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

Repair is a Radical Act

patagonia.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 116 posts

Re: Repair is a Radical Act

#51

Post by invernomut0 »

mattnewport wrote: post #47
annnnd wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you about moralizing - it can be (and often is) harmful. But in this case the advice is sound. Taking care of your stuff, not discarding it just because it is a bit worn around the edges, and trying to repair it instead of just discarding + buying new; is there something wrong with this approach? not sure it is a "single best thing", but it would make a difference. A large one imho.

It's almost certainly not economically efficient for a software engineer to be darning their own socks. Economic efficiency doesn't align perfectly with resource or energy efficiency in an environmental sense but in this example it is still likely true. There are economic and environmental costs to everyone having the tools, skills and supplies to repair a reasonable range of products. At the least it likely makes mo…

You can pay someone to repair your stuff and make the local economy grow instead of dumping and buying a shiny new toy from a big corporation.

Buying new is often not optimal since the stuff you buy istantly is worth something like 20% less from the moment you buy it.

You pay to avoid the risk of buying an used object, for example, but I'm not sure that buying new is the more efficient choice every time.

Re: Repair is a Radical Act

#52

Post by rukuu001 »

gherkin0 wrote: post #35
studentrob wrote: post #30

I live in Asia and can always find a shoe guy or garment lady to fix my stuff for $1-$5. They are found in market stalls or the side of the road somewhere. You can't find as many of these "tiny businesses" in developed countries, perhaps because licensing costs too much to make it profitable, licensing isn't permitted for street vendors, varying climate doesn't make it as easy year-round, or ... Anyway, I really like…

> perhaps because licensing costs too much to make it profitable, licensing isn't permitted for street vendors, varying climate doesn't make it as easy year-round, or ... I'm not sure that someone would be able to make a living in the US repairing everyday imported clothing items. The few times I tried to get something repaired by a tailor stop in the US, the cost at US wages was a significant fraction of what it wou…

> the cost at US wages was a significant fraction of what it would cost to buy a brand new replacement

This is why I get the highest-quality stuff I can and repair it.

Instead of replacing mediocre things every year or two, I have a few superb things that I spend $100-$200 a year maintaining (total, not each).

Re: Repair is a Radical Act

#53

Post by mattnewport »

invernomut0 wrote: post #51
mattnewport wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's almost certainly not economically efficient for a software engineer to be darning their own socks. Economic efficiency doesn't align perfectly with resource or energy efficiency in an environmental sense but in this example it is still likely true. There are economic and environmental costs to everyone having the tools, skills and supplies to repair a reasonable range of products. At the least it likely makes mo…

You can pay someone to repair your stuff and make the local economy grow instead of dumping and buying a shiny new toy from a big corporation. Buying new is often not optimal since the stuff you buy istantly is worth something like 20% less from the moment you buy it. You pay to avoid the risk of buying an used object, for example, but I'm not sure that buying new is the more efficient choice every time.

I'm pretty sure that neither buying new nor repairing is the most efficient choice every time. I also think that it should be a decision based on efficiency and not moralizing.

Buying new may or may not be optimal in any given situation but the resale value is only relevant if you decide to resell, it's not a general argument against buying new.

Re: Repair is a Radical Act

#55

Post by pjc50 »

quanticle wrote: post #43

While some companies, like Ricoh, DeWalt, Caterpillar and Lenovo have made repair and remanufacturing a staple of their business model, This is why I continue to buy Lenovo, even though it can be argued that overall quality and durability of a Thinkpad isn't what it used to be when IBM still owned the brand. When I buy a Thinkpad (like the T440s I bought last year), I am reasonably assured that if something breaks, I…

You're unconcerned about Superfish etc?

Re: Repair is a Radical Act

#56

Post by acd »

This brings be to the area of new cell phones. Not good for the environment global warming. Consumer electronics are designed to be replaced which is bad for the environment.

See planned Obsolescence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_obsolescence

I do not buy that you cannot make a good looking cell phone that is sturdy and allows for component replacement.

The Apple Macbook unibody 2009-2012 has metal screws, you can replace the battery, the memory the storage. Same aluminium metal design with Philips screws must be also be usable on cell phone designs.

Here is a list of smart phone repairability scores. https://www.ifixit.com/smartphone-repairability

Its also conscious to think about the electronic waste and that products we design today are not designed to be recycled. It should be easy for a robot to disassemble all the components of electronic devices and reuse most of the raw materials so that we have a closed loop where do pollute more as new and faster designs are out.

Re: Repair is a Radical Act

#57

Post by Camillo »

mipapage wrote: post #46
Camillo wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The reaction was to focus severely on attracting customers that were using the products for utility and to discourage others from purchasing. Wonder why you can't buy everything Patagonia makes in black, like you can for anything North Face? This is why. What? A black waterproof coat is dorky, it makes you look like a walking garbage bag. I should know, I have one (it was the only color left in my size). They are p…

Maybe read the book rather than let this person 'ruin it for you'.

I was talking about the "Repair is a Radical Act" post, and my position, like I said, is that it is brand marketing. Therefore, I am not going to make any active effort: I expect the message to be regurgitated directly into my gullet.

Re: Repair is a Radical Act

#58

Post by Klinky »

mattnewport wrote: post #47
annnnd wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you about moralizing - it can be (and often is) harmful. But in this case the advice is sound. Taking care of your stuff, not discarding it just because it is a bit worn around the edges, and trying to repair it instead of just discarding + buying new; is there something wrong with this approach? not sure it is a "single best thing", but it would make a difference. A large one imho.

It's almost certainly not economically efficient for a software engineer to be darning their own socks. Economic efficiency doesn't align perfectly with resource or energy efficiency in an environmental sense but in this example it is still likely true. There are economic and environmental costs to everyone having the tools, skills and supplies to repair a reasonable range of products. At the least it likely makes mo…

Perhaps the software engineer will become redundant and have to take up darning socks when AI replaces them? It starts to get kind of sketchy when you start dictating how people should spend their time, as if the economy will always take care of them and the environment, so long as they play by the rules of economic efficiency. There are perverse/detrimental incentives in most economies. To suggest that economies and markets are inherently well intentioned seems simplistic and naive.

Environmental economic impact are usually only felt when the damage is so severe it starts to affect the supply chain while a company is still in business, which may take years or decades to manifest. By then the economic cost of the environmental damage may be too great for the company to properly deal with. All too often companies leave behind environmental devastation for others to clean up, and are absolved of the actual economic and environmental harm of their actions. Perhaps it becomes something that society has to deal with through higher taxes, but that just hides the cost rather than including it in the price seen on store shelves.

Re: Repair is a Radical Act

#59

Post by ptaipale »

studentrob wrote: post #30

I live in Asia and can always find a shoe guy or garment lady to fix my stuff for $1-$5. They are found in market stalls or the side of the road somewhere. You can't find as many of these "tiny businesses" in developed countries, perhaps because licensing costs too much to make it profitable, licensing isn't permitted for street vendors, varying climate doesn't make it as easy year-round, or ... Anyway, I really like…

I think it's more that in countries with social security, people aren't forced to work on such low wages (or more precisely, on low income as a self-employed person).

If people have their rent and food and medical care paid for, and have access to a spectrum of free public services, it's not worthwhile to take the toll of labouring and fixing the clothes and shoes for others.

I can typically buy new, good quality shoes (made in Asia by people who have no social security) for the price of one or two simple repairs to shoes. My current favourites are six years old now, made by Ecco somewhere in China, and they show no significant signs of wear outside. I had to have them fixed once when a puppy chewed the heel of one of them a bit.

The problem is bigger in European welfare states than in the US. It's going away, though: the welfare state structures will be ramped down radically within a decade or two.

Re: Repair is a Radical Act

#60

Post by arnehormann »

pjc50 wrote: post #55
quanticle wrote: post #43

While some companies, like Ricoh, DeWalt, Caterpillar and Lenovo have made repair and remanufacturing a staple of their business model, This is why I continue to buy Lenovo, even though it can be argued that overall quality and durability of a Thinkpad isn't what it used to be when IBM still owned the brand. When I buy a Thinkpad (like the T440s I bought last year), I am reasonably assured that if something breaks, I…

You're unconcerned about Superfish etc?

Superfish is a root certificate installed by crapware in the preinstalled windows version. It can be uninstalled or removed by a fresh OS install. I guess someone replacing hardware components in a notebook doesn't keep the preinstalled OS for long.
Post reply on HN