inversionOf

Housing is an interesting economic phenomena because people are often willing to pay whatever is possible to pay, so if you have 100 houses in an area and a single working adult in 100 households, prices will fit the ability of a single working adult. Now get rid of inequality and have the second adult working, and prices simply explode to fill the ability to pay of both adults. And so on. It's how we run to stand still.

Vancouver has hints of insanity, but Toronto's pricing is entirely rational for the current financial reality -- more and more people, and more and more money, bidding up a fixed amount of housing. It has significant ongoing migration from around the world, so if you're a new grad who wants to live downtown, well your dollars are competing with dollars from around the globe. That's how those things are supposed to go.

The fly in the ointment is, of course, low interest rates, and minor movements would be catastrophic. Which is exactly why I think low interest rates are essentially the fundamental reality in the US and Canada -- they have been structurally stratified, and any increase would cause economic devastation that would cause the rates to drop again.

There is no honor among thieves, the saying goes, and you can't expect an adultery site to show great morals.

Yet it keeps getting reported as if it were truth. There was one single news group that actually basically said "Yeah...sure...", but everyone else just went with it as a statement of fact.

The company has no credibility at all.

While a bit of a sidetrack, that review is horrible. Aside from the unnecessary narrative, the complete hackery of their tests leaves me fondly remembering the old days when tech sites actually did regimented, repeatable, bonafide tests among multiple competitors (the Anandtech gold standard, once even shown by sites like Toms Hardware and even rag PC magazines). Now someone hangs a couple of routers off each other, does some non-descript random test (from the web?) at some cherry picked position, and calls it a day.

Maybe this is the result of the ad-supported and then ad-blocking world, but the raw, profound laziness is just too much.

2005-

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/double-trouble/

"Darren Morgenstern is a happily married man who runs ashleymadison.com, a Web site for attached people with cheating on their minds. "When monogamy becomes monotony: That's our trademark slogan,"

2002-

https://web.archive.org/web/20040214171743/http://www.ashley...

The site identified itself specifically for adultery, and that angle earned them an enormous amount of free press.

This is a new restriction and setting on an OS that won't be released widely for months. When fully functioning this setting doesn't downgrade the security of an app, but simply breakingly blocks behaviors that aren't compliant.

Google advises you to start all new apps as HTTPS only, but to add this exclusion to have existing behavior of legacy applications, at least in the short term while they continue migrating the entire ad network to HTTPS.

There is an enormous amount of overreaction and, dare I say, hysteria throughout this thread, and you would think that Google just disabled SSL on the device or something, versus offered an approach for apps to continue doing what they're doing, presumably with the developer understanding the consequences.

And it's worth noting that the "pet moral value" that people seem the most outraged about is honesty, however much people try to load it with their own hangups. If this was a site for open marriages, tinder hookups, or anything of the sort, I doubt it would have gotten much attention at all. Instead it's a site for people a) lying to their partner, or b) lying to everyone else. Some of the most reported cases have been about raw hypocrisy.

This will absolutely make everyone pause when offering up data to third parties though, and really that couldn't come quickly enough. Whenever there is a password database dump, one of the things I've always found most remarkable are the number of people inconvenienced because they use the same password everywhere, trusting their life to every random service they used. Similarly, trusting critical, compromising data to some hookup app -- who have competencies and auditing and archiving that you have no notions about -- seems insane, but it has become an online norm. Breaches like this may make people more considerate of the value of their own data.

There are a lot of products in tech, and a huge number of name collisions. Context (such as the fact that the linked domain is unity3d) saves us all from having to add caveats and clarifications to every mention. Just as I can talk about Microsoft Windows without noting that I'm not talking about panes of glass.

This is a growth based analysis (in effect a form of pyramid scheme), and it increasingly simply isn't true, as many in Japan are discovering. As populations flatten and eventually decline, most of the established dogma will fall.

Most commodity prices are doing superbly (oil is an outlier). Food prices are at all time highs. Canada's economy has faced far more of a disruption from normal globalization and mega companies shifting production elsewhere, than any hewer or wood miner of minerals disruption. It will always face threats and will always be adapting.

Canada is a bit odd relative to oil given that a pretty large contingent of Canadians are really on the fence about exporting fossil fuels. Even in Alberta, the province where most of the oil action happens, the provincial government was recently taken over by a party that you could almost call anti-oil (to the limits of pragmatism).

I mean, it's straight up mySQL dumps. You don't even have to do any complex ETL. Making that geographically and attribute searchable is remarkably easy. Like four hour project easy. Mapping everyone on OSM would be trivial.

Yet very few such apps have appeared. I suspect because of the privacy implications, coupled with the fuzzy legal area of the data -- I might have it, but I'm not going to announce to the world that I do.

