Show HN: Visalist – Find visa requirements for countries around the world - <AUTHOR> https://visalist.io <comment><USER2> Interesting, but how do you keep this up to date? These requirement change constantly and the only reliable source I'm aware of, Timatic (which is what airlines use), is copyrighted and quite tightly locked down.

Wikipedia does crowdsource this info fairly effectively though, sample: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa_requirements_for_Indian_c...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa_requirements_for_Indian_citizens)

<comment><USER3> You do have to be careful and read the fine print. This year, I was turned away at the Belarusian-Lithuanian border (US citizen) because I had read on that Wikipedia page that it was Visa free. In fact, it is only visa free if you arrive via the Minsk airport. Fortunately I was only driving through a tiny part of Belarus on my way to Poland so it was a simple matter of another 30 minutes or so of driving to enter Poland via the Lithuanian border.

<comment><USER4> To be fair, visa-free entry into Belarus for up to 30 days is a completely new thing[1]. Unlike most visa-free regimes, it's not driven by any international agreements, but rather by a Belarusian initiative to promote tourism in the country. Therefore, they can set their own requirements, and it's still not possible to take a 2-hour train from Vilnius to Minsk without a visa. The entire program can be cancelled at any time by one side, since Belarusians don't have the same visa-free access to the EU.

[1] [https://www.belarus.by/rel_image/6400](https://www.belarus.by/rel_image/6400)

<comment><USER5> To be fair, Ukraine has the same unilateral visa-free regime for EU (plus some other countries) citizens. But it's not as arbitrary. If you are a citizen of one of the countries you can enter through any legal port of entry.

Edit. I keep forgetting that Ukraine now does have visa free travel with Schengen states.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> Nice looking site. As others have pointed out, it's important to be 100% credible so that people can trust that the results are correct and up-to-date. The overall look of the site is consistent with this, but having "by 1HaKr" in the lower right would be a red flag for some folks who think of "hackers" as exclusively black hat.

It would help the site's credibility if you linked to authoritative source documents showing that you do/don't need a visa for a particular country, so that folks can trust that your third-party site is correct.

It would also be handy if you could include requirements related to international driver's license, IMO.

Lastly, the button "LETS GO!" needs an apostrophe.

<comment><AUTHOR> This is super useful feedback. I will change my name there. There are already links to official government websites. About driving, license, i will add that. Also thanks for pointing out the typo.

<comment><USER7> Thanks, nice tool, bookmarked. I'll second that "give an authoritative basis" advice.

Two minor items that struck me:

\- Country code, I'd suggest going with alpha2 from iso 3166, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_3166-1](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_3166-1) (Portugal is usually .pt/PT =alpha2 , sometimes POR, PRT=alpha3 is kind of rare)

\- Something strange about the sorting of the left column, mine goes U V V V A by country initial on (default) "visa type" ...

<comment><AUTHOR> This is very useful. Thanks a lot.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I find many of the critical comments to be shortsighted, especially those talking about trust/credibility. Do people really believe folks will check this site then run over to book an international ticket straight after?

This is an awesome site to get a general idea where I (or my friends & family) can and can't travel with and without extra work. It has a nice interface, a good collection of information, and is easier to browse than, say, Wikipedia on mobile.

If I'm actually interested in locking down and going on a trip to somewhere where I may possibly need a visa, of course I'll do additional due diligence with the embassy, which the site often helpfully links.

"1HaKr in the corner reminds people of hackers and may turn people away." Really?

<comment><USER9> I have a completely evidence-free theory that, over time, the average sentiment score of comments on HN has gone down.

Maybe I'm succumbing to bias with this theory (hello Eternal September), but it seems like all I read on "Show HN" anymore is negativity and dismissiveness.

I really ought to try and do the analysis. I _think_ it wouldn't be hard (HN is very good about keeping historical data, and sentiment analysis looks as easy as importing a library and passing it a dataset), just time consuming.

<comment><USER10> I don't know.

To me, HN is a place where ideas are workshopped. If one is looking for accolades, Reddit might be a better forum.

I don't think I have any trouble with critical sentiments as long as they are _correctly_ critical. Of course, too often they are not because some HN folks have an ax to grind, and to make things worse, they are misinformed because a little knowledge is a dangerous thing (pseudointellectuals). [1]

But at the same time, if people are not critically examining ideas, that almost defeats the purpose of this place. I've seen some really bad and incorrect ideas on Show HN that are given a pass due to lack of expertise and discernment on the commenters' parts.

Criticism, when done with civility with the intention to build up rather than tear down, can be a wonderful thing.

Also, despite its purported negativity, people still dip their toe in the comments sections from time to time, holding out hope for finding the one or two gems. For all its flaws, there's no other general forum on the Internet (that I know of) that congregates this level of intellectual ability mixed with technical expertise. (specialized forums notwithstanding)

[1] [https://danluu.com/hn-comments/](https://danluu.com/hn-comments/)

<comment><USER9> The comments on HN tend to be so completely out of touch with reality, that it's sometimes hard to separate the wheat from the proverbial chaff.

If the negativity was constructive, I'd be with you, but I don't think it is. It's the incorrect or incomplete application of concepts people pick up in blog posts or half-read books about one person's opinion about how to do a certain thing, represented as gospel.

Regarding your link, I urge you to check the dates those comments were posted. You'll find, I theorize, that the number of these quality posts has gone down over time. I believe the "good parts" are fading, getting lost in the increasing noise.

<comment><USER10> I'm curious, given your feelings, what motivates your (fairly active) participation in the comments section?

Not trying to be snarky, just want to know what people are truly looking for in the comments, because I happen to have a different view of the comments (maybe it's just in the sampling of topics I'm interested in).

<comment><USER9> Shouting into the void about the void helps me deal with the void's existence.

Honestly, if I were a completely rational actor, I wouldn't comment on HN.

Besides, I think you'd find the level of comments on HN to be no better than what's on Reddit or Stack Overflow or Quora or Slashdot or Twitter or Facebook or even Google+.

<comment><USER10> I think I see where you're coming from. Humans aren't always rational.

I have a different view. I think the quality of a subset of comments here are appreciably better in some respects than many of the sites you listed. Of course there are contrarian, misinformed pseudointellects, but at the same time, one also gets to hear the unvarnished thoughts of lead developers of specific products (e.g. Timescale, Azure services, D programming language, etc.). I know of no other forum where this is true.

Maybe my mind is used to filtering out stuff I don't care about, so most of the cruft and negativity doesn't really bother me. I also come from an academic tradition where debate and disagreement (high quality or not) is just part of life. To me, it's just a reflection of the world out there -- all forums have their brand of stupidity. HN's just a different kind of stupid from Reddit, and I'm ok with all kinds of stupid as long as there are still good bits that edify me, which is why I keep coming back.

Site(s) like StackOverflow and certain StackExchanges have higher quality exchanges on particular topics, but they aren't designed for discussion. They are heavily constrained Q&A sites. The bar of acceptability is much higher (questions get closed all the time), but the topics also more or less have verifiable answers, which makes it easy to achieve "quality"; this is not true of a general purpose discussion forum. Jeff Atwood (StackOverflow's founder) was interviewed on the MIT AI podcast recently about this, and his answers on how to arrive at high quality online communities were insightful.

Finally, and this is my opinion, the way to counter incorrect and unhelpful discussions isn't to withdraw but to redirect the discussion in more helpful directions by providing correct information and a counterargument. HN is just the aggregate of people who visit it -- the same people have to self-govern it to some extent.

<comment><USER9> The problem with this attitude is that it's, in a word, superior. Superior attitudes are rarely productive.

I dislike very strongly those communities who encourage their members to put themselves above others, and I see that as more harmful than any inherent value the community might provide.

If HN were really superior, people wouldn't have to keep telling me it's so, yet that's all I am told when this topic comes up. Why isn't it self-evident?

A large portion of my time on HN (nearly 10 years, blame XKCD) has been devoted to this topic specifically, and no one has yet shown me the merits of this site to a degree that it outweighs the arrogance its members have shown over and over.

I've very recently started writing my thoughts out more long form, maybe I'll dedicate a post to this topic. Otherwise, I am probably done talking about it, as dang tends to get upset with me when I go on like this.

<comment><USER10> I'm not sure I agree, but I too will stop here too except to say that this whole exchange is a bit meta in that it seems to reflect the content and attitudes it is opposing. (I'm not excluding myself from this--I'm equally culpable)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I personally would never use a website like this because I am not going to trust my precious travel plans and legal standing in another country to a non- authoritative website.

For my personal comfort, the problem to be solved is officially recognized information presented in a convenient way.

In fact, I have noticed that websites like this tend to add to my confusion when they contradict the official forms.

<comment><AUTHOR> Actually the information is from the official website, infact in the details page you can find link to the offical website. What i'm trying to do here is simplify the visa requirements for everyone.

<comment><USER12> Over here: [https://visalist.io/new-zealand/visa- requirements/netherland...](https://visalist.io/new-zealand/visa- requirements/netherlands) it says "source: wikipedia", which is hardly "official", and may not be comprehensive.

