I think the issue is that we have under built so much for so long, that it often feels futile to build more. NYC can feel like this, because due to zoning and general difficulties in building, all that seems to happen is a new building goes up and drives up rents. But if we built 20x more of those and sated demand, we would. On a micro level though, it can appear that "new building makes rents go up."

And this pattern repeats across the US. Add in the fact that people want to freeze the area they moved to in time (like suburbs refusing to increase density, even urban yet car reliant neighborhoods panicking if a single parking space is removed: https://hudsoncountyview.com/outraged-jersey-city-residents-...) and we get constant blockers to housing supply growth we so desparately need.

Its been frustrating watching the half baked measures to make housing "more affordable" by making mortgages cheaper when really they need to stimulate the supply side. It seems like an easy political win IMHO as long as you can sell it up front- stimulate GDP by juicing house building, and everyone gets cheaper housing. Just keep it under control lest you end up in a China type situation.

What is your mental model for this then? If the "2BR shack" can be built from scratch for 300k, and the value for the lot + shack is $3M, then the land value is $2.7M. Most expensive real estate is land value, not actual structure value.

I see what you're saying, my point is that the principle thing driving it's value isn't the land nor the shack, it's the regulatory framework of the area.

> Have you questioned whether you might have been better off without seeing ISIS decapitation videos when you were a teenager (you might be too old for that though)?

See, I have, and I think I am actually a better person for it. Videos like these show how humans are really just apes and can easily fall into doing heinous things. It helped harden my view that religion is a net negative for the world, made me a bit more careful, especially in where I choose to travel, and has given me a wider worldview.

No one is rick-rolling with Isis decapitation videos, you go to those sites, and you know what you are getting into. One of the wonders of the early internet was rotten.com, and I am very sad its gone.

How exactly is seeing what human beings are capable of going to harm anyone? It certainly isn't so "damaging" that it needs to be hidden from anyone.

Do you understand how much you are talking only out of your experience? You aren't even considering that people will react differently to seeing that stuff, or that people might not find cynicism in the human nature (or realism as you frame it) valuable, and would much rather want to see the beauty, as naive as that may be.

It might not be harmful on an objectively quantifiable measure, but it will have an effect on people and what that effect is depends on the person.

The numbers are seasonally adjusted- the reports themselves are not very difficult to read, I suggest you go to to the source: https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

The bigger question is the impact of immigration policies- the US population is smaller than expected due to immigration effects, so some of the extrapolation typically done may be skewed. I doubt this will make the numbers look better though. These numbers may be volatile for some time until the true effects of the lack of immigration are understood and modeled properly.

I am kind of lost here on this whole scarf through a ring thing as well. This is just a function of the thickness of the scarf? My wife went through a scarf phase about a decade ago, and I am pretty sure a Pucci scarf could easily fit through a typical sized ring meant to go on a finger?

Its entirely possible that old manufacturing methods produced things that are different, but I would be entirely surprised if they are entirely better overall. If the defining metric for scarves is how well they fit through rings, I am sure they would all be made so you could fit 3 through a ring if people were willing to pony up for that. If you look at a lot of old clothes, they are generally a lot heavier, but I am not sure I would really want to wear them, they look quite uncomfortable. I also think its wonderful that today you can get a set of clothes for a few hours of minimum wage work while in the past this was a major investment. You can also choose to pay thousands for a shirt if you wish, but from 10 feet away its going to be hard to tell the difference.

A full size wool scarf cannot go thorough a ring. You are probably thinking of a silk scarf. I have a wool scarf next to me from Kashmir and it went down about 25 cm. The full scarf is a bit over a meter.

Looked up Pucci - looks like a designer that makes silk scarves. Silk is a totally different material. The Luddites were wool and cotton weavers.

Making wool thin enough for a meter long scarf to go thorough a ring requires the individual strand of wool to be very thin. Both making it thin and weaving that thin strand is the craft that was lost. Go look at wool yarn next time you are at a store and see how thin they can get it.

As for "Are they better?" Yes. Thinner wool is incredible, soft. High quality merino wool is one of the most expensive fabrics. Look up this brand "Made in Rosia Montana" if you are curious. It's not like what the Luddites made, but its as good as it gets in the modern world. Getting stuff from the Kashmir region is difficult - I got mine because I knew someone who ran a school in the area. Most "Cashmere" stuff in department stores is fake/chemically processed for fake softness which makes it nice but it doesn't last. Real quality wool lasts a lifetime. The chemically processed stuff is ok if you want to see how it "feels"

EDIT: also, wool is naturally waterproof! I can walk in the rain with my scarf from kashmir on my head, its pretty thin but absolutely no water goes through even in heavy rain. it has to do with the springiness of the fibers and its natural oils. I will stop nerding out on fibers now!!

Appreciate the clarification. I guess its a case of I don't know what I don't know, but the choice of metric around quality was just an odd one. And yeah I assumed silk because I can't imagine a wool scarf going through a ring.

I think this is behavior that should be encouraged online. Staying quiet and letting the experts talk to increase the signal to noise ratio is a GOOD thing. OP has hands on experience with something that is at least for now quite niche.

I used to only really speak about node.js topics because that was what I had real fighting experience with, at a scale beyond what most webdevs had ever seen. Those were also my most upvoted posts by far.

I get what you are saying, and if that's what the OP was doing I'd somewhat agree with you.

However, if you haven't already, I'd encourage you to read over their past comments. They all read almost identical to the start of this thread. Before this post they had something like 3 other comments on HN and they were all about how great /e/OS is. All of them have a blurb about the privacy focus of /e/OS. They all read like copy from marketing.

That is bizarre commenting behavior for a niche OS. And these weren't comments about using /e/OS, but rather comments speaking positively about using it.

Your posts on node.js, I assume, weren't all "Node.js is the greatest programming environment I've ever used. It's so smooth and fast." Instead, I'd wager your highly upvoted comments contained useful information about using node.js.

I'd also say, that there are people that work for various software tech companies who post here. The best comments I see almost always start with "Full disclosure, I work for X". Those are far better received.

Personally I am already there- I go to Qwen and Deepseek locally via ollama for my dumb questions and small tasks, and only go to Claude if they fail. I do this partially because I am just so tired of everything I do over a network being logged, tracked, mined and monetized, and also partially because I would like my end state to be using all local tools, at least for personal stuff.

I don't love all the new tahoe stuff, and do wish I could go roll back, but this hand wringing around Apple is way overblown IMHO. What he is reporting is real, but in my actual usage I haven't noticed this at all- in other words, if this wans't called out, I am not sure I would have ever realized it.

Tbh I have always found window management on Macs to be annoying and something to be avoided- Rectangle or something similar is one of the first things I install and try to use the shortcuts to just put windows in either a quarter or half of the screen.

That said, I use Macbooks for the hardware, if for whatever reason I had to switch to Linux I would just shrug and not care one bit. It took me a few years to realize, but MSFT just disappeared from my life one day and I didn't even notice.

As someone who frequently posts online- with em dashes- I wonder if I am part of the problem with training llms to use them so much- and am going to get punished in the future for doing so.

I also tend to way overuse parenthesis (because I tend to wander in the middle of sentences) but they haven't shown up much in llms so /shrug.

A few years back, well ok maybe almost ten now, but regardless- a recruiter reached out to me about a role at a "series G" company like it was a selling point, and I was just kinda like ok maybe thats signaling its relatively stable and can raise money, but at the same time, that's a lot of rounds to have preferences ensure unprivileged shareholders get nothing, and also to have most of the hockey stick growth already tapped out.

This was in the middle of the boom when companies were fighting over talent, so I found it odd.