Your Lifestyle Has Already Been Designed (2010) • Hacker News Board

Re: Your Lifestyle Has Already Been Designed (2010)

#141

Post by read_if_gay_ » Sun, Aug 01, 2021, 7:45 PM UTC

RandomLensman wrote: post #93

DangitBobby wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The author seems to indicate that what makes something "unnecessary" in this context is when it very temporarily scratches an itch but does nothing to meaningfully improve your quality of life in the longterm. What would really improve your life is less money, fewer purchases, and more free time.

Again, why is short-term pleasure wrong? My life would not be improved by less money, by the way. More free time, yes, fewer purchases, not necessarily.

It’s not wrong per se. But things that provide instant gratification tend to be destructive, and deep satisfaction seldom comes from things that are easily obtained.

Re: Your Lifestyle Has Already Been Designed (2010)

#142

Post by chrisco255 » Sun, Aug 01, 2021, 7:46 PM UTC

coldtea wrote: post #43

blablabla123 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More subtly a smaller but far more interested proportion of the population tries more experimental things and the big shops just copy that. That's both cheaper for the buyer and the producer. It's the same for tech, various gadgets or technologies that are hyped right now have been gathering traction since years but have been picked up by the big brands only very recently. Best example is the trend of using non-x86 C…

> Looks kind of planned but it's not. It's just that some things fall out of fashion for whatever reasons... "Not planned? Whatever reason?" There are huge billion dollar campaigns for what things "are in fashion" this season. For starters, the thousands of ads by fashion brands with the same "current fashion" messaging. Without that, the majority of the population could not care less what some "small proportion" of…

The people chasing "this season's fashion" are rather niche. People care less and less about this stuff as they get older. We also work in an industry where free conference t-shirts and khaki shorts are perfectly acceptable work attire. It's been over 100 years since blue jeans were invented and they're still quite popular.

And if some people get enjoyment out of trying out new fashion styles, who am I to judge? No different than me buying the latest video game or checking out the newest programming language or listening to new releases of music.

Re: Your Lifestyle Has Already Been Designed (2010)

#143

Post by heavyset_go » Sun, Aug 01, 2021, 7:46 PM UTC

Sebb767 wrote: post #18

> The ultimate tool for corporations to sustain a culture of this sort is to develop the 40-hour workweek as the normal lifestyle. Under these working conditions people have to build a life in the evenings and on weekends. I slightly disagree with this point. The 40 hour work week is a rather recent development; in the past, people had to work a lot longer with no or only one day of. The trend actually goes in the di…

People worked fewer hours in preindustrial society[1], and people had more time off, as well.

[1] http://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/users/rauch/worktime/hours_w...

Re: Your Lifestyle Has Already Been Designed (2010)

#144

Post by chrisco255 » Sun, Aug 01, 2021, 7:49 PM UTC

awillen wrote: post #60

bulletsvshumans wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is no "fashion cabal" where designers get together for drinks and to anoint "cerulean blue" as the color of 2023 and then pull their customers by the nose ring into purchasing. "Twice a year Pantone hosts, in a European capital, a secret meeting of representatives from various nations' color standards groups. After two days of presentations and debate, they choose a color for the following year." "OVER 20 YEA…

Wow... this is maybe the best counterpoint I've ever seen on HN.

Did you buy anything this year in response to Pantone's color of the year?

Re: Your Lifestyle Has Already Been Designed (2010)

#145

Post by handrous » Sun, Aug 01, 2021, 7:49 PM UTC

sneak wrote: post #76

tonyedgecombe wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure about that, even when my wife and I were both working full time we still cooked all our own meals. It's not that much of a burden.

In-person shopping for food (including travel to/from the place of purchase), food prep, cooking, and the associated cleanup is an enormous time sink. Perhaps you have free time or are already used to spending a lot of it on these tasks, but let's not pretend that it's "not that much". It's huge.

It depends a lot on how varied a menu you want/require (or your spouse does....)

Cooking with variety (or "buy whatever's on sale") is really hard if you also want to do it cheaply (minimize waste & spoilage, especially). Cooking the same few meals, maybe with some seasonal rotation, is easy because you can get the measurements of what you need each week ver exact to keep spoilage very low, and arrange them so waste from one meal always goes into another later in the week.

Re: Your Lifestyle Has Already Been Designed (2010)

#146

Post by WalterBright » Sun, Aug 01, 2021, 7:50 PM UTC

throwawayboise wrote: post #110

WalterBright wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been wearing the exact same jeans cut for 30 years now. When they get holes, I just push a button on Amazon for more. My dress shirts are 20-30 years old. They're not out of style. Of course, I've never been cool, so there's that.

> My dress shirts are 20-30 years old. They're not out of style. They are, you just don't care. Which is OK.

You're right that I don't care, but if you saw a photo of me in one you couldn't tell what decade it is from.

Re: Your Lifestyle Has Already Been Designed (2010)

#147

Post by RandomLensman » Sun, Aug 01, 2021, 7:50 PM UTC

DangitBobby wrote: post #133

RandomLensman wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, why is short-term pleasure wrong? My life would not be improved by less money, by the way. More free time, yes, fewer purchases, not necessarily.

Short term pleasure is not wrong. The entire premise boils down to the belief that the 40 hour work-week means you are sacrificing long-term and short-term pleasure for superficial short-term pleasure, and that the inherent dissatisfaction arising from the arrangement is the only thing supporting the economy and resulting lifestyles as they exist, perpetuating dissatisfaction, for, practically, the sake of dissatisfa…

Let me put it this way: people have been spending on pleasure since ancient times (including people without any need to work). So that type of economy has existed for a long time.

The sacrificed long-term pleasure seems rather mythical to me and very different from person to person.

Re: Your Lifestyle Has Already Been Designed (2010)

#148

Post by chrisco255 » Sun, Aug 01, 2021, 7:51 PM UTC

goodpoint wrote: post #73

grumblenum wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A Malthusian crisis has been “imminent” since the 19th century. I think that you should try writing down what facts you think support the a priori assumption that our sinful ways are leading us to a future, sudden disaster. I don’t think you will find much evidence that isn’t traceable to popular opinion. Sorry, fam, it’s just Puritanism for the modern age.

Are you saying that climate change, ocean depletion, soil depletion, desertification, plastic pollution and food shortage are not real?

We don't have a food shortage. Crop yields and agricultural productivity are at all time human civilizational highs.

Re: Your Lifestyle Has Already Been Designed (2010)

#149

Post by agumonkey » Sun, Aug 01, 2021, 7:55 PM UTC

chrisco255 wrote: post #148

goodpoint wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you saying that climate change, ocean depletion, soil depletion, desertification, plastic pollution and food shortage are not real?

We don't have a food shortage. Crop yields and agricultural productivity are at all time human civilizational highs.

This is a fragile argument. Systems can often be at peak before crashing.

Re: Your Lifestyle Has Already Been Designed (2010)

#150

Post by hoseja » Sun, Aug 01, 2021, 7:56 PM UTC

RandomLensman wrote: post #93

DangitBobby wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The author seems to indicate that what makes something "unnecessary" in this context is when it very temporarily scratches an itch but does nothing to meaningfully improve your quality of life in the longterm. What would really improve your life is less money, fewer purchases, and more free time.

Again, why is short-term pleasure wrong? My life would not be improved by less money, by the way. More free time, yes, fewer purchases, not necessarily.

Well for one, because it's very inefficient.