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

nothing to see here, move along /s

wiki: The software was originally developed in Israel by Waze Mobile, a company founded by Israeli entrepreneurs Ehud Shabtai, Amir Shinar, and Uri Levine, who are also veterans of Unit 8200


You think it’s important to point out that the founders are Jewish/Israeli/Zionist.

But if Waze was actually created for nefarious global surveillance as part of another conspiracy, they wouldn’t have shared it all publicly.


What about the many, many thousands of homes that have already been bought up?


If they cannot be resold to other speculators their price can go waaay down


The vast majority of home purchases aren't from speculators or institutional investors.

Institutional investors only own about 0.5% of homes. If they're forced to stop buying, nothing will really change in a noticeable way. At best, small landlords and investors will scoop attractive properties up for slightly less.


Is that 0.5% a uniform distribution across the United States or is it concentrated in a handful of hot markets? I suspect the latter and have to imagine some distortion must be occurring in those regions.


Maybe the best part of this legislation will be that people will realize it's not institutional investors that are driving up home prices. No, that's far too optimistic.


When this doesn't make anything better, the conclusion won't be that it was a bad idea but that it somehow didn't go far enough.


Home affordability is getting better anyways, which is great, because we are finally having a surge in new & denser home building in popular regions and there mortgage rates are more reasonable than they were in the COVID-era.


> Institutional investors only own about 0.5% of homes

Where they buy those homes matters though. In areas with lots of jobs/growth (often the areas experiencing the most housing price pain), that number is likely much higher.


The only way that prices could go waaay down is if the supply of new homes increases or demand decreases (or some combination of both).

Which of those do you think is likely as a result of the proposed action, and why?


Nonsense. Do you think these landlords intentionally overpaid for the properties? They are sophisticated entities who like to pay at or below fair value.


It's pretty simple, you overpay for something if you suspect it will be worth even more in the future.



I'm not sure if they could be forced to sell those, the government could, but then that would fall under just compensation seizure. I'm not a lawyer, but it would seem under basic legal theory that you couldn't take those homes.


Not that I expect this particular strategy from this administration, but there's 'forced' as in "you WILL sell this property", and there's 'forced' as in "any corporate owned housing unit will see its property tax rate increase by 25% per year until it is sold to a person". I don't think your description could apply to the latter.


The Comrade Trump memes would go crazy


IF it results in dramatic reduction of home prices, this sounds great at first, but in actuality, it throws the market into disarray, since many sellers and also buyers, and it may trap home owners who need to sell into bankruptcy.


God forbid someone not sell out of their home. /s Home ownership isn't exactly a crappy life milestone to be stuck at. Yeah it would suck for a select few people who need to get out of one and into another RFN due to life reasons and surely some municipalities would leverage that to really screw people but I think the upside is orders of magnitude higher than the downside.

Come to think of it, I bet making homes less liquid would knock the divorce rate down more than anyone wants to believe it would, lol


Tax vacant properties. To high heaven.


Great point. Those homes need to be back on the market for housing prices to come down.


These homes going back on the market wouldn't make a dent in housing prices. As much as we'd like to think that corporations are to blame, that's not reality. Plenty of middle class families own homes and vote for local politicians to keep their investment safe (and for it to increase in value) by making it hard to build.


Your housing affordability plan is that everyone who rents from a corporation gets evicted?


Have you looked around? We actually have plenty of "housing", however most do not meet the qualities/criteria that make them desirable enough to be "homes".

Lower density, family and pet friendly. You know, the kinds of places that landlords live in. Not the places they are trying to force on others as "inevitable".


can someone explain how a subscription-based product is a great option for privacy?

or how being locked in to a black box vpn instills a sense of having gained reliable true privacy?


It's probably to pay for all the things Google provides for free, app store hosting, review, curation, backups, synced data, etc.


> app store hosting, review

Do they actually host anything at all? All I could find was their F-Droid repository with six (6) applications: https://store.aphy.app/fdroid/repo/. The rest must come from elsewhere (F-Droid's main archive?), but they don't indicate if they actually use the rent you pay to fund the third parties they depend on.

For comparison, the F-Droid archive consists of 4061 applications reviewed, built, and hosted by the F-Droid team for free.


yeah, it seems like the target market for a privacy-focused device like this are the nerds who could do it themselves and be more confident of the results



yes, and:

ruthlessness + strength + WMD =/= intelligence


"the best things don't scale"

may be worth pondering





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

Search: