being young is good. Things can change quickly - you never know where you'll be in 5 years, 2 years, even next year. I wish you good luck!

<comment><USER13> I'm not sure if I replied to you. I think I replied to myself. Also I'm new to HN so I didn't know how to check for messages.

Yeah it sucks, but you know, I made the decisions to get here. Also I've burned bridges too, which made me concerned like "How will I get a job without references?" but factories you know, they'll hire just about anybody.

I work on web development (freelance) on my spare time, but I'm bad at pricing/businessman and also I'm not that great (reinvent the wheel, use bad code, etc...). I'm really into technology, aviation, robotics, programming, I want to be one of those that I read about in the news. Space. AI, etc... it just sucks being there. I'm trapped. I have this miserable look on my face all the time. I feel bad that people see it. But I can't hide it too, I hate it. But other people also hate this job, but they don't seem to make it other people's problems.

So I just day dream while I lose myself cutting meat in the factory. I dream of ideas, designs, etc... I fear I am delusional, if I make the money then I must not be right? So far I haven't made any money so... not going very well haha.

I was in a box, for the last two years, now it's a corner, hopefully it'll be a room(box again)/house.

Yeah it's hard to keep sane. Sorry I ranted.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> It's very simple for me I just think that one day I'll be dead and that I just wasted my life and the only option to change that is to create something that has value to me and that motivates me.

But the more I think about it ... I guess it's fear, it's the fear of a meaningless life.

Eat, shit, fuck, breath, die ?

No thanks

<comment><USER4> This is a popular stance especially among entrepreneurs. "We're here for such a short period of time, might as well do something meaningful."

<comment><USER15> And a very powerful one.

I'm actually a lazy fuck but that thought makes me run circles.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> There is a popular comment somewhere in the internet (I would guess on quota, but not sure) about this subject.

The point of this comment is that you don't need motivation you need discipline.

Motivation comes and goes, discipline stick around which is what you need if you want to build anything meaningful...

</comment><comment><USER17> I heard that inner motivation (motivation from the inside, in other word, yourself) has more impact than outer motivation.

That was my problem too when I was preparing college entrance examination. My teacher told me that you can get a motivation by categorizing what you love, what you fear, and what you hate. Someone can get a motivation because he hates something. So, write it down! Repeat what you've written regularly before and after you're going to bed.

Side note: I would recommend James Clear's reading list for motivation [1].

[1]: [http://jamesclear.com/motivation](http://jamesclear.com/motivation)

</comment><comment><USER18> This is not very scientific, but it has worked for me. I have curated this list of YouTube videos some of which have helped me and some of my friends a lot in the last year. I watch 1-2 of these in the gym when I am doing my cardio (elliptical or treadmill) three times a week towards the end of my workout.

goo.gl/Xv4pwT

I am a very distracted person, and need constant reminders. I have designed my life in such a way to be constantly reminded of my priorities. Once, I decide I need to include an activity in my life (be it learning, workout, eating healthy), I set up a time and corresponding reminders/ alerts. This sort of planning and tracking helps tremendously stay focussed on only things that matter.

<comment><USER19> This is interesting because I think this is my problem as well. I've tried TODO lists, writing things on paper, but I eventually forget about them. Do you use todo lists? Do you write everything down in paper?

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> My motivation at my age: Make my primary job my second job and make enough money in my startup so that it becomes my primary job.

How do I stay motivated to keep at it with my startup? Aside from enjoying doing what I do, developing web apps, I write down the potential profit involved that I could be making every month. Those are the numbers I want to be making that I'm currently not making and that is what keeps me motivated.

Money isn't everything.. that is certainly true! But making enough money to pay off my mortage, my credit card debt, my bills, and still have enough left over to donate to a cause and have some peace of mind is the underlying motivator.

<comment><USER21> Hey Matt. What is your startup, if you don't mind me asking, of course.

<comment><USER20> Hey Ryan, although I'm still developing the projects, I began an umbrella business which specializes in delivering affordable communication services to companies and individuals.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I think about the 24 hours in my day and see if the time I have spent/will spend expresses the priorities I have in my life. I create routines to ensure the decision-making is minimized as much as possible such that my habitual actions reflect my priorities. Lastly I consider the fact that will my future self think I am doing him a favor by the actions/systems I am putting in place. Motivation should be about putting yourself on the appropriate trajectory not just completing the individual action that leads to fleeting satisfaction.

</comment><comment><USER22> There is no one single unfailing way for me to do this.

Some days it will be closing X issues, or a cold beer, or a gaming session with a friend, or tracking down that one annoying bug, or seeing that my numbers are low and I need to up my game (which can conflict with long work to find that bug of course), or reading a book, going for a bike ride.

There are other ways I do it but no single thing hits the spot for every day and every situation. Having a stock of various methods works though and I'm always happy to add another.

</comment><comment><USER23> Shane Parrish recently gave an excellent review on motivation, good food for thought--

Daniel Pink on Incentives and the Two Types of Motivation > [https://www.farnamstreetblog.com/2016/08/daniel-pink-two- typ...](https://www.farnamstreetblog.com/2016/08/daniel-pink-two-types-of- motivation/)

</comment><comment><USER24> Eric Baker has some good insights [http://www.bakadesuyo.com/2015/01/how-to- be-motivated/](http://www.bakadesuyo.com/2015/01/how-to-be-motivated/)

I struggle to get motivated as well.

<comment><USER4> That was a great read. Here's my summary:

Note: For convenience it's also available with slightly more detail (and formatting!) in my notes repo on GitHub at [1].

\---

\- Sometimes people don't feel motivated if they focus too much on the rewards involved rather than the task itself

\- Instead of focusing on the reward, how can we motivate ourselves to care about the task at hand? 3 ways: Autonomy, Mastery, Purpose.

\- The progress principle: the most powerful motivator is making progress in meaningful work (even just the perception of doing so)

\- From _The Progress Principle_ : "People's inner work lives seemed to lift or drag depending on whether or not their projects moved forward, even by small increments. Small wins often had a surprisingly strong positive effect, and small losses a surprisingly strong negative one."

\- If it's hard to see progress, focus on small accomplishments instead of big goals. What is intrinsically motivating to you?

\- In a study by Barry Schwartz on West Point grads, intrinsically motivated students performed better and were more satisfied than extrinsically motivated and those with hybrid intrinsic/extrinsic motivation

\- From _Drive_ by Dan Pink: "So there is this kind of interesting zen-like thing. The route to these rewards is not to be cognitive of the rewards."

\- Extra motivation from Neil deGrasse Tyson: "The problem, often not discovered until late in life, is that when you look for things in life like love, meaning, motivation, it implies they are sitting behind a tree or under a rock. The most successful people in life recognize, that in life they create their own love, they manufacture their own meaning, they generate their own motivation."

\---

[1]: [https://github.com/tedmiston/notes/blob/master/articles/How%...](https://github.com/tedmiston/notes/blob/master/articles/How%20to%20Be%20Motivated.md)

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> Leaving the world a little better than I found it. Find opportunities where you can and want to make a difference, then do your best.

</comment><comment><USER26> Im motivated by my bills.</comment>


Nine in ten Americans view data privacy as a human right according to new report - <AUTHOR> https://www.zdnet.com/article/nine-in-ten-americans-view-data-privacy-as-a-human-right-according-to-new-report/ <comment><USER2> This is quite odd considering how easily (and often) privacy is given away by everyone on a daily basis.

<comment><USER3> Most end users are not as tech-literate as you and I and more than likely don't know just how much of their own privacy they give away on a daily basis.

<comment><USER4> Another hypothesis is that there are stated and revealed preferences. Everyone thinks that they'd save children, but no one actually wants to save children. They want a nicer car.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I always wonder about these polls. 15% of Americans have an IQ less than 85. How do they show up on these polls? Same as median? More? Less? Should you discount them entirely?

</comment><comment><USER5> It doesn't say "human right" anywhere in the article, other than the title. Why that title?

<comment><USER6> What other kind of rights are there?

<comment><USER7> Human rights are rights that every human is entitled to simply through being alive, as opposed to civil rights, which are conferred on those who are members of a society (hence voting in America was a civil rights issue).

The better take here would be to simply call it a 'right,' as the actual report does, which colloquially for us generally refers to civil rights.</comment></comment></comment>


Mozilla to sell '$25' Firefox OS smartphones in India - <AUTHOR> http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-27793464 <comment><USER2> Just so that people that are not following Firefox OS can know some tidbits:

* The mission of Firefox OS is to bring the next billion people online. Many in the poorest classes can't afford a computer or a smartphone and with the web being a wonderful resource with the potential to transform the life of its users, Mozilla saw that it needed to focus on those that are not attended by the current crop of entry level smartphones.

* Another objective is to bring back the freedoms we enjoy in the web into the mobile ecosystem which means no walled gardens and no exclusivity in the sense that the phone uses HTML5 based apps than can be easily shared between Android, iOS, Tizen, Ubuntu, $NEWFANCY, Firefox OS. Using HTML5 based apps doesn't mean the phone needs to be online, it just means that we're using an agreed stardard to build apps on proven technology that is not owned by a single vendor. You're free to build apps and ship them just like you are free to build a webpage and place it online without the need to request permission from Apple or Google.

* Many new internet users are browsing the web thru mobile devices. In some places, mobile devices are already 25% of the internet users and rising. But there was no platform that took HTML5 and the Web as a first class citizen. Firefox OS is a hero platform for the web to prove that it can work on a mobile ecosystem and that we can all use shared technology that is interoperable instead of doing this 1990s flashback of Obj-C here and Java there thing.

DISCLAIMER: I am a Mozilla Rep and I wrote a FOSS quick guide about how to develop for Firefox OS at [https://leanpub.com/quickguidefirefoxosdevelopment/](https://leanpub.com/quickguidefirefoxosdevelopment/) that is helping lots of new Indian developers get ready for this launch ;-)

<comment><USER3> While this is awesome, the bigger problem in India is that data plans are often prohibitively expensive, and the people who can afford data plans prefer swankier phones (since the phone is a status symbol). But this is a good start, so best of luck :)

<comment><USER4> Just back from a trip to India (from there originally), and don't quite agree with you that data plans are expensive. There is a lot of competition, and both talk time and data are quite affordable IMO. I pre-paid for 1GB of data and ~4 hours of talk time for just 250 INR (about $4).

Pretty much everyone in India - rich or poor - has a mobile phone these days. However, unlike the service, phones cost just as much as they do elsewhere so the poor usually end up using crappy feature phones with limited data support. A $25 smartphone with full web support would make an incredible difference IMO.

<comment><USER5> Presumably, a thin client will transfer more data than a thick client. Potentially, making that cost significant.

Though maybe it has some clever caching system that reduces this?

