Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | taffronaut's commentslogin

I'd respectfully challenge that your opinion reflects reality. Nihilism [1] is just one philosophy amongst many. It's no more 'the one truth' than any of the others. Many of the other philosophies have evolved in the light of folks living for centuries through harsher reality than most of us are experiencing today. You might consider other philosophies to be delusional (as others consider nihilism to be delusional), but even in that different delusion they provide a framework to relate your love of your own personality and humanity with the same feelings that a lot of other people also feel about themselves and also each other.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nihilism


Philosophy is the theory and we are discussing the practice here. Be a non-nihilist; belong to any school of thought you like.

Ultimately, out there, people value you by just 5-6 things and almost never they are your beliefs or personal values.

So your respectful challenge seems to be missing the point. Your beliefs are not challenged here. But you cannot change how other people value you.


>Ultimately, out there, people value you by just 5-6 things and almost never they are your beliefs or personal values.

This is such a rigid world view that is demonstrably wrong. I won't even argue with you because others have already pointed out why this cannot be true elsewhere.

What I will say is that I hope you're doing alright.


I have no idea what's your goal with that message. I would love to live in your world but I am fairly sure that wherever I was geographically (5 countries), it does not exist there.


I have struggled to understand why houses don't get built and land sits idle for years. I can only assume that it's significantly more complicated. I'm not trying to excuse the complications. I guess if the house prices are forecast to go up, you build some houses, but not all that you can because the longer you wait, the higher the profit will be on the ones you start later. If house prices are going down, even if it's profitable when you start, you're not likely to build houses because you might be left holding houses that will sell at a lower margin. If there was a tax on unused land, that might skew things towards building more even if prices are declining, but I'm sure there are lots of views on that.


Why would you build on a plot of land when the plot of land itself is already appreciating in value with you doing nothing to it

Building is risky and costly

Having an asset that appreciates on its own regardless of what you do with it is not


In Texas, at least, the lack of income tax is made up for in property taxes. Just owning that plot with nothing on it is still going to be a sizable liability.


Holding costs of land are far from $0 in any major metropolitan area. Sitting on it involves its own form of risk.

Vacant land that's desirable is often held back from development due to zoning or infrastructure issues.


> Vacant land that's desirable is often held back from development due to zoning or infrastructure issues.

Nah, it's mostly speculation. Zoning/infrastructure issues get baked into the price. If you cannot build anything on a plot of land, its price falls.


Only at point of buying. If you buy some land and the mayor suddenly implements rent control then the value goes down.


Until someone gets the zoning board to wave a magic wand and change the allowable uses of the property, and then it's a lot more valuable.

This happens all the time, and is a major reason why people will sit on land for extended periods of time.


Sitting on it is a predictable cost, while building means a costly chaos which may or may not turn out the wished profitability. So when you are used to "old profits" you maybe rather wait on the predicted do-nothing-cost, and hope for the tide to turn again in your direction.


Guys you have no idea about these things and what you are talking about. source: I am a city plot owner.

No land owner will suddenly become a developer to build an apartment block.

A plot owner can sell land to a developer or form a joint venture with developer putting in their land as starting capital (much more risky) most people either keep land as gold or sell it when they need money.

I hope it is clearer now.

The very idea that everyone who owns land should build an apartment block is laughable, it is very complicated endeavour best not to get into it if you know nothing about it. Hell building a single family house is complex, let alone five story building.

So you either keep it if you don’t need money or you sell it if you want to buy something else or need to have liquidity. And you don’t even sell it to buy other investment vehicle because land is already better than gold.

My plot increased 3 times in price in 10 years. Try to beat that with SP500. It’s virtually immune to inflation no matter how the broader economy fares it will always shield from inflation because you cannot make more land hah.

Even in utopia of automation and post scarcity society good location land will be truly lucrative and unimaginably expensive if not outright prohibited to own by private individuals. The question is what will be a “good location” in 30 years.


> My plot increased 3 times in price in 10 years. Try to beat that with SP500. It’s virtually immune to inflation no matter how the broader economy fares it will always shield from inflation because you cannot make more land hah.

The GFC says hi :-)


> Even in utopia of automation and post scarcity society good location land will be truly lucrative and unimaginably expensive if not outright prohibited to own by private individuals.

Indeed, there’s a reason you see silicon valley execs going all in all acquiring land to build fortresses. At the end of the day, regardless of the cold march of technological progress, land remains the root of all real power.


> No land owner will suddenly become a developer to build an apartment block.

No one is suggesting this.

> A plot owner can sell land to a developer or form a joint venture with developer putting in their land as starting capital (much more risky) most people either keep land as gold or sell it when they need money.

Most people don't own vacant lots, but some who do hold onto it as an investment. It's a pretty poor one on average over time, just like gold (which is a good analogy).

> The very idea that everyone who owns land should build an apartment block is laughable, it is very complicated endeavour best not to get into it if you know nothing about it. Hell building a single family house is complex, let alone five story building.

