Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Worst Roommate Ever

nymag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 290 posts

Re: Worst Roommate Ever

#141

Post by mnw21cam »

ghaff wrote: post #132
mnw21cam wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have never seen an address on a cheque. Sounds like a really bad idea to me (privacy etc). Since when was that a thing, and what banks should I be avoiding?

In the US, printed checks don't need to be issued by banks and it's pretty much up to the person you're giving the check to whether they think it's an acceptable check or not. But, yes, to the degree checks are still used, the norm is to have an address printed on them. At least historically, a lot of stores wouldn't accept so-called blank checks without any personalization (understanding that's not quite the same th…

Holy cow! (about multiple things you just wrote).

Re: Worst Roommate Ever

#142

Post by xefer »

maaaats wrote: post #110
BrandoElFollito wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That is of course false. It may be a hassle, but you can absolutely to something. It depends where. In France you are completely stuck when someone dies not pay. It can take over a year to finally kick someone out. And this is just if he is not paying. If someone pays, it is simply impossible. Every three years you may take back the house for your or your close family use only. You cannot sell it empty. You cannot…

> It depends where. In France you are completely stuck when someone dies not pay. It can take over a year to finally kick someone out. But then how do you kick them out? By doing something ! Which was my point. Saying "nothing whatsoever to do about it" is a lie by the OP. I'm not saying all the rules are sane. But it's better to protect the weak that need roof over their heads, than the persons renting out a house t…

> is a lie

I dislike this (sadly, growingly) cavalier use of the word "lie"

Re: Worst Roommate Ever

#143

Post by ejstronge »

dannylandau wrote: post #87
subroutine wrote: post #74

Did anyone else read this paragraph wonder wtf really happened... "Bachman enrolled at Tulane University in the fall of 1975, but his time there was rocky and brief, ruptured by a horrific incident in January at the Sigma Chi house, just off campus. Although Bachman was not a member of the frat, he told Friedman he’d been hanging around the house with a friend from Elkins Park, a boy a year older named Ken Gutzeit. S…

Great find! So, not exactly consistent with the NYT piece.

> Great find! So, not exactly consistent with the NYT piece.

First, this is not a NYT article.

What do you think is inconsistent? The article tries to highlight the idea that ‘beheading’ was said rhetorically.

Re: Worst Roommate Ever

#144

Post by icantdrive55 »

throesx333 wrote: post #107
throwaway_4321 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure this will be unpopular, but: I once had a psychopath like this turn up in my life. Like a lot of these stories, it escalated slowly, one creepy / inappropriate thing at a time. There really is a frog in hot water effect in play here. If you haven't experienced it, it might be hard to understand why someone let themselves be in that situation at all. What I don't understand, however, is why people don't deal…

The thing is, this is purely cultural. In my country(eastern Europe), victim's male relatives would do this almost certainly and the police would not intervene. There is also posibility that the guy would simply vanish. Criminal organizations also handle psychopaths and child molesters. They have families after all.

I sometimes miss that mentality.

I have seem a lot of fancy boys do some aweful things, knowing the worse they will get is a civil lawsuit.

Some of the biggest jerks had a law license.

I'm at the point, I don't even want a lawyer as a friend.

Re: Worst Roommate Ever

#145

Post by HenryBemis »

dalore wrote: post #126
whack wrote: post #53

The kind of tenancy laws I read in articles like these, sound absolutely idiotic. If you let someone into your home, and they aren't on the lease, you should be able to kick them out anytime they overstay their welcome. If you do sign a lease with someone, and they haven't paid their rent, you should be able to throw their stuff out and change the locks as soon as their security deposit has run itself out. As a forme…

In the UK if the landlord lives at the same place (i.e. you live with the landlord) then you have far less rights as a tenant. Including a very short notice period.

I didn't notice in the article that "they signed a lease/contract".

"He signed the check in a messy scrawl" but not a contract.

In the UK (and many other parts of the world) a contract is (almost) always signed before anyone moves in. Handing a checque means nothing is not bulletproof. One can claim that it was a payment for a selling an old computer (and then the courts will have to do the talking).

Re: Worst Roommate Ever

#146

Post by maaaats »

ben174 wrote: post #139
maaaats wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It depends where. In France you are completely stuck when someone dies not pay. It can take over a year to finally kick someone out. But then how do you kick them out? By doing something ! Which was my point. Saying "nothing whatsoever to do about it" is a lie by the OP. I'm not saying all the rules are sane. But it's better to protect the weak that need roof over their heads, than the persons renting out a house t…

> Owning multiple properties and renting them out isn't a right. Having a house to live in should be. I’m not sure I’m reading this correctly. You believe it should be a human right to have a home to live in? Every person is just given a free home? Who would build all these homes in this utopia?