The Wikipedia page is subtly wrong you get a "visa on arrival", not "visa not required". There are some important details left out too; for example one of the conditions for getting the visa is that you have booked flights out of New Zealand. I've heard stories of people not realizing this and having to book flights on the spot :-(

You can get a 9 month visa quite easily, but you need to apply for it (and then you can enter without flights out of the country).

There are probably many more pages where such details (or even more important details) are lacking; I just chose this one as I recently moved to New Zealand so I know a thing or two about the Visa requirements there.

It might be useful for a quick "hm, I'd like to go somewhere, what are my options?", but I would _always_ check the immigration website for these kinds of requirements/details. And frankly, I don't see what this website adds over Wikipedia.

<comment><AUTHOR> So the official website, visa application link, fees and document checklist are not available on Wikipedia. VisaList tries to aggregate all this info and show it in a simple and useful manner.

<comment><USER12> None of this is visible on VisaList, either?

The New Zealand visa website is pretty good, as is the one from the Netherlands: [https://www.immigration.govt.nz/new-zealand- visas/](https://www.immigration.govt.nz/new-zealand-visas/) and [https://www.netherlandsandyou.nl/travel-and- residence](https://www.netherlandsandyou.nl/travel-and-residence)

It includes all these things. Perhaps other countries are less helpful, but certainly in these cases VisaLink isn't really adding anything in its current state.

Also, "You do not need a chip & PIN card to use an ATM — your standard magnetic card will work fine" is wrong for the Netherlands, as magnetic cards were phased out years ago. They're not accepted anywhere AFAIK.

Getting good data on "the entire world" as you're trying to do here is hard, and requires real experts. Just copying/scraping Wikipedia is frankly not a good place to start, actually investing money and paying domain experts is.

I know it sucks to have people be critical about something you spent a lot of time building, and maybe one day your website will have better data, and I wish you the best of luck with, but right now I don't see how it's adding value.

Sorry :-(

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> How do you handle some of the more obscure cases? For example, citizens of some countries, including the US, can do a short, visa-free stay in China if they're transiting through the major airports ([https://www.travelchinaguide.com/embassy/visa/transit.htm](https://www.travelchinaguide.com/embassy/visa/transit.htm)).

I saw Beijing this way coming back to SF from Taiwan. It was a pain to find all the details about how to apply, and a site like this could help people find out about such opportunities. e.g., you could match trip itinieraries to interesting stopovers.

<comment><USER14> Another case you could add is for citizens of country A but resident of Country B. For e.g. Indian citizen residing in US or has valid US Visa gets Visa free travel to Mexico and other countries.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> I recommend using Timatic, through one of the interfaces, like [https://www.traveldoc.aero](https://www.traveldoc.aero)

This is what industry professionals use to check if you are eligible to board a flight.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes but its very old UI and doesnt have any useful information like document checklist, visa application link, etc

<comment><USER15> I agree, the only advantage of this site it up-to-date data and detailed requirements based on your travel itinerary and passport/residence.

With visa requirements there are a lot of details involved, it's not as simple as nationality -> visa requirements mapping.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Bookmarked. Thanks for this!

Some feedback based on first impression:

The title on the front page says "Find countries to travel to" but then I'm suppose to specify my "home country", which I find just _slightly_ counter- intuitive. I'd suggest to change it up a bit so that I can specify home country and, optionally, a destination I have in mind. Then I'd get results specific for that country only (including, eg, transit visas). I'd also replace "home country" with "citizenship", since I may have a passport of one country, but live in another (which is fairly common in some parts of EU, for example). Many people also have dual citizenship.

<comment><AUTHOR> Very useful feedback! I will incorporte this soon

<comment><USER17> I second the multiple citizenship option. I would love to be able to see what countries I can enter with my passports.

But great job with the app, regardless!

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> The color coding between the two most popular categories could stand to be more distinct. Discerning between aqua and turquoise is harder than I thought it would be.

People with felony convictions in their home country may also be refused entry to some visa-free countries and not others, and while it's a rat's nest of exceptions and procedures to sift through, it would make this site far more interesting and useful to show which visa-free countries will still deny entry.

<comment><USER19> _The color coding between the two most popular categories could stand to be more distinct._

I second this. Came here just to say it. Far too similar.

<comment><AUTHOR> Point noted! Thanks for the feedback.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Nice site. This isn't the first visa site like it i've seen, but they all focus on travel visas it seems. I suppose that's the low-hanging fruit.

What would be interesting to see are work visas, entrepreneur/freelance visas, working holiday visas, and so on. Obviously a much more complicated ask but that is what I have not yet seen from a site.

Main reason being this: If you want to travel somewhere you can pretty much go on government websites (either yours or theirs) and see what the visa requirements are. If you're looking to relocate to another country but perhaps don't have a good idea where you want to (or can) relocate to or how, it can be a steep hill to climb. Having something with a bit of a hint as to where to start looking would be nice for people I think.

<comment><USER21> Also on HN a while back: [https://multinational.io/](https://multinational.io/)

I like it a lot because it lets you compare passports, which helps a bunch when planning travels/moves with someone else.

Edit: Ah yes, [https://passportindex.org](https://passportindex.org) also lets you do that, I remember using it, it's probably the most featureful of the lot.

</comment></comment><comment><USER22> What's the difference to [https://www.passportindex.org/comparebyPassport.php?p1=ch&fl...](https://www.passportindex.org/comparebyPassport.php?p1=ch&fl=&s=yes)

<comment><USER23> At a quick glance, passportindex says "visa required" but doesn't give all the gritty details of what's needed in bullet form.

<comment><USER22> I checked "Swiss passport" and "Malaysia" and it has less data than passportindex.

visalist.io: "Visa is not required for a certain period, or there is freedom of movement"

[https://visalist.io/malaysia/visa- requirements/switzerland](https://visalist.io/malaysia/visa- requirements/switzerland)

passportindex.org: "visa-free / 90 days"

[https://www.passportindex.org/comparebyPassport.php?p1=ch&fl...](https://www.passportindex.org/comparebyPassport.php?p1=ch&fl=MY,&s=yes)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> This is a handsome site.

For some reason I am quite curious about this kind of thing and keep looking up passports I don't have for countries I won't visit. I use Wikipedia which is pretty good.

What is missing is all the weird non visitor visas. For instance Canadians might work in the US on a TN visa or Australians can work on the UK for a year if they're under some age (30? 35?)

It's that sort of thing that would be useful. If Americans can work visa free in Mongolia for up to 6 months, it would be great to know. (I doubt this is the case)

<comment><USER25> There's also that weird US visa that Australians can get courtesy of Bush 43

<comment><USER26> It was a quid-pro-quo for them going to Iraq and Afghanistan wars with us. Seems entirely reasonable to give your closest allies a different set of "rules" in exchange for their help.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER27> Funnily enough, about 5 years ago, I did pretty much the same thing. It turned out to be a right pain to actually find, and keep all the data up to date.

(Comments at [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5434186](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5434186) \- the actual site has been taken down)

<comment><USER28> I was planning to build a visa site as well, and I also wanted to fill in the all the visa application forms online [1]. That's actually one of the main reasons that I built FormAPI [2].

I decided to stop working on this visa list / forms idea. I think I could make a bit money from ads (hotels, airlines, etc.), but I can't think of any subscription models, and I personally wouldn't pay any one-time fees just to fill out some forms. I think most people would rather use a pen than enter their credit card details.

It would also be far too much work to organize all of these application forms and stay up to date with visa requirements. I just wanted some passive income and wasn't ready to schlep [3].

But I think it could be done with VC funding and a team of salespeople and immigration experts. You need people calling or emailing embassies, or visiting them in person, and making sure that they know about these filled-in forms and are willing to accept them. I was also thinking that I would eventually build a SaaS service for every embassy, so that people could apply online and track their applications. Could start with filling out the forms, and then eventually digitize the process and cut out the paper. But I was worried about turning into another online visa agency where I was just a middle-man. That's a service business with low margins, and it would be easy to settle into that and get stuck there.

Anyway, it's a huge project, so it's not something I could do by myself. Also trying to sell software to government and immigration agencies is a really bad idea (from personal experience.) But maybe there's an opportunity here, so let me know if anyone is interested in working on that.

[1] [https://www.visaforms.co](https://www.visaforms.co)

[2] [https://formapi.io](https://formapi.io)

[3] [http://www.paulgraham.com/schlep.html](http://www.paulgraham.com/schlep.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> The problem with this kind of stuff is how do you keep these up to date. Visa policies change all the time and generally don't get a lot of publicity. There is a reason there are specialist visa agencies like CIBT

<comment><AUTHOR> My plan is to collect as much data as possible and then build crowdsourcing features so that the community will keep the data up to date. I think that the only way to make #TravelTensionFree

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> The site asks for "home country" when it really means citizenship. Not the same thing at all.

Also, it's missing a way to input multiple citizenships.

<comment><AUTHOR> I wanted to start with the basic usecase and validate the idea if it will be useful. Now that i see there are lot of people found it useful, i will try to add these additional usecases aswell. Thanks for the feedback.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> Incredibly useful website. I have a few suggestions but please don't take this as negative criticism! I travel a fair bit and having these things would make this website my "one stop shop" for travel needs!

      * The ability to export a list of results into CSV or something else that I can import into a spreadsheet. I tend to make travel plans on spreadsheets, and this would be very helpful.
      * Scrolling to the left or right makes the colours disappear? I think this may be an OSM limitation but it really confused me.
      * Is there a way I can filter on multiple categories? I'd like to look at visa-free and visa-on-arrival in the same map.
      * This may be personal preference, but the emoji are really distracting.
      * The region filter doesn't seem to influence the subregion filter? If I select "Asia" as a region I assumed the sub-regions list would reflect only the sub-regions of Asia but that doesn't seem to be true
      * If I can subscribe to visa status *changes* for my country by email I'd give up my email address immediately. I'd probably be willing to pay money for this if it's accurate :)* The fact that this is non-authoritative doesn't bother me at all. You may want to highlight this a bit more "strongly". Maybe give up some of that priceless above-the-fold real-estate just to save yourself any legal trouble.
      * Consider linking to traveldoc.aero as well.
      * Several people I know and work/travel with have multiple passports from countries that allow it. Consider allowing the multiple home countries!

<comment><AUTHOR> This is extremely useful feedback.

 _1\. I understand, there isnt a plan as data keeps changing. i will see what i can do

_ 2\. Go it.

 _3\. I 'm thinking of adding it.

_4 :)

 _5 Yes, it should. I just wanted to keep it dumb in the begining. Will change that.

_ 6 Interesting

 _7 I will

_ 8 Yes this is the most requested feature, i will build it soon.

Again thanks a lot for the wonderful feedback.

</comment></comment><comment><USER32> I'd be curious to know where you got this data from.

Also note: Many, many countries have a different policy if you are flying in (some kind of e-visa) or if you are driving in, where you need a physical visa in your passport.

Ethiopia is exactly that right now for many passport holders.

</comment><comment><USER33> A big thumbs up. Very useful. As an Indian citizen, I have traveled close to 50 countries (not including business trips) and Indian citizens, apart from a handful of countries, need visa for most of the world. This site comes in handy.

If possible, consider adding which countries have exemptions for holders of Permanent Residency (Greencard), or an Australian PR and such.

<comment><USER34> So excruciatingly painful to travel on the Indian passport. I was rejected from visiting my fiancee in France even though I had a UK, Swiss (was not schengen in 2007) and H1b visa on my passport.

Also visa requirements are by the passport you are holding not usually the PR so requirements don't change that much.

<comment><USER35> A lot of countries grant visa free access to holders of e.g: us visit visa or schengen residency, they call it a substitute visa

<comment><USER36> I had no idea about this. Thanks! For anyone, curious here are the countries you can travel with a US visa.

[https://www.visatraveler.com/blog/travel-20-countries- visa-f...](https://www.visatraveler.com/blog/travel-20-countries-visa-free- with-us-visa/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> Really nice. If an eVisa is available for my selection, consider offering me a link so I can sign up direct... and, as an alternative, possibly wrapper a service around this to submit the application process on my behalf (making clear this is a paid/premium service).

<comment><AUTHOR> Interesting, i havent thought about it yet. But i guess then i have to build a company around this as it wont be a microstartup anymore!

<comment><USER38> Microstartup? Do you mean just a webpage, which is exclusively not a startup/buisness?

<comment><USER39> It has ads.

<comment><USER38> Which makes it a business?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> Every page I've visited says:

> _The [country] passport holders can visit 193 countries with different visa_

Check Vietnam, for example: [https://visalist.io/vietnam/all- visas](https://visalist.io/vietnam/all-visas)

<comment><AUTHOR> Most of the major countries information is available out of 201 countries

</comment></comment><comment><USER41> Just checked and it isn't accurate for citizens of Pakistan. For instance it says, "visa is required for Israel". Pakistan doesn't recognise Israel therefore they can't even apply for a visa.

<comment><USER19> I think you've made a mistake there. Pakistan isn't in charge of deciding who can visit Israel. It's up to Israel to decide that.

There are a number of accounts on the internet of Pakistani citizens asking Israel for a visa, and receiving one.

</comment></comment><comment><USER42> nice, however this information is not too hard to get myself. Add Dual nationality/ multi-nationality, and that would actually save me time.

(single nationals can just search for any website, whereas dual nationals would want to search for 2 as they have more options, and if they only have to use your website that saves their time!) :)

<comment><AUTHOR> I wanted to first validate the idea, now that its proven useful, i will add these features aswell. Thanks for the feedback.

</comment></comment><comment><USER43> Other sites that provide this:

[https://multinational.io](https://multinational.io)

[https://passportindex.org](https://passportindex.org)

Given the amount of work needed to maintain this information in useful detail, perhaps a site could ask for $X (maybe less than 10) per lookup for a given nationality to a given country, then use that to have a lawyer or someone keep the data accurate.

</comment><comment><USER44> While this is super cool, as an Argentinian I show up as visa-free for a bunch of Schengen countries, which while strictly not false it's not super useful: We get 3 out of every 6 months stay, and the list would prob be a lot more useful to people who don't know this if these things were somehow displayed; it's after all not a minor caveat when picking travel destinations

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks, i didnt know this. I will add this info aswell.

</comment></comment><comment><USER45> There are spelling errors on each page I've looked at so far (eg travel "Iternary").

Personally I'd never trust such a site; I'd rather rely on my own research of visa conditions direct from official sources for the couples of times a year I need such information. If you can somehow increase the trustworthiness of your site, this might change.

<comment><AUTHOR> Apologies for the typo, corrected it. Currently there are offical website links, visa application link and fee links along with document checklist. You can always cross check with the official site. As next step, i'm planning to add crowdsource validation, so the data is most accurate and upto date.

<comment><USER31> If you plan to crowdsource information, please make it abundantly clear that the info is crowdsourced, and maybe even make it slightly harder to get! There is a lot of inaccurate information about visas.

Part of the problem is that border agents in most countries have A LOT of discretion in who is not allowed in, even if the laws explicitly say otherwise. To a lesser extent, they also make exceptions in the other direction (I've been granted a visa-on-arrival for a country that did not allow people with my passport to get visas on arrival :).

Folks often mistake their personal experience as "the law", which is often wrong.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER46> This is rather basic -- what if your home country is different than the country you live in? Your flexibility to travel, for example in Europe, is quite different if you have a European ID card even if you are not from there. You still need visas to some countries but not others, depending on _both_ your ID card as well as your home country.

<comment><USER47> Can you expand on that a bit? I'm a US citizen living in Norway (a member of the EEA but not the EU). I know that I can use the EEA immigration lines at many (but not necessarily all) checkpoints in EEA countries if I present them with my Norwegian residence card at the window.

Are there other travel optimizations, either in-region or elsewhere, that I should look into? Are they all dependent on a residence card, or does a Norwegian driver license or other documentation confer additional rights?

<comment><USER46> Consider someone from a country with poor passport freedoms. Normally, if they lived in their home country, they'd need visas for lots of places. But now they live in Europe. Thus, the places that require visas depends on:

1) The home country. 2) The destination country. 3) The holding of other residence permits.

That person does not need a visa if they live in Germany and want to travel to Belgium, but they do if they want to visit London. And the only way to know that is by considering all of the above points, not just their home country.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER48> Great website! I travel a ton (50+ countries in the last few years) and usually use Wikipedia to check visa requirements. I'll be switching to this.

Where did you import all this data from in a structured manner? How do you plan on keeping it up to date?

Are you associated with a commercial enterprise in the space (e.g. travel startup)?

<comment><AUTHOR> So i collected this manually. My plan is to add crowdsource data, so the data is maintained by the travel community. No, i'm just a digital nomad, coding his way thrugh life :)

<comment><USER49> If the data is coming from an official web page, you could make something that notifies you when the web page changes. Then you can check to see if you need to update the requirements.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thats a great idea!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER50> How is this different/better than using your country's equivalent to Department of State site to check, e.g. [https://travel.state.gov/content/travel.html](https://travel.state.gov/content/travel.html) ?

<comment><AUTHOR> So except few countries, most of the other countries dont have these sites. Even these sites point to the offical website of the traveling country. More over the visa application link, fee link, document checklist are not present. Visalist tries to aggreate all this information and show it an simple and useful way.

</comment></comment><comment><USER51> Great website.

How do you ensure that all visa information is up to date? Do you automatically parse visa policy changes on official government web pages?

I made a single spot check (USA -> VNM), and the website seems to conflate e-visa with visa on arrival (they are different for Vietnam).

<comment><USER52> > Do you automatically parse visa policy changes on official government web > pages?

Lol. That won't work well.

<comment><USER53> No it won't.

But you could watch for any changes on certain webpages and then flag those webpages to a human for them to check.

<comment><USER52> Glhf with that.

Honestly, relying on any such work flow to find something as critical as visa requirements is insane. At least I wouldn't want to rely on some service which failed to detect that some Russian government page updated their web page and considers the page outdated. The page could still exist while incoming links are removed or similar.

<comment><USER53> I'm not saying this is perfect or it's all you need, but it's something.

To be honest, as someone who's done crowd sourced projects before this entire project sounds .... very difficult.

If it was my project, I'd have worked on these "crowd sourced" elements from the start, not as a "planning to do" \- because I think the only way this will work long term is to get those right. And getting them right will be very difficult to do.

Also, I'd link to source material much more prominently. As a reader, I'm not inclined to trust a random unofficial page on the internet - especially on anything as important as Visas - so providing lots of links I can spent 10 minutes following up on to reassure myself would be great.

Oh, and big timestamps showing when a piece of info was last checked/updated.

To the creator - sorry to be down. Good luck!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER54> Is there a way for US/Canadian long term visa holders to check their visa requirements? E.g. Indian citizens are normally required to get visa for Mexico/Philippines. But with a H1B visa from USA they can travel visa free / visa on arrival.

<comment><AUTHOR> Not currently but that in my plan. Stay tuned!

</comment></comment><comment><USER55> I checked one combination for which I am fairly aware of the details and I find multiple errors:

USA, visiting China.

It tells me 30 day stay, 90 day visa validity--but down in "tips" it correctly says I would get a 10 year visa. (In practice--I hold a 60 day stay visa, my (China-born) wife has a 90 day stay. These are by no means our first visas, though.)

It also says registration is required within 24 hours--this is the rule for urban areas, in rural ones it's 72 hours. Also, in practice this normally does not matter as the hotel does it for you--you just need to do it yourself if you're not in a hotel.

It also lists financial document requirements that AFIAK are not expected of Americans.

</comment><comment><USER56> Great job. If you can keep it uptodate, this would be the first stop before travel. One thing that it can be improved is showing transit Visa requirements. Multiple stop flights are cheaper , but transit visa information is hard to gather.

<comment><AUTHOR> Wonderful feedback. I'm just trying to validate the idea. once there is traction, then i will add more visas. I want to make visalist one stop shop for all visa requirement needs

<comment><USER57> Selecting USA, many countries are showing "13 to 11 hours ahead" for the time difference. I expect it to be "11 to 13 hours ahead" (numbers of ranges going smaller to larger)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER58> I'm helping with a conference and this would be massively useful... except I need to define there relationship by the destination country, not the origin.

Can this show me all of the conditions for people wanting to visit a country?

<comment><USER59> Wikipedia's "Visa policy of X" articles should hit the spot: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa_policy_of_Thailand](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa_policy_of_Thailand)

</comment></comment><comment><USER60> Small note: New Zealand is not part of Australia, and has eGates not Smart Gates.

<comment><AUTHOR> Can you point which page are you referring to?

<comment><USER60> [https://visalist.io/new-zealand/visa-requirements/united- sta...](https://visalist.io/new-zealand/visa-requirements/united-states-of- america)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER61> Good job! Nice UI. But little but very important note for people from those countries: Add region called "Central Europe". Czechs, Slovaks, Poles, Hungarians... they hate being marked as eastern europeans ;)

<comment><USER57> As an American who visited all those countries and conversed with multiple citizens from each of those countries, they do remind you of the "Central Europe" thing..

However, they don't understand that for Americans, "Eastern Europe" isn't geographic; it's geopolitical... essentially, Europe _east_ of the former Berlin Wall

There's South America the continent, but for some Spanish people (and possibly other peoples), "South America" is everything south of America (starting with Mexico)

<comment><USER62> I am from México, and came here to comment because the posted website says "Mexico is part of Central America", and well, No. México is definitely, absolutely, unequivocally in North America.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER63> Over this project - while interesting and excellently executed - I use passportindex.org [0].

I can't validate its sources directly, but its backed by Arton Capital, which after a few minutes of research seems to have a pretty decent reputation in this field.

Its also been validated by some respectable sources: WSJ, CNN, MSN, WaPo, HuffPo, and more [1].

[0] [https://www.passportindex.org/byRank.php](https://www.passportindex.org/byRank.php)

[1] [https://www.passportindex.org/about.php](https://www.passportindex.org/about.php)

</comment><comment><USER64> Good work! Just something I reacted to as a Swede is that the Åland Islands, the Faroe Islands and Greenland are listed as separate countries. Citizens of these areas hold Finnish or Danish passports respectively.

<comment><USER65> Not sure about the Åland Islands, but at least Faroe and Greenland have a different visa regime than Denmark (they are both not in Schengen. Also Danish citizen residing e.g. in the Faroe are not seen as Schengen citizen, or something like that).

Generally a hard edge case are all those autonomous or semiautonomous territories. Like all the islands of UK and France (some French territories are part of the EU, some are not). It's often a lot harder to get info on the visa requirements for those.

</comment></comment><comment><USER66> One oddness - home country is AU, attempting to determine status for Croatia. On the map it comes up as visa-free. Filtering 'croatia' shows it as visa- free. But even after scrolling all the way to the bottom, Croatia only shows up as as one of the languages spoken in Montenegro and Bosnia & Herzegovina. Might be a browser artefact - I'm on Chrome - and/or after-effect of page load, but it's not ideal. (It's always faster to type ctrl-f than to mouse- navigate to on-page search / filter dialogs.)

</comment><comment><USER67> Feature request: Show visa-free destinations of intersection of two or more citizenships: Eg French and Ukrainian couple can only travel visa-free to a few places together. Which are these places?

Otherwise well done!

</comment><comment><USER68> Super cool!

I'd suggest for when you're on the page that shows you the list of countries -> fix everything besides the list, so when you scroll down all the menus and context stay in view.

<comment><AUTHOR> Nice suggestion. Thanks!

</comment></comment><comment><USER69> I'm in Germany and France shows up as 11 to 11 hours behind me. That's not quite right, just wanted to let you know that something about the time differences seems fishy.

</comment><comment><USER70> Impressive. I tested it for a case where Visa was required except for some edge case. And indeed the exception (which applies to me) was shown prominently in a "tips" card.

<comment><AUTHOR> Awesome. Glad its useful.

</comment></comment><comment><USER71> Missing some of the more complex edge cases. Holding permanent residency in Canada allows access to more countries. Cuba for example:

"However, they are eligible to travel to Cuba with a tourist card if they also hold a valid visa or permanent residence permit issued by Canada, the United States or an EU member state."

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa_policy_of_Cuba#Visa_requi...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa_policy_of_Cuba#Visa_required)

</comment><comment><USER72> You won't know for sure, however, until you check with an official Government source. I don't know what the utility of a 3rd party version of this is. Usually people only go to a limited set of countries on every trip, so it's not a big burden to go.

And I found an error on the first country I checked USA -> Belarus.

You don't need a Visa only if you're entering through the Airport and staying less than 5 days. If you're crossing the border from Lithuania by car, you do need one.

</comment><comment><USER73> which country passport you hold is what makes the difference, not your home country (residency).

Example: One can hold Srilankan Passport, but home country now is USA (Perm Residency Greencard)

</comment><comment><USER74> Good job! Also reminds me of [https://www.markuslerner.com/travelscope](https://www.markuslerner.com/travelscope)

<comment><AUTHOR> Yes, useful but doesnt have official embassy link, visa application link, fees link and document checklist, which i think are super useful for many.

</comment></comment><comment><USER75> Correction : For Canada from most Europe Schengen countries you need an Eta visa, it's not visa free. Same for US green card holders.

<comment><USER76> Sorry, but this is incorrect. The European Travel Information and Authorisation System has not even been developed yet, much less deployed. It will only come online in 2021. Until then, Schengen is visa-free for Canadians and Americans.

>On July 5th, the European Parliament has given its final agreement to implement the European Travel Information and Authorisation System, ETIAS. European authorities have decided to establish the electronic visa waiver system in the year 2021 to improve security across the Schengen Area.

[https://www.etiasvisa.com/etias-news/how-will-the-etias- syst...](https://www.etiasvisa.com/etias-news/how-will-the-etias-system-work)

<comment><USER75> I'm talking about the opposite way: FROM Schengen Europe countries TO Canada. My first comment was not really clear to be honest.

<comment><USER76> My apologies, I misread.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER77> Searched from Canada and Brazil was not listed at all. Tried also from US and not listed. Tried from Brazil and Canada not listed.

</comment><comment><USER78> I noticed Hong Kong is missing (one of the SAR's in China). They have specific visa rules compared to mainland China

Overall pretty useful site!

</comment><comment><USER79> Suggestion: The green colours picked for "visa free" and "visa on arrival" is very close. I would recommend that you change the colours to be more obviously different.

I personally found it a bit difficult to tell the difference between green and slightly-darker-green.

Otherwise, very nice apart from the funky scrolling glitching up all over the place.

</comment><comment><USER80> Well done! I like it as a potential way to brainstorm travel.

However I would not use it as a definitive resource simply because there is no authoritative central source for the data, and the official sources are sometimes very messy (I assume you're scraping consular websites to keep current).

Feature suggestion: show the name of the country when hovering on the map.

