Th3 Core

The real rednecks would have dynamite and a seining net.

Right... famous Hillary Clinton statement (or at least that's who made it famous): "It takes a village to raise a child"

I was hoping that with Raz's extraordinary knowledge of American culture, which sometimes seems superior to, say, mine, he would get it :-)

Spotted in the parking lot

something has changed that has wiped out budding mom & pops from the market.

David Cay Johnston contends that part of it, at least, is that big retailers learned how to play hardball and negotiate sweetheart deals with local and state governments, forcing them to bid for their stores (like Amazon just did), and commonly destroying the local mom and pop retail who in many cases would be competitive if they had the same tax deals
https://www.amazon.com/Free-Lunch-Wealthiest-Themselves-Government/dp/1591842484

Obviously there are other factors

Okay... everything I've said in this thread is obviously irrelevant, bullshit and wrong

http://www.foxnews.com/real-estate/2018/04/19/condemned-california-home-with-holes-in-roof-mildew-sells-for-1-23-million.html

Yeah, I probably have a really "off" perspective because of the strange market here.

In brief - prices here have never regained their 2006/07 levels. At that time, lots were selling at $180K-$250K. That $250K lot sale remains by a long shot the record. Our friend bought a lot in 2016 for $100K even.

Similar with houses. A really nice 1600sf house sold for $825K. A rundown but larger house sold for $900k. Then we saw many  sales in the $350-$450K range for rundown houses to $550K. A couple of sales of brand new, showpiece homes sold for higher, but probably less than the owners had into them.

Finally, two years ago a large, brand-new home with high-end construction and Craftsman features fetched $920K and there have been some pretty high-priced sales lately. But there's no way the old home that sold for $900K in 2007 could sell at that price today. And if you bought at $900K in 2007 and then needed to sell in 2015, you were still deep underwater.

Those types of scenarios probably never happen in the Bay Area.

To the best of my knowledge to get a full DNSSEC stack you'd need registrar-level keys to sign the root, so that might not even be an option.

That is correct. Your registrar and your DNS provider must be able to exchange the hash, I suppose very roughly like a TLS handshake (or probably more like a DKIM verification actually).

So if you can't set the hash, specify the hash schema and algorithm etc at the registrar, there's no point in doing anything at the DNS level. In fact, I think that might just serve to make your site inaccessible, because the hash check would fail and security conscious browsers would block the site.