<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Hacker News: bangoimby</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=bangoimby</link><description>Hacker News RSS</description><docs>https://hnrss.org/</docs><generator>hnrss v2.1.1</generator><lastBuildDate>Sun, 21 Jun 2026 09:52:47 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hnrss.org/user?id=bangoimby" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"></atom:link><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by bangoimby in "Polish trains lock up when serviced in third-party workshops"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Ideally we want a democracy to be representative (in the statistical sense) and resistant to regulatory capture and low-information voting. Maybe it wouldn't work in practice, but it seems like we already have a system that attempts to tackle precisely these however flawed it may be: jury duty. Perhaps it could be applied to things like voting.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 07 Dec 2023 07:21:19 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38553768</link><dc:creator>bangoimby</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38553768</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38553768</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by bangoimby in "23andMe updates their TOS to force binding arbitration"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I'm not sure, IANAL but I would say that much of what a EULA or ToS covers is not that novel, companies skate by on technicalities, and a nontrivial portion of a typical agreement may even already be invalid but lacks case law. If companies weren't worried this might be true they wouldn't need the severability clauses. For example, disassembling or repairing items you paid for or duplicating legally owned copyrighted works for personal use (not distribution) were rights that were well established, but sprinkle in the right technology (even if it has no purpose other than to interfere with these rights) and suddenly it gets a pass. It's not a novel situation, it's a loophole to opt out of established law.<p>You are right that we won't be happy with the new laws, as so far and with the examples I gave new laws have mostly removed consumer rights, not asserted them.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 07 Dec 2023 05:08:28 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38553057</link><dc:creator>bangoimby</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38553057</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38553057</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by bangoimby in "If you sell a house these days, the buyer might be a pension fund"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Didn't say it was perfectly fungible, just fungible enough that a significant enough increase in other types of supply might bring down SFHs. Either that or the true value of a SFH in a no longer housing constrained San Francisco really is $2.5 million.<p>If you believe that SFH buyers do not insist on SFH neighborhoods (whole cities are not neighborhoods), and should welcome denser zoning because it makes their lot more attractive for redevelopment, go circulate a petition for this among SFH owners and see how far it gets.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 10 Jun 2021 08:22:25 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27458304</link><dc:creator>bangoimby</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27458304</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27458304</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by bangoimby in "If you sell a house these days, the buyer might be a pension fund"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Please no. There is no need to squeeze new buyers and force them into subtandard conditions. There's no reason cities can't redevelop 2 neighborhoods to 10 stories instead of 1 neighborhood to 5 and still have livable 1-2br apartments. The "where will we fit everything" issue is manufactured by NIMBYs who think a designated area for micro-housing or single story ADUs in the backs of lots will spoil their views less. It's another way to maintain the class boundary while appearing socially responsible.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 10 Jun 2021 03:16:40 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27456307</link><dc:creator>bangoimby</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27456307</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27456307</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by bangoimby in "If you sell a house these days, the buyer might be a pension fund"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>> Building apartments and tearing down houses lowers the price of apartments and raises the price of houses; it's simple supply and demand.<p>Do you have evidence of this? I would think increasing the supply of housing would have a downward effect on all housing. Sure, if you're really set on a SFH and there are fewer of them, you'll have to compete. But I think people who want a SFH want a SFH _neighborhood_, and there's an unanswered question to what extent different types of housing can substitute for one another.<p>The value of _land_ may increase with zoning because development rights are still in limited supply, and the profit opportunity for a developer has gone up. But I don't see many SFH owners clamoring to let their neighbors on both sides be replaced with 5-over-1.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 10 Jun 2021 02:58:35 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27456203</link><dc:creator>bangoimby</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27456203</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27456203</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by bangoimby in "If you sell a house these days, the buyer might be a pension fund"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Prop 13 applies to commercial property too, I'm pretty sure.<p>I think commercial property just doesn't burden the city. A Google office has private security, a fire suppression system, and doesn't house kids who need to attend the school district.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 09 Jun 2021 19:47:45 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27452239</link><dc:creator>bangoimby</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27452239</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27452239</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by bangoimby in "If you sell a house these days, the buyer might be a pension fund"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Bingo. Balance is way more important than density. It should be mandated by state law. Doesn't need to be per-city; you could have a system to trade jobs vs housing with neighboring cities or something.<p>A major irony is that California is approaching this all wrong. The "let Scott Wiener build whatever he wants" laws are in some cases being used to make the problem worse. See: Vallco Mall redevelopment plan, more jobs than housing.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 09 Jun 2021 19:11:17 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27451835</link><dc:creator>bangoimby</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27451835</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27451835</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by bangoimby in "If you sell a house these days, the buyer might be a pension fund"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Honestly I think this would be fine. The problem is they allow FANG to build giant offices, which brings new 400k-income jobs and bids up the restricted supply.<p>I think they should be forced to choose one or the other. Keep their SFH and say no to FANG, or accept townhomes and condos to balance out the new jobs.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 09 Jun 2021 19:03:01 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27451744</link><dc:creator>bangoimby</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27451744</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27451744</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by bangoimby in "If you sell a house these days, the buyer might be a pension fund"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>No. People always say density helps availability, and price increases are due to the denser areas being more desirable.<p>The major factor driving housing inflation is restricted supply, which is relative to demand. Demand is created primarily by jobs. The difference between jobs and employed residents (with overhead for non-working family members etc) drives the imbalance. If demand was being met, prices would plummet.<p>This factor is orthogonal to overall density. The Bay Area is expensive because there is not enough housing for the jobs. If San Jose became as dense as SF, it would not help anything, unless that growth was focused primarily on housing. But San Jose already supplies net housing and SF supplies net jobs. These are not small imbalances either; they are both 6 figures in 2008 ACS commute data. (Unfortunately that dataset seems to be compiled very infrequently, but I doubt things have changed much other than density increasing.)</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 09 Jun 2021 18:59:54 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27451704</link><dc:creator>bangoimby</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27451704</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27451704</guid></item></channel></rss>