Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | more Arete314159's comments login

I think the next 10-20 years will be an era of local real estate highs and lows.

Long before actual submersion, the effects of rising seas will affect property in the forms of more frequent storms, flooding, and the effects on groundwater like in the Florida condo collapse. Inland, many parts of the world will start having water scarcity, or fire risk.

Instead of an all-over rising real estate market, I think prices in places like Florida, parts of Texas, Louisiana, etc. will crater due to uninsurability. The places that are still standing undamaged in 15 years' time will be incredibly expensive.

The only tricky part is knowing where those places will be exactly. The areas that were "sure things" just a few years ago, such as the Pacific Northwest and Vermont, have been shown to be not nearly so certain. Lytton, Canada spontaneously combusted, while VT has had many damaging storms and floods. So it's a guessing game at this point.

One could make the argument that renting is the best gambit, because that's the only way you won't get stuck with a climate change "lemon."


I use a paper planner, but I think I can address your questions. As a disabled person, I have to have patience with things in my health changing all the time. For that reason, most of my to-do's and appointments are written in erasable pen (Pilot Frixion, excellent pens btw). But if there are things that do not care about my health, such as the Rent being due, then I will write that in pen. The rent doesn't care how I'm feeling, it's due on the 1st regardless.

All in all, I have frequently had to reschedule or erase something I thought was "set in stone" for a variety of reasons. I've never regretted writing something in erasable ink whereas the same cannot be said for permanent ink.

TL;DR - the more dynamic, the better.

Secondly, if I have to make a change, my biggest problem is not changing the one item, but changing the downstream issues, such as dependencies, or energy levels. If I'm cancelling task A then I'm also having to figure out how to get dependency B and C done another way. If I'm moving appointment Y to another day, do I have the energy to do appointment Y along with what I already had scheduled for that day?

Dependencies and working with your "energy budget" might be two places for AI to help with a digital planner.


Do you have any more info on this? I have not heard of such a test.


Here is an example test which checks specifically for virus induced antibodies: <https://monitormyhealth.org.uk/covid19-antibody-test/>. Non-profit Testing for All also used to sell similar tests, but they have stopped operating.

In contrast this test does not distinguish between virus and vaccine as the cause: <https://onlinedoctor.superdrug.com/coronavirus-antibody-test...>.

I don't have a better approach than checking the descriptions of individual antibody tests. But I know the distinction is real, because IIRC the ONS (statistics body) used tests which distinguished, when they ran their ongoing study.


Back then the Red Cross would do free antibody tests for anyone who donated blood. There were two. One could not distinguish between antibodies from an infection vs. vaccine, and came back in a day or two. The other did, and took longer.


If you want to be constantly irritated, read about Rosalind Franklin. (And yes, I know she died before the Nobels were announced, that's not the point.)


What is the point? Something unrelated to the Nobel Prize?


The other word visible is "oino", wine. Wine can be described as purple.


I see “oiōn” (οιων), not “oino” (οινο or οινω). I don’t see how it could be read as “wine”. οιων could be several things off the top of my head:

1. the beginning of some form of of οἰωνός “omen”

2. genitive plural of οἶς, meaning “of sheep”

3. a genitive plural of some other word with a stem ending in -οι-, but with the beginning of the word missing. For example, the demonstrative τοίων “of such”, relative οἵων “of which”, or ποίων “of a certain kind”. Or, as speculated in the article, ὁμοίων “same”.

The 3rd option seems most likely to me without any further context. ὁμοίων seems especially plausible since the preceding characters do resemble "ΟΜ".


Only if you assume that whoever scribed the scroll wasn't too concerned about what order the letters in a word should be written in.

The image is annotated OIWN and the article tentatively identifies the word as OMOIWN, meaning "similar".


While modern people make that connection, that is culturally dependent. The color terms available to speakers of a language, and what objects those terms can be associated with, change over time. In the case of the Greek word for "purple", it was connected to a dye and therefore used for clothing, but one shouldn't expect it to be used for wine.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wine-dark_sea_(Homer)

"Wine-dark sea is a traditional English translation of oînops póntos (οἶνοψ πόντος, IPA: /ôi̯.nops pón.tos/), from oînos (οἶνος, "wine") + óps (ὄψ, "eye; face"), a Homeric epithet. A literal translation is "wine-face sea" (wine-faced, wine-eyed). It is attested five times in the Iliad and twelve times in the Odyssey[1] often to describe rough, stormy seas. The only other use of oînops in the works of Homer is for oxen, for which is it used once in the Iliad and once in the Odyssey, where it describes a reddish colour. The phrase has become a common example when talking about the use of colour in ancient Greek texts."


Says you.


Says anyone familiar with Ancient Greek, and also anyone who has followed linguistics (even in pop-sci form like Deutscher’s Through the Language Glass) recently. The comment by fsckboy, which was already there when you commented, gets it. For the Greeks, the connotation of wine was different than purple, purple was not a basic color term in that stage of the language, and πορφυρός was used only in the context of purple clothing and the dye used to make it.


wine stains are decidedly more purple than the wine they came from too.


In addition, as climate change affects more and more places, I think SF will be the winner. It maintains a naturally air conditioned 65 degrees all summer long during a decade that has seen even Portland Oregon go into the high triple digits.

Don't sleep on San Francisco.


I don’t think you are using “high triple digits” correctly.


Were we living in the same city? There were multiple heatwaves in the time I lived there, one so severe that Noe Valley got to 107.

And this isn’t to mention the wildfires or inevitable water issues.


Apparently not because these are the hottest days in sf history:

1. September 1, 2017 – 106 degrees T-2. June 14, 2000 – 103 degrees T-2. July 17, 1988 – 103 degrees T-4. September 2, 2017 – 102 degrees T-4. October 5, 1987 – 102 degrees T-6. September 14, 1971 – 101 degrees T-6. May 30, 2001 – 101 degrees T-6. June 14, 1961 – 101 degrees T-6. September 16, 1913 – 101 degrees T-6. September 8, 1904 – 101 degrees T-11. October 4, 1987 – 100 degrees T-11. September 8, 1984 – 100 degrees

9 of the next 10 days in Dallas would be on that list. 3 days from last year in Seattle would be in the top 5 days on that list.

We are comparable to the extremes of a coastal eastern city, with significantly lower temperatures between the peaks. There’s not many places in the US that have never seen 106.

As for water, 80%+ of it in California is used for food that is exported elsewhere.

Strawberries in December in New York are much more at risk than humans in CA.

As for fires, nowhere in the world is safe from that, as this summer is proving.


I love this idea!


Me too. Make it happen. Free 100 GbE all around.


Me too, I went to doctors when I was in Seattle, they recommended complicated stuff...no Vitamin D though.

I also had a B12 deficiency that contributed to depression, and it was a decade before that was figured out too. But doc's are super eager to prescribe SSRI's.


SSRI's make money, B12 shots and Vitamin D don't. Just a coincidence I'm sure.


Most SSRIs don't make money. I just ordered a 90-day supply of the generic version of my SSRI (actually an SNRI) for $45. And in looking it up, I realized that I overpaid because I went through my insurance, while GoodRx would get me the same pills from a local pharmacy for $20.


My D for a whole winter costs me €20. Strongly prefer that over any sort of "fucks-with-your-head"-drug.


Note that even very expensive places can have this. e.g. Dublin / San Ramon in the Bay Area: https://www.ewg.org/tapwater/system.php?pws=CA0110009

Whenever I consider a town to live in, I google {town name} + {ewg}. The Environmental Working Group has water analysis for pretty much the entire country. Eye opening and terrifying.


I wasn't welfare-poor then I but I definitely had problems keeping a roof over my head. Rent was cheaper then compared to salaries, buying a house or condo was cheaper then relatively as well, health insurance cost less too. The cuts were welfare were bad, but this is not the only factor as the general cost of living was lower.


Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

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

Search: