Millennials and Gen Z Increasingly Pessimistic About Their Lives, Survey Finds - <AUTHOR> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-20/many-millennials-gen-z-pessimistic-on-life-deloitte-survey <comment><USER2> Social media's ills, rising wealth and income inequality, rising sea levels, mass extinction event, crumbling roads, shit wages, corruption in government and industry, governments overwhelmingly filled with representatives of other generations with different priorities...there is a huge list of reasons to be pessimistic and they are constantly thrown in our faces online.

<comment><USER3> It's really hard to take that seriously. If social media is causing you heartburn then back away from it or delete your accounts. I deleted my Facebook account nearly a decade ago and deleted my Reddit account last year. Nobody is forcing you to be a drug addict slave of online media.

Some of your list looks like entitled anxiety desperately in search of sympathy. For example you mention rising sea levels. Do you own ocean front property or did you just list that for some abstract reason? In most countries corruption is at record low levels. Wages are also at record high levels.

<comment><USER4> I agree with the general sentiment of getting off social media, but I really doubt that wages (adjusted mind you) are at record high levels.

As for the rising sea level, thus far not mentioned in this whole branch of the comment tree is the fact that it's going to cost us all money. There have been billions of dollars deployed/invested in port infrastructure. It wouldn't even have to end up being submerged, to become unusable by some number/type of ships. That in turn either requires modifying/rebuilding/relocating (costs money), or reducing/rerouting/cutting off flows of goods (raises prices, costs money).

Not that that's a reason to get particularly depressed; the alienation is mostly what's doing that. But the economic precarity doesn't help matters.

<comment><USER3> I completely agree, but my decisions on the subject would vary in proximity to the immediate distress of the subject and would in no way feature social media.

<comment><USER4> So much the better. You know the more I think about this, social media might be largely responsible both for the alienation that I mentioned, and for exaggerating the seeming proximity and urgency of every crisis (not just the big ones we should care about, but also the little ones that probably have no real effect on us other than as spectators).

Both of those (social isolation and a steady stream of bad news imbued with a desperate urgency and importance) would tend to discourage and depress normal human beings!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> "Climate change, protecting the environment and natural disasters topped the list of most respondents on a personal level, but less than three in ten of both the Millennial and Gen Z cohorts cited it as a worry."

This is surprising. As a Gen Z-er this highlights the kind of bubble I find myself in- my friend group is almost universally in a state of despair about the collapsing biosphere. Climate change and mass extinction are the chief reasons I am pessimistic about my life.

<comment><USER6> _Climate change and mass extinction are the chief reasons I am pessimistic about my life._

Can you name another time in recent history where the end of the world wasn't near? WW1, Great Depression, WW2, Mutually Assured Destruction, Swine flu, AIDS, Cuban missile crisis, etc, etc.

The correct answer is it's always been this way and what we're going through right now isn't really all that new.

<comment><USER7> As a millennial, at least one thing that is different is that we all grew up in that brief period when the world wasn't ending. We grew up in the 90s and early noughts, when ya, there were problems, but they all seemed containable. It seemed like the adults generally knew what they were doing, and could be counted on the to the right thing.

I'd also argue (with no real basis of course) that the type of dread that climate change and mass extinction invokes is possibly of a different kind than most of the crises that you listed.

<comment><USER8> > _the world wasn 't ending. We grew up in the 90s and early noughts, when ya, > there were problems, but they all seemed containable_

Here are some things I remember from that time off the top of my head:

We were on the brink of environmental collapse as CFCs were destroying the ozone layer

Acid rain was going to destroy lakes, trees, rivers, eventually killing us all

HIV was not well understood and very very scary

Waco/Branch Davidians siege

The Oklahoma City bombing

The Unabomber

Desert Storm

The Bosnian War

of course, 9/11

> _It seemed like the adults generally knew what they were doing, and could be > counted on the to the right thing._

I wager that's an artifact of youth, it seems to me we all think the times when we grew up were easy to understand, everything's going great, etc.

<comment><USER9> > We were on the brink of environmental collapse as CFCs were destroying the > ozone layer

I'd probably be ridiculed by most of the younger crowd here for my views on global warming, I mean climate change, but as someone who distinctly remembers the nonstop warnings of the Ozone Layer - we're all gonna die - I just don't put much energy into worrying about the latest issues related to the environment.

Part of me knows that I'm probably underestimating the actual problem, but I've been hearing warnings for years that never amounted to anything.

I wonder if this is why the boomers, who were literally practicing nuclear bomb safety in school (much like school shootings now) and have had another few decades of dire warnings that never materialized, are even more unlikely to care about the environment or much else about which the younger generations are so fearful.

<comment><USER6> This is a very insightful comment!

When all you've heard for the past 40 years is the end of the world is around the corner, and that doesn't turn out to be true, you start to tune it out.

<comment><USER10> Yup, I'm over 40 and there's definitely a "Boy who cried wolf" effect in play here. I'm tired of having to be constantly outraged about the latest environment disaster that's sure to kill us all this time!

<comment><USER11> Except that unlike in the story, there really _were_ wolves, and we managed to take them down.

CFCs and the ozone layer are a good example: there was a wolf, there was decisive action because people listened to the warnings, and we managed to beat the wolf.

Carbon emissions are an entirely different scale of problem though because so much of our economies is built on them.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> I've been fortunate to have landed in a financial position where I'm not scraping by as a millennial but having worked for several years in SF tech one thing that I have felt increasing unease with is the feeling that the companies I've worked for might not actually be a net positive for the world. My problem is more existential than economic, which is very much a first world problem but a problem for me nonetheless.

<comment><USER13> Your feelings sound not unlike colleagues working in hedge funds who say it's hard to maintain motivation when your purpose at work is to optimize a percentage risk/return at the end of the quarter. Quarter after quarter. Year after year.

I think this correlates with the idea we expect to derive most of our "purpose" directly from our work [1]. Which certainly doesn't bode well when you are told to go to college for your "passion," find a job doing your "passion," and are now underemployed at a job that primarily just pays the bills.

[1]: [https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/02/religion-w...](https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/02/religion- workism-making-americans-miserable/583441/)

<comment><USER14> I don't think that's too much to ask that you derive some pleasure from your work. It does take effort, and 8hr is 50% of your waking hours a given day, and if you work for a hedge chances are you are working till at least 6 and weekends during busy season if you are <5 years out of school. That really is a huge chunk of your life and if you think its bullshit, it can really way you down.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> My wife and I are not having kids.

If you could sum it up into one short explanation as to why:

My wife and I don't believe that the future is going to be a better place.

Chief among the reasons are wealth inequality and buying power. If I can barely afford to buy a house now with a great job, I shudder to think what my kids would be faced with.

<comment><USER16> Have some context - you are better off living in this time/place than any other time and your future children would probably be too.

<comment><USER17> Not having children - and not curating a presumably well-mannered and intelligent next-generation - leaves our civilization worse off and large problems that much harder to solve.

Human intellect is rare, and partly hereditary. Please pass your genes along - at least offer a sperm or egg donation.

<comment><USER18> why is this downvoted?

<comment><USER17> Some people take solace in the idea of childlessness.

I think that raising as many happy, healthy, intelligent and productive children as possible, with a suitable partner, is our very raison d'etre. Specifically for the high-IQ HN audience. Life and society becomes much simpler and more rewarding when you view things from this perspective.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER19> > Less than three in ten Millennials expect to stay at their current job for > the next five years.

Well yeah. I can stick around my current company for 5 years and get a 2-4% increase each year, or job hop every 2-3 years and get a 20% raise each time.

With a market like this, why wouldn't you job hop? Loyalty to a company only inhibits you.

<comment><USER14> It's hard to job hop if you aren't already in an area with lots of hoppable jobs. That really only covers a handful of metros in the U.S., and if your school doesn't draw recruiters from these places it's all the more difficult to get your foot in the door when these companies have mountains of just as qualified local candidates they can pick through. Then if you do get all these interviews you have to not only take time off, but book travel, potentially burning airline tickets and hotel stays if it doesn't pan out. You almost need a buddy with a free couch if you are job hunting in NYC or LA. That's why I left the midbest as fast as I could, because I know how easily people get trapped out here with very limited prospects and mobility.

<comment><USER20> Pretty sure most well-paying jobs will pay for your airline tickets and hotels to interview. Not sure why you would take a job in a very high COL city that doesn't cover that type of thing, sounds like you're walking right into poverty

<comment><USER21> Ditto. It's been 23 years since I looked for a job, but all 5 interviews out of EE grad school flew me out and paid for hotel, car, etc.

Have times changed? This was standard practice back then.

<comment><USER22> Not at all. If anything, a lot of tech companies have only upped the stakes since then. Every single one of my friends who just graduated college and was actively interviewing recently had not only flights/hotels/transportation taken care of, but also got some nice perks like first class tickets or airline lounge access at the airport. Most also reimburse for food and any other expenses while you are in the city, up to a certain limit per day, which is usually very generous (the most common one I heard was $75/day for food).

I don't know of a single dev in real life who had to fly out for an interview and had to pay for flights/hotel out of their own pocket.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> This from Bloomberg, is a bit like when someone slaps you in the face with your own hand and then tells you to stop hitting yourself - [https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-10-10/american-...](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-10-10/american- cheese-is-no-longer-america-s-big-cheese)

<comment><USER24> I read the article you linked, other than the fact that the headline is a bit of a cliche "Millennials are killing X", it didn't seem like the article was anything other than reporting on how tastes are changing.

<comment><USER25> The article linked (not the Bloomberg one but the same piece) discussed on HN (too lazy to find the link) and your comment pretty much summarizes the comments.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> One thing I'm pessimistic about is this pigeonholing thing regarding to one's role in a job. I'm a programmer and therefore I can only program.

Or so it seems.

People don't take me seriously at entry level positions of:

\- Consultant

\- UX Designer

\- Data Scientist

\- Marketing (analytics)

I wish people would at least interview me on it. They'd be surprised what I know and am able to do.

One person made it obviously clear that I should become an entrepreneur, but I really can't justify taking the risk.

<comment><USER27> Change your title to Machine Learning Engineer and sell yourself.

Works wonders.

<comment><USER9> How much time did it take you to actually learn enough to become competent?

I've looked at the mathematics needed - after that it seems like figuring out the main 'ideas' and then just picking one of a dozen frameworks in which to become very familiar.

But unless I want to 'fake it until I make it', seems like it would take a good year or two, possibly with two semesters of grad school for both math and the machine learning, to really learn it as it wasn't something I learned at all undergrad or previous jobs.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> I think happiness is very orthogonal to economic progress. It's a uniquely American myth to believe that GDP growth is a proxy for the happiness of a nation's people. (We export it all over the place).

Social systems which do not provide economic growth have been systematically destroyed over the past few generations. Workers have to be mobile to compete; public spaces have been eroded to favor the privately owned; placement into employment has shifted from personal connection to faceless, autonomous, nationwide filtering; geography of public spaces favors the individual over the group (again, to eliminate sharing of resources); media and culture is far more national or even global, rather than local; religion and all of its communal benefits (and downsides!) is waning...

Some of these systems benefit social cohesion and happiness a lot. Often at the expense of individual liberty, that's why it's easy for Americans to rationalize shedding them.

I don't think it's a grand conspiracy, but it seems obvious to me that this cultural shift is occurring because of the dominance of economic life over all other forms. Unfortunately, economic growth is power, and therefore once one party has it, everyone else must shift to compete. We are seeing this reorganization at every scale, from the individual, to the corporate, to the national, up to the global scale. It isn't even close to being over.

I think millenials/genZ realize that our culture is missing something, but they can't quite articulate what it is. This is because the entire discussion folds into this worldview. Look at how many of us are discussing the price of this or the price of that in this thread!

</comment><comment><USER22> Could it also be that it just became less of a taboo topic to discuss in the west, hence why we see so much more of it? Also explains why we are trying to pin it on millenials/genZ, as younger people are typically the ones to experience a lot of anxiety and uncertainty about the future AND are the ones to typically care less about entrenched societal no-nos.