The single and only reason Ashley Madison got media attention -- and they got plenty (morning radio in the Southern Ontario space just loved bringing them up) is that it was salacious: The whole premise of a site to arrange affairs is just very "click baity", and it's sure to draw attention.

Ashley Madison played those cards brilliantly, turning their entrant in a hyper competitive dating site market into a newsworthy, edgy find an affair site.

But that same gambit also means that if you fail, many want to see you fail big, exactly the same motivations drawing media.

There is no hypocrisy or dual standards here. Site is newsworthy for its market, and it's newsworthy for success, and even more for failures.

Exactly the same principle applies.

Look at the title of this submission. Stop and before you knee-jerk a response, contemplate that this isn't "it's hot, yo, and getting hotter". It is specifically that July was the hottest month "ever recorded", which someone quite rightfully noted was since 1880.

People acting outraged about a simple statement of fact like "since 1880", or the notional, obvious statement that a sporadic high or low is, by itself, not compelling, diminishes everyone.

AGW is reality. The disciples of AGW are profoundly intolerable, however.

Do you really think you want to understand? Again, the irrational histrionics of so many to this discussion (such as the conflation of billions of years with a period of time that is a tiny, tiny sliver of human history, much less periods of the Earth). It is impossible to discuss nuances without the predictable, boorish stomping of feet and announcing of positions. People must make everyone know how firmly and strongly they believe in global warming.

And the funny thing is that I fully and completely believe in and understand AGW. It isn't a religion, however, and I'm not waving a flag or announcing fealty, or angrily posting over the top responses to anything that is other than full-fledged Belief. It is the most toxic, bottom-feeding discussion going.

By simple random odds (which given that weather stations are few and far between, simple odds of micro-climates can shift temperature slightly), even with zero influence of global warming or any other effect, it's entirely possible to break records set over such a short period. I'm far too lazy to calculate random odds right now, but setting a new high at a 17 year interval doesn't seem remarkable. It is in the context of global warming, but in isolation it really doesn't mean much.

This isn't an anti AGW comment, and it's unfortunate that it's impossible to even state something so fundamental without it becoming religious, but the truth is that we've been recording our planet for a very short period of time, with growing accuracy and coverage every year.

"My co-workers were a bunch of mad geniuses"

"one of the best companies I've ever worked for"

"my gut reaction was "Great, the bitter wives brigade has done it again.""

Also, they had to retain your information for law enforcement, unless you paid $19 when they would do a super duper all layers deep wipe (apparently law enforcement no longer matters if you have $19?).

They claim be be a senior employee in management, but apparently also talked with every wife calling to find out about their husband.

It's an absurd AMA, and honestly could only possibly fool the gullible.

And FWIW, it makes no sense for someone in the situation described to use a service like Ashley-Madison. Not only is it overwhlemingly males, the few females are generally pursuing the sites dogma of having an affair -- is the healthiest way to fulfill that relationship to engage in someone else's domestic issues? It's like joining an "Al Queda Bombmakers" site because you want to make some cherry poppers for the cub scout glee -- the story isn't rational.

That seems like an absurd story to cast a sympathetic shadow on the site in the wake of a hack.

Comparing the hacking of a infidelity hook up site with government mass monitoring is dubious.

Ashley Madison is not a dating site. It was always, from day one, a site specifically and only for infidelity (earning it millions worth of free advertising via notoriety). The entire rise of that web property came on the backs of the notion that the site wasn't for open marriages or more casual/relaxed notions about sex -- activities that many people engage in with little risk or concern -- but for people who wanted higher risk engagements, whether outside of their own relationship promises, or with parties acting outside of their own relationship promises.

because you suspect most of them might be "guilty" of the crime of "marital infidelity"

Scare quotes aside, moral compasses are personal and vary between us. And the reality is that there are millions of relationships where there is infidelity, often with both parties knowing about it, but more often with one or more party in the dark. It's a risky venture and any of countless things can out one's activities, which in this case is a data dump, making people a victim, truly, of their own actions. It's not hard to imagine why many people may have "glee" about this, as it's somewhat more difficult to find the innocent parties in the churn.

Though I will note that you are being very consistent (I would say to an overly rigorous extent). To address some of the other comments, the parent poster is one of the few people on here who actually very strongly disapproves of what Snowden did (if I recall correctly), so there is no inconsistency. The NSA was a victim, the argument went, of Mr. Snowden's crime.

Having said that, Ashley Madison has approximately zero credibility, so whatever their agents say is open to intense skepticism.

And we know already that there is a lot of confirmed data in there. At least some of the data is unequivocally true, and the data in this latest release feels very organic.

This is just one record, but that data is absolutely real. And I looked up this particular person because they struck me as exactly the userbase of the site.