That's a very non-charitable way of reading my statement, I believe you are very sure you're not reading it correctly.

But yes, I do "believe it should be a human right to have a home to live in". Not given freely, but having the opportunity for housing. It's even in Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Re: Worst Roommate Ever

#147

Post by maaaats »

xefer wrote: post #142
maaaats wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It depends where. In France you are completely stuck when someone dies not pay. It can take over a year to finally kick someone out. But then how do you kick them out? By doing something ! Which was my point. Saying "nothing whatsoever to do about it" is a lie by the OP. I'm not saying all the rules are sane. But it's better to protect the weak that need roof over their heads, than the persons renting out a house t…

> is a lie I dislike this (sadly, growingly) cavalier use of the word "lie"

And I dislike people exaggerating with no basis in reality to force a point. What hurts the discussion more, me pointing it out or the statement?

Re: Worst Roommate Ever

#148

Post by cdancette »

ben174 wrote: post #139
maaaats wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It depends where. In France you are completely stuck when someone dies not pay. It can take over a year to finally kick someone out. But then how do you kick them out? By doing something ! Which was my point. Saying "nothing whatsoever to do about it" is a lie by the OP. I'm not saying all the rules are sane. But it's better to protect the weak that need roof over their heads, than the persons renting out a house t…

> Owning multiple properties and renting them out isn't a right. Having a house to live in should be. I’m not sure I’m reading this correctly. You believe it should be a human right to have a home to live in? Every person is just given a free home? Who would build all these homes in this utopia?

It's funny you mention this, because it is an actual right in France. People have a right to housing. That's why the government provides (or should provide more) shelter to homeless people.

Do you believe that people do not have the right to have a shelter where to live, but only those who are rich enough to afford it ?

Re: Worst Roommate Ever

#149

Post by mercer »

ben174 wrote: post #139
maaaats wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It depends where. In France you are completely stuck when someone dies not pay. It can take over a year to finally kick someone out. But then how do you kick them out? By doing something ! Which was my point. Saying "nothing whatsoever to do about it" is a lie by the OP. I'm not saying all the rules are sane. But it's better to protect the weak that need roof over their heads, than the persons renting out a house t…

> Owning multiple properties and renting them out isn't a right. Having a house to live in should be. I’m not sure I’m reading this correctly. You believe it should be a human right to have a home to live in? Every person is just given a free home? Who would build all these homes in this utopia?

Education for everyone? And (basic) universal health care? What kind of utopial nonsense is that!

Re: Worst Roommate Ever

#150

Post by vanderZwan »

nwatson wrote: post #21
danielvf wrote: post #12

The author of ZeroMQ wrote a book on recognizing people like this, and more importantly how to get yourself out of prison they’ve put you in. The action plans have helped me. The lucky ones in the NYmag article here did many of the things he recommends. Free PDF here, look for the hard to find “read” button. https://www.gitbook.com/book/hintjens/psychopathcode/details

Thanks for the pointer to the book, quite interesting so far. The author talks of psychopathy as an "adaptation" and not a "brokenness" in an individual ... but the adaptation so far mentioned is only in the sense of "the relatively small number of psychopaths is adapted to prey on other humans". I suppose that having too many psychopaths would render human trust very frail and would make a society prone to failure (…

> EDIT: actually, there's the brilliant Marlon Brando speech in Apocalypse Now (https://simonamooon.deviantart.com/journal/Apocalypse-Now-Ho...), where he describes bastards with empathy, people who love their families yet are able to perform the unthinkable atrocities [on their family] to win. So these folks are the opposite of psychopaths -- they do terrible things when necessary and doubtless feel the anguish of it.

Psychopathy is not the reason behind this scenario. It is in fact a polar opposite of it: in this context, doing horrible things is motivated by belief in a greater good. That is also the problem with Milgram's famous shock experiments: in his own explanation he completely ignored the part where the people willing to apply possibly lethal shocks to people where those goaded into believing it was for the greater good of mankind (that is, they were told the experiment was necessary for a better scientific understanding of the human mind).

I suspect you have very secular Western view of the world. You may want to have a look into Scott Atran's work, who dives deeper into this. This RSA lecture[0] is a fine place to start.

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ijmBd69878

Post reply on HN