Anecdotal, but I have family that lives in Eastern Europe, and mental health/anxiety/etc. is still very much a "no-no shameful" topic to discuss or air your feelings about there.

Another anecdote: all the mental health initiatives promoted and advertised at work, nationwide mental health awareness month, etc.

<comment><USER29> I think beyond it being a taboo, it simply doesn't enter consciousness in many non-western (or non-US?) countries — maybe kind of like how Asperger's was discussed before it even had a name — it wasn't, or that person was just a bit "different" in certain ways.

</comment></comment><comment><USER30> In my experience the economy (roughly 80%) and social ties (roughly 20%) seem to be the biggest factors. I work for a large tech company so a majority of the millennial I know are comparatively well off, but even among these folks there is constant pressure to rid themselves of massive student loans, many of my immigrant millennial friends feel trapped due to their visa status.

On the other hand, social ties among some millennial seems weaker than past generations -- a lot of us don't go to church, and spend way more time on social media than hanging out "in real life". For most people the negatives of social media vastly outweigh the positive.

</comment><comment><USER31> Started chatting with a guy at the airport about work / careers. Within 5 minutes he started ripping on millennials and their work ethic. I am a millennial!

Sucks to be saddled with debt after college, have lower paying jobs, and still be shit on by the older generations. And I have things relatively good.

<comment><USER18> I am also a millennial.

The work ethic problem seems to actually exist (from my limited but numerous experiences, including my own), however I am convinced that it is due to learned helplessness.

Just imagine hearing your entire life that the world is just about to end any minute now, the icebergs are melting, everything is polluted, everything is so very bad, financial depression, no jobs for you, etc etc.

Seems like these generations are under massive assault of negative information every second of their lives.

Is it any surprise suicide deaths are a leading cause of death for younger adults? Sort of difficult to have good work ethic with chronic depression.

<comment><USER32> The phrase "work ethic" pisses me off because it codes this idea that I should be a _hard worker_ , which of course (because we live in the world we live in) refers to me busting my ass for somebody else's benefit.

Anyone who wants to criticize my work ethic can go and fuck themselves. I work incredibly hard, but at my _job_ ^[1] I do as little work as I can get away with (while retaining the standing I need to be comfortable) because they pay me as little as _they_ can get away with. I don't see the problem.

^[1] Coveted tech job. It is a "great job" and in practical terms I feel lucky to have it. None of that changes the calculus of the business relationship that is employment.

<comment><USER33> I think a more reasonable attitude is that it's usually possible to improve your material wealth with effort, and people can decide to make the trade-off if they think it's worth it. This is not a value judgement.

<comment><USER32> > This is not a value judgement.

Where "this" is the term "work ethic"? For you, maybe not, but for others it is certainly used to articulate a value judgment, hence my dislike of the term. I don't think it's precise or accurate enough to avoid being used in this negatively loaded way.

I agree that "it's usually possible to improve your material wealth with effort, and people can decide to make the trade-off if they think it's worth it." That is exactly the sort of trade-off I claim to be making, with the additional note that it's a continuum rather than an either/or choice.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> Millenial here, and I just don't understand why my generation is so pessimistic. Things are simply better than when we were children. Perhaps it's having immigrants for parents, but my life just seems great compared to my parents and my aunts and uncles.

<comment><USER35> LOL. Even this comment reflects part of the generation. Probably you are writing this from a first world country. The selfish gene makes people blind.

<comment><USER34> I am writing from a first world country but the news source cited(Bloomberg) is from a 1st world country too, so...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> The millennials in my social circle unanimously believe that they are far behind where their parents were in life at their age. In fact, that's exactly what I heard from my best friend a couple nights ago. Both of us make six figures, and all of my friends in my generation are well educated.

My parents were married in their 20s. I'm single and the majority of my friends are unmarried. In less than a couple years from now, I should own a single family home if I want to catch up to where my parents were. Myself and all my millennial friends rent apartments. (Ok, I know one millennial who has a house, but he lives in the middle of nowhere and he's a douchebag) Only one of my American friends is currently pregnant, and whilst more of the people I went to high school with when I lived in New Zealand have already had kids for years. None of my millennial friends are in leadership or management positions, or at least ones where they actually have any clout.

My dad got into the career he has today by hard work, but also from having opportunities being thrown at him left and right. When he was my age, his current field of work was still being pioneered, and the industry was taking anyone they could get. He happened to work in a slightly related field, his company opened up a new department, and they offered him an opportunity there. He was hardly qualified and had no formal training or college degree.

I know his industry intimately, and there's no chance in hell that his younger self would get his foot in the door today without extreme talent. To get in today, you need above-average talent, you have to attend school, and you need connections.

The same can be said for parents of many of my friends parents.

Keep in mind that the gap between wage growth and buying power was already in acceleration, but it seems like there were more opportunities for people to hit the ground running without too much personal overhead. Now there are Gen Xer and some Boomer bosses who expect younger people to hit the ground running in the same way that they did, yet hold those young people to a different set of standards because of market saturation.

I don't view life as some sort of race to the finish line, but I can see how most millennials are demoralized and even embittered that they seem to be struggling more for _less_ than what their parents and their friend's parents got. The best thing that Gen Y and Gen X can do is experience ego death, realize that their parents lifestyles are flawed and come with other hidden prices, move out on their own if they haven't already, and learn to appreciate the _relatively good_ cards that have been dealt to them.

</comment><comment><USER37> I'm surprised that half of people would believe businesses are making a positive impact on the world.

<comment><USER38> Unless you live in North Korea (and perhaps even there), everything that your life depends on is brought by businesses.

<comment><USER14> And my life is dependent on exponential consumption and destruction, and I have no agency to stop that. Pretty glad I can order pizza with my watch though! Cavemen would be green with envy at that.

<comment><USER38> You could buy a cheaper watch, and go get a pizza from a local pizzeria. Everybody has the agency to control their consumption and ethic policies.

<comment><USER37> I don't know that the artificial monetary value of a watch has any bearing on the impact to the environment it cost to produce it. Or the pizza for that matter.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> I think it boils down to "comparison being the thief of joy." Social media of all types are basically one giant comparison machine, and the people that are the most visible on social media are the richest/best looking/most successful etc.

<comment><USER24> I disagree 100%. It's easy to find a scapegoat but the reasons are complex, and from data we know that Millennials and Gen Z are having greater difficulty achieving basic levels of economic stability that were somewhat easier for previous generations. Students are graduating with increasing amounts of debt and entering a job market that can make it tough to pay rent if you don't have experience.

It's also easy to say things like "more people should go into STEM", which glosses over a couple parts of our reality--we do still _need_ non-STEM employees, teachers, social workers, etc. even though they are not paid well, and even if you do graduate with STEM that doesn't mean you have skills that will land you a decent wage. Just to pick on an example, consider the choice between chemistry and chemical engineering. Both majors are STEM and seem quite similar, but chemical engineering is the one with good job prospects. Likewise, if you do something like mechanical engineering you might be expected to also do electrical and software, the employment prospects for non- generalist engineers is less than it once was.

<comment><USER40> It is honestly ludicrous to see the results of decades of economic warfare and the nonstop closing of proverbial doors of economic opportunity done by boomers and to a lesser extent gen X and then boil everything down to "Social media means more people compare their normal to everyone else's best."

It isn't that it's not true, it is! Social media sucks for mental health. It's just also true that there are many legitimate reasons to be upset. I say this as a 24 year old that has been very very lucky to have affluent parents and gone to a good university and gotten a good job. I make more money than I honestly think anyone needs at my current cost of living and yet despite this I have so many friends that are barely scraping by.

Depending on what stats you go by, the average American household couldn't spare a $400 expense: [https://www.fool.com/retirement/2018/05/23/guess-how- many-am...](https://www.fool.com/retirement/2018/05/23/guess-how-many- americans-couldnt-cover-a-400-emerg.aspx) That's a fucking Playstation. That's absurd.

So sum the constant anxiety of basically no economic safety net, climate change (which is looking to be "how bad", not "if"), social media reminding you of these AND how much better your friends are doing.. Is it any wonder everybody feels like shit?

<comment><USER41> I think it's a tricky one, because there are a couple of factors here.

It's not just one thing, but rather a ton of things - for example, there is social media which is a great way to see which of your 500 friends is currently on vacation right.this.second (and someone always is). While in some senses there's more opportunity than ever before for some groups (e.g. minorities / women) in the workplace, there's also more competition than ever before as more people go for these jobs.

Baby boomers and to a lesser extent, Gen X don't really understand that the economy is different for young people, in that everything that was cheap for them (housing, healthcare and education) is now grossly unaffordable, but the things that were the domain of the rich now cost next to nothing (international travel, cellphones, computers etc).

I make a lot of money (I'm 26) compared to most my age. But like most young people in San Francisco, I have a roommate. I couldn't buy a house on my own. But I could fly anywhere in the world with no worries. The housing situation will be fucked in California for the foreseeable future because politicians don't care about the poor and the vulnerable.

We look at business efficiency as a good thing (and it broadly is), but I think we don't fully account for the costs, in the inherent stress it places on us all. So we now all need a college degree to get an entry level job. That's led to a bifurcation of the economy, between those with a credential and those without.

The climate thing is tricky. I think we'll sort it out, but it is a big problem.

<comment><USER42> > now cost next to nothing...international travel

I'd like to know your travel agent. Or could it be that despite your very real housing woes, you're making a high salary (as you say) and don't realize that international travel is still well out of reach for most Americans?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> >``Instead, travel and seeing the world was at the top of the list (57%) of aspirations,'' the report said. > >Only 52% of the Millennials surveyed responded that earning a high salary was a top priority while 56% of their Gen Z peers did so.

57% is the top of the list but _only_ 56% of Gen Z want a high salary? Hmm...

Aside form nitpicks, the figure showing difference between China,India, and the West is stark. Evidence culture and social media and whatever are not the determining factor, economic growth is.

</comment><comment><USER44> Gen X, having already been born at maximum pessimism, had no room for improvement.

I actually felt my needle jump off the pin for a moment on reading the headline, because it means that the Millennials aren't as stupid as the Boomers have been saying all along.

Now excuse me as I try and fail to revive the fashion and pop trends of the 1990s--a time when my purchasing power and disposable income was slightly higher than it is now, and I hadn't yet shot myself in the kneecap by having doomed Gen Z kids with another doomed Gen X.

Stirring up generational conflict is a distraction, and everyone that is alive today is responsible for what happens on this planet tomorrow... but in proportion to their wealth and influence. If you have been hoarding those for yourself, responsibility for the future is a bit more on you than on me.

</comment><comment><USER45> I was born in 91 and am very happy with my life. Few things that differentiate me from my generational peers is I do not have any social media accounts outside of HN, I get all my news through podcasts of people who I trust to filter through the trash, and I am married with kids and a house.

I think the last I checked I make less than the average person of my generation so money isn't the reason I am happy. I believe that this social media phenomenon has done a great deal to steal people's joy, and society doesn't help things either.

I think having family goes a long way to contributing to my happiness. I don't worry about dating, I have next to no drama in my life from the dating game, I have three really good reasons to wake up everyday, and I have a few hobbies that keep me busy when I am not working.

</comment><comment><USER46> I'm pessimistic about my life because it seems increasingly likely I'll never marry.

</comment><comment><USER47> As a GenXer, I'd like to say...

Welcome to the party.

Now what took you so long?

<comment><USER48> Millennial here, I agree.

</comment></comment><comment><USER49> Stop using social media, go out join in real life local community groups.

A side effect of automation and internet is increased individualism and more isolation from other people.

In the past you would go for example to a video store and watch movies with friends now you use streaming services like Netflix.

More common in previous generations you would call your friends now you text people which is less interaction.

Social media leads to a comparison effect. Ie you compare yourself to others more. Facebook is like sunshine village trying to portray perfect life moments except real life has many everyday dull moments.

</comment><comment><USER50> A single mother working as a waitress at Denny's in the 1980's had more spending power than a college educated cubicle drone in 2019; Let's talk about how is social media's fault!

Twice in the last 20 years - more than any other time in US history _combined_ \- The Presidential election went to the candidate that _LOST_ the popular vote; These generations just lack a proper understanding of civics!

The beatings will continue until moral improves.

<comment><USER51> _A single mother working as a waitress at Denny 's in the 1980's had more spending power than a college educated cubicle drone in 2019_

Do you have any source to support this? Because real median personal[1] income went up almost 50% since then[2].

[1] — don't confuse it with real median _household_ income, which didn't grow nearly as much, because of a significant rise in single-person households which pushes the median down a lot.

[2] – [https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEPAINUSA672N](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEPAINUSA672N)

<comment> crooked-v For some simple examples, inflation-adjusted home prices have gone up by a factor of 6 and inflation-adjusted education prices have gone up by a factor of 3 over the past few generations [1], while inflation-adjusted average wages have only gone up by $2/hour [2]. That single mom would have had a dramatically easier time providing housing and education for kids even with lower purchasing power for most consumer goods.

[1]: [https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/29/how-much-college-tuition- has...](https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/29/how-much-college-tuition-has- increased-from-1988-to-2018.html)

[2]: [https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/08/07/for-most- us...](https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/08/07/for-most-us-workers- real-wages-have-barely-budged-for-decades/)

<comment><USER52> You're not accounting for the higher interest rates of the 1980s.

Which home would you prefer to buy:

$150,000 at 15% over 30 years. $350,000 at 4% over 30 years.

 _Hint_ : they both have approximately the same total loan cost and payment.

You can do this calculation with your parents. My home cost $350k at 3.8%. My parents bought my childhood home for $88k at 8%. Adjust my parents' home price for inflation and run the result through a mortgage payment calculator. You find that I paid slightly more for my home but my home is much nicer (central heat and air, closer to town, larger, better schools, etc).

My parents' home happens to be for sale currently (not by them). If I paid full asking I would pay MORE in raw dollars but LESS in inflation-adjusted- total-loan-cost (which is what actually matters).

<comment><USER53> Down payments are the monkey wrench here. The requirement to have a down payment means high prices basically lock people out of homeownership, period. That in turn limits ability to build wealth at all, even at a crappy interest rate.

<comment><USER54> The main way that owning a home allows someone to build wealth is that it forces them to put money towards something productive rather than blowing it on stupid things.

My experience from buying a house two years ago is that though I suspected it, I never truly realized how many amenities were covered by my rent. I went from paying $30/month in utilities, etc. to ~$400 /month. I also now live 10 miles further away from where I work / hang out.

Granted, we live in a house that is ~2x as big as our apartment, plus two car garage. But if you factored out strictly the various recurring expenses I now pay from my previous rent, it is extremely close to breaking even. And that isn't including the increased cost of owning / operating two cars that now drive ~60 more miles a day between the two of them.

Our net worth increased much faster while we were renting than now that we have a house.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER55> I am surprised that there isn't more pessimism surrounding climate change. This is the biggest factor for me personally. However, I work at FAANG so wages and other more immediate ills do not concern me as much.

</comment><comment><USER56> Just have patience. There will be a glut of second hand boomer possessions coming available in the next 20 years. There won't be enough people able to buy that up at current market value.

</comment><comment><USER57> And who can blame them, what with the non-stop barrage of doom and negativity eye bait being slung at them from every angle 24 hours a day.

</comment><comment> xkcd-sucks "Millennials and Gen Z are growing up"

</comment><comment><USER58> Is the issue that perhaps folks no longer have any conception of history because we are too bombarded with hyper-media and social media? My grandparents grew up on a farm in the great depression where it was common to have multiple siblings die of pneumonia, drowning or other maladies that are far less frequent. African Americans could not even vote until the 1960's in this country. For people to be so pessimistic today is fairly pathetic in my opinion. Humans have always evolved to adapt, work socially and creatively come up with solutions to huge problems from the last Ice age to the Nazis. People should move out of these horribly overpriced cities and get back to small, sustainable agriculture if they want to be happy. If you want a degree get one from a community college. Yeah we have huge problems to face today as many responders point out - specifically Climate Change, environmental destruction and income inequality. Remember in the 1940's we had to go face to face with the most evil empire the modern world has ever known along with our allies and most importantly Russia. I suggest folks toughen up a bit and know that things won't get any better without a steely resolve and working together.

</comment><comment><USER59> Yup, this is definitely all social media and Millennials' fault.

</comment><comment><USER60> We all know the cliches - that millennials are lazy, entitled etc.

Whether true or not (there is definitely some degree of truth in any cliche), one thing is for sure - they didn't vote and as a result we have Trump and Brexit, and all the whining and moaning on social media, which is also what they excel at, isn't going to do squat.

</comment><comment><USER61> I have no idea what my plan is after I hit 30.

<comment><USER62> Hit 40 and re-evaluate!

</comment></comment><comment><USER63> I think this is predominantly due to these generations feeling the affects of social media. They are the guinea pigs of a world wide experiment. They're the first generation that is constantly barraged with photos that lead them to fomo and unrealistic expectations.

I would argue this is a greater factor in producing pessimests than a downturned economy or bearing the burden of the boomers mistakes (climate change etc). They were promised a better life than what they're getting by college and the Internet.

<comment><USER64> maybe we're also the first generation in a while that's seeing things considered normal by our parents systematically out of reach?

Maybe we're a little pissed off that the implicit promise society made us if we "worked hard and played by the rules" like politicians like to say is being systematically broken?

It's pretty clear it's not just the way we fell about things, we're objectively worse off than the previous couple generations by quite a long distance.

<comment><USER65> I hear this complaint a lot, but never really any details. What specifically are you mad about being out of reach and which metrics do you think you're worse off on compared to previous generations?

Honest question. Is it just materials and money per person? Something more?

<comment><USER66> Here's the late boomer side, which seems to be typical for my generation: my parents were average working class but had zero trouble affording a nice- enough-but-not-special home on a single salary earned by my father, with a little extra contributed by my mother. [1]

I went to university on a full grant that covered living expenses and fees - which were much smaller than they are now, so if I'd been in a position to pay my way it would have required a relatively small investment instead of a huge life-changing outlay.

I left university with no debt, in a fairly active job market.

I had a girlfriend who didn't do well enough at school to get into university from school, but paid pocket money for an access course that got her onto a degree - which she also graduated from with no debt.

Some time later my parents died with no debt, a house that had been fully paid off well before their retirement, and some savings.

Millennials today are expected to intern for nothing. Many leave college with absolutely crippling personal debt, and work insanely long hours. Unless they're 10%ers - at least - most have almost zero chance of affording a home with two salaries, never mind one.

In the UK people are literally starving and freezing to death. Some of them are working full time and still can't afford food.

In the US, people are literally starving and freezing to death, and also being bankrupted by health insurance.

That will probably do for metrics. If you need more, let me know.

[1] The property value of the house I grew up in is now trending towards £1,000,000.

<comment><USER65> This is a really well laid out comment, thanks for just spelling it out.</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment>


How a malicious seed generation website stole $4M - <AUTHOR> https://thatoddmailbox.github.io/2017/01/28/iotaseed.html <comment><USER3> IOTA has been notoriously famous for rolling their own flawed hash function which allowed researches to develop a working PoC for hash collision attacks.

[https://medium.com/@neha/cryptographic-vulnerabilities-in- io...](https://medium.com/@neha/cryptographic-vulnerabilities-in- iota-9a6a9ddc4367)

The CEO of IOTA David Sonstebo tells his users it's not his problem if they lose money using IOTA because they're too dumb to understand the design flaws: [https://np.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/7gwl38/hello...](https://np.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/7gwl38/hello_guys_i_have_lost_30k_in_iota_and_i_would/dqmpcb2/)

Yikes.

IOTA also relies on a centralized sever owned and operated by David Sonstebo which takes periodic snapshots so transactions can be rolled back if the IOTA devs ever feel the want to. [https://domschiener.gitbooks.io/iota- guide/content/chapter1/...](https://domschiener.gitbooks.io/iota- guide/content/chapter1/current-role-of-the-coordinator.html)

Further reading:

Nick Johnson: Why I Find IOTA Deeply Alarming [https://hackernoon.com/why-i- find-iota-deeply-alarming-934f1...](https://hackernoon.com/why-i-find-iota- deeply-alarming-934f1908194b)

Daniel Rice: Why I Also Find IOTA Deeply Alarming [https://medium.com/@thedrbits/why-i-also-find-iota-deeply- al...](https://medium.com/@thedrbits/why-i-also-find-iota-deeply- alarming-99d4f2da3282)

Eric Wall: IOTA Is Centralized [https://medium.com/@ercwl/iota-is- centralized-6289246e7b4d](https://medium.com/@ercwl/iota-is- centralized-6289246e7b4d)

Sidenote the founding developer of IOTA, Sergey Ivancheglo claims to have built a time machine [http://come-from-beyond.com/about-me/](http://come-from- beyond.com/about-me/)

<comment><USER4> Why in the world would they design a custom hash function?! How amateurish. As Bruce Scneier said:

> In 2017, leaving your crypto algorithm vulnerable to differential > cryptanalysis is a rookie mistake. It says that no one of any calibre > analyzed their system, and that the odds that their fix makes the system > secure is low — Bruce Schneier (about IOTA)

OK, it looks like the answer is they designed a custom hash function because their system is built with ternary logic (?!?):

[https://hackernoon.com/why-i-find-iota-deeply- alarming-934f1...](https://hackernoon.com/why-i-find-iota-deeply- alarming-934f1908194b)

... because "Ternary is the optimal radix" according to their cofounder:

> Ternary is the optimal radix, actually Base E (2.71....) is, but you can't > make processors like that. So it comes down to Base Binary (2) vs Base > Ternary (3). 3 is closer to the universal optimum 2.71 than is 2. That is > the absolute most simple elevator pitch for ternary.

[https://iota.stackexchange.com/questions/8/why-does-iota- use...](https://iota.stackexchange.com/questions/8/why-does-iota-use-a- ternary-number-system)

Reading about the design of this system, I feel like I just entered the twilight zone, or maybe the website for Time Cube. Urbit makes more sense than this. (The _design_ of Urbit makes fine sense, it's just the implementation is extremely obscure.)

<comment><USER5> Plus, if e is in fact the optimal radix, then there's no way to say that 3 is "more optimal" than 2. That's making all kinds of assumptions about the optimality curve. Assuming such a curve even exists...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I bought some IOTA a while ago and after doing a Google search on how to generate a wallet seed, it sent me to iotaseed.io. Thankfully though I didn't feel comfortable about a third party website potentially knowing my seed (which cannot be changed later) so I searched for alternatives and found a simple Linux command to do it. That probably saved me some money.

It's still surprising that it was a fraud, it looked like a legit website. It seems almost too blatant a crime given that the Github repo, IPs and the domain name of the site can probably be traced to someone.

<comment><USER7> What was the command? Did you have to run IOTA software from github to run it or did the command only use things like openssl etc...?

<comment><USER6> I can't remember the command. I think it was a native Linux command - <USER2> related to IOTA.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> Relevant tweet, with the unbelivable bad (but effective!) code: [https://twitter.com/eukaryote314/status/953839632206020608](https://twitter.com/eukaryote314/status/953839632206020608)

<comment><USER9> That code is awesome. If it looks stupid, but it works, it's not stupid.

<comment><USER10> But they got caught.

<comment><USER9> Plenty of people on HN would love to get caught $4 million later.

<comment><USER11> i dont like the idea of having to look over my shoulder for the rest of my life. Is that worth $4 million to you?

<comment><USER8> No, plus it is not trivial to turn iota into cash.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> The article linked to a fork of the deleted github repo: [https://github.com/eggdroid/eggseed3/blob/8b92ec0f8b251c9fe9...](https://github.com/eggdroid/eggseed3/blob/8b92ec0f8b251c9fe91cd64c86803f5b1cf0e3d3/jscript/iotaseed.js#L203)

But that piece of code should've triggered red flags even if the hacker didn't add a payload to overwrite Math.seedrandom to always use the same seed. The fact that [https://github.com/davidbau/seedrandom](https://github.com/davidbau/seedrandom) isn't cryptographically secure should've been enough to turn you away and warn other. And if you read it a bit more you'll notice that it is mostly junk code (unused variables like visitedHash, newindex).

Props to the hacker for the method acting. From the commit log [https://github.com/eggdroid/eggseed3/commits/master](https://github.com/eggdroid/eggseed3/commits/master) I would not have suspect any malicious intent and just attribute it to incompetence (which might've worked better underhanded-c-contest style instead of using an explicit backdoor).

</comment><comment><USER13> I think it's a shame how IOTA users desperately seeking ways to safely generate their wallet seeds on third party software. Souldn't it be a built-in feature?

<comment><USER14> IOTA is the coin that invented their own cryptography using ternary logic. Practicality doesn't seem to be a core value.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> _Using the official IOTA JavaScript library, the address that should correspond to this seed is PUEBLAHRQGOTIAMJHCCXXGQPXDQJS9BDFSCDSMINAYJNSILCCISDVY99GMKAEIAICYQUXMIYTNQCJYVDX, and according to this website, that's an empty wallet. However, other sites designed to show information about the transaction history of an address just give a 404 error (see here for an example), indicating that either I made an error decoding this address or I'm misunderstanding something about how the IOTA network works._

This for me points out the issue with cryptocurrency in general. Even someone with technical prowess can't figure out how exactly things are supposed to work.

<comment><USER9> >> someone with technical prowess

The author is a high school student who has written very basic HTML/CSS and some C projects, including one as a joke. This is not to say all HS students can't figure out how to use Bitcoin, but you might be overselling the experience/aptitude of the author in order to make a biased point against cryptocurrency.

<comment><USER16> Aha, I don't care if the author is 13 or 70. The article clearly demonstrates they are much, much more technical than the average user. Crypto UX is clearly an issue. (And I'm a massive crypto fan!)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> do anyone prosecute this kind of hacks? or just because is a token without legal status is like stealing Sheldon's gear in WOW.

This kind of pre-generated seed hack is quite dangerous, a lot of mobile apps, don't have deterministic build so you can't be sure the open source version is the same as the one from apple store, and I bet Apple won't do such a thoroughly search.

<comment><USER18> considering how rabidly most cryptocurrency supporters denounce the government and the banking system and wall street and evil regulations, you would think they would be livid at the idea of a government(!) prosecuting people for anything related to cryptocurrency.

<comment><USER19> I'm a cryptocurrency supporter but I'm not anti tax or anti government. I genuinely think that decentralized trust based systems such as blockchain have a place in our world even alongside government.

With that said, I would like to believe that if caught, these types of seed hacks could be prosecuted. (If viable)

<comment><USER20> _> I'm a cryptocurrency supporter but I'm not anti tax or anti government._

The GNU Taler project might be interesting to you, then.

It is based on design decisions that are refreshingly different from classic crypto currencies (who implement more an anarcho-capitalism mindset). Because of those design differences, I'm not sure if it should be considered a crypto currency or not. (They themselves do not.)

Website: [https://gnutaler.org/](https://gnutaler.org/)

Presentation at SHA2017: [https://taler.net/videos/sha2017taler.webm](https://taler.net/videos/sha2017taler.webm)

<comment><USER21> BEWARE: apparently gnutaler.org is a fake website taler.net is the correct one! source: [http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/taler/2018-01/msg00009.htm...](http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/taler/2018-01/msg00009.html)

<comment><USER20> Whoops, wrong URL. Sorry for the confusion!

[https://taler.net/](https://taler.net/)

(Too bad I can't edit my original comment anymore here on HN. I find it disgusting to have helped spread a scam website and not being able to fix that afterwards.)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I wish the post started with a paragraph about why someone would use this website. 1-2 sentences is all that's needed.

I assume the seed is used to generate a public key for some kind of wallet? Is IOTA some kind of cryptocurrency?

<comment><USER23> [https://www.androidauthority.com/what-is- iota-824641/](https://www.androidauthority.com/what-is-iota-824641/)

The project doesn't currently come with it's own seed generator so users are left using (sometimes) shady third-party services, such as this website.

The developers insist that it's not a currency intended for 'speculation between users' but rather for a particular machine-to-machine usecase, which is how they attempt to dodge lots of the criticism regarding the flaws in both the crypto and UX.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> I have a feeling that MyEtherWallet could pull off the same thing. [https://www.myetherwallet.com/](https://www.myetherwallet.com/)

<comment><USER25> Get a hardware wallet then -- the Ledger Nano S is great.

<comment><USER26> There might (in theory) be some kind of backdoor on the device, that could allow the chrome app to send the private key or seed somewhere...

<comment><USER19> Is this just a technical possibility or is there evidence that this could be the case?

<comment><USER27> No evidence afaik. Plenty of scenarios involving unknowingly buying a "pre owned" wallet, hacked firmware updates etc ...

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> I was worried about this happening ages ago so I wrote my own. In case anyone is interested, I believe this is a cryptographically secure method of seed generation, but happy to have feedback from anyone who knows better:

[https://github.com/moustachio- belvedere/iotaseedgen/blob/mas...](https://github.com/moustachio- belvedere/iotaseedgen/blob/master/iotaSeedGen.py)

Edit: spelling and added words

</comment><comment><USER29> > a Service Worker is started to generate the QR code

It's a Web Worker not a Service Worker. Just to be stubborn

</comment><comment><USER30> How were multiple people able to use the same wallet? I thought IOTA didn't support address reuse. And how come people didn't notice it already had a balance?