<comment><USER6> I wouldn't call FirefoxOS a "thin client" (if that's what you meant) - it has a concept of "packaged apps" in which the app and all its assets are packaged and downloaded to the phone, and loaded from there. The built-in "certified" apps (like Phone, Music, Calendar and so on) don't require loading anything from the network at all, for instance.

You can think of FirefoxOS apps the same way conceptually you'd think of them on Android/iOS, except they are always written in open web technologies (HTML/JS/CSS).

App developers do have the option to provide "hosted" apps to the store (which is basically a regular web page but without browser chrome), however even in this case writing HTML5 apps that work offline is totally doable using existing cross-browser standards.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> (Apologies for this rant. I'm just hoping someone from Mozilla sees this here.)

I was very excited last year when I found out that there were phones running Firefox OS that you could actually use. I was disappointed when I found out that the only way to get my hands on the hardware in India was to _fly to a different country, buy the hardware there, and fly back to India_.

It's been a year since that day, and I still haven't been able to get my hands on a Firefox OS device (except briefly playing with a friend's Keon). I get excited every time there's a Firefox OS announcement from Mozilla, only to be let down by the inevitable "We're sorry, we don't ship this product to your country."

If there's a good reason Firefox OS developer devices still aren't available in India – one of the countries Mozilla is targeting with these phones – I'd like to hear it.

I've built a couple of webapps for desktop browsers, and I really like the idea of being able to use the same development stack on a mobile device. Webapps on Android and iOS can do a lot these days, but there's always that _one_ API that you need that is missing. I was hoping I could build something fun with FirefoxOS, but I suppose I should just suck it up already and learn how to use the Android SDK.

<comment><USER8> Send me an email and I'll send you one for free.

<comment><USER7> That's a very kind offer! Thank you :)

Unfortunately, I'll have to refuse. I'll probably just pick up one of these $25 devices once they're out. (Or, I'll buy the Flame if it's ever back in stock and shipping to India.)

<comment><USER8> I'm glad you replied as someone else got in touch and expressed interest. I said I'd wait until a week had elapsed or you'd got back to me. So it'll be going to a good home, regardless... :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> For a $25 price tag, this has the potential to appeal to a lot of Indians in the rural areas and being a potential rival to other in house android brands like Micromax et al.

Even if they support the basic subset of functionality exposed by Android, it should be more then enough for it do well. Looking forward to more updates on the launch.

</comment><comment><USER10> $70 in the US.

When the FirefoxOS developer device was posted on here some time ago half the comments were about how it was missing feature X or Y that Android or iPhone has had for ages, and therefore it just couldn't compete.

A $70 price point doesn't put them in competition with other smart phones, it puts Mozilla at the fore of a new class of customer.

<comment><USER11> I just bought a $69 Nokia Lumia 521 (Windows Phone) off contract. Mozilla isn't at the forefront here - both Nokia/Microsoft and Motorola are driving down the off-contract price point.

<comment><USER12> $25 for a smartphone is a massive step forward in accessibility on $69 when you consider these guys might be earning $60 a month.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> I can't wait to start hacking with these. $25 in India puts these in the range of raspberry pi, plus you get wireless and a touchscreen!

<comment><USER14> Definitely sounds like a lot of fun!

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> What makes Firefox OS inherently more cost effective than Android? I doubt you'd need a weaker CPU or less memory for the same amount of responsiveness. Or is that it's possible for Android phones to be as inexpensive, but no one's bothered creating a decent one at that price yet (just like no one bothered creating even a decent $130 one until the Moto E).

<comment><USER16> Fewer layers between machine and app -- just Gonk (linux layer) and Gecko (application runtime). With Android, you have all the Android runtime in between.

<comment><USER17> How do you figure there are "fewer layers"?

Both are built upon Linux. So we can say that they're pretty much equivalent at that level.

Then there is a runtime and libraries providing common functionality above that. Again, we have pretty much the same in both cases.

Then we have the apps running on top of that, making use of the functionality of the two lower layers. Once again, it's a similar situation in both cases.

I really don't see the differences that you claim are there.

<comment><USER18> And don't forget that HTML + JS + CSS came from a completely different use case than Java, so there's a certain amount of parsing overhead too. Whether or not there being more native code in FFOS can counterbalance this overhead is yet to be seen, but it will be interesting to compare.

(In any case I would like to see more native code apps for mobile devices, as they are naturally more resource-constrained.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> From Indian perspective it may not be a good decision for Mozilla to team up with Intex and Spice. They produce phones priced cheap but their track record in quality is not so good. People have become more quality conscious now. I think it may end up like Tata Nano - cheap car but not many takers.

</comment><comment><USER20> Its a shame that Tmobile US has such odd gsm frequencies than the rest of the world, and as such are unsupported by any of the FFOS phones so far.

With their embracing of prepaid plans combined with inexpensive smart phones could really open up anytime information access for people who cannot otherwise afford it.

<comment><USER21> From: [http://prepaid-phones.t-mobile.com/sim-card](http://prepaid- phones.t-mobile.com/sim-card)

"T-Mobile's network currently only supports GSM-compatible phones. Only 3G phones that support the 1700-MHz band are compatible (not all 3G phones support it). If you own a 3G phone that does not support the 1700-MHz band, it will operate at 2G (EDGE) speeds on our network."

Do you mean that data rates with Tmobile will be slow? It seems to be supported otherwise?

<comment><USER20> Right, it would work. However the modern web, even when "optimized for mobile" is usually a very frustrating experience on 2G, and even some 3G connections.

Stuck at 2G most would probably use the data very sparingly and be stuck using whatever wifi they find.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Why did they have to announce it just 2 days after I bought a new andorid phone! I could have saved some money.

Joking aside this news is very exciting for me mainly because I will finally have a good reason to try out pouch db.

One question that I have though is how the updates to the os are delivered to the user? Are they managed by manufacturers or can any one with access to internet just download it from a central repository?

A request: I implore that you keep a good stock of phones ready. Because I don't want it to go out of stock after the first day at sale.

</comment><comment><USER23> This segment has potential to crack into rural markets of India where "Nokia" and chinese handsets rule . Too early to comment till features are not released . Lot of chinese handsets provide loud music players and camera ( though not reliable).

</comment><comment><USER24> Respect for the endeavour. But India presents many challenges. The masses this phone targets may not be able to use it effectively unless the UI is extremely simple. Remember that India has most illiterates on the planet and the most people who earn less than $2 a day. Smart phone penetration is a measly 10% now though growing at a healthy 50% per year. This is despite smart phones being made available at less than $75 price point already. Would be glued on the ground.

<comment><USER25> Mozilla has an opportunity to gather a lot of data about non-text usability.

Let's hope they can release that data in an open format to allow researchers to make use of it.

</comment></comment><comment><USER26> People in India are Brand concious like anywhere else, Intex and Spice do not really command any good selling space in India. It would be better if Mozilla works with Intex and Spice to just get the Hardware and Software done and let the New brand name be Mozilla Or Firefox Phone something on Similar lines, this way, the brand recall and brand recognition will be instant with regards to the phone.

</comment><comment><USER27> Is there a timeframe for release mentioned anywhere? I skimmed the BBC article and the WSJ article it's sourced from but couldn't find one.

</comment><comment><USER28> What's with the scare quotes in the headline?

<comment><USER29> British news headlines seem to use these far more than I would expect. However, in this case it's perhaps not unreasonable: These are not yet on sale at that price; while the Mozilla COO "suggested" that they would retail at that, it's not clear that he's the one setting the final price - and the linked announcement actually does not include the $25 pricing.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> what are CPU/RAM specs?

</comment><comment><USER31> Why India? Why not China?

</comment><comment><USER32> Sakshat cellphone edition</comment>


Hell Hath no Fury like a Cheerleader Scorned - <AUTHOR> http://epicfumble.com/post/hell-hath-no-fury-like-a-cheerleader-scorned

<comment><USER2> "[Cheerleaders] do not build anything. They have no customers that rely on them. They are not disrupting a vertical segment, creating open source software used by thousands, or investing cash that makes much the of the innovation possible. Cheerleaders cheerlead."

Even if all this were correct, the put-downs are easily answered by the very choice of the term "cheerleader". Cheerleaders are essential to the morale and motivation of the team. The more difficult the task, the easier it is to quit - the more important their services are.</comment>


Introduction to Bioinformatics - <AUTHOR> http://arxiv.org/abs/0911.4230 <comment><USER2> Interesting. A table of contents and an index in the book would have helped though.

<comment><USER3> I also could have done without the official "BIOINFORMATICS POLICY OF INDIA" section...</comment></comment>


Machines 'to match man by 2029' - <AUTHOR> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7248875.stm

<comment><USER2> This kind of fantasizing gathers attention because some people would like it to be true while other people fear it. Controversy results, but it's not about anything. It's a conflict between two forms of wishful thinking.

<comment><USER3> Nice snappy comment but what exactly do you mean? Do you think this sort of thing is impossible? Or that 2029 is way too early? Or are you just saying that speculating about what will happen more than 20 years in the future is folly?

<comment><USER2> I don't know what's impossible. I'm saying this stuff is made up. Nobody really knows anything about it, and there's no way to prove or disprove it (except by waiting a long time). I think it gets attention not because of anything to do with the future, but because it triggers emotions in the present. Some people find it exciting and want it to be true, others find it frightening and want it to be false, and so on. That leads to controversy, but the controversy isn't really about anything, other than conflicting emotions finding arguments to clothe themselves in.

<comment><USER3> Well you could to some extent make the same argument over any attempts to predict the future. Global warming is an instance that comes to mind. The point of it all is that your assessment of the likely futures can effect your current actions. This sort of stuff can be particularly useful for tech startups.

But to follow your style of argument - it can also be true that some people would prefer not to think of a future that is radically different from the past and present. So they will often reflexively turn away from that sort of discussion, dismissing it as pointless. This is the sort of attitude a lot of people displayed to the internet during its growth.

I personally think there is maybe a 20% change he is close to right which to me makes it hugely significant and deserving of a lot more attention than it gets.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I would think more of these predictions if they came attached to some concrete goals. Could we have a list of specific tasks that will be accomplished by the machines in 2029? "Win the world Go championship", perhaps? "Produce a Russian-to-English translation of _Crime and Punishment_ that passes the Turing test?" "Provide better color commentary than the average Fox Sports announcer?" That should be an easy one, but I'm still not betting on the machine.

And I marvel at the tremendous effectiveness of the typical futurist trick: make the banal sound incredible and then predict it:

 _"We'll have intelligent nanobots go into our brains through the capillaries and interact directly with our biological neurons," he told BBC News._

I've got those. They're called _cells_. I sneeze billions of them out every day.

I suppose you might ask whether it's fair to call my white blood cells "intelligent"... but they do have autonomous capabilities, and they do self- organize via a body-wide signaling network. They're pretty talented. I challenge you to produce a device on the same scale that is significantly _more_ intelligent... by 2029.

<comment><USER3> Well I don't think any of your current cells can network your brain to say a google search by thought alone. To say the capacity for rapid brain-digital interfacing wouldn't have an impact on intelligence would be like saying the internet is unlikely to effect society. Not saying I subscribe to the guy's timetable though.

I agree about the goal part. I'd say GO would be gone way before then anyway. It'll take a new algorithm and some more computer power but not general intelligence. The actual Turing Test is always a good one, but if they passed it computers would be way more intelligent than us to beat us at our own game.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Human-level AI is always ~20 years from "now" (whenever "now" happens to be).

</comment><comment><USER3> Ray Kurzweil's latest book about all this 'The Singularity is Near', was released in 2005. It has some compelling arguments is definitely worth a read if you are interesting in the longer term implications of computer technology and networking. He hasn't said all that much new in the years since then and this article doesn't really contain any new information.

<comment><USER6> Norvig doesn't think so: <http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9774501-7.html>

<comment><USER3> Doesn't think what? That the Kurzweil book is an interesting read? I think what you are trying to say is that this guy doesn't agree with the notion of the singularity. Fair enough. Though I think his assertion that we aren't in a time of accelerating change is a minority view amongst recognized futurists.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> These stories should be tagged "Kurzweil" or "non-Kurzweil". Kurzweil's next book should be about how to get constant PR.

</comment><comment><USER8> I think it may happen, but not on his timetable. If you read his _Age of Spiritual Machines_ , he dismissed many very difficult problems in AI and material science with a bunch of hand-waving. He could just as well be off by 50-150 years.

<comment><USER9> "He could just as well be off by 50-150 years."

Well, that's not even a blimp in the history of mankind.

<comment><USER8> True. Like I said, I had a problem with his timetable, which he did not justify to my satisfaction. His premise may be valid. I would say it is almost inevitable.</comment></comment></comment>


Privacy regulation and the "free" Internet - <AUTHOR> http://blogs.reuters.com/mediafile/2010/12/23/privacy-regulation-and-the-free-internet/

<comment><USER2> Companies who have prospered by exploiting their users data warn that the world will end if they have to change their business model. Film at 11.</comment>


The Dow in Gold - <AUTHOR> http://blogs.reuters.com/rolfe-winkler/2009/11/11/chart-of-the-day-the-dow-priced-in-gold/

<comment><USER2> This ignores Dividends.

<http://www.investopedia.com/articles/02/082702.asp>

</comment><comment><USER3> Ratio's can be _very_ misleading. I'd be more interested in seeing a chart with plots for Gold, DJIA, and then the ratio.</comment>


Robotic gripper uses acoustic levitation for contact-free manipulation - sahin-boydas https://newatlas.com/science/robotic-manipulator-ultrasonics-acoustic-levitation-contactless-gripper/ <comment><AUTHOR> I think acoustic levitation is going to be a technology worth watching over the coming years. I'm very curious what could be achieved with application specific speakers designed/built _as_ arrays as opposed to discrete stock speakers assembled into arrays. It could end up being like comparing a matrix of discrete 5mm LEDs to an LED monitor in terms of precision/accuracy and open up a lot of possible applications.

<comment> lachlan-sneff You mean, like arrays of microscale acoustic generators? Maybe if the wavelength was small enough, one could manipulate singular molecules with nanometer precision? 3Ghz ultrasound at sea level has a wavelength of about 150 nm.

Perhaps the endgame of this would be a phased array that can generate phonons with extreme accuracy.

<comment><USER2> I mean remember that the way these things work is by manipulating air molecules. Manipulating single-molecules is going to be difficult since you're always going to be at the mercy of your carrier fluid/gas.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER3> Here's a fascinating video that explains Acoustic Levitation and shows it in action with various materials:

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

</comment><comment><USER4> If they can manipulate multiple objects at a time, this could really speed up PCB pick-and-place operations.

</comment><comment><USER5> Does the actual soundwave itself have an effect on these parts? They mentioned something about a thin layer of lubricant. Wouldn't soundwaves also mess with this layer as well?

<comment><USER6> It shouldn't; fluid is an insulator and the lubricant has enough (viscosity? tensile strength? I'm not a materials guy) to adhere to the part in question. The soundwaves must be super high-frequency so they should just get absorbed without displacement.

I'd be curious to see if something like this could succesfully handle an Etch- a-Sketch or Magna-Doodle without ruining the picture though.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Does anyone know what limits the real-time calculation of these fields?

</comment><comment><USER8> Can you theoretically levitate a car with this?

<comment><USER9> I'd like to suggest purchasing a lift from Harbor Freight...

<comment><USER10> ...their 3T jack really is a phenomenal deal.

[https://www.harborfreight.com/3-Ton-Heavy-Duty-Rapid-Pump- Fl...](https://www.harborfreight.com/3-Ton-Heavy-Duty-Rapid-Pump-Floor- Jack-64260.html)

<comment><USER11> >a phenomenal deal.

eh. i've gone through 4 of them. I only keep buying them when theyre heavily discounted. They begin leaking down quickly, and parts aren't readily available to repair the cylinder, so you're stuck measuring and finding everything yourself -- a feat not worth the price of the product.

i'd have saved money by now if I had just bought something nice and rebuildable.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> "Acoustic Levitation"

Found the name of my band

<comment><USER13> It's going to be awkward playing only songs with suspended chords.

</comment></comment><comment><USER14> That's pretty amazing.</comment>


Uncovering Steve Jobs' Presentation Secrets - <AUTHOR> http://www.businessweek.com/smallbiz/content/oct2009/sb2009106_706829.htm <comment><USER2> "Neuroscientists have discovered that the brain gets bored easily"

It's so nice when business writers take the time to catch up with the latest science! ;)

<comment><USER3> Well, if they were conscious of that, the video that accompanies the article wouldn't have reminded me of local public access programming from the 80's. That was painful. Listen, I get it if you can't help the surroundings you are shooting video in, but could you show some emotion? That was almost worse than people reading from a script while presenting.

Holy cow.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> Neuroscience is the new "I read it on the internet, so it must be true." I'm glad we have some "neuroscience" backing the idea that you should be interesting to keep your audience's attention. Everyone seems to be an expert in neuroscience these days.

Every time I see "neuroscientists have proven" in a lay press article with no citiation, it just reeks of handwaving and an "appeal to authority" type of arguement.</comment>


Clipperz - online password manager - <AUTHOR> http://www.clipperz.com/ <comment><USER2> We have a new contender for most-hack-attempts-on-a-single-website awards...</comment>


The Amazon rain forest may be largely a human artifact - <AUTHOR> http://spacecollective.org/nagash/5282/1491 <comment><USER2> Just to highlight the part that I personally find most interesting:

 _Terra preta, Woods guesses, covers at least 10 percent of Amazonia, an area the size of France. It has amazing properties, he says. Tropical rain doesn't leach nutrients from terra preta fields; instead the soil, so to speak, fights back. Not far from Painted Rock Cave is a 300-acre area with a two-foot layer of terra preta quarried by locals for potting soil. The bottom third of the layer is never removed, workers there explain, because over time it will re- create the original soil layer in its initial thickness. The reason, scientists suspect, is that terra preta is generated by a special suite of microorganisms that resists depletion. "Apparently," Woods and the Wisconsin geographer Joseph M. McCann argued in a presentation last summer, "at some threshold level ... dark earth attains the capacity to perpetuate—even regenerate itself—thus behaving more like a living 'super'-organism than an inert material."_

 _[...] Not all Xingu cultures left behind this living earth, they discovered. But the ones that did generated it rapidly—suggesting to Woods that terra preta was created deliberately. In a process reminiscent of dropping microorganism-rich starter into plain dough to create sourdough bread, Amazonian peoples, he believes, inoculated bad soil with a transforming bacterial charge. [...]_

Wikipedia has, of course, an article on terra preta: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terra_preta>

Most interesting is modern attempts by scientists to effectively reverse- engineer the soil; using a combination of crude charcoal, organic compost, and microorganism cultures to convert poor soils into something approximating the robust, fertile terra preta.

</comment><comment><USER3> My favorite paragraph:

"I asked seven anthropologists, archaeologists, and historians if they would rather have been a typical Indian or a typical European in 1491. None was delighted by the question, because it required judging the past by the standards of today—a fallacy disparaged as "presentism" by social scientists. But every one chose to be an Indian."

<comment><USER4> I guess the 'Indian' here is referring to native Americans.

It amazes me that a bunch of Europeans occupy the Americas, call themselves Americans, and call the people who have been living there Indians.

<comment><USER3> White folks tried calling them "Native Americans" once, and a lot of them still do it, but a lot of American Indians have been calling themselves American Indians for so long they don't really care anymore. "Native American" is a name white people made up to make themselves feel better.

It will become more of an issue as more people from India immigrate over here. I imagine that in some parts of the country, "Indian" already means Indian more than it means American Indian.

Also, the more accurate adjective is "indigenous" or "aboriginal", not "native".

<comment><USER5> Eh. "indigenous" and "aboriginal" are both words which date from the 17th century, not used in the sense you're talking about until the 19th, whereas "native" was used in that sense at least as far back as the 15th century. The OED's definitions of both "indigenous" and "aboriginal" define those words with reference to the word "native". Calling them "more accurate" is a bit absurd, I'd say. Less ambiguous perhaps.

<comment><USER3> I've always understood that "native" was defined on an individual level, i.e. you would be a native American if you were born in America. "Indigenous" and "aboriginal" apply to races rather than individuals.

<comment><USER5> OED has

native, adj:

11\. Of a person or social group.

a. Born in a designated place; belonging to a particular people by birth; spec. belonging to an indigenous ethnic group, as distinguished from foreigners, esp. European colonists.

indigenous, a:

2\. Of, pertaining to, or intended for the natives; 'native', vernacular.

aboriginal, adj:

1\. a. First or earliest as recorded by history; present from the beginning; primitive. Of peoples, plants, and animals: inhabiting or existing in a land from earliest times; strictly native, indigenous.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> It's unbelievably sad that that many people died, and so much collective knowledge was lost. But, it excites me to think that there are still probably a good number of hidden secrets throughout North and South America just waiting to be discovered.

</comment><comment><USER7> excellent read. one thought i can't figure out: how come native american diseases didn't equally damage europeans? why the different biology and disease ecosystems?

<comment><USER8> Not everyone particularly likes him, but Jared Diamond's "Guns, Germs and Steel" explores pretty much this exact question (as part of a suite of "why did Europeans conquer the Americas instead of the other way around" issues). Glossing over a lot of the details and specifics, the argument he makes is that various factors -- geography, indigenous flora/fauna, etc. -- allowed densely-packed settled human populations to develop in Europe/Africa/Asia before the Americas. And such densely-packed populations are far more conducive to the development of epidemic diseases, which would be why diseases brought by Europeans wrought such havoc on the Americas but not vice-versa (except possibly for syphilis, but that one's still being debated).