</comment><comment><USER81> Shouldn't it really be called "visamatrix", because you can lookup based on home and destination countries?

<comment><AUTHOR> So basically for every person, its a list of countries they can travel based on their home country, hence the name. But yes it can be called that aswell!

</comment></comment><comment><USER82> Checked for my home country (Switzerland), and it doesn't seem to be correct - travel to Canada requires an eTA, but the site lists Canada as being visa free. Could get you in for an unpleasant surprise when your airline won't let you board (they check for eTA at check-in).

</comment><comment><USER83> I use travisa for visas. Their website has the visa requirements for all countries free of charge.

<comment><AUTHOR> Visalist is also completely free

</comment></comment><comment><USER84> [https://www.iatatravelcentre.com](https://www.iatatravelcentre.com) is my goto when it comes to visas. Not sure though if they provide this data over an API. and I heard that this is what airlines usually use.

</comment><comment><USER85> When I entered a search for my country, the site informed me that the search input is my home country.

I am currently not in my home country. This is also my first time using the site. What background information is the site using to identify this?

</comment><comment><USER86> Cool! If I were more bored, I'd be interested to see how correlated these two data points are: GDP per capita, number of countries that allow no visa or visa on arrival

Just playing with the input, I suspect there would be a strong correlation.

</comment><comment><USER87> A non-authoritative source of information that is riddled with adverts. No thank you.

<comment><AUTHOR> ads are the only ways to maintain such a traffic while keeping it completely free. Do you have any other suggestions?

<comment><USER87> My only suggestion is for everyone to use an adblocker and starve such parasitic websites out of existence.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER88> Why don't add a second column under the map to use the extra white space ?

<comment><AUTHOR> i was thinking of adding useful tips / content in the future

<comment><USER88> Makes sense. It would be nice if the results refresh as I zoom in the map.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER89> The most helpful addition to this site would be a list of biometrics that the country collects. Eg: fingerprints, photo on arrival, etc... That way we can avoid the fascist, fingerprint hoarding countries!

</comment><comment> dorian-graph > Australia is part of Australia and New Zealand, Oceania with capital at > Canberra.

Somewhat concerning to have a mistake of this type on a website like this—or I'm just behind in the news.

<comment><AUTHOR> So the format is

<country> part of <sub region>, <region> woth cpaital at <captial>

</comment></comment><comment><USER90> This is great...will be using it quite a bit! Thanks for making it

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm glad you found it useful

</comment></comment><comment><USER81> Perhaps you could add relevant links, for example where a user can apply for an e-Visa. Or addresses of consulates, etc. Example visa application letters, and stuff like that.

</comment><comment><USER91> Personally, I prefer to use [https://www.passportindex.org](https://www.passportindex.org) \- how does this compare?

</comment><comment><USER92> Just in time. I was planning for a vacation. Thanks.

<comment><AUTHOR> Happy to help.

</comment></comment><comment><USER93> Looks nice! Sadly some countries like USA doesn't have any information currently on your site, you might want to improve that. ;)

</comment><comment><USER94> Nice! Like the map with colors. For Schengen it is not accurate though, e.g. from Iceland and Norway all of EU is visa free.

</comment><comment><USER95> The time zone offsets are incorrect

For example if I put "United Kingdom" as my home country, it says Ireland is 8-6 hours ahead.

</comment><comment><USER96> Where do I specify my second citizenship?

<comment><USER22> Why does it matter? You can only enter with one passport anyway so just try the two? There's no "combine passports to level up" in the visa world.

<comment><USER81> Does having more passports work "additively" or "subtractively"?

For example I can imagine that a person with only a UK passport can enter the US more freely than a person with both a UK and Iraqi passport.

<comment><USER22> Countries usually don't know which passports you have (If you enter for the first time and they don't have some kind of data-sharing agreement) so you'd just enter with the one that's easier not by showing all of yours.

<comment><USER81> There is no question about other nationalities on the visa application form?

<comment><USER97> I'm not the person you are responding to.

I don't recall every being asked about other nationalities. Countries will ask if you have previously entered under a different name but presumably you are using the same name world wide.

If you have multiple passports you can just use whichever one gets you through immigration the fasted. some caveats:

1) if you have a passport from the country you are entering/leaving they want you to use it ie if you have a US passport you should use it when entering or leaving the US. If you then arrive in the UK and have a UK passport you should use your UK passport at the UK end of your flight.

2) if you entered a country with passport A use that same passport to leave. If you don't they wont automatically match up your entry and departure. On one hand you will have appeared to have overstayed your visa, on the other you are now exiting the country with no record of you having entered. At a minimum there will be questions and your just trying to just get through immigration painlessly.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER98> Uzbekistan has E-visa for all countries. Also, it has visa free for 5 days option if you are using a transit.

</comment><comment><USER99> nice, but it would be so useful to display for how many days u can stay visa free in a visa-free country.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks, I will be adding that soon

</comment></comment><comment><USER100> This is great one stop solution to check visa requirements. Great idea. Hope it will grow.

</comment><comment><USER101> Tough problem, but it seems incomplete without covering long term visas for example 6 months

</comment><comment><USER102> I am amazed by the number of places which I (USA citizen) can travel to without a visa.

<comment><USER17> It's something many of us don't really think about, but it ends up being quite convenient.

For example, citizens of most countries cannot book a multi-leg trip (not single booking) without a visa, simply because that would require going through passport control to board the next leg.

</comment></comment><comment><USER103> If you have a Republic of Korea or Singaporean passport, you can get into any country.

<comment><USER104> I would be very careful with such statements because it's easy to miss a crucial detail.

E.g. the limits of ESTA

<comment><USER103> [https://www.passportindex.org/byRank.php](https://www.passportindex.org/byRank.php)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER105> Looks like it drew a lot of inspiration from Pieter Levels' stuff. Nice work :)

</comment><comment><USER106> Feature Request: Ability to provide more than one passport (for us dual- citizens)

<comment><AUTHOR> Point noted. Thanks!

</comment></comment><comment><USER107> Adding a reference source in requirements details might be helpful and assuring.

</comment><comment><AUTHOR> I spent the last 6 months trying to build [Visalist]([https://visalist.io](https://visalist.io)). Now your quest for tension free visa requirements research is over.

Here's why I made this web app: A year back I became a digital nomad and started traveling. I wanted to visit all the countries that I fancied. Soon I realized that you need a visa to most of these countries, few have VOA(Visa on Arrival) and for others, you have to get it through their embassy in your home country(in my case India). So now I wanted to see the countries I could go without waiting for 3 weeks to get a visa, did some research. After few blogs and websites finally got the list. Traveled to a new country. After few months I wanted to go to another country. I had to do the same search, couldn't find the old one, found a new site which had more countries offering VOA. One of my friends told me that when he researching for Vietnam visa, he found almost 10 websites with .gov and it was really confusing. Many blogs don't have links to official websites of embassies.

To summarize the problems: * No aggregated info of visa related info shown in a useful way. * Most of the existing blogs and website has very less info and are usually outdated. * Lot of research is needed even to go to a single country and this needs to be done every single time. * Difficult to find the official website and data on many websites is outdated. * Pay more than required money to visa agent's

So I took the matter into my own hands and decided to aggregate this info, organize and present it in a useful way to the user and so VisaList was born. While I was talking to my friends about this, I realized many people wanted something similar from a long time. So what this has is * A simple way to find the basic requirements for all the countries you want to travel * Simplified visa requirements like visa-free, visa on arrival, visa not required, evisa, visa required and visa refused (Yes! For North Korea) * A simple map color- coded with visa requirements across the world so you can easily see which countries around you can easily travel to * Visa Requirement details like duration, documents checklist and other requirements for the stay * Which is the official website for that information

I coded, designed and built Visa List using VueJS with NuxtJS for the frontend, MySQL for backend using Golang. I was originally an android developer and learned these just to build Visa List.

I believe every person who wants to explore the world around them and would have faced the problem I faced, so could find value in what I have built. So I would love to know what you think of this and would be more than happy to hear your suggestions and feature requests. Let me know what you want to be added or removed or do I need to build something entirely!

Thanks

</comment><comment><USER108> "Choose your home country" doesn't work on Firefox 63.

<comment><AUTHOR> Sorry to hear that. I just tried on firefox 63 and it works. Which OS?

</comment></comment><comment><USER109> There are some missing entries. e.g. Travel from Australia to Taiwan

</comment><comment><USER110> Turks and Caicos missing. Very good resource if it is complete.

</comment><comment><USER111> Awesome site. Do lots of seo, and you'll be good

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks, thats one things i'm not very good at. still learning!

</comment></comment><comment><USER112> Indonesia is visa on arrival for US citizens

</comment><comment><USER113> Nice one! It'd be really cool to be able to sort by Visa length as well. That'd be a handy feature for digital nomads.

You could solve any issues with info being out of date by sourcing from the community, allowing people to flag or comment on specific pages.

Also, it's useful in the nomad community to know how easy it is to do visa runs etc as well, so that's perhaps some insider info - maybe you could put this behind a paywall.

</comment><comment><USER114> Nice map work.</comment>


What makes a great tweet? - <AUTHOR> http://hbr.org/2012/05/what-makes-a-great-tweet/

<comment><AUTHOR> The full paper can be found here: [http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~pandre/pubs/whogivesatweet- cscw2012.p...](http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~pandre/pubs/whogivesatweet-cscw2012.pdf)</comment>


MongoDB Performance for more data than memory - <AUTHOR> http://www.colinhowe.co.uk/2011/02/23/mongodb-performance-for-data-bigger-than-memor/ <comment><USER2> I don't think it's a MongoDB fault, it is simply true with everything that is serving data bigger than available memory. Of course there is also no solution to the problem as the disk is slower... unless your working set still fits you are going to pay the added latency.

<comment><USER3> One question I really have is: for the exact same dataset, how much RAM is used to handle it with MongoDB, Redis, MySQL, or even a column-based store.

If someone has such a benchmark already, I'd love to read it.

<comment><USER4> There's no way to know, really. When you mmap() backing stores into process memory as MongoDB and Redis do, the OS takes care of paging activity for you. And they get to compete with other processes on the system for memory pages.

InnoDB (MySQL) allows you to fix its buffer pool in RAM, so it makes decisions as to which pages to buffer instead of the OS. Sometimes it makes better decisions, sometimes it doesn't.

<comment><USER5> While MongoDB does this, I don't think that Redis takes this approach. In theory, it manages the memory itself, reading from disk into its own cache. In practice, I worry that it might end up competing with the system, leading to "full memory" like conditions far before memory is actually exhausted. Thus my interest in how it performs in a simple real life test like this.

<comment><USER2> No mmap in Redis indeed.

<comment><USER4> My mistake.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


Github: Your Single Point Of Failure - <AUTHOR> http://www.brandonsavage.net/github-your-single-point-of-failure/ <comment><USER2> > Notably, Gitlab is written on Ruby on Rails; you should understand the > security implications of Ruby on Rails before using Gitlab

Seems like the recent events have really hurt the trust toward RoR.

<comment><USER3> It's understandable, really. 100% reliable arbitrary code execution exploits are bad enough all by themselves. The nature of the exploit in question - which many would consider to be a Freshman error that was allowed to stand for an embarrassingly long time - makes it even more galling.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> > Github also appears to share infrastructure between public and private > repositories, making their paid clients as susceptible to downtime as their > free users. This means Github is essentially charging companies and > developers for not publishing their private code to the rest of the world, > but not offering any kind of SLA for uptime.

This might depend on the level of service you pay for, or perhaps what actually goes down. I've had access to GitHub enterprise while github.com was down.

</comment><comment><USER5> Nobody has heard of gitorious?</comment>


Show HN: Unscatter.com redesign - <AUTHOR> http://www.unscatter.com/

<comment><AUTHOR> I've recently pushed out the first round of the redesign for the site. I used Twitter Bootstrap 2 and made a focus on trying to simplify the user interface, hopefully making it a bit more intuitive.

I also moved away from using YUI and am learning backbone.js and jqeury now. As such some pieces are still missing, for example there's no attempt at autocomplete for search queries or a spell check yet.

I also recently added support for a few more api's, most notably Bing powering video and image search. I'm currently planning /youtube, /bingnews and /netflix as the next api's to add. Later, once I form a LLC this fall I may add a shopping tab and start using affiliate apis like Amazon and Best Buy.

It's still just a personal side project, but it's the search engine I use on a daily basis now and I find it useful. Have to say that using Twitter Bootstrap this is the best it's ever looked.

</comment><comment><USER2> About page returns Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/local/unscatter/tornado/web.py", line 983, in _execute self.prepare() File "/usr/local/unscatter/tornado/web.py", line 1419, in prepare raise HTTPError(self._status_code) HTTPError: HTTP 404: Not Found

<comment><AUTHOR> ah, failed QA on my part. Thanks!

<comment><AUTHOR> Just removed the link for now and kicked debugging off. Thanks for letting me know, appreciate it.</comment></comment></comment>


Microsoft patents "avoid ghetto" feature for GPS - <AUTHOR> http://seattle.cbslocal.com/2012/01/06/microsoft-patents-avoid-ghetto-feature-for-gps-devices/

<comment><USER2> EVE Online would seem to be prior art. The system keeps statistics on players killed recently, and the autopilot has an option which avoids dangerous routes (or those where you are _persona non grata_ for some local NPCs).

<comment><USER3> This patent was filed by Microsoft in December of 2007 and according to Wikipedia the feature you describe was added in March of 2009 to EVE Online (at least 'change to auto-pilot features...' [I don't play the game so I don't know])

Would that mean they are in violation of the patent?

<comment><USER4> Only if the patent applies to general navigation technologies, and not only GPS.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> > The patent, written in a combination of tech-speak and legalese, was awarded > to Microsoft earlier this week.

This must seriously be the first patent the writer has ever looked at.

</comment><comment><USER6> Wait, I thought you couldn't patent abstract ideas. This is a big bummer for more than just the businesses that will be routed around. The patent is essentially on just the thought of delivering a route based on anything other than shortest or fastest. No novel or non obvious inventions are described. In fact, no inventions are described at all.

This is saddening.

<comment><USER5> Did you read the claims?

<comment><USER6> They're comprised of a bunch of abstract ways of getting a route other than fastest or shortest to a pedestrian. States no inventions. Just the concept of route finding based on criteria other than shortest or fastest.

<comment><USER5> They seem relatively concrete to me.

<comment><USER6> Care to elaborate?

<comment><USER5>
        Claim 1. Computer storage media having embodied thereon
        computer-useable instructions that, when executed,
        implement a system, the system comprising:

        a search component that locates at least one information
        source, retains pedestrian history from a plurality of
        pedestrians and addresses of at least one information
        source that has a history of providing reliable
        information, identifies low quality information sources
        that do not provide information used in route
        generation, and blocks information obtainment for the
        low quality information sources;

        a gather component that obtains information related to
        pedestrian travel including security information,
        weather information, and terrain information, wherein
        the gather component obtains the information from the at
        least one located information source;

        an artificial intelligence component that makes at least
        one inference regarding a route based on a previous
        pedestrian behavior;

        a filter component that determines, based on the at
        least one inference, the information that is likely
        relevant and deletes information that is commonly of
        little value in part through examination of previously
        produced routes;

        an analysis component that determines an importance of
        the information to a user, estimates how likely the
        information is to change, and chooses if the user should
        reach a destination through a pedestrian route and/or
        through a conventional route;

        a generation component that obtains the information from
        the gather component and produces a direction set for
        use by a pedestrian based at least part upon the
        obtained information; and

        a resolution component that resolves a conflict between
        an information source with a financial interest and an
        information source without a financial interest and
        instructs the generation component to produce the
        direction set based upon the information source that
        does not have a financial interest in providing the
        direction set.

That sure seems like an awful lot of structure and detail for a vague, abstract idea.

<comment><USER6> Every one of those is an abstract component. Making up an abstract system. There are no algorithms, no methods, no inventions. It's a collection of abstract ideas.

The purpose of patents is to give incentive for the inventors to publish their inventions publicly. So that after the patents expire the public can benefit from the knowledge contained in the patents. This patent circumvents that by only stating a collection of abstract ideas. Then they can actually invent something and have the best of both worlds. They get a legal monopoly on the concept as well as obscurity from the public of the actual invention.

<comment><USER7> > Every one of those is an abstract component. Making up an abstract system. > There are no algorithms, no methods, no inventions. It's a collection of > abstract ideas.

It's unclear why you think that "abstract" ideas shouldn't be patentable or aren't useful knowledge.

Suppose you were the first person to conceive of a wheel, which is surely something where disclosure would be of great value to the rest of us.

What would be acceptable-to-you claim language for a wheel?

Mine would be something along the lines of a description of the distance between the closest point on the axle and some point on the contour of the wheel, which is pretty abstract.

<comment><USER8> That is actually quite specific. Try thinking of patenting the ability to move objects via reducing the coefficient of friction. Not even specifying that you are using a wheel or what a wheel is.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Jesus. They really got a patent on abstractly using computers and data to route pedestrians places in scenarios beyond time and distance based routes.

This isn't an invention. This is a conversation you have over drinks after work that maybe becomes a product idea.

<comment><USER5> They got a patent on the claims, not the abstract.

<comment><USER9> I read the claims. That's still not an invention.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> At SXSW 2007, I attended a talk about Python code for Symbian phones. One idea that the speaker threw out was having the phone start to vibrate if you were approaching a high crime part of the city. I wonder if that counts toward prior art or public disclosure of the basic idea of routing around dangerous areas?

</comment><comment><USER11> After driving across the US this past summer (and finding myself in some not so nice areas), I thought of this exact same thing.

</comment><comment><USER12> How is stuff like this patentable? There should be fines for owning a patent that has claims revoked.

</comment><comment><USER13> I would be interested to see if this works at all here in Baltimore.

<comment><USER14> I was wondering if that was a statement on Baltimore :-) So if you're in the bayshore (a pretty rough part of SF) and you ask for directions does it simply say 'shelter in place'? Or maybe 'call for an escort'?

I totally agree with the sentiment that this isn't a patent any more than patenting a TV that doesn't tune in Adult channels, oh wait, damn.

<comment><USER15> How hard would it be to provide drone support to out of their depth pedestrians? That would be an interesting startup.

... Whoever does this please don't sell to Apple or FB.

<comment><USER16> You mean kill the civilians nearby the pedestrians? That would be an interesting startup!!

Someone has been beta testing in the Middle East for some years now...this tech can't be far off.

<comment><USER15> I was actually semi-serious, and thinking cameras and tear gas, not firearms.

CONTINUED Basically a private protective service for people that don't have the money to afford live security guards.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I'm pretty sure it triangulates by a combination of liquor stores, nail salons and pawn shops.

</comment><comment><USER18> From reading the title, I imagined a fix for Google's habit of telling me to get off the highway in the middle of the downtown of certain cities around here. I always think "no, Google, that is definitely NEVER the fastest route, no matter WHAT the speed limit supposedly is."

This is just for pedestrians, though.

</comment><comment><USER19> they'd better invent 'minimize number of left turns', novice drivers would thank them

<comment><USER20> While I can't be sure, I believe that my TomTom Go 730 gives left turns a higher penalty than right turns when calculating a route.

I've seen it pick different roads to go A->B than to go B->A where the only reason I could discern for the difference was minimizing the number of left turns.

<comment><USER21> It might be minimizing driving time, which would in fact give preference to right turns over left, since you often have to wait for left turns.

<comment><USER22> I remember seeing a paper that suggested outlawing all left turns except onto cul de secs or where at least one road is one way would shorten driving times for everyone. Every time I get stuck behind a huge long line of jerks trying to turn left I think of that and seethe.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> Link-bait title conflates "ghetto" with "high crime areas". It's disrespectful to the millions of individuals of various groups who have been forced to live in ghettos.

<comment><USER24> That is the common meaning of the term nowadays. Many people are actually surprised when they first encounter the original usage as the name for a place where Jews were forced to live. I'm sorry if you consider it disrespectful, but I don't think we should blame the editor for using words as they are commonly understood. The modern usage does derive from the traditional meaning, though — the idea is that certain groups are forced there by socioeconomic conditions over which they have very little control.

<comment><USER23> I disagree. The respectable "modern" variant of ghetto is still to refer to people or things of a group that are constrained to a limited area. There is the "gourmet ghetto" in North Berkeley, for example.

It seems like you're referring to the slang usage of the term, which is mainly used by upper middle class youth when referring to things outside their economic class and daily reality, is pejorative, and is often tinged with racism.

<comment><USER25> I don't understand why lansing's being down-voted here. He's absolutely right. It's pejorative when used as a way to reference a place where black people live now, and it's historically inaccurate. The "modern" usage is all since the late '80s; and it came from a term based on enforced ethnic divisions. The fact that a lot of readers here live in parts of the country or the world that don't enforce ethnic divisions along geographical boundaries does nothing to change the fact that those still exist, even in the US, and they are still enforced by white-on-black violence in many cases. The first question that comes to mind is who puts the boundaries of these ghetto into the database? What's Fairfax south of Olympic? What's 120th and Broadway? And the second question is, would stores and businesses within those areas suffer as a result of decreased traffic; what recourse would they have; and what hope would blighted areas have of economic improvement if everyone followed a GPS that steered them around the zone?

This is a disgusting concept and an insult to human dignity. It will turn "ghettos" in the slang sense into more genuine ghettos in the historical sense. And lansing is right to take issue with the term as it's used now, because it's become a light, casual, racist and derogatory way to talk about a certain area, which is definitely used by the white middle class as a stand in for other racist words they don't feel comfortable saying anymore.

[Edit: The fact this was downvoted in _less time than it would take a speed reader to finish what I wrote_ is pretty much proof that either someone's got it in for lansing, or someone's a fuckin racist dipshit. Either way, fuck you.]

[Re-edit: Not only do I stand by my comment, I think the people who downvoted me are cowards. Respond if you have a response, and you speak enough English to communicate it.]

<comment><USER24> Your comment, even with the edit, takes me about 15 seconds to speed-read (I timed it), and it's short enough to skim-read in about five seconds. And I'm not a particularly good speed-reader. And a lot of people will downvote without reading the whole thing if they feel they've got the gist, though I hope not too many. I think you need to calm down and treat people who disagree with you more respectfully. Your reply is extremely heavy on negative emotion, fairly accusatory and low on solid reason, and that kind of thing does tend to get downvoted here. Hacker News tends to value knowledgeable, factual commentary and reasoning on relevant topics over outrage.

Also, now you're complaining about getting downvoted, which is generally against the rules here and will often lead to further downvotes (because you getting downvoted is _always_ off-topic).

Personally, I think I would find some of what you're saying interesting if you presented it in a way that's more informative and actionable and less angry or defensive. Could this have a negative impact on those neighborhoods? That's an interesting question. I'm not sure if it would (most of the people who travel in the area _frequently_ will already be avoiding them), but it's an interesting question. Unfortunately, rather than exploring this interesting topic, you decided you'd rather hunt racists, which might make you feel all high and mighty but doesn't really advance the conversation.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


US 'got it so wrong' on Saddam Hussein, says CIA agent who interrogated dictator - <AUTHOR> http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/us-wrong-iraq-saddam-hussein-cia-interrogator-john-nixon-george-w-bush-invasion-a7482456.html <comment><USER2> "We never thought about using weapons of mass destruction. It was not discussed. Use chemical weapons against the world? Is there anyone with full faculties who would do this? Who would use these weapons when they had not been used against us?"

Is there any sincere military historian who questions that Hussein used chemical weapons first against Iran?

<comment><USER3> Indeed, the purpose of having biological and chemical weapons - as well as the delivery system he was perfecting before the invasion - was to ensure he had a free hand in whacking his less powerful neighbors, aiding terrorism in the region, and hitting his Kurdish population. They were a threat designed to prevent EU and US intervention. His four-stage rocket, which came close to completion, was designed to have enough range to strike European capitals. Of course, he's putting the best spin on it all that he can - whyever not?

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> And, yet, this is the same CIA who we're listening to when they claim Russia hacked the election.

<comment><USER5> It doesn't seem very logical to dismiss evidence from an organization because of a few mistakes. Consider also the wealth of things they got right, some of which may never be made public.

<comment><USER6> What evidence you are writing about? Did you seen any? that shows what mass media are saying? I didn't. And after seeing how US lost in Syria with Russia and suddenly CIA talks about Putin directly involved in hacking US election I would be really cautious to make any judgments without seeing hard proofs.

<comment><USER7> You saw lot of evidences. You just not attributed them to Russia. Russia doesn't tries to make a direct action for their benefit, but to create situation to benefit from. Moreover, they are not trying to force single exit from a situation, but to limit number of exits, so they can prepare a solution for all of them beforehand.

I clearly see goals and actions, and I attribute them to Russia, because they will benefit a lot from resolution, but I have trained eye because I watched how Russians are working in Ukraine at time of Maidan.

<comment><USER4> All of the actual evidence that I've seen so far is equivalent to an investigator seeing "made in china" written on a hammer used to smash a store window and saying "china broke into wal-mart".

As far as Russia benefiting from the election, what benefit do you think Russia gets out of the situation that isn't just a large, common benefit that could be equally attributable to anyone?

EG: if you say Russia wanted Trump elected because Trump would be a better friend to Russia that doesn't convince me that Russia was involved in that at all. Fixing Russia/US relations has massive, global benefit, it seems equally fair to say that Belgium hacked the election (whatever that means) to prevent Hillary from ending up in a nuclear war with Russia which would obviously be bad for, well, everyone (to be crystal clear, i'm not saying this is true or that I believe this would have happened).

My point isn't that everything I'm saying is correct, merely that there are lots of equally plausible scenarios here.

<comment><USER7> Republicans are natural enemies of Russia, so preferred exists for Russia: democrat elected OR distrust in government happens, which then can be played into something like massive protest.

I also unable to see how Russian-US relations can be better than now. Russia captured Crimea, while USA and Britain are ignored their obligations. It's looks like a gift. Yeah, sanctions can be canceled, but even if not, sanctions are doing very minor harm in compare to gained benefit: Russia now controls Black Sea and can intercept rockets launched from Turkey, so USA bases in Turkey are useless now. Also Russia prevented Shell from pumping of natural gas from Sloviansk (their second goal after Crimea) to Europer, so they saved lot of money on that war.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> I submitted a similar story earlier ([https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13206344](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13206344)) and it was flagged to death because it was just an excerpt from the book in the Daily Mail. So I'm submitting this version because it's an actual story from a more reputable outlet.

<comment><USER8> It's flagged because it's a misleading attempt to relitigate only one of many causes of the war in Iraq.

Among other causes were Saddam's attempts at genocide against the Kurds,[0] his attacks on US and British forces patrolling the no fly zone,[1] his defiance of UN regulations,[2] his redirection and delay of distributing aid to hurt his own people while blaming the international community,[3] his army of fascist goons running the country--to include his serial rapist sons,[4] the training and financing of international terrorist groups,[5] and his attacks on and threats to destroy Israel.[6]

The ideal of providing a democratic model for other authoritarian regimes, proximity to Iran, a need for strategic air bases to support anticipated regional conflicts, and oil politics all may have played some role as well.

Moreover, information declassified in 2015 showed that Iraq had stockpiles of missiles armed with sarin, and internal plans to halt production during sanctions while retaining the capital and facilities to resume production as soon as sanctions were lifted.

The US had a policy of regime change in Iraq as early as 1998, and the conflict should really be seen as one from 1991-2003. In the 2000 Presidential debates, even Al Gore said Saddam should have been removed earlier, and that he wanted to arm rebels to topple Saddam.[7]

It was flagged because Saddam promising an interrogator he wouldn't use chemical weapons to start WWIII doesn't change any of that, and is barely relevant to anything.

Granted, it's an extremely unpopular war. It's extremely unpopular because it was one of the most poorly prosecuted wars in history, partly due to de- bathification deteriorating civil government and partly due to it becoming a magnet for rising violent jihadism.

It's not an unpopular war because Saddam was some noble innocent, some scapegoat who wandered into the crosshairs of geopolitical forces outside of his control.

[0] [https://www.hrw.org/reports/1993/iraqanfal/ANFALINT.htm](https://www.hrw.org/reports/1993/iraqanfal/ANFALINT.htm)

[1] [http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/mideast/081399iraq- conf...](http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/mideast/081399iraq- conflict.html?pagewanted=all)

[2] [https://georgewbush- whitehouse.archives.gov/infocus/iraq/dec...](https://georgewbush- whitehouse.archives.gov/infocus/iraq/decade/sect2.html)

[3] [http://www.usip.org/events/iraq-sanctions-what-have-we- learn...](http://www.usip.org/events/iraq-sanctions-what-have-we-learned)

[4] [https://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/jul/23/iraq.suzannego...](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/jul/23/iraq.suzannegoldenberg)

[5] [http://www.cfr.org/iraq/terrorism-havens- iraq/p9513](http://www.cfr.org/iraq/terrorism-havens-iraq/p9513)

[6] [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/956084.stm](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/956084.stm)

[7] [http://www.debates.org/index.php?page=october-11-2000-debate...](http://www.debates.org/index.php?page=october-11-2000-debate- transcript)

<comment><AUTHOR> > It's flagged because it's a misleading attempt to relitigate only one of > many causes of the war in Iraq.

It's a firsthand account from someone who was there at the time published in a reputable news outlet.

> It was flagged because Saddam promising an interrogator he wouldn't use > chemical weapons to start WWIII ... is barely relevant to anything.

WMDs were the centerpiece of the case against Saddam. All the other arguments were just gilding the lily. The war was sold primarily (in fact, almost exclusively) on the grounds that Saddam was a clear and present danger to the U.S. because he had WMDs, and the fact of the matter was that he did not. (Not only did he not have them, but it was clear at the time that he did not have them: there were U.N. inspectors on the ground in Iraq before the war, and they, obviously, had found nothing.) A first hand account from someone who was there are the time is relevant if nothing else because it provides a fuller understanding of history that could inform future decisions and allow us to avoid repeating this catastrophic mistake.

> oil politics ... may have played some role as well

Ya think?

<comment><USER8> > Not only did he not have them

Declassified intelligence has shown that he did.

> it was clear at the time that he did not have them

That's laughable.

> there were U.N. inspectors on the ground

This cuts the other direction. Hans Blix said Saddam was not complying with his obligations and introducing unnecessary delays for inspectors.

The only reason WMDs were a core argument is because they were a triggering mechanism for a UN process that didn't happen anyway. It wasn't a cornerstone of getting popular support, popular support wasn't a significant obstacle, as they controlled government and won reelection anyway.

Besides, it's ridiculous to say, "there may have been great reasons for the war, but you didn't claim them in time loudly enough, so the war was unjustified."

What would that possibly matter? It's like pointing out that the motivations for entering WWII weren't to prevent the holocaust, therefore preventing the holocaust doesn't matter and WWII wasn't a just war. It's a three card monte with political ethics. Inventing an arbitrary rhetorical standard that decides actual facts about actions.

Moreover, it detracts focus from mistakes in execution, where focus is required if you want future wars not to leave a massive anarchic state in their wake.

But finally, I just keep hearing Clinton's line, "What difference – at this point, what difference does it make?"

There were several reasons for the war. Some got shouted more than others, so what? How does that help us now in any way deal with the current situation in Iraq?

> > oil politics ... may have played some role as well > Ya think?

With the caveat that most of the discussion of that is a conspiracy theory about the US stealing Iraqi oil, which is naive and at best simplistic. A dream of adding a stabler countervailing voice to OPEC is more likely, but even if true, still a long, long way down the list.

This goes back to why this gets flagged, though. No amount of sources, reason, or evidence appear to have any effect on the other side. Each of us thinks we're the sane one and the other is just being stubborn and irrational. There's no possibility for useful discussion here, because everyone's views appear calcified to the other side.

If nothing can be gained, it's so much unproductive gibberish then.

Politics is the mind killer:

[http://lesswrong.com/lw/gw/politics_is_the_mindkiller/](http://lesswrong.com/lw/gw/politics_is_the_mindkiller/)

<comment><AUTHOR> > Declassified intelligence has shown that he did.

You can't be serious. George Bush himself has admitted that there were no WMDs.

<comment><USER8> It's in the cites in an earlier comment. This one was from the New York Times.

You would know this if you had actually read the comments you're responding to.

For example, you completely missed the final point of the comment you just replied to, and instead provided more evidence to prove it's true.

<comment><AUTHOR> I just did a search of this entire thread, and found only one citation to the NYT. It's this one:

[http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/mideast/081399iraq- conf...](http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/mideast/081399iraq- conflict.html?pagewanted=all)

That is a story from August of 1999. So it cannot possibly be evidence that "declassified intelligence" shows Iraq had WMDs.

I feel like I have truly entered bizarro-world here.

<comment><USER8> Maybe it was a different source. Google Operation Avarice.

Here's another incident where DOD describes recovered WMDs:

[http://archive.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=15918](http://archive.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=15918)

Iraq was storing giant caches of sarin-tipped warheads. They also had mountains of yellow cake at Tuwaitha that was moved out of the country for neutralizing and processing.

<comment><USER8> NYT on Operation Avarice, guess it didn't get cited above. My apologies...

[http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/02/16/world/cia-is-said-to- ha...](http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/02/16/world/cia-is-said-to-have-bought- and-destroyed-iraqi-chemical-weapons.html?referer&_r=1&pagewanted=all)

More WMD discoveries covered in WIRED:

[https://www.wired.com/2010/10/wikileaks-show-wmd-hunt- contin...](https://www.wired.com/2010/10/wikileaks-show-wmd-hunt-continued-in- iraq-with-surprising-results/all/1)

This press release from Stu Cohen, under "Myth #10," Stu points out what we're talking about in the original argument about WMDs.

[https://www.cia.gov/news-information/press-releases- statemen...](https://www.cia.gov/news-information/press-releases- statements/press-release-archive-2003/pr11282003.html)

"We judged that Iraq probably possessed one hundred to five hundred metric tons of CW munitions fill. One hundred metric tons would fit in a backyard swimming pool; five hundred could be hidden in a small warehouse.... When the Iraq Survey Group (ISG), led by David Kay, issued its interim report in October [2003], acknowledging that it had not found chemical or biological weapons, the inspectors had then visited only ten of the 130 major ammunition depots in Iraq; these ammunition dumps are huge, sometimes five miles by five miles on a side. Two depots alone are roughly the size of Manhattan. It is worth recalling that after Desert Storm, US forces unknowingly destroyed over 1,000 rounds of chemical-filled munitions at a facility called Al Kamissiyah."

This just illustrates that even if they hadn't found WMDs, it doesn't tell you they weren't there. Under myth #5 he describes the wide variety of sources that supported the conclusion that they were there. Under myth #9 he talks about the equivalent danger of rapid mobilization programs that are completely deniable and would not necessarily produce any recoverable material.

WMDs were found, but it would hardly matter if they weren't.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> This is such an incredibly weird story. "Who would ever think that we would use chemical weapons on the world"? You might start by asking the Iranians, or the Kurds of Halabja.

</comment><comment><USER10> Sadly I'm sure no one will be help accountable for any of this. All those innocent lives lost, the murder of Saddam (like him or not).

It's probably all just going to get swept under the carpet as the focus moves onto Syria. So many secrets and lies.

</comment><comment><USER11> Kind of like James Simons: analyst makes sound recommendation, recommendation is ignored by inbred leaders, calamity ensues, analyst gives up on public service.

Perhaps there's a place for this Nixon guy in the hedge fund world?

</comment><comment><USER12> Doesn't matter had <strike>sex</strike> oil.</comment>