Again, no one is suggesting this. The assumption is that a developer would buy a lot to build on, because that's what happens in practice.

> So you either keep it if you don’t need money or you sell it if you want to buy something else or need to have liquidity. And you don’t even sell it to buy other investment vehicle because land is already better than gold.

Land and gold are not better than the stock market over time.

> My plot increased 3 times in price in 10 years. Try to beat that with SP500. It’s virtually immune to inflation no matter how the broader economy fares it will always shield from inflation because you cannot make more land hah.

The S&P 500 beats real estate over time. Congratulations on getting lucky with your plot of land. Land is a good inflation hedge, assuming you are in a growing area. Ask rust belt land owners how things worked out for them.

> Even in utopia of automation and post scarcity society good location land will be truly lucrative and unimaginably expensive if not outright prohibited to own by private individuals. The question is what will be a “good location” in 30 years.

Thanks for highlighting one of the many issues with communism, but we will never reach a post-scarcity society for many reasons, including this one.


You have no idea what you are talking about…


What on earth are you talking about?

You know what increased more than 3x in the last 10 years? The S&P 500 index (it went from $203.87 at the start of 2016 to $681.92 at the start of 2026). And your plot of land is a massive outlier to the upside in the US overall during that time.

Historically, undeveloped land basically tracks inflation. Obviously, there are specific plots of land that dramatically exceed that, and there are specific plots of land that don't keep up with inflation.

That's the only thing you got right: raw land is an inflation hedge.


If you think you do know what you are talking about, do you think you could back it up with a source?


No, I think he searched for the ETA App and was disappointed at the lack of emphasis on an alternative to the app once you are in it. If you just search the web for ETA and gov.uk it takes you straight to the online portal (which also asks for feedback as it's a service in Beta). The gov.uk website is neutral between you using the app or the online portal.

The only point I can see here is that once you are in the app it keeps encouraging you to use it and doesn't keep suggesting you might like to use the online portal instead. But I don't understand the initial premise about not using app stores. If the author didn't want to use an app store, why did he download an app instead of going to gov.uk?


gov.uk is not neutral at all!

"The easiest way to apply is on the app"

"By applying on the UK ETA app you're more likely to: complete your application quicker; get a faster decision".

"You should apply online if: you cannot download the app on your phone; the person you are applying for is not with you"

All of these are things you see over the course of the THREE (!) pages between https://www.gov.uk/eta and the actual start of the online form, https://apply-for-an-eta.homeoffice.gov.uk/apply/electronic-...

It really gives you the runaround and makes it very clear than the non-app flow is a weird, second-tier option.


If you don't want to use the app, why would you search for the app?


I worked at a company where managers would endlessly push this argument to open a job posting. Of course there was no budget to hire, but they would delude themselves that the perfect candidate was out there and they'd 'be able to make a case' for the budget with the stellar application in hand. Of course they had no idea what that actually entailed otherwise they would do it in advance. To HR's credit at that company their policy was never to advertise a post unless the budget was signed off. They would patiently explain this each time some deluded optimist showed up at their door. I can easily believe in companies where the rules are less explicit that the delusion would manifest as an endless procession of advertised postings that could never be actually hired because there is no money to fund them.


It's quite rare to read about HR doing something sensible on HN. :-)


There is jazz improvisation handbook "Harmony with Lego Bricks" written in the 1980's by Conrad Cork in the UK. It's pretty niche. Conrad approached Lego at the time and they gave him permission to use the Lego name. It's written "LEGO(R)" on the cover. Those were more innocent times I guess. (edited for a typo)


I'm not sure that the RK3688 and a big chunk of the article spent on its specs belongs in a "State of Embedded: Q4 2025 Overview" given that it's due sometime in 2026. I'm sure it's going to be great but I suggest it belongs to a future state.

On the other hand, CIX have been putting actual Arm v9 hardware in developers' hands for some time.


The cheapest appliance is definitely cheap, whereas you generally have to take on trust the quality of the most expensive. The rule of thumb I use is "you don't get what you don't pay for", which is not the same as "you get what you pay for".


Thomann - for musical instrument stuff


Plus microphones and headphones :)


I misread that as "the bassoon of security standards" and it sent my brain in a whole other direction


Most posts here seem to be offering easy on-ramp listening for jazz, but they seem at odds with the spirit of the original post. For jazz that is off-putting at first listening but rewards deeper study, consider Thelonious Monk (Blue Note sessions 1 & 2) or if you are really up for it, Coltrane's Interstellar Space.


I think sometimes it's just a matter of finding an incentive. Isn't it typical for a teenager to start listening to the music of their boyfriend/girlfriend? Or of their group of friends.

My point is: I find that all the suggestions here are great! They may work differently for different people!


Consider applying for YC's Summer 2026 batch! Applications are open till May 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: