Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login
I bought 300 emoji domain names from Kazakhstan and built an email service (tinyprojects.dev)
1683 points by tinyprojects 40 days ago | hide | past | favorite | 612 comments

I'm genuinely impressed by the author's willingness to come up with such a silly idea, go through with it, implement a completely barebones website that won't even let you send emails from the addresses and starts selling subscriptions for $10/year.

I'm not being snarky, I'm genuinely impressed. If it were me I'd spend 2 years mulling about it and never actually do it because I'd be worried about not managing to make it work correctly.

I'll take "things you can do when you're single"... can't quite imagine sidling up to significant other with the gambit "Darling, would you mind terribly if I spent £1000 on Kazakhstani emoji domains?"

I'll never understand this, but I see it all the time. People should have shared money, and they should also have their own money. Does my wife like it when I buy myself expensive toys? I have no idea, it's irrelevant unless I stop covering the bills.

It's for family budgeting and trust. We generally ask/inform if we are going to spend more than $100 on any given project/item. This helps both of us realize if it's a need or want. That way if I mention I'm going to get a new video game, I'll be stopped if its the third one in a month. Or if she wants new luggage, is it because it is needed or is it desired because it's a new color that is available.

You might make enough money to not really need this kind of consent. That's great if you do. For us, it is just a small check to help us get to our goals.

Our solution was to sit down and decide what amount and cadence of "fun money" we can safely allocate to ourselves, and we can save or spend that individually.

In our case we have very different spending habits - I love to get a fairly regular coffee-shop latte & croissant, or fancy restaurant meals with friends, and similar things that savings gurus tell you will prevent you from ever retiring (my spouse's point of view).

My partner likes to spend way too much (imo) on "toys" once or twice a year.

We spent way too much time being obnoxiously judgemental at each other before we did the math and discovered each spending pattern works out almost exactly the same in aggregate over a year or two. Now we just set that aside and there's no judging because we know that the amount spent averages out to under what we decided was reasonable.

We do the same, but in reverse: we roughly figured out what we need for shared spending, and have both set up automatic transfers into our shared checking account from which those expenses are paid. Everything that remains can be spent at will without having to consult the other.

Edit: No kids though.

Yup, the same here down to the no kids. The tricky bit is deciding on what counts as 'shared spending' — my partner is insistent that it should cover necessary bills only, I think it should cater for almost everything we share including meals out, for example.

I'd love to hear more details on how you are defining 'shared spending'. I've seen my parents have major conflict over control of spending and this shared account idea is very appealing to me, when I need it.

What do you want it to mean? There's no right or wrong answer but there's basically four fairly common ways to do it across the spectrum: 1) two individual accounts only and you pay everything separately; 2) joint account is for truly joint bills only - think mortgage yes, car payment no; 3) joint account is for "family" expenses - mortgage, cars, groceries regardless of who will eat them, etc.; 4) one joint account only and 100% of spending comes out of there.

#4 seems very common for my parents' generation (in their 60s). #1 seems like a logistical headache for something like a mortgage.

My ex-wife and I basically followed #2. This works fine for a lot of people. It worked fine for us until it didn't - unrelated to the OP, but if your spouse runs up a shitload of CC debt while you're married, you're responsible for half of it. If she cashes in a 401(k) and uses the entire proceeds to pay off said debt, you're responsible for half the taxes.

My current SO and I have discussed merging accounts will probably do something closer to #3 - each of us putting in somewhere between 50-75% of our income into a joint account, and the rest is personal money. But the joint account is for everything. Obviously joint stuff yes but basically anything that isn't 100% individual will come out of that account.

So, as mentioned, right now it's just essentials: mortgage and house bills really. Everything else we pay for individually — our own mobile bills, etc. We tend to alternate on things like meals out.

Yep, my wife and I each have separate checking accounts that are basically our own allowances, set up with an automatic recurring transfer every month. We're fortunate enough to have enough financial security to do this.

My wife and I do the same thing. 99% of the time the answer from the other is "Yeah go for it, I don't care". But there has been occasions where one, usually my wife, says "we might want to wait on that" or something to that effect. It's worked for us for 20+ years.

I like that approach

Not being snarky: What's the alternative? Like, what would happen if you didn't do that?

I ask because my wife and I spend money however we like, and I think it'd be quite strange if she checked in with me before spending $150. Is there some useful context or previous over-spending that you're solving, or is it something you'd recommend for everyone?

People generally treat their partners like pets or property where they gain agency over each other’s wallets and body.

I could careless what my partner spends his or her money on or even whom they decide to sleep with. We treat each other as equals to make their own decisions together or apart.

If you’re with an irresponsible person then you either break off the relationship or agree to suffer with the consequences of their actions.

It works surprisingly well. Others should try it.

> even whom they decide to sleep with

I do not expect this to be popular.

There are many forms of consensual non-monogamy, including polyamory and others. I don’t know exactly how common, but I’ve heard 5%.

I doubt I’m the only one a bit surprised by this post.

Do you live with your partner? How do you split shared or somewhat-shared expenses? Are your incomes equal? Who has the role of managing expenses? If you go out to dinner, who pays? What if you share a dessert? (.. etc - you get my point.)

I hope you’re willing to expand given your enthusiasm for your lifestyle, but more context will help.

I’m not the parent commenter, but, the same thing comes up with friends and housemates. Even married couples who are otherwise “traditional” sometimes keep their finances separate. You each pay rent. If you go on a trip together or buy something for the house, you split the costs. The shared expenses are the easy conversations. If anything, sharing all money obfuscates the harder ones.

Exactly this.

We have our own personal accounts and then one shared joint account for things we decide to buy together.

When we buy property, we buy it together or if one chooses to buy it alone that’s OK as well.

We also have a loose relationship document that we have created and regularly review to discuss things important to us.

- death - children - retirement - house chores - parenting - sex - commitments

Whatever style of relationship model you have overcommunication and active listening are extremely important especially as it deals with ones feelings, needs and fears.

ALWAYS handle tough conversations the same day (preferably) or week to avoid spiraling negativity and resentment.

Spending habits become exponentially more important the less money you make. If you make $125k as a software developer in a MCOL area you can basically spend whatever you want and if you're not downright reckless you're going to be fine.

If you're a couple whose combined income is $50k, spending is important and you simply can't afford to have your partner blow $80 on something because that could cause you to miss a bill, incur late/NSF fees, etc. My parents are elderly now and there's certainly a generational aspect as well but they made very little when I was growing up and they both knew every dollar that left the checking account. I make good money in tech and my SO is a physician so we just need to decide what portion of our income is allocated to joint expenses and the rest will work itself out. There's ways to optimize it of course but an NSF fee from the bank or a $30 late fee from Comcast is not really a concern for us the way they were both very real concerns for my parents.

No, there are no consequences for not telling, at most we would be a little disappointed. This doesn't happen that often. Maybe once a month or so, and it's always "Hey I'm gonna by X for Y." "OK". Then we are a little less shocked when we see a $130 charge show up on our statement.

We do have saving goals, like for a house, paying off bills, etc. We aren't wealthy people my any measure either, so every bit counts.

Life is just different for us that don't make as much money and are trying to get ahead.

Maybe 100 bucks mean to him far more than 150 bucks mean to you, or 15k to Elon Musk, or 15 to someone struggling to escape homelessness.

This is also how my wife and I approach our money. We don't stop each other from having fun but we're aware of any big spending before it happens.

Bills. And retirement savings. And college savings for the kids. Oh yeah, saving for the new stove.

I give myself $50/mo to spend on whatever I want. Anything else I mention it to my wife. Oh, and if it takes space in the house I mention it too.

When your family has limited resources and needs to prioritise it's frustrating when somebody chooses to use those resources on frivolity.

You can still have personal budgets, even if they are very small. Heck, when things are tight, even having 10 Euro personal "fun money" a month for each partner can give a bit of freedom.

For sure, but the original article and the comment I replied to are talking about relatively expensive spends.

1200$, which were not squandered but invested.

You should do something about your financial situation if that seems like a lot of money to you.

Edit: how is it controversial that if you are poor, you should try to do something about it? To claim it is impossible to escape poverty is madness (unless you are sick or handicapped). Obviously the only way to escape is if you do something about it.

Even if you just earn 5$ per hour, you can try to save something. 1000$ would be 200 hours, not impossible. A better strategy would be to try to find a job that pays better, though.

"Stop being poor"

That's how what you are saying sounds like.

EDIT: Even when you aren't poor, blowing 1K on a crazy project that might or might not pay off is something that a lot of couples would discuss first.

> To claim it is impossible to escape poverty is madness

This is an offensively wrong statement and suggests an extremely privileged and out-of-touch upbringing. There are numerous - hundreds - of articles explaining in-depth why it's very expensive to be poor in the US.

> Even if you just earn 5$ per hour, you can try to save something. 1000$ would be 200 hours, not impossible.

It really sounds like you're suggesting that someone in poverty should be willing to work for below minimum wage for 200 hours (5 weeks of full-time work) to save $1000 to "invest" on Kazakh emoji domain names? I would typically assume I'm misunderstanding someone since that's such an incredibly asinine comment, but given the first half of the comment I have to wonder if that's what you actually mean.

"This is an offensively wrong statement and suggests an extremely privileged and out-of-touch upbringing. There are numerous - hundreds - of articles explaining in-depth why it's very expensive to be poor in the US."

Nobody says it is not "expensive to be poor". But it is idiotic to claim it is impossible to escape poverty. Billions of people have done so in the last century.

"It really sounds like you're suggesting that someone in poverty should be willing to work for below minimum wage for 200 hours (5 weeks of full-time work) to save $1000 to "invest" on Kazakh emoji domain names? I would typically assume I'm misunderstanding someone since that's such an incredibly asinine comment, but given the first half of the comment I have to wonder if that's what you actually mean."

No, your interpretation is asinine. However, if you believe "emoji domains" or whatever have a shot at becoming a viable business, doing that is an option. Personally I would suggest trying to find a better paying job first. But if you can't, what would you suggest? Vote Democrat and hope for a minimum wage law, which will then make you lose your job?

Obviously, if you don't believe in the emoji business, don't invest in it. Find something else to invest in.



I've never been that poor, but I've had limited funds in the past, and I can say that having even a small amount of money that you're psychologically comfortable spending on anything is a massive relief. Sometimes the best thing you can do in a situation largely out of your control is to consciously take back any amount of control you can, even if it ends up being more symbolic than anything.

GP mentioned a situation where money is tight.

I’m glad you’ve never been in a place where 10 Euro fun money felt like a bit of a luxury.

I don't know where you lived but I've been there and 10EUR doesn't make you feel free.

It's an amount lower than the volatility of basic life (running out of toilet paper...). You would have to save five months to buy a jeans.

10EUR remaining on your bank account is precisely the amount that makes you feel insecure and poor.

Either you live in a very poor country, either you have no idea what you're talking about and are just condescending.

You must be mis-understanding me. I am implying that the basic necessities are covered by the common budget.

10 Euro buys you a coffee in a nice cafe a couple times a month. When you're poor, that's something!

"a bit of freedom" is the quote that you're arguing about.

That goes a lot further in eastern europe than you might think!

This is a topic we covered in pre-marital counseling. The exact approach you pick matters less than making sure you both agree on it. My wife and I share all of our money and agree on big expenses before they happen.

you must not have kids. If my wife and I have relatively large personal budgets to spend on ourselves, it would feel like we are denying our kids a nicer holiday or a nicer college education.

Unless of course you're rich enough to afford everything.

I guess this is a problem only in USA. In Europe, the education is inexpensive enough with government funding and some effort from the child(which eventually pays back). Holiday vacations are usually for the whole family or organized by the school so this is planned expense. And in my opinion most of the expensive "toys" are usually not good for the child, like giving a sever year old an iPad/iPhone. I prefer to go with toys that spark creativity which usually are less expensive. That is not to say I would not buy expensive toys, however I believe that they should be given as rewards for memorable achievements or and to teach them what investment is. However I do admit that during the first five years the expenses for a child are huge, because most things have very short utilization lifespan - strollers, clothes, furniture, toys etc.

Instead of shared money with personal allowances, which works in constricting manner, we have shared goals approach to which we contribute whenever and however we can, which works in contributing manner. And we try to keep our budget aligned with our forecast for the goal or we reevaluate the forecast in case of unforeseen circumstances like the COVID pandemic. Of course we don't hit all of our targets but with time we get better at evaluating. Also any unspent money from a missed goal start as base for another goal.

Way to miss the point. The examples I gave are just illustrations and not restricted to the USA. In simple terms: if you make a "selfish" purchase there is always an opportunity cost in terms of money not spent on loved ones. I don't see how parents can justify having a large personal budget unless their total budget is millionaire-level large. Have nicer and/or more frequent holidays instead, or get a larger house in a nicer neighborhood, hire a nanny perhaps.

"there is always an opportunity cost in terms of money not spent on loved ones" seems to me that by that logic you don't "love" yourself and you put very little value to yourself and that you only serve your loved ones. Everything that I purchase and that brings me happiness in term usually makes the people around me that love me also happy. Either by improving my mood and so improving my social interaction with them or simply because they care about me. And most of the things that I can and will buy for myself are transiently valuable to them as well. I buy an Omega watch -> someday I will leave that watch to my kid hopefully with a good story and a loving memory. I get a gaming PC/console -> I get to spend time with my kid playing a game. I build a utility room into my garage -> I get to teach my kid how to build/fix something. I buy a telescope -> I can spend time showing them the stars/galaxies etc. I do not buy something like that when there are more pressing matters at hand. However if we are meeting our common goals the money that we earned are for us to spend in whatever way we want, including giving presents for each other(even in the form of money). The freedom to care for ourselves improves our care for each other.

Where by large you mean 1000$? Why would you have to be a millionaire to be able to afford that? What exactly do you plan to buy for your kids?

Expensive holidays are not automatically better, by the way. You don't need a luxury hotel abroad, maybe kids would actually have more fun going camping.

Also everybody seems to be missing the point that those 1200$ from the article where a business expense, not a "selfish purchase" as such.

I have a one year old, and I grew up poor. We still don't have a lot. But at some point you don't have a money management issue, you have an income issue.

It's very specific to each couple. My wife and I both trust each other and consult each other on big purchases. We also trust each other not to be controlling and judgmental. We have no need for separation of money. Not everyone can do this and that's also fine.

I disagree on initial premise of having shared money...

On the one hand, I'm single and if I wanted to I could also blow a few grand on emoji domains for an experiment, then I could. On the other, I'd be taking a few grand from my savings for my mortgage deposit.

This isn't about relationship status, the author of this post just has money to burn.

And even if the author expected to get their money back through paid sales...they're on the hook for those accounts now unless he personally writes it off.


> 1000$ is not a lot of money

For a lot of people in the world, it's a tremendous amount of money. Congrats on being someone without that concern.

> Stop making excuses.

Take that up with the person you've imagined you're talking to.

We are talking about people with internet access, not some rural farmers in the third world.

Nobody says those rural farmers should embark on an emoji project.

Here in the United States, there's well-publicized research into how hard many families would have to work to come up with the money to cover an unexpected $400 expense.


I didn't see anything about how much they would have to work, just what percentage would have trouble coming up with the money on short notice. It doesn't even imply they are poor, they could simply put all their money into their mortgage every month.

$1000 a month is a good developer salary in lots of third-world countries, and that's not even entry level jobs. Hardly a bunch of rural farmers.

> For a lot of people in the world, it's a tremendous amount of money.

And for a lot of people it is a pocket change.

> Congrats on being someone without that concern.

> Take that up with the person you've imagined you're talking to.

Gee, someone being able to afford something really crawls under your skin.

> 1000$ is not a lot of money

Yes, it is.

I can't imagine spending $1000 on a fun thing or a joke and I'm single.

I run a corporate data science department and my wife has a more respectable job and we still couldn't imagine spending that kind of money on a joke.

Could you elaborate? I'd really like to understand why you don't have any spare money, despite of two good earners in the household?

"A joke" is also incorrect, the guy is trying to make money. Nevertheless, if you reframe it as "for fun", vacations presumably should count. I rather doubt you would be unable or unwilling to spend 1000$ on a vacation?

Nobody says that everybody should be willing to spend money on an emoji email project. That just happens to be that person's interest, so they spent money on it. Don't you have any interests at all that cost money? I personally wouldn't spend 1000$ on many things that other people spend it for, but that is not the same as not being able to afford it.

$1000 is less than 1% of the money I have in savings sitting in the bank. After all my expenses this month I better have more than $1000 left over when I get paid or somethings gone horribly wrong!


I still wouldn't spend $1000 on anything outside of essentials without having a really good reason. I'm not spending $1000 on a holiday, that seems mental to me but then I'm not big into traveling.

I like gaming but I can't bring myself to spend the $2-3k or whatever it would be to get a good gaming PC. SO I have a PS4 and I mostly get games on sale or "free" via PS+.

Hell, I'm even considering whether or not I want to spend <$1000 on a PS5 if they are ever available for sale again... The PS4 is fine and I don't really need it so it feels like too much money to spend on something I don't really need. I can definitely live without it.

I just feel $1000 is a LOT of money. There's an amount of money that is a lot and an amount of money that I don't consider a lot. I think that break off is actually around $400. More than that trips a mental switch for me.

Sounds like you might also be starving yourself and your family for no reason? If you have > $100k in the bank, and presumably a much larger multiple of that in investments and other assets - why not spend $1k sometimes on something that you could enjoy or that (in this case) could earn you more money?

Maybe "not a lot of money" was a bit misleading. It really depends on what you want to achieve. I agree that it feels like a lot of money for spending it on a gaming PC (I have the same debate with myself). But since you are a head of something, you probably know how much it costs to hire people to get anything done. So 1000$ does not seem like a lot for investing in a project, for example - even if you don't pay any money for anything, you'll rake up 1000$ in opportunity costs quickly.

If you want to achieve anything, you'll need a lot more than 1000$, so in relation to that 1000$ seems little. And I don't just mean for projects, but in general, if you want to change things in your life (get an education, have kids, whatever).

And it also is not a lot in terms of how much money people need and earn. I think most people will spend more than 1000$ on rent, food clothing and so on every month. Especially if you have children.

I wouldn't spend 1000$ every day just like that, but I would spend it for special occasions (like going on holidays).

He spent it on a project that would potentially earn him more money.

Perhaps that you can not understand it is part of the reason why you can't afford it.

> 1000$ is not a lot of money.

If you're wealthy, sure. Being one of the Americans that can handle a $400 surprise expense doesn't mean you can casually handle a $1000 joke.

But it's not simply $1,000. It's a $1,000/year commitment.

It's also not simply $1,000/year. The article claims they spent weeks on it. That could be anywhere from $500 to $50k in unspecified labor, whether that's simply opportunity cost or the estimated value of your nights and weekends, for an unspecified duration.

Maybe there was no meaningful opportunity cost, maybe this person is well off enough they don't really have to make hard choices or worry about where they will live if their $50k idea is a total loss.

It's not a joke, he is trying to make money. If it doesn't work out, he can cancel it after a year, or only keep the most successful domain names.

As you said, it is nothing compared to opportunity costs. The person from the article seems to also have a day job, though, so they won't end up on the street if the project fails.

Why can't you handle 400$? I have many times been in the situation where an extra 400$ would have been painful. But it was a temporary situation. It doesn't imply 1000$ is a lot of money to spend on a project.

You also have opportunity costs by staying in your current job and not trying new things.

That depends a lot on your privilege level. Yours is apparently extremely high.


I feel mostly angry when I read the comment I'm replying to. There's simply too many people not able to spare $1000 who are not in a position to change that, for reasons outside their control. Although people posting such comments are likely not listening to reason anyway, I feel something needs to be said.

I'm now curious where your question comes from, though. Note that I'm aware of the "virtue signalling" narrative. But better that than blaming people for their poverty.

Sure, but we could have neither and be happy :)

"many people not able to spare $1000 who are not in a position to change that, for reasons outside their control"

What would be reasons they couldn't change that? I am genuinely curious? Not counting being too sick to work (of course such cases exists, but it would be silly to cite them).

Frankly you getting angry makes me suspect you want such people to exist, to fuel your feeling of virtue and social justice superiority.

Why do you think adding "genuinely curious" allows you to insinuate all kinds of things?

What do you mean? I see you have no answer to my question, though.

What are your monthly costs of living? Where do you get your money from?

I would expect 1000$ is a common cost of living for a month, so that would be "one month of living expenses".

If you can live for less money, perhaps it is you who is privileged.

It's a time thing also "Sweetie, I don't want to go to your parents for dinner b/c I'm building <insert silly fun project here>"

I feel like he could've got it going with 5 or 10 emoji and spent a lot less. Also impressed with his commercial.

I thought about that but I think the main advantage of doing it this way is to corner the market somewhat. You get all the "good" ones and make it harder for anybody to clone your idea.

Personally, if my partner dropped £1000 on something goofy like this, and all bills were paid, I'd probably cheer them on. There's nothing wrong with spending money on something that's got no purpose other than making people smile/laugh/what have you.

I genuinely wish more people saw life this way.

I hear so many people mull over money in finance forums, constantly saving every penny that is possible. If you go to finance forums of reddit or Dave Ramsey cult stuff you will even hear people brag about how they have more than a whole retirement's worth saved up yet continue to save and penny pinch. Why? It is ok to buy something because it makes you happy. Not everything needs a complicated pro/con list, a 30 day waiting period, and signed off approval from your partner.

It is one thing if you can't pay your bills. You should definitely pay those first. And of course put money towards savings and retirement each month. But don't stock all of your money away. You could die before using any of it.

I enjoy cycling. Road cycling and mountain biking. Anyone else who is in the sport knows that it gets expensive. Decent full suspension mountain bikes don't even start until about $3,000 nowadays. Mid-tier mountain bikes are priced around $5,000 - 6,000. A lot of people ask why I would spend that kind of money on a bike. "I could buy an old car for that" they often say. Great, then you go buy an old Honda civic, I don't really care that I "could" do that. I don't want an old car, I already have a good car. I want a nice mountain bike. I ride it 3-4 times a week and it makes me happy. Happier than watching Netflix, happier than playing a video game, happier than hiking. It makes me happy and if I can afford it, then I should reward myself. That is what life is all about.

If you enjoy cooking, go buy yourself some expensive ingredients to spoil yourself. If you love movies, treat yourself to some movies at the theaters.

Money management is like healthy eating. Eating too much is very bad for you, just like spending too much. But you can also over-correct with spending. Spending too little is just like eating too little, you can sometimes hurt yourself going the other way. I know people who take the financial FIRE principle too far. They stress about money that I know they can afford. They stress about going out to dinner one night a month because they only have $50 a month in their budget for eating out and now they are going to spend $70 this month. Why? Enjoy the fucking meal. Life is far too short. It's ok to spend money just for the enjoyment that it buys you. Your mental health will thank you.

I find the whole FIRE thing a little odd. Why would you spend your entire life on a short budget just to 'retire early'. Besides, how enjoyable is that retirement if you're constantly fighting to pinch every penny you can.

But why would you do that? I mean if that's you money, why would you ask your partner? I'm pretty frugal, don't spend on stupid things easily (well, things that I find stupid, at least), but if I had a business idea or even a fun project I don't think I'd need permission from my partner to spend my own money on it. Discussing it is a different story, of course.

Maybe in a “partnership” you don’t need to ask a “partner”.

But in marriage you don’t have “your money” - you are both on the same team, so all money are shared. If you spend $1000 on something random, that sets your team, your family, back of its common goals - house down payment, vacation, etc.

I am in a long marriage,we each have our own money and joint account money. We are both in the same team and can spend our own money. Each person has the same percentage of take-home to spend as an individual.

Work for us, may not work for others.

This is just you having "extra" money. I guess it's a demographic thing but do you (and everyone else) not understand that over 50% of people (in the US at least) don't have "extra" money. The money they make is already allocated before it's made, any sort of "extra" spending goes on a credit card or forces some other payment to be not made on time, often incurring fees. In some cases that money would deplete a small savings balance.

This is pre-covid numbers but 69% of Americans have less than $1000 in savings. 45% have no savings, and roughly 30% spend more than they make each month, accumulating and juggling credit card balances / short term loans.

I'm from a poor area in the US and most people have $0 "extra" money. As an example my high school 10 year reunion was a few years ago and the target goal was $20. Even with a year's notice most people said that would be too expensive and they wouldn't have it. ($40 per couple).

We had multiple fundraisers to try and get everyone to participate. The fundraisers were everyone buying extra chicken wings with their food stamp cards and giving it to a local restaurant that cooks them and sells fundraiser plates and a car wash sponsored by the bowling alley that gives a free game to anyone who gets a $5 car wash.

How long can you continue to spend more each month than you make?

I don't fully trust that story. Maybe many of the people who have "no savings" have a mortgage to pay off? Technically they have a debt and all spare money goes to the bank, but really they own a house that is worth more than the debt?

In such cases I'd say it is more of a mindset issue.

Wasn't all of this caused by people not knowing how to manage money rather than not being able to save?

I don't get the quotes. Not sure whether you're mocking or hinting at my use of the word partner as being incorrect in this context or you are downplaying the seriousness of (romantic) relationships outside of marriage. Well, if it's the first, indeed there is the name of such "partnerships" it's officially called a domestic partnership and legally not very different from marriage in most secular states in the western societies.

If it's the second one, it may come as a surprise, but you you don't have to go to the church, even in front of a state representative or throw a big party to start and maintain a normal, pair bond based relationship or even a family.

And I'm pretty sure that most people who end up marrying, start with such "partnerships" and only "upgrade" when they feel that it "works". Which also means that they'll set most of the rules before the act of marrying. It's only a guess, but it wouldn't make sense to make too big changes compared to what you have tried, what worked and what you've probably grown to like. I'd also guess that it's the same with money things. At least it should be, because it's said to be one of the few that can cause serious disagreements between partners.

Anyway, to put it short: different people require and like to maintain different level of independence (or the illusion of it, doesn't matter). Also, $1000 can be a large sum for one family and a smaller one for the other, so it's actually pretty hard to even gauge your opinion. E.g. I live in Eastern Europe, work as a software consultant and while $1000 is about the average monthly salary it's just a fraction of mine and my partner would never see it as a setback if I spent that amount on myself because I just felt like.

Of course, if we have common goals then you should not endanger those without discussing, but I wouldn't like to be in a situation where basically 100% of my earnings are accounted towards a common goal. That's just too much stress. Then you either making too little (which is very stressful) or have very stretched goals. And while it sounds almost the same, the difference is that in the second case you do have a choice to make. And it's better to choose a more relaxed set of goals and life. Maybe that 2 stories house in the suburbs or that 2nd car, etc. isn't worth it to have to beg your partner to blow $300 on a more expensive laptop. Or even just to have that thought in the back of your mind.

Agreed. But as somebody mentioned above: It's good to maintain a (small) personal budget for each partner that they can spend as they please.

It's a matter of trust; my wife and I don't sweat the small stuff, but if we're spending more than £100 on something, we'll probably discuss it first - that doesn't mean she gets to say no to the top of the range MacBook Pro, just that she knows what's going on.

Which is basically the same what I've said and fundamentally different from what the GP hinted at.

I think it's pretty common that when people get married it becomes our money instead of my and your money.

And we can buy emoji domain names.

I don't know how common it is. I'd guess it's at least also pretty common that it doesn't. But the GP didn't even talk about a formal/legal marriage (if that makes a difference in your reasoning). They said significant other.

I guess software dev can afford to blow 1000$/year on silly side projects. Especially seeing how he got back significant portion of his expenditure. Being single or not has nothing to do with that? It sure seems fair to agree on spending policy with your significant other beforehand, but other than that...

I keep expecting this to tie back to a Borat sequel.

A common wallet with a SO freaks me out :)

You don't have to go all-in, but a common wallet is very useful as a wash account for common expenses.

Having an account just for expenses, with no overdraft, that's usually at $0.00 balance is useful for other purposes too (ACH pull is dangerous! Especially when everyone who has ever looked at your check can do it)

The day I have to ask my significant other how to spend money I earn is the day I will quit that relationship. I get that some couples throw everything on a pile and go a pseudo-democratic way of spending things, but I have never understood this meme of males telling all the world that they have to ask their wives for permission to spend money. We're in the 21st century now. She is supposed to not be dependant on him, and the same should apply in reverse.

It was kinda like that in 2013 when I suggested btc mining to my wife to cover the costs of the electric heat in our new house. And here we still are...

Hope you learned your lesson, buddy.

There's several lessons in there and I learned them all really well.

can't quite imagine sidling up to significant other with the gambit "Darling, would you mind terribly if I spent £1000 on Kazakhstani emoji domains?"

There's a PSA running on Australian radio these days that says if your spouse doesn't let you control your own money, that's a form of abuse. There's even a hotline to report that you're being abused.

(Heard it on 2GB/Sydney last week.)

Find yourself a partner who will share in your enthusiasm.

From the looks of the author’s website, he very carefully time boxes his projects and weighs the expense and revenue generation. This is very different from spending a grand on something with unbounded time costs and no tangible return, like buying a boat.

I've come to believe that there's a certain amount of insanity required to be a great entrepreneur. Like Jobs or Musk--their personal qualities aside, they both had arguably legitimately insane visions that they refused to let people talk them out of.

The side effect is they're also crazy in other ways (Musk-time and the billionaire-playboy-cyrptocoin-gambler being easy examples), but I think it really does take someone who operates with a totally different set of constraints on the world to pull Really Cool Stuff off. Like reusable rockets. Or electric performance cars. Or an incredibly versatile computer that fits in your pocket (while also giving the middle finger to Flash, the incumbent web media tech at the time).

Steve Job didn’t invent the smartphone and Elon Musk didn’t invent the electric car, they did both make those things cool.

Steve Jobs also had a treatable form of pancreatic cancer and died from it, because he refused traditional medicine.

You can point to countless inventions and advances in humanity that are not due to crazy asshole geniuses. What happens to people is that the better you are at something, the more willing they are to forgive your flaws. This allows those flaws to grow and grow, to the point where you’re accusing random people that insult you of being pedophiles. But these flaws are not a requisite part of being driven and not giving up.

There are way more insane people in mental institutions than insane billionaires.

Hmmm, I wonder if the ratio of "insane billionaires : insane people in mental institutions" correlates to the ratio of "sane billionaires : sane people (presumably not in mental institutions)"?

Are you more or less likely too be a billionaire if you're insane?

(Is there even such a thing as a "sane billionaire"?)

It depends on how we define "sane", doesn't it?

If we just mean "not evidently delusional or psychotic", then probably a billionaire is no less likely to be sane than anyone - probably if anything more so, one power of money being that of reliable access to medical care.

If we instead by 'sane' mean "firmly grounded and operating within consensus reality", as I once heard the term defined, then I think the question becomes considerably more interesting. (Whose consensus?)

Classic correlation / causation bias

I once registered 60 domains just to reproduce bitsquatting.

Do you also ask your wife when you have to use a toilet?

Does it cost $1000?

I took a poll with a kid who said they thought an emoji email domain wasn’t smart. Up until that point, I’d been sold on it also.

There's a big downside to using .kz in that the registry has a policy (as per https://nic.kz/rules/) that .kz hostnames must relate to "Internet resources" located on hardware and software located within the territory of Kazakhstan.

I think the OP is OK as it appears the IP addresses of both the A and MX records are located within Kazakhstan, but something to be aware of if you think registering a .kz is a fun idea(!) :-)

This is something to keep in mind with all TLDs really. They're not all created equal and can be subject to rules specific to their operators. Have to do your homework before you buy that cute domain.

Like how many UK businesses and individuals had to give up their .eu domain name after leaving the EU.

I'm really surprised they didn't do the logical thing and grandfather all existing domains in when the UK left the EU.

It seems like the policy was simply designed to frustrate as many people as possible for no real gain for the EU.

The EU continues to control .eu because it is available only to EU citizens. Nothing changed.

Your surprise exactly reflects the typical beliefs of a Brexit supporter, you thought the idea is you get to keep all the benefits you had before, and also you get rid of any downsides you didn't like, and somehow it's the EU's job to help you achieve this after you leave.

That didn't make any sense in 2016, and it still didn't make any sense in 2020, and so unsurprisingly here we are in 2021 and it isn't what happened. "We told you so" is boring but it's true. We told you so.

It might make sense for certain Internet resources to be made available only to citizens of some political region. It might make sense to revoke access to such resources if an individual renounced their citizenship or loses it due to their own actions (like, say, treason). But it really doesn’t make much sense that I could lose access to an arbitrary Internet resource I legitimately possessed because of large-scale political changes unrelated to my actions as an individual.

> "After large-scale political changes I want there be no changes that might affect me personally."

.eu domain has certain registration requirements: - A Union citizen, independently of their place of residence. - A natural person who is not a Union citizen and who is a resident of a Member State. - An undertaking that is established in the Union. - An organization that is established in the Union, without prejudice to the application of national law.

Its completely normal for entities to stop servicing other entities after they aren´t in accordance of laws or rules.

Both forms of Internet naming semantics make sense to me. Unfortunately, we've never reached any consensus or understanding at all about which apply where, or how to tell. That leaves us in this kind of crummy middle ground where different TLDs do or don't assert things about their registrants, to a degree that can change over time, and there's not an easy way to check. (You could read the NIC web site, if it's up-to-date, if it's in a language you speak, and if its stated policies actually correspond to its practices...)

It's not surprising at all that people's intuitions about a particular TLD would diverge. But it's sad, because it means the Internet naming system isn't working well in terms of the function of letting users know what particular names mean.

It's not crazy to imagine either a TLD that says "despite any possible appearances to the contrary, this is a first-come-first-served namespace in which names have no extrinsic meaning at all" or a TLD that says "this TLD is owned by entity X, and subdomains, like subdomains of a corporate or governmental network, are only given to persons with an appropriate relationship with entity X, and only during the term of that relationship". (Maybe even a TLD that says "notionally this TLD is about topic or group Y, but our rules about what that means are kind of idiosyncratic".) (But if there are TLDs in all these categories in the same DNS, both registrants and Internet users are probably going to be unsure which is which, as well as exactly what the TLDs in the third group "really" mean.)

But this policy doesn't make sense for the EU either. They lose domain registration revenue. Thousands companies migrating to a new domain name will lead to confusion for EU citizens too, etc.

It just seems like a case of "we want it to be as painful as possible for you, even if we have to take a bit of additional pain for us too".

And so it should be. The Brexit should be as painful as possible for the UK. The more the UK is reminded of what they gave up, and what they will be missing, the better, as it positions them better for reentry.

Who cares about domain registration revenue? The only reason it isn't free is because of the administrative hassle of distributing frivolous domain registrations.

If EU citizens are confused about UK companies disappearing, maybe they'll search and be exposed to EU competitors, how could that be a bad thing?

Fortunately most institutions of the EU are not as absurdly extremist as you are.

Preposterous isn't it?

Who hurt you?

The British?

Oh are you from .io originally? (TLD of British Indian Ocean Territory)

I mean, almost the whole point of the British is that they fucked over everybody. Americans, Chinese, Russians, Australians, Canadians, Indians, all have plenty to blame the British for.

Even a bunch of people who by rational assessment would count as British can reasonably say the British fucked them over because of a series of Tory policies, first destroying the paperwork which proves they came here by invitation (on the Empire Windrush and other ships), and then insisting that since they don't have that paperwork if they haven't already secured citizenship papers they were never authorised to be here and must be sent "home" - in some cases forcibly deported to countries they hadn't been to in more than half a century. See "Windrush scandal".

I was unaware that such thing happened, and I'm kind of surprised as it sounds like somewhat un-EU-ish to me, but I obviously had the wrong sense of what is EU-ish. And I wholeheartedly support that. I mean, it makes sense. If the domain policy of *.eu says that it is for *.eu-based people and organizations, and you leave the EU, why the fuck should you keep it?

