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

Ultra-flat timepiece, the RM UP-01 Ferrari, is 1.75 millimetres thick watch

richardmille.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 278 posts

Re: Ultra-flat timepiece, the RM UP-01 Ferrari, is 1.75 millimetres thick watch

#201

Post by closeparen »

Sporktacular wrote: post #101
what-imright wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The solution of giving away your money over buying something is some broken logic. Plenty of corrupt charity officials line their pockets and live it up on donations. The rich don’t owe society, exactly the opposite, hence the money. It represents an unpaid debt so you can’t turn around and ask for it back.

"The rich don’t owe society, exactly the opposite" This is precisely wrong. The rich do indeed owe society. They owe their wealth to the workers working for them. To the education system that educated their workers and made them productive, the roads that brought them to work and the health system that keeps them at work. This is obvious from the number of millionaires produced by healthy, educated, stable societies…

Indeed, the rich owe society for all these things. The amount they owe is called the price. And the time for which they owe it is from the moment of services rendered until the invoice is paid. Some of them, indeed, weasel out of paying the agreed-upon prices for their inputs. A certain former President comes to mind. But once paid, the debts are clear.

Re: Ultra-flat timepiece, the RM UP-01 Ferrari, is 1.75 millimetres thick watch

#202

Post by closeparen »

kqr wrote: post #186
dotancohen wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They owe their wealth to the workers working for > them. To the education system that educated their > workers and made them productive, the roads that > brought them to work and the health system that > keeps them at work. Assuming that they've paid their taxes, they've paid their debt.

Assuming further that the taxes accurately measure the benefit that comes from the interaction of luck, privilege and society. Assuming even further that taxes effectively redistribute wealth to workers, educators, and nurturers. These are together three assumptions, none of which I think are true.

Taxes are the price we pay for society. Quite! Well, a price never fully captures the value to the buyer of what they're acquiring. Otherwise they'd be worse off for making the exchange. We cooperate because we both gain more than we lose from said cooperation. That's a great and beautiful thing.

Re: Ultra-flat timepiece, the RM UP-01 Ferrari, is 1.75 millimetres thick watch

#203

Post by rmason »

polio wrote: post #81
staplung wrote: post #55

William Gibson wrote a piece for Wired back in the day about his obsession with mechanical watches.[1] He puts it thus: ``` Mechanical watches are so brilliantly unnecessary. Any Swatch or Casio keeps better time, and high-end contemporary Swiss watches are priced like small cars. But mechanical watches partake of what my friend John Clute calls the Tamagotchi Gesture. They're pointless in a peculiarly needful way; t…

They're beautiful and impressive, but I find the amount of money that flows into "high horology" to be an sum with an egregious opportunity cost to society, made even worse by the fact that all that complexity goes towards a movement that is worse at keeping time than a rudimentary quartz. If people want Tamagotchis, they can get a Tamagotchi. I wish people would flex their donations to effective charities instead an…

It's an acceptable way for men to wear jewelry. To flaunt success without being gaudy. I prefer skeleton watches and although even more expensive models exist imho Richard Mille makes the top of the line.

Re: Ultra-flat timepiece, the RM UP-01 Ferrari, is 1.75 millimetres thick watch

#206

Post by emsixteen »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #145
Sporktacular wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These ones are not.

150 of the exact same model, among huge piles of other models. I don't want to argue about word choice. In the distinction I was describing, however imperfectly worded, watches like this easily go on the bulk side of the line.

Imagine thinking that there's 150 of a watch means its mass produced.

Re: Ultra-flat timepiece, the RM UP-01 Ferrari, is 1.75 millimetres thick watch

#207

Post by Dylan16807 »

emsixteen wrote: post #206
Dylan16807 wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

150 of the exact same model, among huge piles of other models. I don't want to argue about word choice. In the distinction I was describing, however imperfectly worded, watches like this easily go on the bulk side of the line.

Imagine thinking that there's 150 of a watch means its mass produced.

> Imagine thinking

You don't have to mock me for using the wrong word.

I hope you realize it's my vocabulary having a slight issue here, and not my understanding of the world, right?

Re: Ultra-flat timepiece, the RM UP-01 Ferrari, is 1.75 millimetres thick watch

#208

Post by emsixteen »

metadat wrote: post #172
dotancohen wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thick and heavy compared to the watch in the fine article. For a desk jockey maybe that doesn't matter. If I'm being flung around at seven G, I'll take the thin, light watch at great expense.

Sounds like a big "if" unless you're taking about that time you jumped off the third floor. Back here in the real-world, you're a deskjockey.

It's important to check the time on the way down from the third floor though, clearly. Need to have your watch on whilst in motion.

Re: Ultra-flat timepiece, the RM UP-01 Ferrari, is 1.75 millimetres thick watch

#209

Post by bowsamic »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #176
Hellion wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, they don’t. And you won’t find many watch enthusiasts who agree with you either about this class of watch.

I drew a line. It goes on that side of the line I drew. > And you won’t find many watch enthusiasts who agree with you either about this class of watch. What specifically would they disagree with? The idea that these 150 watches are made in bulk to a single design, and that watches of this class have many closely related designs? Or something I said that wasn't watch-specific? If they're not made in bulk that's extre…

To me it seems in bad faith to use a word that draws a line in a roughly agreed upon place, and then claim you have freedom to place that line wherever you want, and thus are always correct in asserting that it is "made in bulk". Using your argument, you could claim that 1, or even 0 watches are "made in bulk", or that 30C is "cold" bc you draw the line of "cold" at 40C, etc. Throwing away all understanding of concepts that has ever existed in order to win this one point seems pointless to me

Re: Ultra-flat timepiece, the RM UP-01 Ferrari, is 1.75 millimetres thick watch

#210

Post by dirtyid »

samatman wrote: post #51

I'm disappointed to see this merger of art and engineering received so poorly here. This pushes the envelope of the possible, something I consider beautiful. It's roughly as impractical, expensive, and awkward looking, as a human-propelled airplane. I don't think any of the many commenters here who panned this watch would have anything bad to say about a human-propelled airplane. It's a pity that they can't appreciat…

>envelope of the possible

Maybe limits of human hand craft which I assume is the allure of these bespoke time pieces. That said I don't actually see the description mention hand crafting other than polishing and drawing a few surfaces. Otherwise I don't see why this is pushing any envelopes when we can make micrometer MEMS machinery. Which would be pretty slick - theoretical minimum micrometer thick watch mechanism encased in sub millimeter baseplate.

Post reply on HN