<comment><USER9> Among other things he says that there were no (or almost no) animals suitable for domestication and mass herding in the Americas. Therefore the native Americans had no contact with herds of animals that would have bred diseases of that kind. Most of those epidemic diseases that killed off lots of people apparently stem from chicken and pigs. (note: guess why it is called "swine flu").

<comment><USER10> Also, the spread of disease did go both ways. Syphilis came from America to Europe.

It's also worth noting that Europeans are not at the top of the food chain in terms of disease resistance. Various European powers raised a flag on New Guinea, but they never successfully colonized it. It's a cesspool of disease, and Europeans never managed to do more than establish a few trading posts on the beach.</comment></comment></comment></comment>


OCZ RevoDrive X2 Tested: Fastest PCIe SSD Yet, Standard SSD Price Point - <AUTHOR> http://hothardware.com/Reviews/OCZ-RevoDrive-X2-Review-Killer-PCIE-SSD-Performance/

<comment><USER2> It's insane how expensive FusionIO is.

OCZ RevoDrive X2 100GB = $459

Fusionio 80 GB = $5,231.98

The specs are nearly identical.

<comment><USER3> Fusion io is about two years old, so of course it's expensive; the real problem is that they haven't refreshed it. BTW, the list price is $2,400 (including enterprisey markup) for the 80 GB ioDrive and $900 for the 80 GB ioXtreme.</comment></comment>


New urban migration patterns shaped by the youngs - <AUTHOR> http://grist.org/news/new-urban-migration-patterns-shaped-by-the-youngs/ <comment><USER2> I'm from Copenhagen, Denmark and we've seen this here as well. Especially lately I feel that a lot of 1st-time parents stay in city apartments instead of buying houses in the outer parts or in the suburbs.

I have several friends, whose apartment complexes within the last 5-7 years have turned from housing a bunch of 50+ year old folks without kids to primarily young couples in their 20's/30's with 1 or 2 young kids.

I think this have a lot to do with the city's development and "marketing" towards the younger generation. Maybe the Danes just want to stay "young" longer and longer ;)</comment>


Startup outsourcing: when to do it - <AUTHOR> http://goodcode.io/blog/startup-outsourcing-when-to-do-it/

<comment><USER2> For a product development company, it is advisable to have a in-house development team</comment>


Does anyone see the parallels between Aaron Swartz and Alan Turing? - <AUTHOR>

<comment><AUTHOR> Two brilliant tech minds lost before their time, because authority pushed them to their limits.

</comment><comment><USER2> Such as?</comment>


Anonymous comments improve online debates - <AUTHOR> http://ajr.org/Article.asp?id=4916

<comment><USER2> There may be some situations in which the only way to get honest opinions is to enable people to post anonymously, but in the majority of cases where I've seen people posting anonymous comments, or comments under pseudonyms, the quality tends to slide. HN is a conspicuous exception, although that's probably due to its fairly restricted scope of interest.

<comment><USER3> I find that Reddit is great because of anonimity. People can talk about problems they can't talk about to anyone. People share experiences they would never dare to share. You get to realize some things are extremely common yet never discussed, because of shame or stigma.

Anonimity is the key to getting truth. Even the extremely superficial posts like "U SUCK DICK! LOLOL!" or extremely incendiary posts, or illegal stuff like child porn, they show what people are like or what strange and dark thoughts sometimes pass through their minds.

Anonimity is the counter to hypocrisy.

<comment><USER4> Hypocrisy, maybe, but not misdirection. Anonymity makes it easier to build straw men to defeat, or make it sound like your opponent is an idiot, because nobody knows if you're you or you're them.

<comment><USER3> It's not like misdirection is not possible without anonymity. In fact, anonymous misdirection is less effective because the source is more questionable. Misdirection from an authorative source is the really dangerous stuff (WMD's in Iraq?).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> The right tool for the right job. Anonymity works in some areas, not so great in other areas. While many sites are shifting to real-world user IDs, I believe that is an extreme step and something like 'expiring comments' could be a better alternative to deal with the problems that come with anonymous comments » <http://j.mp/cKstr2>

</comment><comment><USER4> > _There are ways to curb abuses in the forums, whether using high-tech > solutions or good old-fashioned editing._

Similar sentiment:

All code is efficient given a sufficiently smart compiler.

<comment><USER6> No. Your compiler can't compile out side-effects. (Or at least, it should not.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> Well, I guess that would explain the high quality of discussion on 4chan, then.

</comment><comment><USER6> Sensible article. But very US centric.

<comment><USER8> Yeah, I find the whole framing the thing around the US constitution unhelpful. This is really a human psychology issue rather than a cultural history issue.

The thing that makes me curious is whether "semi" anonymity is the best of both worlds (where the person whose platform it is knows your identity but it is not published). In the example of women not writing letters to the editor because of their names being published, would they still object if the editor verified their identity but then published the letter pseudonymously?