If EU wanted to make more money on it, it would have made it available for everyone from the start. If it doesn't... well, it just means domain-selling is not the core EU-business. So it's exactly one of the 2: either Russian and Japanese companies should be allowed to own *.eu domain, or British ones shouldn't. And I don't honestly care which one is it. But it cannot be both at the same time.

So, no, it's not about hurting you, it's simply about the fact that the world doesn't revolve around you. As surprising as it may sound.

They maintain sovereignty though. That’s more important than domain registration revenue.

If I somehow owned tax.gov, and was running a tax prep service from it, I doubt the “I’m grandfathered” argument would fly.

It’s likely similar to lawyers.eu (I made that domain up), etc; people should be able to expect that to be an EU based service, not something overseas.

> They lose domain registration revenue.

But in the other scenario, they now have to deal with support queries ("why can they have a .eu when I can't?"), possibly legal action ("why can they have a .eu when I can't?"), etc.

A British business suing the EU in an EU court about a contract that explicitly says for EU members? Wouldn't go far.

> about a contract that explicitly says for EU members

...which would have some British businesses grandfathered in and therefore have a loophole that some enterprising lawyer can no doubt make a great deal of hay with.

> They lose domain registration revenue.

I think only micronations have a significant revenue coming from tlds (e.g. Tuvalu)

.EU has a functional purpose, and to grandfather in those names would lead to disruption of the functional meaning.

Think of it as a UX reason rather than financial.

Sure it does:

1. The .eu TLD is supposed to signify that a business using it is part of the EU. That means EU consumers will know that EU regulations such as GDPR apply, they're unlikely to pay import/export taxes, etc. Allowing non-EU businesses to use it dilutes the purpose and value of the TLD.

2. The EU wants to avoid making freeloading look like a viable strategy. If Britain is able to leave the EU and still reap all the benefits of being an EU member, then what's the point of other nations staying in the EU? Domain names are obviously only a minor benefit of being in the EU but there's a reason this policy is being applied mostly across the board.

The idea is that (at least in theory) when someone has the .eu domain, then they are in EU.

There are many ways to skip it, but it blocks at least some.

That revenue is tiny compared to being able to say .eu domains for EU orgs and businesses.

The EU domain is available to EU residents and citizens, not just citizens. I as a British citizen and EU resident am entitled to one (not that I have bothered - someone got the one I wanted first :O )

I guess an EU citizen living in the UK could also hold them on behalf of UK based UK citizens. Thinking about it this situation does seem a little convoluted...

Harsh. But fair.

It could be a fraud prevention and accidental legal misrepresentation defense mechanism to take away the .eu domains from the UK. If you go to a .eu domain and buy something you would expect not to be subject to import duties etc.

.eu domain usage isn't that high, I don't think. I only have anecdata from my time in the UK, but .co.uk appears to be "the" domain to have in the UK.

From what I've seen the same is true on the continent. .fr and .de for example are highly popular in France and Germany. You rarely see local business reaching for .eu domains.

According to wikipedia, the number of affected domains is 344,584. Also compared to wiki there are 11M .uk domains and 16.5M .de domains. According to EurID[0] there are 3.7M .eu domains

[0]: https://eurid.eu/en/welcome-to-eurid/statistics/

Just a matter of getting a TTP / Intermediary to hold the domain for you in the EU, same as for the local presence requirements in for example .no(rway) and many other TLD's.

It's just another $10-20/year and fixes your 'problem'

Many domain registrars will offer this service, as 90+% of their clients will need it for these ccTLD's.

The most fun TLD is .su Someone on IRC managed to register "kremvax.su" a few years ago and gave anyone in the channel who wanted them email addresses (so I briefly had swiley@kremvax.su for example.)

Unfortunately the were asked for some documentation they couldn't provide a few months later and it got shut down.

Notion is frequently blocked because notion.so is a Somalian domain. Not really sure what they were thinking there...

Which OP didn't do multiple times and got his purchased annulled. But hopefully in the future, heh.

> There's a big downside to using .kz in that the registry has a policy (as per https://nic.kz/rules/) that .kz hostnames must relate to "Internet resources" located on hardware and software located within the territory of Kazakhstan.

Any country TLD is a potential risk that most western "entrepreneurs" blissfully ignore.

Just a month ago notion.so had troubles with it's domain because .so belongs to Somalia, and Somalia changed some rules around registration and ownership [1]

The same, really, goes for Tonga's http://dev.to, Libya's http://bit.ly or Greenland's http://goo.gl...

[1] https://twitter.com/EpsilonTheory/status/1360239738020634629

Some extensions require presence in the EU, eg .eu & .it [0]

IOW not available to citizens or companies in Europe, but not member of the EU eg. Bosnia and Herzegovina

[0] Who can register a .it domain? https://www.nic.it/en/find-your-it/faq

The registration of a domain name in the ccTLD .it is permitted only to persons who have citizenship, residence or a registered office in the countries of the European Economic Area (EEA), the Vatican, the Republic of San Marino, and Switzerland.

Although .gl isn't much of a risk, as Google has some presence in Denmark and relations to the country.

But you shouldn't use TLDs of countries with which you have no affiliation.

Aka why I mainly stick with .com

The issue it that a lot of .com are taken so for the sake of a personal email address it is not ideal.

The person that owns "belval.com" literally registered it before I was born so I settled for "belval.org", "belval.me", "belv.al" but only the first one is accepted by most company.

All 4-letter .com's were taken as of 2013.


I wonder how long until all 5- and 6- letter are gone.

Exactly, I too had to use .net & .us, because.com was registered in 1995.

My last name ends in al but the domain is taken. The .com one is taken by a guy who’s using it to showcase his Holocaust family tree (oddly enough his son had a run in with my sis a while back). I tried reaching out to him to see if he was interested in taking like .org but he’s not :( so I got .me

I offered $1k (there's nothing on belval.com) and belval.org to the owner of belval.com, he just replied to say "never contact me again" as if I was with the mob or something. It was a weird experience.

So weird. Why would you hold something without any plan to sell it, nor a thought towards using it?

I learned some countries have things like this after an article last month where someone traced an IP range used by palor or another organization like that to a country with similar rules, and filed a complaint with the company that leased it, who revoked the range. (Going from memory here, sorry if I'm getting things wrong).

Especially given Ive heard some of these TLDs are cheaper to encourage their use, people who want to run services on these should be careful even if enforcement is often lax or nonexistent until a complaint is filed.

Uh oh. How do I find rules for other domains? I went a little batty with the .de domain years ago and have quite a few. But, I'm not in Germany. While there is a mild ethical cringe at doing this, am I running afoul of some rules that might actually bite me later?

I find Gandi to have pretty thorough information on all TLDs they offer. The page for .de[1] lists one rule to keep in mind.

[1]: https://www.gandi.net/en-GB/domain/tld/de

In general, Wikipedia has some starting points for all ccTLDs, for example for .de here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.de

The information on Wikipedia itself is mostly descriptive, while the registry website or other external links should have the actual rules and restrictions.

I would recommend advertising that at https://www.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/

the people there are f'ing addicted to the rocktes emoji and dont care how much to pay to have it appear somewhere

I was actually just thinking that he should probably register the [diamond][hands].kk domain, there's got to be some demand for it given how much it gets spammed over there.

OP sort of deserves this. His little commercial there shows the diamond hands emoji but he never registered it

> The offical site for diamond hands

> Money printer go brrr. fuck them paper hands

Flawless. I couldn't have expected anything more from this site. It perfectly met my expectations.

that was quick

wrong emoji... this is it http://.kz

way ahead of you... OP was right, it was a pain to use that registrar.

Diamond hands appears to be taken everywhere listed by the mainstream emoji registration sites, sadly. It was a good idea


The customer's words echoed in his mind. 'robert at lightbulb emoji dot kz, but with a real lightbulb emoji.' The clerk had registered thousands, maybe tens of thousands of e-mails into the Nordstrom Rack Nordy Rewards program, and he had seen it all, but this, this was something entirely new. This wasn't the single letter username or the overly sexual address or the gmail address with the plus sign, all mildly interesting but within the bounds of what was possible. What was normal. What was sane. This was something entirely new. The point of sale workstation has no key for the lightbulb emoji. This was the predicament. But if an emoji can be an e-mail address, maybe some other part of the computer can be a keyboard. Maybe the floor can be a table. Maybe hands can be screwdrivers. The clerk began touching the screen. Pawing at the sides of the monitor. He began mumbling as he moved his attention to the receipt printer, ripping it open, 'there's gotta be an emoji button in here somewhere.' As his search intensified, so too did the stares of customers waiting in line. In a final effort the clerk hoisted the register above his head before smashing it on the ground, bringing himself down with the machine. Associates had pooled around their coworker and were urging calm. Emergency Services had been notified and were en route, and slowly the chaos turned to calm. An associate reached out to ask the customer if she could finish ringing him up on another register. 'Sure,' he replied, 'but this time let's just use my gmail address.'

By the way, we already have an "emoji button" on our keyboards: on Windows, it's the Win+. keystroke. Try it if your Windows 10 is updated enough.

That UI is hilarious (for a given value of hilarious) in the sense that the search for emojis uses whichever input language you're using, even if your UI language is something else.

So, for instance to find the light bulb emoji, I need to start typing "valo" (light in Finnish), which really threw me off at first.

The default Android keyboard has similar behaviour. I was learning Spanish so I switched my phone to Spanish then back in English at some point later. Yet the change never propagated to the keyboard for some reason so my emojis are still in Spanish.

eggplants in Spanish

la berenjena

I originally thought the typing didn't work at all, because the couple of times I tried pressing Win+. the emoji UI came up, and it said "Keep typing to find an emoji", but nothing happened when I typed.

Turns out the search only works when you have a text entry area selected elsewhere.

The iOS and I believe macOS emoji picker let’s you use any language to search for emojis. ハート brings up hearts for example.

But you have to switch to that language first.

For example on my iPhone if I type in Norwegian and jump to emoji then I can type “hjerte” and find the heart. But if I type “heart” then there are no results when the language is Norwegian. So if I want to search for emojis by English name, then I must first ensure that my keyboard is in English. And this is good I think, but wanted to point it out.

On my phone at least (latest iOS) it will search any installed keyboard languages.

A couple of alternatives for Linux users.


The kitty terminal emulator supports this out of the box (it also works on two other platforms):


Ctrl+Shift+U opens a Unicode input panel with fuzzy search by symbol code or name.

I use Compose key for this, surprised nobody mentioned it here yet. This way it works in all X11 apps (Sway supports this out of the box as well), with no need for extra software or some specific desktop environment.

Just put something like

  <Multi_key> <semicolon> <parenright>  : ""
  <Multi_key> <t> <u>                   : ""
  <Multi_key> <t> <d>                   : ""
in your ~/.XCompose.

Yes, you have to put all the emojis you want there manually, but I use very few of them so it works for me.

EDIT: HN removed the emojis from my snippet. The double quotes there contained smiling face, thumb up, and thumb down.

My n00buntu derivative has some emojis and other logograms out of the box, eg. lines 326–337 of /usr/share/X11/locale/en_US.UTF-8/Compose:

  <Multi_key> <C> <C> <C> <P>             : ""   U262D # HAMMER AND SICKLE
  <Multi_key> <O> <A>                     : "Ⓐ"   U24B6 # CIRCLED LATIN CAPITAL LETTER A
  <Multi_key> <less> <3>                  : "♥"   U2665 # BLACK HEART SUIT
  <Multi_key> <colon> <parenright>        : ""   U263A # WHITE SMILING FACE
  <Multi_key> <colon> <parenleft>         : ""   U2639 # WHITE FROWNING FACE
  <Multi_key> <backslash> <o> <slash>     : ""      # PERSON RAISING BOTH HANDS IN CELEBRATION
  <Multi_key> <p> <o> <o>                 : ""  U1F4A9 # PILE OF POO
  <Multi_key> <F> <U>                     : ""  U1F595 # REVERSED HAND WITH MIDDLE FINGER EXTENDED
  <Multi_key> <L> <L> <A> <P>             : ""  U1F596 # RAISED HAND WITH PART BETWEEN MIDDLE AND RING FINGERS
Unbutchered: http://ix.io/2SsC

Oh, those are in Debian, as a matter of fact!

https://github.com/kragen/XCompose for those who prefer a more methodical approach.

There's also https://github.com/salty-horse/ibus-uniemoji if you want something a little more interactive.

I wrote https://github.com/sphaerophoria/ibus-memebox for myself because I wasn't quite happy with the performance of any of the solutions I found.

And another character picker for Rofi:


GNOME has Ctrl+period.

KDE has one, too. Not sure what the default was, I remapped it to Super+Period

I use KDE and I've never tried it before. Win+. works!

Does it? I am in stock gnome and this shortcut isn't bound by default. What distro are you using?

I believe it has to be a GTK app - which almost none of the things I use on a daily basis are. Try in gedit or something like that.

My daily drivers are IntelliJ, Firefox, Chrome, and Terminator so it's not super useful to me... :'(

Check out this extension: https://extensions.gnome.org/extension/1162/emoji-selector/

It implements a system level emoji keyboard that you can trigger with <Super + e>. It works pretty great and on all apps, I use it a lot.

Oh wow, you are totally right, that does work in GTK apps. My daily drivers are about the same :(

It doesn't do anything for me. Can you point to a doc?

For other readers: emoji keyboard is ctrl + cmd + space on macOS.

On macOS I use Rocket [0]. It's not perfect but it's the best I've used and it does make finding the emoji you want pretty easy. You can add custom alias/shortcuts for the emojis and you can also use it to insert images/gifs from the searcher.

[0] https://matthewpalmer.net/rocket/

The globe button on newer Macs can be retasked to call up the emoji input panel (I guess any button could be before with custom keyboard shortcuts but now it's a simple dropdown in keyboard preferences.)

Holly mothballs. I didn't know this trick. Works in Slack as well.

Not always; that's app-specific, not a system-wide setting.

I think it is system-wide. At least I've not encountered any input field where it doesn't work. Even Microsoft Office, which uses its own input routines, supports it.

It's a shortcut to an Edit menu item within the application, so whatever shortcut the app gives it; e.g. in Firefox it appears to be simply Cmd-<space>.

But wait... that doesn't actually work (it just switches to the next input layout). Maybe that depends on my keyboard settings in System Preferences. Or maybe it's just a Firefox bug.

Cmd-space launches Spotlight. Ctrl-space switches the input layout. Ctrl-Cmd-Space launches the emoji viewer (even in Firefox...)

Not for me. (I suspect the details of this vary between system versions, and they certainly depend on settings chosen in System Preferences / Keyboard / Shortcuts.)

It's the standard behavior. If you do something to modify or override it of course it won't work, but that's like changing the keyboard to Dvorak and saying that pressing the g key gives an i instead so you can't count on getting a g when you press the g key.

It's standard for Cocoa-based apps, I think, but it doesn't appear among the system-wide shortcuts in System Preferences on my Big Sur system, at least. The only shortcuts offered under Input Sources there are to select the previous or next input source (which are set to Cmd-Space, Cmd-Opt-Space).

A command to open the Emoji & Symbols palette is generally at the end of each application's Edit menu, and that's where its shortcut appears. But in current Firefox the item in the Edit menu shows the shortcut as Cmd-Space (not Cmd-Ctl-Space), and it doesn't work for me because the system-wide shortcut takes precedence.

If I disable that shortcut in System Preferences (which may well be the default, particularly if multiple input methods are not enabled), then Cmd-Space does work in Firefox to bring up the Emoji palette -- but note that it's not the standard Cmd-Ctl-Space combination.

Works fine for me in latest Firefox. I've never had it not work in a specific app. Though, sometimes the keyboard crashes and doesn't come back up until a restart (that could be the fault of my Ryzen Hackintosh, though).

What exactly works in Firefox -- is it Command-Control-Space or just Command-Space?

Cmd + space brings up spotlight, as it always has. Cmd + ctrl + space brings up the emoji keyboard.

Perhaps you have some forgotten keybindings, because that's the case on every macOS device I own.

It doesn't work in every app sadly. Qt based apps for example

Hmm, I guess I've never used any Qt-based apps.

I use two now, Quassel which is an IRC client, and QtPass which is a password manager. Both are cross-platform which is great because I don't use just Mac. I use pretty much everything. Mac, Windows, Linux, FreeBSD.

That means most of the built-in facilities of the Mac (like iCloud Keychain) are no good for me. Because they only work on Apple OSes.

But anyway both these apps don't support this. When I press the keystroke, nothing happens. I suppose it only works for apps that use the native text input boxes, or that have built specific support for the feature like browsers.

In my password manager I can do without Emoji, though it allows for text comments and it would be handy there. In IRC it's quite handy to have the option these days.

Thanks, did not know this. In fact, learned both Win + plus (and discovered Win + minus along the way) as well as Win + dot :)

> Try it if your Windows 10 is updated enough

And if it's not, please go update your Windows. You should not be reading HN with out outdated operating system.

laughs in Windows 7

If your Windows isn't updated enough, grab AutoHotkey[0], and try this: [1]. It's a little "emoji keyboard" I wrote a few years ago, to insert most important emojis into team conversations. Globally binds itself to F2, and it's ergonomic. You press F2, then number, then CTRL+V (that last step could be automated too).

The script is easy to extend with new emojis, and also supports selecting alternatives based on which program you had focus on when invoking the keyboard - you can see it using Skype-specific notation for Skype.


[0] - https://www.autohotkey.com/ - it's the keyboard rebinding / advanced automation platform for Windows. Literally the first thing I install on a new Windows machine (mostly for rebinding Caps Lock to Ctrl).

[1] - https://gist.github.com/TeMPOraL/d330edccf8ba9a2b13d01b4e7f1...

On my work computer on Win10 it just opens up the magnifier :(

it's <winkey> AND <periodkey>. I tried <winkey> AND <pluskey> the first time too :)

There is an actual emoji button on new dell keyboards as well as a lock button. Not just a repurposed FN key but really a separate key with a smiley on it and one with a lock next to it. Both work without extra drivers in Windows 10.

Do you know if this key produces the regular shortcut for invoking the emoji input method in Windows, or if it has its own key code?

Not sure. And I only know how to figure that out in Linux but it's my windows work computer. Is there a windows method to see what key code the keyboard is sending?

Win+Period or Win+Semicolon

<-- Yes!

Edit: Alas, it does not work on HN. Pity.

Where does this work?

Literally everywhere. HN just strips out emojis from posts, because they're obnoxious.

Unless, apparently, you're trying to post your sweet new email address. Honest question: if this takes off, do you think HN will stop stripping them?

No. Because

1) it won't take off 2) punycode 3) other reasons

I use an email address that ends in .io and the amount of people that still ask me ".io? are you sure that's correct?" never ceases to amaze me.

Yeah. Try using wildcard email accounts together with a uncommon TLD, and people ask me if I work at their place all the time.

Last time I booked a car at Hertz:

> Me: My email is hertz@capableweb.work

> Agent: Woah, you work here at Hertz? That's so cool

> Me: sure, can you remind me of the employee discount again?

So many email validations fail with a uncommon gTLD that I started switching everything to a .com domain instead. Sometimes I even get rejected when my email address contains the company name... "Sorry, your email seems invalid" is all I get, but changing one letter of the company name makes it pass the validation...

As a security person its hard as heck training (some of) our users to understand how basic domain formats work. We use a phishing simulation service, and outside of certain content,putting part or all of our company name in the domain but adding other words/underscores/etc is what tricks a lot of people. I tend to explain how it works in a basic format, and often you can see the light bulb go off when I point out how a subdomain works and why an underscore or dash creates a whole new domain anybody can register while a subdomain is something our company can only create/use (mind you, I'm not going to confuse them by explaining how this can be abused, these people i talk to about this are having enough trouble grasping the basics).

I registered .com domains with my kids' names when they were born, and when one of them discovered that they could get the email address gmail@hisname.com he was stoked. His friends don't understand how it's possible for that email address to work. As a practical joke, he always says "what do you mean? Doesn't gmail@yourname.com not work too?"

Somewhat similar to this... My full name is Tambe Barsbay, so I bought the domain mbebarsbay.com and have t@mbebarsbay.com as my email.

As a human who had to describe the internet, computers and email addresses to some of our older population, I agree, stuff is really hard for newcomers. Most of them barely understand the mouse abstraction, so getting them to understand some of the finer details of the modern computing world is a exercise in humongous patience.

This stuff is not really well made for normal people, to be honest. Just look at all the discussions and troubles (tickets, misunderstandings, security risks) related to email and hyperlink parsers..

It took me a while to know that FQDNs can (and sometimest must?) start at root with a period, meaning every address you've ever typed could have finished with a period (news.ycombinator.com.) and I recall some newspaper (NYT? News Yorker?) failing to test for that when people want to bypass their paywall. And this is a valid email address apparently: #!$%&’*+-/=?^_`{}|~@example.com

RFCs/codified norms by tech people are just weird to normal people.

Please stop downvoting this. If not an unpleasant truth, it's at least a widely held perception, which must have a reason. (And I suspect that reason is because it's true ...)

> this is a valid email address apparently: #!$%&’*+-/=?^_`{}|~@example.com

If so, that's actually the same as #!$%&’*@example.com (mail user 'foo+bar' is the same as 'foo'). Many webforms/DBs don't know that.

> If so, that's actually the same as #!$%&’*@example.com (mail user 'foo+bar' is the same as 'foo'). Many webforms/DBs don't know that.

Actually, no. To the best of my knowledge (and I'd be delighted to be corrected!), that's merely a convention that lots of providers (including GMail) conform to, but it's not part of the RFC or standards.

Don't get me wrong - it irritates me when that very-common behaviour isn't supported (and, at the very least, `+` shouldn't be considered an illegal character). But it's also technically-not-wrong to consider `a+1@test.com` as different from `a@test.com`.

It's explicitly called out in RFC5233, at least: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5233

TIL, thank you!

You are right. In fact, RFC 5321 specifically forbids you from interpreting the local part of an address in any way.

> the local-part MUST be interpreted and assigned semantics only by the host specified in the domain part of the address.

See your sibling comment for another perspective! (EDIT: which, to be clear, doesn't invalidate your point. Though it's worth considering, I guess, whether "only assigned semantics by the host specified in the domain" prevents user-tracking systems from calling "foo+bar@gmail.com" the same user as "foo@gmail.com". After all - if they're being interpreted "as" user IDs, rather than as emails, does that really breach the RFC?)

It's not really a different perspective. Sieve, which the sibling comment's RFC extends, is a mail-filtering script language for end-user inboxes. So it's perfectly reasonable for a user on foo.com, who knows that foo.com supports the `+` syntax, to write a Sieve script directing mail to "username+blah@foo.com" to a particular inbox.

In fact, that RFC specifically calls out that interpreting the `+` on non-local addresses is likely wrong:

> NOTE: Because the encoding of detailed addresses are site and/or implementation specific, using the subaddress extension on foreign addresses (such as the envelope "from" address or originator header fields) may lead to inconsistent or incorrect results.

EDIT to address your second point:

> After all - if they're being interpreted "as" user IDs, rather than as emails, does that really breach the RFC?

Well, technically no, the RFC is about SMTP so if you're not writing an SMTP implementation, you're not breaching it.

But RFCs aren't the law, so whether you're technically breaching it isn't really what's relevant. What _is_ relevant is that a system that treats foo+bar@quux.com the same as foo@quux.com is making assumptions about how email works that contradict the RFCs that define how email works. Whether that's a useful thing to do in practice is an engineering decision with tradeoffs. E.g., it's probably fine to assume it for a whitelisted set of domains where you know it to be true, like gmail.

This root period was mentioned on reddit a while ago because the domain "youtube.com." would fail to serve ads.


> I recall some newspaper (NYT? News Yorker?) failing to test for that when people want to bypass their paywall.

For a long time I could access Bloomberg for free because they failed open when you did this

From doing agency/marketing work for numerous large corps, I can tell you that many have a straight up block on corpname on any email name or domain to prevent phishing.

Yes, I recently got a new chromecast, which now requires a google account to set up via the google home app. I knew I was never going to use this single-purpose account for anything real so I decided to make the name very descriptive and tried to put “googlehome” in the identifier but google would not let me get away with the string “google” anywhere in it. Ended up with “GewgleHome.”

I've never seen that and I have dozens of company@me.example emails signed up.

Be careful using illegitimate car rental codes. Sometimes they look so cheap because they cancel a lot of your insurances, because your employer carries those insurances itself. So if you crash or the car is damaged, the clerk says, “Don’t worry Hertz Corporate will pick that up” but of course when they discover you are not an employee they will not.

I'm sorry, did you reply to the wrong comment? I'm trying to understand where "illegitimate car rental codes" comes from here, as I never mentioned that or anything related to it.

I agree with you, just trying to understand how it's connected to what I wrote initially.

They are talking about this line:

> Me: sure, can you remind me of the employee discount again?

Which suggests that you would/did ask for (an employee) discount code when renting from that company.

If you use a discount code, say the Boeing discount code when you rent at Seattle Airport, Hertz will cancel any insurance off the price because Boeing covers those risks itself for its employees. But, if you’re not a Boeing employee and you crash, you’re not insured by Boeing and you’re not insured by Hertz.

They are referencing the line about the employee discount.

No one wants car rental insurance anyway.

Especially not Hertz, who doesn't honor claims anyway and is thankfully bankrupt.

I fucked up a truck and they covered it without questions, I guess their customer experience was highly variable.

On just meeting a girl in school whose last name was the first name of a lead actor in a popular TV show, I started blurting out “Are you related to X” and my brain was already sending X to my mouth before I realized no, stupid, that’s not how names work.

Turns out she’s a nice girl, and she answered happily, “no, but that would be cool”. I smiled back while I died a little inside.

It’s always possible the person figures out this is not right before they get to the juicy bit. But I’ve been wrong before.

My spouse got that a lot growing up, sadly she now sometimes gets another one since she took my last name. Thankfully the new actor is not very relevant anymore so it doesn't happen often.

Same experience, though I never tried to get a discount out of it.

In that case she tried to apply the discount via my email or something like that, but she said it failed. I blamed on it that I was a new employee and I'm a rush, so nevermind, let's proceed normally.

I'm not sure I would actually accept it if it went through, but I'm always curious to see if it works sometime.

I wrote libvldmail for that: https://github.com/dertuxmalwieder/libvldmail

Sadly, it is poorly adopted.

My favourite is when the validation rejects anything with the service name in the email. I wonder whether it's to prevent somebody registering <anything>@<service> as a joke, or a really bad attempt at preventing <service>@mailinator.

Well that would have caused me problems when Oracle started requiring registration for some form of Java downloads.

They haven't spammed that though, I don't think I've ever received any actual email to the "oracleblowsgoats" address. Probably keeps any sales droids from even bothering with me as well.

It's because it is a common spam action to use <site>@<free_email> when blasting out stuff. It's also common to try and use <something>@<site> in either/or the to/reply-to fields for spambots.

So, it is easier to blacklist it altogether.

I once owned "firstname.to" I figured it would be easy to tell people my email is firstname@firstname.to and have them use it, spell it right, and remember it.

Nope. It confused the hell out of people.

Aw man, this exact situation happened to me last time I rented a car with Sixt. I wish I had thought of this genius line of yours,

> Me: sure, can you remind me of the employee discount again?

Sooo… did it work?

Mine ends in .sexy, the looks I get are even better than when I used my .io one ;p and then if they follow up for my phone number it gets even better when I tell them as it ends in 6969.

Is it by chance 420-6969?

I wish, but that is now my goal to find that number! https://howlett.sexy/ its over on here if you want to see ;p

Your web page font is unreadably thin.


Hell, booking.com will even tell you that "your address looks incorrect" (sometimes, I got it once out of two bookings made on a single day), if you dare to use your own domain .com. They used to nag me about "ohh, are you sure it's not tadzik_@gmail.com"? And I'm not sure what's worse.

You got nothing on my firstname@lastname.technology email.

Can't register at half the sites, and if you can register sometimes you can't log in. Banana Republic, in particular, lets me log in through one login flow, but not the one that's integrated into the checkout process.

Ah! What a coincidence — I registered my Banana Republic account with a gmail "+" email (eg, my_email+bananarepublic@gmail.com) as is my standard practice with retail accounts, and I have the same login issues. It's quite odd, but I'm glad it's not just me!

Wallethub let me register email+wh@gmail.com but did not allow + sign in login. Cant signup again with email@gmail.com Had to ask support to fix that.

If they’re just warning but letting you proceed, that’s fine. They do that because they see looooots of people screwing up their own email addresses in a few common ways. Run any email signup with a general audience and any kind of volume and you’ll end up doing the same, to reduce the load on support.

It does work well. I used a customized version of https://github.com/mailcheck/mailcheck on an ecomm website and the amount of bounces due to typos went way down.

It is important to tune it a bit based on what you see after installing it to reduce the amount of bad suggestions.

Same using me@domain.cricket or similar. "Do you mean me@domain.com?"

צדיק גמור אתה!

My domain ends in .me which according to Aliexpress is not real. So instead of me having to manually unsubscribe, they got sent to the huge spam box that is gmail.

Which reminds me, I used to use me@myname.com but gmail’s UI gets weird when viewing emails from me as it uses “me” to indicate the owner of the gmail account.

My domain ending in .in is not supported by Discover Bank because it can be used only "in" India.

A ton of services kindly ask me if my personal domain on .me TLD is correct one, but at least they don't block me from using it.

Sometimes it is better not to be too clever. I built a CRM like app for the construction industry and used "inc.construction" and "inc.services" as the app domain. So customer would have


I thought it was clever, but people do not understand them. Everything is .com in their mind.

Mine is my name, like john@jsmith.com. The number of people who exclaim "I've never heard that one before!" surprises me. Obviously other people don't use it, because it's my name.

I have a simple email address:

firstname @ (nickname for firstname) + (last initial) .net

And it's amazing how hard it is to explain this to people over the phone or in store for email receipts, etc.

I'm shocked how few folks seems to be vaguely aware that .net as TLD exists even though it's one of the original TLDs from when they were first created: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.net

I have 2 email addresses because of that. I thought it would be good to have my and address at my own domain but if I could go back in time I would tell myself to just stick with the gmail address. For anything where I can type in my email address, it's fine. But if someone asks for it verbally, I just give them the gmail address because firstnamelastname@gmail.com requires no extra clarification.

Besides lots of other adresses i have forname @ forname-surname .de as an adress easy to understand. I totally understand your problems, I have this even with people who already have forename and surname on their screens, it's ridiculous.

Yes, I just posted something similar. My domain is initial + surname, and the most common response I get when giving my email is that the person hasn't heard of "that one" before.

To make matters worse, I chose a slightly uncommon tld.

My spouse, who does not work in an IT/software related field, has an email address that is firstname@lastname.com and quite a large number of people refuse to believe that such a thing is possible. There has been more than one instance where some person treated them as if they were so clueless that they didn't know how to properly format an email address.

I use hello@firstmiddlelast.com

I also have firstmiddlelast@gmail.com, and about half the time I tell someone my email address, the send it to the gmail one.

I use first@firstlast.com and wasn't able to get the firstlast@gmail.com so I guess I'm just hoping I'm getting all my email. I will say that having my name be my email makes life /so much/ easier. Especially over the phone, "Yes, my email is first@firstlast.com, just like the name I just told you and/or is already on your screen when you pulled up my account".

For me, they send emails at mydomain.com@gmail.com

Ah jeez, maybe they do that to me, too, and I just don't know it?

I know because I registered an actual mydomain.com@gmail.com name too.

Its 2021 and I am just finding people that treat .co emails as normal and don't mentally overwrite that as .com and create a typo

For services that actually require correspondence, I register the cool fun tld and a seperate .com for email

This also lets mailing lists het marked as spam without harming the deliverability of the other

Just FYI, .io is the TLD for the British Indian Ocean Territory, which has a less than savoury history.


Please don't tell me there exists genuine attempts to "cancel" the .io domain.

Sorry maybe I missed the memo, but is this how things get “cancelled”?

I was just pointing out that the domain is tied to a sad history.

At no point do I advocate for/against using it, nor did I pass any judgment on people who choose to use it.

The only opinion expressed in my comments is that the way the British and American governments have behaved is bad. If you take issue with that, let’s discuss but please don’t put words in my mouth.

> is this how things get “cancelled”

Yes, associating tangentially-related controversies with previously innocuous topics is how things get canceled. Bringing up topics like this on a post about emoji emails implies that you want the conversation to flow in a certain direction; that's how conversation works. It's only missing Twitter and the word "problematic."

Are you cancelling free speech?

Owning a .io domain is taking part directly in the enslaving and poisoning of the island's native /s

Not everything has to be “cancelled” but if you are buying a domain, you should probably inform yourselves of what that TLD represents since people you’re communicating with might and might not look too favorably on its use.

Yeah, .io represents “Input/Output” as much as .net represents “Network”

Domains often have little connection to their intended meaning.

Let's say you're running a startup and decided to be hip and get an io domain. You reach out to a potential major client who happens to be of Chagossian descent.

They probably wouldn't care for your interpretation of the domain, they just see you supporting the people who relocated their entire group of people from their native homeland.

So, yes, you should be well aware of what the io domain represents and who you're supporting when buying one. Because it might bite you in the ass down the line and could have easily been avoided by just getting a different one without a storied past.

No "cancelling" going on, but just like a lot of other things, it's a risk that should be taken into account.

> they just see you supporting the people who relocated their entire group of people from their native homeland.

I'll take "Things that you'll never have to worry about IRL for 1000$ Alex" This reads like satire. What cross-circles of people who happen to recognize the .io and know its associated with a TLD for a country or nation and also happen to not know it's other innate purpose of representing input/output? This is as ridiculous as worrying about having a brand with a .tv domain and a negative perception of those from the Tuvalu island.

Mine ends in .by as my surname does as well and people still say "Is that it?"

EG if my surname was "Gummersby" my email domain is "Gummers.by"

If your surname contains an "a", say Gaddersby, you could also do "g@dders.by" to confuse people even more

Try spelling that, though. :)

I have purchased some domains for myself and my friends based on that rule, like rubinste.in, fedorovi.ch, or oba.ma (not real names). They thought it's cute but didn't hold them for long.

A friend with a last name that ends in ..skova wasn't so lucky as Vatican doesn't sell domain names.

My domain has a hyphen in it and I find places that reject it all the time.

Try using a .Irish domain

I have a very short .co - gets 'em every time.

ok, ok, but is that really correct?! ;)

This is art. I worked as a cashier for a couple years, and this feels like a fever dream about those days.

Sample size dichotomy.

From a customer's perspective, this is the way everyone does things. (Sample size: themselves)

From a cashier's perspective, this weirdo is a few standard deviations outside the mean. (Sample size: 1,000+ customers)

right, okay, robert@xn--ds8h.kz, got it. thanks, Punycode!

Come to HN for the news, stay for the short fiction. Well done.

>> Maybe the floor can be a table

Why wouldn’t you throw stuff all over the floor. It’s the biggest shelf in the room.

Haha. This is halfway between psychedelic and hyper realistic in a way that made me think of Thomas Pynchon.

There should be a museum for those kinds of HN thread comments.

This kind of prose is truly hilarious.

Thank you.


Very well written.

Bill burr on his podcast was talking about, when he first discovered reddit. He couldn't understand what it was... He then realized later.. "it's a site for people that really like to type.. that's what it is.."

I like to think of Wikipedia as a site for people who like to correct other people.

One of my favorite reddit shower thoughts:

"Wikipedia built the biggest modern information hub using nothing but nerds' need to correct each other."

It's really quite astonishing how powerful a force that is, and how well Wikipedia channels it toward something good!

"Well actually..." given form.

I'd never actually tried to describe Reddit so succinctly; in the same vein as yours, maybe Reddit is just Jeopardy where every comment must be in the form of a correction.

Perfectly accurate or not, I think the venn-diagram of "People unlikely to already know what Reddit is" overlaps heavily with "People who know and understand what Jeopardy is", making it an excellent analogy :)

This is brutal, and potent. Nicely done.

Oh, that cuts to the quick.

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