<comment><USER8> I think previous versions of the wallet allowed address reuse (even though it is not recommended as you leak parts of your private key).

The latest wallet doesn't allow you to send money to such an address.

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> Thanks for this post and clear explanation

</comment><comment><USER32> am I the only one who thinks this is neither a new kind of scam, nor in any other way surprising, and that the whole discussion here is hardly about the article but mostly people voicing their general opinions for/against iota?</comment>


How realtime web frameworks work? - <AUTHOR>

With the recent advances in the web technologies like Node.js, WebSockets and cloud computing we are moving towards the new design paradigm for web apps and lot of smart developers are leading the way with their cool new frameworks. Is the design of this new frameworks a completely new development in Computer Science or has it been done before in a different context?
Are there any  research/white papers they rely on ?
on a related note, Are we reinventing X Windows on the Web ? <comment><USER2> You should first take a look at <http://www.meteor.com> as it's all the hot rage and uses Node.js and websockets.</comment>


Noteslate is back - <AUTHOR> http://noteslate.com/

<comment><USER2> Oh I hope you don't break my heart this time Noteslate!</comment>


Privacy Jobs – Get a job in a company building the future of privacy - <AUTHOR> https://www.privacyjobs.net/sign-up <comment><USER2> The only thing this page does is ask for my email address. Are you kidding me? And when I click the "privacy policy" link it takes me to Twitter. Way to not understand your target market.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thank you. That is fixed.</comment></comment>


Visualizing Kickstarter - <AUTHOR> http://avc.com/2016/09/visualizing-kickstarter/ <comment><USER2> The better article would have been the one that they copied out of: [http://polygraph.cool/kickstarter/](http://polygraph.cool/kickstarter/)

It's got interactive graphs and lots more information.</comment>


What happens when you put evolution on replay? - <AUTHOR> https://phys.org/news/2018-02-evolution-replay.html <comment><USER2> The title reminds of Tierra. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tierra_(computer_simulation)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tierra_\(computer_simulation\)) It is astonishing. After Ray have cobbled together the best self replicating program he could and launched the simulation, all the familiar patterns emerged, including shorter programs than Ray could write, sexual reproduction, parasites ... It's one of the best demonstration of evolution I am aware of but the interpretation of it is not easy alas.

</comment><comment><USER3> For those arguing about the role of determinism (or lack of it) in evolution, I just finished and highly recommend the new book Improbable Destinies by Jonathan Losos. It covers both sides of the debate (sort of set up as "Stephen Jay Gould" vs "Simon Conway Morris") and gets you up to speed on all the latest fascinating stuff revealed by genome sequencing. There's a lot more to the topic than you might expect if you haven't been following the last few years.

</comment><comment><USER4> I feel like this article is pretty misleading in terms of the context and significance of the research. Inserting ancestral genes in extant organisms is a well-accepted approach to studying evolution. Evolution happens because of environmental pressure and random luck (mutations). There's no deterministic factor of evolution, and it's weird that the article tries to present it that way.

<comment><USER5> Just because evolution is governed by randomness doesn't mean you can't make educated predictions about how an organism will evolve (at least given a set of otherwise constant environmental pressures, which is far from assured in the article's E Coli experiment). This is the whole premise behind convergent evolution: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convergent_evolution](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convergent_evolution)

<comment><USER6> You can make a prediction about _what_ not _how._ Set things up and E Coli will develop antibiotic immunity, repeat the experiment 100 billion times and you might see 1+ billion different solutions. Insert fragments of a solution and repeat the experiment and you increase the odds to get the same solution, but the original solution space was still vast.

Consider, we say cancer mutates to disable specific genes, but not how those genes are disabled because it's outcomes not methods that are so common.

<comment><USER7> > repeat the experiment 100 billion times and you might see 1+ billion > different solutions

You won't, though. There has been some excellent research on this done by amongst others Burmeister and Meyer in the Lenski group. Evolution is 'channelled' into certain solutions by its previous history and the process of co-evolving with other species.

<comment><USER6> That simply means some solutions are more probable than others, but there is a very long tail. Or at least as extrapolated from computer simulations.

<comment><USER7> Sure. It's still a game of chance. However, evolution is not random in the purest sense. Evolution itself skews the distribution of the kind of mutations you see.

For example: on of the papers by the Lenski labs show that the lambda phage evolves a certain defense mechanism very reliably in duplicated studies, despite it requiring several very specific mutations.

<comment><USER6> Random does not mean a uniform distribution. Toss 2 six sided dice and 2's and 12's are uncommon. But it's still a random process.

Also, saying you often get some set of mutations may be likely if subsets of those mutations provide advantages or there is some process that makes those mutations more likely.

<comment><USER7> > Random does not mean a uniform distribution. Toss 2 six sided dice and 2's > and 12's are uncommon. But it's still a random process.

True, but dice don't adjust their own shape so that they're more likely to stop at certain values.

> Also, saying you often get some set of mutations may be likely if subsets of > those mutations provide advantages or there is some process that makes those > mutations more likely.

Yeah, but doesn't take away from the fact that evolution is canalised into certain options (most of the time) by its own evolutionary history.

<comment><USER6> I am not disagreeing with that. I am simply saying even if 95% of the time you see a small set of options the other 5% get's increasingly bizarre. Start grouping them and the last 0.001% case has just about anything.

So, sure you can specify odds, but again that's very different than saying something is not random and thus predictable.

PS: I tend to focus on black swan events because they tend to be more important. If you focus on the most likely outcome that becomes less important over time. M1 - M10,000 might _each_ be happy paths, but M1 - M10,000 is is extremely unlikely to have _all_ of them be happy paths.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> If anyone is interested in arguments about winding back the clock and replaying evolution, I highly recommended Stephen Jay Gould's "Wonderful Life."

<comment><USER3> I also recommend the new book Improbable Destinies by Jonathan Losos, which has a big discussion on convergent evolution and the role of "replaying the tape" \- it refers back a lot to Gould's book "Wonderful Life" and what new genome sequencing is revealing and how it relates to what he got right and/or got wrong and/or how he was misunderstood.</comment></comment>