<comment><USER6> This is a sane solution, only if you can trust the editor never to reveal your name. Ever. Not even to law enforcement.</comment></comment></comment>


Ask HN: explain to me what piracy isn't - <AUTHOR>

Right off the bat: I don't support SOPA, I think it is detestable on constitutional grounds and that its existence reflects irresponsibly uninformed and one-sided decision making on the part of congress.
That said, I need some clarity on the hacker side of things. I'm a new computer science student, I love startups, and did the "I'm gonna start this awesome startup with my friend even though neither of us is technical" thing back in high school (with typical failure to move past drafting tons of "Business Models"). That said, I like to be involved with the startup culture and work to understand how hackers think.
But what I just don't get, is why piracy does not equal theft. I just don't get it. I see tons and tons of people talking about why piracy isn't theft because the object is duplicated, so it isn't taken from the owner, but I don't fully see the flow in that. Musicians have always sold copies, but piracy is taking one without paying for it. The thing that the musician lost is their revenue, or the economic costs of production which they expect to make back. That seems like theft.
And the argument that we can't prevent duplication and that the music industry needs to expect it almost sounds lazy, and seems to neglects the music industry almost as much as SOPA neglects the rights of web sites. I think that I just don't understand what solution the idea of "piracy is a reality" poses. That flow never really sat well with me either.
Now I am not so brazen as to assume that I've got it right when a sizable community seems to believe otherwise, but I need this laid out, and I think that creating clear and understandable ideologies beyond "This is unforgivable let us do battle" can be a positive exercise for the HN community. So, somebody out there, anyone out there, please tell me why the status quo is ok, why piracy isn't theft, or why my conceptions are all backwards and wrong. I should lose all of my 22 karma within 10 minutes because my misconceptions are being laid out and taken to school. I just need this clarified so I can understand not just that the corporations and SOPA are the worst thing ever, but that we can do much better, and that there is a reasonably collective counter-ideology.
Now I've got my own ideas about what should be done and how the system could ultimately be repaired, but I didn't scream those at you, so keep the responses ideological please. And always honest.
If you want to do the most good, email me directly at firstname.lastname@example.com. And If you want to do the second to most, include what you think the correct ideology pertaining to intellectual property ought to be in your comment. <comment><USER2> Musicians have not always sold copies of anything. Recordings that can be sold are a relatively new technology (20th century). Musicians and artists worked on commissions or got paid for their performances. In fact today very few musicians make much money from selling recordings (talk to any jazz musician about it).

As far as lost revenue. When I drive a fuel efficient car that uses less gas, am I stealing? After all I am depriving the oil companies of revenues.

</comment><comment><USER3> It's not theft because theft is defined as something completely different. Piracy is Copyright infrigement which was already tried.

I'm not going to say it's not illegal - it is. I have no problem with it being illegal, but I do have problems with how it's redefined as the "big corp publisher" sees fit. At various times "piracy" meant among other things:

\- playing purchased media on a different player than designed by the publisher

\- playing purchased media in a different country

\- making own copy for private use on a different device, or in a different format

\- breaking disk protection so you don't have to use publisher's spyware

\- buying used media from previous owner

\- downloading albums from internet if you already own the cds

\- using/printing/copying purchased item more than X times (when this fact is not stated in big red letters on the outer packaging)

\- downloading a copy of some album/book/... if they are not legally sold in your country and cannot be obtained easily enough (for example distributor/producer not shipping items from japan to europe, or country- specific "bonus tracks" on albums you otherwise own)

\- using abandonware

I remember at least one article claiming each of those to be "piracy" (apart from the last point, which actually is a copyright infrigement now, but i believe shouldn't be). I believe each of those points should be completely legal and are valid use cases, but many publishers claim otherwise.

Also you make the common mistake of "The thing that the musician lost is their revenue". No - they have not lost anything yet. I might actually like the album which is why I'll buy it later. That's what happened with all albums I have. I download it, if it survives a couple of days without deletion, I'm most likely going to buy it. I'm not going to claim it's currently legal, but unless you're into mega mixes of whoever's on top in pop right now, you've got little chance to check if you really want the whole cd. At least in UK with very limitted choice of on-demand streaming.

Re abandonware, availability and country-specific items. I don't care how "illegal" it is. If I can't buy Samla mammas manna albums from '70s then noone's losing anything here. Same with anime which is not dubbed - I'd pay for subbed version, but for whatever reason it's not sold here and I'm allergic to bad dubbing. Bonus tracks are self-explanatory I hope.

</comment><comment><USER4> Piracy is the future of course - musicians and performers and actors and writers etc are embracing a dying business model and should seek revenue elsewhere, either by selling tshirts or spending months on the road away from their friends and families performing live or by just accepting that 1% paying pennies online is better than 100% paying dollars.

It's not theft because it's just 1s and 0s, not real work like what _we_ do.

The view from our comfy pedestals, safe in the knowledge that our web applications can't be effortlessly copied, is not at all flawed!

<comment><USER5> If it is "just 1s and 0s", does this mean making desktop software is also 'not real work'? And thus, copying desktop software is also not problem just as copying music is not a problem. And programmers should go find a new way to make money that is not developing and selling desktop software?

<comment><USER4> Programmers already did - complete, mandatory binding to online services because your user account / subscription can't be distributed like the software.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> IMO, piracy _is_ theft. The way I was raised, taking something that isn't yours without permission is stealing. If you feel bad thinkng of yourself as a thief, you come up with rationalizations as to why stealing is OK. Here are some popular ones:

"That store is overcharging/doing something bad/is a big corporation so they deserve to have their stuff stolen."

"They are using the _wrong word_ (pirate) to describe my stealing so even though I'm still stealing and I know what they mean by that word, since I'm not doing what they say I'm doing I'm not (technically) a pirate.

"I think what they are selling should be free so it is alright for me to steal it."

</comment><comment><USER7> here's a start: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_infringement#.22Theft...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_infringement#.22Theft.22)</comment>